daily. in 1979, c-span was created as a public service by america's cable television companies and today, we continue to bring you congress, coverage of the white house, the supreme publicand published -- policy events in washington, d.c. and around the country. c-span is brought to you by your cable or satellite provider. >> today on c-span, "washington later, livenext and coverage of president trump at the conservative political action conference and bernie sanders launches his presidential campaign. in about an hour, the national chair of the young americans for discussesrant strobl, important issues to conservatives. and later steven shepard on the history of election do overs.

and i look at the historic public lands bill passed in congress this week. our guest will be dan puskar with the public lands alliance. ♪ host: good morning. welcome to "washington journal." congress warned the pharmaceutical industry this week that it may have to step in on one of the most talked about issues on american lives, the high cost of prescription drugs. drug companies have argued they use their profits to innovate and improve american lives. many americans agreed the cost of medicines is too high. what do you think? should there be a federal role in lowering prescription drug costs? should market forces continue to set the price for drug prices?

we will talk about whether there should be a role in our government for lowering prescription drug costs. if you are in eastern or pacific time zones, call in at (202) 748-8000. if you are in the mountain or pacific time zones, and you want to talk about whether there should be a federal role in lowering prescription drug costs, call in at (202) 748-8001 . we are always reading on social media come on twitter and on facebook -- social media, on twitter and on facebook. congress had a hearing earlier this week. senator bob menendez of new jersey warned pharmaceutical executives that congress may step into lower prescription drug costs. [video clip] >> americans everywhere reject the notion that reducing prescription drug costs means reducing innovation. they are uniting around this issue.

it is bipartisan. maybe it is for political reasons, but president trump is talking more about executive action, and the republican chair of the finance committee has convened this hearing today, the second on to on prescription drugs. reducing prescription drug prices has been the focal point of nearly every democratic presidential campaign. ,onsider it a friendly warning it is time to be proactive. meaningfulot make action to reduce prescription drug prices, policymakers are inevitably going to do it for you. this seems to be an issue many americans care about. npr had a story yesterday talking about a poll that have been taken on prescription drugs. i am going to read a little bit of this story. about a quarter of americans

surveyed said they had trouble paying for their prescription drugs, and a majority welcomed government action to help cut the cost of medications. a survey released friday by the kaiser family foundation finds many people have skipped or rationed prescription medications or substituted cheaper over-the-counter drugs. those who rationed their meds are often sicker. it also looks at why prescription drug prices are such a big issue for the trump administration and on capitol hill. theave heard a lot about high prices of prescription drugs, alex is our said in a speech on february 1. he was touting a series of regulatory proposals he says will bring down prescription drug prices for consumers. the survey says a change like

that would be well received. 79% of respondents say drug prices are unreasonable. 63% says there is not as much regulation is there should be to limit the price of prescription drugs. this is not just an issue for democrats. seems both democrats and republicans are noticing the costs of prescription drugs. a senator from georgia who separates from parkinson's disease on refilling his prescription. [video clip] >> i appreciate all you do. i go to work everyday because of the pharmaceutical industry. i have parkinson's disease. i can function every day and do my job because of that. my first chief of staff called me sunday night from atlanta to say his youngest son had been diagnosed with juvenile diabetes. the thing he said is at least i

know he can live a normal, happy life because of insulin. those are good stories. we cannot forget. that is the value of innovation, research, and development. it, and cannot explain you are elected to the united states senate, and i appreciate your comments about how honored you are to be in the united states senate. when i cannot explain it, it is tough. i cannot explain the cost increases i have seen. , when i wenti take to get my new prescription in january, it was $90 more than it was at the end of last year. let me call you back. i will call you in the next hour see if i cannot find a better price. some if i did not use insurance, it was one price.

if i used cash, it was another price. if i used coupons, it was another price. it was very complicated. host: let's call to mark, calling from new york. good morning. caller: good morning. i do not believe the federal government should subsidize pharmaceutical companies to make drug prices cheaper. the drug prices have to go through so many rigorous testing risk because the companies have to make sure their product is not going to fall, so that makes it cost so much money. really, we should let the free market tried to even it self out, provide the best drugs possible and try to ease regulations so it does not cost the company's itself -- companies itself such a high

price. peoplehat do you say to who say it is great that these medications are out there, but it does nothing if we cannot afford it. >> that is a good point. that is a good point. you go to canada and get medication. maybe you just have to let the companies figure out who can make the best product. me tonot acceptable to subsidize and use taxpayer money to provide -- i think it is a bad principle to pay money to make drugs cheaper. --t: let's go to the adele. caller: what a wonderful program. all doctors take the hippocratic

oath, first do no harm. has harm inrmacy it. people should realize, you should eat good food, exercise, meditate, and you can heal all kinds of things through food. you can heal diabetes. people.actice, we heal we don't treat them with drugs. host: let's go to travis. he is calling from oklahoma. good morning. correct?where close to caller: you were pretty close. host: go ahead. caller: my policy on the federal government coming into pharmacies to lower the drug cost, to me as a dreamer and american who believes in capitalism and the ability to work hard has the ability to

price their product however they want. if you think of kanye west and his shoes, people don't normally pay $600 for tennis shoes, but because kanye west has label that, people will pay $600. that is what i believe in capitalism. this is an opinion. i don't believe the federal government should be helping regulate taxes and prices that go into pharmacies. it is private business. in the end, i think capitalism is the right way to go. host: what do you say to an elderly patient who is on medicare and social security and says they cannot afford their medicine to keep them alive? caller: the problem on that part is you want to look back and think about having insurance, going through that time in your

life so you retire, and you go on this medicaid and get on social security. it is not a lot of money per month. i understand a lot of prescriptions need to be filled and take income or these people -- taken, and these people will get sick. if you cannot afford the medication, you cannot go out and get it, you have to find another way to heal yourself. it is not the only way to cure a disease. it is like the flu. you can take medicines for the flu. that does not mean it is going to cure it. people who need medications to keep them alive, that is kind of a touchy subject. alive, ithat keep them don't believe in federal government getting involved in private industry. host: let's go to david calling from california.

good morning. caller: mi on the air? host: you are on the air. go ahead. caller: i am from los altos. i have been moving back and forth from california to sweden for quite a few years. i'm a dual citizen. the main thing i have noticed in europe is prescription drug costs are much lower. a lot of countries have socialized health care. the way it works in sweden is the maximum out-of-pocket prescription drug costs is $2 062 crowns, after that it is free. i like the way it works. i like the fact i don't have to think about my family losing everything because of the cost of the drug. i feel like when i was living in california, not long ago, it was

a gamble. hoping i don't get cancer or some other type of illness where i have to buy an expensive drug, and hopefully my insurance covers it. host: you are living in sweden now? caller: i move back and forth quite a lot. i am from los altos. host: do you have any concern under sweden's socialized medicine that you would not be able to get the care you need? caller: there is always that concern. you never know for sure you can get the care you need. anecdotally speaking, i have never had a problem. i have heard many people say there is socialized health care, and you have to wait months and months. i have never had that express. i have been able to get care the same week whenever i need it. host: real quickly, when you say

there is a difference in the cost of prescription drug prices, give us an example of a specific drug or cost you are talking about. how much cheaper is it in sweden? cannot the thing is you really compare it that way. it is max out-of-pocket $2000 in sweden. if you don't have insurance, you are stuck paying for a drug that costs tens of thousands of dollars. many americans cannot afford that. host: the maximum out-of-pocket you would pay in sweden is $250. there is no maximum in america. caller: exactly. host: let's go to robert in michigan. good morning. caller: good morning. i guess the last caller touched on some of the things like

prescription drugs are so much cheaper in other countries because they are subsidized. i am a believer in a more socialized approach to medicine. as i have gotten older, my costs have increased dramatically. i think we need to get out of this key regulatory strategy -- deregulatory strategy we have in the country. host: one of the things we have heard a lot in the political campaigns right now is anti-socialism. it sounds like you would prefer a more socialistic approach instead of a more market-driven approach to prescription medicine. i my understanding you -- am understanding your? caller: yes. what deregulation has done to , union,n my demographic

former union scenario. -- i first started working when i first started working, my prescriptions might have cost me three dollars. now i would be in dire straits if i had to take the total amount. there are some prescriptions that would cost me $300. my cost would be $50. my medical situation has changed as i have gotten older. you can see where this is headed. it will become untenable at some point. go to donald from texas. good morning. caller: good morning. the federal government is already in the prescription pharmaceuticals. we subsidize these people to create the drugs.

i am sick of people calling in. we already in that. in the private sector. if you cannot afford a job, you are going to die. takes muchnow it time before they can get you to see a specialist, or the cost of drug? this is what the federal government does if you need medication. if you cannot afford a drug, i'm on a drug now that costs me $19,000 a month. insurance, onete of them i have to let go. to live, i have to pay all the way to subsidize my insurance company for helping me to get this drug. paying forrs already their medication. when we pay the drug companies to create these drugs, then when

they create the drugs and put them on the market, talking about capitalism, where the money go? pocket. ceo's stop with this socialized correct. -- crap. host: let's go to ron from indiana. caller: good morning. i would like to say you look nice without your glasses this morning. it looks great to see her whole face. host: thank you. caller: i am an asthma sufferer. i have been for most of my life. one of the things i have noticed is that the cost of my medication has skyrocketed grammatically. i used to be up to buy an over-the-counter medicine to control my breathing. it was taken off the market to support a much more expensive medication. what i used to spend $15 a month

on now costs a little more than $700 a month just so i can breathe. this idea that the pharmaceutical companies, doctors, hospitals, health insurance companies get to make so much money off of people suffering is absolutely a part. -- abhorrent. these industries should be considered a humanitarian enterprise and should be limited on how much money they can make as a prophet. host: part of what america is based on is a capitalist society, where market forces set prices for many items in our lives. why should medicine be different? caller: it should definitely be at least some portion of socialism, the better portions of socialism that assist society without interfering in people's liberties. host: let's go to kate. caller: good morning.

i don't understand why the republican party and voters always come down when it is time to help the poor and struggling. they want to help the ceos, the politicians, tax cuts. layoffs. they are making all this money, shipping all these jobs overseas. i don't understand that. people are sick. they cannot afford it. if you go to church, it tells you to help the poor and needy. the five fingers are not equal. haveverybody can the same amount of money. when people need help, the right thing to do is to help. health care is not welfare. you are sick.

you are in pain. you need help. all this gun control and all complain theeople government is taking my guns away, and they want to control iran from building their own weapons. i don't understand that. the most hypocritical party i have ever seen. host: let's go to brian for montana. good morning. caller: good morning. how are you doing? host: just fine. go ahead. caller: i had a stroke a couple weeks ago. when i left the hospital after two days in the icu, they told me i need a prescription. they said pick up 30 days downstairs. paidt to the atrium and $35. latertor i saw a week prescribed three months and sent

the prescription to walgreens, and i was going to pick them up, $668. i went back to the atrium and said how much with three months of this cost? $105. difference, four times a year, $2000. i don't get it. host: let's go to christie, calling from oklahoma. good morning. caller: good morning. i wanted to speak to the issue that the cost of drugs is raising, the caller a few minutes ago from oklahoma. i take a prescription. i started taking it about four years ago after iran through all the other kinds of prescriptions

is an kind, which arthritis drug. they don't seem to work on me anymore. when i first started taking it, my doctor recommended. it is the newest thing on the market. go out and get it. she gave me some samples. i tried them. it was ok with my system. i could take it. the next thing i know, that was about four or five years ago. they were costing about $320 for three months supply. now this drug i am still taking four years later, during the beginning of obama care, the toce of this drug has reason

$8,889 a month for 60 tablets. i don't know if i can afford to take this anymore. i am on social security. i don't know how i can handle it. i have some money, but i am not going to pay almost $9,000 a month for a prescription. , and shemy doctor back a place in i try canada. this company offers the same citizensanada for u.s. to buy by simply calling them. the drug in canada i can get ,889 a monthe $8 drug, i can get that same drug for under $300 for a three

months of life. i think the pharmaceutical industry is ripping us off in this country as opposed to the rest of the world. i don't think it is fair to people. this is a maintenance drug that makes me feel good day today so that i can walk in continue to do my activities of daily life. i think it is totally unfair somebody to have to pay that kind of price for a maintenance of twoat is comprised over-the-counter ingredients. the pharmaceutical companies would argue that the psst americans pay hel subsidize the innovation that they need to come up with the new drug some would argue that

prices are set by the market. that is how america works. yourresponse to that -- our response to that? false. that is a price for a bottle of one is $40 a month. the other is $20. pill,hey combine that butlable over-the-counter, it would upset your stomach if you take it that way -- i have tried. the put this together with codeine on it so it protects your stomach lining, they raise it to $8,889, that's

unreasonable. i am furious about it. go after the drug companies and lower the cost of this. host: let's go to sue from michigan. good morning. caller: good morning. just a few things. i'm going to be retiring the end of this month. i work the health care industry. my medicare, i'll have bettere coverage being retired than as a nurse. astronomical.is prescription drugs

go, that's a different story. the cheapest i can get is mail order, and that's still high. i believe they should allow us to get drugs from canada to get our costs down. a couple people are younger, they don't have a clue. they don't think about that. can't take your prescription medicine, you won't be living. people are totally clueless. host: the issue of prescription drug prices came

up on tuesday. exchange between pfizeren and tehe ceo. [video clip] >> it is a negotiation. >> you set the list price. >> yes, but -- >> is it correct when a hypothetical patient goes to pay is drugs, her co-insurance based on the price you set? >> it is correct in many cases. >> the number one reasons hammred isre getting these list prices are

unaffordable, and the high prices are tied to what the consumer pays at the counter. the rebates and discounts and coupons is window dressing. on part d, 40% of the drugs don't have a rebate. i want it understood, i think you and others in the industry are stonewalling on the key issue, lowering list prices. reducing those list prices are the easiest way for american consumers to pay less at the pharmacy counter. host: let's read some of the tweets from social media. rebecca writes, talk about the high cost of prescription drugs

in congress. that is all it will be. talk. people used to be able to afford when america was great, these days great means to expensive. jim writes, foreign countries forced low prices at the risk of denying the company patent protection. cynthia writes, capitalism should not profit from human suffering. nation,ly civilized health care, education, and present would be nonprofit -- pr ison would be nonprofit entities. let's go to gary from west virginia. good morning. caller: good morning. i want to let you know, i am a retired government employee. i am diabetic along with other things. is onice of my medication

the insulin for me has gone down. i was paying $100 a month co-pay. now i am only paying $70. a lot of my other medications have gone down. i am taking a lot of generics. they do the same thing. it depends on where you go. i heard that young man say about waiting for this and that to go see whoever you want to see in the hospital. i don't. i go to my doctors and go where i have to go when they tell me to go. i don't have to wait months. i go every six months for my checkup to make sure everything is ok. if there is anything in between, i call them. they usually put me in the hospital. host: you are the first caller

to say your prescription drugs have gone down. what makes the difference for you? caller: i don't have any clue. all i know is the first of the year, i went to get my medicines, and they said it will be $70. i said what happened? they said, i don't know. it is down $35 for each one of my insulin month. i will be glad to take that. that's no problem. host: let's go to steve calling from fargo, north dakota. good morning. caller: good morning. i just wanted to mention that from a pastor's point of view, there is a lot of risk in and aping these drugs huge amount of expense. you have many years of negative , in flow to develop a drug

the area of $900 million roughly to bring a drug to market. it is a risky prospect. when a product finally comes to market, you have to do to have flexibility of pricing to be able to reward the people that have stuck through that company. it in g20ey work nations were basically the americans are subsidizing all the other people around the world through the higher prices we pay here needs to be checked and looked into, and that is the key problem with prices in america. host: what exact proposals would you suggest for congress or anyone to do to reverse that?

caller: we have to basically have fair pricing laws. nationsot have g20 negotiate a price that is cost or below cost, and we have to make up all the difference. workableot a functioning system the way we have it. we are getting taken advantage of. it needs to be addressed and stopped. taxes on excessive profits over and above what we are charging other countries. host: what would you say to those that say that is interfering with the market system america has prospered under? prospering by the inequality of prices. the other people and other countries are. i am sort of america first.

phy should the other people rea the whirlwind of benefits while we are paying the price? it is not correct. host: let's go to cap and from texas. -- kevin from texas. caller: good morning. i disagree with the whole premise. i think it is kind of biased. you are saying, should we let market forces continue to work or let the government get involved? we are not letting market forces work. price is set by supply and demand. we have two things going on right now. the government has been limiting supply. i cannot go down the street and just get a drug. doctorto go see a first. then i have to go see a pharmacist. the pharmacist can only sell things the fda approves of.

on the other side of the equation, you have government subsidizing people's prescription drugs. they are increasing demand. if you are limiting supply and increasing demand, what do you think is going to happen to the price? host: what would you say would be an option? complete deregulation of the prescription drug market? caller: that is a false premise in itself. you are not going to deregulate to the point where people are being poisoned. righters have individual to know what they are buying, to know whether it is safe. they should be making the decision as to whether it is in the market or not. the fda is deciding if it is in the market. all the fda should be doing is providing statistics on specific drugs. is it safe, does it work.

they can provide that information and let the consumer make that decision. look at it illegal drugs. look at the price of illegal drugs. marijuana is more potent than it is ever been and cheap. why hasn't its price,? we don't have the government itself regulated where people don't know what they are getting. somehow people don't die from marijuana overdose. difference between the scenarios? government. to corneliago calling from idaho. good morning. caller: good morning, everybody. this gentleman from texas that just spoke is absolutely on to the truth. the american people, unfortunately, have been

bamboozled by the prescription and pharmaceutical drug companies. if you look at these opioid prescriptions that were going on from pain medication, you can see what the pharmaceutical companies are doing. they are putting stuff out there that is not safe and charging a high price for it. here is what the american people do not understand, at least a lot of them. controls what is on the market. it is government control. pharmaceutical people sit on the fda and they persuade the .o stop innovation innovation is going on privately. to come to theed four because of the fda.

on the fda should only be doctors, not pharmaceutical companies. the pharmaceutical companies pay .ur politicians it is not a republican or democrat issue. senators, one a democrat, one a republican, who both take huge amounts of money from the pharmaceutical companies to keep this racket going. instance, diabetes, my heart goes out to people with diabetes. i have a son with diabetes. doctors are discovering, the scientists are discovering that vitamin d, which is ultracheap, can actually promote less illness in america because vitamin d plays a huge role in our immune system.

cornelia, what specific actions do you think congress should take to help solve this problem? caller: i think we have to start with the government control in the prescription business. not allow pharmaceutical companies to sit on the board of the fda. only doctors, only scientists. vitamins and minerals can prevent a lot of cancers. cancer is a racket. costs are out of sight. you cannot believe what it costs. doctors are persuaded by the pharmaceutical companies that the only way to treat cancers with chemotherapy. there are holistic doctors in texas, california, all over

america. withwill treat cancer herbal products that are cheap, like oregano oil for instance. host: let's go to diane, calling from de soto, kansas. good morning. caller: good morning. i used to work in the pharmaceutical drug industry in a regulatory capacity. there is so much misinformation out there, and it is so complicated the way drugs are approved in the u.s. versus other countries. the first point is everybody should be grateful for probably the safest system for approving drugs in the united states compared to anywhere else in the world. there is a problem with the u.s.. the u.s. is one of only two countries in the whole world that allow prescription drug advertising.

or what theyon tv call direct to consumer advertising. i think this did not used to be the case. rule that was allowed until the 1980's. i am sitting here listening to all these people talking about all the things they are doing to avoid these prescription drug prices and still maintain their health. going to canada, going to take other remedies. what i see is a safety issue arising from the fact that people are desperate and are doing things, not taking their drugs or substituting or whatever. i think there is some leverage the congresstween and the fda regarding prescription drug advertising, saying we gave you the right to do this under certain conditions

, which have greatly benefited your company's, and yet our own areents in the u.s. resorting to all kinds of things that are not good for their health to avoid the cost you are putting on that. -- them. we need to perhaps reconsider some of the benefits we have given you before in exchange for some consideration i drug companies to reduce and/or stabilize some of these drug products, especially for conditions that are life-threatening. i guess i am talking about leveraging. thato want people to know there is so much involved between insurance companies, different company's regulatory requirements, it is extremely expensive to develop drugs and to keep them on the market.

there just has to be some balance in where we are going with regard to safety, efficacy, and drug pricing. that is my comment. mac callinggo to from georgia. good morning. caller: good morning. i am glad you are having this program. i would like to toss one thing in among the other comments that were made. we need to be better consumers. shop around. don't use the same pharmacist. don't use the same doctor necessarily. find out if there is a drug that is cheaper. it is surprising, sometimes you can pay the cash price less than the price your insurance company would give you. it is a good idea to shop around. your doctor, asked him, is there another drug that will do the same thing at a cheaper price. pharmacist, is there

another drug that will do the same thing at a cheaper price. they will keep you informed. they want you to come back and buy something. if you just show up with a prescription, they will fill the prescription. that is what they are supposed to do. if you talk to them and get to know them, you can sometimes save half of what you are paying now. be a good consumer. that will solve a lot of the problems, and look after your health. don't the fact, don't drink alcohol to excess. don't use drugs. you will save a whole lot of money if you take care of yourself. thank you. host: during that senate finance committee hearing, here is a democratic senator questioning richard gonzales of the company that makes you merit. here is their exchange. [video clip] [video clip] >> look in europe, when your and to expired in 2018,

sellers came on the market. your prices were already lower than in the u.s., but now you are offering up to 80% discounts to be able to continue to compete in europe. with all the, support of american taxpayers on this, why don't you offer the same low price to american families? >> generic plays a very important role in the overall funding of r&d. if you look at these inventions we have created, they are patented. they include a number of different diseases. they evolve over time. we think we have struck a reasonable balance. we have now licensed seven similar players to the entire portfolio. themve given licenses to

in the market in 2023. the earliest patent to expire in that portfolio is june 2022. >> i know my time is up. let me just say, i think you charge more here because you can, and american taxpayers are subsidizing all of you to be able to have incredibly high profits, the fastest-growing part of the health care system. i think the people in michigan and across the country deserve better. they need to be able to afford their medicine and not have to go to another country to get it. host: let's see what people are saying on twitter about this topic. , i listened to the ceos of big pharma give lip service to the senate committee. nothing will change. they would just increase the amount of bribe money. here is a tweet saying, rebate, if they can take a drug from

$120 to $8, there is something wrong. medicare and medicaid participants are the largest group of prescription drug buyers. one might think the government could be instruments of getting the cost down. one suggested under the obama administration, people said that was picking winners and losers. these politicians are the fox guarding the henhouse. let's go to donna, calling from tennessee. good morning. caller: good morning. enrolled in medicare plus. and thankfully i recovered like 99%. i had to have surgery. cholesterol out of

my right side. i had to have the other side done. i switched insurance to a medicare plus plan. i cannot believe how wonderful the insurance is. my drug costs went down. the most expensive one is $15. i have recovered from my surgery. i don't know how they do it. i talked to people. they want me to do all kinds of stuff. i don't know how they do it. this is not a commercial. i'm amazed at the good health care i am getting. i have never had such good care in my life. pat, callingo to

from michigan. good morning. caller: good morning. i am calling about a whole population i have yet to hear on any program. it is a group of us who need compound drugs. if people think regular drugs are expensive, try to get compounded drugs. your insurance company does not want to pay for it. my husband, who is now a laid toldngineer, his company him i would be better off if i just died. host: tell us what compounded drugs are for people who do not know. caller: it is when you cannot take regular, commercially made drugs. it is when you go to a pharmacist that will only get you the ingredients that your body allows you to take. i am allergic to everything. they don't know what to do with me. the things they ordinarily give people with reactions, i am allergic to.

my medicines can cost anywhere from $20,000 to $30,000 a month. i cannot do that. i will be 68 next saturday. this has been going on for years. nobody ever mentions people like us and what we are supposed to do. you talk about going to canada. people intacted canada. drug premisesed are not as strict as they are here. dir andthe initials pbm. i know a little more about, pharmacy benefit managers. it was when medicare first started and then became such a deluge of people signing up for it. now they are just moneymakers.

they control the cost of the drugs. what i had to do this summer because i needed a different kind of drug, they wanted me to go have reactions and see what happens. i cannot do that. i have to try baby doses of things. my reason for calling is for people to start speaking up on our behalf because when you need a compounded, specially made drug, the irony of this is medicare will pay for compounded drugs. it has to have two or three ingredients. in my case, a couple of them and need sterilized water the active ingredient. they will not pay for the very expensive active ingredient. they will pay for water. i cannot tell you how may times i have been told it would be

better off if i just died. topicsuesday, one of the that came up was the proposed rebate rule. he was a little bit of that discussion with chuck grassley. [video clip] >> some of you have voiced support for the recent rebate rule proposed by the administration. should the administration finalize this rule, will you commit to lowering your truck prices? >> chairman, we are supportive of the rule. we would like to see it in its final form to make a final decision. we are supportive of taking the discount to the patient at the point-of-sale. >> astrazeneca. >> i would go one step further and say if rebates were removed from the commercial sector, we would definitely reduce our list prices. >> we have the same position. >> johnson and johnson. >> we are supportive.

definitely would be my goal. we would need to see the final legislation provided that there are not additional fees added into the system. >> merck. >> i would expect our prices go down if we change the system again on the commercial side. >> pfizer. >> it is very clear intention, we will not keep a single dollar from these rebates. we will move every single penny to the patients. >> santa fe. >> lowering list price has to be linked to better access and affordability at the counter for the patients. host: rob says the federal government in washington, d.c., has no business trying to dictate the price for any good or service. tweets, the fda is supposed to be a consumer advocate, not in collusion with

creatempanies that high-priced drugs that have little if any healing properties. weets, if you have to ask your doctor for a drug you saw advertised on tv, it is time for a new doctor. jill. go to caller: good morning. how are you? host: just fine. go ahead. caller: just want to talk about the issue i have with prescription drugs. greatdoctors have me on a cocktail. my particular drug costs between $70,000 and $90,000 every three months. this is wrong. something should be done about it. host: what do you think should happen with this? you have pharmaceutical companies saying they cost so much because they have to keep coming up with new drugs.

people on the other side say the markets should set prices for drugs. fda shouldhink the not -- there has got to be something done. there has to be something done. i cannot tell you how to fix it. i know this is ridiculous. there has to be something in place to fix this. you for somefor suggestions. host: let's go to joe from georgia. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. this drug problem is a real problem in the country. it is not just prescription drugs. we are a country of drug addicts. hello? host: keep going. we can hear you. caller: it is very difficult for me to understand why they have a

substance like marijuana that is legal medicine's and almost half the states. before marijuana was legalized, the incidence of opioid accidents have gone down. why can't we wake up and legalize this powerful medicine that would bring down the costs of prescription drugs immediately because people could legally smoke the marijuana, they would not need those other drugs. herb.uana is a healing it has been used for centuries throughout history. the drug companies are the ones who don't want to legalize it. thank you. host: let's go to bridget, calling from kansas.

good morning. caller: good morning. i think they should start treating prescription drugs like public utilities. they are a necessity of life. they have a monopoly on their drugs. we give them a monopoly because they had patents. we should not have to go to canada for our drugs. we have drug companies right here. they are monopolies. like i said with patents and everything. they can get a reasonable rate of profit. that is what happens with public utilities. in brazil, their people, i read an article a while back, when their people are dying, i think it was with the aids drugs, they said to the heck with patents.

they started manufacturing the drug himself. i think if you want to be predatory on the people, their patents should be pulled. that monopoly status should be disintegrated. host: let's go to steve, calling from north carolina. caller: good morning. the twohame that highest paid professions play on people's grief. that is the medical profession and the legal profession. i'm a strict capitalist. i am in hurricane country. after hurricanes, people price tag. -- gouge. they will come down to those people and give them finds and make them go to court. if you have something people require to live, and you are the it, ourson to have market might say that is price

and demand. price gouging is a legal issue. the government has every right to take action against it. the problem is there is a money connection. -- influence of big money and lobbyist between drug companies and politicians, nothing will change. it's as that. as a cpac continues in washington, d.c., we will be joined by our guest from young americans for freedom. serieser on, our continues and we look at the history of election do overs, with stephen sheppard. stay with us. ♪ >> the only thing we have to fear is fear itself. not -- ask not what

your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country. -- newest book, the presidents, noted historians rank america's best and worst chief executives, providing insights into the lives of the 44 american presidents through stories gathered by interviews with presidential historians. the events that shaped our leaders, the challenges they face, and the legacies they left behind. shelves april 23. but you can preorder your copy as a hardcover or e-book today. >> the c-span bus recently traveled to texas, asking folks what does it mean to be american? >> i believe that being american

anyone andyou can be anything. you have the freedom to express yourself, and the freedom to embrace your culture and show off your culture, because america is a melting pot. we are part of a community and it's so nice to share values , respect for one another, the freedom to share amazing things. , think we are just lucky education in the states is just amazing. being a foreign exchange student -- we have for exchange dudes coming because were so fortunate. >> ieven with health -- would say on the one hand it is being a free person, but as far as being a citizen i would say that it's taking an active part

in trying to better your country and not think of it as a perfect nation. always be on a mission to make it better. >> voices from the road on c-span. we are back with greg -- grant strobl of young americans for freedom. tell me what it is? guest: it's the preeminent conservative group. ofstarted in the family home .illiam f buckley jr. in 1960 over 50 young conservatives wrote the share in statement, one of the preeminent of documents and conservatism and we are still alive with 400 chapters across the country. the young american foundation, and we even are at the reagan ranch. host: is this a college only

organization or an organization that exists inside and outside the university structure? guest: our main focus is with university and high school students. we also accommodate home school students. that's big now with academic liberty. you hit on a great point, half hard-workinge americans who chose not to go to college and pursue other avenues . and we are willing to accommodate them as well. host: president trump speaks today at cpac, what do young conservatives want to hear from him? what do they need to hear now? guest: i think they are really excited about some of the changes president trump has implemented over the past year, the economy is booming. jobs --ls changed chagne jobs quite a bit. a bit.ge jobs quite

and graduates are moving up the job latter, they are able to pay back student loans. but student loans are still a serious issue, especially for college students. the economy affects those in college and who go through the university system and those who do not. so the economy i think is huge, but i think another thing young people are concerned about, the national debt and entitlement. those things may not be available for me when i retire. those are a few issues that have been on the back burner and it would be great to see the president address those. guest: -- host: i don't know if you saw the conversation we had on air about prescription drug costs, there seems to be a generation gap in the callers between younger callers who say market forces need to control prescription drugs, versus the older callers who say we need to have these medicines. is there an age gap between young conservatives and old conservatives? do you see a different -- a

difference of opinions? guest: with prescription drugs in particular i'm not concerned. but on a few things yes, especially with entitlements like mentioned -- like i mentioned before. with health insurance. there seems to be more of a market orientation for young people which is exciting. polling indicates that young , despite the news today, i think there is -- i really feel, talking to students every day, that students are embracing free enterprise and they believe that's the way they can grow and make their own lives and do what they are destined to do. guest: we are talking with grant strobl of the young americans for freedom. if you want to join the conversation we will open up our regular lines, for democrats (202) 748-8000, for republicans (202) 748-8001, for independents .202) 748-8002

keep in mind we are always reading on social media, twitter, and on facebook. see a change in young conservatives and their priorities over these last few years? or are the things important to young conservatives classic and timely or are their shifts? >> there is a shift and i think president trump played a huge role in that. now that the economy is booming i think there is less focus on that amongst young conservatives. reallys less focus on fighting against all of the regulations that are now being repealed. there is lots of focus on the need for title ix reform, which is already in play.

a focus onss of those things and more focus on keeping ensuring that free-market reforms are staying in place. host: a few years back there was an autopsy and the republican party where they were concerned by some of the party leaders that younger americans were straying away from the republican party. do you still see that, or do you think that's true? i disagree with that autopsy report. thinkoung person, i don't we like being talked down to. nobody likes to be talked down to and try to pander towards any group of people. that's why i think the autopsy report is wrong. i think what conservatives need to do is articulate ideas. talk about ideas and policy solutions and convince people to adopt those solutions. movement inevery history has grown and survive.

host: you have been a major how do you see- that issue going? do you think conservatives and their voices are treated differently in the university and college settings than other voices? guest: they are and it's unfortunate. i have experienced it myself. i have had students chanting on my front lawn. there was a survey at the university of michigan of all students. ann arbor, where i was for undergrad. there was a campus diversity survey, it perplex the administrators when they got the results, i bet. it showed the number one form of discrimination that students felt was over politics. that was more than raise and sex -- race and sex. intellectual diversity is very important, just like any other

form of diversity is important. i think that's what young conservatives are doing. they are contributing to the campus community in an interesting way. if anything, i think it's a public goods provision to their left as well. as a conservative i think i benefited tremendously from being surrounded by people who disagree with me, i was able to hone in my own arguments and it forced me to do my research. my syllabus was full of one political opinion and i had to look outside that syllabus and look at other viewpoints. really, i think it was a benefit to me as a person in my intellectual development. that's the same provision we would like to provide to the left. host: you say you see this anti-conservative thought at the university, are you speaking

specifically in political cap -- classes or all classes like ,nglish classes, math, algebra or specifically in political classes? syrians, iersonally experienced it in all of the classes other than the political science department -- in my personal experience, i experienced it in all classes other than the political science department. they understood that it was an inherently political class. it's interesting that the classes that don't talk about politics are the ones where the professors are talking about politics. the only class i ever had to drop because of political beliefs was a science class on the environment. it was too bad, i wanted to learn about the environment but i was getting a political talking point. it's too bad. of the top 50y universities in the country and we have 250 courses that are really indoctrinating students.

queering god,s and another one on cuba that doesn't even mention the oppression that is occurring to the cuban people and why so many cubans had to escape and come to america. those are two examples of many of some courses aimed at one political viewpoint and not adequately balancing both. host: lets let viewers join into this conversation. , from new york. caller: my name is john, can you hear me? host: go ahead. caller: i don't know who is responsible for this mess, we could blame trump for how bad everything is, but we've had leaders for the past 250 years who have been doing this job for us.

and i don't think it's been all of abad until sudden we start watching tv 24 hours a day and it's all news. it has put a wedge i think youeen people, to where either sway this way or that way. the millenials see that. if they want to walk into a fortune 500 company, go get the trump haircut. go where the hat. --wear the hat. i think a lot of republicans believe in their party and they bailed because trump was coming in. bailed out the corporations, they were in trouble because they were paying so much taxes, 30 3% tax on a corporation. they make jobs, they build, they are the backbone of america.

the dairy farms are in wisconsin are losing land to corporations. booming, is how you opened up your opening statement we have a booming economy, i think that's where you wanted to leave us and go on something different. i want to say, i forgot your first name, you would have to tell me, how is it you see the economy booming and the unemployment rate so low but we lost circuit city? staples? best buy? payless shoes? sears? kmart? blockbuster? hearties.e are losing -- hardies. guest: i would not view that as a bad thing. that's the free-market working. that means we are creating new and better products that can help more and more people. i think it's interesting you're

talking about the division between the corporations and the wealthy and the average person, to me, we should be thinking about the human condition. we should be thinking about the individual and every person in this country and the world who has benefited from innovation. think about today compared to 100 years ago, pre-much everybody has a smartphone. everyone has a television or air conditioner. it's different today than it ever was. this is a product of free enterprise, of having less regulation, a product of having lower taxes. there was one very interesting from the university of illinois, chicago, where nearpreneurs and up making 2% in total benefit to society in their own take-home pay. we always think about how wealthy these people are, but we

lose sight of the amount of wealth and benefit they have created for society and they personally only receive a fraction of that. host: we have a couple of tweets asking the same question, one says is there a generation gap between the younger and older conservatives on some of our social issues? and the yes as our young conservatives motivated by economic issues over social issues? guest: i would say depends. in the past two years i have seen a rise in conservatives embracing the issue of life. i think that's an important issue. the development of science and the more we learn about the issue of life, the more young people are realizing that the arbitrary line that is originating in roe v. wade. i think more young people are

being educated by science, they are realizing that these lines are meaningless and life begins at conception. host: any other social issues? say healthuld insurance. it's a bit of a blended issue. i would say that's important. i would like to see the administration do a better job of reforming the affordable care act. right now, it's unfair for young people that our parents are forced, and when we get off of our parents plans, we are forced to play into 8 -- to pay into a pool we are not directly benefiting from if we are healthy. tried the entire regime to masquerade the real issue underlying the rise in cost of health insurance and health care. , fromlet's go to harry

georgia, on the independent line. caller: i'm very happy to talk to you. things i want to talk about. one of those is the support of free enterprise, that's the most important thing we have going for us in this country. but when something gets going it would be good if we could get the whole economy behind it. you talk about, and i'm sorry, i'm not speaking to the host at this point i'm speaking to the guest. capitalismout how has raised more people out of system than any other has. and of course we only have a few

of them. if you live where i live, and you work with the people i have worked with, you will see that people are suffering under because the cream gets straight -- scraped off the top, as is always said. the reason medicare for all is because itction is has a 1.5% overhead. medical insurance companies have -- overhead and they do not the do not contribute to society as a whole.

had a wormike if you in the body and it was eating your guts out, that's the way it is. by no means is any system perfect. but i would argue that free enterprise is more perfect than the others. the condition of those in venezuela. you look at the condition of those in cuba, this is not something we want in america. you were talking about medicaid for all. -- government planning, all it does is spread poverty to more and more people. that is the last thing we want. what i think is superior about the free enterprise system is that by no means is it perfect but it gives every man and woman an opportunity to lift

themselves up from the bootstraps. think the government needs to get out of the way, they need to get out of the way, i was in a new burke car on my way to the studio and i was -- and -- an car, the driver wants to start a baby toy business and i don't want the government to get in the way of her dream. host: president trump is speaking at 11:30. i'm sure you will be there and you can also watch it live on c-span and c-span.org. there has been some conservative criticisms over president trump's style and tactics. david french at national review wrote this earlier this year. of all the disorienting and disturbing cultural effects from trump's ascension to the presidency, if are as disturbing as the redefinition of ideal masculinity in the heart of many of his biggest fans.

the sheepdog has been replaced by the wolf. cheap shots have replaced bravery, animal cutting has replaced honor, regression has replaced fidelity. there are some conservatives who do not like his style. what are you hearing from young conservatives about it? guest: that's one of the great things about the organization i get to work with, we get to talk about ideas, values, what makes conservatives conservative. part of what's important about being conservative is the idea of virtue. the idea of values. that is something we try to instill in our members. president trump, i think he's interesting. i think his style has been successful for him. i would tend to agree on a personal level that it is not my style. it is certainly working and it resonates with a lot of the

anger that many people in middle america, places where i'm from in michigan and indiana, it resonates with people from there who feel like they have been left behind. i think that is something to pull into consideration when we are evaluating the president. i have to say, it would be great to see the president from the state of the union more often. i thought that was brilliant. he inspired americans -- i thought one of the most touching moments was when the net -- was when a holocaust survivor needed a veteraning -- when it needed help standing and a holocaust survivor helped them stand. i think he should emphasize that more. i think it would be beneficial. host: and you do consider president trump a conservative. guest: i don't know if he considers himself a conservative so i don't know if i can label him. policies have been

amazingly conservative, and on some metrics i would say some of his initiatives have been more conservative than more recent republican initiatives. host: david is calling from north carolina on the democratic line. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for having me. talk about the influx of money into our politics, especially with lobbyists. we have pumped a lot of money into politicians pockets -- politician's pockets. that influences quite a bit of their decisions. i'm not comfortable with that. opinionlike to get your , the influx and the influence of money on politicians. thank you. interestingis an

question. i have read a few ideas that i thought were interesting in terms of reforming money in politics. what's interesting is now that we have such tight constraints on contribution limits for candidates and their committees, a lot of the wealthy donors snstead have been going to pac and outside resources to influence elections. an interesting idea that i think would be an interesting change would be to raise the contribution limits. the only reason i say that is because when you are donating to a campaign, that's transparent. you as a voter get to see who contributes to each of the candidates. when contributors donate money toa pac, you are not going see that. you are not going to know who is influencing our politics. i think transparency is important, and counterintuitive.

but it might help. marilyn, from to ohio, on the democratic line. caller: good morning. i have a question, i'm very concerned about the kind of messages your group is trying to promote. the reason i say that is because i do not understand why your group likes to do things like bash the word socialism and say democrats are about socialism and big government and higher taxes, yet you don't say anything bad about capitalism. it's a disease in this country it's turning into a culture of greed and selfishness. the average person think they can't make it in this life if they don't make a hundred thousand dollars or more a year in salary. that's crappy and we need to put an end to the capitalism that's fueling the greed and ruining this country and is widening the gap between rich and poor and

takes away benefits like social security and medicare and people who are not entitled but need and earned these things. and we need to get this notion of people talking about right to work as being a problem. we need to promote unions. your group doesn't do that. we want to country and 45 years ago, we had the best economy when we had unions, we were about the people who had equal rights, equal pay, and equal opportunities. that is what made america great. guest: i would say that's very ungrateful. on are calling into a show c-span that you are watching on a flat screen tv sitting on a couch. consider perspective. 400 million people died at the hands of communism during the cold war. compare that to the comfortable

living that we have in the united states. how youer rethinking view the two systems. by no means is any system perfect but i think i would rather choose freedom and opportunity and the opportunity to prosper and innovation that america has contributed to, to give people enter the world, that free enterprise has contributed to the world. you can log on to amazon right now and have next day delivery of pretty much anything that you want. you can go on your iphone that i'm sure you have and download any app you want and you can get any information that you want out of anything. think about under socialism and communism, books were banned. now you have access to any book in history. the amount of information you have access to his tremendous and that would have never happened without free enterprise and capitalism. i would choose that life over a

life in huts and despair and poverty that you will see under any socialist regime that has ever existed in world history. is calling on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i certainly appreciated the guest comments around the current state of our economy. when i say current state of not talking about within the last few years, just as president trump had gotten into office. certainly obama lifted us out of the recession and we have continued to do well. i think there needs to be more the benefit of capitalism. and i think the last colors comments around the last 45 years being this period of prosperity in this that and the other, when again, everyone knows you're talking about for a

certain group of people. that group of people did not include a lot of nonwhites and women. that leads me to the question knowing thato ask, capitalism has improved the general,americans in not just white folks like it did in the past, were talking about americans in this country who are nonwhite, we have expanded the middle class. our standard of living has increased in general, in terms of our standard of living today. it gets better. i think where the conservative movement is, especially the young conservative movement takes the wrong term is not by looking to expand the base by being more inclusive, but rather continuing to support and oldote the policies of the

guard republicans that look like a bunch of white men. i would like to learn more about, from your guest, what is the young conservative movement doing to become more inclusive? how are you measuring that? guest: we welcome everyone. throughout our history, even going back to the civil rights era, when hotels would not let one of our black american board members stay, we protested and say you are either going to integrate this hotel or you are going to lose our business. so we have had a proud track in young inclusion americans for freedom. that is something we want to epitomize for the conservative movement. you touch on an important point. the rising tide lifts all boats, and that's what we want to do in a free market and free enterprise economy.

and certainly i don't want to minimize some of the evils that have occurred in american history, and the impacts on the economic situation. solution tok the that is more government involvement. the solution to that is working together and helping each other prosper in a free enterprise and achieve their dream. host: we would like to thank grant strobl, the national chair for being with us today. thank you. senator bernie sanders is scheduled to announce his bid for the white house today, we want to get your thoughts on his candidacy. democrats call in at (202) 748-8000, for republicans (202) 748-8001, for independents (202) 748-8002. newsmakers interviewed the nebraska governor who chaired the republic or government -- the republican governors association. supportsked if he would

governor hogan if he attends to challenge president trump in 2020. here is what he said. >> if the popular -- [video clip] fellowd you endorse your republican governor? would you stay on the sidelines? >> i will be supporting the president and his reelection campaign, there's no doubt about that. >> what advice would you give governor hogan? isany republican who thinking about running against the president should wait until the president gets past this reelection cycle. i want to follow-up on that, a lot of the governments in the gubernatorial arena liked governor hogan as a model for the party. this is a governor who is actively thinking about running for president and at the same time the incumbent president, also a republican, has less than ideal poll numbers. youd you explain about how

square that. if hogan is an example we should look to as how republicans should run their states and how they stack on the national stage, and at the same time challenge the incumbent governor -- incumbent you are supporting? >> governor hogan is doing a fantastic job in maryland, and i think his reelection, a second time a republican has been reelected there since the civil not the status close if exact, he has done a good job in his state and he has -- and he has done a wonderful job. so has president trump. you would be hard to find an administration that has accomplished more than the trump administration in the last two years in the last century. think about the tax cuts and jobs act. the renegotiation of trade relationships, the work with the regulations, 20 two regulations cut for everyone in place. with things are impressive

regards to him delivering on campaign promises. look at the growth. at the end of the date gets back to results. >> washington journal continues. host: senator bernie sanders of vermont is expected to announce his candidacy for the democratic nomination for presidency in 2020. thehe phone today we have national political correspondent who is actually in brookland and will be there when bernie sanders announces his presidential run today. david, good morning. guest: good morning. thank you for having me. host: what do we expect to hear from senator sanders? we are going to hear him argue that he is the most electable candidate running for the nomination. he will not use that word but he thatsketch out a campaign would overwhelm the trump

campaign and democrats in terms of volunteers and small donors. he will get into his biography growing up in brooklyn, and how it made him realize the power of an active government in helping people get out of poverty. there has been a conversation about how sanders has not talked about himself, it's a bit overdetermined. he's talked about going up fairly poor frequently. but this is the most he has leaned into that. it's not just a response to another -- another person who's talked about coming from the projects, and he said that bernie sanders may ask him -- makes him think about running as an independent. host: you answer the question, but why is he making the announcement in brooklyn? do you see any difference tracks that he will take this time that he did not when he ran against senator clinton?

the brooklyn announcement as a part of a tour he is doing. he's going to selma, alabama, for civil rights event -- anniversary event and then to chicago where he went to school. that is meant to emphasize what some people think on his team was not well known in 2016. he grew up in the civil rights era, he was an activist, he has a story to tell about how he tried to shape american lives and american justice as a young man. looking after the primary, and how poorly he did with black voters, he felt people didn't know that. so they're trying to emphasize that early. the problem being that this was against a well-known democrat, with hillary clinton. this time he's running against two african-americans who are not well-known but do seem to be gaining steam, kamala harris and cory booker. that's the biographical stuff. when it comes to his campaign,

his supporters, including some who have signed up since 2016, believed that he would have won the election last time because he would not of had the same vulnerabilities and he would not have made the same moves to mollify moderate voters who did not turn out for hillary clinton. the idea is that he will be the most electable and he would have one last time. the polling has shown that but a lot of democrats don't believe it. , for the first time somebody leading in the polls, when you look at his personal records, his finances, things of that nature, they think they're of roller abilities that would have been exposed. -- vulnerabilities would have been exposed. and especially because because himself a democratic-socialist, and though that's less charged than it used to be, but it's a big anchor to put on yourself. he has some policies that poll

well, like medicare for all, a $15 minimum wage, free public college. when you attach a socialist label they become less popular according to polling. the people -- it's about saying the people who said this wouldn't work last time is wrong and you have a chance to put him in charge. host: a lot of conversation last year was that bernie sanders ideas have been adopted by the party. a lot of what he was talking about in the last primary has been adopted by a lot of candidates. so what makes them stand out if everyone else is already talking about his ideas? question, andgood i think it has been a problem for him. polling in the high teens are low 20's right now, more than half the people who voted for him last time are already floating with other candidates.

it's one thing for kamala harris or kirsten gillibrand or elizabeth warren to say he supports -- they support these policies, but he was doing it 20 and 30 years ago, so who do you trust to deliver, someone who adopted this stuff in the last two years or someone who has been in the system? we will see how it goes. the downside is that there are a lot of democratic primary voters who resent how long he ran last time. i was speaking to a veteran from the clinton campaign yesterday, kept things going, made them angry and people ended up voting for a third party. no one else running has that sort of callous and bitterness in the base. so how he navigates around that, honestly what he said in a race this crowded you only need about 30% of the voters to win.

the question is, what do you get if it's him versus another democrat, will he be the favorite? it's too early to predict how this will go. if it's a crowded multi-candidate race, between his consistency in his level of support, his money and his , he probably needs 30% or so to win, he's in the position that donald trump was in 2016. where he'll game momentum and will be too late to stop in. host: we would like to thank david, the national political correspondent from the washington post for being with us. thank you. guest: i appreciate it, thank you. host: senator sanders is expected to make his announcement at 11:30 am. you can see the stream live on c-span.org. or you can watch it on c-span at 12:30 and at 8:00 p.m. on saturday on c-span. let's go to the phones and talk to ralph, calling from murphy,

north carolina. good morning. caller: good morning. i used to be in -- and i go there every -- in vermont, i used to go every year to see family. we knew bernie sanders when he was the mayor. he took all of the welfare people and he put them in urban renewal and they trashed all those places. i go to vermont every year, and he has not expanded one road up there in 40 years. vermont,0 jobs left in bernie just made it into the biggest welfare state i have ever seen. ago there every year and it's shame. my relatives own a store and they are making a killing on food stamps. he is not the leader you want. if you go to vermont you will see what i mean. taxesy 7000 in property and your roads are beat to heck.

calling from is new york, on the democratic line. good morning. caller: good morning. capitalist, but i ran my business as i saw fit. the way i run my business was when you had to compete to get the quality employees he wanted by offering health and -- you want by offering health insurance. and did, i shopped around got the best i could get which was a million-dollar wraparound program and my employees were happy. had at the 401(k), i just gave them a straight bonus for $1500 and then it declined to $2000. i had such loyalty, it was amazing. those were amazing years, i'm

retired now. sanders not bernie to emphasize so much that he is going to do this welfare state, and everyone is opposed to it. i wish you would understand that we need capitalists, but we need good capitalists. not the ones who hold them down to minimum wages and keep the working class down. wage,hould have a working but they need security. essential,are retirement and health care. richard, from to mississippi, on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for c-span. , everyone isoticed asking what bernie sanders will

talk about. the seniors are getting left behind in this country, in the last several elections we have not heard one word about seniors. i personally know of some seniors who have to buy dog food to eat because they can't afford meat. is talkingy nobody about seniors and what they need anymore. and that's all i have to say. thank you. host: vice president mike pence spoke at cpac on friday. favorticized those who what he called socialism in the united states. here is what he had to say. [video clip] >> remarkably a leading candidate for the democratic presidential nomination is a about a socialist. but it's not --an avowed socialist. he has been joined by others who

socialisted over policies. what they are actually offering is more of the same. spending, moree government, and less freedom. freedom, not socialism, that gave us the most prosperous economy in the history of the world. [applause] freedom, not socialism, that ended slavery, 12 world wars, and stands today as the beacon of hope for all the world. it was freedom, not socialism, that is moving us beyond the past to move -- to move towards a more perfect union to extend blessings to every american regardless of race, creed, or color.

it was freedom. was freedom, not socialism, that gave us the highest quality of life, the cleanest environment on earth, and in crude -- and improves the health and well-being of millions around the world. medicare for all is quality health care -- quality health care for none. the only thing green about the green new deal is how much green it will cost taxpayers if these people ever pass it into law. tom, on thego to independent line. caller: that's probably the best beach vice president pence has ever given. that aside, the 2016 bernie sanders would have crushed donald trump. sanders, because , and irepublican version

am referring to that brainless congresswoman from new york, aoc, who has hijacked the party, has forced him to the left so that he could not win in pennsylvania, or michigan. so now you are in favor of undocumented workers having guns. those is going to lose states. , fromlet's go to bob north carolina, on the republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. first i have a comment and then a couple of questions. , as far as bernie sanders being a socialist democrat, all we need to know about that is cuba and venezuela

and the situation in those countries. the questions have to do with an article i saw, which may be fake news. it could be fake news. it has to do with bernie sanders and particularly his wife. i understand that according to the article she was the president of the university, a private college which has gone out of business. during the seven years she was there the tuition doubled. at that time she also put in her daughter, bernie's stepdaughter, into position where she was making a good salary for a class that was woodworking. i have nothing against woodworking and i think it's wonderful. probably it should have been a vocational school. in that respect, given this with nepotism, can you shed some light on that as far as my questions and that article, were they true or not?

host: let's go to susanna from rochester, massachusetts, on the democratic line. caller: i probably messed up the name of that -- host: i probably messed up the name of that town. caller: it's actually gloucester. being in thats on spot. you look really good. i am wondering this morning if we will hear from bernie that he will finally commit to party membership in the democratic party or if he will preciously think everyone owes him special support while he can be either one of us or them. it's a strange idea that someone hem the outside thinks should be in the party system without having the guts to say i am one of you. a major issue, i find it odious when all of the new kids who felt the bern went toward a

door in the next -- the last election cycle were told this position on the iraq intervention. if you look for the iraq liberation act of 1998, under clinton, you would find that the senate was for the liberation of iraq and about 85% of the house, and there was one bernie sanders of vermont in the house who happily supported the liberation of iraq. acthe language in that completely outlined why saddam hussein had to go. while senator sanders -- bernie when -- bernie- sanders said this is all terrible. i was always against it. but you do not want to tell such stories to some -- two young voters who have their first experience of integrating themselves into the democratic

process and speaking on important issues and to have this de facto lie being told again and again. as nice a guy's people think, and if you are for the act, do not say you were against it. and you look good up there. thank you. host: this weekend, the c-span traveled to pasadena, california, to feature the city's history and literary life. easternp today at 7:30 on book td, all of our literary programs will air together -- on book tv, all of our literary programs will air together on one time block. diana talks about the unsigned papers project, the first edition of einstein's written legacy. [video clip] caltech at the end of 1930, he was invited by the

president of the california institute of technology to visit almost as soon as caltech was founded. 1920, anda around robert millington was one of the founders of caltech. he came from chicago and knew of einstein's work, he knew einstein personally, and he wanted to come to this new institution and raise this new institution, especially after he won the nobel prize in physics at the end of 1922. he arrived before new year's eve in 1931. einstein was very famous by then , and he was followed by journalists every day, all day. he was appointed a visiting researcher at caltech. he did not have to teach. mars,ticipated in senna -- senna not -- seminars.

and he interacted with physics faculty, the astronomers, geologists, and chemists. the fields best represented at caltech 80 years ago, we now do more than that. host: be sure to watch pasadena weekend on book tv and american history tv. i also want to remind you that senator sanders will be making his announcement on seeking the democratic nomination for the presidency at 11:30 a.m. eastern , streaming live on c-span.org. you can watch it on c-span at 12:30 p.m. and 8:00 p.m. on saturday. we will be streaming live at 11:30 on c-span.org and you can watch it on c-span at 12:30 and 8:00.

let's hear from anthony, on the democratic line. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for c-span. just a comment on cpac, i don't believe they would have allowed teddy roosevelt in the room nowadays because he would have been too far to the left. as far as senator sanders, he seems to be a fair weather democrat. when he's not running, he's an angry independent old man. forgets with his salary, benefits, and pension, he is part of the 1%. i wonder if anyone has ever asked him if he would be willing to double his federal income tax deductions, and take out withholdings to support the plans that he happily presents. i also think he does not really

reflect the majority of democrats who are still in the middle. justice, butcial we also want to make a comfortable living. a this is his idea of comfortable living, while he's making 100 $80,000 a year and everyone else makes $30,000 a and he $180,000 a year made it -- and everyone else makes $30,000 a year, that doesn't sound right to me. host: rosemary, from pennsylvania, on the independent line. caller: just a couple of comments. i don't think the current crop of democratic nominees can senator harris, senator , for younger people

, i think they will vote more for bernie. i would like to complement back --or having ceased for having cpac. i'm an independent and i like to listen for both points of view. and even dan jones speaking, i think it was good for conservatives to offer a different point of view. thank you so much. angela, fromo to dumb freeze, virginia, on the republican line. s, virginia, on the republican line. caller: i want your listeners to answer this question, how many people have risked their lives and the lives of their families and the lives of themselves to escape capitalism. it has never happened.

they have always done that to escape socialist and communist countries. they romanticize an ideology that is failed and has been proven to have been a failed ideology, and no one has risked their lives to escape capitalists -- capitalism. they need to ask themselves to look at history and find out why that is. why hasn't anyone risked their lives to escape capitalism. it doesn't happen. because it's the best system. it's not perfect but it's better and --, the other one. thank you. is calling from new jersey on the democratic line. good morning. caller: good morning. i'm so excited that bernie is running for president. i think with him we can make a change. he does care. i support him, the young people

support him. any candidate that can rally all of the young people like he did, we cannot act like that is not important. being utilized right now, they were stolen from him. i really believe in this candidate and i support bernie sanders. thank you. host: robert is calling from lynchburg on the independent line. to send awould like message out to all of the right wingers saying that socialism is bad when we have the government , one ofing communism the biggest communist countries in the world.

socialism here, but they -- what is that? totalitarian, like donald trump is doing, the totalitarian regimes all around the world, instead of taking the word of his own people, and you have a whole bunch of "yes men" working for him. they don't dare to speak against him, and when they do speak against him, he talks about them , and that he said bad things about them. hired them, and they worked for him 10 to 20 years. host: coming up next, our spotlight on magazine segment. we will talk with steven shepard about election do overs after a reelection call in north carolina. then dan puskar of the public lands alliance will join us.

we will be right back. morning, american history tv have live coverage of the american civil war annual symposium from the library of virginia in richmond. featured speakers include pulitzer prize winning author john meacham, elizabeth barron, cassandra newby alexander talks about the importance of african-americans in the civil war, and catherine shively looks at military history. virginia tech civil war's professor paul quickly to questions why the war took laced, followed by closing boards by edward ayers, president of the american civil war museum. watch the civil war museum live on american history tv on c-span3.

>> this weekend on booktv, author and political commentator heather mcdonald and former and deputy director andrew mccabe sunday at noon eastern on " with our life conversation with heather mcdonald. she will take your calls and "the war onuding cops," "the burden of that idea," at "the diversity diversion." andrew mccabe talks about "the threat," and he is interviewed by "new york times" reporter adam goldman. mccabe: i did think about how we thought about it at the time and with the benefit of hindsight, i tried to be honest in my own reassessment of, did we get it right, or did we not.

it was a very public case that departed from precedent. and to notify congress about the reopening of the case about the emails on the lunar laptop. i very much agree with jim's decision to announce the case, as we get int in july. in retrospect, i think i probably got that wrong. onwatch "after words" c-span2. journal" "washington continues. host: we are back with politico's steven shepard, who wrote about election do overs. since then, we have had a new election called in north carolina. is this an unprecedented act? guest: it is not unprecedented,

but that's been a long time, almost for a years since we had calledtion do over al for. in 1974, watergate, richard nixon, a pretty crazy time in politics, we actually had two election do overs because the louisiana, there was a concern about voting machines. a voting machine had malfunctioned in baton rouge, the way toas no know, so they ordered a new election. about it in terms of a senate seat, which is so valuable and so precious. we have a new hampshire senate seat where it was undecided into of 1975 before there was a new election, so this does not happen before, but it had been an awfully long time before

we had election officials throw their hands up and say we do not know who won, and the only just solution is to do it again. host: talk a little bit about what happened in the louisiana case. guest: we had a republican who was 44 posts ahead of the republican, jeff mccabe. that was an interesting scenario. of attentiona lot from the liberal primary challengers who won in 2018, alexandria ocasio-cortez, area presley, for example -- ariana pressley, for example. some of them have been in congress for a long time. one of the leading louisiana.ists in he ran and beat him in the primary, but that created an opening for a republican to win indiana. it is not happen a lot in the 1970's. voting machine malfunctions,

elections officials, no way to know who really won. iny ordered a new election january. that ended his political career. host: instead of a house seat, we are talking about a senate seat. more: this is a little political. you have democrat john durkin, republican louis wyman. he isa small state, but only ahead by 10 votes, so they have a recount. aheads case, wyman moves by two votes after the recount. just two votes. the governor of new hampshire was a republican. they certify wyman, sent him here to washington, a stone's throw from where we are now, but democrats holding super majority

in the senate. this is coming out of the watergate midterm, a terrible year to be running for office, and the democratic super majority refused to seat wyman. remember, each body gets to control the member of it, and itt ended up happening is played out for months and months. eventually, wyman realized it was too close, and he caved and gave in. the rematch and ended up holding the seat for only one term before he was unseated. especially the new hampshire election of are wed-earth politics, seeing that in the north carolina race that is going on right now? yout: we were for it while are you remember mark harris, and the north carolina republican party called for mark

harris to be certified as a winner. he was ahead by a pretty solid margin. there were questions about absentee ballots, whether they were actually filled up by the voters who submitted them, whether they were filled out by consultant for harris' campaign, which you are not allowed to absenteeomeone else's ballot, it is against the law. there were reports that someone had change them, which is obviously a different level of election fraud. so there was a time when republicans really wanted mark harris to be seated. hearinghat four-day last month, eventually mark harris conceded you know what, a new election is probably the way to go, and the north carolina republican party set we have to live with a new election. this coming monday, the state court will set the election

date, and that will really frame how it will go. mark harris says he will not run again in the new election. republicans need a new candidate. democrats have dan mccready, the democrat who lost narrowly in the vote count. he is running again. he has already raised a lot of money. he is raring to go. who is this challenge are going to be? when will that race take place? i think you will see things turned up a notch once we get into the campaign of this do over. host: let's let our callers joining the conversation. if you are a democrat, you can call in at (202) 748-8000. republicans, call in at (202) 748-8001. independents, you can call in at (202) 748-8002. and keep in mind we are always reading on twitter and facebook. on twitter, you can reach us @cspanwj. and on facebook, you can reach us at facebook.com/cspan. so in the new hampshire situation, you said the senate aclares that the bacon and

temporary senator was appointed. has that ever happened in the house? guest: all members of the house out to elected, you cannot have a governor or some other personnel went a member. we have had seats declared vacant or the house decides that somebody else, other than the certified winner, should serve. the happened as recently as 1980's, in indiana, the eighth congressional district, you had a long, protracted fight between democrats and republicans. democrat, frank mccloskey, was trailing republican rick recountedfter indiana its votes, but democrats have questions about how that recount to waste, and they essentially created a house committee to conduct their own recount. they ordered materials from indiana and counted all the votes and came out with the democrat ahead just by four votes, stopped counting,

the clear him the winner, seated him. republicans ended up walking off the floor. by stevea great book kornacki of nbc news called "the talked the blue," and he about how this moment in the 1980's really turned up the partisan dial here in washington over democrats seating mccloskey in such a controversial way. pretty moderate and congenial leader of the house republicans let this walkout. that was really unusual for that time. of more time bipartisanship, and you saw the two parties really be at loggerheads during this fight. you do not see that as much with the north carolina ninth district. bit clearer what took place here. republicans in washington have not really protested to have

harris seated. when you have these election do overs, when you have these controversies, does it make the american voter last trustful of the american electoral process? is an interesting question here i think it does to some degree. you may have seen last month mitch mcconnell, the senate majority leader, use this as a for increasedcall protections against voter fraud, which is not what we are talking about. this is not voter fraud. this is election fraud, it allegedly perpetrated by a consultant for the republican campaign, who was collecting absentee ballots. these are people who should not have the right to vote because voting in a locality

they are not supposed to, this is not what we talking about here, but this is where both sides are using to advance the americans right and access, whether it is republicans calling for more restrictive voting, to protect against fraud, whether it is democrats calling for looser laws with the voter id, preventing people from voting who may have the right to and -- be dissuaded or otherwise either they do not have a proper id or they cannot vote, if there are not enough early voting hours, they cannot vote on election day, they cannot get out of work, democrats are trying to make it easier. and increased protections that republicans want against fraud may make it harder. they are using these cases to make it harder. host: let's go to al who is calling from michigan. tell me how to pronounce your

town. caller: hello. thank you for taking my call. ask the question, it was a shame for the president of the united states. those large amount of money. trump had that mr. permission to nominate in 2020 , collusioncrimes with russia. host: i do not know if you want to talk about that at all, but i will give you a chance if you want to. have thisare about to case take place in the context of what is going on in washington feared there is another special election in north carolina that says the general election will be in july

or november. leslie jones, a longtime member from north carolina, passed away last month, so his seat will be bank it. -- vacant. there will be a primary in may. about in thelking battleground district could take place at the same time. it has been almost a month now since we had voters really weigh in on what they see in politics and what they see in washington in the midterm elections. i know in the last segment, you were talking about the 2020 presidential election. the iowa caucus is 11 months away. the situation in north carolina an earlylly be barometer. special elections are weird and unique. this one is especially weird and unique. it will be the first early barometer that looks at how americans and how voters in this district are viewing what is going on in washington. this electionif

is not held until july or november, any special report that robert mueller issues, americans will have a chance to weigh in on that. we tend to blow special elections out of proportion. this could be really interesting. host: we talked a little bit about this in our conversation, but does it affect the political future of someone who comes in after an election do over, say in a challenged election, does it affect that person, their political career going forward, or do they just forget about it and move on? is an interesting question. there is not really a case to establish a rule in how this works. a district that president trump carried by more than 10 points, obviously was so close in the 2018 election. democrats are over performed and to 2016 aces compared and 2018. that is why they had such a good

election. dan mccready, if he were to win this election, he will face a real fighter 2020, when presumably president trump will be on the ticket. this is a place president trump did very well. in the doadvantage over election later this year. even if he were to win the plection, he would be high ato republican target lists when it comes to the 2020 general election to unseat him in their quest to win back the house in 2021. host: once again, we are talking with steven shepard of political. we want you to call in, democrats, call (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001. independents, (202) 748-8002. let's talk to charles, who is calling from columbia, south carolina on the republican line. charles, good morning. caller: good morning, stephen --

jesse. -- steven, jesse. there are a couple of things that i think are true. one, there is evidence that the democrats were doing the same activity. you say republican election fraud on absentee ballots, i think the democrats were also shown to have done the exact same activity. but this was push more. in the last gubernatorial election, pat mccrory, who lost, the incumbent, filed a challenge over this same issue, and there was a lawyer for the democratic party that blocked that investigation. that same lawyer is the one that has pushed for the investigation in this case, when the democrats lost. the election board is dominated by democrats. i think the current election chairman formerly worked for a

guy named lindberg, who is one of the top democratic donors in the whole state. this is asaying is political -- this seat basically has been stolen. mark harris should have been seated. the investigation was pushed by someone who try to block the same sort of investigation in the past. i just want to get your comments on that. guest: sure. that was the arguments republicans made through most of the hearing and going into the hearing. this is -- obviously -- and i dallccrae add that mcrae inless, who was charged this scheme, had worked for democrats in the past. he was a political operative for hohire. when roy cooper defeated pat majoritythey had the

there, but they can order a new election, and it is something mark harris and the republicans conceded was appropriate at the end of a four-day hearing, which examined these allegations, not other allegations about whether democrats were collecting ballots as well. that is something that happens, where it is legal, for example, in california, republican stern is a "democrats did the same thing in california. it is why they did so well there in 2018," but it is legal in california, and it is not legal in north carolina. gym, and's go to brownsville on the democratic line. jim, good morning. caller: good morning. thanks for taking my call. if you can give me a second before you cut me off, but i do not understand, there was a republican running against a democrat.

this guy, his own family testified against him. they knew he was wrong. he stepped down because of whatever issues he had, but the reason he stepped down as because he knew he could not win. so what i do not understand, and maybe you guys can help me here, why is it that democrats have to run against someone else? he did not do anything wrong. this guy did something wrong. they should give the democrats, you know, the office, because he did not do anything wrong. he should not have to run against someone else. the republicans want him to run against someone else, because they know this guy is not going to win. host: i am actually getting that same question from a bunch of people on twitter. why should the democrat have to run again if he did not do anything wrong? why does there need to be a do over election? guest: well, there will be a do over election, but there are some questions about how this will work.

the board is expected on monday to set the new election. after that point, it is rumored that dan mccready, the democrat, may challenge the terms of the new election. inle this is all happening september, and state legislatures were about to leave for the year, this was a possibility. and republicans controlled the state legislature in raleigh. they passed a law, they basically change the election law so that if the court orders a do over election, and there is also a new primary, they just do over the general election. politicalrris' campaign was tainted in some way, they wanted to have the option of a different candidate running because they thought a different candidate might be stronger than someone who, perhaps knowing, perhaps not knowing, exactly what his consultant was doing. it is possible to democrat could challenge the new primary in courts and either ask the courts

to make it a do over between mark harris and dan mccready. mark harris says he is not going to run again. he says he is in poor health and does not want to mount another campaign. or potentially order them to do over both the primary and the general election, which what iwd who alsot pittenger, said he is not interested, so you could have two people running for a seat that they do not want just to take on the democrat. it is going to be interesting to see how it goes. it is still hypothetical. you cannot file suit for that until the new election is called , because he is not being injured in any way. but it is something to watch next week. you will see the dates on monday. if you are following this closely, later in the week, you may see a lawsuit filed to challenge the terms of how the

new primary is going to work and whether or not republicans will get another candidate that might be stronger than mark harris, who is tied up in all of this. host: we actually have a republican from north carolina on the line here. was callingo kristi from rockville, north carolina on the republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i was wondering why all the elections are different. is north carolina different from north carolina, where just anybody can call? are run atelections the state and local level. there are different rules. some ways, this does create a hot podge of different laws in different states. some states are more restrictive and require voter id. some states have really liberal early voting rules. you might be able to vote in september in the november general election.

you might have to have a really good reason to vote absentee, or else you have to vote election date. not everyone has the same access to the ballot box. that could be good or bad, depending on how you look at it. there is one advantage, though, and that is if we do have a number of, say, recounts or things like that, can you imagine a really close was heldial election under the popular vote that required a national recount? scalee that on a national in the national popular vote election. that would be really pretty difficult. so there are advantages and disadvantages to local control of elections at this point. even with the hr-1, the new bill that democrats are pushing, separate rules committee on tuesday, this is a law that would create some federal standards, but still our

elections would be conducted by state and local officials. host: for those of us not familiar with north carolina politics, tell us exactly where this race stands right now and what to look forward to next week. republicans have long dominated the congressional delegation there. it was a district that was not ,eally competitive in elections but it remains to be seen as 2019 will be just as good. there will be a new election scheduled on monday, and that will be the starter pistol. district ir mentioned, eastern north carolina, the governor, when he called for it, only gave candidates a week and a half for filing the filing deadline is already next friday. it is expected this district will also be an abbreviated filing period, so any republican candidates who want to jump in, they will have to do it quickly, they will have to get their campaign started ahead of a primary that could be as early as may, and then we can have a really intense special election.

we have had examples of this in the past couple of years, previous to the 2018 midterm, and pennsylvania with conor lamb's district, that is a district i think you spent a lot of time talking about. i think i was on "washington journal" at one point talking about it. this is a race we will talk about a lot is would move through the spring and the summer, and it will be conducted in the shadow of everything happening in washington, perhaps with donald trump and robert mueller, and everything with candidates. host: right now, there will be a primary and a special. guest: that is the plan. host: right now. [laughs] guest: democrats could sue to change that, but that is the plan. and there could be a primary runoff in a special. the candidate needs 30% of the vote was want to clinch the nomination in a primary. if you have a big republican field, and and no dominant candidates and nobody gets 30% plus one, then you would see a primary runoff between the top

two candidates and then the special election. host: let's let herb, who is calling from pennsylvania on the republican line, join the conversation. morning? are you this caller: i am fine. good morning, gentlemen. have the rights to recall? host: is there a recall for the house of representatives or senate in america? guest: there is no recall for federal officials. some states do have recall provisions. it is something you have seen recently, most recently in toconsin, where voters tried recall the governor, then governor scott walker back in to recall him in 2012, and he survived that. previously in california, voters recall gray davis and elected

republican arnold schwarzenegger. it is not something we have for federal officials. the only people that can be approved for a member of congress is a body itself. host: let's go to judy from virginia beach, virginia on the democrats line. judy, good morning. caller: good morning. , gentlemen. my problem is, who do we t rust? i mean, you have a lessor a right issue. who do we trust? you want more people to vote, and what is happening now is issues to we know there is a small margin of error that there is cheating going on. one man has to win bank by a large margin just make sure there is no margin of error in cheating. how do you go about correcting this issue when you have one group of people that are heavily prosecuted and the others are just let off with nothing? guest: i do think it was

interesting watching the hearing, four days of hearings in this case. this is something that was televised, and it was livestreamed. it was as out in the open as you could be. i think a lot of north carolina is viewed that is necessary to gain the public's trust in this process and make it clear that they were trying to conduct this and get to the facts of what happened by having a free and fair election and determine whether or not that is what happened in this case. host: we would like to thank steven shepard of political to be here to talk to us about his article. stephen, thank you so much. guest: thanks for having me. host: coming up next, dan puskar of the public lands alliance will begin to look at the public lands legislation that passed congress earlier this week. stay with us. ♪ sunday night on c-span's "q&a

u.s. army veteran ilene rivers on her book "beyond the call," about three women who went beyond the regular duty to help women in afghanistan and further the mission. eileen: one experience that was shared with me as there was a time when she felt men were trying to break her and test her and see if women could actually hack it. so they have this really happy gear, they have these weapons, and they were carrying it, and she pulls her aside and says no matter what happens, don't you dare start firing, and you better keep up. i have a feeling they're going to try to test us, and that is exactly what happened. >> eileen rivers sunday night at 8:00 eastern on c-span's "q&a." this weekend, booktv will be live from the 11th annual tucson festival of books, from the

grounds of the university of arizona. noon easterny at featuring republican strategist rick wilson with his book "everything trump touches dies." then journalists shane bauer with his book "american prism: a reporter's undercover journey into punishment." and a 50-year fight to exonerate an innocent man. professor and author greg landon with his book "the end of myth." on sunday, our live coverage continues with journalist dave: in his book "heartland, "heartland:union birth of a union."

coverage of the 11th annual tucson festival of books this weekend on booktv on c-span2. >> "washington journal" continues. host: we are back with dan puskar, executive from the , and he iss alliance here to discuss the resource management act that passed congress earlier this week. first of all, dan, thank you for being here. guest: thank you. host: tell us about what the public lands alliance is. guest: public lands alliance exists for one simple reason. we believe that the americans who own our parks, refuges, they deserve an incredible experience when they go there, they deserve federally protected land. they nevers out that get enough resources, enough expertise, and it is often global, nonprofit organizations that need to fill in the gap and do that margin of excellence.

the public lands alliance exists to represent the partners so that they can make significant contributions. host: so who are your members, and where do you get your funding from? guest: our members are the nonprofits across the country. here in d.c., we look at folks like the friends of kenilworth gardens, preserving that incredible stretch of the anacostia. but we also have the grand canyon conservancy, grand canyon forever, the rocky mountain conservancy. funding comes from our members, by and large, as well as other organizations. host: congress recently passed the national resources management act. does and whathat is one of the top things people look at when they look at that bill. guest: the one act is really a

compilation of 100 different in during the put 115th congress, but even then does not really tell the story. a lot of these bills have been in the works for years. they are bipartisan in nature, and they really are the kind of bills that are not controversial, so when you think ere, thee headlines thr ones i see most often are that more than 2 million acres of public lands are protected in new ways, and hundreds and hundreds of miles of rivers, trails, and deserts, whether that is 650 miles of scenic 2400s, more than miles of new national trails. we also have a number of new monuments, national conservation areas established. those are the big ticket items.

you also hear certainly about the fact that 30,000 acres outside the yellowstone national now athere is prohibition, into perpetuity, for gold mining there. so lots of great things happening. when we think about this bill, there are a couple of other things to keep in mind. wow,you imagine, 100 bills to achieve something major, it comes down to an upper of things. each of these individually went through a local process. elected officials worked with their states, which could be tribes, coalitions, businesses, that made sense in their community. build billey quickly together, and the entire bill produces the money the federal government spends, by negligible

amount, maybe $9 million, but it will not run of bills, and that is a good thing. but overall, we have all these new protections. he also increase the estate by over 15,000 acres. so both sides of the aisle have a lot here to get excited about. host: let's let our viewers join in by calling and. this time, we are going to break up the lines into regional lines , so if you are in the eastern north central time zone, we want to hear from you at (202) 748-8000. if you are him and the mountain and pacific time zone, we want to hear from you at (202) 748-8001. , we are alwaysd reading on twitter, @cspanwj, and at facebook at facebook.com/cspan. au said this bill with bipartisan bill. what is the likelihood of president trump signing this bill? guest: pretty good. the administration seems to be

pretty in favor of it. it passed both chambers with more than 80% of the chamber supporting, so well above anything they would need for a veto, but i do not think that is expected. again, these are noncontroversial acts, and really a lot of credit needs to go to those that put it together, senators murkowski and cantwell that put it together in the last congress, and then joe manchin who helped in this, and then on the house side, representatives bishop and grow ijalda, who actually handed the gaveled back and forth, both put their money where their mouth is to get this done. host: are there any specific thatsions in this case prohibit specific states, like utah, oregon, california, is there anything in the bill that really highlights how conservation is in those states? guest: sure. i think there are a couple of

great was. if we looked down in new mexico, for example, we recently created oregon desert mountain peaks national monument. that has almost 250,000 acres of new wilderness. a late example of their local friends groups working with elected officials and other this isders to say hey, a really valuable resource we need to protect. if we go to california, a number of the provisions of the act help create an interconnected landscape within the california desert, so if we go to a place like joshua tree national park, we will see an expansion of that park's boundary, in part due to donations by a group, the mojave desert land trust. if we shoot up to maine, we can see other expansions in a great place, one near and dear to my heart, acadia national park. k.at is an interesting par

it was created, by and large, through donations from landowners, and through an extensive process working with stakeholders and elected officials, they made sure to find a way to properly expand the boundaries on the peninsula, adding 1400 acres of donated land to continue to preserve the wild natural oceanfront there. host: let's let lynn, who is calling from california, join in on the call. lynn, good morning. um, i am very interested in this public lands alliance. uh, let's see, where do i start? there is so much misuse of public lands, that in order to preserve it, these groups are going around, trying to purchase it, so that they can put it into

wilderness and basically keep people out. the land management, between blm no agency services, have any money. they talk a lot about public-private partnerships working together, but when you do that, nothing ever seems to go forward. so it is kind of like a land grab that they are doing to "preserve the land," but then in the long run, it actually keeps people out. these public lands are for our used to recreate, and what needs to happen is a greater public awareness of how to treat the lands instead of abuse them, almost like smokey the bear did for teaching people not to play with matches, we need to have something like that, because people do not know how to respect the public lands.

and then we have groups like these come in and try to buy morland, turn it into wilderness, and then there is less public lands for the public to use. host: go ahead and respondhost:. guest: thank you for your question. a lot to unpack there. certainly there is a need for a ethic withinrdship the country as it relates to our public lands, and thank you for bringing of smokey the bear. 76 the birthday this year. host: yeah. guest: we are very excited for him. this bill have a number of provisions that i think work toward that, whether it is the creation of the 21st century conservation corps that provide for our land management agencies to have new and use your authority to work with youth and veterans to establish an indian youth service court, and to get younger folks to be able to , get anrn skills

education, and earn some money, as they are hoping to reduce the ourtenance backlog on public lands and create greater user experiences. we have the great outdoors app, which enables all fourth-graders, or 10-year-olds, around the country to get a free america the beautiful pass, so they can go and experience all of america's public lands. i really believe that those within the public lands alliance are not seeking to in any way lock up our public lands so that people cannot access them. i believe we are really there because we do care about the visitor aske experience. and that experience is wide and varied. sometimes it does include hiking. and there are some provisions

that include sportsmen. there are certain provisions the explore this act with forand forest service experienced hunters, recreational shooters, to go and experience the land as well. one of the interesting things about the way this bill can together is there are those gifts and takes, and on the national scale, our elected representatives came together and said if we create a little wilderness here, then we will also pull back somewhere else. about 160,000, acres of wilderness study area were removed, and now those areas can go and be used in other ways. the same time preserving a new 1.3 million acres of wilderness. while on the one hand, we try to create new opportunities for, yes, in that wilderness, maybe it is more about hikers, photographers to

experience it, we also create opportunities for hunters and anglers. testamentain, a real to the leadership in the congress to come up with a bill of balance. host: let's go to liz, who is calling from michigan. liz, good morning. hi, i am calling because i saw something in the initial listing of all the funding. i want to know what they consider private, and who are the private people who will be getting some of this funding from the federal government? guest: really with this bill, there is not much funding involved. one of the only areas of the bill that spells out a big price permanenty, is in the reauthorization of the land and water conservation fund. a really huge monumental

achievement to have that done. for those who do not know, the land and water conservation fund comes from a pretty simple premise. on federalat, if lands owned by the american people you are going to extract wealth, whether that is oil or gas resources, that some of that money should go back into conservation of the places enjoyed by and recreated on by those same american people. this does is it creates a fund, where you can place, on this authority, some $900 million annually to do that work. and just be clear, that money is not all going to the federal government for its use. there are reforms in this package to ensure that at least 40% of whatever money congress eventually appropriate goes to butfederal government, another 40% minimum has to go to the states and localities.

additionally, an additional 3% or $15 million of whatever total congress appropriate must go to recreational opportunities come as a can really experience the public land. here is the twist. these authorities are great. thise last four years, twice, so it is great that we will not have to reauthorize that again with a permanent reauthorization. however, you can have congress appropriate in one year of to $900 million. there is zero funding within this bill itself. use congress, it will be up to them to decide how much to put forward, and in the history of congress, they do not hit that top number. [laughter] host: let's go to robert, who is calling from clinton, maryland. robert, good morning. caller: good morning. congress has passed a law to build in the last week.

i noticed one bill that congress passed, 53 senators voted for infanticide. you have 53 senators who voted to want to kill babies after they are born, but none of you are talking about that. host: do you have a question about what we are talking about now? i think we lost him. let's go to tammy, who is calling from -- another one of those town names this morning. minnesota. how do you pronounce the name of your town? caller: you were really close. host: what is your question, tammy? if there am wondering are any problems in new mexico with the butterflies, and are they going to bulldoze anything

with the butterflies? host: i think she is talking about the border wall with the butterfly reserve. guest: we do not have anything to do with that. ofill say there are a number members within our network, certainly, that are always concerned when we are adding new requirements, new infrastructure in our public lands that is not driven solely from a conservation or recreation perspective. but i do think that our member organizations, nonprofits that are locally based around the country, they are also really great facilitators, right? solely to make sure places like the santa ana national wildlife refuge or big bend national park, that are some of those places along the border have a voice in their communities. for people to be able to talk through those issues. host: i noticed that you

about thein january impact on the federal shutdown on national parks. where does that stand? guest: i never want to speak for the national park service in particular on this. there are a lot of assessments that are still ongoing. it is unfortunate that some of the -- the real lasting, burning, searing images from this last shutdown are going to be the fallen trees in joshua tree national parks. not going to go back in a year or two. the damage here is long-lasting. it is unfortunate, it really is, that these places, owned by the american people, can be held hostage -- and let's be honest, that is what it felt like -- to the political winds. former director of

the national park service who often like to remark that it was tough to lead an organization that was there in perpetuity but have to manage it on an annual appropriation, and i think that is true. for the protection of all of our public lands, they really need dedicated funding and not to experience those kinds of interruptions. host: let's go to chuck who is calling from las cruces, new mexico. chuck, good morning. maybe: i have a comments, a question as well. i started learning about the oregon peaks reservation thing. acres,originally 5000 and it went up to 500,000 acres. and now apparently it is down to 250,000 acres, which i view the whole thing as a land grab. what i think is terrible was i

used to love to go out there, because it is a pretty place, but what i think is terrible is the roads are disintegrating terribly. it is hard to even get around out there today. the farmers used to take care of it. now they are kicking those guys out there. the last time i went out there, i saw "keep out" signs all over. that is telling to me. it looks like a land grab, and they are trying to keep people out, and they are not maintaining the area. that used to have an asphalt road. now it is just falling apart with potholes, and it is terrible. so i do not know what the purpose of that was, because it has gotten worse. guest: i really appreciate the question. just to make sure i make a distinction so as not to confuse anyone, the new wilderness is 200 50,000at acres in no way is representative of the entire

oregon desert mountain peaks national monument boundary. a much one piece of larger monument that really is designed -- the intention behind it is to have mulled all uses, with conservation as a key piece, though. i am glad that the caller mentioned that he has been to a couple of meetings in las cruces. i know that there has been a long public engagement with local elected officials, other stakeholders, members, like the friends of organ mountains of at speaks has been part long process over the last 10 years to really ensure that all voices are heard. one of the kinds of choices that , it is true, land managers can and sometimes do make, not necessarily because of a wilderness designation, though, is that those things have been created by man in the natural

environment may or may not be solution.ong-term sometimes over the years, the u.s. fish and wildlife service, can applied for maintaining certain roads within wildlife refuges, maybe they should not be maintained. maybe they should not be something that would put a whole lot of effort into, and that access can be different than being able to have, say, a four-lane road go through certain public areas. host: let's go to william, who is calling from harrisonville, missouri. william, good morning. caller: good morning. about, whywondering is the government out there in california, they put wolves out there, and it is

killing their cattle out there and everything. so why did they have to do that? farmers do not like that out there. another question is, i was wondering, eight year, two years spending money to find out which way the fish went up the mississippi, and i think that is ridiculous. they could save that money for something else. thank you for a much. host: wildlife management. is there wildlife management in this bill? guest: it is a great question. while there is not a lot of direct wildlife management, if we think about the wild life management as new provisions around saying, the endangered species act, you are not going to see that. nor, to the best of my knowledge, do we have fish up the mississippi or wolves in california, although, to be

honest, with over 100 bills put into this one, you never know. i am not aware of it at least. one of the great things is, and i mentioned this a little bit earlier, but to your point about california and the california desert of southern california, one of the things this bill does is pulled together a lot of disparate actions that can help create greater landscape ity so that mojave national preserve, joshua tree, death valley, and others can have greater resources that help wildlife corridors that already exist, stay maintained. so that certainly is a great benefit. who iset's go to betty, calling from oregon. betty, good morning. caller: good morning.

i rode wasld, and back in montana. i lived in montana. i am from oregon originally. all of this is well and good, but you get people to go out and because theseup, younger people do not want to be 100 yards from a cow. they think it is boring out there. so they cannot get people to go to yellowstone. so cleaning up after the gases that these people make. thank you. host: one of the things you said earlier, is you are talking about the madison path. tell us more about that. guest: certainly the 21st century conservation corps that performs the public land corps act is something that is

designed to help be a pipeline for that next generation of rangers, that next generation of leaders in nonprofits, in guys and outfitters and others who do work the places you love so well. i was up in glaciers last fall. she knows what she is talking about. it is a tremendous place, and you should all go visit, please. but that new authority will make it easier. it will make it much easier for the federal government to enter into agreements with the more than 130 controversia conservatn corps across the country who do a fantastic job of being pipeline for youth, for veterans, who are looking for a skill-building, a chance to be out in the outdoors and to do some good from the perspective of national service.

i am really glad to see that included in these provisions. caller: what i want to know is, why doesn't the federal for all ofmake a law these logging companies who go in and cut the timber, and they should replant the trees? >> logging on public lands. >> admittedly not an expert in this area. , when the forest service came over to the department of agriculture, when teddy roosevelt will in there back in the early 1900 the idea was exactly what the caller was hoping for so that, yes, they would take some trees for the use of commercial industry to

further the nation. but you did want to replant them as well. we certainly hope that does happen. ,> we would like to thank dan executive director of the public lands alliance for being with us here today. thank you so much. >> thank you. host: and i would also like to thank our viewers who called in today. join us again tomorrow morning at 7:00 a.m. for "washington journal." have a great day. ♪ announcer: coming up, interviews with new members of congress discussing their first days on hill.l

then, deputy attorney general rob rosenstein on the mother investigation into the 2016 election. and tonight, we go live to see back for remarks by president trump -- live to cpac for remarks by president trump. >> the 160th congress is the most educated group ever with 72% of lawmakers earning a graduate degree. c-span spoke with several of the new faces. daniel meuser is new to washington but not to politics. he served as the state secretary of revenue. it also helps to build a medical equipment company with his family. euerressman m commemorated you grow up? rep. meuser: i grew up in new york. my father was a police officer. my mom stayed home with us. when we went off to school, she went off to work. i had a brother and