>> we heard just a short time ago some of the officials and lawyers in the supreme court case on the citizenship question. they are excited to rule on the case at the end of the court's june. the chair of the white house counselor of economic advisors larry kudlow will speak at the

national press club. we will have coverage on c-span. you can stream it live on c-span.org or listen with the c-span radio app here is more from today's washington journal on the citizenship census question. today supreme court justices will take up a case looking at a request or desire by the trump administration to put a question about citizenship in the 2020 census. the administration wants the senses to be distributed to all people living in the united states next spring to ask are you a citizen of the united states. a group of blue states led by california and new york emphatically do not want a census citizenship question because they're worried it will make their residence less likely andeturn their census forms reduce their amount in congress after the tally. this bring will hear oral arguments.

to give you a sampling of what might appear as far as the question is concerned and here it is, asked the question is this person a citizen of the united states and gives you a variety of the united -- variety of questions -- answers. yes u.s. citizen by naturalization, the final box, no, not a u.s. citizen. should the trump administration have the question. our supreme court producer nicole highlights that when it comes to the mechanics heard today, attorneys will argue before the justices and get a total of one hour 20 minutes to make their case. the commerce department versus new york. for the remaining time of our program will be devoted to this idea of the question and should be added to the census if you say yes, call us at 202-748-8000

, if you say no, call us at 202-748-8001. you can make your comments known on our social media site at c-span wj and facebook.com/c-span. >> while we wait for the calls this morning on whether or not the immigration question should be included in the census, take a look at this exchange recently between congressman clay -- commerce secretary wilmer -- and commerce secretary wilbur ross about his motivation on including the question. >> you wrote to the committee a few months ago that the reason you did not mention all your efforts to add a citizenship letter wasfore doj's because these efforts were "informald i quote, and hypothetical discussions." that doesue respect,

not pass the test. >> that is the facts sir. i'm sorry you are dissatisfied. >> you testified three times, and each time you withheld critical information that congress needed to oversee ration for the 2020 census. mr. secretary, will you take responsibility today for misleading congress, whether intentionally or not, about the process you followed to add to the citizenship question to the 2020 census? >> i have never intentionally misled congress or intentionally said anything incorrect under oath. , you have liedy to congress, you misled the american people and you are complicit in the trump administration's intent to suppress the growing political

power of the nonwhite population. harmave already done great and you have zero credibility and you should, in my opinion, resign. host: that is the argument made by democrats that it's a political motivation to suppress the vote, republicans are arguing the trump administration arguing the commerce secretary has the right to decide what questions should be on the census and that this would give the government a better idea of who is in this country and protect minority voting rights under the voting rights act. we want to know what you think about. andy in florida, you say don't include the question. why? caller: because is geared towards identifying people is not born in the united states

and will tend to dissuade citizens of other naturalized or immigrants that are in the process of being naturalized from answering the census. to whole point has been exclude those people and to minimize their participation in the democracy and to maximize white voters impact which, by the way i'm a white voter, i don't know what's been done with this kind of approach -- i know what has been done with this kind of approach. the heinous things that can only lead to extreme damage to national security. that's all. host: we are showing you and your viewers the questions pedro laid out. this question according to the commerce department would be at the end of this 10 year census that would go out and 2020. the question would come at the end when you are filling out this document.

bill in columbia, maryland two says yes. caller: good morning. i think they should put the question on their, but the condition should be that the information gleaned from the census for apportionment, the noncitizens would not be representative of apportionment. but as far as resources to the communities, it should be included as resources to the community. i heard the discussion on washington journal and it seemed like they were throwing out the red meat of if you have it on there, then you are not going to get the resources from the federal government you need. ithink it makes sense to do and it makes sense to differentiate, take that information and differentiate it so it is not just a way for democrats to increase their

representation, but also it is possible to get to the resources where they are needed. host: how do you respond to people who would say this information will be used for the next 10 years after 2020 and then if you don't help those people discount those people, you are missing out on potential voters as we read earlier. jorge who works for latino 32 million voters will be eligible to vote in 2020, the largest ethnic minority vote in the country. an undercount will result in faulty data the census bureau might not be able to correct for the 2030 census. there are potentially eligible voters that won't be counted and won't be represented for 10 years till the next census. caller: i'm not following what you're saying because i

understand there's a 10 year lag between when the census occurs but if somebody is here and they are not a citizen, they should not be voting. so if they check off that they are not a citizen, than when it comes to apportionment representatives, that would not be factored into the representative. host: i hear what you are saying. happens ifng what they are not legal at the time of the census but then they become legal citizens before the next census? caller: that's the reality of life. and 10 years is relatively a short period of time in the grand scheme of things. host: elaine in washington, you say no. go ahead. caller: absolutely not. there is no real reason to try and identify who is the noncitizens. what we need to know is the

number of people by location, demographically with respect to apportionment i sort of agree with the last caller and when it comes time to vote, if noncitizens have completed the census, than if they become citizens and they are eligible to vote, that should be dealt with individually by the various jurisdictions. states, localities, however it is done in each state. many who are not citizens who may become citizens may not even try to vote. we don't even know that and i think under the present administration especially i think the information is likely to be misused. host: there is a clause does a privacy clause. you can find it there. the u.s. census bureau is bound by title 13 of the united states code that provides authority for the work we do and strong protection for the information we collect from individuals and businesses. it goes on to say it is against

the law for any census bureau employee to disclose or publish survey information that identifies an individual or business. it's true for even interagency communication. other entities don't have the legal rights to access the information. when these have been challenged, the confidentiality guarantee has been upheld. robert in california, good morning. what's your opinion? yes it my opinion is should be on the ballot. we need to know who these people are in the number of people we have in this country. county, we'vema been invaded since 1960 with these illegals and it's getting ridiculous. we pay for them, we pay for their kids in school, their employers, they don't take care of their workers. hospitals and we pay the bills. we need to do something about

these illegals. i joined the army in 1965 not that i wanted to, but there was no work in sonoma county we were so inundated with illegals. jobsjust put them in our in the construction fields, not out there on the farms and a lot of americans were out there working on those farms and they did something about getting rid of them over time. host: ok, robert i'm going to move on to carmen in texas who says no. caller: good morning. people in thet of united states. this is kind of racist all these people talking about legal and illegal. there's a lot of people here on green cards, they are not citizens, but they have a right to be here. it would be not a fair account of the people.

we not to know how many people are in the united states. -- we want to know how many people are in the united states. people here that are not citizens, they are paying taxes, this last caller saying they're taking over the job of construction workers and all of that, they are people that are working, they want to better this country. i just think there is a lot of racist people calling in and i'm very sad for this country. my people have been here in the united states even before it was the united states. i'm calling from texas. we have a lot of people coming in from central america. i belong to a church and we have a congolese congregation, they are very hard-working people and they pay their taxes. people have to chill out. it's a count of people.

this question should not be there. host: philip in kansas city, you say yes. caller: i do. i think it should be on their and we should know how many u.s. citizens we have and that way our states and stuff can figure illegals we've got in each state and how much money we are spending on them. host: ok. phyllis in kansas. go to oregon, leanne. why do you say no? caller: i think there's a lot of -- it just shouldn't be on there. it should be count the people. not these busybodies who want to know if they are illegal or no,l or what, it should be it should be counting the people , not of their beliefs. host: chris in alexandria, good

morning. should bethink they counted on the census. there are currently anywhere to 100,00075,000 people crossing the border each month. so for folks who are supporting not having that on the census you are essentially saying citizens of central america, who were on one side of the border a few days ago should now be counted in the census. this totally corrupts and perverts the original intent of our constitution. thank you very much. linda, why area, you against including the language? caller: >> because it all has to do with money. it means federal funds won't be

going into the larger states like california and new york. host: so you say count everybody so we have an accurate idea of what is needed? yes, because there are other issues involved. it has nothing to do with citizenship, but the number of people in the country. we don't even need this thing with redistricting. we will not have the number of people to represent us that we need in each state. everybody has to be counted. that is how it was always done. there might be an issue with the administration as it stands now. they want to keep the money in washington to divided among -- divide it among the different entities in the government and

not give it to the state. we are paying taxes to have this money returned to us. that is how i feel. host: ok, linda. dale in hudson, florida. how do you feel about it? theer: it should be on ballot. we need to know who is here and what division of who is here. if someone is illegal under the , and you claim everybody should open up the borders -- announcer: we will take you live to the national press coverage. -- press club. we will be hearing from national economic council director larry kudlow. >> please, turn off your cell phones. there are a lot of cameras in the room. i would like to draw your attention. there should be question cards. if you have a question for