>> coming up friday, the house gavels in and will debate a bill to ban discrimination based on sexual orientation or identity. the army secretary will speak at 11:00 eastern at the atlantic council. at noon, congressman michael mccaul, lead republican on the foreign affairs committee, talks about foreign policy at the heritage foundation. on c-span3, how climate in the arctic is affecting infrastructure. >> in about an hour, we will talk to georgia representative about the effort to pass a $2

trillion infrastructure package. later, wisconsin representative mark pocan on today's health debate. a bill to ban discrimination based on sexual orientation. >> we cherish the open door that we want to create for our country, but a big proportion of must come innts through merit and skill. >> good morning. we will begin with your reaction to president trump's immigration proposal. if you support it, (202) 748-8000. if you oppose it, (202) 748-8001 . if you are a green card holder, (202) 748-8002. you can also go to twitter or poster comments on facebook.

to your calls in a minute. here is what is in the president's proposal. he wants to put in a merit-based , skills-based immigration system. overhaul the asylum process, and get a new border wall constructed. that is what the president is proposing. here is a little bit more from him yesterday in the rose garden, where republican house and senate members and cabinet members attended his address. this is what he had to say about those that are migrating to the country who would get a sort of preferred status over others. [video clip] >> priority will also be given to higher wage workers, ensuring we never undercut american labor.

forrotect the benefits american citizens, immigrants must be financially self-sufficient. integration,romote assimilation, and national unity , future immigrants will be required to learn english and to prior tovics exam admission. [applause] through these steps, we will deliver an immigration system that respects and even strengthens our culture, our traditions, and our values. host: here is what is not in the legislation, according to "usa today." it will not do with a solution for dreamers, the so-called dreamers, the children brought here by their parents. there are roughly 3.8 million of them in the country.

it also would not deal with the nation's estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants in the country. "usa today" points out it does not include a solution for more than 300,000 foreign nationals in the united states legally here and the temporary protected status program. the speaker of the house nancy pelosi, who would have to agree to some immigration proposal to get it on to the house floor and negotiate with republicans in the senate, had this to say before the president's announcement on this idea of merit. word that they use is really a condescending word. are they saying family is without merit? are they saying people who have come to the united states in the history are without merit? certainly, we want to attract the best to our country and that includes many people from many parts of society.

, to quote will ronald about, what he said newcomers to our country being the vital force of america's preeminence in the world. we cannot close the door. this is about our vitality. the youth and entrepreneurship in the country, every president has recognized that since ronald reagan accepted this president. titles like heard merit, which is nonmerit. merit in the as of donald trump. host: this morning, support, proposal, president's and if you are a green card holder, we want to hear from you at (202) 748-8003.

ryan in alexandria, virginia. you oppose with the president laid out. caller: anytime i hear the president go into that monotone reading from the prompter style, he is unconscionable when he does it. why is coming up right now? you see him trying to pander to his base. agree with a lot of pelosi's comments that the opposition to certain fort-based strategies certain individuals coming in. my wife is going through the green card process right now, i'm active duty military. i'm kind of curious as to how the points system would reward her or award her status for getting into the country ahead of other certain individuals. that is primarily why i oppose it. host: can you tell us a little bit more about what the process is like to obtain a green card?

how long does it take, what do you have to do, how much does it cost? caller: yes, most lawyers in the take you forl $3000 to help you fill up the paperwork. from $1600d to range to $1800. individuals almost have to have $5,000 liquid on hand to initiate the process and for somebody who was low income or does not have an engineering degree, is not coming from a certain source of money, that would be incredibly difficult to come up with to ensure that the process goes smoothly. host: how long does the process take? caller: it really depends on what area of the country you are in. center for the different forms you have to send in range anywhere from about 6-8 , i know12-14 months

that in higher volume areas, it can stretch from a year and a half to two years. do you get a priority because she is your wife and you are a u.s. citizen? caller: i have been told i will be prioritized because she is the wife of a citizen and the wife of active-duty military. lawyers said typically when they see that, priority is given to them to help the process go in little bit smoother. host: ryan in alexandria, virginia. in oklahoma. you oppose, as well. caller: good morning. greta, can you name me? i'm calling from oklahoma and i oppose it. host: you are breaking up.

can you start over? caller: yes, thank you, greta. sorry. host: go ahead. one last chance. caller: ok, i'm calling you from oklahoma. i oppose this president's immigration law he is proposing. i oppose it because it just does not make any sense. host: all right. we move on to marshall in park ridge, illinois. for those that support, we need you to call in. marshall, let's go to you. caller: good morning. thank you very much for the service you provide our nation. you are unique and just a treasured asset for our country. i would just say that i oppose it because i believe it will phd's,e the mbas, the

the individuals here in america earning these degrees, going into significant debt. we have already seen what outsourcing of american jobs to the far east has done to the midwest and outsourcing skilled labor jobs and manufacturing. this will be the next wave of american job loss. i work for the university and have seen what the common practice of the visas being utilized to hire individuals from china and india and paying those people who have high skills and knowledge being paid a fraction of what an american would be paid and they are being brought into our country, doing the research, doing the financial analysis, so you folks with your mbas from blueblood

institutions, look out, this is the next wave if you let this happen, you were going to be outsourced just like the folks in ohio and michigan and what have you. host: "the washington post" notes that under the system the president is proposing, this is not law, not executive order, the white house is saying this is just the first step and they would have to pass something through congress, but the washington post says that under this system, 57% of green cards would be issued based on professional skills. at that is as opposed to 12% now. h-1b v says allow workers to stay for work. they are capped at 85,000 per year, but renewables do not count against the cap. sponsored by

colleges, universities, or nonprofits. to the laborest department about the wages and working conditions they will offer h-1b workers. astoria, oregon, you support. the morning. caller: good morning to you. and votedp supporter for him. that i got a move questions about. i agree with the last caller. but yet i think that this is a political move for trump to try to get the democratic congress to negotiate with him on his proposal. host: right. think: and i just, i just

that he is making his move -- not everybody is going to agree with him that voted for him, but i have mixed feelings about what his proposal is, but yet i think it is a political move, like i said before. to try to work with the democratic congress. host: ok, why do you have reservations? and coulter, conservative , "howng out yesterday, about language proficiency for ll, a continuous vertical brick or stone structure -- trump's bill does nothing about dreamers, doing nothing means they get to stay, and yet another year goes by without enforcement against millions of illegal aliens." .he is skeptical saying no wall

the same massive levels of illegal immigration. not even a serious bill. do you have the same reservations as ann coulter? caller: i do like him coulter -- ann coulter, but she is really far right. i'm more of a middle-of-the-road type of guy. i really don't, have much more to say. host: mark, you oppose. caller: of course i oppose this. my parents and grandparents were italian immigrants. they had no special skills. on my mother's side, my grandfather was a tailor. on my father's side, he worked on a small vineyard. forget about language proficiency. my grandparents, none of them on

both sides, grandmother, grandfather, mother, father, they never learned english, to be honest. learn english.d italy.nts were born in my siblings and i are all licensed professional. i one brother is a physician in phoenix. my sister is an rn. i'm a licensed accountant. this is un-american, greta. to say thatculous we are only going to let a certain type of people in. who knows who is going to wind up -- my grandparents could not speak a word of english and their grandson is a physician. host: ok. we will go to caroline, ventura, california, who supports the

president. caller: good morning. host: tell us why. caller: pardon me? host: tell us why you liked what he said yesterday. caller: i like it. i support this president. we need to fix our immigration. he is doing this first step to take care of it. congress is not doing much. .t needs to be started i live in southern california, high taxes. you know, we need to do something about it. --is taking the first at step and doing something about it. host: when you say we need to do something about it, why? caller: number one, we have the border. the borders need to be taken care of. our legislators isn't doing much. they talk about it, but they

don't do anything. taxes, and ihigh see that there is a school in investigated,not but they said they have a school where all they teach is spanish. they should be teaching english to these people that are here. lindsey graham earlier in the week unveiled a proposal to deal with a siloed laws in the country, one part of the immigration proposal. he had with him customs and border protection, a chief operating officer, who laid out what the situation is at the southern border. >> never before has the united experiencedr patrol

a situation where agents spent more than 50% of the time caring for families and children, andiding medical attention, acting as food service providers. apprehension numbers are off the charts. let me briefly go over some of the numbers today. , we haveis fiscal year apprehended nearly 520,000 people from the southern border. in the past seven days, we have averaged over 4500 arrests per day. in the last two weeks, we have had our highest single day, over 5200 apprehension's and our single largest group of more than 420 illegal aliens. already this fiscal year, we have surpassed the total southern border apprehensions of every fiscal year since 2009. the number of family units and unaccompanied children have skyrocketed.

so far this year, we have apprehended more than 285,000 and more than 50,000 unaccompanied children. in the month of april alone, we had 42,000 children in custody. he talked about those that are coming from central america seeking asylum. throughook at the 2013 2017 figures. , 13% ofse years migrants coming to the country were refugees. 14% were getting a visa for employment. peoplee family sponsored migrating to the country. 45% were immediate relatives of u.s. citizens the family route between 2013 and 2017 making up the most, the largest portion of

our immigration system. immediate family of u.s. citizens can sponsor their spouses, unmarried children under 21, and parents for a green card. this category does not have an annual numerical limit. family sponsored preference the says, over 226,000 green cards reserved each year for other categories of relatives. u.s. citizens can sponsor a dull children and siblings, while green card holders can sponsor spouses or unmarried minor or adult children. there is also the employment route. 30,000 green cards are available each year. these categories were created as part of the immigration act of 1990 and the numerical cap has not been adjusted since. case withso the family preferences. the president tweeting on immigration this morning saying, open border patrol apprehending record numbers of people at the

border. bres, of which there are many, are being detained and will be sent home. all people that are illegally coming into the united states will be removed. please do not make yourselves too comfortable. givethe democrats themselves a badly needed when? he says there is a good chance. cover the that immigration. "the plan may be dead on arrival, but it is really about 2020." trump's latest immigration plan came with no democratic outreach. going no further than the white house garden. "the hill" newspaper, the

capitol hill buzz saw. you oppose, bernie in florida. caller: good morning, thank you for taking my call. designatettempt to only educated people into the country by merit is a ploy. the ploy is this. people to make a living are played well. it cuts their payroll probably in half. the more they import, the more bottom line goes up, and workers that are american go down. he is only interested in bottom line. not the american worker. this claim is disaster for the tech industry as far as workers

are concerned. people go to college and are saddled with debt, they learned the skills, they have no place to work. host: david, you supported in texas. caller: good morning. what the fellow just said and with several others have said, it is just not true. listen back to discussions about the have had growing economy, one of the biggest concerns was whether or not the u.s. would have enough of the skilled labor to fill the jobs that were there. we don't have enough people educated, trained, and ready for the jobs that are available. there is a really good chance it is going to slow down the economy. the trump plan does not call for

everybody to be educated, it puts us back on more 1965 footing. they made the law much more family oriented, which then turned the ratios and relationships completely upside thosend made it where people were coming from south and central america, mexico, it became all about family reunification. it is kind of like the corporate tax. people get all upset thinking because they don't like the idea of corporations and rich corporations are paying less in taxes. that was not the point, the point was we were losing tens of thousands of companies and manufacturing companies overseas , where just about everywhere else in the world were they could get much lower tax rates. this plan is designed to put us on economic footing to compete.

all the merit-based thing is doing is basically what candidate does, what england does, probably most of the western countries in the world do. where jobs area getting more technical, even the manufacturing jobs. they have to have more technical .kills it just makes common sense. the idea that trump is not of the on behalf american workers is nonsense. he is working on building the wall. ann coulter is really getting under my skin. he has gotten such resistance to building the wall. it has taken a weeks and weeks of people watching. the number probably getting

through is three times that many. where in conjunction with the prison reform, where people are getting out of prison , the lower end of the economy, the 3.2% increase in wages, that is an average. the percentage increase at the closer to 6%. they are getting the biggest of the increase. the unemployment rate for high school kids is probably the lowest rate in 40 or 50 years. a hard timee having finding people to fill these jobs. the trump administration announced that the social security administration is letting employers know that they have employees working for them that do not match their name. these things are common sense.

they are being done for the first time. people knew for decades that there were 3 million people whose names did not match the social security numbers. they know where they are, the states they are in, but there was a law that did not let them cooperate with the irs to get a direct match and notify people. it is crazy how much has been built in to our immigration system over the decades to put us in this situation and the trump administration is doing things that make common sense. they are going to help everybody, including immigrants who want to come here legally. we must have immigration. i don't know too many people to realize this, we have to maintain -- they just announced this last week that the birthrate dropped to the lowest amount in decades -- we have to have a replacement rate. do we want to replace the -- withon with older

grandparents and uncles or with isnger -- one of the points you get younger and you can contribute to retirement funds for a longer. -- longer keyword of time. there is still a large percentage dedicated to family reunification, it is just that it is only done two the point of mothers, fathers, brothers, and sisters. keep in mind, there was that one terrorist guy who had brought in 20 relatives from afghanistan. host: i will just add to what you are saying. view its grants about one million visas per year. president trump said he would at thathold it steady level. david also mentions 1965, i think he was referring to lyndon b. johnson, when he signed an

immigration bill into law at the statue of liberty in new york. this is from the lbj library. signing this legislation. said thatgton post mr. trump's speech was a most postponed as officials scrambled to find an appropriate location. jared kushner wanted to elevate the event. they considered trump giving the speech at the statue of liberty. that would have carried historical significance. lyndon johnson did it in 1965. if you want to learn more of that, go to the lbj presidential library website. in north plains, new

jersey. good morning. caller: good morning. opposed to president trump's plan. and i do feel that it is about that the democrats and the republicans worked together on this big problem. politics should not be part of this. children that have come here with their parents are the most lnerable. -- vu our two parties have to start working together on this because it is a big problem and a human being problem. we have to have our government work on this. do you think it is , the last time the nation's immigration system was

overhauled was 54 years ago -- every president has talked about and congress has talked about trying to do something -- do you think it is possible? it can be possible if they take the politics out of this and work together with their hearts. to get this thing resolved. it is human beings who are hurting. and politics have to stay out of and the the democrats republicans have to start working together. host: "the washington times" calls it déjà vu. another day, another white house immigrations each. they start with 1993 when bill clinton delivered a talk. go to january 7, 2004, george w. for filing for a program

foreign guest workers. in 2006 and president obama in 2014, all of by president trump in 2019. take a look at those moments from the c-span archive. [video clip] >> i propose a new temporary matchrogram that will workers with willing american employers were no americans can be found to fill the jobs. this program will offer legal totus as temporary workers the millions of undocumented men and women now employed in the united states and to those in foreign countries who seek to participate in the program and have been offered employment here. this new system should be clear and efficient, so employers are able to find workers likely. live you expect people who

in this country to play by the rules. we expect those who cut the line to not be in further rewarded. we are going to offer the following deal. if you have been in america more than five years, if you have children who are american citizens or legal residents, if you registered, pass a criminal background check, and you're willing to pay your fair share of taxes, you will be able to apply to stay in this country temporarily without fear of deportation. you can come out of the shadows and get right with the law. that is what the deal is. >> law enforcement professionals have requested $5.7 billion for . physical barrier at the request of democrats, it will be a steel barrier, rather than a concrete wall. this barrier is critical to border security. it is also what professionals at the border want and need.

this is just common sense. the border wall will very quickly they for itself. host: that was president trump early in his tenure at the white house. outlined a merit raise plan. the lines are divided. (202) 748-8000. if you oppose, (202) 748-8001. if you have a green card, (202) 748-8002. bolivia, you support. caller: yes, i do support. there is very little coverage about what is going on in the , especially ins predominantly black communities. whenever you have black people

asking, especially in places like east l.a. and compton and those areas where they are asking legislators to stop with the sanctuary cities -- that guy --loy ofout a floyd p getting skilled workers here, but what about the ploy of lumping black people in with people from other countries? that is a ploy to get black people to help other people to bring their own demise. kidschool systems, the from what i understand, a lot of the blackic boys, boys cannot talk to the hispanic girls. it is almost like a curved -- coulter war. all of these things are going on in these predominantly black communities.

overrunning a lot of the inner-city areas and no one is looking at the sanctuary cities where predominantly black people live and how they are asking elected officials to do something about the illegal immigration. so, it is a ploy to get black people to help bring people in here by saying they should have some type of brotherhood or sisterhood with people of color. no, we are americans and we need to stand with america and do something about this illegal immigration. that is the other thing. thehear a lot of talk about president's against immigration. that is another ploy because it is a lie. we are against illegal immigration. we do want the immigration system fixed, we want a border tol, and we want our schools

be better, our hospitals, all of our services are being divided and taken away from people in this country, including the housing come the homelessness is just ridiculous. i see so many homeless people in a lot of these areas and they are mostly white and black people from this country. i rarely see any thousands of unemployed -- i'm sorry, homeless illegals. roseannwill move onto who opposes with the president's going to say. thank you. i oppose it 100% because it is based totally on bigotry as far as i'm concerned. not necessarily racist, because i'm sure he would allow a phd or , he referred to

people from norway, nobody should forget that, but to base an immigration procedure or policy on who you are and how smart you are and if you speak american. really an it is just bigotry. host: how do you respond to the president and others saying that canada does it. i don't know canada doesn't. i don't believe what president trump says. i would have to look into it and see what canada really does. host: i will show you. competing approaches to selecting economic immigration. canada, if you are able to do candidate, you submit an online express application. the candidate is then assigned a score according to a

comprehensive ranking system. candidates with the highest to thes are invited rounds of invitations, which happen every two weeks. you have 60 days to submit an electronic application come you must provide evidence. then the applications are assessed by an agency to ensure program eligibility and admissibility requirements, medical exams, background check, etc. if you cancel that, you are approved. yeah, it looks like it happens in 60 days or 120 days. canada does not have a statue of liberty, america does. this is a country of immigrants, maybe canada is, but they don't have a statue of liberty.

we do. supports the president's immigration plan. your previous caller spelled it out. we have a security problem, we have a cultural problem, and we have an economic problem. economically speaking, we do need to screen people to see if they can contribute economically. right now, we are being overwhelmed with waves of people who want to depend upon the taxpayer to take care of them and it is really congress' fault when the laws were changed in the 1960's, i vaguely remember that because i'm old enough to remember that. there was a civil rights component to it and an emotional component to it. there was a biography or television presentation that was .ade about immigrants working

-- working the fields in california. so all of those issues that are mentioned that your other colors our issues that have to be resolved and until congress decides to get the huevos to do something about it, it will continue to be a disaster. [video clip] >> our plan includes a sweeping modernization of our dysfunctional legal immigration process. is totally dysfunctional. the system will finally be fair,

transparent, and promote equality and opportunity for all. every year, we admit 1.1 million immigrants as permanent legal residents. these green card holders get lifetime authorization to live and work here and a five-your path to american citizenship. most prized citizenship anywhere in the world by far. currently, 66% of legal immigrants come here on the basis of random chance they are admitted. it does not really matter who that relative is. another 21% are issued by random lottery or because they are fortunate enough to be selected

for humanitarian relief. contrary totion is american values. it blocks out many qualified people from around the world. you would not believe how many countries like canada create rules that america does not. we are not able to give preference to a doctor, a .esearcher a student who graduated number one in his class. we are not able to take care of it, we are not able to make those incredible breakthroughs. host: president trump in the rose garden yesterday spending

30 minutes or so outlining his immigration proposal. it in itst to watch entirety, go to c-span.org. if you want to go through previous presidents, you can find it if you do a search at the top of our website on c-span.org. our video library reached a major milestone this week. we surpassed 250,000 hours available. 28.5 years it would take you to watch all of that programming. all the content can be viewed for free at our website. to explore some of these features, we've created a new quick and easy guide to the video library. click on the quick guide next to the search bar and you can find it all their area the reaction from democrats to the president's proposal yesterday. senator chuck schumer tweeting out this.

"today, the statue of liberty museum opens. billresident's immigration is an insult to our grand tradition of welcoming immigrants from all walks of life." "merit-based is code for those who can speak english and are already employed. not reflect the diversity and strength of our country. sayingther freshman trump's immigration plan would have a devastating effect on millions around the world. our nation should be a beacon of hope to the world. we should be welcoming immigrants, not treating them like criminals. amy, you support. good morning to you. caller: good morning. yes, i do support it. isfar as the language, there

already a language component in the naturalization law if people look it up. texas to wonder here in with all the people coming through on the border, how are these people being physically screened. i'm a retired nurse and there is a lot of really bad bugs that are starting to cook up. these children, have they been vaccinated, are they going to be vaccinated? outbreaksing measles vastly increasing in the country. as a nurse, those are my concerns when you have people flooding through. that is just a really good way to get an epidemic started. host: got it. petra, you are a green card or visa holder? caller: i'm a green card holder.

host: how did you get it? caller: i got married in germany. my husband was in the military. host: when was this? caller: it was 1976. host: you still have a green card or have you applied to become a citizen? caller: no, i still have a green card. host: why not apply to become a citizen? caller: right now, i cannot afford it. host: how much would you need? caller: of $1100. host: ok. do you have to renew your green and isery so many years that the original one you received? i have to renew it every 10 years and that is another $800. host: how long does it take? caller: it takes about two months for it to go through.

host: what do you have to provide the government to get a renewed? and whatll the history you have been doing and where you have been working and make sure that you don't have no criminal record in that time that you were here. donnie -- cut truck, i'm sorry, i dida, i'm not get your opinion. caller: i support the president on immigration because right now , the system is actually andning the social security it -- i how do you say forgot. things there is a lot of

in this immigration things that need to be done. lot of of the merit, a the immigrants that come over here do not speak the english language, which that needs to change. i had to learn it when i came from germany. i had to take classes in order to get a job and for me to fit in, into the american society. hold on a second. host: i'm going to move on. donny, you will pose. caller: i just not like chop. -- trump. donald trump, no way. lindsey graham and mitch mcconnell. they have him on the tv 24 hours per day.

could take him off television, we would all be a lot better off. host: let's keep it civil. no need to call names. we want your opinion about the policy legislation that the president of the united states has announced. caller: [indiscernible] they started out with separating the kids from the parents. he done it and he knows he done it. mcconnell and lindsey graham back him up 100%. ok.: in case you missed it yesterday, our coverage on capitol hill, we covered several different hearings. one of them was about the hiv ceo ofion drug with the the company. if you missed it, you can find it on c-span.org. pusheda hearing that was

by a freshman congresswoman alexandria ocasio-cortez. had some tense exchanges during this hearing. the other hearing we covered was with the fiancee of the saudi journalist jamal khashoggi, she testified about the dangers of covering human rights as a journalist. also, quite a lengthy hearing on capitol hill yesterday about maternity health and mortality. a hearing that was with the oversight committee and the house with witnesses, doctors, and state officials testifying about that issue. finally another hearing that we covered. this was about the event horizon telescope and the blackhole that was discovered. for those science and space geeks, this hearing might be for you.

you can find it all at c-span.org. russ, you support the president's proposal. go ahead. caller: yes, i have my son, he is a homeland security police officer and he was just a ploy to mcallen texas and this was a week ago. i talked to him. he said he has been in afghanistan, iraq, he said, i've never seen anything like this. he said the one night he was out , they had 1500 people cross the border in front of them. two of his buddies, they had to go to a dollar store parking lot, where they had 400 people standing there with their arms up waiting for these people. my son said this is going to affect this country for decades to come if they don't do something about this. ms. pelosi and chuck schumer say how this was a manufactured

crisis. now you see pelosi yesterday on tv saying, we never said it was not a crisis. how can these people sit there and have these politicians that are so high up in our government , sit there and lie to the faces of the american people on national tv. they sure did not want them going to their house when president trump said they were going to send them up to pelosi and chuck schumer's house. it was a whole different tune then. a national crisis. my son is there. he says it is going to change this country for decades. people have to start talking to their people that they elected. host: i want to show that moment you are talking about yesterday with the speaker of the house. [video clip] >> there is a humanitarian crisis at the border.

some of it provoked by the actions taken by the administration. friends fromour the evangelical community when they came in and testified in the last congress in one of our hearings. , refugee in and said resettlement program, the united states refugee resettlement program is a crown jewel of american humanitarians. the evangelicals. the association, the representative. what is happening at the border is tragic and we hope to adjust some of that in the supplemental , the disaster supplemental to provide some of the resources needed there. you take children out

of the arms of their parents, would you separate families, when you do what the administration has done at the border, you are making matters worse. it is really sad. we want tocourse have comprehensive immigration reform. that is the answer to so many of our challenges and we understand our responsibility to secure our border, but the manner in which the administration has gone forward undermines our humanitarianism as a country. we will hopefully work together in a bipartisan way to address this. , thet is a crisis, yes crisis is a humanitarian , the more the administration way.in the shameful

host: will go to steve in north carolina. you oppose the president's plan. caller: good morning, greta. i would like to make a couple comments. people have been talking about the language issue. generally aat this, first generation immigrant never learns the language. second-generation speaks english and whatever their national language was. the third generation speaks only english. you can check that out for a fact. s storego into any lowe' in the country, they will be doing advertisements in spanish. the reason is so many of their customers only speak spanish. the charlotte paper a couple years ago interviewed 400 recently unemployed people. andf them were i.t. people

they had been replaced with foreigners. so, that is what is going to happen. that i find it interesting parents came here is an extended family and it needs to be logical, sensible way. may i say, greta, you are absolutely the most beautiful commentator on tv. host: let's go to tim in maine. thank you for taking my call. to ait comes to relating policy that donald trump is trying to evangelize or endorse, sometimes i find it necessary to separate the man from his policies and i did vote for donald trump.

i'm not a fan of his communication style. sometimes, i think he is in a some self from others, simply by his personality, but when it comes to listening to what he is trying to do, sometimes i find it very helpful for me to relate his policies to however in my own home and how i'm a single .ad, divorced sometimes, it's best for me to separate my ex-wife from what she wants to tell me. sometimes, it is helpful to separate the person you are dealing with from what they are trying to tell you. when it comes to a merit-based policy on immigration, that seems to align with how i let people in my own home. i don't let just anybody walked

into my home with my children. again, i'm trying to keep this i simple as possible because know there are a lot of different reasons for public policy. host: i understand the point and i will leave it there. ,irst, this weekend on book tv our c-span cities tour visits milwaukee as we explore the history and literary life. here is the milwaukee mayor on the economy of the city and the impact of hosting the dnc national convention. [video clip] >> milwaukee is on the shores of lake michigan. it is historically best known for beer, but the economy has changed pretty dramatically. we are proud to be the home of miller, but we have diversified a lot since we were the machine shop for the nation. i think a lot of midwestern cities have suffered because of the attention that has been paid to other parts of the country,

but you look at the cities in the midwest, we are all fighting back. you have a letter new industries popping up here, including northwestern mutual, a major anchor here, harley davidson is headquartered here. we have a lot of great jobs were people can support their families. will be theilwaukee host of the 2020 democratic national convention. this will be the first time in the history of the city, in the history of the state that we will be a host to a major political party national convention, so it is a big deal here and we are very excited about it. right now, we are beginning to assemble the team, but we will have many thousands of visitors here. we will really be the center of 2020ical attention in july as the democrats pick the next candidate to run for the democratic candidate for the presidency. host: you can learn more this weekend as part of the c-span exploring the

history and literary life of the cities. find it at you go to c-span.org/cities tour. let's get in edward who is in greenbelt, maryland and opposes the president's immigration plan. good morning. caller: good morning. i am an african-american scientist. what miss nancy pelosi is saying. my father was an immigrant. our country is an immigrant nation and we are blessed to have immigrants in this country. i am proud of what the women are doing. you look at congress. for the first time in history we have -- we have foreigners in the congress. countryho came to this

as immigrants to this nation. manthing is i oppose this -- what the president is doing for two reasons. we have the electoral college in the popular voting system. hillary clinton one that by nearly 3 million votes. this man want electoral college. he is hollering out this nation americare to protect from foreign and domestic enemies and this man pretends he loves america. that bothers me. the reason why i called in i have a feeling for this nation. we must go on. this nation is an immigrant nation. what nancy pelosi is talking about, if we don't continue to foster this nation and love this , we are goingople

to suffer. keep up the good work. i thank you very much for taking my call. host: we are going to take a break. when we come back, we will talk to two members of congress. first, representative rob woodall of georgia. fund a talk about how to $2 trillion infrastructure deal. congressmanmocratic mark pocan of wisconsin. he will talk about today's house of vote on the equality act. we will be right back. ♪ >> this weekend on book tv, we are live from the kid there's bird book festival. are all they coverage begins saturday at 10:15 a.m. eastern.

include vince houghton. at 11:15 a.m. eastern. etan15, former nba player thomas with we matter, athletes and activism. washington bureau chief of usa today susan page enter book the matriarch: barbara bush and the making of an american dynasty. the kid there's bird put festival this weekend live on book tv on c-span2. eastern on:00 p.m. american artifacts, we are at the library of congress to learn about a muslim scholar from west africa, where he was captured and sold into slavery. he wrote the only known american slave narrative in arabic.

we see his autobiography and several documents from the collection. >> it went from hand to hand. people felt it was important enough to carried on. this is the only known existing manuscript in arabic. artifacts,erican sunday at 6:00 p.m. eastern on c-span3. >> washington journal continues. host: joining us is congressman rob woodall, a member of the budget committee, here to talk about this $2 trillion infrastructure package. between the president and democrats. i want to show our viewers what we are talking about. repair roads, bridges and transit, upgrade wastewater infrastructure and upgrade

broadband in underserved areas. how do you go about this process? what you do first when you have the president and democrats agreed to a number? guest: it is even a lower bar than that. we had presidents at democrats agreeing in a meeting. the more difficult conversation will happen next week when they sit down and talk about how to pay for it. we spent so much time talking about those issues that divide us. come,and bridges back rural broadband, these are not republican or democratic issues, these are community issues. if we can break through on these issues, i think it will pave the way to a more productive congress over the next 18 months. host: where will be the sticking points? guest: how to pay for it is number one. are we getting the best value for our dollar is number two. i come from a conservative state

in a conservative district. when we had transportation challenges, we get performance bonuses to contractors. fiscal conservatives don't mind paying for concert -- don't mind paying for performance. we will talk about where do we get the money and how are we spending it. are we throwing it away on worthless regulations or investigate in ways that are environmentally responsible. one man's trash regulation is another man's treasure regulation. host: how will you prioritize what are the infrastructure needs in certain states versus others? will you just blanket give money to a state, this is what you get? guest: you have identified what i would call the third-highest challenge. we have states that have done nothing, waiting for the federal bailout to come. and then we have states that have done everything, raising local money, raising taxes and

trying to keep up with the 21st century plan. will we need to bailout some states that have not done enough? we are. there are real concerns in those communities and we will have to pay attention. do we need to reward states that have done everything right? we do. we need to make sure in this infrastructure package, we don't discourage the responsibility that states have taken on and localities have taken on and finding that level playing field be very difficult to do. host: on the question of how to pay for, some point to the gas tax. 18.4 cents per gallon on gasoline, 24 point four cents per gallon on highway diesel fuel. there is a tax on heavy vehicle use. tax on trucks and trailers. this is how infrastructure is paid for now. guest: that is right.

we have two different bills that we have a shot at. , water,astructure bill broadband, many needs that america has. the second is a highway bill that expires next year funded out of those gas taxes, those tire taxes, and we don't bring in enough money today to fund the highway. i drive an electric car today, i am not paying my fair share in the gas tax. my mom's car is getting twice the gas mileage that she did in 1993. the gas tax is going to have to go away and get replaced. we have some choices. it does not mean someone is tracking you every day of the week, you might turn in a form once a year to show how many miles you had last year and how many miles i have on my car this year. it is a user fee that pays for

highways. i think it is important to keep it as a user fee. taxes are something someone else pays so we benefit, user fees are what we pay to benefit. i am in favor of that. had someone from the american society of engineers. they grayed our countries infrastructure every year. this is what his views are on imposing a vehicle tax to pay for infrastructure. [video clip] >> i am very interested met. i think that will be the wave of the future. we have a fairly low percentage of electric cars. the gas tax is probably the way to go for the next five to 10 years. as we think about the future and the way cars are power, we will have to look for a way to charge people for the actual miles they drive and be less concerned about how their cars are powered. host: what you think? guest: he is exactly right. when you need to bring in one dollar tomorrow, we have a gas

tax rate to go. chairman -- he proposed the bill before he retired last year. he said we have to create a 21st century system that will be vehicle miles traveled. to pay for roads this month, next month and a month after that, i am willing to use the gas tax as a ready to go funding proposal. that is what we will watch for. are people going to go back to old and familiar, or are they going to do it because we do need a bridge to a new system and we are only going to use it temporarily? if it is temporary, i will be on board. host: a republican, our first call for the congressman. go ahead. caller: how are you doing? these progressive city councilman need to come fix the potholes in my neighborhood. how are you going to get these

democrats to fix the infrastructure of the u.s.? it has been put off for so long by all the people in elected government. like donalda person trump and you have people like nancy pelosi and chuck schumer, they are directly at odds with each other. i don't believe they will get they don'tcause i -- want to see donald trump have a win. guest: i worry about what you just said. there is a presidential election right around the corner. have we come to that place in america where if the other side is proceed to win than i am perceived to lose? i don't think that is the way it has to be. i think we can all win. when the pothole in columbus gets fixed, everyone in columbus wins. preserved,quality is we all win. it has been true that we have had a reluctance of the sides to

get together on big issues. when we try to talk about immigration, nancy pelosi and chuck schumer said no to the president's invitation to come to the white house. this time they said yes. there are a lot of folks saying it is impossible, but the way we have always gotten big things done in this country is to bring the sides together. i can go through a long list of big american successes -- they weren't done by democrats or republicans alone, we did it together as a country. that opportunity exists and divided government today, the question is will we say it yes to it. i think we will. -- ir: i am calling to ask am wondering why we can't just put this on the credit card. we put the tax bill on the credit card. is it because it is a democratic bill or democrats want to always pay for something? why can't we put it on a credit card? guest: it goes to what we were

talking about earlier. would we talk about taxes, were not talking about raising taxes on ourselves, we are talking about raising taxes on other people. user fees are something we pay for something ourselves. whethertation, democratic or republican, has always been paid for by user fees. users of the system, we pay based on how much we use it. that has slipped away and some republican congresses and democratic white houses. we are now borrowing from our -- it is a $20 billion a year going forward -- to pay for the highways. there is not enough money coming in from gas taxes. wants tot from oregon pay for this bill. i am a conservative republican from the deep south, i want to pay for this bill. let's leave all the other issues

we disagree about behind us. let's focus on something we can agree on and let's not pass the bill to our children and let's have a world-class infrastructure system. host: we want to get your .eaction's immigration plan guest: i support a larger bill than what he laid out at the white house. 27% firstt is generation americans. you want to talk about folks who love america. folks were coming to build a better life for themselves. i have folks who have been trying to do the system the right way. there is no pathway for their children today because they happen to come from a country like india and the wait list is 75 years long to get a green card. yesterday's bill did not do anything to address that. host: why is it 75 years long? guest: we have country caps. in an effort to bring diverse

groups of people to america. we have built this country on immigration and we will in the future. we said let's bring in as many people as we can from as many different places as we can. it turns out there are a lot of indians who are willing to build a new life in america. if you are a high skilled folk from india here on a visa, there is no room for you, so the law says today. your children know no language but english, no country but america but there is no room for them. when they turn 18, they aged out of the system. that is not who we are, that is not right. do we need to deal with illegal immigration? of course we do. look at is theks bill the president talked about two years ago, similar to this language, but he cut total immigration in half in that bill. this keeps immigration at the same levels and in the state of the union address he said he

wants to preside over the highest level of legal immigration in history. those are things that can bridge a divide. the details will always matter. host: what did you not like about what the president said yesterday? guest: we do have a crisis at the border and we did not spend any time talking about it. the president would say i have spent so much time talking about it, this is how we reform the legal system. there are a lot of families in my district that only got to america by family-based immigration. people are worried about family-based immigration going away or being curtailed. most of those families have grown their own business, they are entrepreneurs in the district. they could have come on a skills-based visa but they didn't, they came on a family-based visa. transitioning from what people notice what they don't know is always a scary time. i would encourage people to look at what the president said in the state of the union. i want to preside over legal levels of immigration to the

effect of growing america and growing the american economy. unless we are willing to have about 10 kids apiece, the future requires a robust immigration policy. i would say to folks questioning that, take a look at countries around the globe. economieshrinking and are suffering, some are growing. if you love american ideals, i think we should make a place. host: the washington post is reporting you will get all members of congress on tuesday a briefing from cap it officials about the iran threat. i understand it will be the secretary of state mike pompeo, pentagon secretary, along with the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff. what will you asked them about what is going on? guest: i wish we could televise some of these things. we televise all the theatrics. c-span is in every committee hearing room and sometimes it is not good public policy, but

theatrical extremism that gets portrayed. when we go to these classified briefings, it is the most serious group you could imagine. you see a unified congress that cares about america and national security. i asked different questions that might democratic friends will ask, at the end of the date we are one nation fighting one threat to freedom around the globe. i don't expect there to be fireworks. an ax to folks with grind? of course there are. but iran is a real threat, proxy wars are a real threat. you know that from the soviet union and today in the middle east. host: are proxy wars a real threat from iran? guest: i would say we already have that going on around the middle east. when you look at who is funding terrorism in israel, you can trace those dollars back to iran. when you look at who is fomenting unrest in syria, you can trace those dollars back to iran. in lebanon, you can trace those

dollars back to iran. host: would you support a direct war with iran. guest: i don't support war. i don't want our young men and women involved. i don't want any conflict to have to come to that. i do think we have options left. signing on to the iran deal during the obama administration was a disappointment. we had the world together united and bring in funding of terror the tehran was so well known for. we gave iran and out another rest of the world is happy to give them an out, as well. they are not ambitions to make the world safer. they are ambitious to make the world a more dangerous place. host: philadelphia, independent. caller: good morning. i have two questions. month, thene is last former inspector general for theanistan complained that

pentagon and parts of the state department refused to be audited and here we are with another undeclared war on the horizon and nobody is saying who is getting the profits from this. i think it is a scandal and we ought to have oversight and if there is any kind of military action, it has to be voted on by congress. the second thing is i wonder how many people are concerned that 7% of1965, approximately legal immigration each year comes from europe. we go backwhy don't to individual merit? i appreciate his comments. are talkingnk you about things we can begin to agree on. merit-based immigration was the point of the president's speech

yesterday, not to keep anybody out to make sure there is room for folks who want to come in. i think that can be a unifying issue if you view it through the lens of trained to provide more instead of provide less. as for audits on the pentagon, we are working on the first audit the pentagon has ever known. you are absolutely right. there are a lot of dollars the disappeared. the truth is when i have a man or woman in an american uniform sitting in harm's way, i care about the balance sheet second. i care about their safety first. having the best war fighter on the planet comes at a high cost. the pentagon is committed to getting that audit done. it will be the first one in american history and it will not be the last one. it will be the beginning of a process of accountability. as the article one congress, i need to vote to declare war, i cannot delegate that responsibility to the white house, and i to track those dollars when they caught the

door. host: arlington, virginia, republican. caller: going back to the gas tax i fully support the gas or raising the gas tax. i have two concerns about the per mileage user fees you are talking about. one is it provides a disincentive to drive places that concerned about the economic benefits from that. obviously, the gas tax does, too, but it is disconnected. the second issue is how you bridge the gap between people who drive short distances in cities on expensive roads, versus people in rural communities who drive long distances on cheap roads. guest: you make an important point. when the gas tax fully funded the fund, we would have that debate about rural america and urban america. a state like georgia where most of the population lives in atlanta, we would only get back

$.70 of every dollar we sent in and gas taxes. why? states like montana and wyoming were sending in less because they had fewer people but more of a federal highway need so we could get back east and west across america. we have long had a redistributive federal gas tax system that expected that to continue going forward. we would handle the rural-urban issue in that way. how we get from the gas tax to a vehicle miles traveled tax or another revenue stream is something i think all the options are on the table. i will never pair my fair share with an electric vehicle and i cannot maintain, without a dramatic increase in the gas tax, because there are fewer drivers on the road and folks are getting better gas mileage. we cannot maintained the revenue levels needed without increase

in the gas tax that might be shocking for most families. host: why jubail electric car? you buy an electric car? moral i wanted superiority in conversations about the environment. [laughter] guest: i find my road rage goes down dramatically because i get better gas mileage when i drive slowly. i don't support federal mandates in order to change america, i support individual action. when we talk about loving the environment, liberals and conservatives both love the country, we just view you how we express that love through a different lens. i believe personal responsibility begins personally and took that on. i would be happy to take you for a ride if you want to feel the release that is slow driving in

traffic areas and no road rage. host: do you feel moral superiority? [applause] guest: i do. in georgia, we have an option to pay extra. when i asked for a show of hands in a town hall meeting about who agrees to pay more for green energy, there aren't many hands ago up. what wewe could tell value by what we are willing to pay for. that is what i want to keep a user fee for transportation. it is one of the few places left in american government where we get what we are willing to pay for. that helps the checks and balances in ways we can't do any other way. host: cleveland, ohio, democrat. caller: i am a 70-year-old woman who is retired. my question is -- you can give the superrich in the u.s. a tax cut, but we have plenty of

american families who take their children back and forth to school, back-and-forth the college, to their jobs and you want to tax them. they did not get any money back on the tax break because they are either working-class or bottom of the line middle-class. you want to tax them. republican,, mr. you tax the people who have money. it is not the working class who have money. if you want to go back and resend those tax cuts for rich people so they pay their fair share, i don't think i should expect them to pay any more than i pay, but they should pay at least what i pay and i am retired. guest: you are identifying exactly the problem whenever we talk about income taxes. the top 1% pay more than the bottom 90% combined.

you say that is not their fair share, others might say that is more than their fair share. we will always debate that. most american families, about 85%, paying more in payroll taxes today than they do in income taxes. income taxes are about to be such a fall -- small part of federal income. we will not even have that conversation. i can't cut income taxes for lower or middle class families in ways that make a big difference. i can cut payroll taxes. those are taxes. we are talking about user fees. it might be that you oppose user fee systems. you don't think we should pay based on how we consume. tax shifting is one of those conversations we have. host: i think part of the point she was making is you have working-class americans who cannot afford to live for their job is that and they have to travel many miles, commute for long amounts of time, and they

are going to pay the brunt of this user fee. guest: yes and no. if you are driving alone in your brand-new mercedes from the suburbs downtown to work, you will pay that gas tax just as you do today. there will be a larger user fee. if you are climbing on the metro bus to get downtown, you are sharing that cost with 60 other people. if you are climbing on the train, you are sharing that cost with 300 other folks. if you are carpooling, you are sharing that cost with your community. it has always been true that -- if folks want to abolish the system, we can do that and perpetuate the myth that someone else can pay for everything else we want. i don't think that is the right direction to go and i don't think you will find republicans or democrats advocating for that. host: larry in michigan, republican. caller: representative, i think

it only makes sense to use user fees for roads and bridges. like amtrak and public transportation, those kind of things. foryou for that or are you taking those things out of the funding? guest: i would like to get them out of the road funding. about 15% of the highway trust fund is not spent on highways, it is spent on mass transit projects. that has long been a debate. ronald reagan signed that bill into law. i would like to see us reverse that. let's use highway dollars for highways, but let's come up with a funding stream for mass transit. mass transit is here to stay in urban areas and is important to bring people back and forth the work. amtrak is a great example. if you live in the eastern c new york andeen

washington, d.c., it is important. if you live in atlanta where i do and you want to go to is four hoursh away, it is a three day ride. it is of no value to me whatsoever. that is why it is important to have skin and again. people in new york and pennsylvania and maryland are happy to pay for amtrak fees because they get so much value. in atlanta, i am happy to pay for interstate fees because i get so much value. keeping the user fee will make that conversation easier because you and i will pay for services most important to us. host: robert, nashville, tennessee, democrat. caller: politicians are doing the american public a great disservice when they talk about the proxy wars of iraq. and particular in israel. politicians never give the context that israel has been

ethnically cleansing and has a to therelative n-jews in israel. when you say it is the indigenous people committing terrorism, you are not giving the true context and it is time that the news and politicians give the context of ethnic cleansing and israel. guest: i could not disagree with you more. onlyld tell you one of the bipartisan issues left on capitol hill is that of support for israel. you cannot have law & order in a lawless state. i can introduce you to arab mayor after arab mayor who says i am not in favor of the two state solution, i want a one state solution and israel is that one state. provides --order

that israel provides allows me to have the freedom of speech and the freedom of worship. i reject that notion of ethnic cleansing in the facts don't bear it out. host: before we let you go, about the threat of iran. do you think this administration would be able to confront iran with military action under the current authorization for military force? guest: do i think i could find a lawyer who could make that case? of course i could. but i am in the camp that says it is shameful we are still talking about it from the first part of the last decade. it is understandable with folks like robert on one side and others on another, why congress does not want to take these issues head-on. the president has the authority, constitutionally, to take temporary action all over the globe. -- if we aret talking about a war, congress has to.

we have not declared a war since world war ii. we are not comfortable doing that in this country, and this congress. i think that is wrong. if we want to involve our young men and women around the growth -- globe in defense of freedom, we should make a declaration of war and stand behind them 100%. host: always appreciate the conversation. we will take a break. we come back, we will talk to democratic congressman mark pocan of wisconsin. he will talk about the house of vote today on the equality act. we will be right back. ♪ former vice president joe biden is in philadelphia this saturday at 1:00 p.m. eastern to officially kick off his candidacy the democratic presidential nomination. watch our live coverage on c-span. we have covered the campaigns of over 20 democratic candidates

who have entered ray safar, from their announcement speeches to campaign events. website, time at our c-span.org. ♪ this week, our online video library marks a milestone. 250,000 hours of content. since 1987 are available in our online library you can view them all for free at c-span.org. c-span's newest book, the president's: noted historians rank the best and worst chief executives. it provides insight into the 44 american presidents through stories gathered by interviews with noted presidential historians part explore the events that shaped our leaders, challenges they faced and the legacies they left behind.

order your copy today. c-span's the president's is available as a hardcover or e-book at c-span.org/the presidents. >> washington journal continues. host: back in our table this ,orning, congressman mark pocan democrat wisconsin, here to talk about the equality act. guest: in a majority of states in this country, you can be legally married on a saturday and be fired, or lose your housing on a monday simply because of discrimination against the lgbtq community. the equality act takes everything in law around discrimination of the lgbtq community and has it taken care of so well you can be legally married in this country, there are still all these other problems state-by-state to make sure people have a fully quality. we need to pass the equality act and that is what we are taking up this morning on the floor of

congress. host: why do federal laws that prohibit discrimination, that have been on the books for decades, not cover this community? guest: when you think about the civil rights act in 1964, i think at that point the lgbtq community was not as visible as it is today. i think this is something we are finally catching up to where the .merican people are at a few other federal laws are being amended to make sure in every area, we can provide full protection and equality for every american. it is a long time coming. i think this morning it will pass on the floor of the house of representatives. we will have to try to get it passed of the senate. host: what will the vote be today? guest: we will have some republican supporting it, i wish we had some more. what i think is interesting about this issue, before it was a political issue around the lgbtq community, in wisconsin,

my stay, we were the first state in the country to have a gay and lesbian civil rights bill. it took nine years for another state to do it and it was signed by a republican governor. at that time it was not seen as a political wedge issue. with marriage equality becoming reality, people see my average to my husband is not affecting anyone else's marriage, and if it did, they probably had other issues to deal with. treating other people fairly like they want to be treated is what america is about. host: what is happening at the state level that is in support of what you are doing and opposition? guest: there are 21 states that provide legal protection around housing and employment, but the majority of states do not. for too many people, it is not offered. in wisconsin, when we passed the bill in 1982, we did not include the transgender committee.

we need protections for the transgender community. i think this will bring us to where america is that. we can bring our federal laws there. being able to treat everyone the same way is really a fundamental american value. host: who is opposed to the legislation? are there groups? why? guest: there are some people who use this issue as a wedge political issue and like to build fear around it. somehow you will have people using the wrong bathroom. if you said someone could not do that to someone -- people would say it is discrimination. it should not be any different here. it is getting to the point where we can have equal protection for everyone, regardless. that is what the equality act would do. was on theobertson christian broadcasting network and he was talking about the equality act. [video clip] give the good names to these things.

this is a devastating blow to religious freedom and to the sanctity of america. if you want to bring the judgment of god on this nation, keep this stuff up. i was reading where it said because of these things, the land will vomit you out. i think god will say i have had it with america, if you do this kind of stuff i will get rid of you as a nation. there is plenty of stuff going on, when you look at the something on our grid, you can go down the line of the devastation that could happen to our nation. we want the blessing of god, not the curse of god. guest: i bet he made a lot of money that day. that unfortunately is the reality. he has made a lot of predictions and the lgbtq community has been one of his more profitable messages he has that had out there.

religious faith that think about treating everyone under the eyes of god in a fair way is making sure we are treating everyone civilly. unfortunately, you will always have politics, for some people this is useful to have people divided against each other. we are trained to bring people together. host: let's go to new york, republican, good morning. caller: good morning and good morning, representative. there are two parts to my comment. the first part is this -- i want to be clear that i am a republican, and i am in favor of what you are proposing. i have a brother who is gay, he lives in washington, d.c., he is married to his male spouse. i am happy for them. i know in my heart as a catholic that god loves them and blesses them, just as he does all of us. i want to be clear there is a

large contingent of republicans like me, who have no issue with this and have not had an issue for decades print i don't like the fact that there are times when we are thrown in that basket for political gain. the second nuance to my comment, there is i think equality in this bill but i wonder if you and the leaders in washington are going to address the inter-. inequality as a result of the $23 trillion debt and the fact that every single year we add to the debt by having deficit budgets. when is washington and the leadership in washington going to address this very serious national security issue that will take away the rights of all of us, no matter what our preferences are? guest: great points. on the first point, i think most people are in the place you are

at. it is an issue where political leaders and other people use this issue to either make money or win support that likes to divide people. most people in the country are fair-minded and what the best for, whether it be their brother, sister, son or daughter , neighbor, coworker, we want everybody to be treated fairly. to your second point, i agree with you. one of the most shocking things as we passed a tax bill that 83% of the benefit will go to the top 1%. in eight more years, that added $1.9 trillion to the deficit. they used to give good conversation about taking care of the deficit and instead they added $1.9 trillion. we need to do more to address it and it does not get discussed enough in washington, certainly people who talk about it and do the opposite. need to educate people on the

basics of math. host: the supreme court took up three cases this past term dealing with lgbtq work discrimination. how do you think those court cases could impact the laws that are on the books now and how congress reacts to a court decision? that is how equality came to the law of the land. because the courts did what they did, we have it in place. the good news is there is wide support above all clinical spectrum for marriage equality because they see nothing bad has happened. my marriage is not affecting anyone else's. what we fear is when something goes to court it might get more divided politically. i want to have faith in that branch of government that they will still make the right decisions. it is all the more important that we pass laws like the equality act to show where the will of congress is and i think that will help us when those decisions come up.

host: fargo, north dakota, democrat. are we not all guaranteed equal rights? guest: that is a widespread to. assume equal treatment under the law based on everything this country is founded on. today, this will be for the lgbtq community. let's make sure it passes today and get through the senate. we could get the president to sign the bill, after all. on a rural issues come in general. 800 30in a rural town of people. i got broadband one year ago. rural areasple in feel they are neglected. one of the real challenges we is infrastructure.

we have to make sure it covers people in rural areas, things like rural broadband and many other issues. i appreciate it from cleanup sites in rural areas to making sure we have broadband and roads. we have an infrastructure package, we want to make sure everyone is included, and that includes rural areas. president's immigration plan, what would you agree to? guest: if he was serious, he would have sat down with us and did what together. i think that is part of the problem. we have to have a conversation about how to move forward. we need comprehensive immigration reform. at the end of the day, all we wind up doing is fighting over a bunch of issues and not resolving the issue. when i first came to congress,

there was a bipartisan bill that had almost 70 votes in the u.s. senate that was a comprehensive package. i would love to see us go back to that, because it had so much bipartisan support. was it perfect? no, but it was a great fundamental start. when you don't have a conversation like what they did in the senate, we will continue flinging ideas past each other and that is not resolved the issue. it shows me the president is not serious about this and i find that unfortunate. host: anything you agree with, though? prefer that we look at a plan that already has a bipartisan support, like the senate plan, that addresses border security and protection and a pathway to citizenship. for anyone to put their head in the sand that there are 13 million people here that are undocumented, you can't just deport people you have to have

something in place. the president was active on twitter again and one of his tweets was over the top, watch out we will come after you. that is not at all helpful in this debate. host: we will go to mount vernon, new york, republican. good morning. caller: good morning. thank the good lord for c-span. bushvoting for president bush, four more years of unusual business. i am calling about this lgbtq stuff, whatever it is called. woman man and woman with is an abomination to the lord and the word of god is not coming back void. i don't know why america is putting all this emphasis on this lgbtq community when at the end of the day it is nothing but a hiroshima bomb. we hurt your point. you must have for this before

heard how do you respond? guest: i would tell him to read all the pages of the bible because there is a lot about passion and respecting other people that are in there. most major religious organizations have look at this and there is a lot of support in the faith community and business community. there is a lot of support saying to treat every person with respect and dignity. all i want is for my husband and i to be treated the same as you and your spouse if you have one. that is a pretty easy ask and i think it is american. host: starkville, mississippi. caller: i up close the equality act but not for any religious reason. act opposed the equality but not for any religious reason. this federal law that could be alled will apply to universities through timeline.

that means women's sports will be filled with trans men. powerlifting has taken away metals from men who completed the support -- competed in the sport as women. i think she brings up an issue that we heard debated more than any other issue. out thatputting this somehow a bunch of men will become women to compete in sports. the people i know who are transgender would never do anything like that. they are doing it because of who they believe they are. they go through a lot of discrimination. way more than they gay or lesbian brothers or sisters. he would not go through all that just to compete in a sport. it is put out there to make people think, oh, that might

happen. the reality is, from talking to many people, that is a red herring put out there by people who want to oppose this law. if you think about it fundamentally, for somebody to go through all of that just for that is probably not practical. host: michigan, democrat. caller: i have a question. the civil rights amendment is being amended with the equality act or replaced with the same language, the problem is they are adding the sexual orientation portion and there that is the factly the word -- sexual orientation, can you confirm that? are people going to have to declare their sexual orientation? like someone is being accused of not following the act, or they could say no, my sexual

orientation is different and that is why i've complaining. how does that work with the amendment? guest: the easiest way to think about it is if someone is discriminated against because they are african-american or asian american, federal laws are in place to protect them. it is no different if someone is gay or lesbian. in 30 states in the country right now, you can get married on a saturday or get fired and lose your house on monday because of who you are into your love. we would never accept that for someone who is african-american, asian american or latino, but that is the reality. this would go into the civil rights act about treating everyone equally. host: california, independent. caller: good morning. host: go ahead. is i don'tcomment

agree with this movement, this lgbtq movement. everything is being dumped on the black community. this is not a civil rights issue, it is a moral issue. to get on the coattails of black civil rights to advance the agenda -- i thought happen, i live in california and in the mid-1980's, they ran a proposition out here for same-sex marriage. it was voted down. thought it wasty the mormons and christians devoted to down, but it was the african-americans that did not agree with it. for them to keep using black people as their base that we agree with them, we don't agree with them. keepthing where they saying all these other groups agree to it, that is not the case. in california, you have a lot of people voting who are not legal and they are not even citizens of the country. for some reason, they vote for a

lot of things that seem to be lifting up the democratic party. guest: a couple things, a first of all i think when you look at the support, there is a large amount of support within the religious community, within the civil rights community, many people who have been the longest lifetime advocates for equality for everyone are supporting this law. second, i think many of the arguments you brought up why the lgbtq community should not have equality were used against the african-american community and other communities in the past. one of the most core fundamental american values is the respect and dignity we can give to everyone. that is all people are asking for. i think this law is way past due. if you could be married in this country, why should you not have protection under law for employment and housing and other ideas? some of the arguments you brought up or arguments used

against the african-american community and others. if you think about it, you might want to take another look at it. host: seattle, washington, dennis, independent. you are on the air with the congressman. caller: hello. as a gay man who has been advocating for justice for lgbtq since 1974, i am concerned that we still have not passed the era . i see this is getting a backbench to that. i wonder what the response is to that. thank you. guest: i think this is a different path. era,nk we should pass the but that would take more states. we have protection for people based on gender currently under the law. this would include that for the

lgbtq community. it would address the concerns you have but i also agree, i would love to raise the era to get it passed. host: san diego, republican. caller: i would like to know what is the era, i have never heard of that before? guest: equal rights amendment. myler: i have gay people in family, i have hispanic and black people, but we are pretrade with negative think -- we are portrayed with negative views. i want to talk about someone getting married on saturday and losing their job on monday. where is something like that? i have never heard of it. can you tell me where that is going on? guest: in the majority of states , i believe it is 29 or 30, i believe it is 30 but i will say

between i. wisconsin was the first date to have a lot back in 1982. it was signed by a republican governor. it was not a political wedge issue. it was nine years before the second state came on board. you can be legally fired, specifically for her you love in the majority of states and country. to most people, this does not seem fair. this law would provide protection for everyone know better what state you live in. you would be protected from being fired or losing housing because of who you are and who you love. that is the fundamental of the equality act. host: st. louis, missouri, democrat. thank: hello, i wanted to you so much for all that you do. i wanted to respond to the gentleman earlier who said people like you and me are riding on the coattails of the

black community. i am black. i think social justice involves everyone. equality involves everyone and that means lgbtq people, too. onis not about riding coattails, it is about making sure everyone is equal. i wonder what you have to say. public opinion has drastically changed to support this. what is your opinion? guest: you are exactly right. we saw that with marriage equality. there was not a majority of support one decade ago and now we have a strong support of people for marriage equality. it did not do any damage to this country, it did not affect anyone's marriage and if it did, they probably had issues already in the marriage. this is about fairness. if we can treat everyone with dignity and respect and treat them equally in this country, we are stronger as a country for that.

that is an american value. i would help these people look at this vote in congress this morning. we think about that. this is not a wedge issue. we don't take up this as a political issue but as a human and american issue. if we do that, i think that is where the vast majority of our constituents are at. host: the house is about to comment any minute. when will the vote take place? guest: probably 11:15. for our viewers that want to watch that, keep your coverage on c-span. democrat in chicago, make it quick. caller: i don't like the way they are using this homosexual thing against black people. it is the same thing as being orck, being a man with a man a woman with a woman. that is not right. host: anything more to add? guest: looked back at civil

rights history and cya people said african-americans should not have equality. look at history and i think you will see some of the same arguments made and hopefully you might want to revisit why we want to treat everyone equally, no matter who they are racially or by their sexual orientation. pocan, democrat of wisconsin. you can learn more if you go to his website or follow him on twitter. thank you very much for the time. the house will be voting today around 11:15 am on the equality act. they are coming in momentarily on c-span to start the legislative day. we can see the door and people are about to walk through it. live coverage here on c-span.