about the resignation of a commission of your you've enjoyed the conversation on c-span and twitter as well. -- commissioner. you can join the conversation on facebook and twitter as well. "washington journal" is next. host: good morning, it is saturday come august 31, 2019. a three-hour "washington journal " is ahead for you. a trial court for the first time held accountable a drug maker in the opioid crisis. the battle is far from over. we are spending our first hour talking to you about the nation's opioid epidemic. who do you blame for it and why? give us a call on phone calls set up regional here if you are in the eastern or central, (202) 748-8000. mountain and pacific time zones, (202) 748-8001. you can also catch up with us on

social media. on twitter, @cspanwj. on facebook, it is facebook.com/cspan. a very good saturday morning to you. you can start calling it now. having this conversation after a historic week when it comes to opioid litigation. on monday.t happened the drugmaker johnson & johnson was found to be was on support for contributing to oklahoma's opioid crisis and ordered by a court district judge to pay $572 million in fines. on tuesday, purdue pharma was reported to be in talks to pay between $10 billion and $12 billion to settle some 2000 opioid-related lawsuits brought by states, cities, and counties. this was the scene in that oklahoma courtroom when the judge announced his decision in that johnson & johnson case. [video clip] the opioid crisis is an

eminent danger, and my judgment includes findings of fact and the law of the state mets its burden that the defendant, misleading inson, includingection one, the finding that those actions compromised the health and safety of thousands of oklahomans, specifically, the defendants caused an opioid crisis evidence plan increase overdoseaddiction, deaths, and neonatal issues. host: this is the headline from earlier this week from "60 minutes." "opioid epidemic -- who is to blame? drugmakers, lawmakers, who is to blame?"

that is the question we have for you this morning on the "washington journal." if you are in the eastern or central time zones, you can call in at (202) 748-800 0. mountain time zones, (202) 748-8001. over 400,000 americans killed over the last 22 years. over to -- overdose death 47,6000 inhigh of 2017. the total economic word and of opioid misuse estimated to be somewhere around $78.5 billion a year, according to a cdc estimate on that topic. this morning, we are asked to you who is to blame for that

crisis that we have seen over the past two decades. several of the major papers writing about the historic opioid ruling in oklahoma. the "new york times" editorial board picking out up this week. they write that the opioid industry has been quick to point out that today's opioid crisis is driven more by street drugs, like heroin, than prescription drugs like oxycontin, and that is true. but there is no question that this epidemic began with the rampant overprescribing of the painkillers. opioid makers, including purdue and johnson & johnson routinely and knowingly misled the public about the products. they played down the risk of insisting their drugs were safe, and if anything, underutilized, and combined growing concerns with aggressive lobbying and public relations campaigns. some of part of the editorial written this week by the "new york times" editorial board.

one other editorial specifically about that johnson & johnson case came from jonathan turley, and he wrote his piece in "usa today." here is what he had to say. "opioids are not effective product. pain.elieve like guns, the product is in the description, not the design of the drugs. the united states represents only 5% of the worlds population and yet consumes over approximately 80% of the world opioid fo supply. some thoughts on who is to blame for the opioid crisis. we want to hear from you this morning, again, phone lines split up regionally. we will start down in palmetto, florida. betty is up first of this morning. bett, good morning. name is betty,

and i'm calling from florida. thank you, finally third we always talk about opioids and all this other drunk, and we never talk about morphine. that is the strongest drug there going patients, three days, it is over with. they should not be administering morphine to know people. god brought us to this earth. days you are gone on morphine. all these other drugs, i have seen people live 30, 40 years. no family should allow them to give their family no morphine. widerwhat about the opioid crisis, and as we see the lawsuits progress through the

legal system, the idea of who is to blame for the opioid crisis? caller: the blame is these drug companies. that is who is to blame for it. these people do not go out and make the opiates. host: that is betty in palmetto, florida. theou would like to join precision, phone minds are split up regionally. if you're in the eastern and central time zones, (202) 748-8000. if you are in the mountain or pacific time zones, it is (202) 748-8001. a simple question for you this morning -- who do you think is to blame for the opioid crisis? one more editorial in the wake of that johnson & johnson ruling in oklahoma. this from the "wall street journal" editorial board from earlier this week. they write "like most of the opioid plaintiffs, oklahoma attorney general hunter cannot draw a line between doctors, who supposedly relied on the drug allegedes'

misrepresentations and the injuries suffered by victims, he doesn't even attempt to specify ,he particular doctors prescriptions, pharmacists, or victims involved in the chain of addiction." that from the "wall street journal." jared out of nebraska, good morning. caller: yes, it is johnny. is that i was in an accident when i was 18. i am 58 now. i have chronic pain. i was prescribed hydrocodone. oxycontin for several back problems and a hip problem. that went on for 20 years. and now, when i really need them, i cannot get one.

me 220 of them a month forever. host: that is the impact of the opioid crisis on you, it makes it harder for you to get the medication that you need? caller: exactly. host: have you ever been worried about addiction or abuse? is that ever something that has scared you? because itually, no, do not like the effect of the hydrocodone or the opioids. they make you sick. if you take too many, you do not get high, you just get sick. you get sick to your stomach. it is bad. host: here is a discussion, as we saw in the various editorial pages and opinion pages this week, especially after that in isn't the faultg, of the pharmaceutical companies who make these drugs, fault of thet the

doctors who prescribe these drugs, where is the fault in escalating the crisis over the past two decades? caller: everybody. everybody have a little bit of the blame. you know, the doctors are being pushed by big farmer, you know -- big pharma, you know. allow me to point something out. i saw him work, like 50 of the city's, municipal cities, you know like in the united states, and 50 of them came out positive for psychotropic drugs, thorazine, valium. that is generated in nebraska this morning. eric is out of tucson, arizona. good morning. caller: hey, good morning. i think the knowledge of the addiction does make people

that goes toand the manufacturers who are clearly aware of it, and they are diverting. they were diapering huge, excessive amounts, so that means they were doing it for profit. as aoctors were using it treatment plan, like an orthopedic surgeon, they could keep the patient for 10 years going by just prescribing opioids. and i have seen it personally dealt with overdoses of family addictiveue to the represent of it, and doctors are aware of it. host: when it comes to these lawsuits and findings, do you think the doctor's should be held accountable as much as the pharmaceutical companies? caller: absolutely, yeah. it was very clear that their

patients -- because people are crips beforeheir s the month was up, and that is super common. if it is that take four the six pills a day, well, people were r, they had a bad day, they are taking seven, and they are running out the or the 30 days him and i'll are's were seeing that constantly. host: eric, what about the government agencies that we rely , members of congress realizing this sooner or lobbyists who talk to them sooner, the you find them in the city here, and washington, d.c. ? ? caller: i do not speak from knowledge, i can speak from my experience side, but i think there were huge profits in this.

and so you have got to follow the money. people are making money, there's going to be less you know, they will be hesitant to stop it. and i do think it was super heavy-handed was they recognize the the problem, they shut it down so fast, that i think it did cause bigger problems, because the doctors -- and i think this happened i think two years ago, doctors were suddenly prescribing zero. they went from saying here is your -- you know, they would refill the prescription every month, and then they would say, oh, sorry, you have got to get off of this stuff right now. that caused a huge problem. host: that was a concerted one of our previous callers this morning. that was eric. this is michael out of baltimore, maryland. michael, go ahead. theer: i say blame , gatekeepers being

the doctors and our government, doctors and our government. that is to i would blame. host: not the pharmaceutical companies, as we saw in the case of this week? o, they are trying to make a profit, yeah, but there's regulations and things in place to i guess keep them in control, and so those regulations and those gatekeepers, they were not keeping the pharmaceutical folks in control. host: michael, do you know anybody who has been impacted by the opiod crisis in baltimore? caller: i live in baltimore, so i live in baltimore city, and it is -- how can i describe it? it is crazy. so when youe hood, walk through the community, you see people just, like, literally on a street, just rolling around, it is literally

insane. people are just in the streets, just doing weird things, and it is so crazy. host: michael in baltimore. this is daniel, san diego, california, good morning. caller: good morning. hello? host: go ahead, sir. is doingeah, my doctor a very good job, but it is affecting me. he has dropped my prescription by three-quarters, and i barely make it to the end of the month, and i am very low functioning at that level, and he keeps an eye on it, but i feel like i need help. i am not going to go to the street and look for fentanyl or heroin, but i think my doctor should be allowed to prescribe what i need.

thank you. host: daniel, do you think the doctors are to blame for overprescribing in the opioid crisis? do you see any blame there? caller: no, my doctor has been very in touch with that, unlike us that, he has got me back three-quarters. i do not know at the beginning if that was overprescribing or not. need assay i did not much as i got in the beginning, but since the crisis, he is very aware and keeps very good track of what he prescribes, and i will ask for more, and he says, "i'm sorry, i just cannot do that with you." host: that is daniel out in san diego this morning. ,n twitter, this is bcvenice writing "big pharma pays doctors.

where does the blame lie? with our lawmakers." this weekew comments in the wake of the johnson & johnson case in the news about the potential purdue pharma settlements, members of congress , ro khanna, a democrat out of california, saying johnson and and won' will pay millions -- johnson & johnson will pay to oklahoma.ollars another congresswoman, democrat out of washington, says big pharma and corporate greed caused thousands of american lives. these companies must be held accountable, but there is still a long way to go. a few more tweaks from members of congress this morning, including rick scott, a senator out of florida, of course a republican, "we must find a solution and hold big pharma accountable. we need to limit and reduce the

spread of drugs in the communities, and a link to his clip in which he talked about it on television this week. "we all know the devastation it has cause in our community. fentanyl and fentanyl-laced heroin are flooding our knowts," he said, and "we where most of it is coming from arriving atd it is th post office facilities like jfk's international mail center. " host: we want to hear from you regionally, a eastern and central time zones, (202) 748-8000. mountain and pacific time zones, (202) 748-8001. jim, waynesville, north carolina. good morning. caller: yes, good morning to you as well. if found like you have had a very interesting morning. i have enjoyed listening to

everyone. there is a lot of blame to go -- there's enough people to take all the blame for this. i worked in health care for 35 years. i took care of overdose patients on ventilators, given heroin addicts narcan and reversed their addiction whenever they got into the emergency room. i intubate those people and all these things. it is just -- it is a nasty mess. give a little to history lesson, i guess, and i don't mean to jump on my soapbox, but this has gone full circle back to where, you know, we were before they started treating pain. was congress -- and see, this is where it is all wrong. congress should stay out of medicine. they should totally stay out of medicine. talk to pharmaceutical

companies, don't mess with doctors and their prescriptions and how they treat their patients. leave them alone. let them do their work. they know there were better than any of the guys in d.c., especially when the guys in d.c. do not know how to take care of their patients. he may be in podunk georgia or halifax or out in alaska. how do the guys in d.c. know how to treat this? host: so jonathan turley in "usa they" yesterday said doctors, their role in overprescribing is a major part of this. you disagree. know, i cannotou say i don't totally disagree, ok? i have to say they do take some responsibility, but the majority

of the doctors are doing a hell of a job. i mean, they are doing a very hard job. they are balancing all of these people on these drugs that they knew, and these doctors knew -- do you think that they went to medical school and i and all of the other nurses and medical people that studied all of our lives to work in these professions, we did not realize that an opioid was addicted? i mean, you know, the pharmaceutical companies say it is not addictive, they tried to make it sound like it was less addictive, when oxycontin him in, i was a patient, i have been a patient myself on these meds for the last eight years i am disabled. i've had five surgeries on my back, had a knee replacement, need another one on my right, and i never felt like i had to jump out of the car and run to and snag a bag

of heroin. media do believe is the has not done a very good job -- no one has done a good job at saying what this really is. it is a heroine problem. trouble calling, what is it, ice, ice, what is it called, do you know what i am talking about? host: i don't. caller: i don't, either, but there's other drugs, and they're calling everything an opiate, they are putting it all in one box, right, and saying the pills, you know, the legal prescription pills, the things that we get from china, mexico, that are coming through -- you might host: th host: the fentanyl? caller: pardon?

host:host: the fentanyl that we were just talking about? caller: yes. thateed to separate all of from what doctors are prescribing to people, because all i see it a year, when i hear these programs, people are suffering. the people that are on the when they cannot get their medications, they are going to go to the streets. host: that is jim and waynesville, north carolina this morning. speaking of the rise in fentanyl and fentanyl overdose deaths, this chart showing national drug from 1999eaths to 2017. the yellow line on the chart, the one that jumps up dramatically in just the last couple of years, that yellow line is synthetic narcotics, mainly fentanyl, responsible for in 2017.66 deaths the blueline, the one that has been high for so long, the prescription opioid deaths. heroin below that, the green

line there. ov, ifhart, drugabuse.g you want to see some of the government data and the various charts that they have showing the rise of the opioid crisis over the last 20 years. johnny is next out of golden valley, arizona. n, who is to blame for the opioid crisis? caller: good morning, jonathan. a bloodo explain i have diphtheria,ed for th and i am allergic to all man-made medication. when i got injured and had to have back surgery, they just started dumping all of these meds into my body. if i drink a beer, i can go into a coma. and allergic to our bohol drugs, and these doctors did not care. i tell them i have wrote the

protheria, and they look at me like -- well, how do you know? know. it is my life. and these doctors do not care. they just pump in the pills, and finally my mom came in, and she says it has been 42 days, 42 days i had been laying in bed on pills. myad to stop taking them on own, and when i did, the pain and i brokele, teeth, from grinding my teeth from the pain, i broke a bunch of teeth in my mouth, and now i cannot afford to get my teeth fixed, but the doctors are to blame. they keep pushing the pills. they do not listen to the patients.

back in the 1970's, someone would sneeze and i would call my doctor and say hey, i am going to come in on my lunch break, give me a good is still in shot. called out, can you work, so i would call my doctor and say, i need a b12 shot. today, can you tell a doctor what you want? no. it is what they want. it is what is on the computer screen. they want money. how can we build your insurance company? host: thank you. mary is next, hempstead, new york. good morning. go ahead, mary. caller: good morning. good morning. hi. the lady was right. the doctors, you know, in cahoots with the manufacturing. that is why i think we need president trump, because he is against all types of drugs. when my mother was in the hospital, we were going to

heres that would steal medicine, because they were hooked. my point is that people need to be involved, and i mean black people -- not necessarily black people on opioids, because now the white, upper middle class people are opioids, and sometimes the doctors are on them. so the government has to work in cahoots with the manufacturers and stop things, because doctors are human beings, and if they have back pain and stuff, they will take them, ok? and once you take them, you cannot stop them. host: that is mary in new york this morning. one thing the government has been very involved in, especially in recent years, and with the rise that you saw in that chart with synthetic drugs, like fentanyl, is trying to crack down on fentanyl coming into the united states. the united states senate judiciary committee holding a hearing on the effects of fentanyl back earlier this summer.

if the senator josh hawley talking to kent chester at the white house office of national drug control policy about china's role in the distribution of fentanyl. [video clip] ask youley: let me about the chinese government connection can i want to read , just a fewion weeks ago, he said "china's control over fentanyl drugs is very strict. it cannot be the main source for the united states. the u.s. accusation lacks evidence and is contrary to the facts." respond toe want to the accuracy of that statement, that china is not the main source of fentanyl coming into this country. mr. chester: this is a refrain that we have heard from the chinese government for many years. they understand, and one of the principal outcomes of president xi's commitment to president trump, that they would schedule fentanyl as a class is an understanding and acknowledgment on the part of china that they are in fact the source of fentanyl coming into the united states. the evidence of chinese

overnights of fentanyl in the has been presented to the government at all levels, and it is not at all an area of dispute that china provides the fentanyl that comes into the united states. sen. hawley: you reference the recent moves by china to exert some control, they have not done this and previous years and previous administrations. would it be fair to say that the chinese government has, at least to a point, knowingly looked the other way, as fentanyl traffickers in china effectively poison thousands of americans? is that a fair statement? mr. chester: i think the chinese government would say they have a vast chemical industry, somewhere around 60,000 chemical industries a of some kind. they have difficulty controlling that. they would tell us they have done their level best to exert some kind of control over this. however, i think there acknowledgment and their

agreement to do class scheduling was a result of several things. i think it was a result, number one, on the interest on the part of the congress, repeatedly, through congressional delegations, through letters, letting the chinese government understand that the entire united states government wants to see them take affirmative action against this particular problem. the directthing was intervention and leadership i the president, who directly asked at the g20 summit last september, president xi to take definitive action against this. i think both of those things and an acknowledgment that the chinese government played a serious role in this all caps together for the chinese government to take this very important step. host: if you want to watch that hearing in its entirely, you can do so -- it's entirety, you can do so on our website, c-span.org . we are spending the first hour of the "washington journal" asking you -- who do you blame for the opioid crisis? it is just after 7:30 on the east coast.

if you're in the east coast or central time zones, it is (202) 748-8000 to call in. if you're in the mountain or pacific time zones, (202) 748-8001. out in eugene, oregon, this is alan. good morning. caller: good morning. i have been a patient on some opioids for a while. i think what people are not understanding is who can believe crisis have an opioid but yet we do not have a climate change crisis? acts and the data that are coming in now on the so-called they areisis are -- not thought out, and they are not actual facts, and how come nobody is mentioning that still throughout the whole course of the whole thing, the number two cause of death has always been cocaine. host: so, alan, do you think

that over 400 americans dying of overdoses on prescription or elicit drugs over the last 20 years, you don't consider that a crisis? caller: did you say 400? host: 400,000 over the past two decades. caller: so that is 20 years. host: in 2017, alan, it was 47,000 600 people who died from opioid overdoses. caller: they guide of opioids, ok. opioids go a long way. was it harrheroin? many of those overdoses were from people who actually needed to be medication and took too much of their medication? that is not broke down, is it? host: so, alan, we talk about who is to blame for the opioid crisis, you think the blame is on the end user? caller: no, no, i do not.

i think the blame for the opioid crisis is the government getting too much involved in medical care. the pharmaceutical industry also will push their drugs, because they have got to make money, and the doctors are not educated enough to understand what they are pushing. and, yeah, i think in the late 1980's and through the 1990's, the pharmaceutical -- everybody just kind of took it as it is ok. opioids help people. but when you get a broken finger and a doctor gives you a prescription for a year of opiates, then the doctors either did not know, i am sure they were not doing it on purpose, and then people started overdosing. so the pharmaceutical company pushed too much of them. the doctors were not educated

enough, and the consumers who were taking them were not educated enough, and they, you younger generation likes to get them, they get high, and then they do not know what they are doing unfortunately, we lose some people, so there is over prescribing, but it is not the crisis that they are saying it is. host: that it alan in eugene, oregon, where the opioid death sixs in 2017 was between and nine and a half overdoses per 100,000 people in oregon. you can see the chart there appeared darker states on this the death higher rates per 100,000 people. the darkest red an almost brownish on this chart is close 100,000 above are people, and that is in states like ohio, kentucky, west virginia, maryland, maine, massachusetts as well.

that chart from the national institutes of health. lisa out in hopewell, virginia, good morning. caller: good morning. um, i put blame on the doctors and the government, those regulations. and for somebody to take a pain pill for 10 years is just crazy. evidently, if they had the surgery, the surgery was not right. i know back in the day, when you they wouldurgery, send you with tylenol 3. a week.d take it for now to prescribe something for , i have to put the blame on doctors. my sister has polio. she hurts everyday. she takes ibuprofen. you have got to put it on the doctors, the government, the regulation, and the people themselves. host: lisa, was there ever an

offer or a chance to go on opioids for that pain that your sister has, and what would be the interaction with the dr. on that? caller: absolutely. she chose not to, so she will ibuprofen or you cannot put the blame on the drug companies. they are there to make money. the doctors know. for 10 years? something is not right. host: that is lisa in virginia. reid is up next out of union, washington. good morning. caller: good morning, john. i have a few comments to make, and i will be brief. the first comment is a really is personal responsibility. everybody knows that this drug is addictive, and if somebody is going to abuse it, the doctor is trying to help, but they can second so much, and the

sort of maybe political statement about it is, isn't that always the case that on the left, they seem to always adopt this victim mentality? they are not the ones putting the drug in their mouth, oh, it is that drug company, it is always the got besides you that made $35,000 a year, you only make $30,000 a year, so you are a victim of the guy beside you. i digress. what i would like to offer a possible solution, why don't we have it in a law that when someone starts on a regiment of pain pills, and let's make a distinction here, people in a car accident or a soldier who lost a leg, when you have catastrophic injuries that absolutely require this so the person can exist, then there are people who say i have got a headache, i have got a gut ache, i need pain relief, so people are gaming the system, why don't they set it up so one is administered to them, set up in the pharmacy so it is naturally

deluded, so these pharmaceutical companies have to offer versions of it so that we naturally, as the person starts the drug, they are weaned off of it. as i understand it, you can doctor shop, you cannot have overlapped, because the system knows when you receive your prescriptions. so the people can no longer get to multiple doctors and get an overload of these drugs. so if the potency of it is in aally reduced and stepped way, then they are naturally going to be weaned off of it. that is my suggestion. maybe we should legislate something like that. of hopelix is next out mills. it is to blame for the opioid crisis? caller: c-span and america, how are you doing on this beautiful day? host: i am doing well. caller: glad for that. i am in nonmalignant pain. i have been for 35 years.

pitbulls a we also do things and change it around, well, the doctors i go to keep an eye on me, and i have to see them every 30 days, and they have to make sure how i am progressing every day. they ought to let the doctors do the job, and you need to make a program about the individual patients who have chronic nonmalignant pain, because we are being lumped in together with junkies. every time we go to a doctor, we have to prove ourselves innocent and not being a drug addict. i have got five vertebrates, right shoulder crushed, three surgeries on the left, to bone removed, on my right wrist, one bone removed, seven inches of my intestines removed from one and fell on me,ner and we are just being lumped in, and the thing is this, the junkies, they are going to score anywhere they can because it is

a disease or a mental defects,. the doctors write prescriptions. if a look at the medical records and see if they had -- excuse me, my pain level is always between eight and nine on a tense and will, even with the medications. thehe doctors would look at medical records and see if it is medically appropriate, you cannot come in there with ace rained finger -- a sp finger one week, come in with a twisted back the next week, somebody is looking for drugs, but if you have medical documentation that you are disabled, then they should be able to treat it. everybody is at fault. host: david is out of monroe, utah. you are up next. who is to blame for the opiod epidemic? caller: hi, how are you doing? i have had this medicine since the mid-1980's, and back in 1990, i am going to tell you a little anecdote, the anecdote is -- the anecdote is that,

whoi had a patient come in was a medicaid patient, and he was drug seeking, and i knew he , and i get aing call from medicaid the next week , saying that i was going to be investigated for abusing a medicaid patient. guy, i investigated this and he had received opioids from about 15 different doctors around the state. that in the mid-1990's, there was a pain crisis. we were all told that we did not of how to manage pain. there were congressmen standing up like they are now, but they were then saying doctors are "mean" because they would not give people their pain narcotics. the idea was nobody should have pain, because it is subjective, and physicians cannot understand their pain, so the government pushed this to the point that by

the mid-1990's, we were having to take 20 to 40 hours of continuing medical education every two years on how to give narcotics, to get our licenses renewed. so it is not surprising that this happened, because there was intense pressure on physicians to prescribe from official and nonofficial agencies. host: so, david, what do you think when members of congress blame doctors for overprescribing and pharmaceutical companies for pushing these products? caller: the same ones who were screaming about doctors being mean for not prescribing narcotics in the early and mid-1990's are now screaming about the opioid crisis. the same people. so i think this is done for political gain. iw, there is a crisis -- agree with that -- and i blame the physicians for yielding to the pressure from the

government, as they are now yielding to pressure to not prescribing medications. i work in a hospital, where there used to be signs that said "if you have pain, tell your doctor." now it says "if you have pain, tell your doctor you do not want opioids." so we have come full circle with the big political game that is going on here. host: do you think we are going to keep coming around that circle? did you think the pain crisis is going to be back in the coming decades? caller: yes. in 15 years, some of the same congressmen are going to be standing up, screaming that we have a pain crisis. host: david in utah this morning. we mentioned the johnson & johnson ruling that happened on monday and tuesday. there were is that purdue pharma is in talks to settle thousands of lawsuits brought by states and cities and counties, possibly somewhere between $10 billion and $20 million, was the reported settlement amount. here is the settlement on that from today's "new york times."

host: that in today's "new york times," if you want to read more on that.

about 50 minutes left in today's "washington journal." we continue with your thoughts on who is to blame for the opioid crisis. out of west palm beach florida, good morning. caller: hi. good morning. thank you for taking my call. first and foremost, i do want to echo the question that you are asking is multifaceted and is extremely complicated. surgeryorthopedic resident, so i have seen the different intersections. responsessome of the somewhat offensive when they try to put the majority of the blame on doctors. i do think some doctors do have their part, sure, if a patient your in, i think it is responsibility to, you know, look up their history of narcotic prescriptions, pain pills. but i think part of this started

with economic 90's, and there in theudies -- way back 1990's, and there were studies, so if you have a patient in the hospital, rate your pain, 0 to i just had ankle surgery, and my pain is 7 out of 10. call the doctor. give me something stronger." "no, i do not want to give you something stronger." thepeople who call your show or the ones who give a one out of five review. everybody's pain for the most part is different. whove seen patients come in are on hair when because, you know, they have an effectiv inf, for example. simple them can be as as, hey, i had an ankle fracture way back when, and they gave me 20 tablets of oxycodone, and by

the first tablet, it was euphoric, and after that, the second reason, for some people, because they have a lot of ates, soo these opi if your grandma has 80 oxycodone for her hip replacement when she only needed 10, maybe she needed 7, who is to say, but there is a lot of access to pills, and you have these pill parties that give these young kids access to it. host: you are in the medical field? caller: yes, i am an ortho surgery resident. in my opinion, we prescribed for legitimate pain, but at the same time, that said, if somebody has an angle fracture, i have to give you narcotics, the answer is point to be equivocally, yes. hey, if you have an ankle fracture, a patient who is on opioids or a patient who is just on tylenol, they do not do a ok, but i think there is a societal

perception or a misperception of their expectations of pain. if you have surgery, i am supposed to be at 0 out of 10 pain. no! pain is a natural response. so the nurses will ask you, what is your pain, 0 out of 10, and if it is more than 7, then we need to get you something stronger, and that is a false system. it's -- there's a lot of issues that i cannot really articulate in this three- minute segment. host: you did pretty well so far. i appreciate the phone call from florida. this is cherie out of indianola, iowa. good morning. caller: good morning. i have not heard anything said about the cannabis yet. i have been in to the pain for years with surgery, shunts in my spine, my shoulders need to be replaced.

i am only 66 years old. i recently had a hip replacement that went bad. i got a staph infection. they had to remove the hip, they went back in, that it got dislocated. i have been homebound for a year. i have been going to a pain doctor for nine years who watches me very closely and knows i do not like the opiates. he finally suggested that i go anough the channels get the cannabis oil or the pill, and i absolutely swear by it. when you are on opiates, you are not yourself. cannabis, regardless of what people say, you do not get high off of it. it only kills the thought of the pain so you can function. who: sherry, when we asked is to blame for the opioid crisis, do you think it is the doctors offering patients more alternatives, like you have been able to find? caller: exactly.

anybody who is an acute pain he is to be sent to a pain doctor. and from there, i think pain things get better, but you have such a fight with it, because there is such a stigma of how bad it has been in the past. this these to be pushed further. i do not know who is stopping it. in our town, it is our governor. excuse me, in our state, it is our governor. it is not a high. it just kills the pain. host: that is sherry in iowa. to indiana, pennsylvania, this is brenda. good morning. caller: yes, good morning. first of all, i want to say that we do not hold gun manufacturers responsible when people misuse their products. companieshold alcohol responsible for when people misuse their products. so i think we are holding drug manufacturers responsible because rehab and treating drug addiction is so expensive, and they want to get the money from somewhere.

much the same as they call drug addiction agencies. well, they quality disease, in my opinion, so that medical insurance will pay for rehab. i totally hold the patient responsible, the person using the medication, responsible for the crisis. i have been on pain medication from one state years because of a car accident and a bad neck and bad back, and in january, i went to a pain management clinic. i spent two minutes, he told me, he looked at my x-rays, i don't need it anymore, i just need a physical therapy. so since january, i have been taking thousands of milligrams of ibuprofen and acetaminophen to try to make up for not having the pain medication, so now i am at risk of ruining my kidneys and ruining my liver because of these massive doses of ibuprofen and acetaminophen. and i did try the cannabis oil.

i tried that for a couple of months. it did nothing. what i call walking wounded, i am one of the walking wounded across this country. they have been our portray really of pain medication because of this manufactured crisis. host: that is brenda in pennsylvania this morning. brenda, you started talking about guns in your comments. hurricane to note how dorrian is impacting potential gun legislation on capitol hill. here is the story from what happened late yesterday. committeejudiciary and announcing on friday that due to hurricane dorian, it was canceling plans to have members, early from the six-week break to get a jump on taking up a batch of gun bills. forecastedy 3 storm to slam forward a next week, that is when the congressional panel had planned to mark up several bills in the wake of the recent mass shootings in

california, in texas, and in ohio. here is the announcement from the committee yesterday. "due to hurricane dorian potentially impacting millions of floridians in the travel of members of the house judiciary committee, including five members who represent the districts in florida, the searing has been postponed it will take place the week of september 9." not beill obviously showing that on c-span next week, but when they do come back in town and when they do take up that legislation. eric is next out of phoenix, arizona. good morning. caller: hey. all i have got to say is this. everybody needs their medication. i just need my medication. you can ask anybody. i need my medication. i need my medication. when it comes to the government, no matter the legal stuff, no matter what comes in next, but anytime we ever talk, we just need our medication. ask anybody. we need our medication. host: all right.

to david in iowa city, iowa. good morning. caller: good morning. i guess my view of this is it is unfortunate we could not have avoided some of these issues from the very beginning. we are physical beings operating in a physical environment and have the ergonomic standards been how manyed, who knows muscular skeletal problems could have been prevented, that led to people skeletalg mus muscle pain and developing the need for these medications. host: david, now that we are here at a time when we have seen 400,000 prescription and illicit opioid overdoses in the past two decades, who is to blame for that? caller: [sighs] i can't tell you that. host: that is the conversation we're having this morning. ken is in kentucky. good morning. caller: good morning. thanks for taking my call.

this opioid epidemic is so blown out of proportion. it has been made into a news story. that is causing all of this is fentanyl and heroin and all of this speed or whatever, it is illegal drugs already. they are going after the people that are taking control. these are people that have never been a criminal or nothing, you are treating them, like the ones that, you go to a doctor, you are treated, you are tested and all of that like you're a criminal. i have never done nothing in my life. i have had 30 years of back pain and all this. in the last 10 years, i have been fighting colon cancer, and now i go to the doctor, and i have got to fight to get medication. and when they talk about this -- how many people die from it -- it is overdoses from heroin and fentanyl. en, it is more than that, and let me show viewers a chart,

the black line on this chart from 1999 to 2017, this is overdosed deaths from prescription opioids, rising up from five per 100,000 americans in this country, coming around the early 2010's and staying through the number through 2017. problem is aerdose redline, and you can see that jumping up much later and still below what the black line is, which is the prescription opioids. and finally, the fentanyl overdose deaths is the blue line, jumping up in very recent years, some surpassine perception opioid overdoses and reaching close to 10 americans per 100,000. the three waves of addictions and overdose deaths in this country. dwight is in indianapolis. you are next. caller: hi, john.

i just want to say thanks for programming that informs people, no speculation, and gets the voices of the people out there. i have been a teacher for the last five years, and one priority in my classroom is to talk about social issues, so we talk about this crisis. a lot of the conversations i have had about them, the one thought that i had is where did extensivelyrong in testing this product before it got out to the public market? that has always been my concern. obviously the drug companies made the products. the sackler family new that it but before it even got out to the public, what happened with the fda? and that is possibly where the blame could go. host: dwight, how old are the kids you teach? caller: ice age teach adult high school, so 17 to 70.

and what is the feeling that they have, and is it different from a 17-year-old to a 70-year-old? so, for the most part, they put the blame that on the user. they feel like the user have a choice to stop whenever they want to and get the help that they need, but i tried to challenge them with the idea there is a neurological, kind of biological hold that is placed on the user, when they get on a drug. they are captive to it. so it is a struggle to really come to a conclusion with that, but i do hear that the user is to blame, as far as what i hear from my students. host: thank you for the call from indiana this morning. caroline, orlando, florida, good morning. caller: good morning. yes, what i am saying is i am on opiates, and i trying to move down. coworker.red by a

i can longer sit for any length mytime, and i spend 90% of time and that, and i used to run 10 miles every morning. keptput me on opiates and moving the opiate up to 100 milligrams every single day. host: when you say "they," caroline, you are talking about your doctor? caller: we did not know that it was good, bad, or anything, it just seemed to help with the pain, but i have been on it for a number of years now, and the last couple of years, i have been trying to move myself down, off the intensity, down further, and it is difficult. everything i have tried to try to move down, it does not work, because i finally found out that, uh, you can't. as soon as you put a new medication on, it jumps it the l

level. host: you think your doctor should have let you know where this could be headed when you started this process. do you think your doctor should have done more to let you know where this could have been headed when you started using the opioids for paying? caller: it would've been helpful to have more information, but i guess we could have found out too. when it firstl, started to be dug it helped communities and helps people get energy and helped the companies, and it turns out that it was not the best thing. call, paul has been waiting, florida. go ahead. caller: hello. several years ago, a former florida attorney general went after off -- went after all of those pain management clinics and shut down hundreds of them at the same time when senator scott was governor of the state

of florida, because that was where the crux was on where the outflow was on all of these foxy type drugs. hydrocotin, and i said i do not want the stuff in less it is absolutely extension -- essential. we had a deputy sheriff, a good workers' comp case and got so addicted to oxycontin that this boy broke into a drugstore and we had to deal with that. how did we deal? we did not fire him, we got him assistance to get him down off of that drug. this is a real serious problem, a real serious problem, and the blame goes back to the time when pam bondi was going after these pain clinics and she went after

them with a vengeance. at the same time, the administration in washington, doing nothing. they were on those. host: that is our last caller in this first segment of the washington journal. plenty more to discuss. we will switch gears and have a discussion about cryptocurrency and the future of money. americane joined by enterprise institute visiting fellow, jim harper. and later, the former vice president for u.s. telecom talk about efforts to combat illegal robo calls. ♪ >> in the late 1850's, americans generally trusted their congressman did not trust congress as an institution. nor did congressman trust each other. by 1860 many congressmen were

routinely armed, not because they were eager to kill their opponents, out of fear that their opponents might kill them. >> yale history professor joanne freeman will be our guest on " in-depth." her latest book is the field of blood. her other titles include " hamilton: writings," and " affairs of honor." join our live conversations. then at 9:00 p.m. eastern, and his latest book "the immoral we is examiningo if evangelicals are choosing political power over christian values. >> i think it contributes to keeping a system in place that takes accountability out of the system. -- is the also has easy way to bring in something like evangelicalism and use that as a way to get votes, which

seems like the worst possible way you can use faith. >> watch book tv every weekend on c-span2. >> washington journal continues. american enterprise institute visiting fellow jim harper joins us from new hampshire for our conversation on the future of money. we are having this discussion on the 50th anniversary of the first atm installed in the united states. 50 years from now, what do you think the biggest changes will be to the currency system and money as we use it? guest: it would be neat if we never had to use atm's or pay their fees. it could be that banking and finance are replaced by software. we will see. maybe it will take longer or shorter. host: cryptocurrency is one of

our topics to discuss. can you explain what it is and what the word means? guest: cryptocurrency is an internet native digital asset. what i mean by that is that it is an asset you can transfer online without going through any intermediary. it is called cryptocurrency see because it use cryptography in a couple of important ways to secure the assets for holders and to the assets in a way that makes it on counterfeit a ball, he cannot be -- on counter --un counterfeitable. it is a digital asset as opposed to the kind of assets which a lot of us use nowadays because and other financial service providers are tracking the exchanges through their companies and systems. this would be totally online, you can exchange with anyone online, anywhere. host: the money you are talking about is the mobile apps being

seen used more? guest: it is a narrow but important distinction. a lot of what we are doing, venmo, paypal, and using our app, that is putting an internet skin on traditional banking. you are using enter -- the internet as a base. the difference with cryptocurrency is that you are doing the money yourself. it has challenges because you are sponsor both for securing the money. a lot of hacking will go on to get at the money. we rely on the banks and other financial service providers now protect the money that we leave with them and with cryptocurrency, you are on your own. host: do we know how many people use cryptocurrency, and what the value is? guest: it is very hard to know exactly how many people use it. you can count quality dresses, the number of wallets -- you can count wallet addresses, the number of wallets created.

it is easily in the millions, perhaps tens of millions. large provider and has millions and millions of users, but how much they actually use cryptocurrency is not clear. host: how does one obtain cryptocurrency and go about spending it? guest: about three ways to obtain it, one is to go to an exchange and buy it. there are lots of them. i mentioned coin base, and there are others. a lot of them are new businesses, so it is care of -- so you have to be careful. another way is to earn it, find someone with cryptocurrency and is willing to trade or pay for it. ae third way is mining, it is highly technical business, but you can my new cryptocurrency for yourself. -- mine new cryptocurrency for yourself. it is tradable like any

currency, there are cryptocurrency exchanges that operate essentially the same way. you can also use it to buy and sell. it seems like there was a heyday five years ago when there were more retailers using bitcoin and other cryptocurrency's, now they are a little harder to find because the industry needs to settle out in the community needs to settle on one major cryptocurrency. in time, you will find that a lot of retailers, and places online except cryptocurrency as payment for things you buy. over stop is a good example of a company that -- overstock is a good host: example of a company. i want to invite viewers to join in. if you have questions, now is a good time to call in. if-748-8000 is the number you live in the eastern or central time zones. 202-748-8001 is the number if you live in the mountain or pacific time zones.

cryptocurrency, a special line for you, 202-748-8002 is that number. we would love to hear your stories and how you use cryptocurrency. our guest for this segment, jim harper, writes about these issues. a visiting fellow joining us from new hampshire this morning. as people are piling in, what is libra? libra is a competitive cryptocurrency and there is an argument about whether it is a true cryptocurrency put together by a coalition led by a spoke. the ideas is to have something much like bitcoin, but this consortium would run it using the swiss foundation. the interesting thing about libra is that it has an installed user base. the companies involved have billions of users, so you can really leap to a high user base it isy, and is -- and

important because acceptance is what makes money worthwhile. libra is an important player in this game and there interesting questions about other it cryptocurrency. it might be a centralized system, which people are trying to get away from where it masquerades as cryptocurrency. an important player that earned the attention of congress, the senate held a currency, a digital this is senator sherrod brown of ohio discussing his concerns with big companies like facebook getting involved in the business. this is what he had to say. [video clip] >> i am all for innovation especially if it delivers on its promises. big tech companies and wall street banks are hiding behind innovation as an excuse to take over important public services that we all benefit from, and should all have a say in. there are some things, our

currency, the protections of our savings accounts, that everyone has a stake in. we should not be handing those resources over to wealthy special interests so that they can squeeze more profits out of ordinary americans. think how hard it is to get quality service from comcast, to know how your privacy was invaded by facebook, or to know how much your personal data was leaked by equifax, and we've just learned capital one. who is next, we do not know. we should be suspicious when someone tells us that only big corporations can be trusted to provide critical public services. [end video clip] host: how much regulation has the federal government done so far when it comes to digital currency? guest: digital currency fits into the existing wrigley tory categories. that it has been said cryptocurrency's are not regulated.

they are not regulated in the same way that american cash dollars are not regulated. you can walk around with them and buy everything you want, expect when they are regulated. if you are in an exchange, you are regulated. if you are a payments provider, you are regulated. if you are signing any other financial service, you are regulated. it is highly regulated already. libra and any other cryptocurrency service provider is responsible to the u.s. federal government to know your customer, doing background investigations on users, maintaining information, that is the bank secrecy act that requires rather extensive financial surveillance by companies that provide any financial services including those offered in cryptocurrency's. it fits into a highly regulated mold already. senator brown expresses a lot of importance in -- concerns with

--sumer interaction protection. the irony is that the government requires financial surveillance that is undermining privacy a bit. there is real concern about facebook because it is really not a privacy hero, and i am being a little bit understated. host: a good time to get your questions off of your chest. jim harper with us for another 20 to 25 minutes. john is up first out of arkansas, good morning. caller: yes. hello, can you hear me? host: try that again. caller: ok. thieves have held different cities for ransom and are to maiming -- demanding payment in cryptocurrency. cryptocurrency is enabling them to do that and get away with it. that is what a concern to me is.

what i want to know is when they get that cryptocurrency, do they cash it in for money, what do they do with that? host: glad we were able to get you. guest: those are great questions, and important. there have been a number of packings around the country -- hackings around the country in the world where someone will lock up a system and say we will release your files and data and let you use your systems if you pay us off in cryptocurrency. i think for the criminals, that is a penny wise and pound foolish. works --cryptocurrency the way that cryptocurrency works, there is a permanent transaction record that is publicly available that shows where it went. in the early days you could abscond and trade it on a platform right away and get away with whatever your local fiat currency was. but today there is enough tracking and monitoring that

goes into this kind of thing that when you get cryptocurrency ism a scam like this, it going to be a little bit harder to trade and it is going to get harder and harder. there are fascinating differences between cryptocurrency and fiat currency. dollars you can move without being tracked. cryptocurrency, they will be on your trail pretty quickly and law enforcement will get better with that. cryptocurrency is not the thing that allows this, the criminals are using it for that purpose and that is something that has to be chased down. host: out of maryland, good morning. caller: good morning, my question is about caret -- karat bars. can you tell me a little bit about that and how it works? guest: not a cryptocurrency? guest: i am not familiar with that company, i cannot say how it works. cryptocurrency is also thought of as digital dirt -- digital

gold and a competitor for gold. host: do we know how many different types are out there? it is more than 1000, easy to make a cryptocurrency if you have basic coding skills. you can copy the bitcoin cold dashcode and change it however you want. you can create a new coin. maybehave been thousands, not multiple thousands, but more than 1000 out there that have very thin trading. you got your gold, silver, and other metals, and for currency purposes and for holding value purposes, the others do not metal much. -- matter much. there are cryptocurrency's that have been created that are referred to as utility tokens. those are currencies that will be used in some kind of service like filesharing. the interplanetary file sharing

network that uses its own cryptocurrency to create an incentive ecosystem that will allow people to share files among themselves. that will be outside of the major cloud services. it iss interesting stuff, complex, there are security issues about those kind of tokens, but there is a lot going on beyond bitcoin and the other well-known names. host: what are the main ingredients in a good cryptocurrency? guest: in a good one, that is hard to say. cryptocurrency is founded on a data protocol called block chain. you take data and put it into a block, think of it as a page in a ledger. using cryptography you attacked a ledger to the next page in the next page, and that way you create a system that is what the

technology underlying bitcoin and other cryptocurrency is. it is a way of keeping track of exchanges. you can use this technology for lots of things other than trading money or value. once you have got that, the cryptocurrency provides in his -- an incentive system to secure the pages so they cannot be changed. you have a log of what happened. when i send you bitcoins, that goes into that log and it will take computing power to change the transaction. that is the way you get this global ledger system that in the case of bitcoin and other similar currencies is optimized for value transfer. it is a new form of money, very different from the money we are familiar with. there is an interesting challenge for the bitcoin community to make it accessible to people, to make people understand it, make people confident that they can hold it securely. that has all yet to come. who knows how long it will take. i think it will happen. host: inviting members of the

bitcoin community and those who owned cryptocurrency to call in at 202-748-8002. otherwise the phones are split up regionally. robert from virginia is next. good morning. caller: good morning. i have two questions. one is what is bitcoin, and the other is if russia can hack security and do all this election stuff, what is to stop a real good hacker to get into a bank system? the question what is bitcoin is philosophically deep. let me go into something about value and what money is. it is easy to think that money in the u.s. is the u.s. dollar, and that is about it. if you go into history you see that all kinds of things were used as money, cows, shells,

salt, the list is long. gold and silver, obviously. it is possible to think of control of digital assets as being valuable. it is a form of money, cryptocurrency when people recognize it, and believe they can trade it for something of value, then it is a competitor for the place held by the dollar, euro, yen, and other currencies. that is one answer, there are a lot more. as far as hacking goes, the bitcoin block chain, the protocol it runs the program that causes bitcoin transfers to be stored, that has never been hacked. it has been run on computers across the globe. nothing could knock it out. providers, individuals that hold bitcoin have suffered a lot of hacking. bitcoin in first

2011 and it was promptly stolen. i got an important lesson. if you do not hold the private keys, either not actually hold your bitcoin. so, there are a lot of hacking challenging's and the bitcoin community owes it to people to teach them how to hold their own and the service providers have to strengthen themselves against hacking aimed at them. why rob banks? that is why -- that is where the money is. why hack cryptocurrency's? that is where the money is. host: can you please comment on the energy requirements used to maintain block chain cryptocurrency. guest: it is an interesting challenge and issue. part of what secures the block chain, what causes the pages to be unchangeable is a thing called proof of work. computers around the world that are specialized for this challenge are entered in, and

people enter their computer processing and using lots of energy enter into a contest and lottery to find the next block or page. , they getn to fees paid the new bitcoin, that is the mining process. the competition is so fierce that a lot of electricity is going into running those computers to try and find the next block. there are estimates all over the place of about how much energy is used, a lot of the estimating about it is pretty bad, because they are not considering the fact that a lot of bitcoin mining is hydropower. in china these days, there is a lot of unused hydropower because the chinese government has built large dams, controversial in themselves, and hydroelectric facilities that are not connected to the grid to where major electric uses is in china,

so there is capacity from the hydropower plants, and bitcoin minors are locating themselves there. the u.s. they are looking themselves in the northwest. greenland is a good candidate for mining because temperatures are naturally low in there is a lot of geothermal energy. bitcoin mining gravitates to where energy is cheap and where energy would not otherwise be used. some of the estimates take mainstream middle american energy prices and usage and extrapolate outs what the energy costs are in kansas or san francisco, and assume that all of the mining is using that energy. energy has an interesting locality, and bitcoin money goes where the energy is cheapest and environmentally sound. it is a real debate and concern. minersare constantly -- are constantly looking to lower

their cost and energy usage. host: tory in washington, d.c., good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. i was hoping that your guest talk a little bit that some of these organizations that issue bitcoin and talk about how we can go to exchanges and purchase bitcoin by a little interaction. be tied to, something like the gold standard silver standard. we had banknotes for building an exchange that were tied to the credibility of a certain organization or bank. and, so, it seems now with bitcoin that it is kind of hard narrowed down the credibility of whatever is the issuer. host: let us take up that first question. guest: a great question. money has interesting

credibility challenges. in the past, i am not a great historian of money, he would pick it up and know the value right away. a quantity of salt, you can tell what they are. if you are trading cattle, people can see that they are a certain size or things like that. naturally new the value. we moved to gold and there was an industry among issuers and clipping them and shaving them down, and minting them with less gold than they said. the credibility of money has always been a concern. american dollars used to be backed by gold, in theory at least. 1971 the gold window was closed. government said you cannot pay just trade your paper notes for gold, and now that we trust that the paper is valuable, even when the central bank and the federal reserve prints lots more dollars or issues more dollars. the credibility of money itself is a challenge, and then there

is the main thrust of your question, the credibility of the companies that are selling cryptocurrency. comesyptocurrency itself out of a software process. it does not have an issuer except based in code. the code can be reviewed. i do not have the capacity to review it. there are very intelligent people who do. they are confident that there were only be 21 million bitcoins government in. ay are minted at decreasing rate for the next 120 years until the last unit is mined people are confident that it will not be debased by overprinting like some countries do. as far as the exchanges where you go to buy your bitcoin, they are all new companies, a lot of them are run by bright young people, but they are still young people who do not have the experience that is handed down

from years and decade to get -- decade to decade from companies that have been around for a while. they are making mistakes, many have been hacked, but there are major providers of bitcoin exchange in the u.s. and europe that i feel relatively confident in. a piece of advice, if you ever buy bitcoin, do so cautiously and hold your own private keys, do the research to understand what it is. there is a private key, which is a string of letters and numbers you have to keep to yourself, or else someone can go on to the network and trade those coins away. if you hold the keys you hold the bitcoin. bitcoinre leaving your at an exchange, they are the one holding the private keys and they can get hacked and can be pulling shenanigans. there is a lot to watch out for in the bitcoin world.

it has been around for just under 10 years. host: when you lost your first bitcoin, what happened there. pretty much nothing. i was an early adopter, i had been educated about bitcoin and did research and thought it was interesting. i am going to start a modest investment plan, and i mean modest, a very small percentage of my small wealth. i started buying in, buying the same dollar amounts month over month, and right after the first month i got word from the exchange from when i would -- where i was buying it that the exchange had been hacked. do i know if they were telling the truth? no. they might have absconded with the money i transferred and the bitcoin, they might have been hacked legitimately. you just do not know, that was years ago now. anould not do business with eastern european exchange i had

never heard of again. there are majors that are well-known and have good reputations and solid management. the important point is to be modest in your purchasing. interest, and until you feel confident that you know who is who and who is doing what, and you know how to hold private keys. host: time for a few more calls. -- fellow scholar with the american enterprise institute. bob and mein. good morning. -- in maine. good morning. caller: the national debt of our country is going up the rate of $2 trillion a year. the country cannot keep going up that rapidly without going bankrupt. if the country goes bankrupt within 20 years, how will that affect cryptocurrency? guest: great question and great point. a lot of people in the crypto world to not trust governments

to produce high quality, label money. one of the defenses that the u.s. government would take if the interest rate got too high and the national debt started costing too much, it would to be to print new dollars, which decreases the value of the dollar. ofordingly, the value bitcoin, gold, and other assets would rise. bitcoin is a hedge against the risk of inflations for holders of u.s. dollars. bitcoin is more valuable for people and countries who do not have a well-managed currency. argentina and zimbabwe are examples of countries that seem to consistently manage their currency poorly. for people in those countries, getting into cryptocurrency, no matter what the variation in price, and it does vary quite dramatically. you are better off than you are in a your local currency. it is a hedge against the u.s.,

and an unlikely chance of high inflation or hyperinflation, that it is a hedge for people in countries that have terribly rotten fiat currency. host: we started talking about it being the 50th anniversary of the first atm being installed in the united states. i wonder your thoughts on sunday who writes and thinks about currency and money -- your thoughts as somebody who writes in things about currency and money, your thoughts about how it changed and how we deal with money. guest: i guess that i'm old enough that i used to go into a bank with a passbook to do -- obviously, you can do miller banking -- more banking more times a day. bitcoin in cryptocurrency's offer not just improvements on

how banking is done, but even replacing banking and replacing money issuance with software. there is a heck of a lot of social development that needs to happen before it is a reality. people need to understand the technology and study it carefully. people need to know how to hold bitcoin and cryptocurrency. there is a lot of social capital that needs to be billed. there is real potential that banks could be replaced by software the way that communications, the postal service still exists, but much of its work has been replaced by the email protocol. the bitcoin protocol and similar open, cryptocurrency protocols could replace some of these institutions, governmental and corporate have a little too much power and create too much risk first -- for consumers. host: jim harper does a lot of thinking and writing about christo -- cryptocurrency. he is a visiting fellow at the american enterprise institute.

thank you for your time. will talknext, we about campaign 2020, that your thoughts on the races that you are watching. the phone lines open so you can start calling in. for republicans, democrats, and independents. stick around, we will have that next. >> the u.s. senate comes back into session on monday, september 9 with two important issues on their agenda, passings federal spending bills and anti-gun violence legislation. the four senators returned to washington, had a behind-the-scenes look with the history program the senate, conflict and compromise. here's a preview. >> there is cap -- this government was created in compromise and mutual concession. >> thomas jefferson question the

need for the senate. >> let us follow the constitution. thehe framers established senate to protect people from their rulers, and as a check on the house. the fate of this country in the world lies in the hands of the congress and the united states senate. >> the senate, conflict and compromise, using original interviews, archives, and unique access to the senate chamber. we will look at the history, traditions, and roles of the u.s. senate. eastern and:00 p.m. pacific on c-span. >> watched campaign 2020 coverage of the democratic presidential candidates at the new hampshire democratic party convention, live coverage is saturday, september 7 at 9:00 a.m. online, or listen with the free radio app.

>> washington journal continues. host: for about the next half hour, a conversation about campaign 2020. i want to hear from you about what races you are watching this cycle, whether it is the presidential, senate, house, or governors races. let us know which candidates you are more interested in. republicans at 202-748-8001. democrats at- 202-748-8000. independents at 202-748-8002. a noteare calling in, that this week on newsmakers we spoke with guy cecil of priorities usa, biggest spending democratic party super pac. here is guy cecil talking about their efforts. [video clip] >> the most undervalued thing about running for president is being able to explain, which

sounds like a basic criteria. the one thing that elizabeth warren has going for you. if you asked her in two minutes or five minutes or two hours why she is running for president, she has a clear case. it is consistent with her life's work and that is an important facet. cory booker is building a strong operation on the ground. if there is a chance for a second-tier candidate to move into that first-tier, cory has shown a strong ability to enter into the debates and come out with strong organizations. i expect that he will be doing better. certainly how giving -- given how late joe biden has gone into the debate. i think there are highlights with a lot of these candidates. the key is how do you balance the national needs of a campaign with the fact that so much attention is placed on iowa, south carolina, and i think the campaign will have to try and

figure out how to balance at the best will be the ones who are successful. iswe are looking at the map, there a state or two that you see as a state that could be unexpectedly given the areas that the trump campaign is focused on. >> i think arizona on our side is a state. it is a state we see moving in our direction. we had some success in 2018. i expect that mark kelly will be the next senator from arizona, which helps but that state in play from the presidential perspective. north carolina is always on that margin. president obama was successful in 2008, another senate race there is important for democrats to have, the majority on our side. , andto talk about georgia texas continuing to move more into the democratic direction, those are states that we tend to keep an eye on. [end video clip] host: you can see the entire

interview tomorrow morning at 10:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. you can hear it on c-span radio and watch it on c-span.org. there are plenty of -- there is plenty of campaign 2020 coverage taking place including senator bernie sanders tomorrow at 3:00 p.m. eastern and online at c-span.org. iceill hold a town hall and cream social in raymond, new hampshire. you can also watch it and listen to it on the free radio app. also, elizabeth warren will be attending a house party where c-span will be. hampton falls, new hampshire. you can watch that on monday at 2:30 eastern. again on c-span.org. we will listen to it on the free c-span radio app. about 20 minutes left in this segment, i want to hear from you. a bit of open phones to hear about campaign 2020, the candidates and races. we will dive into it.

elinor is in nashville, tennessee. >> good morning. made a comment earlier how -- i made a comment earlier i am paying attention to the democratic and republican party integrating with each other. my comment is that the race that they have been running and integrating, the problems and the solutions that they have been solving has been a wonderful raise. i have been watching as an american as a whole. you get the positions from people who control everything. host: what specific issue do you see the democratic and republican party coming together on? withr: i see them together with solving and

maintaining all of the issues whether it goes through whatever part of science that it needs to. host: we will go to john in washington, d.c.. a republican. go-ahead. caller: good morning. i would like to introduce the idea both parties more so the republicans, because they were the original liberators of our union from slavery. it is time that we start using the correct word for the ending of slavery in this country, which is called recovery. not reparations, reparations goes into targeting and people,ly prosecuting as nurses, and everyone else that had something to do with slavery. claimcovery goes into a for the injury without the taxpayer paying for it. i -- and also getting rid of

dysfunctional taxpayer programs. host: as you look ahead to campaign 2020, do you think reparations or recovery is going to be one of the top issues? caller: absolutely. voters -- you have 60 million to 80 million voters who support the agenda. people want tax relief. my organization is an anti-poverty and taxpayer relief group. area -- incialize that specific area of introducing this idea to the public, and the public is absolutely ready for this. host: what is the name of your organization? caller: the united states adjustment and recovery act. it, spell it out, it will readjust the taxpayers'

responsibility, lower taxes, and give people a sense of responsibility and bring this country together without saying you pay for this even though you had nothing to do with it. that is what will cause the vision. we have to stop using the word reparations. host: michael is next in stanford, connecticut, an independent. good morning. caller: i was thinking about campaign signage. i do not to have to write the word trump on anything, though i was thinking more having to say vote him out. you do not have to put trump on everything and people would know who it is. i think trump is having it tough because the hurricane looks like it is coming right through mar-a-lago, and i don't know if anything would be happening again ever again. host: this is mary, michigan. good morning. caller: hello.

i am in a swing district. -- the has been democrats have been doing better and better in recent years. i am watching to see if this is the year that we finally get the house seat from republicans. this is from a 30 some year incumbent who has worn out his welcome. is running for the democrats , and working very hard. i think itclose, but is a bit of a bellwether. why do you think fred upton has worn out his welcome? caller: yes. i think he voted with trump, he is very pro-gun and anti-woman. we have an old-time republican

on our hands. about the me more history of that district, how long have you been there? caller: i have been here a long time, decades. democratice had a interviews at short -- intervals through the years. fred has had the seat for 30 or some years. host: it is michigan six, i was looking it up. ae rankings habit as republican seat, but one of the races that they say is on the board this cycle, they ranked the rancid is from -- they ranked the races from likely republican, likely democratic, and those are the races that they think are in play.

john, kansas city, missouri, talking about campaign 2020. what race are you watching. caller: i am watching presidential races, and my concern is this time that the principles in both parties are elderly. we look back to president reagan in 1988, and now looking into of9 saying that at this end this term, the alzheimer's was always in very very beginning stages and we can see some of those actions and consequences. i am going to be looking at -- sorry -- i will be looking at the libertarians again. young,ve somebody who is of takingd capable four to eight years of the busiest executive office in the world. thank you very much.

host: clyde in oklahoma, a democrat. which race are you watching? caller: right now? host: what race are you watching? caller: i guess about all of them. generationst many back, things to me have now gotten worse instead of better. one running in one race and another running in another. obviously they should all get together. any -- otherwise they do not get anything done. host: do you think we are bickering now more than before? caller: twice as much. wisconsin,er john, independent, good morning.

caller: i am calling because what i am paying attention to is the mass incarceration rates and silent crime. i live in milwaukee, and the dnc will be here. code-5 3206 we have inches the marsh -- the most incarcerated zip code. i feel as though the democratic party had slept on this issue. our community has been left hopeless, and in terms of silent crime in the city of milwaukee, it is out of control. a young girl just died in that zip code of senseless violence. it is just frustrating because theof the guns used in crimes come from 5% of distributors outside of the city of milwaukee. that is a fact from the brady campaign, and i would like to hear the democratic party talk on these issues, because

children are dying, and it is tiring. host: how do you think president trump has done on these issues. the president often talking about the first step act that he signed into law. caller: i do not think there is enough being done. i do not think anything has changed. drugs and of horrible guns that cycle through the community, it is so little being done and we have to pay attention to the fact that when people are incarcerated, whether it is for or drug charges, there is money being made in private prisons, there is no incentive to fix these problems, so our communities are being left in the dark, and it is like a disease. it starts a cycle of vacant houses, garbage everywhere, a just never end s and andys -- an --ends. host: tell us about the races and candidates you are watching

this cycle. some news out of illinois. congressman john ship gifts -- john shimkus announced that he would not seek reelection. as a senior member of the energy and commerce committee and he said that he would retire at the end of his term. there is a picture of him there. this is the statement he put out or at least part of it. "it has been the honor of my lifetime to be asked by the people of illinois to represent them. each day i have tried to do this as best as i could, and my success lies squarely at the feet of my incredible staff in illinois and washington, d.c." his district is the 15th heavily republican district inside of elections, another one of race ating organizations ndc -- in solidly republican story. this from usa today talking

about republicans who have retired or announced retirement so far this cycle. noting that the list of lawmakers continues to grow. so far 13 members of the house have announced that they will not be running in 2020 which includes 11 republicans and two democrats so far. we want to hear about the races you are interested in. john in houston, texas is next. , i had one thing to say, but i have two things to say. stop -- when i am watching the races, who is going to say that they are always talking about the young people. i lived through the 90's, the 80's, and we were targeted, lack men were targeted for crack and cocaine and they were -- black men were targeted for crack and cocaine. i lived through that and i think wet -- stop thinking that --

did not get no training when we was in our teens and 20's. industry,ity had this and we were not taught about any of that. we let all of the guys from mississippi take the jobs and the guys in new orleans was left to cooking and making beds and stuff like that. host: as you look ahead, which candidate is speaking to those issues and concerns? i am writing with bidens because biden was true to obama. the only reason why trump is not going to win is because it became an issue. are not going to vote for him, they are going to go in the booth and vote for trump because of the

immigration, because the immigration issue, they are labor ties thanks in the south. that is why trump is going to win. he is going to win because of the immigration issue, and a lot of things trump is saying, i always want the things that he is saying to happen. like bringing the troops back home, all of this type of stuff, he is saying that. i am not for trump, but that is why he's going to win again. host: what did you think about john's thoughts in the presidential race. caller: i have been watching quite a bit, and i am a tired and a veteran, and i think one of the issues, a spiritual issue about the guns and all these different things, we have got an left that ito far

and iting this violence, is on all sides. i'm not saying it is on one side. the gun issue, it is part of it. if you look over in some of the areas in africa, for instance. if they do not have a gun they start using machetes. they are going to find a way to have violence, either knives, guns, and what, you will never stop it. if you take it up from the people who are honest and trying to protect themselves, you know the criminals will not give them up. there is not going to be on that side, any release. so, i really believe it is a spiritual thing, and i think people need to get right with it, and i believe a lot of could be solved.

gun issue, want to note that the house judiciary committee announced yesterday that due to hurricane dorian, it is canceling plans that members come back and mark up gun legislation. it was a hearing that we were expecting to cover on c-span, but that announcement coming due to hurricane dorian potentially impacting millions of floridians, the travel of house judiciary committee's including house districts in florida, the markup has been postponed and will take place during the week of september 9, that was the announcement and released late yesterday. it was several pieces of gun legislation that they had planned to take up. tim in wisconsin, what races are you watching? i am looking at the sanders campaign, basically. actually, all of them.

sanders, gabbard, and things of that nature. i find that sanders, i like some of his solutions about wanting to help and get everybody some medical insurance, but they are going way overboard. there is a lot a people in this country, american citizens that need medical insurance and all i ever hear is the democrats talking about they will cover all of the illegal aliens, and that is just crazy. you have got to get the american citizens first, and i am also a veteran, so we have got to get the veterans and american citizens covered with medical insurance. finance --ly a finite amount of resources in our budget and we cannot drive this country further into debt, so i hope they take that into consideration. i am watching gabbard and sabir

-- sanders, i voted third party and was not happy with either candidate. can -- and ony our foreign policy, i like gabbard's foreign policy stances about getting in these excursions all over the world. she has right, we cannot be invading every country and arming every country. a lot of times that makes the situation worse, and you can see in afghanistan, and other places, libya, it is not just trump that has done that, it is obama, bush, and all going back for decades. i hope someone can get a handle on this. i like gabbard's foreign policy and i like sanders' ideas trying to get people covered, but we to be ado it, it has marriage between private, and the government. host: that is tim. a fan of gabbard and sanders.

we will hear not from tulsi gabbard at that upcoming democratic primary debate on september 12, she did not make the stage for that debate. bernie sanders dead. here is a map showing where the candidates who did make that debate being hosted by abc and univision, where they will stand on the stage. the map of the candidates' positions. you can see bernie sanders next to joe biden next to elizabeth warren towards the middle of that. that is going to do it for this discussion on campaign 2020. 20 more to talk about today. we hope you stick around -- plenty more just -- to talk about, and we hope you stick around. the national book festival is underway at the walter e washington convention center in d.c.. joining us to to -- to chat about it, we are joined by a librarian of congress, carla

hayden. how many authors are you featuring at the book festival this weekend? who are you most interested in hearing from? guest: i am bubbling over because we have over 140 authors and illustrators, every genre, every type of book will be featured, and of course, we have justice ruth bader ginsburg and young people were lined up at 4:00 this morning around the convention center, and that of course is one of the highlights. we have so many more people that poetxcited to see the lawyer yet, to see michael, all of these people will be here, plus you can buy books, it is just a book lover's paradise. host: i believe the doors opened half an hour ago, it is packed

in behind you. what do you look for in the authors that you invite each year? what are the qualities that you are trying to find? caller: we look for people who are producing work that stimulates the mind, excites arele, also fun, there mystery writers, people who are -- you have books on magic, all types of subjects. this is like a festival. you think about it when you go to a food festival, there are all types of food. i want to show the variety we have. look at this menu of authors and illustrators. we look for balance and variety, but also people who can bring the joy of reading to everybody. that has been going on for 19 years. the first festival took place before the september 11 terror attacks. can you go back to that first festival and talk about how it

got started? guest: it got started because ft lady laura bush had developed a very successful book festival in texas when she was the first lady there. as soon as she became first lady here in washington, and the country was really going through quite a bit, she asked my predecessor, dr. james billington, who recently passed, if we could have a national book festival. we are hoping that she will join us in the 20th year next year because she was really the person who said that books can help heal, books can help people understand. we are very grateful to first lady laura bush. also, she is a librarian. coverage -- our live coverage of the librarian of congress national book festival on c-span2.

for folks who cannot make it to the convention center today, how can they engage with this festival and the library of congress? >> i am so glad you are mentioning that because the event will be livestreamed then you can watch it all day today. it goes until 8:00 tonight and it is a great way to have your coffee or just relax and enjoy the authors. we want everyone to have the experience whether you can be here with us in person or you watch online, so we are excited about it and we hope you will join us. host: i have to put you on the spot. i know you are introducing justice ruth bader ginsburg, and which one are you more interested in, and which book do you like better? >> i can't say. i like them all. love booksarian, i and reading. to be able to go from justice

eas who has done so much in terms of humanitarian irk, to also some fun things, am a mystery fan, so i am just overjoyed. i want everyone to have the same feeling. host: the librarian of congress will be there all day, carla hayden, thank you for starting the day on c-span. you can watch it on c-span2 starting live at 10:00 a.m. thank you for your time this morning. >> thank you. host: there is the shot of the convention center, the main stage. we will show you live coverage on c-span2 starting at 10:00 a.m. we will shift means of coming occasion from books to telephones. forre joined by kevin rupy a discussion on efforts to cut down on illegal robocalls. he is a former vice president of the united states telecom association.

what is the difference between legal and illegal robo calls? guest: absolutely. that is an important distinction. we hear a lot of talk in the media and the government that people talk generically about robocalls. it is important that we make a distinction between those that are legal, like calls from your pharmacy reminding you about prescriptions, school closings, etc. and those illegal robocalls which are a huge problem and those are the scammy, fraud related robocalls. host: estimated 26 billion robocalls made in the year 2016. where are they coming from? guest: they can come from anywhere. a large percentage of the are comingocalls from overseas, but there also illegal robocalls coming

domestically. the exact spread of that is an open question, but the fact is given the technologies, these calls can turn from literally anywhere. host: who traditionally has taken the lead on trying to cut down on these, the telecommunications companies, the state, federal, lawmakers and regulators? guest: it is all of those groups. one of the things you have seen the last few years -- i've been focused on this issue for the last seven years -- one of the things you are starting to see happen which i think is tremendously helpful, starting to see much greater collaboration between industry and government at the federal and state level. tot collaboration is crucial addressing this issue. host: what is the latest approach to trying to cut down on these calls? guest: there is a lot happening in this space.

given that we are in washington dc, one of the things i want to point out about the issue is that this is angiven that we arn unbelievably bipartisan issue. the senate pass legislation , housear 97-1 and the sec 129-3, has been doing a tremendous amount of work. they are doing things like traceback to identify the origin of calls, sharing the information with the federal government, and enforcers. last week, we had the announcement from 50 state ag's to eighttry agreeing principles that are focused exclusively on addressing illegal robocalls, and that is the close collaboration that is ongoing and expanded to put a dent in the issue. host: kevin rupy, former vice

.resident at u.s. telecom if your questions about robo calls, now is a good time to call in. ,epublicans, (202) 748-8001 democrats (202) 748-8000, independents (202) 748-8002. kevin, what should viewers know about shaken stir? stir is a set of standards and best practices that have been developed by this is a very technical standard. stands for anr acronym. but to make this a easy for the viewers, it is basically the equivalent of a notary public. when you go to a notary public with a document, they do not

look at the contract, they don't look at the form, they don't make a judgment on the document. the only thing they look at is the signature that you are putting on the line. they verify that that is your name being put on that document. shaken stir is basically the same thing, but it relates to the caller id, the phone number that shows up on the consumer's phone. that is really important because one of the reasons that robo calls have been so effective is that these bad actors, these criminals can spoof any number. i can spoof your number, the irs's number, to gain the trust of that consumer. designed tois address that and make sure that would not number present, it is authenticated. the two things that are really important for your viewers to

understand about shaken stir, it does not tell you if that call is legal or illegal or wanted, or unwanted. i just verifies the phone number. the second thing is it will greatly enhance the ability of law enforcement and industry, which u.s. telecom has its trace back group, to identify the origin of the call. host: does every phone company now you shaken stir technology? guest: industry is aggressively moving forward on deployment of shaken stir. at&t is actively employing this standard in its network. it is already exchanging traffic with comcast and t-mobile. it is happening in the network. verizon is exchanging traffic with comcast. chairman pi has made this a major priority for

implementation of shaken stir. i think what you are seeing is industry focus on this to start employing the standard, get implemented into the network by the end of 2019. the challenge is shaken stir only works on what is called an ip network. it is not want to work on the traditional copper, tdm network still out there. -- networks still out there. this is going to be an evolution, but as more and more providers implement this standard, that will greatly strengthen caller id integrity. host: if that is the focus on the providers' side, how would you rate the focus on prosecuting illegal calls, especially if they are based overseas? guest: great question. i think the enforcement piece is

one of the most important components to this issue. finding, identifying these bad actors. ftc, they haved authority and they have been aggressively pursuing these calls. citationssued totaling finds north of $200 million. a gentleman, i think it was a $120 million fine, but they are aggressively pursuing these illegal robocalls. last july, sentenced 24 defendants who are associated with the irs and in the united jail -- united states to jail. just because the callers are overseas does not mean they are unreachable. the federal trade commission has

done incredible work to go after and shut down these call centers. when that happens, when the call centers are shut down, these calls plummet. host: is that what you mention, the gentleman was running overseas? guest: his operation utilize call centers that were originating calls from mexico, but he was coordinating all of this and conducting it domestically. andas based out of miami, what i think it's really interesting, the fcc has put a major priority on robocall enforcement. when they issued their citation against the gentleman, they included in their language discussing how he violated the wire fraud that you, which is a criminal statute -- wire fraud statute, which is a criminal

statute. what the fcc was showing was that the gentleman was doing with a criminal violation. that type of enforcement is crucial to the robocall effort. host: robocalls is the topic. if you have questions, kevin rupy with us, taking your phone calls this morning. not your robocalls. paula in arizona, republican. youer: good morning, thank for taking my call. i enjoy watching you. tion, i get a phone call, and it is my own phone number calling me. i getthe next thing is, phone calls from other individuals and i will look them up on the computer, and then call the person, they don't even know their number is being used how do you address something like that? guest: what you are experiencing

right there are the issues i was talking about. this notion of spoofing. yourthey called with number, it is called mirror spoofing. that is the problem that is really fueling this robo call have endemic. the bad actors can literally just change the caller id that presents on your phone. they can change it to your number, they can change it to anybody's number. the second point you talked , that is another piece of collateral damage resulting from these illegal robocalls. if my number gets spoofed and a bad actor generates calls, my phone is going to start ringing off the hook, because people will call me back. that is what shaken stir is

designed to address. deployed,chnology is -- voice be able providers and analytic providers, will be able to score the call and make the determination of whether to block the caller let it pass through. host: how long does that take to do? will you be waiting longer to make phone calls to make sure it is verified? guest: absolutely not. it is another challenge on this issue. we are talking about billions of calls transiting the network on a regular basis. all of this needs to happen real time in a network. authentication, as well as the analytics. voice providers and analytic providers utilize to basically score that call. happens real time, there

will be no impact to how the consumer receives the call. the only other thing i wanted to say is one of the things i have -- i really would like your viewer to know is there are available to them whether it be their voice provider or if they have a smartphone with the app or android store, there are solutions that they can put on their phones to stop these illegal and unwanted robocalls. i think it is really important for consumers to know that. host: how do they do it? guest: one good resource they can go to is a website called bocalls.cti.org. ctia is the wireless association. consumer goes to that website, they can look up their provider by name, at&t, verizon, whomever, they can see the tools

the provider offers, and they also have a link that will lead them to apps that are available, and these are third-party apps they can put on their phone. these are powerful analytic tools that can really help protect consumers. i think there is a lack of awareness. host: portland, oregon. kelvin, thank you. caller: good morning. thank you for the clarification within the structure because it can be confusing and also, host, you do a great job. i have a question for the matter ofs it a the house and senate taking a leadership role in identifying that and policy, -- in policy,

fcc need to take a position that these types of unwanted contacts with citizens should be criminal? under this me that current administration, picking and choosing which regulatory strength they want to use. -- cities andg states around the country do not have the option to say they do radiationhose towers. of different attorney generals around the country, democrats have filed lawsuits saying the fcc has gone beyond its constitutional authority to mandate those types of things. why not address this from a criminal perspective as opposed to picking and choosing which policy to make civil versus criminal? guest: sure. that is a great question.

a couple of things. -- ink that he'll and the think the hill and fcc in terms of regulatory approaches to this have taken a leadership issue -- or leadership role in addressing the issue. what you are seeing coming out of congress, strongly bipartisan, substantive bills that focus on addressing robocalls. point aboutr's criminal enforcement, both bills establish basically an interag that brings group in multiple regulatory agencies and enforcement agencies to figure out how to better target criminally robocallers. that's important. chairman'sside, the number one consumer priority in the commission is robocalls.

you are seeing the agency do a lot of things on that front. they authorized voice providers to block certain categories of calls in the network. earlier in june, they adopted a that ared rulemaking milestone proceedings that they have adopted. the firsty ruling for time provides voice providers with the authority to offer consumers opt-out call blocking tools. to my point earlier, the consumers are aware of or adopting tools that the declaratory ruling posted that. host: one tool is the do not call list. is that dealing with illegal or legal robocalls? guest: to your latter point.

hasdo not call list unfairly and unfortunately been thrown under the bus in this discussion. list -- it is a legal framework for ensuring illegal calls. it is their legal framework for how they may make those calls. list, the do not call consumers would be getting even more robocalls. it is an important statute. texas,ichard in democrat. caller: thank you for having me on. i appreciate the work you do. i love listening to you. it seems to me that the path of least resistance is something that i have noticed. and i lot of out calling, kind of appreciate it in a way,

,ometimes i will get sometimes i will get someone's answering machine and it will say, please tell us who is calling, state your business. i can state my name and what i am calling for, but the computer,machine is a i guess, and it seems to screen my call, and then i wait a minute, and they pick up the phone. and that seems to me to be the path of least resistance for a lot of people. are you familiar with that system and do you have any feedback about it? guest: sure, yeah. the system you are talking about is something that is basically what i have heard referred to as a waiting room or holding room if you will. essentially, what that is is it is a method whereby, the person receiving the call can basically screen the call. to your point, you are making asked the, and if

question, you can answer it. thet is a robocall, robocall cannot answer the question asked and will be rejected by the consumer. moreroader point that is important to note with respect to that question is there are tools out there that take a variety of approaches to address whether theycalls whether they are live or robocalls, and that diversity in approaches whether deployed by the voiced up -- voice provider or analytic providers, that creates a much more challenging environment for the legal robocallers. host: kevin rupy is our guest. and former u.s. telecom president. guest: it is a trade association

down the street, and they represent the traditional phone companies that are now wire line, broadband providers. at&t, verizon, centurylink but smaller,esenting rural telephone company throughout the country. u.s. telecom and its members are extremely focused on illegal robocalls. when i was there, one of the things we started with, the group.y trades pack all kinds of providers. the focus of that group is to basically trace back illegal robocall campaigns to identify the origin of these calls. i like to think of it as pulling a weed out of the garden. if you pull it at the stem, it will grow back. get down to the root, it

is gone forever. that is why it is so important. leading the effort to find out where these calls are coming from, because once you can do that, you can stop the calls at their source. before they are ever made. host: connecticut, joe, republican. caller: thanks for taking my call. man, i don't buy it. landline and i've had one for the last 50 years. all of a sudden, we are going crazy with these robocalls. you are telling me that at&t does not know when someone is doing 50,000, 500,000 robocalls at one time through the system and they don't know? they know. the pay congress, they pay money, and congress could pass a law and say stop it. at&t could stop it with the push of a button, and they don't.

this is just like the cable tv's. host: why do you think they don't? caller: they are making money, man. at ourdy is making money expense with these robocalls. that arese robocalls scary, they scare old people. consumerunderstand the frustration on this issue, joe. there is a lot of anger and frustration about this issue. i will say this. at&t and other phone companies -- at&t provides a service called call control. since 2016, they have blocked 600 million suspected fraud calls. they have blocked 1.4 billion suspected spam calls to the call control lab. in their network, since 2016

they have blocked 5 million calls. all of the companies operating in this space regardless of who they are, they do not want this traffic on their network. they want it off. they are doing things to ensure this traffic is removed. is of the challenges we have that a network, it is basically a network of networks. there was an article in "the wall street journal" recently talking about how there is a series of providers out there, a small group of providers, that basically take this traffic in and dump it onto the network. was talkingn i about earlier in his senate testimony about robocalls said, if he went to a company like at&t and verizon to take his traffic, they would not take it. they are not going to take that traffic because they don't want it. what these illegal robocallers

do is they find providers that literally seek out these types of calls, dump the traffic onto , and that traffic goes downstream ultimately to the consumer. host: these providers the route that you are talking about, the true gatekeepers? guest: i think a lot of those providers are. we do not necessarily know who they are. host: do we know names are anything that people would know are generally have heard of? guest: these are companies you have never heard of. these are companies that nobody has ever heard of. when you look at the work of the industry is doing through things like the industry trades pack group, those are the companies we want to find. , there was an announcement with the 50 state ag's and industries agreeing to eight principles -- a lot of the

principles go exactly to this issue. they talk about things like before you take a customer onto your network, you figure out what they are doing. you do what is called know your -- and the principles also stipulate that you support traced back efforts. and you will cooperate with trace back efforts, and you'll put contractual terms in your agreement that stipulates that you will comply with trace back efforts. host: we can put those principles on the screen for our viewers to read. who agreed to these principles again? guest: basically, it was an agreement between the 50 state ag's and a series of major voice providers, so at&t, centurylink, verizon, comcast, charter -- all of these companies basically said yeah, we support these principles. these are important and

effective principles that have widely adopted, can have a positive impact. host: five minutes left to take your phone calls on robocalls. steve, austin, texas. independent. caller: good morning. mr. rupy, i would think that , legitimatezon phone companies, would know who is interconnected into their network. forcan't they identify example, somebody is overseas, pumping hundreds of millions of calls. it has to be terminated to some provider in the u.s. xyz phone company who then connect to the at&t network, for example. why can't at&t identify this xyz phone company and look at the amount of traffic they are dumping, just passing a law and say cut them off? terminate their interconnection.

if they have legitimate traffic, that would force xyz to identify and block the bad robocalling incoming traffic. guest: right, that is exactly what we were discussing. oft is exactly what all these major providers are trying to do. companies like at&t, verizon, comcast, others, they have network operation centers operating 24/7, 365. callsas blocked 5 billion on its network because they don't want the traffic. point about these providers that are sending them this traffic, i totally agree. get them off the network. large does notit want these providers on the network. where it gets challenging is let's say i am in california, i

am a verizon subscriber, you are in d.c., i call you. the call does not necessarily go from verizon to at&t, there could be 3, 4, 5, 6 intermediate carriers in that. the challenge is you get closer to the origin, they may pull out 10 million calls, that get spread out among the multiple providers, and it is kind of like a shotgun blast. whenyou shoot a buck shot, it leaves the barrel, it is highly concentrated, and when it goes out to the field, it is dispersed. that is why identifying the illegal sources of traffic, you want to get as close as possible to the shotgun barrel. host: we want to get to a few more calls. olga, austin, texas. good morning. caller: hello? host: you are with kevin rupy. caller: yes. i fail to believe that at&t or

verizon cannot stop these robocalls. aam getting 22 to 23 calls day that start at 9:00 in the morning and start that -- stops at 9:00 at night. this gentleman is saying you could buy something to put on your phone to stop these calls. why can't the company do it? if i can do it, why can't the company do it? guest: olga, i understand your frustration on this. there is blocking taking place at multiple levels. toolse about consumer that are available to consumers, many of which are offered by the providers themselves that can help block these calls. the voice providers are blocking these calls in the network as well. the fact of the matter is, we are not going to block our way out of the problem.

onis conventional wisdom this issue that this will take a holistic approach in order to effectively address this issue. one of the challenges that is out there is that depending on the network that a subscriber is basically going to support only a certain level of tool functionality, so the more advanced at the network, the greater the capability that a consumer has in terms of options. on a traditional network, there are tools either offered by the provider that are available that can help stem the calls. and: last call from louis washington, d.c., a democrat. caller: good morning, how you doing, brother? they be calling my house all the time and they say they are social security people, and i have to call.

they call all the time that night and everything. and they be calling all different nights and everything, and they be using different phone numbers, saying they are and stuffool loans like that, and they be saying all the difference of on the phone. i call the telephone company to block them, and they still calling from different calls and everything in d.c. they be calling a lot of people in d.c.. host: we are running out of time. andn, on the scare tactics what individual citizens can do? guest: sure. it is a multipronged approach. we talked a lot about tools, i would encourage consumers to look at the tools that are available. the second thing is, it is really important for consumers

to educate on this topic. is getmean by that information on this. if you have an elderly parents, talk to them about this. i have a mom in new jersey. put no verizon fios, i mor robo on there. it is important for consumers to educate themselves on these types of scams because these people are effective. formally ofrupy, u.s. telecom. appreciate your time. guest: thank you. host: we will turn from the sec to the -- fcc to sec. dave levinthal will be our guest. we will be right back. ♪ host: thank you so much.

>> labor day weekend on american history tv. tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern on "lectures in history," discussion about abraham lincoln and native americans. sunday at 4:00 p.m. on " reel filmca" the 1950 army "invasion of france." monday, labor day at 8:00 p.m. eastern, the commemoration of the anniversary of virginia's first general assembly at jamestown. onlore our nation's past american history tv, every weekend on c-span3. watch book tv for live coverage of the national book festival. today, starting at 10:00 a.m.

eastern. authorerage includes interviews with justice ruth bader ginsburg on her book "in my own words." david troyer, and his book. sharon robinson talks about her book "childhood of the dream." atkinson, and charles malone discussing his minds."per the national book festival live today at 10:00 a.m. eastern on book tv on c-span2. >> "washington journal" continues. ast: dave levinthal serves federal politics editor. remind folks what the mission of the center is. guest: we are a nonprofit and very much nonpartisan investigative news organization right here in washington dc and we want to make sure that government officials are being

held accountable regardless of whether the republicans or democrats, but do a lot of work around politics, environmental, national security. host: here is the headline of federalest piece, election commission to effectively shut down, now what is the question you asked. what is happening and why is it shutting down? guest: this past week, matthew peterson currently serving as a vice chairman of the commission is going to step down. he announced his resignation. that will be effective tomorrow. the bottom line for the fec is a need for members of their commission in order to conduct high-level business and enforcing the law in the various ways that they do it as it applies to campaign-finance. zeey can't go ahead and penali political committees or actors that are doing something wrong.

they can't pass new rules and they will be in a holding pattern until they can get that bare minimum of four commissioners now down to three. theoretically, they are supposed to have six, and this speaks to a larger issue about the nomination of commissioners to this body. host: why can't the president just nominate a new commissioner and the senate confirm that, and the fec goes on its way? guest: you would think that would be easy enough, but it has not been. this goes back a decade to george w. bush and the latter days of his administration. he, along with barack obama and president trump have all at their own times, failed to appoint commissioners to spots that were either vacant or commissioner spots where the commissioner had overstayed his or her six-year term. commissioners to the fec, they serve 16-year term. if they don't get replaced upon the expiration of term, they can

stay in office, they can stay in their position for an extended time, untilefinite the president nominates new commissioners and the u.s. senate approves the nomination. but that has not happened as it is supposed to, so as a result, the current four remaining, soon to be three remaining commissioners, they have overserved that their terms a collective 37 years. donald trump, the ball is in his court. he could clear them all out tomorrow, if he wanted to, and nominate a new slate, but that is simply something that he has not done. it is something barack obama could have, but he didn't either. host: how long has the vice chair of the commission been in his position. guest: more than 11 years. in the same boat in the sense that his term expired years ago and he has been serving in the holdover status ever sense. host: what is he leaving for? guest: we do not know yet, he

has not said. we have asked the question. it is unclear, but it is clear that he has been angling to get off the commission for a little while. 2017ct, president trump in nominated him for a federal district courtship and you may remember, it was a very turbulent one and he ultimately flamed out during his confirmation hearing when he was unable to answer many of the questions that were posed to him either -- him by the senate judiciary committee, and he withdrew his own nomination and went back to the fec. host: oversight of federal elections. that is our topic for the last 20 minutes or so. the phone lines are open for you to call in, (202) 748-8001 republicans, (202) 748-8000 democrats, independents (202) 748-8002. let's back up to what the fec

does, and what you think will happen over the next 14 months without a fully functioning fec. the history is this is a bipartisan commission that was created in the aftermath of watergate, many elect -- many irregularities in campaign-finance in the 1972 election, and in 1975, the fec came to be to call balls and strikes as applied to campaign-finance. now it is a commission that does not have its own police force. it does not deal with criminal matters. it is a civil body, but it is the pop on the beat so to speak. they enforce election laws and that is the court duty. duty.e also, serving as a transparency organization when they have to be submitted for periodic campaign reports without much money they raise, how much money

they spent, and if they have any debt. as an agency that provides the information publicly so that you, me, or anyone else can look and see what these committees are doing in the context of electioneering. what happens when the fec is not able to serve the enforcement function? that is a situation we will be income tomorrow, september 1st. the fec will not be able to of they take a care law-enforcement portion of its responsibilities. one example of something that happened just this week. there was a complaint that was filed against congresswoman omar from minnesota that alleges that her campaign committee used campaign money potentially for personal use. we don't know if that is true or not, but that would be the job of the fec to investigate. the fec will not be able to vote

on whether it wants to investigate on that matter until it has a fully functioning commission. so it could be weeks or months before the fec is in a position to deal with that specific case or any case it has before it was a situation that did occur back was in ahen fec semi-shut down mode during the 2008 election. barack obama and john mccain where the candidates, and any republicans or democrats if you talk to about that particular situation, none of them really thought that was a great situation by and large. host: we will get to your phone calls, aligned to republicans, democrats, independents as usual, but you mentioned that the commissioner that is stepping down as been around for 12 years. he was around for the citizens united decision? guest: correct. host: what role did he play in that? republican and he is typically on the side of

going forward with a very -faire approach to finance campaign law. ideologicalficant division among conservatives and the liberals on the fec. on the conservative side, the republican nominees and appointees to the fec for the past 10 years or so and you can include don mcgahn, the former white house counsel, and was chairman of the fec for one year, they largely believe that people, political actors, candidates should all have a very open right to speak as they will. if you want to use money to enhance or promote a message, that should be ok. they are in the camp of let's not tamp down on the little

activity of that sort unless you really have to. on the other site, democrats have largely taken the notion an approach that no, money has been something that played too much of a role in politics. you mentioned the citizens united decision, that has opened the floodgates to money not only playing a negative role but sometimes a corrosive role in politics. on theve been much more let's enforce the law in a strict way side of spectrum. host: kelly is out for us in california, independent. caller: what up! host: go ahead, kelly. obstructing moscow is at his tactics again. host: you are saying that the fec commissioner stepping down, you think that that is the politics of capitol hill played into that? caller: i absolutely do. absolutely. -- three down, we have a

nonfunctioning government right now. it is very scary knowing that he is not allowing a vote to go through with protecting our elections right now. making sure that there is money there that is keeping our elections as safe as possible. absolutely. he is an obstructionist. comment, the caller's one of the criticisms from democrats has been that the fec to godlocks and inability and agree on what campaign-finance law says, which will result in divided or split votes where they cannot proactively move on an action -- you will have deadlocks and the fec not being able to rule on certain cases in an affirmative way, as they put that very much

on the side of republicans. mentioned mitch mcconnell, senator from --itentucky, has long been held as unspoken tradition, but informal tradition, that the u.s. senate would provide nominee suggestions to the president of the united states for the fec. the president would nominate those people, send them back to the u.s. senate, and the senate would almost in pairs, democrat and republican at the same time, send fec nominees through the system. that just has not been happening given that we have two vacancies on the fec now. we will have three, come tomorrow. and there is only one nominee on the pipeline right now, an attorney from texas. donalda supporter of trump, and the senate has not been acting on his nomination in

two years and the pipeline. democrats are saying that mitch mcconnell is holding off because their theory is that many republicans want to see the fec be weeks or not even functioning any major way because -- be weak are not functioning in any major way. host: you think the senate would take up nominations if it was nominated alongside a republican and the fec got a vote on the commission board? guest: it would be up to president trump to nominate a democrat to be in the pairing. i suspect that the senate would have a much stronger case to go forward with paired nominees and that would deal with the problem of the fec not having the minimum four members to conduct high-level business, but we are getting into new territory here. donald trump, for better or for worse, does not always hew to political tradition and

wants to break with political tradition often times. theoretically to play this out, if donald trump wanted to say, nope. i will put six new nominees into the fec, all people i want to, even break with the tradition of having three republicans, and three democrats, he could potentially do that. not saying he would, but he could put three republicans and three independents, so i do not think there is any way to accurately and perfectly predict at this time with president will do. jackie, good morning. caller: i agree with everything david is saying. i agree with everything the first caller said. theuld say this is the way deepest, swampiest swamp is playing. host: concerned about election interference.

there has been a lot of concern about combating foreign influence in u.s. elections. what is the fec's role in that process? guest: the fec has not been able to answer that question this year. it has debated that matter after the mueller report, about what to do. they never came to a conclusion. the current chairwoman of the fec is a democrat, commissioner served one year in rotating terms, she has been largely an advocate ever since this became an issue that the fec should play a role in trying to fetter out potential foreign influence. taking a very strong handed approach to any foreign actor trying to involve itself and elections. u.s.gn influence in political elections generally speaking, is prohibited. you would think that the fec

would be at the vanguard of trying to prevent that type of activity, but the fec has been on the sidelines. as a civil body, there is a limited amount they can do, but has the power to investigate the activity, there just has not been a coalescence of how to exactly deal with the threat of foreign influence or how to deal retroactively with the stuff that happened in 2016 involving russia and other forces. host: less than 10 minutes left in our program, we will end at 10:00 a.m. eastern. 10:00 a.m. eastern is when we start live coverage of the national book festival taking place in washington dc over on c-span2 if you want to head over there after we finished, you are welcome to. if you want to call in and asked questions about election oversight and the federal election commission, (202) 748-8001 for republicans. for democrats. (202) 748-8002 for independents.

, a question from twitter -- if social media algorithms are biased in favor of one political candidate or ideology over another, how is that not a contribution in kind that can affect the outcome of an election? how is it that that social media political bias does not come up under the purview of the fec? guest: that is another area that the fec has discussed at length with not having a conclusion of how it wants to deal with social media. they have been dating this -- debating this for years. this goes back the fec talked about electioneering the internet and online properties. although folks have articulated, particularly on the left, that the fec should have a major role, the fec has not been able

to come to any meaningful conclusion without wants to deal with twitter, facebook, campaigning online, how people should report that in ways that go above and beyond the case now. host: has congress tried to get the fec to do this by getting more money to fec in a world where there is more social media to deal with? what has been the staffing and funding of the fec? around $70as hovered million annually. it is a little beyond that right now but that has been more or less static for the better part of the decade. at the beginning of the decade, it was around $65 million. not a whole lot of money, but i talked to a couple of people who have taxpayer related concern saying any amount of money we are paying the fec right now, we should at least have a functioning commission and they were agitated at the idea that taxpayers are funding an agency that cannot do its job as

an election watchdog. i talked to congressman derek kilmer, democrat from washington . we had a conversation where i asked about a particular bill that he sponsored it to reform the fec. many elements went into hr-1, the democrats sweeping attempts to deal with election related issues and ethics related issues, and his comment on all of this was that the fec absolutely needs to function in its current state, but he and many democrats, even a republican says the fec needs to be reformed. it should be a five-member body where you will not have the deadlock votes anymore because you would have it a -- an odd number of commissioners. and it should have a more robust ability to call balls and

strikes on campaign violations or alleged campaign violations. ,ost: on reforming the fec senator klobuchar says that she has a plan to reform the fec. what is that? guest: many elements in the senate version of that bill that senator klobuchar has put forward are similar to the ones we have seen in the house. the bottom line is that there is not the will in a bipartisan fashion for democrats and republicans to agree on goinr forwardd -- going forward. host: john in florida, democrat. caller: yes, hello, how are you doing? host: i'm good. thank you. caller: i was wondering, how long is it going to take for things to get better? democrats and

republicans, but it seems like the democrats are doing what needs to be done and the republicans are trying to do the best that they can to make us unnoticeable. host: to the question of how long before things can get better -- how long to that process take in your mind? guest: two steps. the question of when is the fec going to have the basic number of commissioners to, at minimum, this is weeks that we can expect the current situation of not having an ability to enforce campaign finance laws that will go on for weeks and potentially go on for months. it is going to be up to the president to push this issue, nominate new commissioners, and ae u.s. senate to have confirmation hearing for the one commissioner nominee who is in the pipeline, and then the senate has to vote on it. the senate is not in session right now, so we will have to

wait until probably later this year for that to happen, and it could go into 2020. can anyoneissue of, expect some fundamental reforms of the federal election commission of campaign finance laws -- you talk to a lot of democrats and republicans. inocrats say, if we win 2020, retain the house, and the u.s. senate, absolutely you can expect some legislation that has been proposed by eric kilmer amy klobuchar to go forward, and not be blocked by the republican controlled u.s. senate. republicans i talked to have also said the same thing, but with great disdain that there would be massive reforms. their biggest fear that the bipartisan nature of campaign-finance law and the fec would be eroded, and that democrats would have some systematic, fundamental

advantage over republicans which they do not see as a good thing. host: want to get in roger green's tweets looking at the history of these effective shutdowns of the fec. ther says, harry reid did exact same thing. is that history correct? guest: it is a little complicated. the writer might be talking about filibusters,, but going back to 2008, yes, there was a situation and harry reid was there where he could just not get coalescence around the notion of putting forward commissioners to get the fec fully functioning. it is a different situation now in the sense that the players are different but the fundamental issue remains the same. host: dave levinthal, you can see all of his work at publicintegrity.rorg. we appreciate your time. guest: thank you. host: will be back here tomorrow

morning at 7:00 a.m. eastern, 4:00 a.m. pacific. in the meantime, have a great saturday. ♪ [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2019] >> the u.s. senate comes back on monday, september 9 with important issues on the agenda, passing federal spending bills and anti-gun violence legislation. before senators return to washington, get a behind the scenes look at the senate with c-span's history program, the senate, conflict and compromise. >> government under which we live was created in the spirit

of compromise and mutual concession. >> thomas jefferson question the need for senate. >> the founders envisioned. >> the framers believed. >> let's follow the constitution. >> the senate was established to protect people from their rulers and as a check on the house. >> the fate of this country and the world lies in the hands of congress and the united states senate. >> the senate, conflict and compromise, using original interviews, c-span video archives and unique access to the senate chamber, we look at the history, traditions and roles of the u.s. senate. >> please raise your right hand. >> sunday at 9 p.m. eastern and pacific, on c-span. here is some of what you can watch today on c-span. officials examine the relationship between the press and the trump administration. after