>> -- including agriculture, transportation, and housing. boeing's3, the head of on capitol hill at 10:00 a.m. eastern to testify about safety concerns related to the boeing 737 max 8 aircraft, which saw its entire fleet grounded earlier this year after 2 fatal crashes. later in the day, a house judiciary subcommittee looks at how current immigration policies are affecting veterans and their families. >> coming up on "washington representatives roger marshall joins us to discuss the new health care plan released by house republicans. we will also here from north carolina congressman david price about efforts to pass a government funding bill before

the november 21 deadline. later, jeff moore doc of the washington times talks about the justice department's investigation into the origins of the russia probe. ♪ ♪ host: it is the "washington journal" for october 29. the bill will vote on a -- the house will vote on a bill sanctioning turkey. --losed-door hearing national security council official who will express concerns about president trump's ukraine phone call and thursday, presentmocrats will current procedures of the impeachment inquiry and .stablishing new ones .epublicans, 202-748-8001

democrats, 202-748-8000. and independents, 202-748-8002. if you want to text us about this coming up vote on thursday, ---748-8003 is how we will bring a resolution to the floor that confirms the ongoing investigation currently being conducted by committees as part of the impeachment inquiry including requests for documents, subpoena, testimony, and other investigative steps previously taken or to be taken investigation, this resolution establishes the

proceedings for hearings open to the american people, authorizes the disclosure of deposition transcripts, outlines procedures to transfer evidence to the forth due and sets process rights for the president and his counsel. that coming from speaker pelosi's office. that garnered a response from kevin mccarthy, who sent out a tweet that reads, it has been 34 days since nancy pelosi declared her impeachment inquiry -- this process has been botched from the start. we will not legitimize the s impeachment hoax -- setting up new ones when it comes to future public hearings. we want to get your thoughts in

our first half-hour hour before our first guest and you can make those thoughts. republicans, 202-748-8001. democrats, 202-748-8000. independents, 202-748-8002. you can also text us about this if you want to. make sure you include your name and city and state and text us at 202-748-8003. you can post on twitter and facebook. christopher off of facebook rights after two months of closed-door secret meetings, this is a joke, right? this is gilbert from facebook saying is a good idea, it will show democrats are finally doing the action they should have done some time ago. however, it will never pass the senate. thoughts on your our social media sites. you can call us on this new step

when it comes to impeachment inquiry by house democrats. wisconsin, this is bob who starts us off, republican line. what do you think about this latest step? caller: i think it is a farce, sir. this is nothing but a democratic coup and an attempt to overthrow a president who has done nothing unconstitutional to be impeached. still red flight -- red-faced for lying about the russian involvement in election. ukraine has not been asked to interrupt our voting system. sham on our democracy. is next in ohio,

line for democrats. caller: good morning, sir. thank you so much for c-span. otherwise, we would never hear the other side. i am so glad speaker pelosi decided to take a vote. i believe in due process even for president trump or anybody else and i am so grateful to her for doing this. it will all work out, but we all have to stand and take a stand for the constitution and the rights of the united states of america. host: do you think they should have taken this vote right off the bat and put these public hearings in the public -- caller: no, sir. we had to get some information or they would have never known which direction to go with this. now they are saying this is a

sham. just like nixon and all the others, it is going to work out, but it will take time. some of the other congressional reaction is highlighted in the wall street journal this morning in their story saying the move to have a full house vote came as a surprise to democratic lawmakers in competitive districts who have been hesitant to take a vote while saying they support the investigation. one lawmaker said he was and said the vote was "completely unhelpful." i think this will remove any and all ambiguity and quit giving people excuses to hide behind. that was the virginia democrat who beat a republican in the midterm last year. we will hear from al in saint robert, democrats line. this himself.rted

he started january of 2016 when he told obama, everything you have, i am going to overturn it. september 13th, 2013, when the -- border money for $140,000. host: how does that rate -- relate to the actions taking place this week? snitched onuse he himself. host: monique in washington, d.c., also on the line for democrats. caller: hello. thank you for c-span. procedureo say the nancy pelosi and the democrats went through is nothing new. the republicans did it in

benghazi. they also did it with bill clinton. the only thing she is doing is following procedures. when republicans get on here and all about it is a coup and this stuff, they must not listen to facts or c-span. host: why not establish those procedures from the beginning and wait until now? caller: because back in 2015, the republican congress and senate passed these rules themselves. they implemented this way of procedures.-door this is something they did and i learned that off c-span. host: do you think democrats should have changed the rules and modified it? caller: no, i just think they needed to follow the rules. republicans are so hard on following the law and following the rules, nancy pelosi followed

the rules. hearingsd closed-door just as the republicans did on ben cozzi -- benghazi and clinton. this is the american -- united states of america, we are one regardless of what party side you are on. this is our country. this is not donald trump's country. host: that is monique in washington, d.c. the editors of the wall street journal take a look at this and come to this conclusion. if her letter is sincere, the house resolution will follow the schiff's end adam secret intelligence hearings, make documents available to all house members and the public and make future hearings public. the house remains a long way in

our view from making such a credible casea floor vote is a g members take political responsibility if they vote to oust mr. trump. an independent from florida, this is kathy. hello. caller: hello? host: you are on, go ahead. caller: yes, what they are voting on his transparency. pelosi and schiff changed the impeachment guidelines in last updated, august 12, 2019. those were never voted on. host: about this tweak's action -- this week's action, do you think it will offer transparency to the people watching? caller: i believe what they are trying to vote on is what they have already put into effect. like changing the rule on the form for the whistleblowers. host: in this case, what they

are voting on will change procedures when it comes to public hearings and the like. yes, that is what they are trying to do. host: do you agree with that? caller: no, i don't. it has never been voted on. it has already been implemented, it was changed august 12. in ellet's hear from pete cerrito, democrats line. caller: hi. i have to differ with the person just on the line. first of all, the rules were not changed. as the previous caller said, they were set up by the republicans. poppycock what they are saying. host: what do you think about the decision by nancy pelosi for this vote on thursday? caller: it is not required, there is nothing in the constitution that it is required

. what gets me is all the hearings they had with ben ghazi -- and ghazi and all the hillary clinton refused to show up and the cabinet members refused to show up. ont: do you think this vote thursday strengthens or weakens the democrats case when it comes to the impeachment inquiry? will satisfyobably the republicans, but the --ocrats are very generous they have treated republicans much better than republicans would treat the democrats. i used to be a republican until the party drank the kool-aid. host: that is pete.

this is from nancy pelosi's release yesterday, this memo talking about this planned vote for thursday. she says the resolution they are going to offer establishes the procedure for hearings open to the american people, also authorizes the disclosure of deposition transcripts, outlines procedures to transfer evidence to the judiciary committee as it considers articles of impeachment and sets forth due process and rights for the president and his counsel. if you go to speaker.gov, you can read the memo from nancy pelosi, the release yesterday. jim jordan says this in a release of the tweet saying the announcement from nancy pelosi that they will vote to open the impeachment inquiry codifying a sham process halfway through doesn't make it any less of a sham process. joseph is next from

pennsylvania, democrats line, hi. caller: good morning. am amazed when i see how the republicans behave themselves. the whole matter of impeachment should be handled by the entire congress. all of what we are calling secret meetings are not really secret. maybe they were kept from the public, but both sides from the house were participating in those hearings. host: people in the relevant committees participate in those hearings. caller: precisely. and the house of representatives do oversight. the intelligence committee and the others participating in the hearings, i inc. -- i think

there were three of those committees and republicans keep making it look like they were shut out of those meetings. host: what do you think specifically about that move? .aller: i think it is ok i have been listening to the rationale for having these meetings in private and it is because you don't one of the conniving ande comparing testimonies and the rest of it. had we had an independent counsel to do what was necessary , i think maybe nobody would be complaining it was secret. host: this is maggie texting us absolutely yes, saying in all caps, of course republicans are complaining, they would have

anyway. lindsey graham sending a tweet on this matter at about 5:45 in the afternoon saying there is no doubt in my afternoon -- in my mind the overwhelming response democrats heard in support of my resolution forced their hand. this is the resolution that took place in the senate last week. today's announcement is an acknowledgment of the success of our efforts from last week. donna in georgia, independent line, you are next up. hello. caller: i would like to say the whole impeachment thing is a joke. thank you. host: why do you say that? caller: because. look at it and you can see. host: tell me specifically why you come to that conclusion? caller: why is adam schiff hiding behind doors? host: so now that democrats are planning for public hearings, would that satisfy your mind about the process?

caller: no, adam schiff is still in charge. he has lied. greg in will hear from ohio. caller: good morning, cnn. host: this is c-span, by the way. like cnn.u guys act all you ever do is bash trump. why is that? host: we are not those networks. we are talking about the impeachment -- what do you think about the move? caller: it is stupid. he is not going to get impeached. the whole thing is a joke. host: one of the key witnesses the hearings will hear from today, the relevant committees enclosed hearings is highlighted in the new york times, lieutenant colonel alexander of the army. twice registered internal objections about how president trump and his inner circle were treating ukraine out of what he

called "a sense of duty" he "i dido tell the inquiry nothing it was proper to demand that a foreign government investigate a u.s. citizen and i was worried about the implications for the u.s. government's support of ukraine." i realize if ukraine pursued an investigation into the bidens, it would likely be interpreted as a partisan play, which would undoubtedly result in ukraine losing the bipartisan support it has maintained. that is a closed-door session. these new procedures are setting up practices when it comes to the public hearings you have been hearing about. the president commenting on this saying americans know by now the impeachment inquiry is just another hoax and silent coup to remove the president from office. schiff is a leaker and corrupt

politician who made up what i said in order to hurt the republican party and me. sandra ino eastpointe, michigan, democrats line. caller: yes, hello. anyone who really knows about donald trump, all his life, he has broken laws. i was surprised to years ago when they did not do something to him when he ran that big college, he cheated us out of $75 million and he got a slap on the wrist. he had to pay a $25 million fine. host: how does this relate to that announcement from nancy pelosi yesterday? caller: i am really happy she is going to do it and hopefully donald trump would stop blocking people from coming forward to testify. it would have been over with by now, but he keeps stopping it

because he knows he is guilty and that is the truth. if you check into his background, he has been known as a corrupt -- all his life, he has cheated people he has always done business with, cheated almost everyone. is supporters no nothing about him -- his supporters know nothing about him. yes, i just think it is a shame what they are doing cop.se he is doing a great there is no reason to remove him from office, absolutely no reason. host: this latest announcement regarding the procedures of the inquiry, what do you think about that? caller: i just think they are confused. host: how so? caller: of what they are doing because they are doing one thing and then they are doing another thing and going back and forth and they are desperate looking

for things. host: the latest poll october 20 ninth saying when it comes to impeachment, 48.7% support this process playing out from the sampling of polls they take. for those in the don't support column, 33.4%. more breakdowns of those polls, you can see more when you go to the website. joe in california, independent line. caller: hello? host: you are on. caller: the evidence speaks for itself. i hope the house has the energy to do what must be done under the constitution. host: what do you mean by that? caller: i mean they can do their

jobs. host: that is joe in california. it was yesterday on the senate floor the senate majority leader mitch mcconnell spoke briefly about the impeachment efforts by house democrats before the announcement that took place. here is mitch mcconnell. [video clip] >> committees have denied president trump important rights and protections that president nixon and president clinton enjoyed. they have impeded his right have counsel attend hearings and even accessedd the evidence they are producing. democrats are flouting practices that gave minority parties basic procedural rights during past impeachment. house republicans have not been granted subpoena power and the participation in closed-door proceedings has been limited. it is no secret washington

democrats have been looking for a way to remove president trump .ince his inauguration that does not remove the basic requirements of fairness and due process. host: that was from yesterday, just a few minutes before we have our first guest of the morning. if you want to comment on this announcement from speaker pelosi, it is 202-748-8001 for republicans. 202-748-8000 for democrats. and independents, 202-748-8002. you can text us at 202-748-8003. on twitter, this is timothy saying i hope they get something done with the public hearings. people are getting tired of our leaders playing politics. let them have a vote and let the senate hear it all. from robert in maryland, independent line. .aller: good morning as a vietnam veteran, it breaks

my heart to see what is going on in our country. i remember in 1964, lyndon saidon -- abraham lincoln a nation divided against itself cannot stand. all of these so-called liberals or with the republican party and conservatives were with the democrat party. johnson said once they passed -- hevil rights bills called it to the t. by housethe decision democrats on this move to the impeachment inquiry, what do you think about that? caller: sir, we are a good country. until we start doing things

right, our enemies will exploit this division in our country. it is well ingrained in this country and this country cannot survive with this division. host: kathleen from ohio, democrats line. you are next up, hello. feel -- ialways guess, confused, and really actually upset about why we choose to impeach. why didn't congress, democratically controlled house push for the impeachment inquiries based upon mueller's findings, the 10 points of obstruction? last night there was an attorney who talked about how the public is going, which way the public is going on impeachment. thedoes it matter how public is going when there are allegedly high crimes and

misdemeanors? why aren't they determining the impeachment based on that? fore have clinton impeached lying under owes, we have andrew johnson, i forget exactly the reasons why. i could never figure out why pelosi did not push for impeachment inquiries for bush and cheney based on high crimes and misdemeanors pushing this nation into an invasion of iraq based on false intelligence, which many people knew prior to the invasion. is from san jose, california, republican line, steve, hello. caller: if what nancy pelosi is doing now and she is calling that basically the correct way to handle it at present, it should have been the correct way to handle it from the beginning. we all recognize this for what it is.

what they have done up till now low iqy to stir to decide inters their hearts and their minds are correct.crats just remember, there have been hasirst-hand accounts, it all been second, thirdhand accounts and opinions. they are still searching for first-hand accounts, that is all i have to say. host: to the first part of nancy plans's release of what to take place later in the week, -- affirms the ongoing existing investigation currently being conducted by our committees including their request for documents, subpoenas, and other steps previously taken are to be -- the first link if you

want to read it for yourself. some of the activities taking place on the floor of the house involving turkey and and effort on sanctions. the house set to take up additional sanctions taking place. the trump administration agreed to drop its own recent sanctions. lawmakers have been weighing how to respond to the decision to pull back troops in northern the legislation is spearheaded by eliot engel and the panel's top republican. it would sanction officials offensiven turkey's until turkey ends its military operation in syria. on our independent line, we hear next on this plan to vote on thursday from orion in georgia.

say this just want to sheasically about time and did not push for an impeachment because shere now could not get public support behind it. the public support has been a drag along and build up as first-hand accounts come forward. all we have to do is read the transcripts, read the testimony and make up our own minds. host: does that include the hearings not open to the public? how do you factor that into it? caller: i am sorry. i factor that into it as an investigation. my lawyer does not get sent over the investigator's shoulder and cherry pick what they get to release to the public or

anything else, my lawyer doesn't get to see what is going on until i have been indicted. investigation is not supposed to be public. the witnesses that come after can calibrate their testimony to adjust for what has been said before. ont: the procedures voted on thursday, do you think that should have taken place at the beginning? doner: if they could have -- taken a vote on it, but it kept their closed-door hearings and still had the public impeachment inquiry, i think she should have pushed forward earlier than this, yes. woodbridge,s andy, virginia, democrats line. opening ofelcome the the procedure by nancy pelosi, i think it is a good thing and i approve of the way they did closed-door to begin with because now we have -- we can

run on so anytime we get a commander-in-chief president that we don't like, we can be rid of them. host: that is andy in virginia on this topic on this house about. if you did not have a chance to call in, join us in about half an hour from now and we will take up this topic again. our first guest of the morning, roger marshall, republican of kansas to discuss a new republican plan providing health care to some americans, that is coming up next and later in the program, david price on the latest effort to pass fiscal 2020 government spending bills. those conversations and more coming up on "washington journal ." ♪

host: here is a -- >> here is a look at some books being published this week. s christmas ever, karen pence and her daughter offer a look at the holidays in washington, d.c. through the eyes of their pet rabbit. in "the truth will set you free," but first it will -- floria steinem provides a collection of memorable quotes. andrew roberts examines the military tactics of 9 leaders from napoleon bonaparte to dwight eisenhower in his latest book, leadership in war. in the american story, philanthropist and washington, d.c. businessman, david rubenstein profiles american historians. also being published this week, hymns of the republic recounts the final year of the civil war. on"how to beat trump, advice

how the democrats can win the next residential election. his time working as director of communications and chief speechwriter to james mattis in "holding the line." look for these titles in bookstores this coming week and watch for many of the authors in the near future on book tv on c-span 2. we are making it easy for you to follow the impeachment inquiry on c-span.org. to all of c-span's coverage as well as the administration's response during the impeachment inquiry process. log onto our impeachment inquiry webpage at c-span.org/ impeachment, your fast and easy way to watch c-span's unfiltered coverage anytime. >> "washington journal" continues. host: roger marshall serves the

first district of kansas, he is a republican and also the chair of the republican committee task force and joins us this morning on washington journal. sometimes from democrats republicans don't have a plan when it comes to providing health care aside from the aca to read how would you respond? guest: we do have a plan and this is the first chapter. we have been working with the white house all year long in this and very proud of what we have for solutions. host: when it comes to the specifics, what would you highlight? does this work apart from the aca or alongside it? guest: each state will be able to do what they want to do. if they like parts of the aca, they can keep it. number one is wherever i go, health care is the number one concern. specifically the cost of health care. people tell me it is broken and we need to modernize it and the next thing people tell me is how personal their health care is.

we want to make sure patients and physicians are in charge of their health care. give them choices to give them control and contrast that to what democrats are offering. they want to double down on the aca and they want complete control of your health care. they want to take away your health insurance. we want to do the opposite. we want to put patients and doctors in charge of their health care. host: one of the main concerns is this idea of pre-consisting conditions. guest: i woke up in the morning and went to bed at night think about the best way to fix pre-existing conditions. we talk about ways to fix pre-existing conditions. i went in the white house to talk with president trump about this. the first thing he said was whatever you do, you have to fix pre-existing conditions. i think our plan will fix it better than it has ever fixed it.

we make your health care portable the same way it is protected in the employer-based market and we have federally funded state run reinsurance pools. if you everyone believes get your health insurance through your job, that your pre-existing conditions are protected as you go from job to job, but they are not protected if you are in the self-employed market. we are going to get those same protections as we do in the self-employed market and the reinsurance pull works like this . a state can run it however they want to so if you develop a high risk condition, if you go past a , you automatically go to this reinsurance pull, so that will allow premiums to be .ower states get the power,

they can -- how do you develop a standard of care? guest: we have allowed this framework i just described. if we require that hepa is portable for health care, that gives them some type of baseline and if we have a reinsurance we are alle way, going to develop a pre-existing condition. host: if somebody is able to carry it over, what about affordability, especially if they don't get insurance from an employer, how is that satisfied? host: one of the major objectives is to drive the cost of health care down. that will be about a 30% savings for everybody and when we promote competition and choices, that will drive it down as well. we promote innovation and transparency and patients becoming consumers again.

all of those are going to drive the cost of health care down. every mandate costs about 2% to 3% additional. every time the federal or state government creates any type of mandate, it drives the cost up. host: our guest with us for about half an hour and if you want to ask him questions about this plan from the republican study committee, 202-748-8001 for republicans. 202-748-8000 for democrats. and independents, 202-748-8002. text us at 202-748-8003. one of the features is a block grant to states, correct? guest: exactly. we want to put the state in control and make sure the neediest of people -- i think of people with disabilities, children, and the elderly. i want to make sure the money is at the proper places. host: turning in existing stream

of federal spending that exchange subsidies into an intergovernmental transfer is a bad move, it diffuses responsibly for the spending of the taxes or deficit and it is likely spending would grow at a much faster rate under the plan as states are more powerful, sympathetic, effective lobbyists . would you agree with that? guest: of course not. at the end of the day, our plan would drive the cost down in many ways. everybody in kansas wants me to balance this federal budget. plan, look at our entire we are going to drive the cost down. we will be spending less than the $70 billion we are spending each year on aca subsidies. host: when it comes to the current aca lawsuits, where did you stand on that as far as supporting it? guest: i would love to see the aca overturned and if that happens, this is one of the

reasons we have been pushing to get these concepts out and everyone should take a breath. if they overturned the aca, they are not going to say it ends tomorrow. they will give us time for the states and federal government to come up with long-term solutions. guest: roger marshall host: -- roger marshall a doctor and rep ascended from kansas. laura, you are on with our guest. caller: good morning. i heard you really vilify the democrat's plan. i don't know why people are so against -- some people, republicans primarily -- i have lasted through the entire probably 10 years when you were so against the aca, but you never had a plan that changed it

and now when i hear you talking about states getting different things, what happens when i move to another state? how is that medical attention transferred? sos seems to me -- i am disappointed with what is going on in washington. instead of people working together to improve something, they seem to want to knock apart and start and this has been the story with the republicans. host: we will let our guest answer. guest: thank you so much. the biggest concern is the doubling of premiums and your already a pocket -- out-of-pocket went up as well and the quality went down with at. it was a miserable failure. both democrats and republicans realize it is a failure. in 2020 we have the choice, do we want to double down or give patients more choices?

we had a good solution before two years ago and we have taken it upon that and improved it as well and we will address going across state lines. our product we released last week allows for better use of health care along state lines. we are not going to take your medicare away from you. if democrats pass their solution, they will dilute medicare, create long waiting lines and restrict access to care. host: chris from birmingham, alabama texting us asking how you intend to reduce dockable's. -- deductibles. guest: patients being consumers and take people out of that high risk pool, that will drive the cost down. we will give insurance companies more flexibility and they will be offering plans with lower deductibles as well. host: specifically how?

guest: when you promote consumerism and allow customers to use hsa's with pretax dollars, we will expand your health care savings account as well as health care reimbursement accounts. we will allow for association health care plans. they can set up however much of a deductible they want to. we will expand upon those. by giving patients more choices, they can choose a plan they like. tot: did you talk stakeholders, administrators and the like? guest: absolutely. three years ago, i was helping run a hospital as well as a full-time obstetrician. i talk to whoever i can about how you would fix health, whether it is nurses, hospital administrators, insurance companies, all those people, absolutely. hi.: democrats line, caller: i don't know how you do it every morning, sitting across

from this republican congressman, he is looking you and the american people straight in the eye and you know he is lying. host: he is talking to you right now, go ahead and ask him a question. caller: the only question i want to ask this gentleman, is it ok for a president of the united states to ask a foreign government to intervene in an american election? that is what i want to know from this republican. have you read the transcript yourself? caller: yes, sir, i have. the only question -- don't ask me a question, i am asking you -- is it ok for any president to ask a foreign government to intervene in our election? please don't ask questions, just answer mine, yes or no. guest: i want our president and

foreign -- to invest a corruption. it is not president trump's fault this corruption ends up in the lap of joe biden. if you read the transcript, he was asking the ukrainian government to investigate corruption and where ever takes them, it takes him. unfortunately, it takes him back to joe biden and his son. host: with the announcement yesterday with nancy pelosi formalizing procedures, what did you take away from it? kansansnsans -- guest: have impeachment fatigue. since the president has been elected, they have been focused on impeachment. what they want us to focus on is fixing problems like health care, infrastructure. it is disappointing the democrat parties want to take away the votes of over 60 million americans and they have not made this process transparent. it is high time they did this. i think this has been a sham from day 1. i am glad the president is finally going to get to say his

side of the story and reviewed -- refute the one-sided stories. host: if these new rules go into place, does it change how you review the impeachment hearings or will you still be skeptical of them how they go forward? guest: i think the proof will be in the pudding. we will see, i will give them every ounce of respect i can and hope they run a fair process. host: we heard the ambassador talk about concerns if he makes those statements to the public. do you think it will change the minds of some republicans? guest: absolutely. from what i have heard is the ambassador's comments -- booker's comments supported the president and the other people supporting the president, once they were cross-examined, it refuted everything they were talking about. no due process and only one side of the story is

being leaked. no one in america thinks this has been a fair or due process. host: you were part of the republicans that went into the skiff yesterday. what drove you to do that? guest: i was fed up with it. i had been calling every day to get to review the volcker transcript. when they told me we could and then pulled the rug out from under us, that was frustrating and we asked why can't we go in and they could not give a reason. they sent these people who were not congressman just to tell us we could not go in and we said let's speak to the democrat majorities running this meeting and explaining why we can't see the transcript or be part of the hearings. when they denied us our due process, i felt very frustrated. i felt it was an opportunity for civil disobedience prayed i represent 800,000 people. my job is to be their eyes and ears in washington. host: why not be satisfied with

the republicans on the committee's hearing the testimonies for themselves? guest: they are not allowed to tell us. nothing specific. they could not tell us how they were refuting the leaks being released by democrats. we are staying true to our word, we are not leaking. republicans were not going to come out and tell us anything specific. when this is being tried in the court of public opinion and the president does not get to have his own representation, doesn't get to call witnesses, it is frustrating. host: kevin in florida, good morning. caller: i am a little frustrated, i did not want to hear about the transcript because it spends both ways. i want to talk about health care . i am teacher and i am hearing what you are saying and i am not buying it and i want a little clarification. you are talking about how people care.o keep their health i am teacher in broward county.

a place where our students get shot up on a regular basis. you are turning around and seeing there is not a single teacher that wants to keep health care, but we have to because if we don't, we can't afford private health care. that is the only reason most people want to keep health care, because they can't afford it. you are talking about the corporations, insurance companies be able to give us plans, it is like car insurance. the more you take away, the last deductible -- the less deductibles we have. i have a friend who lost his job because of his health. he has leukemia. he lost his job, so he does not have insurance. how do you cover the people who lose their jobs? your plan does not provide for that. i have never seen anyone other than the aca giving you choice. host: you saw our plan that

fixes exactly that problem. most of the 28 million people that don't have health care coverage right now are the person you described. they had health insurance through their job, got sick, could not do their job, and had to go to the individual market. we are going to protect his or her pre-existing conditions. we will protected -- that is exactly what we fix and what the aca did not fix and for the rest of you in that employer situation as teachers, we want you to have expanded health care savings accounts. you can go out and choose your own insurance, we want to put it back in your hands in your control and as much as anything else, if i can drive the cost of your health insurance premiums down by 30%, it will make it more affordable. hype at the premiums you have been paying have doubled in the past 4 to five years and your out of pockets probably went up

five to 10 times as well. host: brad from ohio saying reinsurance pools had an annual limit on the number of people who could participate. would your plan allow for this form of rationing? been: i think there has very successful reimbursement .lans out there right now, there are 8 of them in practice. they have a to hunt a 32 waiver to get away from the aca rules and those have been successful. i think there is a right way to do it, a wrong way to do it, and we will have the people in congress hold our capital accountable. host: are there limits to those pools and how many can be in there? guest: not the way we will have it set up at all. we will have federal dollars. we are going to take some of that $70 billion we are wasting on the obamacare pools.

over and above health-care costs, will that totally depend on a state -- what they decided to do? guest: we are going to give them a federal dollars and give them as much flexibility as possible 8d there has already been doing it already. i would have to have faith the local state governments want to take care of their people. i would personally like to see the states have some skin in the game. i would like to see the insurance companies have skin in the game as well. i think they will have better use of federal dollars. if the money we are giving them is not enough, they can add to it. host: from wichita, kansas, brian for our guest. thank you for taking my

i would like to give my own, personal story because i think it could add something to the conversation and dr. marshall, i am a registered republican, but based on the way things have gone lately -- i have always been independent-minded, but i really am totally fed up with the republican national committee, the republican national party, the democratic national party, the democratic national -- guest: what are you fed up with? what really, really bothers you about it? it may bother me as well. caller: the perfect example is iwatch "washington journal" here. pretty much it starts my morning every morning for the last few years and it is almost every day

i watch exactly what is wrong with american politics on here, the guests that come on, the viewers that call in. host: to the topic of health care, what would you like our guest to address specifically? caller: i really wanted to just share my story -- i wanted to have time to share my story probably oneory is of the examples that really addresses all of these things about health care, ok? job where ieft the had health care to start my own business and i could not afford health care. i started a business, i had no money, no equipment, no customers and within a week, i had equipment, customers, and a little bit of money flowing in.

it was a struggle. in 2005, i had a bicycle accident and i suffered a final court injury -- spinal cord injury. from that day to this day -- i have been in pain every single day. for the last four months, i have literally gone from my wheelchair to my bed, from my bed to my wheelchair and been in tears all day long. i have tears in my eyes right now because of the pain i am in. i am not in opioids. i have taken a handful of drugs that don't -- work or don't work. host: only for the sake of time, what do you think needs to change about health care? caller: i could not boil it down to one thing, pedro.

guest: are you on medicaid now? do you have a disability? caller: here is my story. yes, immediately -- here is my thing, i am laying in the hospital -- i can't move a single thing except for my arms, you know? i am laying there and i have absolutely no hope of my future, but i tell you what, i was never more thankful in my entire life to be an american citizen then i was when i was laying in that hospital bed because i knew i was going to be taken care of. host: i apologize only for sake of time, we will let our guest respond. guest: first of all, don't give up hope. i am glad you call a wide -- qualified for disability. i want to make sure people like you have disobeyed -- have disability insurance prayed i am so proud that you have hope and

i know those type of back injuries, spinal cord injuries for youric and we pray recovery. we want to make sure people like you have health care coverage. host: debbie from new mexico, roswell. caller: can you hear me? host: you are on, go ahead. caller: i just found out i have hepatitis c. they won't treat me -- i have medical coverage. they won't treat me because i am too healthy. my insurance company sent me a really nice letter telling me as soon as my liver starts failing and i get cirrhosis, they will treat me. they are going to give me the hepatitis c medicine once i get cirrhosis. and now i am stuck with cirrhosis. 30% of the time is all they say for yes for hepatitis c medication because it costs

$90,000 here. in india, they made a deal with the same company where it costs $440. in chile, it costs $11,000. i don't drink, i am not going to start drinking because some sadistic insurance company wants me to get cirrhosis. what do i do about the cirrhosis? cure.s right, there is no that is too bad for you. what am i supposed to do because i am healthy? i found out i got this from a blood transfusion in the 1970's because you guys did not want to bother to clean up the blood. the thing is, i am healthy, i cannot do anything about it. the cheapest medicine is $14,000 but 40days, not 30, because it is a 60 day regiment.

ist: as a physician, understand your situation and want to help you. this sounds like it is a prior authorization issue. i want you to write your state insurance agency, whoever your state insurance commissioner as well as your congressman and describe what is going on. one of the legislations i worked on very hard and thought we had bipartisan support was a prior authorization legislation where we would take control back in the hands of you and your doctor to make these decisions. innovation will do more to drive the cost of health care down more than any legislation congress can write. 5, 10 years ago, you had a death sentence and would need a liver transplant which would cost $600,000. this is an incredible drug,

incredible breakthrough, one pill a week for 12 weeks will cure you for hepatitis. i cannot imagine why your comp and -- insurance company does not want you to take it. host: in maryland, on the republican line. caller: the most important aspect of any reform is price transparency. guest: absolutely. caller: it has got to be able to use competitive forces to bring down prices, but it has to be easy. imagine elderly officials who are not computer savvy. that has got to be set up. also, some kind of a catastrophic component so people do not go bankrupt. i was thinking something on taxable income, like 2% of your taxable income is your premium, 10% of your taxable income is your deductible, everything above that is covered so you don't go bankrupt. what do you think?

guest: i have been talking about transparency for three or four years, how important that is. you get more information from a restaurant about what you will be charged than a doctor. transparency when it comes to getting your pharmacy prescriptions, that is a challenge. i hoped we would have a bipartisan solution by the end of this year, but unfortunately it has become polarized. there is nothing less transparent than purchasing your prescriptions. very much in favor of that. in terms of catastrophic policies, i want to make those available. i like direct primary care in conjunction with a catastrophic policy. direct primary care is when you $50 to $100 aan month and they are your concierge doctor.

can you imagine back in the day when the doctor knew you and your family and you could send a picture of my daughter's throat and say, can she go to school? the doctor would know if she was allergic to penicillin. i like your concept. gaithersburg, maryland, democrats line. caller: thanks for the opportunity to share. my name is samuel. i have two questions for dr. marshall. care you and those health at the right, not privileged, not i am lucky to have it, but would you endorse it as a right? why is health care coupled with work? what does work have to do with -- somebody has cancer, what does work have to do with it?

,ould you support decoupling separating work from health care so that people get health care whether they work or not? ,eople do not choose to be sick right? why is it that they have to work before they have health care? why can't they just have health care? i am a member of the high life radio team and we have a lot of audience here in the d.c. metropolitan area who are interested in this health care, especially immigrants from ghana. work? health care link to first of all, i want to make sure every american has access to health care. first step to doing that is giving them more choices and driving down the costs of health care, which our plan does. at the end of the day, there will be more people with health care once we implement our plan. as far as decoupling health care

to work, that is what our legislation does. it lets you keep it as it is if that is what you want. the health care reimbursement account is what decouples it. there are absolute policies that would allow more choices to make your health care more portable, to allow you to leave the job where you got your health care and become self-employed. i want to give you choices and want you to do it your way. host: the idea that health care is a right? guest: every person should have access to health care. host: new jersey, republican line, dori, hello. caller: i just wanted to make a comment about the medication the one lady called and how expensive her medication is going to be. we have good health care coverage. my husband and i are on medicare and we pay a lot of money for our supplement. thank god that we can.

with a, i was diagnosed diagnosis that was going to cost me $1300 a month for my medicine. we were able to meet that to any , my good doctor said to me there are foundations which can support, if you and out of about four foundations i found one to qualify. two people listening to this, if you have something that costs a lot of money for your medication , ask your doctors for foundational help. thank you. guest: exactly. that is great advice for people. i want to remind folks back home that medicare enrollment is going on, and one thing that is

working is the medicare advantage plans. there is lots of choices. my parents and i had the same discussion this sunday about what they should do with their medications and a medicare advantage plan. ,hey use their local pharmacist person they trusted for decades and years. pharmacists understand these plans about is better -- as best as anybody. to helpcall our office seniors make some tough chances -- tough choices as well. host: you said this was phase one. what is phase two? guest: more transparency. we will have to address issues we thought we would address this year, authorization, pharmacy billing. host: where can people find the plan? guest: congressman dr. roger marshall. you can go to the republican study committee website.

host: representative roger marshall, talking about our health care. guest: i enjoyed the open forum and i hope people felt we answered their question. host: the house vote on the impeachment inquiry, the procedures and questions on those. you can tell us what you think. republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. ♪ >> here is a look at some books being published this week. ever," firststmas lady karen pence and her daughter charlotte look through washington through the eyes of their pet rabbit. but truth will set you free

first it will pick you off," gloria steinem provides memorable quotes. historian andrew roberts examines the military tactics of nine leaders from napoleon bonaparte to dwight eisenhower in his book "readership in war." in "american story," david rubenstein profiles american historians. also published this week, "hymns of the republic," recounting the final years of the civil war. mark halperin provides advice on how the democrats can win the next democratic election -- the next presidential election. the former defense secretary james mattis in "holding the line." look for these titles in bookstores this coming week, and watch for many authors in the near future. today, the senate commerce

science and transportation committee hearing examining the boeing 737 max following two international accidents last year. president is boeing's and ceo dennis muilenburg and the vice president, john hamilton. on c-span3, listen live on c-span org. "washington journal" continues. host: this vote on impeachment is scheduled for thursday, and we are asking your thoughts about this announcement from house democrats yesterday. you can call us on the lines or tweets at (202) 748-8003, , or post on our facebook page. speaker pelosi making the announcement yesterday that says, "we will bring a

for theon to the floor ongoing investigation that is currently being conducted, including all requests for documents, subpoenas for records and testimony, and any other steps taken or to be taken as part of this investigation are cut -- this investigation." that garnered a response from kevin mccarthy who says -- "it has been 34 days since nancy pelosi unilaterally declared her impeachment inquiry. today backtracking is an admission that this process has been botched from the start. we will not legitimize the sham pelosi impeachment. you can also post on social media. muriel in florida, republican line, you are first. caller: i just want to say one

thing, i want to go into the impeachment, but i want to say doctors andout the hospitalization. if we did not have all these immigrants coming in that we take care of, we would have enough for our own. that is enough for that, because japan doesn't have immigrants coming and that they take care of. host: to the impeachment inquiry, please. caller: about the impeachment, if they ever impeach president trump, we would have a socialist that youhat would -- would be sorry about. i would not want that. he is the best president we have ever had. host: dennis in ohio, independent line. good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. i think this impeachment is pretty much like the russian

hoax. hoax, it isainian all a smokescreen. ,he politicians are so crooked our president stepped on a few toes when he was campaigning. the swampned to drain and stop the welfare fraud. host: so the announcement by house democrats, what do you think about that portion of the impeachment inquiry? caller: i will be honest, i did not hear that. annapolis,in maryland, republican line. caller: am i on? good morning. hads just wondering, we precedent prior to this impeachment process, president bill clinton was impeached. there was an impeachment of richard nixon. in both cases, there was statutory crimes listed that

those people had committed. in this particular case, all we are hearing about, inappropriate phone call. constitution,ur it has to be high crimes or misdemeanors and i have not heard nancy pelosi or adam schiff or anyone saying what exact crime did president trump commit. talking to another leader the way you don't like is not a high crime and especially high crime or misdemeanor, talking to somebody the way you disagree regarding your policy. it is not a high crime or misdemeanor. that theh the idea democrats will formalize these procedures, especially when it comes to public hearings and due process, what do you think? caller: i believe that again, just like they invoked the word "impeachment" before the

president took office, the inquiry part represents another dungeonause it is in a of a capital building. it is somewhere that no one can see documents. the public does not know who testified as to what, and especially when it comes to removing illegally, properly elected president of the united states, this looks like another coup attempt that we do in other countries illegally. host: let's hear from missouri, democrats line, chris. caller: hello? host: you are own. caller: the lady just said about a coup attempt in the united states government. wethe real world we live in, -- if you get arrested for a crime and go before a judge, they go by your criminal record

on sentencing. in other words, if you have a background of repeated violations of things, this goes before the american courts and the judges make the decision. our president has a track record of several things that he has done, not just one thing. it is that thousand things he has done. host: when it comes to the impeachment inquiry, are you satisfied with the way it has played out so far? caller: not really. it should have been done quicker. we should have been more transparent and that everybody in america knows about it. the republicans went down and crashed the thing, saying they did not get their legal say when in actuality, there is people in the republican party already in there asking questions. with --avid embassy

msnbc watcher, and nancy pelosi is doing her job. my mother used to tell me the wheels of justice grind ever so slowly but ever so fine. host: part of the announcement about the resolution yesterday from nancy pelosi's office says it establishes the procedure for hearings that are open to the american people, authorizes the disclosure of deposition transcripts, outlines for seizures to transfer evidence to the committee, and setting forth due process rights for the president and his counsel. lou from tampa, florida, republican line. caller: thank you. i want to speak to everybody out are way better off in america with our economy three years after this gentleman, mr. trump took

office? congress toe the get their act together and stop this, and let's move forward, america. i think this is a horrible thing . we are going into the holidays and the world is looking at us, and trump is really trying to do the right thing. i really urge the congress to stop this impeachment process. if everybody called their congresswoman and congressman who cares about america, i care about -- i am a veteran. we need to put this impeachment behind us. host: what is the key reason for doing this? caller: it is better off for the economy, for the markets. host: you are only concerned about the impact on financial markets, or is there more to that? think itosh, i just

would be worse if this impeachment process goes forward. i just, i have a bad taste in my mouth about it. host: peter in everett, washington, democrats line. caller: good morning. the last caller, it seems like the money thing. they are selling their soul to this guy. i wish i was a republican just so i could understand how they this foul mouth individual we have hired for president of the united states. host: how would you justify the impeachment inquiry? caller: congress has a job to investigate. the senate has a job to adjudicate. -- people don't

understand civics anymore. they don't understand how the government works. host: the current way the impeachment is being conducted, is that something you -- approve of? caller: yes. host: why? caller: you have to do an investigation before you can vote on the issue. that is democracy. host: should there have been public hearings to begin with? caller: also, you have to be able to investigate people behind closed doors to make sure -- that are being investigated do not know what the last guy really said. you have to keep that separated. host: james from sykesville, maryland, republican line. caller: this seems like a crime looking -- a punishment looking for a crime. the second issue, one of the difficulties we will have to

fare through regarding the ukraine issue is that, can we investigate for past criminal andvity or indiscretions, have -- at the same time? the third is relative to mueller which all goes to the obstruction thing they are impeaching him on. can the veracity of trying to claim you are innocent interfere in the process of a false claim? i think there will be some legal hurdles. host: about 10 minutes left until we go to our next guest. your thoughts get in, house democrats formalizing the impeachment process in a vote set for thursday, (202) 748-8001, republicans. (202) 748-8000, democrats. (202) 748-8002, independents.

aboutew york times" talks what it means for political ads -- more than $13.6 million have been invested in trying to change public opinion on impeachment since the inquiry was announced, according to the analysis by advertising out allete ask -- analytics. will likelyg that dominate the early stages of the election is coming into focus. democrats at first largely loathing the talk of impeachment , have been quickly put on the defensive. for aillion in ads democratic alliance super pac members.by freshman dennis in to williamsport, pennsylvania, democrats line. caller: thanks for taking my

call. i would like to comment that in the case of richard nixon, we had a special prosecutor and in clinton's case we had kenneth starr. congress is doing their own investigation and they have had to investigate behind closed doors to get the testimony and the facts in this case against trump. host: if some of those people who testified behind closed doors ended up in public testimony, shouldn't that have been done in the first place? caller: they needed to do the behind closed doors to get the facts. i hope they are and i am glad to impeach him. i about throw up every time i hear a republican say he got 63 million votes. hillary clinton got 66 million votes and she is not sitting in the white house. the story about the

president spending on ads, mr. trump is outspending democrats on facebook, tripling his weekly buy as soon as the impeachment was announced and has spent four point $5 billion on impeachment ads, dwarfing tom steyer flooding airwaves to raise his profile. sean is in baltimore, maryland, independent line. what do you think about this latest move? caller: i don't have a problem with it. let me talk about this process of behind closed doors, because republicans swear up and down there is something funny going on. you hear supporters say coup d'etat. let's say i commit a felony, robbery, some type of felony. a detective will talk to me. -- myt bring my attorney

attorney is not there then. that detective will go before a grand jury and get it straight. my attorney is not there to cross-examine the detective and other people. my whole point is, things are always done behind closed doors. , then thed to realize senate will get involved and the republicans can cross-examine and trump can bring his attorney and his witness and everything. host: since you are talking about due process, should that have been done from the beginning instead of now? caller: due process was done. in my opinion, it was done. this president does whatever he wants. like for example, the whole mueller report, he broke the law and there is nothing to hide.

,hy not show the mueller report especially to the gang of eight? they could not receive the mueller report. i do not have a problem with anything because trump just break the law left and right and republicans are backing him. host: that is sean in maryland. gilbert in north carolina, republican line a dust line. -- line. caller: pelosi is taking this vote thursday because they did not have the number of votes on ago.em side 30 to 35 days they were getting enough information to convince the dems in trump friendly visit -- districts to possibly impeach. there was always an impeach vote for an inquiry. it was done with clinton and nexen, and the reason they have not done that is because -- , and the reason they have

not done that is because they did not have the votes. they are sharing information that is twisted and biased against the dems. host: "the new york times" talks about some of the testimony still to be done, five more officials are expected to testify this week including lieutenant colonel alexander bettman scheduled to appear today. he plans to detail his concerns about mr. trump's attempts to influence -- pressure ukraine. wrapping up the depositions, the house intelligence committee will hold public hearings with key witnesses including gordon sondland, fiona hill, and william taylor junior, the top american diplomat in ukraine. the president sending out a tweet this morning saying -- where is the whistleblower? just read the transcript.

everything else is made up andage by shifty schiff never trumpers. caller: i am amazed by how the democrats are holding to what the republican wants, so they can get in and filibuster and call witnesses and drag this on until the election. host: you are saying that should not happen? caller: that is right. like a grand jury, it is not a secret to make sure the evidence is done right. host: baltic, ohio, republican line, tim. caller: hey. , when id of wondering vote for president of the united states, i don't tell people who i voted for and i don't have to. if you want to take politics out of this situation, have a private vote. don't let any of these

congressmen tell anybody who they voted for and just have a private vote. then you will get an absolute honest answer from congress. host: you mean a private vote on the impeachment inquiry? caller: right. when they vote, get rid of the politics and that thing on television of, politicians voted this. have a private vote and get them honest, honest answer from this congress. host: if it is private, wouldn't you like to see how your legislator voted? caller: no, you don't have a right. they don't have a right to see what my vote is for president. i don't need to know what they voted politically, and that is what it has come down to come the left and the right. host: if he represents you in congress, i am curious about why you wouldn't want to see how they voted on this issue. caller: because i voted for a

person and how they feel and how they think. i have to respect how they feel and think. if not, i should not have voted for them. host: legislators sitting on the fence leading up to this, "the wall street journal" says it is a surprise news for some democrats, hesitant for those legislators to take a vote while they say they support the legislation. one said he was blindsided and said the vote would be "completely unhelpful." elmer, new jersey, sue, democrat line. caller: i wanted to call in and approve whatove -- nancy pelosi is doing and how she is doing it. if you remember when she announced she was going to do the inquiry, she told everyone the plan.

they were gathering information, looking at information to see if they should go forward. she is right on track, doing what she should do, and everyone should give her a chance. host: this process would open up hearings and give due process. why not have those things from the beginning instead of now? caller: they had to see if it was even possible. they had to see if there was enough information to go forward. they had to look at the information first. it is like, if you have an accident, police officer comes out and looks at the evidence and listens to people, which is what they are doing. then they decide if somebody is going to be ticketed for the accident. host: shouldn't that play out in the public from the beginning rather than now? caller: no, i think it is going its course. they are getting as much information as they can. i think this thing he is going

to do on thursday on the vote is too, i don't know, kind of stuff theddy republicans have been putting out. they want the people to get the accurate information and try to stop all the noise that is going on. the last call,be thanks for your input, and everyone else who called in. our next guest is here to talk about the status of -- status of the passage of government bills and the funding of the government, david price joining us next. ♪

>> we are making it easy for you to follow the impeachment inquiry on c-span.org. search all of c-span's coverage for video on demand of congressional briefings and hearings, as well as the administration's response during the impeachment process. log onto our webpage at at c-span.org/impeachment, your fast and easy way to watch c-span's unfiltered coverage anytime. today, the senate commerce science and transportation committee hearing examining the boeing 737 max following two international accidents last year. testifying before the committee is the president and ceo, dennis muilenburg, and vice president, john hamilton. watch on c-span three, live on c-span.org, or listen live

wherever you are with the free c-span radio app. ♪ watch our live0, coverage of the presidential candidates on the campaign trail, and make up your own mind. c-span's campaign 2020, your unfiltered view of politics. "washington journal" continues. host: this is representative david price, democrat of north carolina here to talk about the status of the funding of the federal government. where are we when it comes to fully funding the government? it is not totally certain when this will get wrapped up. it has been wrapped up for some time on the house side. 10 of the 12 bills have passed through the house floor, the appropriations bills. we were frustrated early on.

everybody knew this day was coming when we had to get a budget agreement and get the bills written. the fiscal year has already started. in the spring, we set some caps. the senate did not do that and it was not until late in the season that we got the budget agreement. now we at least have topline numbers we can work with, but there is a new problem, a new old problem, donald trump's wall. the republicans in the senate have included a $5 billion item for that wall and have included money to backfill the defense accounts that were raided earlier to pay for the wall, so it really messes things up. it does not just mess those particular bills up, it misses all of them up because there is an allocation problem. if you remove that kind of money from the up line numbers to accommodate trump's wall, you

mess everybody else's appropriation up. hhs, bysed up labor, the nature of the domestic bill. the bill i preside over as chairman of the transportation housing subcommittee, it is going through the senate now and it is not a bad bill, but it too is infected by this allocation problem where the overall number is not a reliable number because the wall is absorbing number from -- money from everyone else's bill. it is a big problem to get this done in a timely way. we have a continuing resolution taking us into the fiscal year. we will renew that for some time and hopefully we will not go too far into the year before we get this resolved and get these bills passed. andt now, it is difficult,

we may well go into calendar 2020. host: so no chance of a government shutdown at this point? guest: there is always a chance if things get to the point where we cannot agree on a continuing resolution or appropriations bills to carry us forward. i don't think anyone wants to shut down, but we know president trump well enough to know he is willing to do lots of bad things to try to get his way. he precipitated the longest shut down in history than recent memory, a five week shut down in the recent cycle. we could have that. we are trying to avoid it. it is not good for anybody to have continuing resolution after resolution. it is uncertain and you do not get to do the things you need to do for your budget and provisions that are needed to run these departments. it is not desirable, but continuing resolutions are better than an absolute shut

down. host: representative david price as our guest, and to ask about budgeting issues, you have the chance to do so. (202) 748-8001, republicans. (202) 748-8000, democrats. independents, (202) 748-8001. you can text at (202) 748-8002. on the issue of border funding, is it an absolute no go or is there a compromise to satisfy all sides? guest: this issue has become so toxic because of the full range of trump's immigration policies, the utter cruelty of shutting the door almost totally to refugees, separating these families, random raids that have decimated our communities and sowed such fear. the betrayal of the dreamers, it goes on and on.

this is an area where we are really having trouble dealing with even the routine items because everything is so toxic because of trump's rhetoric and policies. having said that, there are appropriations items that address border funding. committeerman of that in the last period of democratic leadership, and we built 700 plus miles of fencing and other border barriers, so there is money in there for border enforcement and detention beds and all the rest, but the exact amount and certainly the magnitude of the investment in a new wall and the kind of request trump has made, which is a huge request sitting right in the middle of the budget, that is a problem. that is a problem you cannot

just put the difference on. we are having trouble with this, and trump always has trouble compromising. we don't know where we are going to end up. yes, there will be money for border security. there has got to be border security. the question is what the president will work with us on and to what extent he will insist on the symbolism of this wall is a big budget item. host: your first call is from patterson, louisiana, democrats line, james. go ahead. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i have a question for your guest. the over $200lain billion cost of illegal the $5tion, versus

billion request of the president? how do you wash that? you complain about 5 billion dollars when you are spending over $200 billion plus for illegal immigration. would you explain that or are we going to change the subject? guest: i would like to know how on earth you come up with the notion that we are paying 200 billion dollars for illegal immigration. what are you talking about? host: he hung up. guest: i don't know where a figure like that came up. security homeland agency that processes immigrants and runs customs with legal trade and migration. then we have enforcement agencies. there is a budget that we can debate. that is not a rational debate to throw a number like that out and hang up. in state college,

pennsylvania, republican line. caller: first of all, it is not trump's wall, it is america's wall to protect illegals from intruding into our country. i agree with the call from louisiana. i know here in the state college area in pennsylvania, our school district had to hire extra people in the classroom in order to speak the language of the students that are here. it is costing the taxpayers in our area extra money. health insurance, everything else with illegal immigration, do not tell us it is not costing us more than the wall. why don't you start making some laws? you guys are in charge of the rules. why don't you fix immigration and stead of blaming trump for the wall? -- instead of blaming trump for the wall? guest: if what you are saying is

we need comprehensive immigration reform, i could not agree more, and this cannot be handled with year-to-year funding of the wall or anything else. we had passed through the senate in 2013, comprehensive immigration reform that had lots of border security provisions and provided for the pursuit of legal status and citizenship by the people who have been working here and been productive in our communities, took care of the dreamers, lots of other things. that bill fell victim to the talk shows, the republicans would not bring it to the floor, but it did pass the senate on a bipartisan basis. that is what we need to get back to. donald trump has made that far harder because he shows no interest in comprehensive immigration reform. he shows interest in a punitive approach that builds walls and conducts midnight raids and

separates families and otherwise tot makes it -- he does try make life miserable for migrants , but also makes the politics impossible for anyone to solve a problem. host: tracy in maryland, democrats line, good morning. caller: good morning. senator price, i support you. i am a teacher and i have these beautiful children in my class. the wall is not going to keep out someone who comes in from a war-torn country. placere trying to find a -- i teach history , and the irish came over, the italians came over, the

dreamers. if we have dreamers that can become part of the workforce, we need economic growth with a workforce in 2030. weting back with the budget, have to cut our spending and the tax breaks to the rich and the corporations that set our deficit off. it is completely off on the deficit. guest: you are fading a little bit, but if i can respond, i appreciate your experience with these young people in the classroom. i have had lots of similar experiences, especially with the so-called dreamers, young people brought here as children who president obama regularized their status through the daca declaration when he could not get the legislation through congress, when republicans

blocked it. it was the only recourse left. donald trump has blown that up and these young people are in jeopardy. that is not worthy of our country and is certainly a betrayal of these young people who put their trust in this plan to get themselves to legal status. i also understand what you are saying about the economic effect of migration. that has been true throughout history, and the net economic effects of immigration are positive. all you have to do is open your eyes and look around the community. who is on the construction sites? who is in the hospitality industry? who is harvesting the crops? triangle,a, research there are lots of immigrants working in the most sophisticated fields and adding to our cutting edge

economically. up and down the economic ladder, we have immigrants contriving to the society and we need to make it possible for people seeking a better life to come here to work, to improve their lives, and also to improve our economic situation is a country. if we cut this off way that trump proposes, there will be a heavy price to pay, not just in terms of basic american values, but economically. you are right about that. a couple of callers this morning have talked about how immigration costs us. countcount would immigration is a net plus economically. that does not mean we do not need border security and a comprehensive, well-rounded policy to make our immigration fair and humane. those are the qualities we are looking for.

that is what comprehensive reform would aim at and what this president has made it almost politically impossible. host: roll call reports the senate is expected to take up four bills. guest: that is what i was referring to, the senate has made some tentative steps toward getting this resolved. those are the bills that will be in the so-called minibus as opposed to an omnibus, and i am pleased to see that transportation hud bill included. the bill the senators are working with is a pretty good bill, a billion and a half dollars below our bill partly because of the budget agreement did not quite meet the numbers we have been working with in the house, but also because of the problem that affects all these bills, the border wall items sitting in the middle of the budget allocation absorbing money from all these bills.

that takes away from what we can do on infrastructure and makes it very hard to wrap this up. it will be a step forward as the house passes this -- senate passes this omnibus. you give us a good topline number, we call it four corners working on these bills, the ranking member, my colleague in the house, and susan collins and jack reed, the four of us will work out a great bill, but we need a reliable topline number. as long as the wall is sitting in the middle, that senate bill is not quite the last word, even from the senate. it is very hard to wrap anything up until we deal with that central problem. for: put on your budget cap second. a tweet that came out from the associated press -- the national debt up 3 trillion since the

president took office, 50% increase. what do you attribute that to? -- what attributed to has immediately made it far worse is the trump tax cut which took us 1.5 trillion dollars in the hole over a five-year period. that knocked the numbers far deeper into red territory. also, a failure to have a comprehensive budget agreement of the sort that got our house in order in the 1990's. i have been around long enough to remember that. --have three con comprehensive budget deals in the 1990's. somewhere bipartisan, some were democratic heavy lifting. balancedur years of budgets and paying off the national debt, paying off for

billion dollars of the national debt. we had a roaring economy. what is not to like? we do not seem to recognize that lesson now. the republicans say they will never, ever raise anybody's taxes. the other problems are tough as well, the question of entitlement spending. a comprehensive budget deal in the end will have to get us through this. we have got to get our politics to the point where we can do it, and it will have to have everything on the table. you will need to adjust the tax code and we need to pay our own way. the wealthier people need to help. we need to restrain entitlement spending and constrained domestic spending, but you cannot do it just hammering like republicans do, on domestic investments alone. that will not solve your problem and will disinvest in things we

need to invest in. host: the point you just made, they wrote this -- the major drivers of spending are not social security, medicare, and medicaid. the u.s. government will not be able to put a fiscal situation on solid footing without addressing major drivers of spending. caller: and revenues. we have had these ill advised tax cuts, mainly benefiting corporations and wealthy americans. there could've been a bipartisan agreement on a calibrated reform of the tax code where we paid -- toion to some of the stimulate investment and other needs. there was room for that, but the republicans instead did it on their side of the aisle alone. and they didn't pay for it. it was $1.5 trillion into the whole and it is still does into the hole and it is still pretty

unpopular. host: a strong economy helps offset that. guest: yes, kind of a sugar high you might say for the economy. the recovery was proceeding nicely. this juiced it up for some months, a kind of sugar high, which is a good analogy. and then when you really need a stimulus of that sort, when the economy is down, which will surely come, then you don't have the slack in the system to provide the stimulus. they provided the stimulus when it wasn't needed and it got some good economic numbers, but we will pay a price heavily in the years to come. host: david price with us. john is in oregon, independent line. caller: from the great northwest, i am on the oregon coast. guess what?

it is not raining today. good morning, sir. thank you for your service. i just want to say on the budget deficit, i am a recovering republican and we used to care about budget deficits. i agree completely with what the congressman said in terms of the 85% of theand the tax cut went to the wealthy and corporations. much.y, that is too concerned, wall is didn't work for china 2000 years ago or whenever that was built. in technology, there is much that are ways to do that. we do need the guestworkers. they are the ones installing the sheet work -- sheet rock, the drywall, doing the work that

americans do not want to do. i got through, i guess i did not have a lot to say. the deficit used to be important to republicans and should be important to all americans. we shouldn't balance the budget on the back of people on social security or what is left of our safety net. guest: i appreciate those reflections. let me just tell a story of my own. i was out in a pretty conservative part of my district one saturday morning just knocking on doors, not campaign time, just to see what was on people's minds. it was a hot day and there was a bunch of construction workers on a roof across the street, so i knocked on the door. a big, burly fellow came out. see those guys on that roof? i thought, here it comes. he said, do you realize how hot

it is on that roof? do you realize how hard that work is they are doing? don't you think there should be a way we should figure out how to keep these folks in our country? that made my day. people that open their eyes and open their hearts realize these people are seeking a better life. they work very hard. they are essential to our economy and we just have to work our way through this. we are better than this toxic political standoff. i would hope our country could work it out. it is a major test, one of the toughest i have ever seen. host: louis and saulsberry, north carolina, republican line. caller: i appreciate you coming on and really enlightening the people about the cr. here we go again, the crybaby will want the wall and we already know it will not work. you have a lot of republicans,

will you please reiterate onto the republicans that when they had control of the senate and congress and the white house, that paul ryan did not slip the wall budget in for the president. could you please let republicans know that even the republicans know that the wall and trump was furious the wall was not in there. what does he do? steal money from our military to pay for wall or call for a national emergency to steal money from our government to pay for wall that mexico was to pay for. please let republicans know they had the opportunity to fund the wall but wouldn't do it. guest: the caller is exactly right. this was not a republican priority. in fact, we worked for years on homeland security in a cooperative way. i was chairman during the years of democratic leadership and

worked with others when republicans were in charge. nobody was beating the drums for , as kind of a wall a total solution or magic solution to this. under democratic and republican leadership. we did invest in barriers on parts of the border. where that was called for and where that was helpful, we have over 700 miles of fencing now. we had a reasonably cooperative, balanced approach. that has deteriorated, to say the least. that is a kind word, the way this debate has gone under donald trump, and this notion of a grandiose wall which as you say, republicans never particularly prioritized or even talked much about. that has become the be all and end all of border security, and

it is nonsense. it is nonsense on the merits and politically, it does provide a barrier so to speak for us to overcome right now. the emergency i thought it was a good point as well. we don't just let the president move money around that will carry it -- at will. congress has the power of the purse. as a subcommittee chairman i have said many times on transfers of funds. sometimes that is necessary within government accounts. we do have to do that. to move hundreds of millions in contradiction to congress's appropriations bills, the declared policy of the country, he did this emergency declaration. we cannot let a president at a whim declare a national emergency. that should be reserved for very

dire situations. that is what the president has done. he has moved hundreds of billions of dollars. he has the audacity to say in his budget that only should you provide $5 billion for a wall but you need to back build those defense accounts i have rai ded to get ready for the wall in previous years. that is not how it works. ,ost: from royal oak michigan, republican line. we will hear from carol. caller: hi, senator. i cannot understand why democrats want to put illegals in front of true americans. we have americans that are needy also. they need looked after first before any illegal. we do need the wall. over are aoming disgrace. the human trafficking, a disgrace. there is more to illegals than just people that want a job.

you need to look at all factors. trump goesident after birthright citizenship right after he built that glorious wall. rep. price: i would suggest -- just ask any knowledgeable person where the drugs come in, where the human trafficking takes place. is it where this wall would be built? the answer is no. this contraband, these illegal bringing over of persons and goods occurs at legal ports of entry. donald trump is actually proposing an underfunding of the legal ports of entry, the kind of scrutiny we need to give cargo as it comes over and the needs to beef up our customs stations and ports of entry.

we absolutely need to address the drug problem and the human contraband. the wall is totally irrational, irrelevant solution to that problem. address of having to domestic needs before we address the needs of people who have come into our country, i don't think anyone is suggesting that we shortchange our domestic needs. on the contrary we have pushed very hard in this congress now that we have democratic leadership we have pushed very hard for renewed investments in public education. we want to get health care extended. we are fighting in north carolina to get medicaid expanded to 500,000 people. i put a very high priority on that. it is very near the top of the list in terms of things we ought to address.

infrastructure, in our transportation and housing bill we have what we think is a good down payment on this country's infrastructure needs. need,g program that we the big bipartisan effort that we were promised, still no sign of that. i think that is going to have to await a democratic president and democratic leadership. back seat to no one on investing in our country. host: a couple of north carolina related king. kayprice: i served with hagan, very sad. she has a terrible illness, she contracted encephalitis and was slowly recovering from that over a four year period. it she was recovering seemed. she was in durham, north carolina on sunday night to greet joe biden when he came to the state. then she died in her sleep the

next day. it is just shocking. she is a wonderful person and a wonderful colleague. she served as the north carolina representative. before that she was a state senator. she paid a lot of attention to our state's military bases and the needs of men and women in uniform as a armed services member. i worked with her. speaking of our budget woes, when we were having sequestration we did a bill to make sure that the education expenses of servicemen and women would not be affected by the sequestration. that was an example of many. she worked very cooperatively with house members across the aisle. she was a person who did bring people together. we will miss her. she has a wonderfully supportive family and we reached out to them. the loss of kay hagan is a real loss. yesterday in north

carolina there was a court decision saying the congressional maps were declared legal for gerrymandering towards -- >> i don't know how this will be implemented. it is an absolutely spot on decision. about this is that it was taken through the state courts and refers to the state constitution. we have argued for a long time, and many affiliated groups have argued for a long time that of the gerrymandering party legislator following the , it became a textbook case of extreme gerrymandering. as you may remember the federal courts throughout the first map on the grounds that it was racially gerrymandered. we got new maps about five years

ago on that basis. they were still gerrymandered. an evenly divided state still had 10 republicans and three democrats in the house delegation. something is wrong with that picture. it was equally gerrymandered just quite known as egregiously done on racial lines. the u.s. supreme court by 5-4 decision refused to overturn that last year. now this case has come up through the state courts and referring to the state constitution. it is late in the day but we will see what kind of adjustment is required for this year. hopefully we will present the worst excesses. host: about a minute. the decision by speaker pelosi with the vote on wednesday formalizing. should this have come at the start of the process or is now a good time? rep. price: this is a good time.

there are no set rules as to what kind of vote is required. i think it is good at this point to affirm that the inquiry not only is underway but that it is reaching a public phase and to convey the expectation that subpoenas will be honored and there will be cooperation from the executive ranch has there and a plan for opening these hearings to the public and making the depositions public. representative david price serves on the appropriations and budget committee. thank you for your time. up next we will be joined by washington times reporter jeff mordock that will discuss current federal investigations into the origins of the russia investigation. those conversations when washington journal continues. ♪

♪ > we are making it easy for you to follow the impeachment inquiry on c-span.org. search our coverage for video on demand of all the congressional briefings and hearings as well as the administration's response during the impeachment process. our impeachment inquiry webpage on c-span.org/impeachment. you're fast and easy way to watch unfiltered coverage anytime. today, the senate commerce,

science, and transportation committee hearing examining the boeing 737 max 8 following two international accidents. testifying is the boeing president and ceo and vice president and chief engineer. today at 10:00 a.m. eastern on c-span three. online at c-span.org or listen live wherever you are with the free c-span radio app. ♪ >> campaign 2020. watch our live coverage of the presidential candidates on the campaign trail and make up your own mind. c-span's campaign 2020. your unfiltered view of politics. >> washington journal continues. host: this is just more -- from the washington

times here to talk about the various investigations into the origins of the russia investigation. how many investigations are going on on that front? mr. mordock: we have three. the john doerr and probe that began in april, he is a u.s. attorney from connecticut that was tapped by bill barr to investigate the origins of the russia investigation, more specifically if the intelligence community did anything improper or illegal when they began surveilling members of the trump campaign manager we have the investigation that has been going on since 2017. we have not heard a word about what is going on. started out as an investigation into the origins of the russia probe as well as the clinton foundation. john durham took over the russia .spect from john uber we don't know where things stand with his clinton investigation, if it is ongoing or if it has

been's needed to someone else. it has been strangely silent which is interesting. the other investigation is the michael horowitz investigation, the inspector general for the department of justice. michael horowitz is looking into whether or not when the fbi got warrants to spy on carter page and other members of the trump campaign, if that was warranted. that report should be due out soon. we have a lot of anticipation building on that report. bill barr said earlier this year it should be out in june, then we heard late september, then october 18, now it is october 29 and we are waiting. it is completed and i know they are going through the d's -- declassification process. host: what do republicans hope to gain from release? to proveck: they hope that foreign nations interfered with the election, not just russia, and that interference was there to help with an campaign.

that would be the best scenario for the republicans if they uncover evidence of that. they are looking for evidence that they can prove that the spying on members of the trump campaign was illegal, politically motivated, because that gives credence to president trump's witchhunt argument. host: on the fbi aspect of this goes back to the obama administration. mr. mordock: they are going back to 2016 the fbi started their counterintelligence probe. we will see a lot of obama officials -- we know john durham wants to talk to john brennan and james clapper. theave other people in obama administration that mr. durham wants to speak with. michaelwhy mr. barr -- horowitz is an obama appointee but he has been very fair, no one is questioning his partiality and he has uncovered a lot of stuff. horwitz, his scope is limited to current employees

because that is the limit on the inspector general's role. he can only talk to active government employees. attorneyam as a u.s. with a criminal probe he can do subpoenas, subpoena nongovernment employees, compel documents, compel witnesses to testimony. fromat prompted the ship john durham's investigation to a criminal probe? >> that is the million-dollar question. it could be something significant or something as simple as a witness or two lied to investigators and durham uncovered that and that would limit the probe in scope. happenedation also after bill barr and john durham went to italy and talk to some investigators over there. it could also be possible they uncovered something overseas. the question is what prompted this investigation. host: current federal investigations into the russia probe.

that is our topic. if you have questions call and ask. for republicans (202) 748-8001. for democrats (202) 748-8000. independents (202) 748-8002. if you want to text us your questions do so at (202) to put your be sure name, city, and state. if you want to post on our twitter feed it is @cspanwj. in determining whether there is reasonable indication of federal violation a special agent may it take into account any facts or accounts that a prudent investigator must consider. the standard requires specific facts or circumstances requiring specific facts -- a past or current violation. a mere hunch is insufficient." how does that factor into what we are seeing play out? mr. mordock: it factors into that john durham has found

evidence that a criminal violation occurred. he will still have to bring that and theygrand jury will have to decide whether to move forward with any indictments he may want to bring. not -- heows this is is not acting on hunches. he is developing concrete, real evidence that he can bring forward before this was moved up to a criminal investigation. host: what are democrats most concerned about? mr. mordock: democrats are this already as president trump using the justice department to go after political opponents. they think they are going to use this as an attempt to go after james clapper. they worry this is going to be an attempt to go after critics of the president. that is how they have been painting and even after the escalation to a criminal investigation was announced. you saw a lot of democrats

coming out immediately and there was a lot of complaining from them. host: for the durham investigation like outside of the breast -- justice department? mr. mordock: it is not standard practice but nothing about this is standard. we are in uncharted territory. i think why william barr did that is a couple reasons. the horwitz probe is limited. two, he is outside the washington bubble. he is outside of where a lot of this occurred. he has been in a lot of high-profile investigations. he has been a u.s. attorney since -- which helpssider because he is investigating the justice department. you have a weird situation where the justice department is investigating it does the fbi is part of the probe. host: if the justice department and fbi are being investigated how forthcoming are they in helping with the investigation? mr. mordock: william barr

yesterday said the fbi has been extremely helpful and he gave a lot of praise to fbi director christopher wray for being more helpful with the investigation. host: let's hear from callers. we're going to start in new jersey, democrats line. rhonda, you are on with our guest. caller: good morning america. listen. i just want to say that i am so grateful that nancy pelosi has taken this vote to open up this indeed been hearing. -- impeachment hearing. donald trump is running a criminal organization in the white house. you know it and so do live. host: that is not the nature of our discussion. michael in massachusetts, independent line. caller: good morning. what i would like to ask the gentleman is, i read a few articles yesterday about james

durham,operating with have you heard anything about that? mr. mordock: we have heard a number of people cooperating. we have heard baker and several names cooperating. we don't know the full scope of everyone mr. durham has talked to. becauseh is interesting he has spoken to over 100 witnesses. i can imagine that durham will speak to more than that possibly by the time this is all said and done given that he has a larger scope of his investigation. host: when it comes to that the staff and the manpower, how much is being applied? mr. mordock: we know it is a small step for john durham. it is a small staff and we know a lot of that is his people from connecticut he has brought down with him. other people have been helping. a retired fbi agent has been helping. lot of people tangentially have been helping. host: let's go to jeffrey in

ohio, democrats line. pinkerton, ohio. caller: good morning, gentlemen. mordock, this is my problem with what is being done. we know that the trump campaign -- during the election. side of the investigation was publicized. the investigation of mr. trump and his campaign did not start until once he was in office. he was in office. he had are ready reap the spoils of what ever happened between him and the russians. we do know russians were convicted. we know that mr. barr has set himself to be a partisan since he has gotten the job. --purposely

he said people were spying on the trump investigation, a word that no one in doj would ever use unless he was a partisan. this whole investigation is to prove what? mr. mordock: the whole investigation was to prove whether or not the intelligence agencies including the fbi, and when theyimproperly started surveilling members of the trump campaign manager no russians have been convicted yet. -- trump campaign manager. no russians have been convicted yet. robert mueller brought charges against 25 russians but they have not been indicted. this surveillance in terms of carter page went on before trump was inaugurated or elected. from pennsylvania, debbie is joining us on the democrats line. good morning. caller: i have a question. if it comes down to trump did

all this, which i believe he did, will it come out and will it come out soon? because our country can't take it anymore. mr. mordock: will what come out? host: willis -- caller: will it come out that this is all bu ll crap? host: are you talking about the investigations into the russia probe or other things? caller: the russia probe israel according to what i have seen. investigationg an to try to counteract of this because the white house wants this done. trump, did down to authorize this to be done how long will this take to clarify that everything is on the up and up and how long to get this guy out of office? mr. mordock: in terms of clarifying whether or not this investigation is legitimate, we will know when we get the

conclusions. we will be able to go through their investigative steps, what they looked at, who they looked at and why and should be able to make concrete determinations about the investigation. host: let's say the reports come out and there are things, what is the next app, what does the justice department do with this information? mr. mordock: if there are potential criminal violations the justice department has to move forward with an indictment. they have to show the american people what happened here and make that argument. for the democrats, if there is potential criminal violation they are going to have to go back to their argument that this has been politically motivated and this is trump prosecuting political enemies before the election. on the sundayiff shows this past week talking about the durham investigation. let's listen. schiiff: the justice

department is doing a criminal investigation into people who properly looked into russian interference in our election. it means that bill barr on the president's behalf is weaponizing the justice department to go after the president's enemies. i served for years on a committee that would help emerging democracies. , when youlways inform win an election you don't seek to prosecute the losing side. this is what bill barr is seeking to do. he is demonstrating once again that he is merely a tool of the president. the president's hand. host: jeff mordock. mr. mordock: that will be his position going forward. he does not offer any evidence for why he believes this to be politically motivated. he seems to indicate that but does not say it, he should come

forward and say why but he does not bring that forward in that interview. host: in this process does bill barr constantly talk to john durham about this or is john durham given the freedom to do what he does as far as looking to it without influence from bill barr? mr. mordock: bill barr keeps saying that john durham is acting independently and that he is not involved in the investigation but john durham went to italy and the united kingdom with bill barr. host: talk about those trips. they factor into the fact that john durham is looking into what countries, if any, interfered with the 2016 election alongside rush hour instead of russia. the justice department has confirmed it looked at ukraine which is interesting given all that is going on with ukraine. they confirmed that they are looking at italy. we have seen differing reports about what they have uncovered in italy. we heard bill barr is looking to set up a secure conference room in the american embassy because

they have uncovered some stuff in italy. they have looked at the united kingdom. they have talked to people in australia. bill barr has accompanied john durham on some of those trips. i think that indicates he is more involved and he is oftainly taking an approach definitely overseeing what is going on. host: the name that comes up in this story is joseph, why is the important? mr. mordock: he is a professor who is believed to have ties to american intelligence or russian intelligence depending on which side you come out. democrats have alleged republicans claim he is part of russian intelligence. he is a gentleman who first made overtures to the campaign official george papadopoulos who was a young trump campaign aide. he was the one who offered and

indicated that there are -- that russia was going to be leaking the hillary clinton emails with the trump campaign -- would be trump campaign be interested? some people argue it was a setup. that john durham has reviewed phone records from him and he is set for a deposition with john durham. he is a key figure in we will get more about his role. host: we are talking these investigations with jeff mordock of the washington times. cleveland tennessee, republican line. you are on. caller: [indiscernible] host: you are going to have to turn off your television. since trump has been in office the democrats have given him nothing but problems. one problem right after another. i'm sick of it myself.

i voted for that man and i will vote for him again in 2020 if i am alive. the main thing that is bothering hillary clinton deleted a lot of females that was related to the government -- a lot of mails related to the government. host: for those of you waiting to get on turn off or turn down your televisions. does hillary clinton factor into this? mr. mordock: i don't think so. the state department completed their probe a week ago. they found that nobody acted in terms of malice in terms of deleting emails but they did find that a lot of violations of state department protocol occurred during the deletion of the emails. which is a point i want to bring up with the durham investigation. we have been talking a lot about criminal investigation. durham and horwitz may not uncover something criminally him it might just be that they violated justice department

communityintelligence policy which we saw with the james comey investigation. they found that basically he had violated some of the protocols of the fbi. no charges were ever brought. from pennsylvania on the republican line, robin is next. caller: good morning. the peoplew where that are calling in, where are they? are they watching the news? are they just watching cnn and msnbc? judicial watch is getting the facts out. host: collar, you are on with our guest. address your question or comment to the guests. what do you want to ask about the investigation? mr. mordock: -- caller: how come the stations on the other -- how come nobody is talking about the fact that are coming out on this case?

they are saying it is all made up. mr. mordock: do we have any facts at this point? -- host: do we have any facts at this point? mr. mordock: we don't have any facts. question is what prompted the escalation to a criminal probe. host: william is in maine, democrats line. caller: hi, good morning. i would like to express some concerns. people seem to be all into trump but you have to look at the fact that he is a serial liar and he does not stick to the truth, it is all alternate universe. people would sell out their ,ountry with this man illegitimate all of a sudden. again we are talking about these investigations. do you have a specific question? are theyk: are

investigating the investigators because they have something to hide and they want to keep it quiet? iss democratic process legitimate and the american people need to know the truth about this president being a crook and stealing taxpayer money. host: we believe it there. the investigation of the investigators. is that the best way this has been framed since the beginning? mr. mordock: i think it is. we are looking at the intelligence community and the fbi and the justice department and the decisions they have made. democrats are trying to use that phrase as a way to disparage the investigation. ofis also a way to sort count for this investigation is headed. it is going towards the people who did investigate the trump campaign manager that was justified or politically motivated areas -- motivated. host: michael from washington,

d.c.. democrats line. caller: good morning. i think that when president obama found out that russia putinered in our election had discovered oil in the black sea. obama put i blockade there so he cannot drill any oil out of the black sea. he was standing to make trillions and trillions of dollars. i think trump is trying to prove to the world that russia did not do it so he can lift the blockade up from putin to make those millions of dollars. he is trying to get putin to go drill oil out in the black sea where obama put a blockade so he can do it. host: ok michael, thank you. anything to that? mr. mordock: i don't have a comment. host: industry, pennsylvania

republican line, john, hello. caller: thank you for taking my call. since 1947 we have interfered in over 80 countries elections including russia. we have spent hundreds of millions of dollars to interfere. can we interfere in their elections and they can't interfere in hours because it's a big deal? mr. mordock: i don't think anyone wants foreign entities interfering with u.s. elections. we want u.s. elections decided by u.s. citizens. from california, democrats line. caller: good morning, c-span. i had a question for your reporter. is trumped by sister who is a federal judge, is she helping in this investigation as well? has she been helping trumped all

along? i will take my answer off-line. mr. mordock: president trump sister is a federal judge but there is no evidence that she has been helping in the investigations. none of the court cases that have sprung up from the russia probe have been in her courtroom. iny have all largely been the courtroom for the u.s. district court here in d.c. just down the street. judge amy berman jackson seems to get most of those cases and trump's friend not been involved. host: what is the likelihood this report could come out at the same time that we are full-blown into impeachment hearings and the like? mr. mordock: that is possible as this impeachment inquiry moves forward and it is moving forward at a pretty rapid pace. if that comes out it will be interesting to see how that plays. the key goes back to what i said about john durham being in ukraine and the justice department confirming he has talks do non-government officials in ukraine.

it will be interesting to see what john durham uncovers in ukraine and how they use that in terms of trying to defend the phone call president trump made to his counterpart in the ukraine. host: jeff mordock writes for the washington times. here to talk about the investigation into the russia probe, we thank you for your time. are going to hear from you about your top public policy issue. it could be current events of the day or other things. what is important to you when it comes to politics? for republicans (202) 748-8001. for democrats (202) 748-8000. independents (202) 748-8002. we'll take those calls when we continue. ♪ look at some books being published this week. secondchristmas ever"

lady karen pence and her daughter charlotte offer a look at the holidays in washington dc through the eyes of their pet rabbit. the truth will set you free but first it will pay sealock" off." stott -- piss you gloria steinem offers quotes from throughout her career. examining the military tactics of nine leaders from napoleon bonaparte to dwight eisenhower in " leadership in war." story" davidican rubenstein profiles american historians. republic" the recounts the final year of the civil war. markhow to be trump" halperin provides advice from political strategists about how to win the next election.

recalling his time working as director of communications and chief speechwriter to james mattis in " holding the line." look for these titles in bookstores and watch for many of the authors in the near future on book tv on c-span two. we are making it easy for you to follow the impeachment inquiry on c-span.org. search all of c-span's coverage for video on demand of all the congressional briefings and hearings as well as the administration's response. log on to our impeachment inquiry webpage. easy way to watch c-span's unfiltered coverage anytime. >> washington journal continues. host: if you want to tell us about your top public policy issue and you want to text us it is (202) 748-8003. you can post on our twitter feed

wj or our facebook page. you can call us on the lines as well. a story out today about the boeing ceo set to testify concerning the status of the 737 max 8 this is ian duncan from the washington post reporting that the ceo plans to acknowledge his company made mistakes when he faces lawmakers while looking for answers about how flaws in the 737 led to a pair of deadly crashes. someknow we made mistakes and got some things wrong." 10:00 today is that live hearing on c-span3 where you can watch the testimony and the issues and questions that will be asked concerning the boeing 737 max 8. you can see that on c-span three. watch it on c-span.org or you can monitor it on our radio app.

this is your top policy issue. if you want to tell us, (202) 748-8001 for republicans. (202) 748-8000 for democrats. for independents (202) 748-8002 off incerra starts us austin, texas on the democrats off in sarah starts us austin, texas on the democrats line. caller: hello? host: go ahead. caller: thank you for c-span. my top policy issue is the family separation at the border. i think it is an atrocity and we will look back on this and it will be like what we did to japanese-americans in world war ii. host: why a top issue for you specifically? i thinkock:--- caller: because of my location in texas it feels close to home. there are women and children who are being contained close to where i live.

i think that it is ron of the coolest things -- one of the cruelest things to do to families and children. the consequences to nonverbal or preverbal children will be long-lasting. i truly do blame the trump administration and other politicians who are standing by and letting this happen. host: larry is on the line for republicans in minnesota. hello. caller: how y'all doing today? dallas on the in construction sites installing high-rise elevators and different things. the illegal aliens. they are illegal. they don't belong here. they come across our border and we are supposed to take care of them? i don't think so. they have no rights. if they are separated at the border it is for their own safety. they need to be returned to wherever they came from.

we are not the world upon's babysitter. as far as taking care of people. they pay coyotes and drug cartels to get up here. they have no rights. it is because of bleeding liberals that have made our country a cesspool. host: mark in north carolina, independent line. caller: good morning and thank you for taking my call. that previous phone call is upsetting. this country was founded upon immigrants. what we need to do especially with the immigration in social security is make sure it stays. perhaps if we show these people a simple pathway to citizenship where they contribute to the economy and contribute to the social security system we might be in better shape. that previous caller may want to think about one important thing. if you give a chance to a kid that comes in this country that gets an education in the u.s. and find secure for a

debilitating disease, when that be beneficial to people in the u.s.? let's look at it from a perspective of we are an american nation under god and let's reach out to people who need a situation that is better overall for america. host: the washington times highlights some democratic senate races when it comes to fundraising by various candidates involved. saying that democrat mark kelly republicanlenging senator martha mcsally raised 5.5 million in the third quarter. miss make sally raised 3 million last quarter and has 5.6 million on canned. sarah gideon, i democratic challenger to susan collins in maine raised $3.2 million. miss collins had more than $7 million on hand. in iowa a democrat raised 1.1 million and outpaced a republican senator.

miss ernst had close to 4 million on hand compared to 1.2 million. you can read more about that in the washington times this morning. in west virginia, democrats line, good morning. caller: good morning. talk about the previous thing you had with the doj about the investigating, getting -- investigating the investigators. i think the attorney general is really corrupt, william barr. i think that he should recuse himself from russia and ukraine situations. he has heard too much fox news. i think that not only does he corrupt but fbi is he is basically investigating himself. i think that is awful. in america.

this, to me, is what authoritarians do. i think the democrats should bring bill barr up and have to testify and see what he is up to. host: dominic is in new york, independent line. caller: good morning. with all this garbage going on with the investigating and all schiff, thedam country is still running like a well oiled machine. everyone is doing good. this guy, as much as they think he is a criminal, trump is doing great. i went to a gas station and i cannot believe the gas prices. i remember when nancy pelosi was in the house before that, the gas went up to four dollars and $.49 a gallon in new york. -- where thecan monkey bites. this guy is running this country

like a well oiled machine. god bless him and got less c-span. host: a story in the washington times about the former attorney general jeff sessions. saying a potential wildcard came doubt of -- came out when reports surfaced that former senator jeff sessions may want to see back. mr. sessions has been taking meetings and calls in regards to running for his own seat. thought to consider candidacy for the 2020 senate race. he will be seeking the cd vacated and 2017 to become president trump's first attorney general. is republicanthat opponent roy moore had sexually assaulted young women decades ago when he was beginning his legal career. more of that in the washington times. cleveland, ohio, democrats line.

caller: i just wanted to say, especially as a recent high school graduate one of my top domestic priorities is going ahead and fixing our education system. are higher education there plenty of problems there without certainly expensive it is, i am more concerned about at the high school and elementary level where students are simply look at as numbers and figures and statistics rather than actual real human beings. what once washat such a prominent policy issue is now kind of falling by the wayside with all the stuff that is going on in washington. host: that is creased is from cleveland, ohio. 15 minutes left in this program. if you are on the line if you would hold a couple minutes we would appreciate it. if you are calling in you can continue to do so. in the papers and online you will see photos out of those

wildfires taking place in california. here to give as a legislative perspective on an area being affected directly is a democrat from california that serves the fifth district which includes -- representative thompson, good morning. a status give us report on your area specifically and how it is being affected by wildfires? rep. thomspon: i can. that is in the fire or around my district has grown to about close to 75,000 acres. that is the bad news. the good news is that it is 15% contained. under 5%little yesterday so that is a real improvement. person every imaginable and piece of equipment on this fire. engines,lmost 475 close to 50 water tenders, anywhere from 10 to 25

helicopters that are flying, i watched yesterday as three of them were taking water out of a farm pond and dumping it on blazing fires adjacent to some homes. there is a ton of hand crews. there is about 4500 people on this fire working, doing everything from logistics to on the line firefighting. we have air tankers that are in the air constantly. because of wind conditions and visibility. when they can fly they are there. can we arerything we doing to get these fires suppressed. it looks like we are making headway. we had somehow help yesterday from mother nature. and we did notd have much wind yesterday and that allowed firefighters to really get an upper hand.

they have been building fire breaks and trying to get ahead of this. the bad news is, this other wind event today. we don't know what that will bring. anytime you have wind at this beat at which the winds have been blowing. some of these winds when this fire started were clocked at over 100 miles per hour. that is because they are very difficult to contain that fire. we have incredible men and women out working on this. we are really making a dent in things. host: what is the potential of rain there? rep. thomspon: no rain in the forecast. the only good weather forecasting we have from noaa who is on the ground and sonoma county is that there is not another wind event after this one today.

in their projections. the other issue that your viewers should know about is this is impacting more than just the fire area. driven through the area yesterday. the heroic efforts of our firefighters have really paid off. you can see where the fire has burned right up to and around homes. those homes were saved. we have lost over 100 structures, we lost a number of homes. -- homes of the firefighters the homes the firefighters saved, it was impressive and heroic. it is also impacting the area. there are 190,000 people who have been displaced who are having to live somewhere else while this is taking place.

they have been evacuated, they are in shelters were staying with friends and neighbors for staying in other areas. schools are closed, businesses are shut down. this is really impacting our area. in a very negative way. host: what kinds of resources for those directly affected are available from the federal government and what you petition congress and the white house for more resources? rep. thomspon: that is why i am in my district and not back in washington. ears for mys and district. in regards to getting information to washington. i have been in touch with the white house and we are working closely with the state. the cooperation is very impressive. every level of government is cooperating well. the people in our area. the number of volunteers is unbelievably impressive. right down to food preparation. we had three of california pot

best chefs yesterday in the kitchen facility located at the fairgrounds in sonoma cooking food for people. that is a nonprofit organization to feed people when there is a disaster. we have chris and tyler here. i am here to make sure that folks in washington and congress and the white house know exactly what we need and how we needed area so far everything has worked smoothly. the federal government has come forward with the fire grants to help california deal with the cost of fighting the fire. as we get out of the firefighting component of this disaster and move into the

recovery there will be a need for more resources. the role that the company pg and he plays in this, what do you think about their response and the reaction? is this something congress will look at in the future? rep. thomspon: as you know pacific gas & electric company that provides cap were -- provides power to northern california falls under the jurisdiction of the state legislature. they have done a lot to bring pressure on pacific gas & electric to do a better job. i believe there is more in store. anything congress can do we will do. it is very clear that pg and the and the services they deliver are not adequate area we need to have consistent power for my constituents and every other gas and electric user in northern

california and we need that company or another company to be able to provide that in a consistent and safe manner. what is happening now is neither safe nor consistent. e i doure of pg and not know. or stillin bankruptcy struggling from the fires we had last year. this is not going to help that situation. host: because of the area of california you are in, for those who manufacture wind what is the special economic impact? our winespon: businesses have probably lost some visitors over this period. people are not interested in coming as a poorest any place. we still make the best line in the world and i don't think that

will change. the greats have for all practical purposes have been all harvested so there is no danger there. vines that were burned, those will be replanted i'm sure. there is an immediate economic impact for all businesses in the long run in regards to wine i am sure things will be fine. representative mike thompson a representative from california who serves the fifth district. onating us on what is going in his district. thank you for your time. rep. thomspon: thank you very much. host: for those of you holding thanks for doing so. new jersey is next. we are talking about your top public policy issues. go ahead. caller: i think that the whole political system has to be totally changed, overhaul. nowhere in the world is this working were you elect one person to represent millions of

people and he is not going to get corrupt or get narcissistic. not do things for his own benefit. that does not work. always become worse, threatened, bought off or all the above to play ball for just a few rich people. host: what is a better system? caller: i don't know but you better come up with something. i am not the one who went to super colleges and everyone is so politically smart on the shows. they don't know that this will work. the idea that someone who says " i. can lead you i'm the best" that's the last person you want to have in control. host: let's go to gym in new jersey on the independent line. caller: my public policy issue is religious freedom. a number of states including new jersey and 13 others are applying for affordable care act similar to the ones under obama.

every one of these excludes a religious exemption from conscious of providing contraceptives and those types of things. since the history of this country people have been allowed to have a conscience and allowed to follow their religion. the law that says separation of state and church basically says the state cannot impose a religion on the people. in this case i think that secularization is a religion and that is what is trying to be forced on us. to take away people's conscience and freedom is wrong. are one state that just came up and there are 13 others. there is a court case in california and pennsylvania. i am afraid for our freedom. host: john is in california, republican line. caller: good morning, how are you? host: fine, go ahead. caller: talking about this investigation they are doing.

i remember in the 60's in the 70's the liberals were just losing their minds over the fbi infiltrating their antiwar movement and all of that. now you fast forward to this time and you have a cia director , a national securities director, the head of the fbi and they were conspiring to spy on the president of the united states, actually the president elect, and there is prompt 20 of evidence. text messages between those two top fbi officials. phone call between comey to talk about the phony dossier that hillary clinton paid for to report for him and accomplished. they took that and they took happened topless and they

set him up to talk about the russians. they went to the pfizer court -- court and they got a warrant to tap his phone. they were tapping the phones of a trump campaign worker and they probably were tapping the phones of trump tower in new york. host: that is john in california. let's hear from luis in washington, d.c.. caller: i wanted to bring up a shadow network by and nelson. i heard her -- ann nelson. book onher describe her c-span at the wisconsin book festival. it is an eye-opening, alarming situation. the full title is " shadow network, media, money, and the secret hubbub the radical right." she has done tremendous research and this has than going on for 31 years.

it is changing the way our politics work. i recommend everybody listened to her. host: ok. caller: wisconsin book festival on cnn. opened my eyes and it explains so many things. we love book festivals and all that information when it comes to book tv. you can find our main website if you go to c-span.org. from georgia, independent line. caller: yes. has this show -- does this show just let people call in and say anything? host: we are a call-in show. there morning -- caller: have been all kinds of democrats calling in making totally false statements. making statements they have absolutely no evidence of about how the attorney general is corrupt and how the white house

is carrying out a criminal enterprise and all of this stuff. they are saying stuff with absolutely no evidence. and y'all are letting them get away with it. kudos to the man from california that just called. with some facts! democrats don't like fact. host: you are a perfect example of the way we format this network, letting people on and say things to guests but in these times of what is going on when we do these bone segments. i appreciate your call. a lot going on on capitol hill. a closed-door session as part of the impeachment hearing. the lieutenant colonel arriving on capitol hill earlier today to participate in that event. there is video on the house side on turkey. sanctions on on turkey