discusses the presidential transition process and the role of the presidential transition act. and dr. oliver brooks talks about racial and health disparities in the pandemic. "washington journal" ♪ host: good morning. it's sunday, may 10, 2020, mother's day across the country. house democrats could bring to the floor of a new coronavirus ofief package, price tag upwards of 2 million -- $2 trillion. the president says he's in no rush as the economy takes the first steps towards reopening. we're asking this morning if there should be more federal pandemic toing the boost the economy.

if you do think there should be, the number is (202) 748-8000. if you don't, (202) 748-8001. a special line this morning to hear specifically from those who have recently lost their jobs, (202) 748-8002. you can send us a text, (202) 748-8003 is that number. if you do, please include your name and where you are from. otherwise catch up with us on , andl media, @cspanwj facebook,. -- facebook. you can start calling in now on those phone lines as we show you a chart about what congress and the president have approved so far from it comes to coronavirus relief. thattrillion, including inst spending bill from back march, followed by the families first coronavirus response act, the bulk of it coming from the

, $2.7 trillion, and the additional money approved in the paycheck protection program, additional money needed to heat that going last month. of course, the unemployment numbers we learned on friday, stand like this as of april. 14.7% jobless rate, 27 million in the month of april. economic projections about jobs, unemployment expected to average 15% in the second and third quarters of 2020. 28 million fewer people will be employed this fall. 9 million fewer people will be in the labor force than projected back in january. , do you favorbers

more government spending to boost the economy? paragraph of the lead story today, "new york times," the nation confronts unemployment levels not seen .ince the great depression "pivotal choice, continue spending trillions or bet that state reopening's will jumpstart the u.s. economy or online -- economy." democrats this week are expected to bring in bill of $2 trillion in one of the main components would be new funding for state and local economies. at the coronavirus daily briefing yesterday, andrew cuomo was asked about the money specifically for state governments and this is what he had to say. [video clip] >> everything is dependent on whether we get federal funding. there is a financial hole in the state.

there is no way that the state can manage that. and we had nothing to do with it. it was all covid related, hurts everybody. it will be wholly dependent on .hat washington does this week i hope, finally, the federal government actually passes a piece of legislation .hat helps the states they haven't taken care of small business, hotels, restaurants, airlines, that's great. how about the working people of this country, right? not just corporations, but working people. funding a state government is a way of funding the working people. when you fund the state, i fund's substance abuse programs, police, firefighters, hospitals, schools, remote learning. that all comes from the state. it's a function of what the federal government does. cuomo, yesterday,

at his daily coronavirus response briefing. friday president trump said that he's in no rush to move a new massive piece of legislation on friday. larry kudlow was asked on friday about what would be next in the phase for response effort, the legislative response that the white house has to see. this is what he had to say. [video clip] >> is the white house on the same page of stimulus not being necessary? >> we have caused as far as formal negotiations go. let's have a look at what the latest round produces. we need a month or so to evaluate that. the president as you know has put out a number of his own policy ideas.

payroll tax cuts, liability restrictions for businesses. whether you are a large or small company, i talked to some of the big car companies in recent days who are going to try to reopen in a week or 10 days. incur a lot of expenses as they deal with the virus and prevent recurrence and that will costs money. i think every nickel of that should be expensed 100% taxdiately, to provide some relief there. the president has talked about opening up america to tourism, travel, and restaurants. providing some tax relief there. his philosophy, as you know, and i will just pause a minute on this point. i'm not here to negotiate with anybody.

but his philosophy from day one was lower taxes, lower regulations, opening up energy and fair trade. those worked that and produced a strong economy as recently as january and heavyweight, but whatever policies we come up with will be consistent with that point of view. .t rewards success we think that people should be able to keep more of what they earn. that was larry kudlow, friday. taking your phone calls this morning about whether you favor more government spending to boost the economy in a week where house democrats could introduce a bill that could be in the area of $2 trillion. carl is up first in marina, california. go ahead. ahead, gosh,t, go

andrew cuomo, all he has is his hand out. he's just like california, i can't believe it. as a government employee, i'm retired, but i'm not hurting at all. i'm being made to stay here and it's ridiculous. the best thing the president can do is open up the economy totally. if california, new york, and illinois want to stay out of it, they can stay out of it. there has been no problem here in california. i don't know anybody, haven't seen anybody. what would have helped most -- thet -- the most is if president had closed down all the media, no tv, no print media, we wouldn't be fear mongering with everybody running around. we would have had emergency broadcasting going on and i guarantee you it wouldn't -- it would have been over already. host: state government, federal

government? ander: i was both city county and at one time i was federal. how is the local government, what are your thoughts about what the state government is doing out there? caller: because of people like me not taking it seriously, they get heavy-handed. it's like a little bowl here, salinas is the means city. how do you think the state government has been doing? caller: i don't appreciate his lockdown, his heavy handedness. he keeps coming up with, we were just required to put our masks on a week ago. people started talking back and calling them bad names to the politicians locally. they get arrogant. they get nasty. they really do. is carl, up early

this morning. this tweet from the end of last , "states and locals spared and pandemic -- democrats onthe the house budget committee. several democrats also tweaking about state and local government, they expect it to be a major part of the next coronavirus response bill. said thatfrom ride a in the united states they are being dedicated, congress must act or we will see millions of .ublic servants lose their jobs "state and local governments in maryland and across the country have let our fight and in the

next federal response package we must provide resources to help them to continue to serve the american people are co- expect to hear more comments and tweets like that from democrats this week as they look to move a new piece of legislation. we will see what happens in the building behind me. do you favor more government spending to boost the economy? he likes, out of north carolina, yes. why is that? spending cannment be good, but it should be lower maintenance now a little bit. i have heard that human health have spent at least 4 trillion dollars now. i read the joe biden response to but the other day, personally [indiscernible] cheryl, alabama. on the line for those who say no to more government spending to

boost the economy. good morning. i think that checks and balances that were in place with the last bill were not well thought out. i disagree with continuing to just fund and print money for this. the country needs to open up and i think that there is going to be some safety precautions in place for that, but we can't printing ourselves out of this. there is something going on between the democratic and republican parties where they are so far apart from each other, they can't come to the middle to understand what needs to take place for the benefit of the american people. thatave democratic states don't want to open up at all and you have got republicans taking steps that are too aggressive. some of them i think are also being careful about how they are doing it. but you need to come to a middle ground with this. i disagree with this totally.

host: what's it like down in alabama? it's starting to open up. the numbers are going up everywhere. you have to look at what's happening with the death rate and the hospitals. i see that the coronavirus, the being diagnosed with the disease, it's going up, but the death rate is not increasing so much. and i may, i'm a self-employed individual. i have lost my income. but again, i think there needs to be some real thinking about this instead of just buying ,eople, giving people money they need to open up this country. host: what kind of work do you do? caller: financial services. host: place with a call.

carl, oxford, in favor of additional government spending to boost the economy right now. go ahead. caller: thank you for c-span. sure, you should infuse money into the country, invest in the country if you want to keep it strong. if it is some of the money they spent for the bloated military, all the bases all over the world that we use the bully other countries, if we invested it here, we could handle any emergency, pandemic, infrastructure, anything. we are all over the world, butting into the business of other countries. we could be self-sufficient to a large degree if we took that money and invested it in our country. that's basically it. thank you very much. happy mother's day to all the mothers. echo i would certainly those comments, happy mother's day to all the mothers out there.

having this conversation in the first hour of our "washington journal," do you favor more money to boost the economy? this conversation as we expect house democrats to put on the floor this week their latest coronavirus response bill. a bit more from "the washington post" about what could be in a package that democrats are putting forth, building on the that wason cares act passed in late march. along with an array of other provisions, including morse of work for health care, postal service, food stamp recipients, extension of unemployment insurance, and direct payments to individual americans supplementing the checks included in the cares act. again, "the washington post" saying the price tag of the new bill could be up to $2 trillion. mitch mcconnell has talked about

would be ind insist the next coronavirus response package. senate republicans focusing on businesses that are reopening, from lawsuits when it comes to coronavirus. this is mitch mcconnell talking to fox news last week. there will be in a adamic of litigation surrounding the pandemic and the coronavirus. as of one week ago, 771 lawsuits have already been filed. to trial lawyers are waiting go after everybody who tries to get back to normal and of course, the democrats say we can't possibly do that. at what i want to make it clear to them is that if there is another rescue package, it must and will include liability protections related narrowly to the coronavirus pandemic that

has affected every single state in america. that will have to be a part of any rescue package. host: senator mitch mcconnell last week, he made those comments on the floor last week several times. do you favor more government spending to boost economies? right now around the country, this is jennifer from lafayette, louisiana, on the line for those who say no. good morning. myler: thanks for taking call. i hope it's ok to hedge a little bit. host: totally fine. caller: i'm mostly not ok with it. i haven't really heard much from anyone about, you know, the theibility of spending on contemporary equivalent of like a public works administration. something to put more americans who really need

infrastructure, like a high-speed rail system. the grid that is locally inadequate like that. and would like to see something like that. i haven't really heard it. it could be that i'm just not seeing it carefully enough. i would be in favor of something like that. less in favor of just bloated spending willy-nilly. i'm from a state that has been hit hard by both the virus and the economic repercussions of it. we are in the top six. at were -- we were at one point growing faster than anybody in the world, now we are in the top six for per capita cap -- cases. potentially reopening march 15. we will wait here with the governor has to say. our economy is heavily oil dependent. we have been hit hard by the balloon prices of oil.

it will be interesting to see, a red state with a democrat for a governor and a lot of louisiana residents are champing at the bit open. more cautious about it. we will see what the governor has to say about it. i have seen some members of congress tweeting about the idea of some sort of public service, national public service program, especially with college students graduating right now who are likely to face perhaps the worst job market of any graduating class in decades. going back to the great depression. creating some sort of program to get those students into public service jobs, public works programs for infrastructure projects around the country. sounds like you would support that? caller: i would absolutely. i would love to see something that put unskilled workers to work. i know that these are folks who have been disproportionately affected by the shutdown.

yes and no. some of them are considered essential workers in as much as they have low-paying jobs and things like that, but a lot of them who are in construction, offshore work, they have been really adversely affected. i would like to see something not just for college graduates and still professionals, but something for unskilled laborers as well. sam, tennessee, the line for those that say yes to more federal spending. go ahead, sam. caller: surely there should be because of the unemployment. stimulus is a great idea but we have to do something about the virus and. i never received my stimulus check. small socialetting

security checks for years from the same bank account and , they haveound me already gotten their checks. whenever i try to go on the site , i have tried numerous times. when i try to go on the site it says that they don't have enough information now. i've been getting a social security check into the same it's like i'mand not eligible or something like that. or try, they always say, don't ask about the stimulus check now. ,hat i would like to find out have all the social security people gone out? some of the spare check people have gotten theirs. you haven't seen your stimulus check yet. we have seen stories about the payment process and the problems at the irs to get the payments

out and how slow that is happening, yet some members of congress are talking about a second stimulus check. this was congressman joe kennedy on friday saying that congress must pass meaningful direct cash payments for every american. if you think one time of $1200 was enough to get with the crisis you are out of touch with reality." is it time to start a second one before the first has been paid out? caller: well i don't know about that but the people that haven't filed and don't have bank accounts, they said it could be months. whatever understand, i thought the social security people with bank accounts got those first. well, they can talk about whatever they want to. i'm concerned about my own self. no need to go to the site, it says that my information is not

correct and it is absolutely correct. host: to luck with that, sam. we have seen some stories about the process and struggles people have had with it. on 7:30 on the east coast, asking if you are in favor of more government spending to boost the economy. phone lines, (202) 748-8000, if you do agree, if you are in favor. if you are not. we have a line for the recently unemployed coming up to april jobs report with 14.7% jobless rate in this country, if you are (202)ly unemployed, 748-8002, we wanted her your thoughts especially. frank on the line for those that don't favor more government spending. good morning. caller: yes, sir.

favor of any more giveaways. the national debt is so high now , it's something like $4000 per taxpayer that we owe. that muchagine owing money and they are willing to bankrupt the united states, their pensions, their social security. there won't be more money to give out. host: let me give you the u.s.debtn that from clock.org. 25,000,000,000,100 and $53 billion and counting. that comes to $200,000 per taxpayer in this country if you went per citizen. the federal debt per citizen in this country, $70,000. caller: still, can you imagine someone putting out that much for a debt in interest that we

pay on the debt? it's unbelievable. i still feel like if we bankrupted the united states, where will we be then? you started by saying no more giveaways. what were the giveaways that you packagese first four passed by congress and signed by the president? the biggest one is the small business program. some of the individual companies that got the money, it's millions of dollars. ease from thefore facts -- they pay their employees from the taxpayer and profit from it and the government expected nothing back. imagine how long it will take to pay back just with a received and the interest that should have been paid all the money

that was given away. some more projections from the congressional budget office .rom the end of april if current laws don't change, if there is not another massive spending bill, federal deficits would still be $3.7 trillion in 2020 and $2.1 trillion in 2021. federal debts held by the public 108% of gdp by the end of fiscal 2021, up from the end of 2019. the 108% would be the highest centage in the history of the nation. jonathan, new york city, in favor of more government spending to boost the economy. go ahead. they keep on pumping up know,people about, you the virus. to make a long story short,

there's no money coming from local unless you work for the city in new york. other than that there's no money nowhere. are you serious? i came out and i learned on the collegiate level how to do math and trade the forex. i have been doing that. it is so rough. host: what kind of work you do now? caller: i'm a traitor, a trade. took me time to get the hang of this thing, man. i got a really look outside the box. honestly? right now people want to talk because we live in a capitalist state, the people on the top get the money and the people have very little to spend after that. governor andrew cuomo yesterday talk about the need

for money for state governments specifically in the government budget shortfall that has happened in new york city. friday ineekend on the weekly democratic address, bob menendez of new jersey talk state andissues of local government funding and why democrats are pushing so hard for that in the next responsibility and this is what he had to say. [video clip] speak, states, cities, towns are hemorrhaging money to defeat covid-19 while revenue dries up. in new jersey they have been ravaged by the coronavirus. they are running out of money to pay firefighters and police officers, teachers and sanitation workers. building permits are not being processed. lifeguards are not being hired to patrol the beaches or part-time staff to run summer camps. this isn't a blue state or red state issue.

this is an american issue. if we ever want to get back to thrive to see businesses , we need to make sure that our police officers, firefighters, have the resources they need. we need to keep the lights on at city hall, public workers on the job, kids in schools, streets in -- streets in shape. contrary to the mcconnell solution, we cannot bankrupt our way out of this crisis. that's foolish and downright dangerous. congress must pass without delay a state and local aid package that delivers the flexible funding the front line state communities lead. -- need. congress must make sure that the trillions they have authorized coronavirus are being spent properly by the trump administration. small mom-and-pop's are not being shut out in favor of

fortune 500 countries -- companies. unemployment and stimulus checks are being paid. hospitals, community health centers, nursing homes, with resources they need and that the american people are getting what they paid for. they are counting on us. bob menendez in the weekly democratic address the came out on friday, setting the stage for what we expect will be the conversation on capitol hill this week. taking your phone calls. 7:30 on the east coast, asking if you are in favor of more government spending to boost the economy. (202) 748-8000 if you are, (202) 748-8001 if you are not. special phone line for the recently unemployed, (202) 748-8002. you can keep calling in. want to show you this story having to deal with the white ,ouse and concerns specifically, about the spread of coronavirus within some of

the top ranks at the white house. in the latest signs of worried that the coronavirus to be spreading through the senior ranks of the trump administration, officials -- the actions come after the disclosure on friday that vice president mike pence's press secretary tested positive for the virus. she had a tennis -- attended numerous meetings of the task force, including dr. redfield, ." hahn, and dr. fauci

that story in "the new york times," but you will be seeing it throughout the day, likely. it's also in the other major newspapers as well. back to your phone calls. yes,iah, birmingham, favoring more government spending to boost the economy. go ahead. host: i truly believe we need more spending. the taxpayers are the ones that fund the federal government. when it comes the responsibility of the federal government, they are not funding americans. i just think that's wrong. when it comes to opening up the country, we have some cities and some states that have a decrease in the epidemic. that was because of social distancing. we have others that have beat the pandemic, other countries,

because they took short-term pain for long-term gain and we refuse to do it. when you look around the country at demonstrators not wearing masks, not social distancing. parks, whenk at the , thisok on the streets virus does not respect our constitution or your constitution. there are many people still hurting. $1200 was in adequate. -- inadequate. in as like a drop of water glass when you need a glass full of water. we have examples of how other countries, including communist countries, that have taken the appropriate action to reopen the

countries. we are going to have a spike in .his virus in four weeks to six weeks, i think in that time you will begin to see the hospitals overwhelmed again. businesses may practice social distancing, but people don't. host: mark stone on twitter saying

in cornwall, on hudson, new york. good morning. i would like to say a few things about governor cuomo. he has been in charge of the state for the last 11 years. people are leaving in droves. taxes are over the top. he was over $6 billion in debt before any virus any -- ever, ever hit at all. he has done all the wrong things . the entire state is not manhattan. he limited the subways in manhattan. there's a study from m.i.t. that clearly shows you can trace the hot spots, he limited subways, put more people on crowded subways, same with the buses. it's now may. he's just starting to sanitize

the subways overnight. he closed everything down in may. 50,000 ventilators, a fraction were used. he got the hope ship, he got the javits center and all the beds. that, we heardof from the governor yesterday about the $13.3 billion hole in new york tax projections and whether the federal government needs to spend more, including on local and state economies, do you think they should? no, that's the problem. the state and local economy is what i'm trying to say. half of it was his fault to begin with before the virus ever hit. demanded, he put an executive order to demand nursing homes receive, when they

were discharged from the hospital, that they accept these covid positive patients and then he denied it. once an investigation as to why i believe 40% of nursing homes are affected very badly. the best part, he is demanding all the people who came to volunteer, nurses, emts and so on, now he is demanding that they pay state income tax on the days, the number of days they worked in the state to help. he has brought this state down, down, down. watch the daily coronavirus response briefings? highlightso get the of it. as i say, one thing i agree with senator menendez, yes, it should

become the money so far, it should be oversight to see that it's going where it should go. but the bailouts state and local governments after they have been mismanaged by mostly democratic governors and trying to put the blame on the virus is totally, totally not right. that's marie this morning. out of new york. brad, out of kentucky, the line for those who say no. good morning. caller: good morning. i don't think that government spending, increasing government spending here is going to be the answer. spendingvernment helped to fund the wuhan lab that the coronavirus was developed in? was the tax money not sent there from us? government spending is not going to be the answer. host: what is the answer, brad?

well, i don't know specifically what the answer is or is not. down,t the entire economy we have made a lethal decision here. i don't see any way back. the government is not prone to relinquish power for control once it has them. the people cannot make money, they have to be legally go out and protest, today the government to let them work. i don't know how this happened. maybe history will be able to tell us. i mean 130 million extra people are going to start in the third world and it's not even discussed here. because we have our problems.

a -- has been a humanity level disaster. i don't how it has happened, it's quite sad. we have in having this conversation, a few more tweets -- host: sean, north carolina, knightdale. good morning. caller: good morning, how are

you doing? other videos and things that i follow on youtube, people discussing the issue. one of the things i seen is what the republicans and democrats might be willing to go for would be $2000 a month three months. that would have a big impact on to receive have yet unemployment checks. here in north carolina, you have got people that can't even get through the unemployment line. with 2600 people answering phones, trying to get these people onto on employment. going on 6, 7 weeks, people haven't received any money. $1200 from the government is a slap in the face when they gave $4 trillion to the banks to loan to us? the banks are making money out the was too? why are we propping up the banks? giving the money? the overnight market, whatever the banks use to borrow money

back and forth, they have been being funded since september and it makes no sense. why are the people suffering when the corporate guys are not? the editorial board of "the washington post" today talking about the next coronavirus response bill, saying it is still the time for compromise, noting that the next response bill is likely to be the electionbefore and, not coincidentally, the hardest fought politically. some proposals, like the democratic demand for billions in new subsidies for the postal service, or the mr. trump insistence on a payroll tax cut, and cannottargeted make it into the bill and are meant as political messaging

host: if you want to read the editorial board of "the washington post," that's today's her. paper. 15 minutes left in asking if you are in favor of more government spending to boost the economy. florida, ormonde. i you with us? robert.will go to alexandria, virginia on the line for those who say no. caller: yes, good morning. i don't say totally know, i say targeted. what have we got here, another former lawyer, we are spending with debt fueled money. we have to do something about the debt that will overhang from this. on,you know, we keep piling piling on, pushing money out but not creating anything. we need to create into productive works for this to be valuable to us.

i think that new york state, they deserve their share of the pie. at this point they gather more money for the federal government than they receive. states like virginia, maryland, california, even texas, received more money from the federal government then new york state or other states. that should be looked at and considered when they make funding. host: at this point the debt is over $25 trillion. when this is all over, do you think we are more inclined to start dealing with the debt and in recent years? over $25 i don't. this will go on forever. we really need to go back to our history books and learn our history lessons from the new deal, where they created work projects and created camps and

the hoover damm. the tennessee river authority. those were projects that put us into the future. what we are doing now is spending and we are never going to come out into a future because we will be in debt. robert, thank you for the call from across the potomac. massachusetts, saying it's not time for more government spending to boost the economy. go ahead. caller: good morning, how you doing this morning? host: doing all right. caller: i'm not for any more government spending. what you are looking at right now is a bit of socialism. the government, especially at the local levels, they have totally flubbed this. where imassachusetts live, i have a republican governor. he shut down the economy.

now we have got people struggling badly. in this state alone 60% of the debts in this -- deaths in this state were in nursing homes. why is that, we ask? because they were mandated to take in , and they werets ill-equipped, didn't have the proper facilities to do it. they were mandated it to keep the hospitals open for future cases. to me, that's a pretty bad scenario right then and there. on the government spending aspect of this, i want to show viewers this chart again. this ongoing tracking from the committee for a responsible federal budget. $3.6 trillion in total authorized legislation so far for different packages. that story coming in in the cares act we have talked so much about over the past couple of months.

that much money has been approved, 1.5 trillion already .ispersed and out the door of that money, fran, has any of that impacted you? did you get a stimulus check? are you part of a business that apply for a loan? caller: well-known, i'm retired. yes, we did get a stimulus check because we file jointly. we didn't really need to stimulus check. we are doing fine. of nursinga director services, she has got a job. unfortunately, my down syndrome has covid-19 and is currently in the hospital right now. my wife is at the hospital with her. they allowed her to stay because she doesn't understand it. she never left this house for a month and a half. i wouldn't take her out with me when i went out. i was going out to breakfast and

lunch. i wouldn't take her, i would bring her some thing home. somehow, she contracted it. i'm not sick, my wife is not sick. we have both been tested. this thing is just a random attack. i'm not sure that the lockdown stay inside, i think it has destroyed many more lives. .e lost lives to death unfortunately. i'm sad about that. but how many lives are going to be destroyed in the coming years? i'm predicting millions. they want feel get their life back and be able to run their families and households and have .heir sense of worth back they have got people scared to death. they are afraid to go out, they won't want to go to work. i'm not one of those people. i do go out. host: how do we get a sense of

self-worth back? caller: pardon? host: how do we get people's sense of self-worth back? up the you had to open economies, let them make their own decisions, let them be americans. do what they do, do what we do. thank you for the call and best wishes for a speedy recovery for your daughter. thank you for the call this morning. tom, baltimore, maryland. good morning. caller: not only do i think the government should spend more, i think they need to spend whatever is necessary. to ask someoneme to go to work and possibly be spending -- standing next to someone, working with someone who may have the virus, because they cannot get tested.

of theseities, many facilities have no way of testing any of their employees and you are going to tell people to go there who are under the risk of possibly getting this contagion. the people calling in, they are basically saying that you just have to take a chance and accept the fact that you may be collateral damage. that's what it amounts to. just go and if you get it, and you die, well then tough, that's just too bad. you can put people in that position. people don't stay home because they want to stay home. they are staying home because they are dams scared. it's just stupid. so many of these people calling in, many of them are getting their payments. they are getting their needs met.

. lot of other people are not it's just stupid to hear some of these people saying, well, i got mine, everybody else, shame on you. it's just, it is so devoid of human compassion from these people. sickens me tot listen to some of these people. it's as if they don't even understand, people are not staying home because they want to. they are staying home because they are afraid and you can't get, how can you tell someone to go when they can't even get tested? you don't know if the person wherever you are, you have no person youing if the are with or the person standing next to you has the virus? before you tell anybody to get to work, get them tested. provide them a way, way for employers to be able to test people. that's the bottom line. host: tom, thank you the call

from baltimore, maryland. kentucky is next. caller: good morning, how are you? is talking about this unemployment, everybody's on, nobody's employed in this country. well, everybody lost their jobs at the same time, pretty much. when everyone goes back to work and open spec up, a lot of the unemployment goes away and we get the jobs back. there's plenty of jobs out there. i have been working for 30 years and it's the first time i have ever drawn unemployment in my life. there has always been a job i could find, not the one i want but it is there. people saying they can't make it, everyone has got disabilities and pensions and everything. people not working getting unemployment. what it is is everybody's getting greedy to me and they want more and more money. even the businesses, a lot of these business people out there, taking the money from the

government, small businesses having trouble. they need to fix that. once everybody get spec to work, a lot of the jobs and unemployment will go away host:. what kind of work at you do? caller: security. job, when you lost your can you talk us through that process? was it a firm process or a permanent loss -- for a low process or a permanent loss? you said that you implied -- applied for unemployment insurance. caller: it's a furlough. host: what did they say about when they could get you back? caller: they said it would depend on safety and after that it would be they could open back up. more aboutll talk that in our next segment of "the washington journal come -- journal," the employment report they came out on friday, high numbers of people reporting that they expected to get their jobs back, some economists pointing

to that being the silver lining of the report. thank you for your phone call. a lot of attention yesterday on the front page of "the new york times," showing the massive job losses that people report. ,"re is "the washington post their effort to put it in graphic forms. a decade of economic gains lost in a month. you can see the gains that had then going up since 2010. the red line on the far right, what happened over the last two months, nearly a decade worth of job growth is eliminated just since march. andjob level is now at 100 31.1 million, 18 million layoffs , they were temporary, 2 million said to be permanent. that's the focus that we will talk about in the next segment. time for a few more of your phone calls in this segment. timothy in new york on the line for those who favor more

government spending to boost the economy. timothy, go ahead. caller: yes, yes i do. we need to spend more money. the virus is not going anywhere. even set up has not testing for upstate. i got my stimulus check, but my stimulus check is gone already. it's gone already. the price of things have gone up. anything. and it's not going to go away. not for a while. you need toid stimulus check for? what did you spend yours on?

caller: on my bills, on my bills. host: you think it is time for another $1200 or perhaps more? caller: $1200 is fine, ok? it shouldn't be coming out of the united states government, it should be coming out of china. china's bill. it's china's bill, not the u.s. government possibility. china's bill. timothy, new york. phil, huntington, west virginia, good morning. caller: good morning, good morning. host: good morning, go ahead. i just want to say that if you are going to have more government spending, you don't need to put it into things like the kennedy center, so that we get all these things that have nothing to do with the virus or getting people back to work.

we talk about the provisions in the next package. one of the things that has been talked about is funding to heat the postal service going. is that something you would i support ther: postal service going, but i think it should pay for itself and give our employees at the postal service arrays. food stamp recipients, new funding to extend those programs, is that something that you think is worthwhile? caller: food stamps is a very good program. who can't gete money any other way. he gets money for food to allow them to go through. host: funding for tax revenues,

is that worthwhile? no, it's not. what they want to do is get money for the pension plans that they overpromised. states that have to balance their budgets every year don't need more spending money. host: money to expand testing capacities and states? i would agree that we should do more testing, but the health department in all of these states have money that have been set aside in their budgets for these things and they should approve that. that ishat is -- host: phil, in huntington. the last caller in this segment. olivia, go ahead.

caller: happy mother's day to all the mothers this morning. i want to say yes, we need another stimulus package, we really do. and it needs to give towards citizens and it needs to be geared towards the states. donald trump said that he would not with his blue state. as federal government you are responsible for spending money to the state. he is being petty and i don't like that. another thing, these people calling in saying we don't need another stimulus? let me tell you something, when you are working with federal workers who are black and latino [indiscernible] those protests, those people, the majority of

them were white people. we've got black people that are dying in record numbers. i don't appreciate this. we need to wake up. it seems like it is just of's against each other -- just us against each other. this does not discriminate. get it together. we need another package. i got a stimulus check but it was gone like that. people need help. host: thanks for the call from alabama. our last call in this first segment of the washington journal -- of the "washington journal." here is what is coming up next. we will be joined by mercatus centre research fellow michael

farren to discuss the un-limit numbers -- the unemployment numbers. we will also talk later in the 8:00 hour with martha kumar on the white house transition project. the process that has already begun under law to prepare for the possibility of a new administration coming in in january. a lot more to talk about today on the "washington journal." we will be right back. ♪ >> c-span has unfiltered coverage of the federal response to the coronavirus pandemic, with white house briefings, updates from governors in congress, and our daily pro -- our daily call in program, "washington journal," hearing your thoughts about the coronavirus. if you missed any of our live coverage, watch anytime at c-span.org/coronavirus. monday on the communicators,

microsoft president brad smith, co-author of the new book, tools and weapons: the promise and peril of the digital age. >> we need businesses in the tech sector to step up and exercise greater self-regulation with a higher commitment to responsibility. we do need more regulation of technology. think about how we live our lives. if you go to the grocery store and pick something up off-the-shelf, you will read the nutrition label knowing it is standardized and accurate because of regulations. if you go to the pharmacy department and buy a product, you don't worry about the safety of it because it is related. when you get into your car, they complies with certain safety standards, the same is true of an airplane. digital technology has gone longer with less regulation than almost any technology since the middle of the 1800s. we think the market, customers and even the industry itself

would be better for the long-term. >> watch the communicators monday at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span2. "> "washington journal continues. host: michael farren is back with us, joining us by zoom. he is an economist at the mercatus center. bad jobs historically report came out, you tweeted about something of a silver lining in that report. if there was some good news in that jobs report, what was it? it waswhat i said was the best worst jobs report we could have hoped for. the reason is because nearly all --the rising unemployment rise in unemployment, nearly all of that increase is due to temporary furloughs rather than permanent layoffs.

that means that the recovery, when the coronavirus allows the economy to start reopening in, should be swifter than a typical recession. host: 15 million of the 20 million reported job losses reported to be temporary according to that jobs report but who is to say that isn't in scissor going to maintain their relationships with those employees next month or next week or even tomorrow? guest: that is the question that is up in the air and that is the question that could turn this short-term recession in a -- into a long-term recession that will take a longer time to recover from. for the moment, businesses are still keeping their relationships with their workers thathat is a hopeful note as we reopen and as we practice new forms of social distancing or new norms of wearing masks, that we will able to start going about life somewhat as normal or

a new kind of normal and the economy will just kind of limp along until we get something better like a vaccine but the important thing from my perspective is maintaining those employment relationships because the economy was doing well before hand. there was no major dislocations or disruptions that caused this session, it was the coronavirus. as soon as we can get back to some semblance of what came before, we will start climbing out of this and because employers and workers have been maintaining those relationships, we will be able to see a quick recovery as long as we don't keep the social distancing up to a point where businesses start failing. host: how is that number determined? is that employers saying they are continuing to maintain those relationships or is this self reported by people who filed unemployment? containse jobs report

two different surveys, a household survey and an establishment survey of businesses. one in 60 households are surveyed every month about what their members are doing, what kind of jobs they are working in, their salaries, that kind of thing and whether they have looked for work. one of the definitions of your typical headline unemployment rate is whether or not you have looked for work. that is some thing that comes out of that individual based household survey. the establishment business survey looks at the total employment and multiple industries across the u.s. the question of whether you were absent from work last week but still employed or whether you were completely separated from your job comes from the individuals rather than the businesses. host: michael farren joining us from mercatus center, from his home via zoom.

you can call in and join the conversation. as folks are calling in this morning, we just got this jobs report on friday. what would be a good bad jobs report month? guest: that is a great question. i think the best jobs report we can see next month would be starting to see that unemployment rate declining, asserting to see more people reentering the labor force. at the moment we are seeing a few states start to reopen. governors going ahead and getting rid of the stay-at-home orders or business closure orders. the survey -- the results of the survey we release the first week of june are going to happen this coming week, the week that includes may 12. ist we are going to see hopefully the numbers getting a little bit better but at the same time, a lot of people may

still -- april may not have captured all of the economic disruption the coronavirus caused. it is up in the air about what will happen but a hopeful sign will be seeing unemployment falling and employment rising. host: you mentioned earlier the great recession. closest thing that americans alive today can compare this to. ofe us to the early months the great recession and the jobs report that came out. how much of those early job -- people reporting that it was a temporary layoff, a furlough and not a full loss of jobs. did that happen and did that cascade into permanent job loss? guest: there was definitely some the main job losses that came in the great recession

came toward the end of the recession and that is the way most recessions are in that employment losses come toward the end of the definition of the recession in terms of a decrease in the national gdp. the main problem from the great recession is that hiring also substantially fell more than layoffs. increase, theyid doubled compared to the normal number that is just the net -- just a result of economic churn. the rate of hiring substantially decreased and stayed low until it climbed back in the last few years. that is the reason why the recovery from the great recession felt like it took solo, because hiring fell -- felt like it took so long, because hiring fell. host: michael farren with us after that jobs report came out. if you have questions about it,

eastern and central, (202)-748-8000 is the number to call. if you live in the mountain or pacific regions, (202)-748-8001. keeping that line open for those who are recently unemployed. your stories. (202)-748-8002. one tweet as we have been having this conversation about job losses. this is jim saying these jobs are not lost, they will come back when this madness ends, blaming scare tactics journalism. dave is up first on the phones out of new york. good morning. caller: good morning. a quick couple questions. the federal reserve in 2008 had to print a bunt -- a bunch of money. at this point i think it is already up to $6.6 trillion and growing.

the national debt prior to the $23 trillion and now i think this year there has been another $3.7 trillion. how long can the economic system handle that much of an increase and should i be nervous about that extent of money printing? latest from the u.s. debt clock, the national debt at $25 trillion and counting. some of the projections if federal laws don't change right now, the deficit in fiscal 2020 would be $3.7 trillion and another $2.1 trillion in fiscal 2021. michael farren, we will let you jump in. guest: this is one of the reasons i love being on your show.

you have smart callers like dave asking in-depth questions. the best thing i can say to start off with is i am not a macro economist so i would suggest consulting a macro -- macro economist to get a detailed answer. inflationt seen high for the past 30 to 40 years and when that episode did occur in the late 70's and early 80's, it caused a lot of economic hardship. we should want to avoid that as much as possible. the federal reserve has been a pretty good job managing that until now. i am confident they will intinue to manage that but and other economists have been surprised the federal reserve is using both barrels, reloading and using both barrels again on this crisis. i think they kind of learned from the great recession and they went big early rather than

hesitating and doing something more nuanced. host: a question from mary on twitter or a comment at least about the stock market, saying it is going up so we can finally the stock market has zero to do with the broader economic health of the u.s. we saw the stock market close up 425 points. why does the stock market surge on the day that one of the worst jobs reports ever comes out? guest: because of the same story i told you at the beginning. this is the best worst jobs report we could have possibly had because it shows that although unemployment has skyrocketed to levels that would terrify us during the great recession, we knew it was coming. we knew that there was business shut down orders and stay-at-home orders and even if those had not been implementing,

dachshund lamented, a lot of people have been practicing -- and even ifng those had not been implemented, a lot of people have been practicing social distancing. a lot of people listed as unemployed have retained their connections to their employers. they are temporarily furloughed, not permanently laid off. that says the economy is ready to come back as soon as the conditions allow it. i think that is what the market was saying. in terms of the market and the broader economy, the market is forward-looking. people are pricing and potential events down the way into the current crisis -- current price of stocks in the stock market. what the stock market is generally saying is they are pretty hopeful. initially the overestimated the pain that was going to come from -- initially they overestimated the pain that was going to come from the coronavirus.

host: oakland, california. this is our next caller. go ahead. caller: the best way i see us getting out of this is everybody going to work now. people are trying to get $600 a week every week so they don't have to go back to work. if that wasn't in place, people would rush back to work. people have got to be brave and not being scared about people being sick in the office. most people come out good. the numbers are going to get better. i say everybody should go back to work now. that is the best way we can get out of this. no free money, no more stimulus. everybody needs to go back to work. guest: he brings up a great point. the federal pandemic unemployment compensation that was part of the cares act essentially was a federal bonus of $600 per week to state

unemployment insurance. state unemployment insurance generally only replaces about fromf a person's wages when they are working before they went unemployment. that is 50% up to a point. that design is intentional to encourage people to go out and look for work. and it is designed to help them float along until they find a new job but it is not designed to completely replace their income. the problem with the $600 federal bonus is that in some cases it replaces most of peoples previous income if not more than the previous income, so there is a lot of anecdotal stories coming out of work ayers -- of workers resisting business's attempts to reopen because they don't want to give up the federal pandemic unemployment compensation until it runs out at the end of july.

essentially what they are doing at that point is they are taking a risk that when they go to reclaim their job that it is going to be there or that a job will be there and they won't be unemployed for a longer time. act was probably need it and very fortunate at the time but the way it was designed and created a disincentive to pursue additional work. that makes sense for a lot of people and that probably makes sense for the situation we find ourselves to motivate people to stay home but i think maybe it should be tweaked to allow people to still claim a portion work ind go back to order to motivate returning to work, to act as a bonus for returning to work or some sort of hazard pay as the idea has been put forward and remove that disincentive from going back to work. host: we spent the first hour of

our program discussing with viewers whether you favor more government spending to boost the economy right now. guest: we have already allocated that $600 per week for everyone on state on limit insurance as a federal bonus through the end of bonus- state unemployment -- unemployment insurance is a federal bonus through the end of july. you would not be motivating individual -- any additional spending. i would be careful about throwing too much more money at the problem. are a lot of proposals running around saying the federal government needs to bailout states and cities. there are good arguments for that but there are also states and cities whose budgets are kind of out of whack and who's patient -- and whose pension programs are underwater and we don't want to create more hazard by bailing out people who have

not done well with their budgets previously. host: what about another round of stimulus checks? guest: i am not a big fan of that. maybe that makes me unpopular but a lot of economists like the idea of just sending out money. send out money and we will stimulate things. the problem is that they actually tried that at the beginning of the great recession. i remember getting a stimulus orck in the spring of 2007 2008 when they were trying to boost the economy before everything completely fell apart and people didn't do much with it. they just kind of threw it in their savings because they were worried about becoming unemployed. are probably spending the $1200 check they got more but i am worried about the targeting of the check. for example i got one of those stimulus checks. i am still working from home.

i didn't need one. there are a lot of people who don't need a stimulus check. that money could have been better allocated to people that are out of work and needing it. of -- i ama big fan not a big fan of carte blanche stimulus. asking another viewer morning.sked wj in the you can also call into share your views. we appreciate you calling in quite a bit. the phone numbers today in this segment, (202)-748-8000 if you're in the eastern or central time zones. (202)-748-8001 if you are in the mountain or pacific time zones. we have that line for those recently unemployed, (202)-748-8002. line is calling in on that from california. int kind of work were you

and what is your situation now? caller: i work from home and i repair vintage bicycles as well them andem and sell since people cannot meet up, i don't have any business right now. i am holding on to my stock until we can get together. i had a couple questions for your guest. the way i see it is there is no going back to normal until there is a vaccine for 7.5 billion people. mile-long.lines a is codehat furlough word for you are fired. wouldn't this be the perfect and to resend the bush thep tax breaks so that richest among us can contribute to the great cause and we can use that to buy food from bankrupt farmers and give back to people in these mile-long food lines? maybe we can create a works

project to repair our decaying if we rescind and the bush and trump tax breaks, everyone can contribute. i just see this as a great opportunity for the most wealthy amongst us to begin to contribute and help us rebuild the infrastructure. where there are many problems there are great opportunities and this could be a great opportunity for us all to contribute. host: thanks for the call. michael farren, go ahead. guest: the caller makes the point that i think a lot of people are making and it depends ando you want a society and economic system that is focused on government spending or do you want an economic system that is more focused on the market and interchanges between individuals? license is the latter is

preferable -- my sense is the latter is preferable because taxes have deadweight losses, the lost value from inhibited exchanges that would have otherwise occurred due to the taxation. essentially taxation reduces the efficiency of the economy. by reducing the efficiency of the economy, you reduce long-term economic growth. to the extent that we should rollback the recent tax cuts for individuals as well as corporations, you could argue that increasing taxes on corporations right now, increasing their costs would cause a problem in terms of -- at that point they may be less likely to bring employees back is all of a sudden their costs have risen in the current pandemic environment. a little leery of changing too many variables right now because there is enough change and enough disruption going on. in terms of infrastructure programs and bringing stuff

back, i know pennsylvania is doing a coronavirus conservation or something like that. the governor has proposed something like what came out of and i knowepression president trump has looked at infrastructure bills later this year. i am not a huge fan of just throwing money at infrastructure to stimulate the economy because there are a lot of better ways you could do it. in the current environment of extremely low interest rates, if you are going to borrow money for infrastructure spending, now is the best time to do it. host: what about this idea of new business deductions being allowed to try and boost businesses? we heard larry kudlow on friday talking about that and we played that for our viewers in the last segment this morning. guest: buy new business discussed -- by new business deductions, are you talking about deductions for payroll tax? host: deductions for businesses

who are responding to coronavirus, being able to write off some of those expenses as they try to figure out how to reopen. guest: so any cost of doing business, whether it is a normal environment or a pandemic environment, should be something that should be able to be written off because you only want to tax profit, you don't want to tax money that a business spends on expenses or to make that profit because what you are doing is inhibiting businesses from growing and expanding and employing more people and that can lead to a version of tax burden. business expense that is incurred as a result of coronavirus should be applicable for taxes. host: about 15 or 20 minutes left with michael farren, joining us from his home via zoom this morning, a research

fellow with the george mason university's mercatus center. org if you want to check out his work or give us a call like steve did from missouri. caller: good morning. as far as i know, this is the first time that self-employed people have been offered the opportunity to file for unemployment. my question is what effect is that having on the economic calculation, weekly unemployment filing numbers and just in general that issue. guest: i love your callers. they have such good questions. thatis the first time self-employed persons, independent contractors and the like are eligible for unemployment insurance because unemployment insurance is a cost taken out of an employee's payroll that is only for

employees, not for independent contractors. if you're an independent contractor and you lost your gig, you -- in this situation it makes sense to expand unemployment insurance to independent contractors and about 10% of 15 million people report that independent contracting is their primary occupation. it is not a small piece of the workforce. what we are going to see, you would always see people -- independent contractors always included in the unemployment numbers. however, they weren't included in the unemployment insurance numbers because they want eligible to file. now they are eligible to file under the cares act. the problem is because they weren't eligible before, states didn't have any paperwork or

procedures for independent contractors because of all the information they have to gather in order to provide unemployment insurance benefits. about half of the states have been allowed to have been able to get their paperwork in order and have independent contractors start filing. saw the surge in unemployment insurance filings in early april and it is tapered off although the numbers are still very high. we will continue to see high numbers until those independent contractors work their way through the system with the rest of the states, figuring out other ways to file as well. host: we love our callers as well. we could not do the program without them. this is joshua out of ohio. good morning. caller: good morning. somethingke to see with social security for all and medicare for all.

you put medicare on the federal budget. social security for all, $100 a month -- a week for everybody, 20 years and older. every year above that add another $100. somebody that is 40 would be getting about $2000 a month. if the person is 60, they get about $4000 a month. this would stimulate the economy. it would help out the people -- when you are young, you can work. it is easier to find and do work. as people get older, it gets harder. what do you think on those subjects? essentially shifting medicare to being fully federal paid rather than partially state paid and partially federal paid is an interesting idea. there are arguments that would

say that is a good idea in terms of federalism because over 30% of state budgets are the result of federal grants to the states for different programs. this causes a lot of problems in terms of expanding the total amount of spending that would have otherwise occurred at the state level. increased taxes at both the state and federal level and a disconnect between people seeing the effect of their taxes in local amenities and public services. to the extent that people should be able to say this is the tax dollar i paid and this is the effect of the tax dollar, reducing federal grants is probably a good thing. whether that would be better to move medicare onto the federal government or move it state --

move it back to the states is an open research question that is debatable. in terms of social security for all, i think you described gradually increasing over time universal basic income. described as $100 ,nitially and then growing $4000 per month at age 60, that is $48,000 a year. you would essentially see a larger dis-employment effect as people age. that would have major economic problems associated with it that would harm economic growth because as workers get older, they gain experience and knowledge and should be sharing that with the younger workers but if you are motivating them to leave the labor force, you enforcing those

younger workers to make the same mistakes over. i am not sure that it would be good for the long run. host: speaking of open and debatable questions, i wonder your thoughts on long-term changes to employment, especially for companies that figure out how to stay open amid the pandemic, amid social distancing. how likely is it to cause a rethinking of how you use your employees or how you reach your customers? sameobs going to be the when everything comes back? guest: there is obviously going to be some sort of differences. i think there are a good amount of employers who will look around and say it turns out we don't need that expensive office space after all, especially in the downtown of cities. we have figured out that there are effective ways to telework and we have not seen production decline. ,e will see more people

essentially higher demand for housing in suburbs and more rural areas as companies decide they are just as effective teleworking as in the office. that is not going to be the same for everybody and a lot of companies and restaurants and businesses are looking at new ways of serving customers and finding out it doesn't make sense to have a dining room, we are doing just as well with our takeout orders. it is not the case for everyone, but for some businesses, they may operate more like a food truck but essentially a kitchen that does takeout orders rather than a full service dining room. we are deafly going to be seeing changes and that is one of the interesting things to follow in the coming months. host: out to california, this is philip in l.a. caller: i have two questions, one is with the government

shutdown of the economy and the presidential election. what do you see as the long-term consequences of what we are going through right now? do you see a greater role of the economy in our government or will we revert to where we were pre-virus? of goingour view through modern monetary theory that since a government can print money, we could have all of our wishes granted in terms of what bernie sanders was proposing in terms of medicare -- for all, free student enrollment and all of that. guest: some great questions today. i will take the second one first. , kind ofnetary theory an esoteric concept has come into the mainstream a little bit but essentially says that the government should spend as much money as possible to stimulate the economy and it shouldn't

worry about trying to fund that with taxes because they can always print more money. i think i have that right. i am not an expert on mmt. the answer to that is that eventually the payment comes due. it may not be this year or this decade or even this generation but you can't do something without having a trade-off. that is the underlying kind of understanding of economics in general. in census matters, there is always trade-offs. i would be worried about engaging in that kind of approach could -- approach to economic stimulus down the road. really weren't any deep structural problems in the economy going into the coronavirus. that was mostly true. there was one thing i was keeping my eye on and that was the amount of corporate debt that has built up since the end

of the great recession because interest rates have been so low. in a situation where you are describing, we would see government debt increase extensively and so eventually those bills come due one way or another. i would be pretty concerned about that. other question was about the long-term consequences , especially when it comes to the role of the government. guest: very good. my sense from keeping an eye on the news and seeing what is going on is that you are going to have a portion of the population pushing back against anymore government involvement in the economy and pushing for more market-based regulation, consumer-based regulation in terms of whether companies are doing the right things by consumers were not and you are going to have other people that will have said this proves that

government is a good way to organize as a society and is running the economy well. billy thing i can predict out of this is even more partisanship -- the only thing i can predict out of this is even more partisanship. al in new york. caller: good morning. how are you doing? guest: i am doing well, thank you. 72, i am am almost pensioner and i receive social security. i worked for 35 years climbing utility poles. i have seen this kind of thing theen since eisenhower in 50's -- in the 1950's. the economy comes back eventually but it takes years and many years sometimes. if you skip forward to today,

the only thing that is going to help everybody is the fact that there are going to be more layoffs coming, the next couple of weeks. unfortunately the president is not going to sign any kind of a stimulus bill for main street. he is going to bailout wall street again. he already did it once and he is until he gets a quote, infrastructure bill, but he wants his candy upfront. i don't say -- i don't see how that is going to help main street. main street is going to have to change some of their habits. me, down the road from amazon is building some huge million square foot warehouse. seven days a week, 24 hours a day, three shifts, 800 people. there is going to be so much automation.

that is what is going to take people's jobs. , the supplyjobs chain jobs. they are all overseas. they get a tax break. they got to bring back all that money just last year around christmas time and they bought back their stocks. all these corporations. that is where wall street got its rush. they have readjusted since then and they have come back down to earth. they are still trying to eke a candy rush. wall street does not reflect main street at all anymore. that is for the rich. iny all come up to stay their summer homes in escape the city and all of this pandemic. i don't see that this is going to end for at least five or six years. host: thanks for the call.

guest: thank you for the call. it is understandable having looked at recessions for the last 50, 60 years to say we will have a long time to climb out of this one. recessions over the last 30 to 40 years, the climb out has generally been longer and longer and part of that has to do with the decline in the hiring rates after a recession, especially after the great recession. the question is how can we andove the rate of hiring one of the ways to do that is to reduce the cost of employment and for businesses to employ workers because like you said, there is a trade-off between employing someone or paying for a machine, a piece of capital

that will essentially do part of that person's job. restaurants, and a lot of them you don't even order at the counter anymore. most of the time you are getting drinks yourself. the exchange between capital and labor is a fundamental dynamic in the labor force and as capital increases, there is less opportunities for labor in the current labor market but that opens up a resource to then be used in other ways. is going tot ai essentially diminish the demand for labor isn't exactly correct. it is going to diminish demand for labor on the current market but the market keeps evolving and whenever you have extra of a resource, people are going to find a way to use that resource in more productive ways. i am not concerned about a lack

of jobs going into the future as a result of increasing automation. about this concerned recession being as long, especially the worker recovery and employment recovery being as long as the great recession even though the unemployment rate is , maybe as0% larger high as double or more the end of limit rate during the great recession because workers have maintained the relationship with those jobs. it takes time and energy and resources to search, sort and select and reestablish those employment relationships and also to gear up to full productivity after that worker has been hired. i am a little more optimistic because of the fact that those employment relationships are still there and things were going pretty well beforehand and we just need to figure out the right way to continue to contain

the coronavirus in the era going forward. i have seen some interesting booths inplexiglass restaurants that would allow people to continue practicing social distancing but still remain, still go out and enjoy a meal and enjoy normal economic activity. entrepreneurs are going to see a way forward and demand for those new forms of social distancing, that is going to drive the demand as we figure out how to get through this crisis. host: we have always looked at the monthly jobs reports when they come out. that has always been something we talk about on this program but in recent weeks, the new unemployment claim filings report has also been a number to track. we want to go over the past five 4,ks, going back to april 6.6 million new unemployment claims.

april 11, 5.2 million. april 25, 3.8 million. the most recent one, 3.2 million. do you want to make prediction of where it is this week? guest: i believe it will continue to fall. it is going to be under 3 million. the number to look at is the actual number of claims versus the adjusted numbers because the seasonal adjustment makes the different months and weeks comparable against each other. you might increase or decrease the number by 5% or 10% based on previous relationships and previous years. in this situation we have never had a coronavirus so the seasonal adjustment probably is less accurate than we would normally see. the numbers are about 500,000, 600,000 lower in general from

the actual numbers as opposed to the seasonal adjustment numbers. they are still astronomical compared to the previous high of 700,000 in the 1980's. we are cute -- we will continue to see those high numbers. thoseing to remember is are simply the claims, not the approved claims. those numbers are going to overestimate the number of unemployed people to some extent because people will be filing in multiple states. they may be filing multiple times in the same state. they are being doubly counted. i created something last week called pandemic furlough rate thatt makes the assumption all the people who have applied for unemployment insurance have been furloughed rather than permanently unemployed, so take that with a grain of salt but

based upon the amount of people, the labor force in february before the coronavirus hit, you have seen about 17.7% of the labor force file for unemployment. that is the number we should be looking at or one of the numbers we should be looking at in terms of estimating the effect of the coronavirus on employment. of theaffected 17.7% workforce right now. rather than trying to use unemployment which measures something a little bit different and is an estimate based upon a sample. they do adjustments to make it as valid as possible but the good thing about the unemployment insurance claims is that this is administered of data that is verifiable and is more certain. host: time for one or two more phone calls. kathy, thanks for waiting. caller: i am wondering if people with two jobs can get

unemployment if they are getting paid for one but not the other. i also get a bit of social security and i don't work in the summer for one of my jobs. could i get unemployment? i have not filed for it but i am wondering if i could get some. upon the depends specific regulations of your state. this is why the statistic i just mentioned is not going to tell the exact same story as the unemployment rate because you can file for unemployment decrease ine to a your working hours or being furloughed or laid off from one job and still working at another job. if you are still working money -- if you are still earning money, the amount of benefits you will learn from state and

employment insurance will be -- stateo some amount unemployment insurance will be reduced to some amount. you may be approved for unemployment insurance based upon the fact that your normal amount of work hours have been cut but your actual benefit may be small because you are still earning money at the time. it is when you are not working at all that you earn the maximum benefits. as i mentioned earlier, the federal pandemic unemployment compensation as part of the carrots act -- parts of -- as at thatthe cares act, point you are eligible for that $600 a week federal benefit. that is a bonus on top of the state unemployment insurance. even if you don't qualify -- if you qualify for state unemployment insurance, you could still get $600 from the federal government.

host: michael farren, you can check out his twitter handle. he is a research fellow at the george mason university's mercatus center. we always appreciate having you and we look forward to the day we can get you back at our table. guest: thanks john. host: up next on the washington journal -- up next on the "washington journal," we are joined by the transition project director martha kumar to discuss the federal transition process. later, national medical association president dr. oliver brooks will join us to discuss racial and health disparities during the covid-19 pandemic. first here is new york governor andrew cuomo during saturday's coronavirus briefing with an update on hospitalizations in new york. [video clip] >> the hospitalization rate dropped once again which is very

good news. the total hospitalization rate has dropped, the intubation rate has dropped. pernumber of new cases day has dropped. people who walk in the door of a hospital or people who were in hospital and test positive. that is down to 572. it has not been at that level back in marched 21. that is welcome news. news, andt welcome this has been heartbreaking every day. , 226 families. number has been infuriatingly constant. 226 is where we were five days

ago. we would like to see that number dropping at a far faster rate. these are 226 people who lost everything despite our health care system could do. that is despite the best hospital care, the best nursing, the best doctors and equipment. we know weople who made every effort possible to save. to the extent there is some we aren that, then looking for peace wherever we can. the priority for us today is dealing with a new issue that has come up, which is truly issuebing and that is the on how the covid virus may

affect young people, very young people. children in elementary school. based ont initially the initial information we had that turned out not to be correct or turned out to be modified, but we were laboring under the impression that young people were not affected by covid-19. that was actually good news. the vulnerable populations were one of the fewt rays of good news -- few of good news was they were not affected but that is not the fact anymore. toddler and element tree school children are presenting symptoms orilar to kawasaki disease toxic shock syndrome.

inse are children who come who don't present the symptoms that we normally are familiar with, with covid. it is not a respiratory illness. they are not in respiratory distress. that is one of the reasons why this may be getting discovered this far into the process. >> "washington journal" continues. host: with federal agencies beginning the process of preparing for a possible presidential transition in january, we are joined by martha kumar, author and director of the white house transition project. remind viewers what the transition project is and how you do your work. guest: it is a group of presidency scholars and political scientists and what we do is prepare information for people coming into the white house. if you are coming in to the

press office, we have an essay on the functions of the office over time and the responsibilities of the press secretary and then we have organization charts that go all the way back to ronald reagan, of how our offices have been organized. what lessons people have learned and what seems to work and what doesn't. it is helpful for people coming in and also for people who want to learn about transition. it is white house transition -- it is whitehou setransitionproject.org. host: there are several federal laws that dictate what the transition process looks like. one of the major ones going back the9 sixth -- 1963, presidential transition act and then the act of 1988 and the act of 2000 and the improvements act

of 2015 and another improvements act for president show transitions passed in 2019. six months until the 2020 election. what is in those federal laws that we just talked about? what did they dictate must happen six months before a presidential election? guest: looking at that history over time, the laws have been developed on a basis of need. what have people found as necessary? the first law was created to provide federal help in transition because it had been the political parties that raise the money. that has proved sufficient. gradually the federal government has needed to do more and i think particularly after 9/11, there was a need to provide

information to the candidates and also to get prescreening of people who are going to come in to the transition so that it would be smooth because it is a time of vulnerability when you are working between one government if there is a change. time and thatable has been recognized in law. rule is thats there has to be a federal transition coordinator. that is the general services administrator and she has worked on transitions in the past and she is a career official. transitione agency director's counsel and that has

20 members on it. the 15 departments and the five largest agencies. they meet to discuss what kinds of things need to be done and to make sure that there is coordination. and are the implementers the policy center is the white house transition coordinating council, which is appointed by the president and its members work on establishing what kinds of things need to be done during the transition and the implementation is by the agency transition directors counsel. host: when you talk about this, one of the themes you always talk about is to start early. when it comes to first-term presidents running for reelection, how inclined are they to begin planning early for their potential defeat and departure from the white house? probably not something they want to plan.

guest: they are not so inclined. in obama's case he could have set up a counsel. the law at the time said a president may set up a white house transition coordinating council but they chose not to do so. the people who have set up such the first clinton was one, that was in his final year. bush created one. so far, president trump has not created his white house transition coordinating council. somebody who is well-versed in transitions who could handle transitions and that is chris lyondell who is the deputy chief of staff for policy coordination and he was

the executive director of mitt romney's transition operation. there are people who have experienced transitions. we just don't have that counsel yet. host: coming up on 9:00 on the east coast. we just came up on one of the deadlines last week when it comes to planning for a potential transition. martha kumar joining us to discuss transitions. martha kumar, folks are calling in. when a white house changes parties, what is historically in the modern era, what has been the best transition and the worst transition? transition ist would say is 2008. welltransition worked

because president bush in december of 2007 said to josh bolten, his chief of staff, that he wanted this to be the best transition because we were in affords and we could not to have anything but a smooth transition. he wanted that set up. worked through the spring and summer. there was no law at that time required the sitting administration to bring in the candidate. when they were presumptive candidates, that is what he did. they worked on the process for clearing people who would come in to work on the transition, that the department of justice

and fbi work on that. they worked on that. they worked on a memorandum of understanding of what the rules would be for transition, that both sides would agree to. then they worked on a piece of computer software for handling resumes that would come in. consideredwould be to be the worst transition? worst transition probably would be the transition from truman to roosevelt truman had just come in as vice president in january. died.il, roosevelt he had not read in truman on all work being done, in particular the manhattan project on the atomic bomb. he did not let truman know about that.

was a grave same for a president -- grave thing for a president to all of a sudden be in the presidency and not know about what was going on. in his view, the transition was very important. so when he was leaving office after he decided he was not going to run again for had the head of the bureau of budget work on preparations for transition. that summer, he wanted to bring andther the candidates dwight eisenhower into the white house separately meeting with white house staff and the cabinet to ask any questions they might want to ask. did come in. eisenhower did not want to do

so. he thought it would send the wrong message that he was working with the administration. and truman was not happy about it. kumar, a great resource to talk about presidential transitions past and planning for future transitions. the phone lines are open for you to call in. albert is first, a democrat. caller: good morning. i will be brief. i want to start off by saying for nearly two years, donald trump had the department of justice trying to put hillary clinton in jail just because she ran against him. i have no doubt whatsoever that come november, during the transition, the trump white house is going to do everything they can to sabotage the incoming administration. these are petty and vindictive

people. that is my comment. i think an outgoing president has a stake in having a good transition because it becomes part of his legacy. if the were to lose -- president loses an election, they know that not preparing and havingssor something go wrong would work of historym in terms of how we would see that president. and then, i think so much of the work done in the transition is done by career people. line withery much in running the government according to the laws and rules that have been established.

they want to see government work. i think also an incoming president can get information from groups outside that provide a lot of information. for example, the partnership for public service has a center on presidential transitions that has been doing work for well over a year preparing for the next transition. i think there are a lot of places for candidates to turn. i think the government itself, the career people, are going to work in favor of a smooth transition from one administration to another. i do think legacy is an important issue. host: we know the presumptive democratic nominee, joe biden, has brought in former senator ted coffman of delaware into his

transition planning. explain who ted coffman is and why he is important in some of these earlier laws that we talked about. guest: coffman had been the chief of staff for biden for many years. bidename a senator when had to resign his seat and become vice president. took theas the one who position. he is very interested in presidential transition and smooth operation. legislation of the presidential transition act is and the meshakeoff ted kaufman -- ted kaufman and mike leavitt.

he served as governor of utah. you had a republican and democrat behind it. kaufman worked on biden's before he became a senator, he was interested in transitions. he is a very good person to head such an operation for him. host: a lot of calls for you and a little bit of time. anthony is in missouri, a republican, go ahead. caller: thank you. i could not disagree with that gentleman more. president trump will win by a landslide. there will not be a need for a transition. shiitent obama, the muslim, and hillary clinton, the communist, have tried for four years to oust this president but it will never happen. thank you. guest: if trump is reelected,

there's something of a transition there into a second term because you have a history over the years of second terms not being very successful. a lot of work is going to need to be done to prepare for a second term and what kinds of things need to be done. that really starts right from the election campaign itself. one of the problems presidents have had in second terms is they have used the second election to talk about the past, what they have done well, what their achievements are, rather than laying out an agenda for a second term. that was something ed meese who worked for ronald reagan talked about as a problem.

that they had spent so much time talking about the past and not talking about what they would do in the future. they are going to experience a transition. many people leave and administration, although they have had the highest turnover of cabinet member and talk white house staff members than any administration. to get onoing to have solid ground as far as their appointments and direction is concerned to try to beat the it not beinginx of the more successful of the two terms. host: you said of the roosevelt-truman transition as a particularly bad transition. lissa question of the single transition.us

roosevelt not taking truman into confidence. usually, there is some hijinks that take place between the administrations when one is leaving and another is coming in. w's offple, taking the the keyboard as the clinton people left and the bush people came in. only some of the keyboards, but that was one of them. a lot of people condemned what happened. an i talked to someone in earlier administration who talked about all the things they had done, including taking a upa fish sandwich and poking one of the pieces in the ceiling

that they could then put the sandwich in the ceiling and let it steep. there are those kinds of things that take place. one problem can be when a president does not ask for the resignations of the people that he appointed in his administration, because there should be a clearing out. something most administrations, if they are changing parties, people know they are leaving, but if there is a continuation in a party like say between reagan and bush, people were not forced to leave. bush had toge h.w. clear out people.

that is one thing that should be done. , who was chief of staff for george w. bush, sent out a memorandum. .t was dated december 1 it reminded people that term was up on january 20 and the president expected the resignation. and by the way, here's a draft. you can just fill in your name and position. host: a few minutes left with martha kumar this morning, director of the white house transition project. information on their website if you are interested in transitions. you could spend a lot of time on that website with the information provided. deb in white plains, new york, is next on the langford democrats. good morning -- on the line for

democrats. deb, are you with us? you have to stick by your phone. we will go to brooklyn, new york. this is billy also on the line for democrats. caller: i would just like to debunks the caller that said barack obama is a shia muslim. this is a conspiracy theory that islamaphobic. i want to call out the hysterical xenophobia of the policy.ng and the he exempts them from his immigration ban. the immigration ban makes no sense as coherent policy. it is all about keeping brown people out of the country and all about xenophobia, fear of the other, which is at the core of republican politics. if trump were so scared about disease, why would he accept

foreign guest workers and exempt them from his travel ban? i wanted to call up the right-wing for the conspiracy theories. the right-wing demagogues about -- host: billy, got your point, appreciate the point. we just have a few minutes left with martha kumar. guest: immigration actually has been a lightning rod kind of issue. presidents have had a great deal theirficulty getting immigration legislation through. one of the ways you could see george w. bush's second term was having trouble is he worked hard getting immigration legislation through.

surrogates went out and worked on it throughout the country. they were not able to get it through. host: one last call for you. this is jim who has been waiting in missouri, an independent. go ahead. caller: good morning. my question has to do with the news of the week with regard to general flynn. wasrently, the logan act being invoked on him for having contact with foreign officials before he was actually in office during the transition. is that normal for people in the state department or appointees, future appointees in the state department or national security council, to have those kind of contacts before the inauguration? guest: before the inauguration, there are not

contacts. the president-elect does get calls thanking him, congratulating him on his election. and so, they are involved in that way. but one of the rules is you only have one president at a time. and so, as far as policymaking is concerned, that is done by the sitting president. presidents have been very clear on that, that that is what they expect. they are the policymakers. they don't expect the president-elect to be dealing in that. but what they can be doing is putting together their team. it is very important during this time that they develop their appointments list and begin getting those people cleared,

particularly in the national security area they have to have top-secret clearance. that kind of work should be done. but policymaking is left to the sitting president. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2020] go,ha kumar, before you what is the next big deadline we should be looking to if we are looking for a smooth transition if that is what happens in january? guest: i would think the next one is appointing the white house transition coordinating council because the agency transition director's council's meeting on may 27. and their role is to implement the policies established by the white house transition coordinating council. host: martha kumar is director of the white house transition project. howhite

housetransitionproject.org. we will be joined by the national medical association's president to talk about racial and health disparities in the coronavirus pandemic. stick around. we will be right back. unfilteredas coverage of the federal response to the coronavirus pandemic with white house briefings, updates from governors in congress, and our daily call-in program, "washington journal," hearing your thoughts about the coronavirus crisis. if you missed any live coverage, watch any time on demand at c-span.org/coronavirus. monday, microsoft president brad smith. >> we need businesses in the

tech sector to step up, exercise more self-regulation and a higher commitment to responsibly. but we do think we need more regulation of technology. think about how we live our lives. if you go to the grocery store and pick something up off the shelf, you will read the nutrition level known it is standardized and accurate because of regulation. if you go over to the pharmacy department and buy a product, you don't worry about the safety of it because it is regulated. when you get into your car, it complies with certain safety standards. the same is true of an airplane. our basic point is digital technology has gone longer with less regulation than almost any technology since the middle of the 1800's. we think the market, customers, and even the industry itself would be better served for the .ong-term eastern monday at 8:00

on c-span2. >> monday, the supreme court continues hearing oral arguments via teleconference. at issuea.m. eastern, whether the prosecution of the native american for crimes committed on tribal land is subject to exclusive federal jurisdiction. then, the justices hear a consolidated case. andlady of guadalupe school st. james school looks at whether the first amendment's religion clause prevents taking claims against religious employers. the supreme court live monday on c-span, on-demand on c-span.org, or listen on the free c-span radio app. immediately following the live supreme court session, join jeffrey rossen leading a live discussion with scholars. presidents from public

affairs, available in paperback and e-book presents biographies of every president, organized by ranking by leading historians from best to worst and features perspectives into the lives of our nation's chief executives leadership styles. learn more about each president and historian featured. order your copy today wherever books and e-books are sold. >> "washington journal" continues. host: a conversation in our last 40 minutes of the "washington journal" this morning about racial and health disparities in the covid-19 pandemic. let me give up the phone lines first if you want to join the conversation. you can start calling in now on this topic. timestern or central zones, 202-7 48-8000. not more pacific time zones,

202-748-8000 21. and a special line set aside for medical professionals. you can start calling and as we show you one of the recent headlines on this topic. this from "the washington post." more than 80% of hospitalized covid patients in georgia were african american according to a new study surveying eight georgia hospitals. researchers found late last month in a sample of 305 covid-19 patients, 247 were black, more than 8%, and much more than they expected. that is just one of the stories about the disparities. here is another story from "political" talking about testing when it comes to minorities in this country. the politico story noting gross and report the less

underreporting of hospitalizations and deaths has played racial and a thick data at the federal and state level. newly half of all states have not included any data on race or ethnicity of those affected by the coronavirus. figures released by the cdc late last month list the race and ethnicity of 75% of all cases as unspecified. and none of the race and ethnicity statistics for deaths have been reported nationally. just some of the numbers when it comes to this topic about racial and health disparities when it comes to covid-19. joining us for this conversation .s dr. oliver brooks he serves as president of the national medical association. good morning. remind folks what the national medical association is and who your members are. guest: the national medical association is the group that represents the 50,000 african

american physicians in the country. incorporateddest since 1895. this is our 125th year. our role is to ensure there is proper health, equity, and inclusion for african american physicians who were denied access to residency programs and being on staff at hospitals for many years. and also to ensure the african american community is well hasesented so the health proper care and you are not excluded. host: some of the data makes it clear there is a disproportionate impact of covid-19 diagnoses and deaths in the african american community. what is the latest data saying now about how wide that gap is? from new is variable york, chicago, milwaukee, new

orleans, los angeles. in general, i like to look at it on a national level because we are the national medical association. approximately 30% of all cases in the u.s. are african and african americans comprise about 13% of the population. so somewhere around 2.5 times the incidence of covid-19 in the african american community. you are talking about millions of cases and tens of thousands of deaths. you are talking about a lot of excess morbidity and deaths. host: in your view, what is the reason for the gap? this is more of a problem of underlying health conditions, disproportionately impacting people of color? gapt more a socioeconomic that people of color are more and in to coronavirus places where they are more in danger? guest: i look at what i call a

toxic admixture. i look at it as three particular of disparatets, incidents and outcomes from covid-19. first,ee elements are, pre-existing conditions. african are 40% more likely to have diabetes, 30% more likely to -- 50% more likely to have diabetes, 40% more likely to have hypertension, 30% likely to have obesity. these are all indicators for the cdc of more adverse events and outcomes from covid-19. the second, and it is very deep, because these all we've together enter social determinants of health. 1/10 theamericans have

network of the majority household. poverty. statistics show with the cdc data, and that data is sketchy, i might add, that those having covid-19 and dying from covid-19 are four times more likely to be poor. we have poor housing. when you have a housing situation where there are five people in a two-bedroom apartment, if there is a need for self-quarantining, it is very difficult. 40% of the population in the united states that is homeless is african american. that is approximately three times the rate of our representation in the population. food deserts, food insecurity. the percent of african americans that have food insecurity are 22% versus 12%.

if you do not have access to healthy food, you are more likely to be obese, have a high sodium diet, and therefore be more at risk for hypertension. all of these things work together. and there are others. 30% of the bus drivers are african americans, so we are more exposed. security guards, food service workers. the third element is a little more insidious but it is real. and that is race. this country has a 400-year history of racism. that has affected the health of african americans. , to feel racism is stressful. it increases cortisol and blood pressure. the general concept of racial profiling. when you going to a hospital,

how would you be viewed as a patient? will you be viewed as someone who needs care, someone who has an illness, someone who has , will youital signs be viewed as a person needing something? all of these determinants and pre-existing conditions and mixitutionalized racism all together to make us at higher risk for something like a pandemic. and it is being shown in the statistics we have. host: dr. oliver brooks is our guest for this last 30 minutes of "washington journal." asking you to call in. phone lines set up for the eastern and central time zones. in the mount or pacific time zones -- in the mountain or pacific time zones. and the line for medical professionals. racial and health disparities in the pandemic is our topic in this last half hour.

we will start in charlotte, north carolina, on the line for independents. good morning. caller: good morning. how are you? host: doing well. you are on with dr. birx. caller: how are you doing, dr. brooks? good morning to c-span viewers. seemed like they did not want to open the country into it came out that the majority of people affected were african americans. somebody lost the concept of what a pandemic is. it does not discriminate. it would seem like certain people want to use this as a political thing. it is not a racial thing. if we goot make sense down the same are tarted path and do everything by color.

the country is going through this as a whole and you still have people dividing us up with stuff like this. it is not make sense. you should not be allowed to carry guns into statehouses. i do not understand that mentality. i don't understand it. host: dr. brook? guest: there was an article in "the l.a. times" yesterday talking about disparities. up, you talk about opening it is not about money, it is about lives. whitef the protesters are or not inclusive of african next -- latinxt individuals. we are more likely to be losing our jobs and having issues with unemployment.

get 1% ofnesses only loans in the first year they are in existence versus 7% for a white business. is the reopening of the environment needs to be done by scientists and scientific data and not politicians. times theng at 2.5 rate of the majority community. open it for political reasons, economic reasons, and not health and scientific reasons, it is like an experiment. we have been experimented on. at this time, we will not be test subjects. that is why we are not protesting to open up faster. i believe you better get it right as opposed to going fast. it inthis is how they put "the new york times" on the editorial page. the vast majority of protesters are white.

he writes this is in stark contrast to the victims of covid-19 who are disproportionately black and brown as well as those who have lost their jobs as a result of the pandemic who are also disproportionately black and brown, as well as those who have been or will be forced to work more as a result of reopening. the service workers and laborers who are disproportionately black and brown. he writes that it is true not every racial disparity speaks to some deeper dynamic of racism but this one does. separatethink you can that the humans of the protesters from their whiteness and the knowledge that many of the most affected belong to other racial groups. it is not so much that they are showing racial animus but that their conception of what it means to be free is at its root tied tightly to the racial identity. your thoughts, doctor? guest: interesting.

when you hear the protesting, they say i want individual freedom. when you think of the protests of the 1960's, the civil rights protests, it was "we want freedom." there's a vision of what freedom is. it is different for people oppressed versus people who have privilege. individual rights versus a collective need and desire for justice. the fundamental position from which the different groups is coming is what is defining that. . host: dr. oliver brooks, president of the national medical association, is our guest. atlanta, georgia, maria, good morning, you are on with dr. brooks. go ahead. caller: i am a 68-year-old

african american female. hydroxychloroquine 200 milligrams. i take something for blood pressure good i like to know how the environment affects lupus patients. i noticed when i go out, i have a heavy flareup in my nostrils. and like to think about that medicine affecting lupus -- i would like to think -- know what you think about that medicine affecting lupus. guest: i believe the symptoms you are feeling in your nose are important in terms of evaluating your situation. ace-inhibitors, there's a lot of information about that. the most prominent i saw was in

the new england journal. the feeling is ace inhibitors , if you are on an ace inhibitor right now, stay on it. i would say take it. there has been talk about it having some beneficial effect as it relates to the virus, covid-19. as far as the other, there was a study in canada that showed more people die from taking hydroxy: quinolone there were saved by the virus. you have something you suppression. he'd allay precautions. host: michael, good morning. thank you for taking

my call. i agree with what you said about the three reasons it affects the african american community more. the first one is interesting about the comorbidity. when i used to live in manhattan, i lived near central park. the areas below 86 were predominately white and the areas above were predominately african american. i would run everyone. the majority of the runners were while central park is surrounded by an equal amount of everybody. local storeinto a south of 86 street, there was an abundance of health drinks and anything else like that. north of 86, it was difficult to even find diet soda. comorbidityentioned like obesity and diabetes. this is all caused by certain behavior issues.

out --h of the despair disparate outcome has to do with personal responsibility and their attitude towards their own health? host: dr. brooks? guest: interesting question. i would say it all links. below 86 above verses street is a small, defined area in manhattan. if you go further up above 110th street, maybe before the gentrification, it is a little different. but in general, this gets back to a couple of areas. number one, food. african are almost twice as likely to be food insecure. you are giving one particular area. is not ashealthy food readily available to african

americans. this is a fact. number two, generally speaking, the more money you have, the better you can eat. people talk about whole foods. but even in general, you need funds. 30% of public transportation -- 40% is used by people of color. if you can drive to get your food versus having to take public transportation to get food. african americans may live in a more crowded environment where there is not the ability to exercise. diabetes, they look at exercise, nutrition, and medication. we have an uninsured rate of 11% versus 8% in the african american community. you don't have as much access to medication. you cannot exercise as well. and you don't have access to good food. i shudder when i hear personal responsibility. it is easy to say that when you have a car, money, health

insurance. the remove those three things, and you will see --. remove those three things, and you will see there's a major difference in how interpersonal attitude and activities affect her health -- your health. host: one of the issues we started this segment with talking about was access to testing in minority communities. i want to play governor andrew cuomo yesterday announcing the expansion of testing in low income and minority communities in new york. this is what he had to say at his briefing yesterday. [video clip] governor cuomo: today, we are launching a new initiative to expand access to testing in low income communities and communities of color. we are partnering with northwell health, which is the largest health system in new york. they are going to set up 22 additional testing sites at churches in predominantly

minority communities. this is a different kind of partnership. it is creative but necessary. we are working with those churches individually and association of churches and northwell. northwell will provide the testing in churches in lower income communities and communities of color. the churches will help us outreach to the community to get people to come in and explain why it is important people come in and get tested. and northwell will do the testing. we have 24 sites in the new york city area. some will be opening the week of may 12. the seconde opening week of may 19. addsee the coverage when we the network of churches is very

broad. again, focused on these communities that we want to reach out to. host: andrew cuomo yesterday. dr. brooks, your thoughts on that announcement? guest: i think it is excellent on a number of levels. what is needed is messaging coming to the african american community that is culturally appropriate. that ishe primary areas influential in african american communities is the faith community, the churches. going to the churches to do testing is an excellent idea. but do note, you saying we are now outreaching to the african american community through churches months into this. we are finally getting some outreach. it has improved. but in the beginning, there was a woefully inadequate amount of testing of afghan americans. 75% of cdc data did not even

have race and ethnic information. governor cuomo was doing that. it is happening in other states and localities. late and should be sufficient. right now, we are one million cases in, 82,000 deaths in, and this is what we are hearing. host: vincent is on the line for medical professionals. good morning. caller: good morning. good morning, dr. brooks. what is realistic as to when we will have a safe and effective vaccine against covid? what would you say to people who are resistant to vaccines due to our history where blacks have reason to be skeptical regarding our medical system? that thing in my mind --

right now, we have public health which is physical distancing, wash your hands, covering your cough. we have treatments, go to the hospital, ventilators, oxygen, medication. and third is vaccines. are 106 thatere seems in some level of development. ones lately have been the vaccines you heard about last week. those are interesting because you can rapidly manufacture them. you can get 100 million doses made. the thing is we don't have the vaccine studies yet. in my estimation, it will take probably a year or more and we don't even know if the vaccines will work. optimistic.sly i believe it is important to

have african americans involved in clinical trials because there is some skepticism in the african american community regarding vaccines. i will say categorically that vaccines are safe and effective. i would say it would be imperative to have african americans involved in the clinical trial. i look at my african american community and say, there is a vaccine, it protects against covid-19. we are dying at 2.5 times the rate, this is what we need to do. i can feel comfortable knowing you were involved in the clinical trials and it is safe and effective for us. host: dr. oliver brooks is our guest until the end of our program today. he is president of the national medical association and also the chief medical operation at watts healthcare corporation. what is that? guest: watts healthcare corporation is a federally

qualified center where we get federal funding to care for the uninsured. we are in south los angeles. we do take care of those uninsured. again, african americans have a higher rate of uninsured status. andthose that are uninsured cannot get on the exchanges, we thank those that supported the affordable care act, obamacare, because the rate of uninsured dropped dramatically with that, and that is excellent. for those uninsured, there are over 1000 federally qualified health centers in the network throughout the country where care can be accessed. ealth.org.s wattsh there's a special line for medical professionals.

waiting. thanks for are you with us? go ahead. caller: yes. i have a question for dr. brooks. [indiscernible] come blacks are food deserts if they rob food stores? host: dr. brooks, did you get a question there? guest: i am sorry, i did not hear the question what. host: i'm not sure what his question was. next caller, good morning. caller: good morning, dr. brooks. i have more of a statement than a question. a lot of americans are so disappointed in our horrible health care system. joe biden pretty much offers

more of the same for the democratic party. but the green party offers a real alternative, something that every american wants, universal health care. and free college. all the things americans are looking for, and we hope to be on the ballot in all 50 states by election day. why aren't americans focused on every party in the united states and not just the republican/democratic party? thanks very much. unbiased for your viewpoints on c-span. thank you. host: dr. brooks, go ahead, sir. guest: without speaking to the political aspects, the national medical association does support universal health care. we are the only first world country, the only highly developed country, that does not

have universal health care. issue.ve that is a major i will not look into which politician supports what, or party. i do know that is relevant. when you look at the united states, we spend more per capita on health care than any country in the world but our health outcomes put us at 37th in the world. however it is that we are orloying our finances capital as it relates to health care, we are not getting the proper return on investment. host: dr. oliver brooks our guest taking your phone calls. ronald is next out of new hampshire. good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. issues with the disparity is misinformation

about the disease. i was wondering if you have a contact at the cdc because there is a specific piece of information they are putting out that is completely incorrect and is causing i don't know how many illnesses and deaths because of this misinformation. it is in the frequently asked questions section of their website. it concerns how the virus is spread and immunity. statement thatic says, and i quote, "someone who has been released from covid-19 quarantine is not considered a risk for spreading the virus to if they have not developed illness during the incubation period." that is completely not correct. you don't assume somebody has immunity just because they have been through quarantine.

this information has been on a website. i have been trying to contact them for weeks. one of our local tv stations in vermont were putting out this information. i finally contacted them and got them to stop saying that. i was wondering if there is anything we can do about that. if you or you know someone who has a contact at cdc that can fix that, it is causing illness and death i am sure. guest: ok. that is interesting. quarantining is when you are separating yourself from others because there is concern you might have been exposed. 14 days is the general time for quarantine. show they the studies median shutting time of the dding is 20 days -- she time of the virus is 20 days.

i would somewhat agree with you in saying that you were no longer contagious after 14 days of quarantining, your asymptomatic -- you are asymptomatic, is something i cannot categorically agree with. the only way you can say someone is not shedding the virus is will a negative test. we do have communication with the cdc. i will review that particular guideline on their website and see what we can do. interesting question and statement. rsha is next out of tuscaloosa, alabama. good morning. caller: good morning, dr. brooks. i have a question i would like to address. i think there is an underlying issue not being looked at. some decisions being made are some wherebyavor it may not favor others.

i think it is not just that there may be some underlying health conditions that are out there making it more likely minorities are dying from this disease. say for instance, you have nurses. and it is something that maybe people do not want to talk about. but you have nurses from all over the country saying that there are patients being left -- being put under on the breathing machines and they are left to die. most of them are minority patients, just like medical apartheid. and then, there's no one there because their family members have left. i know in alabama they had this policy where if you were theyled or a minority, would not even try to put you on a breathing machine at all. i wanted to know what you think about that. host: dr. brooks? caller brings up a

good point. in a public health emergency when there is not someone with an advanced directive where it the decision estimate about dnr, or the speed more fundamental, we have one ventilator and two people. this is where you can see implicit bias. when the decisions are made, it determined by who will have the best quality of life. if you come into this a minority, homeless, poor, low income, your quality of life is likely to be less than someone else's. national medical association in partnership with the coalition has put out a manifesto. one of the platforms of the manifesto is we want data on all

of the dnr reporters, all of the decisions made, to be provided. we want them to go to a community advisory board for evaluation. maybe after the decisions have been made, but we can look for trends and tendencies. there is a great concern that when life or death decisions are nurses --rally out my not by nurses but by doctors, there is not time to bring the ethical board in, this may be a snap decision. it is an excellent point. we do have concerns regarding that. manifesto push and with one aspect of it saying let's monitor that. we don't even have data on that. host: if people want to read

that manifesto and strategy, nma net.org. time for a few more calls with dr. oliver brooks this morning. mike has been waiting, lakeland, florida, go ahead. caller: i just want to comment on the doctor. the first thing he said when you came on this morning is this country has a 400-year history of racism, as if we still live in a racist society. this is not 150 years ago. this is not the 1950's. our country has fought through that stuff. we have come a long way. we elected our first african american president 12 years ago. keep in mind, that happened. we still have less than 20% black population in america. how can you call it a racist country? systemic racism?

you really think there are medical professionals deciding not to help people because of the color of their skin? that is like a bad movie. it is a joke. this type of thing is harmful to our country. and you folks in colleges and universities across the nation, i am a high school teacher so i see the next intermission, they do not -- next generation. they do not believe what you are saying. when they get in college, a lot of times they are being brainwashed by people saying what you're saying. please don't say this country is racist because we are not. there are bad apples. there are white bad apples, there are black bad apples. but the vast majority of us just want to live happy lives, raise our family, and be respectful of one another. so you should try to do the same. thank you. host: dr. brooks, give you a chance to respond. ere that tould say w

be true, that would be beautiful. but i would direct you to a story i just read in detroit where black men one to three different hospitals, could not get tested for covid, could not get admitted, went home and died in his easy chair. after his wife put him in the ground where she could not be there, chua to the husband and said my husband died of covid-19. they looked at her and said i don't believe you need to be tested. a woman of the majority community came in and said i have nausea and diarrhea because i think i ate some bad sushi. they rushed or in and took her back to evaluate her for covid-19. racism is alive and well in the united states. it has not gone away. it directly affects the health outcomes of the african americans. i hear what he is saying. not true.

there are a lot of those that believe that. and we at the national medical association need to ensure that the health outcomes of our people are not affected by racism. we are working hard for example to get implicit bias training. something just like he said. doctor believes he has no hint of racism, but it is subconscious. it is there and documented. talk before we gohost:, about your work with the administration and the cdc, how much contact you have with them and how you think they have done responding to some of these concerns. guest: i have been on a white house call. to administer -- administrator of the cdc was there. he promised to start collecting race and at the data. the cdc generally collects race and ethnicity.

the race and ethnic data we are getting has been coming from an amalgam of information provided by states and local authorities. cdc has done some work, but i think they are working in an environment that is not a wholly scientific environment. i do believe there is some politicization of the cdc. i think they were allowed to be think theyif -- i have the ability to give more information. there is a report they were unable to get fully released. i have had i interaction with the cdc. i believe there are excellent scientists. i believe we could beginning much more out of them at this point in time. host: dr. oliver brooks is president of the national medical association. net.org. thank you for your time.

that is going to do it for today's "washington journal." invite you to join us tomorrow on our program. by anl be joined executive to talk about impacts of coronavirus on the federal and the impact on loading. will also joins us for that topic of the impacts on voting and looking ahead to 2020. that is all tomorrow on "washington journal." in the meantime, have a day. [captioning copyright national cable satellite corp.2020] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org]

announcer: tonight on q&a, a look at american presidents through the books they've written with journalist and historian. >> the story has often been and you saw it in the piercing quote kennedy's father was the one pulling the strings behind the scenes. that's not true. jack kennedy won the pulitzer prize. there were moments he brought it up. he told another historian, i'd rather win a pulitzer prize than be president. because he had a strong desire for literary fame though he didn't want to do literary work he got himself the prize. in new york city in washington, d.c., people had been gossiping, did kennedy really write that book. i wonder who really wrote that book and wonder how much money they're getting out of the royalty checks but the pulitzer changed the equation and made it a moral question and ethical question and readers realized it, too. when i was at the kennedy presidential library, i looked at the letters kennedy was receiving in 1957 and

librarians were sending him letters and school teachers were sending him letters did you really write this book? you wouldn't have accepted that prize if you didn't write the book, that's not the right thing to do. >> watch tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span's q&a. >> a number of cases coming before the supreme court next week on monday whether states can prosecute native americans for crimes committed on tribal land. then there parochial schools are exempt, giving them more leeway to fire lay teachers. and then a deal with president's financial records and whether his personal financial records prior to becoming president can be submean ad. wednesday is another day of combined cases and this time whether states can act against electoral college candidates who pledged to support for candidates they didn't support. you can watch next week'