first, we will hear from democratic representative dan kildee from michigan, then we are joined by republican representative roadie arrington of text -- jodey arrington of texas. ♪ good morning, everyone. friday, july 31, and the latest economic numbers show that the economy has lost the last five years of economic growth. today, unemployment benefits from the federal government expire. in the meantime, capitol hill is at an impasse over what economic aid is needed. this morning, we begin our conversation with all of you, allowing you to tell washington what aid it is that you need from them. if you live in eastern-central part of the country, dial-in at (202) 748-8000. mountain-pacific, (202) 748-8001

. us with your thoughts with your first name, city and state at (202) 748-8003. or you can go to twitter at @cspanwj and facebook at facebook.com/cspan. whether it is rental assistance, help with your mortgage, you thinke costs, or your state needs aid from washington, help with colleges and schools, whatever it is, whatever economic aid do you need? that is our conversation this morning. joining us on the phone is eric watson, congressional reporter with bloomberg coming year to give us the latest. where do negotiations stand in washington? guest: we are still at a stalemate. there was a late-night meeting between mark meadows, secretary mnuchin and schumer and pelosi. there is talk of a stand-alone bill to a expand -- to extend

-- extend unemployment insurance. schumer and pelosi are united, and polling numbers show americans want a massive stimulus package with the american economy stuttering, so they are insisting on more than a bare-bones package. they are wanting to see one of and locally, state whether public sector employees will be laid off in the coming months if this is not put into the package, and they want to see hazard pay, all kinds of extra spending. we have a $3.5 trillion proposal. at this point, there is no deal, but mnuchin came out late last night and said they are going to intoagain today and saturday to come to a breakthrough. host: are the house and senate slated to return next week, and what could be the timeline for getting some legislation on the floor? guest: well, the house is still

in today. they have some business to wrap up on a regular appropriations on 24but they will be put hour notice. they will not be here next week, but if there is a deal they will be flown back in. i think the infection with covid and louie gohmert has really kind of freaked out lawmakers. they would rather not be in town waiting in their offices for a deal until it is necessary. the senate is slated to come back and on monday, so there is a process set up by mitch mcconnell where they are on a shell bill, legislative be a vehiclegislative where they can have proposals to extend ui, but without democrats you cannot reach that 60 votes, because republicans only control 53 seats. host: are there any senate republicans who could cross over and agree with democrats on a larger economic aid package? guest: sure. i think mitch mcconnell said there are about 20 republicans in his conference that do not

want to do anything more. that leaves the rest of them in play, but they want to stick to the $1 trillion level that mitch mcconnell has proposed and not really get anywhere close to the two point $5 trillion level that democrats are talking about. yes, there is a constituency to do something, certainly to do a round of direct stimulus some sort of unemployment insurance benefits, but not at the $600 a week level. they are looking at $200 a week, which provides enough people to get -- provides enough incentive to get people back to work once it is safe, but we are not anywhere close to that. host: for the latest on negotiations, follow erik wasson at bloomberg.com, also on twitter at elwasson. we will get to your calls, dead in georgia --deb in georgia. what kind of economic aid do you

need from washington? caller: i'm interested in the figures. i was a bookkeeper for 35 years and i can do simple math on a calculator, but they are talking $2.4 billion aid for unemployment benefits. when you do the math, that does not add up to billions. people only 325 million in the united states, and they talk about trillions of dollars of aid and costs. if i were the president, i would give $1 million for every american citizen that makes under $1 million, freeze all food,of commodities and and each person to pay off their house. that comes up to maybe $200 million. so what are they talking about trillions and billions? deb, let's take a look at

the heroes act. this is what the house democrats passed in may. direct payments of $1200 per family, up to $6,000 per household. a weekly unemployment benefit extended through january 2021. student loan interest and payment suspended through september 2021 and expands to all federal student loans. 100 billion dollars in rental assistance. $75 billion for homeowner assistance funds, and a $200 billion euros fund to provide eroesd -- $200 billion h fund to provide hazard pay. this also cancels some payments for federal and private loan holders. this is the republican heels act. employment uninsurance -- unemployment insurance decreases to $200

of $1200irect payments per individual and $2400 per couple, a new round of loans under the paycheck protection program, liability protection from covid like teen related lawsuits, money for virus $105ing, and billion for lawsuits. caller: i have a contradicting opinion. i don't not think our country, $27 trillion in debt, should be doing this. i think the public sector would need financial stimulus in the education sector, which the universities are going to be failing with lack of students. also the technological factors, a large employment source for some of the young

americans especially, but our country, quite frankly, cannot her round of stimulus. we need to start slowly opening, but with precautions. like we did in sweden, they must stay home, work from home, and those who can go to the office should go to the office. that is what i have to say. host: all right, michael. sandy, columbus, ohio. caller: good morning. i was calling to say the way i understand the constitution and the way the house and the senate works is they should be able to negotiate a proper amount. the people need the money. and what it of work feel they should actually do is go ahead and see how many people 15, unemployed before march and go with that number. these people, everybody is not trying not to work.

anyway, we are going to have to pay all this back, including the tax break that trump gave to the wealthy. we are going to have to pay for that anyway. but right now, i feel that people are actually hurting and negotiate that. if you don't want to give the $600, maybe give $450. $400 a week. don't cut people off to actually be losing everything. most of the people, they are going to put the money, some of the money back into the economy as well. theydon't understand why want to cut it completely off. as far as going back to work, there are a lot of people, because of the covid, they can't go back to work. you know, it's unsafe. the conditions on the job do not allow for social distancing, they do not go for the sanitation that is needed, so today. my announcement

have people think about that. host: i think you and others might be interested in these tweets from an economist at a financial research firm. he put out a series of tweets yesterday, the new york times s to them. he wrote on twitter, the bottom no evidence ha found of any effect of labor market flows from more generous ui in may and june, controlling for other demographic actors. full expression would mean an economy that is 2% smaller by the end of 2020, and with 1.7 million fewer jobs. be an economyould 1% smaller by year end with 1000

fewer jobs. howard in carmel, indiana. good morning to you. caller: yes, good morning. yeah, i would support an economic package that provides for direct payments continuity support for employers might have to shutter their businesses for some period of time, like restaurants and that sort of thing. there should be resources to those businesses, provided those businesses maintain their employees, so there is a connection maintained between the employer and the employee think itger period, i has to be six months. this pandemic is far more serious than certainly our leadership has given credit to it, so i think the support would be substantial and perhaps more on the line with what nancy pelosi has recommended in the $3 trillion range, because it provides for more resources for testing and health care and other things.

i think the aid is definitely needed and it is needed now. i really fear that the longer we wait, the worse it's going to get and the more expensive is be.'s going to we have to remember, once these funds are in the hands of the american people, they will spend it and create economic activity. it will stimulate the economy. the: take a look at argument put together today in the wall street journal editorial board, by the wall street journal editorial board, and they argue the lockdo wn's destruction, the wipeout of growth we saw yesterday, the economic news is because of the lockdown, the first lockdown. they argue this -- notably, congress is nearly $3 trillion -- congress' nearly $3 trillion appropriations could not stop it. a 790 $5 billion

decline in employee compensation with a 2.4 billion dollar increase in transfer payments. it cannotws that replace a dynamic private economy. personal disposable income increased $1.5 trillion -- 42% -- while the savings rate rose to 25.7% from 7.3% in last year's fourth quarter. he will haven't been dining out or traveling, so they are stockpiling cash. the more uncertainty caused by the threats of a second lockdown , the less likely americans will be to spend. what do you think of that argument? caller: i think that argument has a lot of credibility. i am not recommending a lockdown, i am just saying we need to research all of the options, what are the most us paste options to get

this pandemic? some areas that might need a lockdown, in those cases, the resources need to be there for that action mode of would be. that action is to overcome the pandemic. i am not recommending a lockdown, i am just saying we need to get over this thing quickly. what will allow for that -- it may be a number of options. we have the resources to do that that needs toies happen, is what i am saying. in indiana. mitchell in louisiana, you are next. good morning to you. caller: good morning, greta. host: morning. caller: i agree with the, i support the stimulus package. host: ok. which 1 -- republicans or democrats? the democratic one. i think they need a little bit more in the economy to help boost it up. host: ok. mitchell there in louisiana. president trump held late

afternoon news conference yesterday, and was asked about the negotiations on capitol hill. here's what he had to say. [video clip] passm asking congress to additional legislation to support americans in need. first, we want to temporary oftension unemployment benefits. this will provide a critical bridge for americans who lost their jobs during the pandemic through no fault of their own -- this was not anybody's fault. from the standpoint of jobs, a terrible thing happened. i want to thank senate republicans for fighting to extend unemployment benefits today, and face a very strong democrat obstruction, which i am surprised that, because this is great for our country and great for our workers, and it was not our workers' fault. democrats are asking to work with us to find a solution that will temporarily stop evictions.

we do not want people who have lost their jobs due to the virus to be evicted from their homes or apartments. we don't want that to happen. third, we need democrats to join us to pass additional economic relief payments for american , like the payments sent directly to 160 million americans earlier this year, which was a tremendously successful program. this money will help millions of hard-working families get by. host: the president yesterday. before he spoke on the senate andr, senators mike johnson -- ron johnson and mike braun try to pass a bill where state and federal assistance combined would have been two thirds of a person's previous wage. if they could not implement the way to match, it would have been at $200 per week benefit, but schumer blocked the bill. democrats then try to pass the

houses roughly $3 trillion bill, but it was blocked by republicans. democrats also blocked a one-week extension of the $600 per week benefit the president was just advocating for. democrats argued that it is not sufficient, that they needs to pass everything, or close to everything that is in the bill that they have passed in may, that they can't just do unemployment benefits, they have to come to the table and compromise on all of the different proposals out there to help with economic aid, mortgage, health care, schools, etc. we are giving you the opportunity this morning to tell washington what you think they should do. george in bristol, tennessee, what do you need, george? caller: i am for the senate's, of course, and as far as the amount for the unemployment, they can probably cut it down to $300 or whatever. coming,thing is, it's something like a depression.

i am absolutely positive of that. i am positive that everything that can be done will be done, and i would like to ask one question -- how many people out there like myself get a social bankity check in the every month and still never got no stimulus and never oh owe anything.ver i have called 11 times and written letters to the irs, and nothing. i don't understand. i wonder how many people out there still never got one cent. my wife got hers. we should have gotten 24 hundred dollars between us. there is no use calling not mine. that is a joke. host: here is a text from north carolina, people worry about $600 worth of unemployment? they need to keep this in place. they need to fund hardship and essential workers for inequities of continuing to work. feelwould fix those that

it is unfair to currently performing essential tasks. and from michael in portland, oregon -- i would like unemployment benefits and a moratorium on rent and mortgage payments to be extended to everyone who needs them. kant would say yes, hume would say no. jesus would say yes. buddha what say yes. that's three ayes and one no. the ayes have it. [video clip] >> schoolkids and so many more the benefits to protect schoolkids and so many more are expiring, and we have a comprehensive, bold proposal. republicans have virtually nothing. let's remember recent history. that may give us some hope. we can gett

something done. back in march and april, republicans were late to the game, just as they are now, and proposed insufficient legislation in response to covid-19, just like they are doing now. each time, democrats were not bullied by republicans into passing something that would not pass and be sufficient, but we demanded our colleagues sit down with us and negotiate a bill that meets the needs of the american people. and that's what we did. in the second, third, and fourth --ses of covid relief, our reduced legislation that passed mini --e with in a nimimity. we hope they negotiate with us

in a serious way. host: chuck schumer. the new york times editorial this morning, they argue this morning that the congress needs to pass the democratic bill that passed the house in may, writing the house passed a bill in may that more than addresses these needs. in addition to extending supplement three unemployment benefits through january, it provides $100 billion in aid for renters, about $16 billion a month for the next six months, and another $75 billion in a for homeowners. it also imposes a 12 month moratorium on tenant evictions and a 60 day grace. for homeowners -- 60 day grace period for homeowners facing foreclosure. it includes 11 point $5 billion for homeless shelters and support services. in sycamore, ohio. good morning. caller: good morning. i am against the $600 unemployment extra. host: tell us why. caller: people in ohio here,

employers, they cannot find anybody to work, whether because they do not want to or they are scared of the covid. most of the time you get unemployment, you work on a percentage. i worked construction for 20 years and got 50% of my pay. so they are throwing money at people more than what they would make working. i think 60%, 70% of what they made, unemployment, would be sufficient enough. host: ok. dave in concord, massachusetts. dave, good morning. caller: good morning, greta. host: good morning. caller: i don't know, you know? i think the question is kind of rigged. $600, $300, $1200 -- it doesn't really matter. -- ofip of state fiscally fate fiscally is completely hosed.

might asrillions, it well be rich you rich terms -- richie rich terms of bajillions. it's all fake. actually create the wealth behind any of these programs in order to pay for them, we would not be talking bailout or the next bailout or this bailout or whatever bailout. we are just too far into lala land host:. all right -- host: all right, dave. whatever money we need from relief and employment can be taken from defense and the military, the most loaded sections of our fiscal year budget. -- an to the republican text from bill in elizabeth, new jersey. listen to the republican

senator on the house floor -- [video clip] colleagues want to pass a bill that costs $3 trillion. we are $26.5 trillion in debt. worthant to pass a bill $3 trillion when we have not spent $1.2 trillion of the $2.9 trillion we have already passed. that massive amount would economy, when economists say it will shrink probably by no more than 7% or 8%. we do not need to authorize more money. what we need to do is help the american people who are unemployed, and i know the minority leader called that stingy. the offer we are making, $200 providement, does not

substantial [inaudible] 20%, it replaces more than 100 percent. what is stingy about that? why do our democratic colleagues want to propose continuing $600 per week, plus up, this is preventing people. incentivizing people not to reengage with our economy so our economy can recover. it makes no sense. host: senator ron johnson of wisconsin there. the argument he made on the floor, listen to that, compare that to the new york times article where they talk about the growth domestic -- gross thomistic product, the decline we saw yesterday -- gross to mastic product -- gross domestic product, the decline we saw yesterday. the drop, the equivalent of a 32 point 9% annual rate of decline, would have been even more severe

without trillions of dollars of government aid to households and businesses. that is the front page of the new york times in their argument. the wall street journal editorial this morning, the lockdown destruction, they write this -- consumer spending fell 34.6% and accounted for some 25 percentage points of the gdp decline. the fallen transportation, recreation, food service and hotels was brutal, but the biggest the prize with a plunge in health care spending during a health care crisis. health care represents about 12% of the u.s. economy, and it collapsed subtracted nine point five percentage points from gdp. stephanie in brooklyn, your turn to tell washington what economic aid is needed? caller: well, greta, i believe they need to send the money out trillionople, the $3 that the house has already

implemented in may. i think it should be passed. what's wrong with the gop is that they gave more money to the corporate businesses, but they are not worried about the little people. they took care of the hotels, they took care of the planes, but when it comes to the working people they are soon to forget about us. we have a gop, a republican party that is stingy. they changed the tax law, which they got $2 trillion in tax cuts , which affected the working people because the new taxes that we were getting before, we are paying back more than we were paying back before. i think the government should put that money in the system to boost our citizens up. if they don't, we are already in a depression. we are going to really be in a depression. we are going to have people on lines, children that can't eat, but they can eat.

have houseset they where they can eat. i bet they have private houses where they can go buy food or people can deliver to them, but in minority neighborhoods, we cannot do that. we are living together, grandparents are taking care of grandchildren, grandchildren are taking care of grandparents, and that is the reality of today. all right, stephanie, stephanie in brooklyn. rocky in hempfield, texas. what do you think, rocky? morning, greta. thank you for taking my call. i have been a republican for a long time, but i don't understand why we have to build a new fbi building. what does that have to do with covid? some republicans rejected that as well. it does not look like that was -- it wasn't included in the republican proposal they put out. it was something the white house had argued for. caller: ok, well i guess i

missed that, because yesterday i thought it was still in there, and also some major improvements on the white house, which seems like the republicans have put a oo andsh list in there t i am kind of disgusted. i can understand why it might be difficult to get anything across. thank you for taking my call. host: david in texas. caller: yes, good morning. first of all, i wish we could do some visionary stuff you are -- every time i hear the word stimulus, my skin crawls. these are rescue payments, not stimulus. all the projections talk about how close we can get back to whatever the growth pattern was for stimulus, this is a rescue economy. as far as the federal payments, i know they had a problem with

the issue of how to monitor what each state was doing in the computer systems could not handle it, so they just threw the $600 out there. i am on unemployment. my clients cannot pay me, they are restaurants and hotels, entertainment companies, big entertainment places. they are operating at fractional levels and will not be able to pay me for months. i am the's basically doing work for free. because i am self-employed in texas, they could not figure out how much i made, which is not true, because i had to furnish them with my 2019 tax return. while they were getting their tax returns delay, any person doing this had to get their tax return done because it was the only way we could get our income. i am 69. i have spent decades of struggle getting ready for -- forget retirement, i will work until i am 90 -- but my wife and i had 100 $50,000 a year. my state unemployment is $200, which is the minimum, because they said we cannot verify your

income. we put $600 with that and we are making probably 25%. let's get back to the 30% thing ron johnson is talking about. 70% is a reasonable thing we want to get back to. to people, people that are wealthy, people that are -- the: they have a cap on $1200. if you make over $75,000 -- that,: look, we received and i am saying the people that should be receiving that are people that were affected by this. all i am saying his government employees weren't affected by this, the vast majority, people on retirement weren't affected by this. they are getting the same things they were getting before and now they are getting the stimulus on top of that. as far as unemployment is concerned, i recognize there is an issue with the lower economic part where they are the ones getting more. i am the getting a fraction, but they are the ones getting more. i respect -- the way to deal

with that is to have a four or five months transition thing employer if your offers you your job back, which is what the ppp and everything is all about -- if they offer you your job back you have to take it or lose your unemployment. we will start you out with that $600 and every month -- for six months, you will lose 100 of that. the state gets you off of the unemployment, you are back in your job -- that will help stimulate the economy to be rescued, not get it back above it, but at least it will connect people back to their jobs and give them an incentive to get back to their jobs and make more money than they were making before. recognize that this is a phenomenon we've got now. third trying to get this 70% thing ron johnson is talking about, if that is the theory to go by, everybody who has been

touched by this economically, they need to give up 30% of their income and see how they like that. it's just not workable. there is a huge percentage of americans that live paycheck to paycheck. you reduce them by 30% and what have you done? right now, the republicans are trying to fund a stopgap thing. believe me, i am a conservative. i am a not a republican -- i am not a republican or a democrat, i am a trump supporter, but the big problem is what is happening with the schools and the teachers and the teachers --ons, where it they where they are refusing to work and these issues of being able to discuss the alternative, the medical alternatives, like the stuff that happened last week with the video of the doctors. our economic recovery is completely tied to getting kids

back in school, because the vast majority of working adults are not going to be able to go back to work if their kids aren't in school. this i want to jump in at point, because the new york times editorial board this morning puts the blame squarely on the shoulders of mitch mcconnell, saying he could rescue millions. in the editorial, they argue that even with the infusion of trillions of dollars of federal aid since march, almost 40 million people do not expect to be able to make their next rent or mortgage payment. almost 30 million americans said i did not have enough to eat during the week ending july 21. last week, for the 19th straight week, more than one million people filed a fresh claims -- filed fresh claims front employment benefits. at the same time, the wall street journal editorial rights this. the labor department's weekly report thursday shows a new in continuing claims.

the continuing claims rate was highest in states like new york, 16.3%, california, 15.5% that have slowed to reopen. states that rely on tourism, and states that offer the most generous unemployment benefits for low-wage workers. arizona, florida, and texas haven't experienced a spike in claims. we also know that those states have seen a rise in the coronavirus infections. mary lee in corning, new york. hi, mary lee. caller: thank you for taking my call. first and foremost, i would like to say that i am one of those people who are on unemployment. through no fault of my own due to the covid.

i would like to share that throughout my lifetime, i have probably worked well over 25 years in which i have paid into the unemployment system. are today and there is no resolution as to what is going to happen to all of us who have unemployment extended benefits, and i would like to propose that may be president trump step up to the plate and get both parties together and get this resolved for us, those of us, especially those who lost their jobs due to the covid. thank you very much. lee, before you go, how has the enhanced benefits from the federal government, the you pay00, helped your bills? worked as it stood, i many, many years in a fortune 500 company and they downsized. when they downsized, i literally took a retail job in new york state.

in new york state, where i live, the minimum wage is $11.10 an hour, which at the end of the day, it is very difficult to live on that. i will admit to the fact that this has been a blessing for me and what it has done for me, and it has helped me to pay my -- i have a house, so it has helped city property taxes, which i had to actually do in the loan for to past, a home equity loan. this time around i didn't have to do that, by the grace of god, and it's helped me pay for my bills. it's given me a little bit of security. however, right now, i am not sure that is going to be the case moving forward. host: brenda and south carolina. hi, brenda. caller: i have a couple of comments, if i have time. basically i think they should pass the bill, because people need it. greta, i do not know if people

understand unemployment. they say if you give them the money and you don't want to go back to work. if your job once you back, the employment cuts off. lots of people do not have a choice. they lost their job due to covid. they might not get that job back, so the little bit of money republicans want to give them is not going to be enough to live off. they will be out in the streets. the trillion dollars, billion dollars republicans gave to the rich, they need to take that back from them and give it to people who are out of work because of the covid. and i hate to say this, but a lot of the trump supporters, they are going to be affected the most by the amount of money republicans to give. when will they see they only care about the rich? i feel bad, because i have family members affected by the

covid. their jobs are gone. they are not there anymore. if you are talking about taking the $600, how are they going to make it? it is just wrong. when november comes, everybody needs to get out and vote. both these republicans out, because they can say this and that about the democrats, but the democrats are for the people. they are trying to help us. republicans do not care about us. they care about themselves, the rich, and their big tax cut. host: frank in new york. hi, frank. caller: hi, can you hear me? host: yes i can. caller: i have been pretty fortunate in life. i have made good and bad choices and was able to get an education and get a job, and was able to saved.o i have money i am unemployed right now because of downsizing. i have that problem. and then covid came along. you know, i really am genuinely concerned about these folks that

live paycheck to paycheck that have not had the opportunity to save, and of course their wages have been stagnant. there is plenty of evidence to show that decades of stagnant wages for the working class and the poor, that is a big problem. had they been able to save, perhaps there would not be as much worry or concern. act situation wherein is an of god. it is a very peculiar situation. a community. we are a society. we need to look out for each other. it is all interconnected. i am worried that ultimately, the market will crash, we will go into a depression, my savings rate, and thiso will happen to everyone. this is potentially -- this could happen. there's a lot of things i think that need to be looked at here. ifeconomist, i do not know

you are familiar with her, has written some great books that discuss reforming capitalism. one of the things she points out is if you incentivized saving, that's a good thing and that would have helped in a situation like this. of course, raising the minimum wage, which is giving, making things a little bit more equal. constantly the inequality, the huge gap we have between the rich and the poor. this is obvious. this is a huge situation that we have right now. everybody is worried, everybody is concerned, and we are all interconnected, so we've got to figure it out. thank you. host: tyrone in michigan. good morning to you. caller: good morning to you. first of all, i want to say that i am 72 years old. i'm a vietnam veteran, and i was working before the coronavirus hit, and now i am currently on

layoff and the $600 from the pandemic fund that i get every iek has come in handy because have underlying issues, diabetes, heart disease -- it has been -- has enabled me to keep her roof over my head, buy food and medication, and i don't have to worry about it. if i was not receiving it, i would be in kind of a bind, so i am very, very grateful. thank you, and i hope congress is able to come to the capitol and pass this bill, and continue the $600 per week assistance. that is pretty much all i have to say. host: tyrone, thanks for the call. we will go to the floor from yesterday. arguingcrat from ohio for the $600 a week. [video clip] >> this is what senator mcconnell>> wants to do. he is going to cut $400 in

unemployment insurance to tens of millions of unemployed workers, hundreds of thousands in my state alone, in oregon, michigan, illinois, in new york and minnesota and texas and florida and wisconsin. thousands of workers are going to lose $400 a week. inc. about what is going to happen. around the country, the moratorium on addictions is expire -- on evictions is expiring. a moratorium on electric and water cut off is about to happen. workers are going to lose $400 a week, face eviction -- we know what is going to happen. more people will lose their homes, more people will be in homeless shelters, more people will spend the night in their cousins basement -- cousin's basement in the middle of the pandemic. it is cruel and stupid policy to cut their income for unemployment, for millions of unemployed workers and then no dollars for rental assistance.

no dollars for paying their mortgage, and no help for those workers. we are the united states of america. how could we do such a thing? host: that was the ohio senator sharad brown -- sherrod brown on the floor from yesterday. the headline -- family's first overof covid-19 losses worker deaths. republicans have argued that any legislation they would like to liabilitye protection for schools, churches, companies. this story, posted on the washington post website at 6:00 a.m. this morning, the white house is willing to cut the stimulus deal without this liability shield, breaking with the republican leader in the senate, mitch mcconnell. david in grand rapids, michigan. what do you think? -- so me,ap

personally, i am disabled. andaughter works her shift she helped me call this morning. they laid off her whole third shift today. we are talking about 100 people that got laid off. because nobody is buying t-shirts -- that is what she does, she makes t-shirts and whatnot. she was one of the ones that out of 100 people, they are going to keep 25 and keep first shift going for as long as possible. this idea that there's jobs out there just to get, that's just a republican lie. you need to stop watching fox. i mean, it is bad out there. it is. it is not going to get any better. people are talking about oh, we need to have the schools open. we need to have a cure. grandson, my daughter is not going to send him back to school.

they are going to do the video thing. the government, if they are for theto provide money stock market, have the stock market go up so that people can sell their stocks, put money in the bank, and buy stocks at a low and go up and down, because that has been going on the last six months. nobody is making nothing, nobody is buying nothing but they are printing money for the stock market. we need to print money for my daughter and the people who just got laid off. that is where the government needs to come in. the government needs to number one, make me feel safe, and number two, make rich people do what's right. tax the hell out of them because the money comes from the bottom. myself, we float this economy. the american worker floats this economy. we need to save ourselves. we need to save us. you know, vote democrat, vote democrat, vote democrat. host: david in michigan.

happening on capitol hill today at 9:00 a.m. eastern time, dr. anthony fauci, dr. robert edfield, and admiral brett --are all testifying on the latest of the disease. you can watch that on c-span two, c-span.org, or if you download the free c-span radio app. 9:00 a.m. eastern time over on c-span two. speaker of the house will hold her weekly news conference to discuss the negotiations. that begins at 10:45 a.m. eastern time on c-span3. , c-span.org, or you can listen on the go if you download the radio app. doubt aboutak no where things stand and what will happen next. john in pennsylvania, good morning to you. morning, greta.

how is that tax cut working for you? is, you had some callers that were correct about if you don't return to work, you lose your unemployment. that was absolutely true. you had stephen moore on their talking about corporate taxes. the effective tax rate at that rate was 21%. now they have knocked it down to 21%, so the effective tax rate for corporation is 11%. that was one of the big problems in this economy. also, the military spending is way out of line for a carrier. they want to build another carrier for 12.4 billion dollars. you could build a 50 story building in san francisco for $1.5 billion. see the differential there? dear spending is out of line. spending is out of line. they have accused these people of cheating on $600 a week -- it

is a disgrace. i don't understand why anyone would want to vote for a republican, especially a conservative republican, when they live, live, lie -- lie, lie, lie. that's my comment. host: we will move on to lance in fort lauderdale, florida. caller: good morning, greta. how are you doing today? i would like to express my the hosts onr c-span. i know it is getting bad in the country win the host on c-span are getting attacked for being biased. host: i would ask that you call us moderators, not commentators, because that is what we do. caller: i am grateful for that, i have always enjoyed the program. i am ok. i on disability, so i am pretty much taken care of. --now people, my kids

luckily one of them can work from home, the other one had a job. getting the extra $600 is not worth it or him to go back to work. he is making more than he was. but i was a musician most of my life, i have other friends that do not get the unemployment and they are dying because everything is closed and there is no work. to me, the problem is people in congress have no idea what it is like for the average person out here. i think the way for them to get together and do something is tell them ok, the average person in america is making this much money. this is the position they are in. that is what you are going to get paid until you work this out. sitting there making $175,000 a year. they have no concept of what is like to worry if you are going to pay your rent next month or feed your kids. tell them what the average worker gets -- that is what you are going to get and see how you like it. that might change their mind. they might come up with

something reasonable in the way of a compromise. think it iseem to my way or the highway, and that doesn't work. host: ok. rob in easton, north carolina. caller: good morning. a fine morning it looks like in washington, a little overcast. my call.r taking i have a couple of thoughts, and please let me finish. first off, the extended unemployment at $600 a week plus your regular state unemployment is a massive amount. it amounts to around $3000 per person. you have to keep in mind that the bottom 48% of the population of the united states pay no income tax, ok? win the election comes up, if democrats can win and get mr. trillion, $3se $2 trillion we are spending on covid relief, financial aid and

safe jobs and everything, when they raise the taxes to pay for it, it will be called a long-term, massive transfer of income wealth from people that work to the people that basically don't work. the other thing i would like to say -- please don't cut me off -- the chinese people studied these viruses in the wuhan level for lab -- level four lab. and categorize the bat lady the other gentleman for 10 years, studied these viruses, and knew which one of the covid-19 viruses was most lethal, most pathologically transmittable, and had the most complications. worldeleased it on the and locked down their provinces in china. they sent it around the world as a massive bioterrorism attack on the world. host: all right, rob's opinion in north carolina.

here's a text from susan in new york. congress must give funds to state and local governments. many more local jobs will be lost if that funding does not occur soon, which will cause more of an economic downturn. you have kendra in richmond, virginia -- we are in a crisis because of the pandemic. they should make evictions carreclosures, repos and utility shut off illegal for now. also provide food stamps to people in need. they should stop handing out free money, were some people are making extra by staying home. our next caller, what do you think? beler: there should something for people with pre-existing conditions, such that we would be able to send in our information and get some type of money so they did not have to go back to work. that, since the job market has shrunk because of covid, then some of the people who have pre-existing conditions could sit back at home, collect the check --

host: ok, lawrence. apologies, we broke up there. break from this discussion, to remind all of you who may have missed it, the late congressman john lewis' funeral was held yesterday, and president barack obama -- former president barack obama gave the eulogy. we wanted to remind you of what he had to say. if you want to watch the whole thing, go to c-span.org. [video clip] >> i am so grateful for the legacy and work of the congressional leaders who are here. way than as a better statement calling him a hero. you want to honor john? let's honor him by revitalizing the law that he was willi ng to die for. [applause]

and by the way, naming it the john lewis voting rights act, that is a fine tribute. but john would not want us to stop there, just trying to get back to where we already were. once we pass the john lewis voting rights act, we should keep marching to make it even better. [applause] by making sure every american is automatically registered to vote, including former inmates who've earned their second chance. [applause] by adding polling places and expanding early voting and making election day and national holiday, so if you are someone who is working in a factory or

you are a single mom who has to go to her job and does not get time off, you can still cast your ballot. by guaranteeing every american citizen has equal representation in our government, including the american citizens who live in washington, d.c. and in puerto rico. they are americans. [applause] by ending some of the partisan gerrymandering so that all voters have the power to choose their politician -- not the other way around. host: president obama yesterday at the funeral of the late congressman john lewis. george w. bush was there, bill clinton was there as well, and you can listen to all the

remarks if you go to our website, c-span.org. jay in washington, d.c.? caller: thank you for taking my call, good morning. would be muchney better spent on a nationwide like you have another countries who are opening up on time with the schools, who are putting their economy back to work this fall the u.s. is in dysfunctional disarray with an executive and republican party that are blocking testing. the main thing we are not doing is mass testing, which will allow us to screen out people who need help and let the people who are not infected go back to work. thank you very much. host: ok. janet in west virginia. hi, janet. caller: yes ma'am. today --nking people when we were growing up, we had

nothing. we were poor. we lived in one room. my mother could not afford to pay rent, but my mother was proud, and she marched on forward. she never complained, and these people think today, being poor, they don't know nothing. i tell you, i think they just expect a lot, but they are not saying -- i am not saying that poor people don't need help, my mother did not want to take that. she did not want to ask for anything. when we got older and the kids -- we were growing up, we helped , get a lot of things for them. my mother and dad died five months apart. i just don't understand people today. everything and don't

want to work. you know that's the truth. they get something free, a lot of them just buy drugs and beer and make like they are children. host: let's go to an in sugar -- ann in sugar grove, north carolina. caller: i would like to comment to the man saying the bottom 48% don't pay taxes? i am looking at my tax return, i am on social security with a very small pension, and another account agreements like a 401(k), and my taxable income was $15,000 and i paid taxes on that money. to north carolina, i/o would also -- i owed also. would likeomment i to make, that conspiracy for ths virus being manufactured in wuhan, china, and you let him go on and on.

i'm just really dissatisfied. the single women voters president obama was referring to, the people in the war in iraq, maybe that single mother is a singer mother because her husband was killed in that war and she needs some assistance with a part-time job or job she has now and would like to be able to vote. thank you for taking my call. host: and in sugar grove, north carolina. we will continue this discussion with two representatives. at we will be joined by dan kildee andichigan -- followed by jodi our intent. froms a brief portion george w. bush and bill clinton. >> the lesson for us is that we

must all keep ourselves open to the -- open to hearing the call of love. the call of service. in the call to sacrifice for others. i had our disagreements, of course. but in the america john lewis fought for and america i believe aredifferences of opinion inevitable elements and evidence of democracy in action. [applause] we, the people, including congressmen and presidents, can have differing views on how to perfect our union while sharing the conviction that our nation, however flawed, is at heart a good and noble one. we live in a better and nobler

country because of john lewis. and his abiding faith in the power of god. democracy, and in the power of love to lift us all to a higher ground. >> mr. john lewis was many things. he was a man. , a sunshine and storm, a friend who would walk the stony roads he asked you to walk, that would brave the be whippeds he would by. always believing none of us will be free until all of us will be equal -- are equal. i loved it. i always will. i'm so grateful that he stayed true to form. he has gone up yonder and left

us marching orders. i suggest, since he's close enough to god to keep his eye on the sparrow and us, we salute, suit up, and march on. [applause] >> "washington journal" continues. host: joining us this morning is congressman dan kildee, democrat of michigan. he is part of leadership in the house. it congressman, i would like to begin with the argument being made by republicans for reducing the enhanced federal unemployment benefits. let me show you and our viewers what the leaders in the republicans in the senate and mitch mcconnell had to say. >> republicans and democrats agree that in these times, it makes sense for the federal government to provide help on top of normal unemployment.

aidblicans don't want this to expire. our plane continues it, but the speaker and democratic leader will not agree to anything unless the program pays people more to stay home than to work. prominent democrats have publicly said they agree with our position. the democratic governor of connecticut wants to continue the benefit at a more targeted level. multiple members of the senate have all said and the last few days that they are open to negotiating this. the speaker in the democratic leader have cut all of their colleagues out. they are saying our way or the highway. so people are going to suffer. host: congressman, do you agree, could you agree with a more targeted approach? guest: it depends on what we mean by that. i respectfully disagree with leader mcconnell's characterization.

i was with speaker pelosi when she made it clear that we can come to agreement on this. the problem is the senates really hasn't articulated a position they can get the votes for. unlike the house, where not only did we articulate a position but we passed the bill through the house. this idea that we should have more targeted unemployment, we have to unpack that. what leader mcconnell is proposing is $200 per week. $200 per week. you can call that targeted. i call that pathetic. secondly, he is also proposing people should be able to get 70% , ultimately in a few months, of their wages replace. there are two problems with that. people cannot pay 70% of the rent or eat 70% of the food they ate, or have 70% of the lights on or heat.

they can't tell the grocery store i will give you 70% of what this costs. secondly, and this is probably the most important piece in some ways, the pandemic unemployment compensation benefit has not just been important to those families that are receiving help. it is really important in keeping the u.s. economy afloat. that money goes directly into the united states economy to support small businesses, small and medium-size businesses, by creating demand in the market. to the extent we held this economy together, it is largely because those people have lost their jobs. 11% of americans have lost their jobs. they still have purchasing power. if they didn't have that, if mitch mcconnell got his way and that $600 benefit one to $200 per week, unemployment will go up because that purchasing power will go away and the economy will continue to crumble. host: what do your constituents

who are receiving this $600 per week tell you about what will happen if it does not continue? guest: they are just afraid. they don't know what will happen. they'd know they will not have enough to take care of their families through no fault of their own. the people who lost their jobs lost their jobs because we have a global pandemic that has caused the economy to have to be shut down in parts. that is a reality. it is not something these employees chose. they didn't lay themselves off. they were working hard, making a living, doing well, and they lost it. what they are afraid of -- lost that. what they are afraid of is that we will just let them go. while leader mcconnell seems satisfied to provide massive support to business, even theuded in his bill opportunity for business executives, corporate executives

, this is a new provision, to write off 100% of the food and drinks they purchase for their customers or for themselves. if he thinks it's ok to do that, he has explaining to do. for me, the priority is the american worker. it is true that perhaps there are some individuals, if you, that would choose unemployment overwork. truth is, they don't have that choice. if they are called back to work and they decide they don't want to go back, they don't qualify for unemployment benefits, number one. secondly, leader mcconnell would have people believe, and i listened to that comment, that our proposal is everyone should get more on unemployment then they got when they were working. that is not true. it is a fixed rate. we try to set it at an amount

where most people would basically have their wages released -- replaced. someone earn a little bit more perhaps in some would earn less than they would have if they were working, but when we went with the flat rate, which we had to do because it was the only practical way to get 40 million people unemployment benefits quickly, of course we were going to have some slightly above the line or below the line. the idea was to get it out there fast so people did not lose everything. i also think it is a bit of an insult to the american worker to imply they would rather collect unemployment then work. maybe that is mitch mcconnell's approach, because he sure has not been working or has done his job, but it is not the way the people i represent think about work. they think about it as a meaningful way to be productive, to contribute to their society. the people i represent would not rather sit at home and collect unemployment.

they would like to go back to work. the problem is that most of them don't have the job to go back to. host: how do you respond to the "wall street journal" editorial board, sang the lockdown in march and april is what caused -- saying the lockdown in march and april is what they say 6% ander spending fell 34. accounted for some of the gdp decline. to 25.7%gs rate rose from 7.3% in the last year's fourth quarter. people have not been dining out or traveling. they are stockpiling cash. -- the moreinty uncertainty with lockdown, the more people will continue to spend. guest: for the couple months we

were almost completely locked down, dashed down, people reduce their spending. i can't do their shopping travel,do their so naturally savings rates would go up. imagine what impact we would have on the economy if consumer spending would have gone down further because we had not provided those pandemic unemployment benefits. that is the point i was trying to make. the extent to which we have been able to hold this economy together has been because those , -- inuals in michigan michigan, that is one out of four workers. they have been able to keep that money into the economy. that is a pretty important part of what we are trying to do. one other point, the wall street journal is correct. outputse gdp or economic

went down because of the lockdown. that is kind of the whole point, that is sort of logical. wehave to think about why had to initiate these lockdowns across the state that were hit really hard, to save lives, to stop the spread of the disease. this is not some fabrication. this is reality. 500 people that i represent have lost their lives in the last few months to covid-19. 500 people in my district. four of my friends, four people i have known for over 40 years are gone. because of this. this is not some hoax, this is not fixed news -- fake news, this is reality. people can try to deny it up until somebody you care about or somebody in your family contracts covid-19. i've seen an incredible transportation -- transformation

among some of my colleagues who were initially very skeptical and denied this who suddenly have seen staff members die as a result of covid-19, who themselves have contracted covid-19. it is easy to deny it until it touches someone close to you or yourself. host: adam in great mills, maryland. independent. you are on the air with the congressman. caller: i would like him to explain something to me. if the basic principle of we can print a u.s. bond with a promise to pay back with interest with central banking and inflation, we are never going to be able to pay off that debt. money is only valuable because we save and a small group of people control the printing press currency. two, i would like to make a point. abraham lincoln printed $1 million i believe in greenbacks for the country. i would love for him to explain that. i know he will say it was backed by oil but the fiat mone

system is a joke and the top economists don't understand that. i would love for him to that to me. have a nice day. serve withdn't abraham lincoln, so i can't make any comment on that policy. it is an interesting historical artifact, but there are similarities. the country was in crisis, coming apart at the seams because of, in that case, a civil war. in our case, we have a war against the virus. the president himself says he wants to be a wartime president to deal with this. in one time -- in wartime, you don't to the round to figure out how to manage it, you put the resources on the table to fight and save american lives. that is what we're doing, first of all. secondly, it puzzles me sometimes that there are folks who believe that somehow we have a choice that does not cost anything. that choice left. that choice is long gone.

we will pay a high price, pay a high help and economic price one way or another. we will pay a high price if we do not provide the help to these families through unemployment or the help to these small businesses through the paycheck protection program or the help to state and local governments through direct support. we will pay those prices by supporting those institutions or pay an even higher price by not doing so and seeing this country fall into a depression. where the incoming revenue nowhere comes close to the costs our society will bear, our government will bear. we are not in one of those positions where we can say if we don't pay people who are unemployed that somehow they are no longer unemployed. that is not the way it works. we are going to pay a heavy price one way or the other. the smartest wh -- the

question is, what is the smartest way through this? that's why we think the heroes act that we passed 2.5 months ago will do. mitch mcconnell said he wanted to look at things in july. it wasn't until july 26 it occurred to him that there is no longer -- he said on july 26 that we will look again in july and make a decision about what we need to do. days --uly 26, four five days before all of these benefits expire. i don't get it. host: we go to steve in noblesville, indiana. a democratic color. caller:-- caller. caller: i have a comment. mitch mcconnell is a multimillionaire. he doesn't care about the regular people. if we were giving trillions of dollars to the billionaires, he

would be fine about it. got to, you know, say no, we can't afford it. it is baloney. the caller makes a good point. i find fault with the fact that in 2017, mitch mcconnell engineered the tax cut and jobs act of 2017, which had the united states government borrow $2 trillion from our grandchildren and give 83% of the benefits to the top 1%. 83% of the benefits of a $2 .rillion tax cut to the top 1% mitch is upset somebody who works for a living, 40 to 50 hours per week, one out of five or six of the people receiving this unemployment benefits,

might get an extra $82 per week? mcconnell voted for the $600 benefit. almost every republican and democrat voted for that $600 benefits. back when we passed the cares act. they thought it was a good idea then. they thought it was the right thing to do because we were in this pandemic. we all thought, perhaps, if we are fortunate, this will pass through more quickly. we did not believe it would this appear like the president says, but we believed maybe this could be a quicker pandemic. we didn't really know what the course of the spread of the disease would be. we now know. the conditions that were existent back when we passed the cares act are still in place. my question to leader macconnell is, if you thought it was a great idea that you had the entirety of the u.s. senate andort it a few months ago,

the same conditions exist now, in fact in places like florida and texas they are far worse than then, why is that great idea, a bipartisan idea a few months ago, suddenly an assault on everything he believes in. -- in? i don't get it. host: blocker in florida. an independent. caller: good morning. ways wondering, is there a to make, for congress, congressman, is there a way to have congress tell the states they need to bring up their basic unemployment. it maybe that is where the 70% should come in. i did a quick calculation while on hold. the $275 per week that florida gives as a maximum comes to $6.87 an hour, which isn't even the minimum wage.

is there a way for the federal government to put some of this states thate administer the program, and whenever the fed comes up with a new idea, say maybe our commuter -- computer systems can't help, can't handle it, will then you have the questions. ken hungers -- can congress help the situation? guest: that is something we have been wrestling with. disparatee is such benefit when it comes to state unemployment benefits. florida has one of the lowest on employment benefits in the united states. unfortunately, there are some constitutional barriers. the only way i could imagine we could do it is if the united states government was providing support for all of the states and territory's unemployment benefits and conditioned that support on a minimum benefit of some level. then, we might be able to use that financial leverage.

the constitutional prohibition really does not allow us to dictate some policies to states, but it points out the very nature of the problem. the unemployment benefits across the states are not enough to keep people from going bankrupt. we don't want one out of 10 americans, all of the same time, to lose everything they have worked for. it's not good for them, obviously, or the u.s. economy. that is why providing this additional unemployment compensation is so important. -- the one point the caller makes gets back to this one issue, if you were to try to put in what we were appear to -- what we refer to as replacement rate unemployment, the unemployment agency directives we have talked about across the state -- directors we have talked to across the state say it would take as long as three months to implement. three months.

it is what i initially thought we should do, to be fair. was informed by fact, and those facts were that it would take too long to implement, and everybody who is waiting for unemployment does not have a very big bank account or someplace they can go to to borrow until their unemployment comes. that is why i think some of these people who are making these decisions that i work with are so disconnected with the realities of people who live paycheck-to-paycheck that they think if you get your unemployment benefit in three months, you can re-compensate your bank savings. you can put it back into the bank. there is no money for the -- no money in the bank for most of these americans. no family member they can go to, father they can go to to borrow money from the way so many of the people who make decisions in this government have lived their lives. it is not there. dunkirk,n in

maryland. caller: thank you for letting me talk. i want to make a quick point. i would be interested to see, when you talk about the trickle-down economics and talk about the people who got these payments keeping the economy afloat, i think it would be which wouldto see work, the trickle-down economics or giving into the people. reason for the assistance was to keep people from going to work and spreading the disease. when you see the outbreak comes up and you talk about breaking the curve or trying to open the economy back by getting the virus under control, by taking away one of the tools you had to incentivize people not going to , then you talk about

the children and burden you will debtwith paying off this in the future, but then you want to rush back to school without money or procedures in place that you can help people. congressnderstand how -- i'm not going to point anybody, democratic or republican out, but congressman congressmen say one thing and then their actions totally contradict what i'm hearing. host: congressman? guest: that's a really good point. the benefits i provided -- just to be clear, both businesses, large and small through the paycheck protection program, unemployment compensation and stimulus payments, all of that was intended to try to hold our

economy together but also to get people the financial capacity that they need to follow the expert, medical advice they are being given. to sociallysomebody distance, isolate home, shelter-in-place, they have to have the financial capacity to do that. otherwise, they are in a position where they have to literally choose between taking care of their family, feeding their family, or exposing themselves to a disease they do not know what the outcome might be. the whole idea of these benefits, the whole idea of this multi pronged approach of large and small businesses, people losing their jobs, others to get stimulus payments to keep the economy afloat, the whole idea was to get our --

ourselves through this, to get our businesses through this so that when it is over, we still have not lost everything we have worked for, and people have had the ability to take care of themselves without having to take the risk of exposing themselves to this virus. it is right. the caller is on point. give people, give ms. this is -- give businesses the strength to follow the medical guidance they are being given. host: we have a few minutes left with the congressman. lynn is a democratic: are -- democratic caller. caller: thank you very much. i have one thing to say to the gentleman. can -- youed maine mentioned the country made it zero balance. how he did that. go study it.

see if we can do that today for our economy. hurting,is going to be not people that pays taxes. see if that can be done. study and for the senate also and see if they can. you guys are the congress, do it, zero it out so you can save everybody, including yourself. . host: congressman? callerobviously the points out we have a lot of challenges here and how we square, how we balance the interest of spend the money we need to spend or keep the economy open and not to risk losing everything. the only way we have ever been able to balance our budget is three economic growth. we will not have -- is through economic growth. we will not have economic growth if we allow this country to go into depression. host: columbus, georgia. independent. caller: yes, i have been looking

where ithe situation seems like nancy pelosi and the have a bigant to bailout for the big industries. the kennedy center, and things that don't pertain to the covid. republicans, they don't want to help out the small businesses. to, but it seems like this whole thing is you just don't want the money out there -- you are putting the money out there, see who it's help and who it doesn't help and people are able to put excuses where it

works or does not work. one more thing. john lewis was a great civil rights leader, and he just passed. another great leader just past, irving king, and i don't see guess the same publicity john lewis god. i don't understand that. maybe because he is a republican and john lewis is a democrat. we all forget about the party when somebody passes away. both of them were african-american men. oath of them were great men. one did it one way -- both of them were great men. one did it one way and one did it the other way. one did it through civil rights movements and one did it's your business. and one did it through business. the lewis did it through

pettus bridge. host: congressman? guest: i don't want to do anything to demean the memory of herman cain. i didn't know him but he did make a business contribution and made quite well with it. -- and did quite well with it. reject thelly comparison between the two and the way the two's passing have been mourned and acknowledged. i knew john lewis. he was a close friend of mine to the point that john asked me to 2.5is proxy in the final months of his life. i was casting votes for him on the house. for the right for people to express themselves through the right to vote. he took risks, he paid a price so we all make

contributions in different ways. john lewis made a singular contribution that i have not seen matched by an individual in my lifetime. and i'm going to remember him that way. host: congressman, what was going to your mind when you are asked to be his proxy? guest: it may be the greatest honor any individual ever gave me. yesterday, his deputy chief of staff expressed in their gratitude for me to be his proxy. i'm the one who's grateful. every time i talked to john, because i had to speak to him before every one of those votes he would say thank you for doing this for me. it took my breath away, because it was john doing a favor for me, gave me that privilege that i will with me until the day that i die, that i was able to cast a vote for the person who, more than anyone else in the

history of our country, stood up for the precious right to vote. honestly, i choke up every time i think about it, because it is something i will keep with me forever. host: congressman dan kildee, think you for sharing that with us, democrat of michigan. we appreciate your time. guest: thank you. host: we will take a break. when we come back, we will hear from a republican ways and means committee member, jodey arrington of texas. we will talk about economic aid in light of the coronavirus pandemic. we will be right back. ♪ >> today at 9:00 a.m. eastern on c-span2, niaid director dr. anthony fauci, cdc director robert redfield, and an assistant secretary for health

before the house select subcommittee on a national comprehensive plan on the coronavirus pandemic. watch live hearing coverage today on c-span two, live streaming and on c-span.org or listen on the go with the free @cspanwj radio app -- the free c-span radio app. this week on q&a, chris ,"llace on his book "countdown on the creation of the atomic bomb and what led president truman to use it. this agonized over decision. he complained of sleepless nights. he had terrible searing headaches which he had throughout his career whenever he was under what he considered heavy stress. and his diary, and that is one of the joys of doing a book about people who are all gone. when i was in the presidential library, i got a hold of his diaries. during this whole period, the

whole 160 days i talk about in the book, he talked about the choice of using the bomb in an apocalyptic term. he kept saying this was the most terrible weapon ever discovered and compared it to the fire disruption prophecy in the bible. >> chris wallace, sunday at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span's q&a. "washington journal" continues. host: we continue our conversation over coronavirus relief legislation with jodey arrington, republican of texas and member of the ways and means committee. congressman, where do you come down on unemployment benefits that expire today, those enhanced benefits? guest: it is great to be with you. very sad situation where

people are not able to go back to work. we need to make sure there is a safety net and we need to make sure that is short up when we are looking at covid related relief and funding. to pay people more to be on unemployment to than in their previous jobs is a recipe for disaster, because if we don't reopen or rebound, then we don't have a stronger economic recovery, that will be far greater devastation from both an economic and social perspective than what we are seeing even in this time of trying to manage the pandemic. there are ways to provide assistance, and i think it is appropriate to provide relief and assistance to individuals and families, but we cannot structure it in a way that does incentivize is the very thing we have to do, or there will be long-term adverse impacts, par greater then what we are -- far greater than what we are experiencing today.

host: democrats have argued that state and local governments need more aid. the republicans did not include that in the raboso -- the proposal outlined by the senate gop. yesterday on the program, we had larry hogan, republican, who talked about if the states like his they do not get more aid from washington what could happen. find someress cannot kind of a bipartisan compromise and get this done, it will be quite disastrous for the country. governor cuomo, who is my vice chairman of the national governors association, and i put out a statement yesterday -- and this was nearly unanimous between all republican and democratic governors, we have been pushing for more relief. the governors are trying to provide more services to more people that are desperately in need. from the500 billion federal government in order to

continue to help provide some of those services. just in state and local governments, we have laid off 1.6 million state and local government workers, front-line workers like health-care workers and teachers, and firefighters, and police officers, and people working to get the benefits, the unemployment benefits to those people, people helping our struggling small businesses. there is a potential to losing 3 billion to 4 billion of them and it is not helpful to the economic recovery. it is very frustrating to us. we had a commitment from the white house months ago. the president said he would support this. now, none of this appears to be anywhere in the discussion in washington. the governors continue to push in a unified and bipartisan way, to try to get the republicans and democrats on both sides of the aisle and both houses and administration to put aside whatever petty partisan differences there are. and i don't care about the specifics about this size once these things included and this i

once these things included -- ants theseide w things included and this side wants these things included. host: where do you come down on this, congressman? guest: i think it is preposterous to ask for $500 million for state and local governments right now when you have the vast majority of states sitting on the lion share of moneys we have already appropriated. the 150 billion dollars that came out of the cares act for state and local governments, only 25% has been spent. communities,ural small and medium-sized towns, are not getting the aid and relief they need. these are tied to covid-related expenses. i'm willing to work with my democrats to make the use of that money more flexible to them. i think there are ways we can do

to improve that and have more meaningful impact. just to throw more money at this , i think you are creating a settingn where you are us up for moral hazard, meaning if states and local governments think the federal government can just, infant item, throw money risk or costut any shared by state and local governments, we will be in the spending hundreds of billions if not trillions more. and you will also have cities and states that are poorly running grossly mismanaged looking to the federal government in an opportunistic way to bail them out. many have pensions that are underwater. you saw in the pelosi heroes act, which was their partisan covid related legislation that was not going anywhere, it was

just wasting precious time for us to come to a bipartisan solution. in that, we are spending money to bailout pension liabilities that preexisted covid because of the poor management of some of the state and local leaders. not to mention the union pensions that are underwater to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars. that is what we can't do. we've got to look at the relief needs of our people, our families, our employers that are trying to the lights on. we need to keep our front-line workers resourced, we need to make sure we celebrate the development of these vaccines and treatments, because that will be a game changer, but at the end of the day, we have to make sure that people are going back to work. because there's not a program that is going to ever take the place of a full-time job or a paying customer, so we have to

open the economy and get kids back to school too. have to the unemployment insurance, that's will be the next big barrier to keeping this trajectory on the right track and strengthening our recovery. host: the state of texas, your state, has the low end on unemployment rate, 10%, and they have not seen a spike in unemployment claims. however, as we were showing our viewers, there are 412,000 more cases reported yesterday -- reported. yesterday saw a thousand 800 new cases and 6000 new deaths. you see a correlation between not locking down the economy and having more spread of the virus and more death? the deaths intake texas, arizona, and florida we

are getting a lot of attention, they don't even equal half of the deaths in new york city. let's keep things in perspective. we are going to have to reopen our country and manage this new risk file that has been presented to us. it is unfortunate, unprecedented, but if we don't take the necessary actions and put the necessary incentives in place to get people into the marketplace and back to work where they can make a living for their families, the devastating effects, whether it is mental health and suicides, addiction, or it is some sustained depression or economic recession, it will be worse than what we are experiencing today. we can responsibly and safely reopen. i think texas is doing that and other states are, but it is not

going to be without spikes and flareups at times. they will need to be managed. as they do flareups, according to the facts on the ground. we don't need blanket protocols, mandates, that will hinder and hamper our ability to get back to semblance of normal and strengthen our prospects for a stable and growing, and hopefully down the road back to the pre-covid prosperous future we were looking at. host: we will go to diane in newport florida -- newport, florida. a democratic color. -- caller. caller: i would like to ask this gentleman, how many people of the 30 million on unemployment now about to lose their cannot find a job, how many of those people are really taking advantage of the

situation? when there is a pandemic going on, people are on vacation, they have a july 4 vacation and then the republicans went on a long weekend, and now they are talking about going on a vacation again in august when people are ready to lose their income, the little money they are getting. my daughter moved here in florida and could not find a job last year. at the end of the year, she took . seasonal job in january, they offered her a part-time job. qualify innot even florida, which is one of the lowest unemployment benefits there because her quarters were not qualifying her. finally, from march, when she had to apply for unemployment, she got the $600, which sustained her, but she didn't get a penny of that money until the end of june. it took her that long to

qualify for that $600. now, she is about to lose that. -- he is abouto to lose that and there is no place to get a job. i would like to know your answer to that russian. -- that question. guest: diane, thank you. i hate to hear this scenario you presented, which is very i know iso you, but one that we are seeing throughout the country and my district. i would say we have unemployment insurance, and if the states from that, and we are not doing with -- doing away with unemployment insurance, we should look for ways to provide support in a temporary, targeted weight. doctor who are

looking for jobs and confounded -- can't find it. a number of people are saying i want to get back, i want to keep my company afloat, but i cannot hire people because they are making people more money then when they were working for me. we can provide the temporary assistance without providing disincentives to work. and cutting our nose off despite our face. i think we can still be very compassionate and understanding, given this unprecedented situation that we are in. and the extenuating circumstances your daughter and others find themselves. it is not about do we want to provide assistance and help all fellow -- our fellow americans, it is also keeping the long-term goal in mind that if we do not rebound in ao not significant way, the long-term adverse impact will be far

greater then what we are experiencing right now. thank you, diane. columbia, south carolina. republican. go ahead. caller: representative, i have heard this many times about people getting 70% and that is not enough to live on. would you ask point of people that nobody takes 100% of their paycheck home, that you take about 70% at the end of the week. thank you. guest: if you are lucky, you take 70%. because of the republican tax cuts and jobs act, americans were taking a whole lot more home and we had more jobs then we had people to fill them. that was right before the pandemic. we had one of the hottest economies we have seen in recent history. cuts are another way to incentivize helping our industry, our employers keep the lights on so they can keep their

employees connected to their company and on the payroll instead of on employment -- instead of on unemployment because long-term, that is best for the working families in this country. so payroll tax holidays. the president has been talking about that. that gives them liquidity and breathing room to the small businesses but also gives a break and allows our citizens to keep more of their hard-earned money, especially right now when we needed the most. there are lots of ways to do this. i am not fixed on -- and i'm certainly not the guy that sits at the table with all of the answers, but i can tell you that there are some principles at play here, long-standing, timeless principles. that is that you get what you incentivize. if we incentivize people getting on unemployment, that is what we will get. if we incentivize people getting

back to work, that is what we will get as well. that, long-term, is better for every american, for our country's economy, and for the recovery and efforts to get through this tremendously disastrous pandemic. dawn in las vegas, independent. good morning. caller: good morning and good morning, congressman. you, well, isk wanted to inform you about something. the $200 of unemployment per week the andblicans are proposing, that being 70% of one's income is absolutely false. in las vegas and worked in las vegas and worked in the private transportation industry where we serviced hotel casino guests. this industry is pretty much shut down since march. my job in this service industry

relied on tips to make ends meet. so i know, and i know for sure that my employer did not include the steps when reporting my income to the state employment. unemploymenthat only pays half of my salary, by the way? and tips are not included in this number. do you know what my unemployment benefits are now? which is aper week, small percentage of my real income. say $200he republicans per week will cover 70% of my income? this makes no sense. right when is about calculating the income for service workers like myself who live on tips. if the republicans want to help service workers like myself who live on tips, and especially workers in the industry that are

hurting right now, like the travel and tourism industry, the republicans need to extend that $600. otherwise, we won't be able to make our living expenses. i'm talking not just for drivers in car services and servicing toel guest but this applies waitresses or people in the restaurant industry, in the hospitality industry, any hotel room, things like that. they may not live on tips but other people do. host: let me ask you, over the years, have you reported that income in tips? caller: yes. host: so you have pay taxes on it? caller: it is not on the w-2 forms which the state looks at. they look at the w-2 the employer reports, so that is the salary. host: congressman? don is like-- countless americans who are in industries -- dawn is like

countless americans who are in are --ies that even oil and gas because of the collapse of crisis, a barrel of oil was selling for negative. they were paying people to take the oil to store it. we need to provide the liquidity relief so these employers can keep the lights on and keep dawn employed, because the government cannot sustain where we are today. we have not talked about the net, but we are at the highest -- debt, but we are at the highest level of debt gdp surpassing world war ii, and we are putting $4 trillion more on the backs of our children. that debt will be paid. it is a deferred tax on our children. we have got to operate as if there are real trade-offs here.

there are real costs and consequences. this is not just -- i think too many people in washington think money grows on the treasury tree. my dad always told me there is not such a thing. but we certainly have seen that in this country for too long, and that will be the disaster, by the way, that you can't ale out of by printing or borrowing more money. but dawn, let me say that 70% is the average. there are people that, if you do $200 on top of the state unemployment insurance, you will have people making close to 90% and people making lower. the average is 70%. in my district, 20 nine counties in west texas, 75% -- 29 counties in west texas, 75% of the people i represent are making more o

unemployment then in their previous jobs. i'm not suggesting you don't need assistance and support. i believe, whether it is direct assistance, tax breaks, or some combination, it is far better long term to not be providing that disincentive to recover as a nation and to get these employers -- we can't keep providing the relief they need without employers providing customers with services like in your case. thanks for your comments. i appreciate your input. in kansass go to skip city, missouri. a democratic caller on the air with jodey arrington of texas, the congressman represents the 19th district. caller: representative, how are you today? hey, skip. i like that name. caller: i have a question for

you concerning the covid-19 problem. host: go ahead. caller: ok. today, i'm looking at an increase of 46% increase of deaths over the last 150 five days since the first case was first reported. that's 46% of deaths yesterday, and increase for the daily average over that 150 died a -- 155 day period. deaths.y's was 1417 new i don't see the government is doing anything about this horrendous plague spreading across the united states. you talked a while ago about citizens keeping more of their take-home pay, yet you live -- you are representing a state that has moved massive amounts of corporate headquarters

offshore just to avoid taxes. is that right or wrong? butt: i think it is wrong, i don't know what specific case you are talking about. i can tell you that i recently talked to folks who have moved -- charles schwab's headquarters from california, plenty of folks moving from other states with high taxes and high regulation because texas is a very business progrowth environment. people feel like they can be more competitive here. and the jobs are coming with them. texas, i know it is the strongest economy of the states in the union, and it is not because we are in any -- it is not because of some magic pill we take. it is because we believe in free markets, we believe in free people, and we believe in the free enterprise system. and we try to limit the government involvement in intervention and have basic

protections for people. against anti-competitive forces and frivolous lawsuits. that whole formula for success worked well for texas. i think we see the numbers -- 1000 people per day are coming to the state, and it is a very diverse state. i think it is because, again, our policies empower people and promote freedom. i think we are seeing less and less of that across our great country, and it is unfortunate because that was always the formula for america's success. there are times where i feel like texas is the last bastion of freedom and opportunity, but look, you talked about the deaths. as we test more, the death rate is going down. we know now that if you are 70 years of age or younger, you are more likely to die from the

seasonal flu. that is a fact. we know how to treated better ,ith antiviral, antibiotics steroids. people are spending less time in the hospital, less time in the unfortunately,, and i hate it, i don't want to lose a single life, but unfortunately people are going to get sick. and some people are going to die , but there are going to be far worse health and safety implications if we do not get back to living and working, and providing for our families and communities. to managet to be able it safely and responsibly. i am proud of my state for what we have been able to do for folks in west texas and they don't want the federal government dictating the protocols for how they think we ought to be living and

recovering in a responsible way. and appreciate the concern i am concerned equally about the covid health implications. i just think the health and economic implications for not recovering is just exponentially greater then what we are facing right now. the vulnerable populations are doing a better job of taking the extra precautions, and i would continue to advise that as we how to recoverrn in a safer and more responsible way, but in one that we are very intentional about doing. host: congressman. the house is about to gavel in. we appreciate your time this morning. thank you. guest: thank you and god bless the usa. for: the houses gaveling in their morning legislative session. it we will bring you to the floor, live coverage on c-span.

the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the chair lays before the house a communication from the speaker. the clerk: the speaker's rooms, washington, d.c. july 31, 2020. i hereby appoint the honorable dianne degette to act as speaker pro tempore on this day. signed, nancy pelosi, speaker of the house of representatives. the speaker pro tempore: the prayer will be offered by our chaplain, father conroy. chaplain conroy: let us pray. loving god, thank you for giving us another day. we turn to you, much as the psalmist did of old. though we walk in the midst of