white house. that's 1 p.m. eastern on c-span. at 3 p.m., democratic vice presidential candidate, senator kamala harris, campaigns in reno, nevada. toer, mike pence speaks supporters in greenville, north carolina. on c-span two at 1 p.m., the thee hosts a discussion on pharmaceutical supply channel and at 3 p.m., the heritage foundation talks about operation warp speed, the race to find a vaccine for covid-19. >> tonight, president trump holds a campaign rally in omaha, nebraska. watch live at 8:30 p.m. eastern on c-span, online at www.c-span.org or listen live on the free c-span radio app. morning's,

on this morning's "washington journal" >> the duties of the office on which i'm about to enter, so help me god. ♪ ♪ at the white house last night, amy coney barrett becomes a 115th justice to the supreme court and the fifth woman to the court in its 231 year history. this happened hours after the senate voted 52-48 to confirm the 48-year-old justice, president trump's third nominee to the supreme court.

your reaction this morning, republicans democrats and us on twitter as well remember you can text us with your first name, city and state. let's begin with amy coney barrett at the white house yesterday. she delivered rare remarks for a justice just sworn into the high court, he or she is. >> the confirmation process has made ever clear to me one of the fundamental differences between the federal judiciary and the united states senate. acute isps the most the role of policy preferences. of a senator to pursue her policy preferences.

in fact, it would be a dereliction of duty for her to put policy goals aside. by contrast, it is the job of a judge to resist her policy preferences. it would be a dereliction of duty for her to give into them. federal judges do not stand for election, thus they have no basis for claiming that their preferences reflect those of the people. duty fromation of political preference is what makes the judiciary distinct among the three branches of government. independenceres not only from congress and the president but also from the private beliefs that might otherwise move her. the judicial oath captures the essence of the judicial duty,

the rule of law must always control. americans, even though we judges don't face alexion, we still work for you. -- don't face election, we still work for you. the oath that i have solemnly taken tonight means, at its core, that i will do my job without any fear or favor and that i will do so independently of both the political branches and of my own preferences. i love the constitution and the democratic republic that it establishes and i will devote myself to preserving it. barrett at the white house last night after being sworn in as the 115th justice of the supreme court.

the washington front page this morning -- from the washington post this morning in a different article by the washington post --

your reaction, james in seattle, washington, independent, you're up first, good morning to you. caller: good morning and thank you. the real reason why the democrats don't make it a priority and mitch mcconnell did what he did in the senate democrats allow him, they don't make a big deal of it. when a republican puts on these what -- right wing judges, they are all white people. the whole white race, democrats and republicans maintains the white privilege and democrats don't make it a big issue. they see nothing wrong with putting this judge on the supreme court because the constitution really means nothing, it's just a piece of paper and it can be interpreted to mean anything, slavery, jim

, it's left up to interpretation and these judges are allowed to interpret whatever they want. there is nothing in the constitution it says they cannot put this judge on. ae democrats could have made recess appointment of a judge when obama was in. it's not a priority to them. it really doesn't matter if the judge -- it doesn't take away the white people's rights. host: is it a priority for you? caller: it's not really a priority to me because it's not against the rules of the law. doing -- people doing something that they don't like but the constitution doesn't prohibit this. it doesn't prohibit the democrats of they really want to do something. they need to put two judges on, one for garland and one for ginsberg.

they don't care about it. mitch mcconnell said he wanted to make president obama a one term president. they say what they want to do and the constitution is fundamentally flawed and it's a racist manifesto. host: are you arguing for democrats putting more justices on the court if they get power? caller: that's what i'm saying, they can do it. the constitution does not prohibit it. host: i'm asking you if you want them to do it. caller: yes, i do, yes. host: dan from stafford, virginia, republican, good morning to you. caller: i am really glad this is over. in a lott was done better way than the previous supreme court judge. i did not appreciate the decor --of some of the sensors senators last night with hand motions or other things they

itered in the last caller, don't think what you're saying is helping anything. i don't see what the last guy's point was. thank you for allowing me to speak. host: pam in burlington, north carolina, democratic caller. caller: i can tell you what is less point was. his last point was that when the written, thisas , and you240 years ago cannot read the constitution as it was then. it's a living, breathing document. therefore, that's where amendments come in. he was talking about when it was written, slavery was legal. that are really against now was seemed ok then. host: your reaction to amy coney

barrett serving on the court and the process to put her there? caller: i think the process was the height of hypocrisy. i don't think, there is nothing in the constitution that says they couldn't do it. so, in that case, i get it. when it comes to what they were 2016, thatebruary of we shouldn't do it in an election year, the people have a right to their voice -- than two months from the election, they are doing it. all of them came out and said this. nowexcuses they are using they weren't using them. then, it's the height of hypocrisy and i don't agree with it at all and especially her. she wouldn't be there if we go

by the constitution as it was written. host: why do you say that? caller: no woman would be on the supreme court. if we were to go by the constitution as it was written them. host: i understand, what do you want democrats to do in response? um, i do agree with joe biden that they should have a bipartisan commission put together and go over what they should do. i don't think a decision to should be named -- i don't think a decision should be made now. host: that is a headline and politico recently look at the tweets from congresswoman alexandria ocasio-cortez --

the president also sending out a tweet saying bidens handler wants to expand the court. this is from this morning. joe and independent in rockville center, new york, how big an issue is this for you? i watch the commentary last night on c-span and some of the commentators online. you didn't watch commentary on c-span because we

don't have it. right, i was watching it and what troubled me more than anything else is american adversaries are winning. america is great because america's good and when america ceases to be good, america ceases to be great. i really, truly worry about the division in this country and whoever is rooting against america is probably cheering all this that's going on. it really does troubled me to the point that we are playing small ball here when our adversaries are playing the long game and i worry that this experiment of american democracy is altering now and i pray to god that i am wrong. what i saw last night was really something of a political maneuver. it was justice stevens that said the supreme court's wearing it should never happen on the grounds of the white house and should happen at the court. to see both the new justice and

president trump on the white house balcony just symbolized what is wrong with this country. i really hope and pray that we get to a new day when america does actually returned to being good. host: what is the impact of this on the supreme court? caller: ma'am, i wish i was smart enough to know that. i hope and pray that the court can actually look through the fog of politics and follow the law. there is no question in my mind that she is qualified to be a supreme court justice but i think the hypocrisy that was previously mentioned rings large this morning and i hope that she can see through the political fog and apply the law fairly and equitably to all. fivethirtyeight.com has this piece

here is democratic senator and judiciary committee member richard blumenthal on the floor about thistalking process and the impact of it. [video clip] >> what's happening today is sad , surreal, even shocking. eight days away from an election , in an unprecedented rush to confirm a supreme court nominee. are taking the place of the next president and the next senate and confirming the next

justice. even as the american people are denied a voice and a say in that decision. what's happening here is not republicanuse our colleagues have explicitly broken their word. we have submitted to the dishy harry committee -- to the judiciary committee cummaquid from 17 of them saying there would be no confirmation of a next justice during an election year. fact, normal because in historically, no justice has been confirmed after july in an election year. is not normal because we are here in the midst of a pandemic. confirming a justice who would potentially guesstimate our health care system now in the middle of a health care crisis. because themal administration has said as

recently as sunday through his chief of staff that there is no control over this pandemic. this abject surrender is shameful. and disgraceful. host: that was senater richard blumenthal on the floor last night. it was only republicans who voted to approve amy coney barrett. one republican, senator susan collins, up for reelection this year from the state of maine, did not vote for her. this is the headline from the press harold and her senator mitt romney voted for judge barrett. here is the headline from the salt lake tribune. here he is on the floor arguing

why he decided to vote yes. [video clip] >> judge barrett wrote in a thes law review that " if courts opinions change with its membership, public confidence in the court as an institution might decline. its members might be seen as partisan rather than impartial and case law as fueled by power rather than reason." consideration of institutional legitimacy has long been a factor in the courts deliberations. but i would argue that this factor should be given even as so manyght today of our other institutions are diminished and under attack. truewould be particularly where the court called upon to decide a matter that would determine the outcome of a presidential election. view, it is of paramount

importance that such a decision follow the law and the constitution where it leads, regardless of the outcome and thereby be beyond reproach, clearly nonpolitical and preferably unanimous. soon send judge barrett to the highest court in the land. i am confident she is up to the measure of the times in which we now live. senator on the floor yesterday. that was before the vote was held, 52 republicans voted yes to put her on the supreme court. there is one more step up her last nights swearing at the white house. the chief justice, john roberts, will administer the judicial ble justice honora coney barrett in a private ceremony today in the east conference room at the supreme court. then there will be a formal investiture ceremony that will take place at a special sitting

of the court in the courtroom at a later date. because of the pandemic, the court is not gathering together to hear cases. they are doing it virtually and there are cases that begin already next week or the week after. justice amy coney barrett is expected to begin work as early as tuesday. boston, an eugene in independent, good morning to you. caller: good morning. and thank you for c-span. nomination of judge barrett, i wasn't for it or against it. is that now six of the nine supreme court justices are of catholic faith.

i don't feel that's really reflective of america at this time because there is other denominations of catholicism as well. where is the methodist, protestant, baptist, christian? i wouldn't want to see six judges of nine of anyone faith. i just don't feel comfortable with that. same catholic faith that has been destroying the lives of children all over the world for centuries. church, what'sic been going on with the destruction of children is not new. that's been going on for centuries. i think that's really a reflection of what america really is. i. think it's really sad

in kentucky, a republican, good morning to you. your reaction to amy coney barrett being confirmed to the supreme court? i support her and think she is qualified and i trust her to be a lady that will make fair decisions in the land that we live in. it's hard to get fair decisions anymore. crime were accused of a and you had a jury of the mob democrats and what went on in 2020, how would you feel sitting facing a jury like that? when everything is wrong, nothing the president has done is right. this lady, look how they

criticized her and her qualifications are supreme. i am glad and i hope that our supreme court will make just and fair decisions, not be put in place to make an activist decision. what the senator just said before i came on. i stand with him and our country. we need good leadership. thank you very much. in milwaukee, wisconsin, democratic caller, the supreme court added another justice but also made a big decision for wisconsin yesterday. your thoughts on both? caller: i am really upset about it. but it's what i expect from trump. trump, to me, has only had to go since he's been in the white house and that's to destroy obama's legacy and steal tax

dollars. it's because of his jealousy and racism toward obama. he is not concerned about the millions of people that are losing their health care. he is not concerned about the millions of people that are protected but -- from pre-existing conditions. other pre-existing conditions and the other issue. i lost my train of thought. my daughter covered ton -- being the age of 26 on that really makes a difference because i have two college students and they don't make enough money to provide their own health care. they are just working small jobs just to keep money in their pocket. that really made a huge difference in my life and my

sister's life who had college age students. my daughter, when she became able to provide her own health care, she did have obamacare. she was able to pay the premium and at the end of a year, she did not have a problem with them taking it out of her taxes to cover the amount she was not able because she didn't have the finances to pay upfront. so she paid through her taxes and we are grateful for that. she had dental and health care. jealousy forhis obama is going to cost a lot of people lives. he has only one goal. the amount of satisfaction he is getting just because it's obamacare and making people suffer during a pandemic.

he doesn't care. i don't know when people will wake up. he doesn't care about them either. he is practicing herd immunity at his rallies. he is using them as experiments. that's what he wants and that's why he's not trying to fight the pandemic because he wants herd immunity and that's why he's not giving nancy pelosi the funds for the stimulus because he doesn't want to provide protection for americans. schools to have protection or jobs to have protection. he wants everybody to go out and get infected and he doesn't care about who dies except for his immediate family. they are notlieve amongst the crowds and they are protected and the only reason he is protected -- he is out there is is because he was already infected. he only cares about himself. host: on the supreme court's

decision yesterday, let me fill in for viewers who may have missed this -- the supreme court upheld wisconsin's voting laws monday, rejecting an effort to require the counting of absentee ballots that are sent back to election officials on or just before election day. means that-3 ruling absentee balance will only be counted if they are in the hounds of municipal clerks by the time the polls close on november 3. the justices determined the court should not be the ones to decide the election rules amid the coronavirus pandemic that is surging in wisconsin and around the world. care.you mentioned health i want to share this piece from you from the los angeles times. it's from their deputy editorial board editor. in his opinion --

that question comes before the court november 10, go to our www.c-span.org for our coverage of that oral argument. william, an independent, good morning. what is your reaction to just as on the supreme court? caller: i think it's a good thing because even though this is an election year, our have a job toces

do. they are doing their job. irregardless of the pandemic, regardless because of the politicized they are everything. they need to's take a step back and do their job. playing games,it trying to curry favor amongst the citizens. we are the american party. ok? we are not all democrats, we are not all republicans, we are not all independents, we are not all liberals, we are the american people and the american people put them in office to do a job, period. if you are not going to do cookeville, tennessee. toler: a great big thank you

harry reid, it was not for him changing the rules, none of this would have been possible. thank you for taking my call. host: bob, referring to what happened in 2013, and the washington post this morning, it goes through the rule changes that have been put in place to allow amy coney barrett's nomination to go forward. nomination,ch's senate republicans invokes the nuclear option to change rules for the supreme court nominee so that they no longer needed 60 senators to advance to a final confirmation vote. that effectively finished the task senate democrats began in 2013, when they deploy the same maneuver to change confirmation rules for all executive branch picks in nearly all judicial nominees. in 2019, senate republicans changed the rules to trim the tried available for floor debate

and district court judges prefer the change, nominations could debate for a total of 30 hours. /that two hours for all nominees, except those for the court and the cabinet and circuit courts and some independent boards. other practices are generally used by the previous democratic led senate that republicans have neglected, including the blue slip tradition for circuit court nominees, giving a state senator veto power over judicial picks from his or her state. the washington post looking not only at the latest edition -- addition to the supreme court by the trump administration but the impact overall that senator mitch mcconnell has had on the judicial branch. leader mcconnell sending this the senateesterday, just confirmed to judge amy coney barrett to the supreme court of the united states, one of the most impressive nominees for public office, and a

generation, will serve for life on our highest court. politico has the back story of how leader mcconnell came to the conclusion that the president needed to nominate justice amy coney barrett. how the senate gop's right turn paved the way for barrett. this piece written. one day after supreme court justice ruth bader ginsburg died, president trump told majority leader mitch mcconnell that lots of people thought barbara lagoa would be the best pick. the cuban-american judge from florida could give a huge political boost to the president in a key swing state. o'connell had a robot all, pick amy coney barrett instead. that the social conservative would have the best chance of uniting the party, and the thought of even picking someone else, he needed to call mcconnell and give him a chance to change the president's mind.

you can read more on politico. .om, a democratic caller how big of an issue is this for you? issue: it's a pretty good . fat donnie and mcconnell play and if democrats take control of the senate and the white house, they should do the same. the first thing i would actually do is investigate judge kavanaugh to see if he lied during his confirmation hearing and impeach him if he did. and packing the court is required, do it. the republicans would if they had the chance. robert, in brooklyn, your turn. the democrats should pack the supreme court, here's

how they should do it. first, this has to be done within two years, so that even if the republicans take back the senate in the midterms, they won't be able to stop it. the first thing they should do is to name 12 radical left-wing justices to the supreme court. damn aboutn't give a how bad it looks, they should do it. and then reverse a bunch of cases so that we would get everything we want or at least as much as possible, including overturning citizens united. once we have all that done, or ,s much as we can get done mission and 50 or 100 more justices to the supreme court and do something similar to the district courts and to the circuit court as well. the ideas once we get we want, we crash the system completely,

so there's no longer a working federal judiciary. then the only way to restore it would be at the very least by a constitutional amendment, or as i would prefer, by a brand-new constitution, rewritten from the ground up. we need a new one. , a republican. to justice barrett being confirmed. i obviously think it's good for the country, with all the rationalizations of whether it's right or not, those are just words. he really is about political power and who is in office and who can do what. everything else is just window dressing. they won't last long. i think there will be a change. but a few quick points and i'll take less time, hopefully. when donald trump was elected i told my family and friends the

next day, the democrats in the press will have americans believing that he divided the country. this is a sin as he was elected. it didn't take long. for four years, the constant criticism in the press. i've not heard one positive story from major networks. i don't have cable so i don't have fox. but the others on the air, not one positive story in four years. also read about the civil rights 1960, look at lbj's position. also we here that obama saved the auto industry. the topics stick to here. larry, democratic caller. they said that they were going to overturn roe v. wade and the aca.

that's what the man says out of his own mouth. but you don't believe what he says? i don't understand these people that support this man. this man is a racist. he's the worst president in history. thatlks about the people vote for him and every race, and he talks about them. have a nice day. republican, ina kentucky. caller: i want to talk about obamacare. obamacare for .bout four years that's only when she could get in kentucky. her premiums alone were over $700 a month. $15,000to pay the first and once that was paid, everything was denied. she almost died waiting on them

to give her the testing that she needed. i think obamacare needs to have a lot of work done to it. it doesn't need to be put forth like it is, everybody should pay the same thing. think having an injustice on -- court i don't think that i think that she will do with right for the country. i don't think that she will overturn obamacare. i don't think she will be any part of that. i think she will vote strictly by the constitution. that's when america was founded on, our constitution and we should stick to that. her: what do you think of

becoming only the fifth woman to serve on the high court? man it if it had been a would've been the same difference. maybe even worse. she's not gonna be another ginsberg, she's gonna be her own person and she should be given a chance to do what's right for the country. people should just shut up about it and do with right for the country. whenever they talk about packing the courts, that's not what our constitution is based on. nine and50 years with that's what we should have, nine. host: newspapers this morning noting that amy coney barrett becomes the for female justice 's 231 yeart history. we are getting your reaction to

this this morning. the politico magazine on their website has a piece. the other tools that democrats have to rein in the supreme court, packing is not the only action. congress could also limit what kind of cases the court can hear . look into this piece. they talked to legal advisors and look at the constitution and say when it comes to the issue of abortion, congress could say you cannot hear any cases dealing with that issue. mississippi, good morning. caller: good morning. i wanted to say amy coney barrett has no track record so far. so i'm not going to assume what she would do in any situation, i did not plan on calling and but i heard a lot of talk about the aca and the idea that health care would become more limited

as a result of the decision while she is in the court. first, congratulations on her nomination for her as an individual. and i wanted to say that the bottom line for me is that -- i can't presume she's one way or the other, she has no record yet, but assuming that people are right when they say that health care could be negatively affected, fewer people would have it. it's important to start considering that health care might be looked at as a national security issue in the sense that when certain basic human rights and services are out of reach for people, i think that's where criminality comes from. s, not always. do you pay a person two dollars to have health care or a police officer five dollars to make sure they don't react badly not

having health care? if you look at the idea of health care is a right, which i , iteve the u.n. says it is becomes a little clearer that , more problems tend to arise because people don't want to be sick. people get angry when it's preventable. james, that supreme court case on the affordable care act, that will be her november 10 -- we heard on november 10. , in california, texted us this morning to say scotus has become a political body with no credibility. pam in tennessee says that party disciples hope that justice barrett is da's in the hall for president trump to remain in

office even if he loses, which he has said aloud to prove that the election was rigged. conrad lindsey graham said they will already contest the result, this is how dictatorships are born. we can only hope that she meant what she said about judges putting aside personal preferences and following the law. we are weak week away from election day 2020. already according to u.s. , the 65 projects -- 65 millionans americans of already voted, many are black americans. cnn reporting this morning, by 621day today, more than thousand black americans voted in georgia, compared to 286,242 two weeks ago before the 2016 election. in maryland, 192,775 voted compared to 18,000 430.

and california had over 303,145 106,360 two than weeks before the election four years ago. that's according to a data company that provides analytics academics, and progressive advocacy organizations sprayed we are continuing our battleground series on the washington journal. we talked about florida yesterday. you can find it on our website. we are talking about wisconsin today. good timing after the supreme court ruled that the deadline stayed in place in wisconsin, november 3 for receiving those mail-in ballots. it cannot be extended. that's coming up in our next two hours of the washington journal. but before then, more of your calls on amy coney barrett, confirmed to the supreme court. in virginia.crat good morning. caller: good morning.

republicans said in 2016 that during a presidential election and we need to let the people decide. they said that we would let the people decide. and now eight days before the election they are deciding who's going to be the next judge in the supreme court. they have no credibility. they have no water. and amy did not answer any question. she slammed justice roberts for the affordable care act. there are seven cap on -- seven x on the court -- seven catholic s on the court. she's talking about being pro-life but she supports ar-15's. you talked about the -- but she supports gumline.

-- supports gun rights. obama took the nuclear option nonna -- senator mcconnell held denomination of 100 judges in the lower court. when they talk about we did it first, no, republicans stopped everything obama wanted to do and judges were held in the lower courts. host: how do you respond to what goes around comes around? because of the decision by senator reid and republicans and now they just smash the record on putting judges, circuit court judges, lower court judges, conservatives on this courts? what was obama supposed to do? wait six years before he could nominate judges? that wasn't right. what was he supposed to do, peel to the supreme court, the highest in the land?

was a conflict for them. but the republicans don't care. they changed the law anyway. i think sometimes democrats made , they knew the republicans had no honor so they should have change the supreme court. democracy, mr.ur trump wants to suppress votes. he's attacking our institutions the fbi, the cia, standing next to putin. democracy?bout we are losing our democracy. senate wea democratic should limit executive power. i don't care if it's democrat or republican.

we should limit executive power. and others toou listen to senator marsha blackburn, member of the judiciary committee. talking is yesterday, about the impact of this confirmation. [video clip] >> i have heard from tennesseans who have set i have changed my mind about who i'm going to vote for in the presidential race because of the quality of judges . we have now hit 220 judges, and because of the caliber of your supreme court justice nominee. how this shows that there is a place, a seat at the table, for women that come from the political center and center-right. and while our democratic

colleagues chose to be disrespectful of the process, of the committee, of the institution, and also of judge barrett, we know that part of their frustration was born out of the fact that justice barrett would not submit, would not submit -- host: the republican senator from tennessee, marsha blackburn. oregon, an portland,

democratic caller. caller: i would like to make a distinction, because i think it's often confused, between court packing and increasing the size of the court. court packing is something like what fdr did, when you want to keep your ideology in the court, but increasing the size of the court has been argued for by people on the left and the right , because there's a variety of reasons for increasing. there's -- we are a bigger country than we were. the circuit courts, the number of decisions have actually been circuitwn, that the courts are increasing the number of decisions. circuit courts often disagree. when that happens, folks have to step down. if we increase the size of the court to equal the number of circuits, or even have a safety

15, and we 11 to adopt circuit procedures like having panels and bank proceedings, then we will have a more efficient court, one that will turn out more decisions. and i believe firmly this is a nonpartisan issue. i don't care visit done by a democratic or republican president, doesn't make any difference. host: you are voting for joe biden? caller: of course, i'm a lifelong democrat. i cannot conceive of voting for a republican president or even down ballot given the political culture that i very much disagree with. they aren't people, -- they aren't evil, but they have a very different relationship between power and the powerless. host: so you are advocating for

more justices, and saves a nonpartisan issue, but i want you to say -- to listen to former vice president joe biden when he's asked about court packing. >> -- amy coney barrett -- [video clip] >> amy coney barrett would give the circuits a 6-3 majority. would you move to add more justices to the supreme court? i'll put together a national commission a bipartisan scholars, constitution scholars, democrats, republicans, liberal, conservative, and i will ask them to come back with reformndations on how to the court system because it's getting out of whack. the way in which it's being handled. it's not about court packing. there's a whole number of things that constitutional scholars have debated and i'm looking to

see which recommendations might be made. >> this is a live ball. >> is a live ball. you will find that there's a lot of conservative scholars that say that as well. the last thing we need to do is turn the supreme court into a political football, whoever has the most votes get whatever they want. presidents come and go. the report justices stay for generations. host: michael? caller: i think he's going the right direction. there are a lot of conservative legal scholars come i think of professor jonathan shirley who wrote about increasing the size of the court. i like him quite a lot actually. he would not be a bad choice on a court himself. that is that, biden is moving in the right direction there. and making it a truly bipartisan somission, 50-50 composition

that won't even have the appearance of unfairness or being something that democrats favor. i truly believe that the court size needs to be increased just because of changing demographics . the increasing number of decisions that are handed down, the increasing number of decisions the circuit court are handling up. i really don't care if trump or it, let'sn't, -- does get the court reconditioned. nine is not a sacred number. the justices used to write circuit and there would be 11 of them. let's just increase the court and let nobody think at the barda sin issue. institution. tennessee, and independent. caller: good morning.

,peaking to michael's comments it's an interesting discussion. think it's either naive or just ingenuous, to think it's not ideological at this point is to really ignore reality. -- i'm not ted cruz a ted cruz fan, but he gave a good history lesson last friday during the democratic no-show committee meeting. he went all the way back to where this started, you can go back to the court packing idea from fdr. that was shot down then as being unconstitutional. people could see it for what it was. that's what it would be now. that's why the democrats are so concerned and republican so

thrilled, because they suited -- see judicial appointments as being partisan. that's a shame. i think judge barrett is a well-qualified theorist. what i understand, mayor garland was two. too.rrick garland was if you look at the way judges have come down on decisions. i've spoken on this before. it's just a fact that liberal justices are pretty much down the line on partisan votes. they vote in lockstep. they can be counted on. was appointed by reagan if i'm not mistaken. he's fairly liberal. roberts broke the tie on the aca issue.

conservatives break ranks a lot more than liberals do. it's ironic that liberals would be concerned. it should be the conservatives, and the conservatives i know who are extremely concerned when we hear this talk as we have heard this morning. just to consider court packing, just as they burn it to the takes, put as many as it to get our agenda through. i see this on social media all the time. some of us conservatives have forums we werem people -- where we were friendly it'speople 10 years ago really sad to see. host: to your point about republicans and democrats saying -- seeing this as political wins. we had this headline from ,entucky, mitch mcconnell

writing amy coney barrett supreme court combination is a win beyond election. caller: yes. candidates particularly will tout this one way or the other and use it for their own ends. i'm sure the press will follow suit. you could spin that either way. you could spend that as anti-or or-mcconnell -- anti pro-mcconnell. host: and mcconnell was up for reelection in seven days. caller: he's probably pulled ahead, hasn't he? it was a tight race and might still be. for hisng that issue

conservative base and i think using it effectively. is a service to the justices with the way they get -- there's a disservice to the justices, to garland, barrett, cavanaugh. the process is really corrupted. if we start court packing, and independent judiciary is just gone. host: would you be on board with the commission that joe biden is talking about? caller: if it were truly who haven, which folks been highly respected on both down thest to tamp nine is a good, number that has worked well. i don't see the need for that. but if it would help to calm things down.

that would be fine. illinois, an independent. caller: i do have a question, how common is it for three supreme court appointees during a four year period of one president? it does not happen often in my memory, maybe my memory is bad. enough of not heard -- i call myself an independent, because we have nothing but republicrats. that's the fault of the system. it reflects a lot of what michael from oregon was talking about, a lot of the systems become arcane and twisted to fit people's desires. the fact that mitch mcconnell could lose his election and not even feel bad about it because

he has achieved what he has tried to do over the last two decades, which is pack much of the supreme court. he put extreme effort and has in the last four to six years managed to get very conservative judges on the federal circuit courts. so if you want to talk about packing, the whole federal has been heavily influenced by the folks that mitch mcconnell got through, especially since trump got in. even president obama, for anything to get past he had to make such concessions, even judge garland, who would they not even -- who would not even be acknowledged if offered up for appointment. president obama, most of the people trying to proposed to get through were very conservative,

even if they were democrats. host: jill, we are running out of time. on wikipedia just answer your question, they note how many justices under each president, in recent history come if you look at this list, ronald reagan had four, they note that one of these appointments involved elevating a sitting justice to chief justice of the united states. two, bill clinton now --orge w two, and i'm sorry? in one term,s all if reagan got four or more, but it was in two terms. this we will return to conversation in our last half-hour at 9:30. coming up, our battleground

series continues with a focus on wisconsin. we will get a lay of the land with just one week until election day. first up, craig gilbert from the milwaukee journal sentinel and then our next guest. ♪ [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2020] >> that is what gives us the confidence to sit here and describe the first 10 seconds of the universe. >> it all started with a big bang. there?here a song in >> i would not give a reporter an interview unless they have the best perks, they have to read the book. tv's in-depth has looked at the top nonfiction authors for an in-depth conversation with c-span2 viewers.

on sunday, at noon, join us for a live 2010 anniversary special with more book talk with authors. your phone calls, and a look back at memorable moments. backth your picture on the question mike to memo those days? -- back? , do you remember those days? >> the book is an examination of life at yale. live at noon,pth eastern, on c-span2. >> washington journal continues. host: over the next five days, washington journal will be focused on key battleground states with political reporters and analysts on the ground looking at what has changed since 2016 with public policy issues and motivating voters. and looking at recent political

trends that could give us a clue on how that state might vote. today is the state of wisconsin. joining us is craig gilbert. paper andn with your the headline this morning on the supreme court's decision. u.s. supreme court declines to change wisconsin's voting rules and keep election day deadline for mail-in ballots. what did the court decide in what is the impact? caller: -- guest: the courts decided that ballots -- not to overturn an appellate decision. they said ballots cannot be accepted after election day. this whole site has a history dating back. of chaos andot court decisions at that point by

a federal judge to allow the receipt of absentee mail-in ballots that had been bait -- mailed by election day but did until several days later. the supreme court let that stand back in april and the issue was revisited this fall in another lawsuit. in the same federal judge ruled shouldember that states accept ballots that arrive after election day if they were mailed by election day. i was overturned by an appellate court -- it was overturned by an appellate court. he went to the supreme court who up out -- it went to the supreme the appellateeld court ruling. so we will not have an extended .ount where we are waiting the ballots will have to be

received by city clerks by election day. another article, election day in seven days, here is when we might know a winner and how each candidate could claim victory. when will we know the victory in wisconsin? the latest on at wednesday morning. it could be 5:00 in the morning, it could be 2:00 in the morning, it could be tuesday night. it depends on how close it is. we are expecting that it will take longer to count absentee ballots in some key cities, particularly the city of milwaukee. wisconsin has an unusual election system. elections are entirely conducted on the local, not county level. one locality does a different from another. the city of milwaukee and 38

cities count absentee ballots at a central location. all the other communities send those ballots back to local polling places and they are counted along with the election day votes. seven cities like milwaukee which has what's called a central count, you have the potential for the absentee ballot count to be reported in one big number late in the process. that has happened in the past in milwaukee. you could be talking about 150,000 or 200,000 votes, in a place for the city of milwaukee where most of the votes will be absentee ballots. -- we willcome in probably not get that number before midnight. it's a close election, the city of milwaukee is a very democratic city which will contribute heavily to the democratic vote. those votes will matter in a close election. host: this is how we are dividing the lines and we

encourage you to join in on the conversation with your comment or question about campaign 2020. if you are supporting me trump-pence ticket, (202) 748-8001. if you're supporting the biden-harris ticket (202) 748-8000. if you are undecided or have another candidate, (202) 748-8002. wisconsin residents, please dial-in (202) 748-8003. or you could text us with your first name, city and state at that same number, (202) 748-8003 . according to a new poll by the research center, the university of wisconsin-madison. 44 inleads 53 to wisconsin. this poll was taken october 13 through the 21st. it's a bigger lead than he had in september. what's the lay of the land now? caller: the polling in wisconsin is pretty steady. having a is typically

smaller lead for joe biden than what he has had in the national polls. in wisconsin polling that has arranged with most of the polls falling within a four to 10 point range. some people think the numbers closer to the small end, something gets closer to the large end, but it's very consistently showing biden ahead , despite all the twists and turns in the campaign. despite some chattering events and developments we have had. the numbers have never really changed too much. there's not a lot of evidence in the polling that the leader -- the lead is shrinking. it's not clear that it's getting bigger. we have to see more pre-election polls to know that. but the lay of the land is based on the polling, joe biden has

lead. but the state is in play. both sides are putting everything into it. the president is here, in wisconsin, i'm in washington, the vice president is in on wednesday. -- joe bidenon will be there on friday. there's tons of money being spent on both sides on television. this is clearly a short list of states where both sides are going all out to the bitter end. on october 20, trump won by 22,700 48 votes, the third time in the past five presidential elections that this was decided by less than a percentage points. the key to his victory was

thoseg noncollege whites, without four-year degrees, by close to 20 points over clinton according to some post election estimates, this is more than half of the states electorate. do they turn out again? do they vote for the president? president has not had the margin with that group in the polling that he had in the election against hillary clinton. that does not mean he won't win by the same amount, but we have not seen it in the polling. this is an important group of voters. if you look at the top six or seven battleground states, white voters who do not have a college degree, those blue-collar white voters that we read about all the time have a larger share of the vote in wisconsin than any other top battleground, well over 50%.

trump did a lot better than mitt romney with this group of voters. that's what moved the numbers from a seven point victory in 2012 to a less than one point trump victory in 2016. and you saw that more dramatically in a lot of small towns, in central, western, and northern wisconsin. places obama won by 20 or 30 points. we saw that in a lot of these places. that's the demographic in those communities. hillary clinton was clearly part of the equation, she was very unpopular with those voters. i think joe biden is arguably less unpopular with that segment of the electorate which may explain why he appears to be doing better than hillary clinton did with those voters. host: why didn't hillary clinton

overcome those voters with other voters? and what does joe biden need to do differently? who does he need to show up that didn't show up in 2016? better her margins were than past nominees in some parts of the state. she did even better in madison in the area around madison, which is very blue and she did better and trump did worse in the republican suburbs and democratic suburbs around milwaukee. everything that happened outside madison, that's a huge proportion. that's what she could not overcome. she also arguably did not try really hard. wisconsin notoriously was a state she did not visit.

as the general election nominee. putdid not see the effort into wisconsin that democrats put into the other two nailbiter five,ons of the last which was in 2004 with al gore and john kerry putting in a tremendous amount of time, traveling to the state, not just traveling and going to western and northern wisconsin. part of this was the sheer difference in the amount of energy and effort that democrats put into the state. host: let's get to some calls. our first out of idaho. supporting joe biden. caller: good morning. , the card questions that they mail to to send in because of the pandemic. i heard they only gave you two

days to mail it out and you had two days to hand in, or do they in weeks but you have to get it in? linef they have a whole out there voting in different areas, and all of a sudden the time runs out, people are standing out there, lots of people, do they shut the doors and tell them that your vote doesn't count now because we are closed? those are my questions. caller: they should not shut the doors. in the past when this has happened when we have had lines, when the polls closed, those people have been allowed to vote . in terms of the first question, i think the caller is referring to the absentee ballot process. what happened in wisconsin was that requests were mailed out to

registered voters and they could fill out those forms and send them in and have a ballot sent to them, or they could go online and ask for a ballot but they had to prove they were a registered voter and get the ballot sent to them. in terms of the time urgency, we are now at a point, voting by mail has been going on for many weeks. thannsin has passed more 1.3 million ballots, most but not all of them by mail. that's been going on for weeks. to approach 50% of the total turnout, more than half of the votes, probably more than half of the votes in this election will be cast before election day, which has never happened in a fall election in wisconsin. but now we are getting to a point where you are running the

risk of not having your ballot arrive in time, if you wait too many days to send it. you have the option of voting in person early, that window started this past tuesday. weeks, they can we have the hours are had close to 300,000 people voter early. that's an absentee ballot but it's a different way of voting. and a lot of people who worried about voting by mail, but still felt an urgency to cap their ballot are voting early in person. john, ingo to wisconsin, he voted for the president, good morning. mr. gilbertt, hello

. guest: oh i'm sorry, i did not hear that, good morning. first, a few facts. subscriber, are you paid by the journal or by kennett? guest: i'm an employee of the milwaukee journal sentinel and have been for more than 30 years. caller: are you aware of the way milwaukee people are harvesting after goingt now door-to-door and taking ballots and bringing them in. many have already been posted, and the same in medicine to a .esser extent

i don't think it's a fair .lection i hope there is a group of people who think that trump may have done a good job around the state, but i don't think they and the madison milwaukee area. host: let me lead there. are you following? guest: i don't know what he's referring to with respect to ballot harvesting. you have to deliver your ballot in wisconsin to city officials. it doesn't allow for third parties to go around collecting ballots and then delivering them to the local clerks and i'm not aware of that happening. host: the president just tweeted , strongly trending on google, that immediately after the second debate is can i change my vote, this refers to changing it to me he says, the answer in

most states is yes, go do it. is this true? can you change your vote? caller: i don't believe so, you can change your mind, but you can't go back and recast your ballot. host: even if it's absentee and dissented in? caller: no, your ballot is final. host: bob, you are undecided, good morning. caller: good morning. guest: good morning. incredible as it far as these battleground states or two ofned that one the largest cities in that state count more typically in each election then all the rest of the state combined. i think it's admirable that we finally have somebody who gets out the rural vote in these battleground states, as was

proven in the last election, and motivates as the more senior voters that have not voted in quite a while. host: let's take that, the rural vote and wisconsin versus the urban vote. caller: if not the case in wisconsin that one or two cities combined outweigh the rest of the state. it's not even close to being the case. the city of milwaukee is probably 10% of the vote in wisconsin. that's easily the biggest city in the state. madison is less. so even if you combine a few counties that madison and milwaukee sit in, it's far less than half the vote in the state of wisconsin. the rural vote is a big deal we saw that in 2016, the swing in the rural vote was how donald trump won wisconsin.

there is a big urban vote and suburban vote in wisconsin and a big rural vote in wisconsin. these are not monolithic. the rural vote in wisconsin is not monolithically can serve it in or republican. there are role counties, particularly in the west that have a long history of voting democratic. trump,d vote for donald but often by small margins. they swing a lot. some could swing back. the cerumen vote is not monolithic. we have very republican suburbs around milwaukee which are probably getting a little less republican, but also extremely democratic suburbs around madison and just north of the city of milwaukee and very purple suburbs in parts of southeastern wisconsin and the

green bay fox valley area. so as much as we talk in broad suburbanbout urban and and rural voters, they are not all caps on the same cloth. swinghow to swing voters -- how did swing voters swing in 2018. guest: some did swing back to democrats but not a lot. elections,on three lost his third attempt for third term by one point. if you think about the swing from 2016 to 2018, you had a president at the top of the presidentrepublican winning by less than a point, and republican governor losing by a little more than a .2 years later. you also had a democratic senator, tammy baldwin, winning by double digits. big swing there. but the interesting thing is

that some of the communities that swung so hard for donald , particularly the most rural ones got a little more republican. but others swung back in voting democratic for governor and president. so not the same pattern and trends across the state, a swing back, but not a massive swing back to democrats in the midterms. host: zach, in indianapolis sends us this text, knowing how most trump voters are traditionally silent voters, which is why the 2016 productions were so skewed, what has wisconsin done this time to consider these silent voters compared to 2016? caller: -- guest: there's not a lot of evidence that the polls missed lots of people. one of the criticisms of polling in 2015 was that pollsters did

not wait for education, which meant that the people they were sampling were disproportionately college graduates and so they were missing the more blue-collar vote, which is why they maced the election in some key states like wisconsin, that is not really apply in wisconsin where the leading and most frequent pollsters has always waited for education, that's marquette law school. what happened in that particular poll i think was that it was done eight days before the election, you had a lot of voters who do not like donald trump or hillary clinton and they were undecided and not entrenched in their preferences and there was a swing for donald trump in that final week. that was an important explanation with what happens with the polling in the disconnect. there were voters who made up their mind, conflicted motors,

voters unhappy with both candidates and they overwhelmingly voted for donald trump over hillary clinton four years ago. this time around, that group of undecided is smaller and there were fewer voters that disliked both candidates because donald trump is more popular than he was four years ago with republican voters. and joe biden is more popular than hillary clinton was four years ago. that's one reason why the polling has been since stable, more than it was four years ago, the electorate is more doug in an has not move much over the course of these dramatic events. host: teresa is in menomonee falls, wisconsin, supporting the president. caller: good morning. twofold, one of

the things that i noticed in wisconsin, and you sort of mentioned it a little bit, there are not many people who will admit that they are actually there isr donald trump no unity, there is so much like to i would sure see wisconsin and america become more unified and a lot of people think that biden will be able to because he reaches out .nd empathize with everybody it sounds good, but in reality the people that have to become undivided are the american people and what they believe in. and being able to have a debate between people instead of putting people down. and that's one of the things that i don't care for about

model withnot a good how he talks and how he talks about people. for the he has done united states is more than i have ever seen from any presidential person in my life. and i really just want to urge democrats, who went back to biden, to really think about president trump again. and the other thing that worries me, and this has been from day one, i do not believe that biden biden, who he used to be. i feel sorry for him for that. but something is not right with him. host: ok, i will leave it there so we can get a response. guest: wisconsin is a very divided state, as noted. it's not a brand-new thing.

wisconsin has been incredibly polarized over governor walker and his time in office. he took office in 2011 and served until early 2019. i remember the 2004 campaign, which went down to the wire in wisconsin between george w. bush and john kerry. that was in the aftermath of the iraq war, the early stages, and it was an incredibly bitter campaign. it felt like the most bitter campaign it we had in a long time. now, i do not want to downplay the divisions of bitterness we see now, because they are really significant, but it is not entirely new. of it's part of the fabric our politics. predates donald trump, but it certainly has been amplified over the last four years. and i think a lot of us who

cover politics wonder where we go from here with respect to the political climate, the political culture and a level of division that, you know, though distressed of people on both sides. i do not know what the answer to maybe a couple years from now, or four years from now, the political culture will feel healthier. it does not feel especially healthy right now to a lot of people. host: terry supporting the former vice president. welcome to the conversation. caller: yes, my name is gerry wh ite, president of the local naacp. jesus christm that aid, joeocrat and he s

biden, save this world. doesesus christ, when he something, he does it right. and it is going to be right. and i believe that. i believe vice president joe biden can do that. harris can do. that. host: dan in maine, voting for president trump. good morning. caller: good morning. involved,has been ever since george washington conscripted my ancestor to fight. and my children are both army officers. my daughter flies a black hawk helicopter and my son jumps out of them. as a result of donald trump's foreign policy, they did not have to go in, and they were supposed to go and save our embassy when solo meaning was

there, however they did not have to go because president trump got him before he could take hostages at our embassy. he has made so many foreign policy advancements, it is hard to tell them all. i think he has a hard time talking about them all, but he got baghdadi, the leader of isis. and just this week, he got the leader of al qaeda in afghanistan. so, the foreign policy is something that people do not look at, but my kids are involved and they didn't have to go back into afghanistan or iraq. he has protected me and my family from all that anxiety. host: dan, go ahead. caller: i look at that and trump , i have an analogy of foreign policy as being football.

bardi,ways loved vincent the green bay packers, but i was wondering if there is an analogy of how are the packer fans going to vote? and i think the packer fans are going to vote for donald trump. host: dan, thank you for your family's service. craig gilbert, you can respond to his analogy, but also the military vote in wisconsin. guest: well, the military vote in terms of military personnel it veterans is not as big as is in states like virginia and florida, but it exists. i made me think back, mentioned at the 2004 campaign, which was such a contrast, because i mentioned how bitter it was, but it was against the backdrop of war and foreign policy, which was at the forefront of that election. and here are, you know, the

bitterness of this campaign, the divisions of this campaign are for entirely different reasons. and so there are foreign policy differences, obviously, between the candidates, and it kind of cuts differently within the two parties, across the two parties, than it did in 2004. whether the role that is playing in this campaign is a little harder to discern, because as the caller noted, for a lot of voters, foreign policy, especially when we are not in a war, are not necessarily at the forefront. in this case at the forefront of a campaign in which we are obviously in the middle of a pandemic and there are big economic issues, as well, related to that. host: doug in newport news, virginia, supporting the president. caller: i think wisconsin should take a longer look at president

trump. he has made the economy strong. i'm retired navy, fifth-generation military. and if joe biden gets in control, we are in trouble. donald trump is making peace in the middle east when nobody else has been able to do it. they have all talked about it, nobody has done anything about it. i do not want to see our country head down a socialist path. i have been in communist countries, and if anybody thinks that is the way to live, leave this country. that flag, people died for, so you can go out and protest, not rob and burn. that is not what it is about. you can voice your opinion and get off the street and go home. host: laura -- sorry, doug. laura in silver springs, supporting the president. caller: i keep hearing a lot of callers talking about the great

foreign policy of this president and all the wonderful things he has done for the country, but as an african-american woman it is very difficult to feel protected in your own country, where your people have lived for centuries, when the president speaks as he does against people who look like you. and it is disconcerting to me because, as an african-american in this country i cannot put aside my color and just look at the so-called wonderful things he has done, because my very color could cause my death. so, when people talk about democrats turning back to donald trump, you need to think about some of the african-american friends, if you have any, and how they feel about this president. thank you. host: mr. gilbert? any thoughts? guest: just on the political

side, it will be interesting to see -- it will be interesting to follow the votes of african-americans in this election. wisconsin is a state that does not have a large african-american population, even compared to the other great lakes battlegrounds like michigan and pennsylvania, it is less than 10% of the vote, heavily concentrated around milwaukee, but it was an ingredient in the defeat of hillary clinton four years ago because the turn out of african-american voters dropped significantly from what was a high level with president obama's reelection in 2012, an extraordinary turnout, and the turnout in 2016 did not really compare. and that was not the major driver of hillary clinton's defeat, but it was an ingredient of her defeat in wisconsin.

democrats have internalized that, they are haunted by that, and they are doing everything they can organizationally to try to mobilize that boot -- vote, given the size of the city of milwaukee and the importance of african-americans in the democratic coalition. so that will be something that will be interesting to watch, whether donald trump on the one hand can get a higher percentage of the african-american vote. he is not going to get a significant percentage, but will he get a higher percentage than he got four years ago, or mitt romney got into thousand 12, or democrats succeeded in mobilizing african-american voters and will be see a bigger turn out, and as a result, will that add to joe biden's margins statewide? host: here is a text from anne.

she wants you to talk about foxconn. she says, you should know about it. what impact could it have on the election? guest: i do not see foxconn having a dramatic impact. there have been so many things movehave not appeared to the election numbers fundamentally, and that includes the protest movement, the unrest in places like kenosha. the pandemic is complicating donald trump's reelection campaign, but again we have not seen the numbers move a lot. foxconn is an issue that will be important to some in southeastern wisconsin. it is a much touted planned project in southeastern wisconsin, originally under the previous governor, governor scott walker, and promoted also by president trump, that has not really panned out the way it was

laid out and envisioned. so, there will be some people who are you know, unhappy about that. and who see it as a broken promise. of whether that moves a lot voters beyond a local area in southeastern wisconsin, i am not sure. host: caller from halifax, pennsylvania, supporting the president. caller: thank you for taking my call. i have three comments. donald trump was compared to george washington, when george washington fought for the independence of this country. i do not think he would've encouraged dealing with china. and we also had a president, john f. kennedy, that stated, do not ask what americans can do for you, but what you can do for america.

and there was one more comment -- i was truly dumbfounded by the gentleman who called and said god picked joe biden for the presidency. my god does not support abortion or killing unborn children. and jesus loved the children. so, this man is very confused when he thinks that joe biden is picked by god almighty to serve the people of this country. host: ok, jim. ed in arlington sending a text on that point, how important is religion in the wisconsin presidential vote? guest: so, you know, a big part of the story of religion and politics is the born-again evangelical vote. and it is not as big and wisconsin as some other states. there's a sizable catholic vote,

but catholics are not a monolithic group, obviously, so it is hard to generalize about the catholic vote. as there is in a lot of states, there is a growing component of the electorate that identifies as secular. so we see a big divide, obviously, like we see in other states, between frequent churchgoers -- a big divide particularly among white voters, among the frequent churchgoers and people who do not go to church. and one of the -- i did a close look at, we have talked about the white blue-collar vote, such a big part of the demographic in wisconsin, and i spent time earlier this year looking at those numbers and what you find is, again, that is not a monolithic group either, but within that segment you have got huge differences between, for

example, evangelical blue-collar whites and nonreligious blue-collar whites. there are massive differences there in terms of how people are planning on voting. there's a dividing line there that is similar to what we see in other states. host: william, you are undecided. how come? caller: well, i am undecided because i refuse to identify with any party. so, i would rather keep my vote. but here is my question for the gentleman here. when you talk about the rural communities in wisconsin -- n ow, i'm in minnesota, close to the border, but i think he fails to mention that there are fairly large cities other than menominee and kenosha, even larger cities like river falls, which is a big, college

university town. there's also hudson, right on the minnesota border, and i know many people who work in minnesota and live in hudson. and eau claire. so, i would wonder how these cities are trending, as far as democrat versus republican. my second question is, we get the covid numbers here from wisconsin on a regular basis compared to minnesota's numbers. wisconsinht now that is maxed out with the icu beds as far as covid and i wonder what kind of impact the pandemic is having on the voters in wisconsin. those are my two questions. thanks a lot. guest: with respect to the second part of the question, i think it is a challenge very president trump. one, it undercuts his argument that we have turned the corner.

wisconsin is a big, important battleground at the epicenter of the pandemic. we have had a big surge in cases, hospitalizations, and that -- so, i think that politically that poses a challenge for the president. that democratsw are voting early at a higher rate than republicans, republicans more likely to vote on election day, so there is some risk if the bulk of the republican vote is going to come through people going to the and we areection day in a surging pandemic, does that affect the election day turnout to the polls? it may not. it may. but it is a question. with respect to the cities, i mentioned madison and milwaukee in only so much of the vote

wisconsin. and only so much of the urban vote in wisconsin. there are smaller cities that are not as overwhelmingly democratic as madison and milwaukee. the caller mentioned at some of them. they did swing back more in the midterms toward democrats. they range from purple to light blue to dark blue in their politics. and these cities, i think, were again, one more part of the ingredient in donald trump's victory, because the deficits in these places were not as big as they had been in the past for republican candidates. but they did swing back in the midterms, so they could be important on election day too. host: you can follow his reporting online. craig gilbert, washington bureau chief for the milwaukee journal sentinel, we thank you for the

conversation. we will continue to take a look at wisconsin. we will speak with david canon, political science professor at the university of adison, after this short break. ♪ announcer: the competition is on. be a part of the studentcam video competition. middle and high school students, be the start of a conversation, by making a documentary exploring the issues you want the president to address in 2021. be bold, show supporting and opposing points of view, and include c-span in your videos. there will be cash prizes,

including a grand prize of $5,000. the deadline is january 20, 2021. the uniformed. you will find competition rules and more information on how to get started on our website, studentcam.org. ♪ announcer: with seven days left until election day, on november 3, when voters decide who will control congress and occupy the white house next year, stick with c-span and watched campaign 2020 coverage every day on c-span. stream or on at c-span.org. or listen on the c-span radio app. your place for an unfiltered view of politics. ♪ the presidents, available in paperback, hardcover and e-book.

it presents biographies of every president, inspired by conversations with historians about the leadership skills that make for a successful presidency. as americans go to the polls to decide who should lead our country, this collection offers perspective into the lives and events that forged each president's leadership style. to learn more about the presidents, and the historians, visit c-span.org/presidents and order your copy today wherever books are sold. journal": "washington continues. host: we are back with david canon, political science professor at the university of wisconsin madison to continue our conversation on the battleground state of wisconsin. the supreme court decision on absentee ballots, what is your take on it? what type of voter could be impacted by this? guest: it really is an important

decision to say that the ballot has to be received by election day, and anything not received by election day will not be counted. where a district court judge ruled you could count the ballots for three days after the election, the way that many other states allow. partiesright now the are scrambling to get the message out that if you want to vote by mail, you better get your ballot in today or tomorrow, because the mail sometimes takes more than a week to get to the clerk's office. this has thrown a monkeywrench at the last minute into the voting process. and we do have a record number of people voting by mail, already almost half of wisconsin voters have voted by mail, over 1.3 million have already voted early. that is getting close to half of our total for 2016, so this could potentially affect a lot of voters. host: are they able to track

their ballot in wisconsin? guest: you can, but you go to the my vote.gov website to track your vote, but the clerks cannot keep up with the huge volume. so in an ideal world, if your vote comes in, it is tallied online and you can see it was received, but often they are behind a week or 10 days, so at this point you cannot count on that. what people are being urged, if you have not voted by mail already, you should take your ballot to one of the drop off boxes or and deliver it to the clerk's office, to make sure it gets there on time. host: we spoke with you on september 21 about the presidential race, has it changed since then? guest: the polls have moved a little bit in the direction of joe biden, but overall things have been stable. the lead ranges between 6-8

points in most polls for joe biden. the battleground poll conducted by my colleagues here at the university just came out yesterday morning, and that showed a four point jump for joe biden in wisconsin, also in michigan and pennsylvania he showed a four point jump. one interesting thing about this poll that has not been widely noted in the commentary, is that unlike most other polls this is a panel poll, so they are read interviewing the same people over the series of polls. they have had four of them now, this is the last one before the election, but these are the same people being interviewed. so that is a real 4% change. it is the same sample of people. to me, that shows real movement toward joe biden in wisconsin and the other two battleground states. host: does that mean some of those people have changed their minds? they started out supporting

president trump, perhaps a voting for him in 2016, and are now swinging the other way? guest: correct, although it looks like most people are sticking with their initial choice. what is happening is people on the fence are moving to joe biden. and we have also seen in the poll that joe biden is doing well among the people who did not vote in 2016 at all, new voters. and people who voted for someone else other than clinton or donald trump, they are breaking heavily for joe biden as well. host: how big is that electorate? guest: fairly small. about 15% of the samples. not a huge percentage, but enough to make a difference in a close race. ask, can youto talk about the wow counties and how they are changing? guest: for those who are not in wisconsin, those are the suburbs

around milwaukee. washington and waukesha county, and they have been heavily republican, the most important part of the republican suburban vote in the state. that was the core of support for scott walker in his election, for donald trump when he won in 2016. in 2018, they were still heavily republican, but they moved pretty substantially in the democratic direction. the other thing i have been watching as the early vote numbers, deceit where they are coming -- to see where they are coming in. and they are running much higher than they were in 2016. and will be more than half of the electorate before we reach election day. but there is a higher percentage of people voting by mail, especially in dane county, in madison 63% of the 2016 vote has already voted in wisconsin,

compared to washington county is still and so there heavy voting by mail, but not as much as dane county. to me that is more of an energized base on the democratic side to get there early vote out. host: what are the demographics of dane county? guest: it is heavily democratic. black?terms of white and it's mostly white. the state is 87% white, 6.5% african-american. the heaviest african-american population is in milwaukee, racine. madison does not have as high of an african-american publishing as those cities. so, it is a heavily white population, but college-educated, as we have seen in this election especially, there is a big gap between the white voters with a college degree and those

without. dane county has the highest proportion of college degrees of any county in the state. host: let's go to ron and pennsylvania supporting the former vice president. good morning. caller: i have a question pertaining to the ruling by the supreme court on the wisconsin voting. defy the state ruling because of state's rights? on the abortion thing, for example, if they rule against abortion, some states can still have a law allowing abortion in their state. is that not correct? i am a student of the law, but i am just wondering. it's a question of information. i do not think the ruling is written in stone for every state in the union, is it? guest: well, good question. play inights come into

this topic, who controls the election. and when you compare the weekylvania situation a ago, where the supreme court allowed pennsylvania to count votes late, but in wisconsin yesterday they said, no, you cannot do that. the difference was in pennsylvania, john roberts voted with the three liberals, upholding the lower court decision to say the votes could be counted after election day because they said -- this is a question of state law, being interpreted by the supreme court in the state saying this is allowable -- so, john roberts said, let's stay out of it. but in wisconsin, our state supreme court is a more conservative court and they said that state legislature should be able to decide this, so now roberts has flipped and

voted with the conservatives, and said you should not be able to count the votes. on the question of states rights and who gets to decide, roberts said basically that this is the state legislature's fault. they should be able to decide this. and our state legislature did not step into to provide extra time to voters. isin wisconsin the state saying states should be able to decide, meaning our ballots have to be in by election day and cannot become delete. host: michael in maryland. you are supporting the joe biden/harris ticket? caller: yes. i have a question and a comment. what was the total amount that 2016?beat hillary by in it was like 20,000 or something, right? guest: 27,000. caller: now -- guest: that is out of 3 million

votes cast. that is really close. caller: i am a black american and i always looked at the black population up there as the reason that occurred, because they stay-at-home, you know. that small amount made the difference. and i am wondering if that is going to come out this year. that's my question. -- is comment is, if responded to the guy who had the dream about jesus and of the other responder about abortion. numbers, chapter 11-31, it states that god sanctioned abortion. host: i will leave it there. guest: on the question of the

african-american vote and did it help elect donald trump? he is right to say that the drop was, thet in milwaukee african-american turnout, was the margin of difference. the straw to go with that broke the camels back argument, why would those voters be more important than others who did not turn out, but it is a critical part of support for the democratic party, and there was a substantial drop between 2012-2016 in black turnout. we saw that nationally, where nationally black turnout was down. but in 2012, blacks voted at a higher rate than whites, nationally, and barack obama's second election. that was a critical thing in the 2016 election. the caller's right to point to that as something that people

will keep a close eye on next week, to see what the turnout looks like in milwaukee. host: there has also been talk about the battleground within the battleground. where is this located? guest: the fox river valley is to the north, from appleton to green bay, an old industrial part of the state with a lot of manufacturing and paper mills. that is the part of the state that has been the battleground within the battleground. there have been many elections in the past where that part of wisconsin has the highest ad buys of any media market in the country. this is a heavily fought over area that does a swing in both directions. so that is another part of the state people will be watching. host: we will go to caleb in maryland. you are undecided. caller: hi, my main concern --

as we know, only 1% of the national budget goes to economic development abroad. and given that 95% of u.s. jobs are directly linked to foreign trade, what are the key concerns in terms of foreign policy for wisconsin voters? as a supplemental question, what could we do more of to make u.s. citizens more interested in international affairs, given the u.s. population is only 4% of the total in the world? right thatcaller is foreign affairs rarely plays a central role in politics. if you look at the most important problems facing the iuntry, the battleground poll mentioned that was released yesterday had a question asking, what are the most important issues facing the country today? it listed 11 different issues

and foreign policy hardly registered. covid was the most important issue for democrats, the economy the most important for republicans. and it is something that simply does not register at the top of the list for most. unless it is during a time of war, then clearly those considerations come into play in a more serious way. in this election in wisconsin, the one foreign policy related topic that does come up, in rural areas especially, is foreign trade. because of the trade war with china, the agricultural sector in wisconsin was hurt hard by the trade war with china. and had the drop in commodity prices, the dairy farmers were really hurt by the lack of demand for many of their dairy products. and so that's something i think probably has hurt donald trump

to some extent in the rural parts of the state here, the trade war we have been engaged in. but other than that, i would agree that there is not really as much interest being placed on foreign policy. in terms of answering the question, what can be done to make americans be more interested in foreign policy, i think that is a tall order. and it is something that we always have been kind of inward looking, as a country, i think. it's something that comes with the territory of being the world's largest economy. and it is a privileged position to be in, do not have to worry about foreign policy as much as smaller countries, if you are one of the leading powers. i, i agree with the caller, also wish we paid more attention to foreign policy, but it is just a reality that we simply do not. host: we told our viewers

earlier about the president tweeting out changing their votes, and according to cnn, among the states that allow the voters to change their early ballot after it has been cast are wisconsin, minnesota, michigan, connecticut and mississippi. david, your comments on this? guest: i had a conversation with our click on this very question a couple weeks ago. me that we used to have a policy that you could walk in your ballot with a different ballot, because the way that they are counted in most precincts in wisconsin, the mail-in ballots are counted in your regular precinct. there are only 39 municipalities, including milwaukee, green bay as well, that come to a central location in the city, but every other of our 2000 minutes apologies will

count the mail-in ballots at the polling place where you normally would vote. so i was told that we used to have a rule where you could take your new ballot, say i changed my mind, they would find your old one, rip it up and count your new ballot. now,ll of that is allowed because it got to be too complicated to do that, especially in the cities where they had the central counting and not at the polling place. it would be impossible to unwind that, the call back your ballot you already cast, so it is possible that in some that.palities they allow that is something that is crazy about wisconsin elections, it is decentralized. we are the only state that has almost 2000 election officials, every other state it's done at the county level. so given that, there is a lot a variation in the practices and

how they work, including the process of early voting. so it's possible in some parts of the state that walking in your ballot could still be allowed, may be in a smaller town it could be done, but in madison i was told by the madison clerk that that is not something that is done anymore. host: it sounds like you need to check with your local authorities. guest: you should check with your local court, because it does -- clerk, because it does vary. host: the president will be holding a rally at the motorsports management company in la crosse, wisconsin today. why there? guest: la crosse is one of those medium-sized cities that tend to be more up for grabs. so, madison, milwaukee, they are heavily democratic, rural areas tend to be more republican. suburban areas are more republican. but it is those medium-sized

cities like eau claire, green bay, la crosse, those are the ones up for grabs and that is where president trump sees the greatest potential in swinging some undecided voters perhaps. although, the percent undecided now is really small compared to four years ago. it is down to 3% in most polls, so there are not many people who have not yet made up their minds. host: jack in davenport, iowa, supporting the president. hi, jack. caller: president trump has come down hard on china. the gigantic chinese trade balance deficit, the chinese military buildup with aircraft carriers and island building, and covid. how is the chinese factor weighing in madison? do you have a lot of chinese students in madison? guest: i do not think that the china question is registering

at a very strong level among wisconsin voters. i mentioned it in the context of the trade war, how it has affected rural communities, but that would be about it. it's not one of the central issues. in terms of voters, asian americans statewide is it low single digits, around 4% or something. we do have a fair number -- fa ir number of foreign students at the university of wisconsin. it is down this semester because of covid. quite a few of them did not end up coming for the fall semester because of covid. so, aagain, it is not -- foreign student cannot vote, so that is not affecting the election results. but in terms of the policy question, do not see china as being one of the central issues, as we talked about with the previous caller, that foreign policy is not up there with the

most important issues. host: joe biden will be in georgia today. we will have coverage today at 1:00 p.m. of his campaign event, here on c-span, on c-span.org, or download any of these events and listen with the free c-span radio app. also today, senator kamala harris will be in reno, nevada, one week before election day. live coverage here at 3:00 p.m. eastern time. vice president mike pence will be in greenville, south carolina, and we will have that live coverage here as well as 3:00 p.m. eastern, online as well. and tonight, the president will hold a rally in omaha, nebraska, and you can watch it live here at 8:30 p.m. eastern time. for all of our coverage, go to c-span.org. tim in luxembourg, wisconsin, you are undecided. part of the very small percentage of undecided voters

in wisconsin. why are you undecided? caller: i have always voted democrat, but it will be hard to vote for -- well, if i do vote, democrat,lf voting but i will be actually voting for harris. bidenard to vote for joe when he voted for the iraq war, libya happened under his watch. but the wisconsin legislature -- i have never seen a legislature like the republican wisconsin legislature that ignored the 2016 referendum that passed overwhelmingly to legalize marijuana. they just did not do anything about that. they just ignored a referendum that passed overwhelmingly.

i wonder if the professor knows many cases where they have had referendums like that, where they passed overwhelmingly and were ignored? guest: that was a nonbinding referendum. it did not have the defective law. process, wisconsin's you have a special process for changing the state constitution that has to pass the legislature. this was not like that. we do not have a direct initiative process that allows the voters to put something on the ballot, that ends up becoming law. was likelike this that the marijuana initiative, was a nonbinding referendum, so the state legislature was not compelled to follow that result. host: what down ballot races are you watching, and are there other referendums that the voters will be deciding in just a few days, and are they also

nonbinding? guest: we do not have many competitive down ticket races. we do not have a governor race this year. the congressional seats are all relatively safe, i do not think they are seen as being in the tossup category. even the legislature, which you think would be more competitive in a battleground state like wisconsin, actually because of redistricting our state was gerrymandered in a very aggressive way, so we do not have many competitive state assembly or state senate seats. so the legislature looks like it is likely to remain in republican hands. tony devers is not up for two years. so there is not much action going on down ticket. there are four or five senate races, a handful of fairly competitive assembly races, but the presidential race is sucking up all the oxygen in the room

right now. host: freddie in seabrook, texas. caller: good morning. host: your question or comment? caller: my concern, i am a former educator, retired. what i see president trump as the person who functions on level of a fourth-grader. when i hear him read, if you ask him, what did you read, what did you say? he does not understand. we have asten --w person who is not a good role model for our young people. we are teaching, saying the way you get out, you have to learn how to read and write, but president trump is a non-reader. if you take his -- all the things, when he is going out and

talking, he is just saying the same thing over again. he is a bully. he is not a role model for our young people. host: ok. phil in north carolina, undecided. do you have a question or comment? caller: good, thank you for taking my call. i will agree with the lady that just spoke. but my question is, vice president biden stated at the last conference that it would come down to credibility as far as the voters go. we have had four years of president trump. he told one story after another one. i did not know about that, then a month later, i knew all about that. i'm undecided because if you listen to the advertisements, the republicans are saying that

the democrats are going to eliminate social security and obamacare. and the democrats are saying the republicans are going to do it. now, president trump's credibility in my opinion is shot. joe biden's credibility, eight years as a vice president -- i didn't really see him do anything that would jump out at you to say that that man lies terribly. so, you have to tell me how you have learned to vote. i have never voted in my life, but i would like to. host: you never voted. how old are you? caller: 69. host: why haven't you voted? caller: i have not believed in a party. in honesty, neither one of them has let me down. they say what they are going to do, they get in and they do nothing. president trump was going to build a wall.

and we were not going to spend a dime on it. host: how likely is it that you will vote in seven days? caller: excuse me? host: how likely is that you will vote. caller: i am going to vote. i am going to have to. i will have to learn how. and do not call me stupid. it should be simple. but i have never voted as much for a county seat. host: ok. guest: one interesting thing he mentioned are these dueling ads, where one side says, joe biden will destroy social security. and they say the same thing about donald trump. what are the voters supposed to believe? one thing that is interesting in the trend of the ads we have seen over the last two months, a project started here at uw in one of our graduate programs, the student continuing the programthere, where they track the ads run on behalf of the two

candidates in all the major media markets in the country. they track the tone of the ads and volume. and a really interesting trend has happened since the beginning of september, where the joe biden campaign has moved a a majority of their ads, positive ads, which is unusual for this time in the campaign. usually they will be earlier in the campaign. so where joe biden has gone from where he was at 5% positive ads in the first couple weeks of september, mostly negative ads then, now he is at 60% positive ads. i have seen them and they tried to be uplifting, bringing healing to the country, bringing the country together, and it does not mention donald trump by name. where trump has gone the other direction, in mid-september 20%

negative, then went to 30%, then 35%, now up to 45% negative. so, we have seen a real different strategy here, where the biden camp is trying to appeal to the idea bringing the country together, where the trump campaign is going on the attack. this is what you often see from the candidate behind in the race, it is often the challenger in that position, but now that incumbent is fighting back by going negative. host: robert, long island, virginia. robert is undecided. tryer: yes, i am calling to to clarify what i believe may be misinformation that both guests have suggested through what i can find -- have suggested. through what i can find, early ballots in wisconsin can be changed. it's not considered cast until

election day, at least according to an article on one of the npr sites. it suggests an absentee voter can actually vote three times, to correct an error immediately made at the time of casting the ballot, but they also state it can indeed be used as a technique to change one's vote. host: what is the date on that article? caller: i am having trouble refinding it, interesting enough. host: it might be an old article. caller: it was a new article, it referenced some of the current candidates, i recall. i am trying to find it again. tot: i think the safe bet is check with your local authorities on this. caller: permission to try to verify this information, i have not been able to get with anybody who can give me an answer. technically, again,

a ballot cast in wisconsin is not considered cast until election day, so an absentee ballot, an individual could request at their clerk's office another ballot and cast it at that time at one of the drop or at a or -- in sites voting location. guest: one thing the caller is correct on is wisconsin is one of the states where no mail-in ballots are processed before election day. that has also been a source of controversy. some people are saying we should start counting them early, otherwise we will have a backlog on election day. but that has also remained unchanged in wisconsin, that we will not start processing ballots until election day. that is why technically it is possible to do what the caller is saying. i know that it used to be the practice, where you could walk

in your ballot and basically just cast a new one at your polling place on election day and have the old ballot taken away. but again, based on my conversation with the madison clerk, i believe that they are not encouraging people to do that now. so i would check with your local clerk if you are thinking about doing that, because you do not want to have illegally voted twice, that is the other thing that could potentially happen if hear first vote is not canceled. it is a felony to do that. host: this is from an article from the new york post. the elections commission noted that many voters had been getting incontact to see how they could revoke, something they could easily do. byoter was not voting absentee ballot or at the polling place, can receive up to three ballots, the first two of them spoiled. the commission saying it has been the law in wisconsin for many years.

so it sounds like there is more information that people need to, if they are interested, to seek out. regina and pennsylvania -- in pennsylvania supporting president trump. caller: good morning. situation with the man who called from maryland. i could not see anything when i looked. the children of israel are a people. i do not know what he was talking about when he said god supported abortion. it's very distasteful and i do not believe it honors god. biden and harris will force us to buy more abortion, which it is not my job to kill more babies. and i find it is very distressful, as the man would be trying to quote god. i see nothing in there about god promoting abortion. when he on the biden, was on the stage with donald said, and a man called and

there was not enough about foreign policy, there is. donald trump has done quite a few trade deals. that is foreign policy. he is underwriting part of the wto, which really works against the u.s. and blocks us out. they just became a big behemoth organization that is interfering with our ability to trade. and as far as the tariffs, joe biden did not know what tariffs were. he thought it was taxpayer dollars. dollars, itxpayer is money that has come from china and the different countries that have been punished because of what they did to us on trade, intellectual property stealing, and they are finally getting a due. the farmers got that money in wisconsin, i am surprised at this man did not mention anything about that. it's obvious he does not want to give donald trump credit for anything. host: let's take that point about the farmers getting money from this administration.

did it help? guest: there is no doubt that the payments to farmers did help with some of the losses they had. when they lost other markets because of the sanctions that china put on us, retaliation for the sanctions it we put on them, the payments to the farmers to make up for the losses did help to close the gap, but the tariffs, just to clarify what excised, tariffs are taxes put on goods when you have trade wars going on. and the costs are actually paid by the consumers, we pay for the higher prices for steel and other commodities and that have the tariffs on. they are not paid by china, they are paid by the consumer. not the taxpayers, but by the consumer.

and one other thing to clarify, with the funding of abortions, has been the policy of the country that we do not have money paying for abortions from taxpayers. so that is something also that joe biden has tried to make fairly clear in his campaign. host: we will go to tacoma, washington. gordon is undecided. caller: good morning. i have a question, also a,. number one is for wisconsin, i am upset. i'm in washington state. i wanted to vote in person and all have got is ballot boxes. i want to know if in wisconsin you can vote personally, or are you stuck with the mailboxes. ? [laughter] guest: we can still vote in person. aree are some states who doing all-male in elections, washington is one of them.

they have done all mail elections for the last 10 years and they have found that voter turnout has gone up a little bit. so it seems to work in those states that have done it. but i like voting in person. i like to put my ballot in the machine. and make sure that everything is ok. so, i am old-fashioned that way. we still have & voting here in wisconsin, although it looks like half of our ballots will be cast before election day. host: mary in las vegas supporting the biden-harris ticket. caller: in history, we had the trail of tears. now we have the trail of germs. it's going to go away, the wuhan virus. it will be like a miracle. it was only one person. on january 3, donald trump was told what was going on. he was told at least a dozen times in january and february.

february 24, he was praising xi of china for his transparency. and there's so much. helsinki alone, that by itself, he never has anything bad to say about putin. listen to the other republicans who have come out, listen to the said,nator, everything he how he makes fun of evangelicals. how he talks about women. just on and on. aide, whopence's own was on the task force, that he thinks it is a good thing that maybe we had the virus, because as a politician you have to shake a lot of hands and i do not want to shake hands with those disgusting people. but those are his supporters. social security, medicare, the

health care trump got, the great wonderful care he got out walter reed -- that's socialistic. ok, that is government, doctors, paid for by the taxpayer. mr. trump should be thanking us instead of getting rid of pre-existing conditions without coming out. for four years he has not come out. if you read bolton's book, he talks a big story. to pick up on your last point, health care your that was a big issue for voters and continues to be so. rate now and what impact could it have? guest: for democrat it comes in second as -- in wisconsin as second after covid.

thise are worried about question of pre-existing conditions. they don't want to lose their health insurance coverage if they have a pre-existing condition. that is something that is covered now under obamacare and could potentially go away if the supreme court were to strike down that law. that is definitely something that is on a lot of voters' minds. you don't want to lose your health insurance in a pandemic. it doesn't rate quite as high as covid or the economy, it is up there as the number two concern for democrats in our state. host: let's end with what you will be watching for on election night. guest: here in wisconsin, i will be looking at what the returns look like from the counties around milwaukee. others still trending more democratic the way they did in the 18? look at the turnout -- did in 2018?

nationally, we will have some early indications from a state like florida, which is one of the states that will be reverting -- reporting early. they have to have the election ballots received on election day so you wont have a carryover of counting for several days without be an early indication of how things are going. david canon, political science professor at the university of wisconsin-madison . thank you. guest: you're welcome. host: amy coney barrett sworn into the supreme court last night at the white house, 52-48.ed by the senate your reaction to this. republicans (202) 748-8001.

.emocrats (202) 748-8001 independents (202) 748-8002. ♪ >> you are watching c-span, your unfiltered view of government, created by america's cable television company as a public service and brought to you today by your television provider. that's what gives us the confidence to sit here and describe the universe. >> and it all started with a big bang. [laughter] >> is there a song in their. there.uldn't -- in >> the top nonfiction authors

with in-depth conversations with c-span viewers. on sunday, at noon eastern, join us for a live 20th anniversary special, more book talk with andors, phone calls, texts tweets. >> the picture on the back, do you remember those days? >> no. >> what's in the book? ofthe book is an examination life at yale. sunday, liveepth at noon eastern on book tv on c-span two. host: amy coney barrett was sworn in last night at the white house to become only the fifth female justice on the supreme court in its 231 year history,

130 associate justice on the high court. from the white house last night. justice barrett: the confirmation process has made ever clear to me one of the fundamental differences between the federal judiciary and the united states senate, and perhaps the most acute is the .ole of policy preferences it is the job of a senator to pursue her policy preferences. in fact, it would be a dereliction of duty for her to put policy goals aside. by contrast, it is the job of a judge to resist her policy preferences. it would be a dereliction of duty for her to give into them. federal judges don't stand for elections. thus, they have no basis for claiming that their preferences reflect those of the people.

duty fromation of political preference is what makes the judiciary distinct among the three branches of government. , judge declares independence not only from congress and the president, but also from the that mightiefs otherwise move her. the judicial oath captures the essence of the judicial duty, the rule of all must always control. my fellow americans, even though we judges don't face elections, we still work for you. constitution that establishes the rules of and the judiciary independence that is so central to it. the oath that i have solemnly taken constitution that establishes the rules of tonighe that i will do my job without

any fear or favor and that i will do so independently of both the political branches and of my own preferences. constitution and the democratic republic that it establishes, and i will devote myself to preserving it. host: amy coney barrett from last night. the chief justice will be administering the judiciary oath to amy coney barrett they write, today in a private ceremony at the supreme court, there would ceremonyal investiture that takes place later on. we are getting your reaction to justice barrett confirmed to the supreme court. michigan, what, did you think? caller: i think it is great. that should be the standard right there.

i just don't quite understand how americans and the so-called wisdom don't understand what she is saying. that should be the standard for all supreme court justices. go to the constitution. i live in a small town in northern michigan where we can make some of our own laws. i have challenged our boards to before you write a lot, you have to see if it comports with the constitution. and it's like i'm looking at a deer in the headlights sort of thing, and they don't even bother to read it. it's not some dusty old document, nor is it a living document, although it can be changed. her standard is perfect and the way she enunciates it to all of us is perfect. that should be the standard for all supreme court justices. i am looking forward to seeing some of her rulings as we move forward.

find his constitution, think man has ever written on this earth. forget hollywood and the bs. i have been in 26 different countries, there is nothing that comes close to it. no one comes close to it, not even canada. host: she can get to work right away, a big case coming up on november 10 the supreme court rural -- supreme court will rule. how would you like her to rule? caller: for the supreme court. you cannot force us to buy anything. we need to get through that standard first. we need to figure that out. i don't want the supreme court changing the constitution. our government has no role in that to force us to buy anything, whether it is health care, a car or anything else. they can't force us to do those. it comes down to individual rights. that is where it all starts.

we need to learn to start treating each other better in our culture. that will not be done by the courts of the law could we need to do that ourselves. host: i will be interested to hear the oral arguments for that case. november 10. go to our website for coverage details. the washington post notes that was only republican supporting her confirmation, barrett is the first supreme court justice since edwin stanton in 1869 to be confirmed without bipartisan support, according to a review of senate data by the national journal. , an senator joe mansion democrat from west virginia, who backed justice kavanaugh in 2018 and barrett over circuit court seat three years ago did not support her. we were showing a headline from herald, senator collins come up for reelection in seven days, republican, loaded no, saying she did not make a decision on her qualifications.

she was voicing her opposition to the process. senator lisa murkowski also opposed moving forward on justice baird's nomination barrett's justice on theion, did vote yes final vote on confirmation. mark in jackson, tennessee, democratic caller. good morning. caller: thanks for taking my call. that caller before it right about the constitution. but the thing is, the mitch mcconnell's and lindsey graham's and donald trump's are intent on shredding that. that is what is wrong here. they rushed this nominee through. he didn't even give her a chance for america to understand what she is all about. what she is truly all about, because she couldn't truly are the answer the questions because

she didn't want to answer them during her come from and soon -- her confirmation hearings. the bad part is, lindsey graham and mitch mcconnell may have had intentions on packing the court themselves. they want to use the word packing the court, they had intentions of packing the court, but what they didn't do is they underestimated donald trump and his heart headedness and his vindictive spirit. what he is doing now, he knows he is losing the election, so he is having all these rallies and more or less sing to america, i know i'm going to lose but i'm going to get as many of you guys sick as i can so it will be a messed up situation with boat giant should him and harris get in. that is a shame. that is the part about the constitution -- messed up situation with the vote should him and harris get in.

that is a shame. mitch mcconnell and lindsey graham put her in a position she is in and the door swings both ways. should by and harris get in there, just like chuck schumer said, don't say anything, because you can believe they will abide by the same constitution that you say you did. thank you for listening to my call. host: robert in lynchburg, tennessee, independent. your thoughts. caller: good morning, greta. i agree with the last caller. they were talking about the constitution. that guy who just called saying they are going by the constitution and individual rights. it is a woman's right to do what she wants to do with her body, not the government. it is an individual's right. they will go by that on some

things and some things they won't. court ifpacking the they are going to let people go by the constitution, why not let obama's judge get through when he had the chance to nominate a supreme court justice? also, if any luck person out there voting for trump you are just as crazy as he is. thank you for taking my call. host: we will go to stephen in new york, a republican. caller: good morning. she will make a great judge because she looks like she is going to interpret the law fairly. the last person was on with tariffs. the tariffs help straighten the country by keeping goods out of this country that are taking american jobs, which hurts health care and hurts buying

power. host: michael in portland oregon sent a text to say advice to justice barrett, sandra day o'connor is an excellent role model. judicial minimalism is a safe oath. as a near perfect balance of conservative and liberal ideology. three, the wary of scalia's distrust of legislative history. diane from ohio, i am extremely concerned of the information exposed.tor whitehouse this threatens our environment, labor unions, women's health care, and more. shameful says diane from ohio. mike says, god bless her in her nomination. now can we work and pass the planlus can -- stimulus please? nancy pelosi said there is a possibility they would continue

talks and get a deal before election day with the house and the senate. they were in washington. the senate finishing up yesterday with the vote of any coney barrett -- of amy coney barrett to become the next justice of the supreme court. jack, a democratic caller. caller: i just want to make a comment about justice barrett, going back to merrick garland, it was said dereliction of duty numerous times. i think mitch mcconnell and the republicans showed dereliction of duty by blocking the nomination of merrick garland. that the senate, i don't know why they were afraid of putting him up for a vote. a lot of times trump and the republicans have to remember the work for us, the u.s. citizens. tv,member baghdad bob on talking about how the american troops were being pushed back

out of the baghdad airport, and on the split screen, we saw soldiers moving in. in covid, trump sounds a lot like baghdad bob. host: the washington post notes, barrett will be the 220th judge confirmed under the presidency and the mcconnell-led senate. that includes not only her and neil gorsuch and brett kavanaugh, but 53 circuit court judges, 162 district court judges come into to the u.s. court of international trade. for the first time in decades, there were no openings, or 30% sitting on the bench have been nominated for president trump. how did we get here? during gorsuch's nomination nuclearnvoked the option to change rules for supreme court nominees so they no longer needed 60 senators to

advance to a final confirmation vote. that effectively finished the task some cat -- senate democrats implied the same remover to change confirmation rules for all executive branch pix and nearly all additional nominees. in 2019, senate republicans changed the rules to trim the time available for district court judges floor debate. before the change, they can debate for 30 hours before a confirmation vote. hours.uelched it to two are other practices generally used by the previous democratic led senate the republic and have neglected. they include the tradition for circuit court nominees which effectively gave a state senator power over judicial picks from his or her state. richard in missouri, democratic caller, your reaction to amy

coney barrett sitting on the supreme court. caller: hello. say it justoing to proves our country is more divided or just as divided as it was in 1860. we can change -- if the democrats get in this time, they will pack the court the other way. despise -- despite the supreme court business, they talk about it being constitutional. in the constitution, the black man was only two thirds of a man or something like that. a big decision the supreme court , we will have to see what this lady does. she is standing there lying, we will just have to see and make up our minds about just what kind of character the republicans and she is. host: the president tweeting out this morning, big project

projected, pelosi only looking for bailout badly run democrats cities. she has little interest in helping out the people. ray and pleasant view, tennessee, a republican. pleasanting -- ray in view, tennessee, a republican. good morning. caller: my statement is about the nomination and the barrett.g ms. trump'sjust one of things he said he was going to do and he has done it. he has tried to do everything he said he was going to do when he was elected. people elected him to do what he do, andwas going to he's doing that. why these people are whining and crying about every little thing. they need to look at the man

do, and he's doing that. they have running. he is a crook and has taken money, and his son has his money and as soon as he gets out of the limelight, he will get out of the limelight that the russians and the chinese and all of them have given to his son. it doesn't take a lawyer to figure this out. wake up, america. philip inlis in -- tulsa, oklahoma. caller: hello. the progressive democrats are complaining there will be six republican conservative members on the court. 1960's, there was one republican and eight .emocrats

i didn't see them complaining they needed to get rid of the . i didn't see them complaining they needed to get rid of the three democrat supreme court numbers to put three more republicans on. the progressive democrats want to add more members to the court to add 15, at which time the vote for the state of oklahoma to leave the union and create a you -- a new united states for the free united states of america, because the united states is becoming dictators. host: area, publican. republican. caller: i want to respond to a couple of people. when mitch mcconnell and lindsey graham pack the supreme court, they do it with the consent of the people. it is called winning an election. it seems like the democrats want to run washington, d.c. without winning an election.

the other comment is about the constitution. the caller said that black people were two thirds of white people or something like that are the constitution is that it contains procedures for changing it, that is what happened on the black-white thing he was talking about. that is one of the wonderful things about the constitution and why it seems like the intorats never quite get remembering things like that. they just want to feel sorry for themselves. thank you very much. --t: jim in silver strings silver springs, maryland. caller: i wanted to give a shout out for the declaration of independence. i certainly believe the constitution is one of the greatest practical documents in history, but i believe the declaration of independence is one of the greatest aspirational

documents in history. current catholic majority -- i'm a lifelong catholic, so i'm very sensitive attempt tot -- is an place the constitution alone with all of its failures with regard to equality at the center of our future. i think it leads to fascism and it is causing me to reconsider germany and my catholic faith and wonder whether hitler's was the catholicy authoritarianism. host: how do you plan to vote? caller: i voted already for the democratic ticket. i really was voting for the demise and total death of the gop, because i believe the gop has been bought and sold to some

silent donors and that it no longer responds to its people. host: have you always voted for democrats? caller: no, i was a fascist when i was seven at holy communion. i prayed for the survival of the -- regime. now i'm 90 and i have been learning ever since how much my catholic appraising tilted me in a way i never understood against democracy. host: holly in las vegas, an independent. caller: good morning. i was curious, because i'm kind of concerned about everybody is so hysterical about having the judge barrett come into office. she takes an oath that she is supposed to be a political. branch ofe one

oliticalnt that is ap and i don't know why the democrats are up in arms that she is going to do things when the supreme court was steely independent and she was supposed to be independent. i'm independent. i don't go completely democrat or republican, so i can see how a person would be able to do that. i don't understand why everybody is so hysterical. i also don't understand last night when clarence thomas swore her in why is it not the chief justice? why would they have somebody on the other side swear her in? so i kind of was wondering about that. i wish everybody would stop -- step back and learn the civics lessons that she is supposed to be apolitical. we need to call people out declaring how she is going to vote when we should all gather around and secure and make sure

it is pristine and not have a legislation from the bench like ginsburg did and nobody called her out on it. host: for you happy with the president's pick? caller: she seems qualified. her education seems qualified. i have only read a few of her briefs, but she seems like she could be fair. if she sticks to her oath where icalis going to be apolit and sticking to the constitution, it should be ok. r.st: our next caller caller: toler: i have a few comments say that donald trump is the best president we've ever had. the democrats know they can't run over him, that is why they treat him so bad. they should be ashamed.

better just than any president has been in the office. they should be ashamed. host: then to, how important of the supreme court picks for the president to your vote? caller: i think he has done a good job. i think he has really done a good job. huntington,n pennsylvania, a democratic caller. caller: thanks for taking my call. i hope you are well. the president in america it is for four years and it does not stop until the inauguration of his president is -- predecessor. justice clarence, just lost my train of thought. he is the senior member of the bench. that is why he did the swearing in. of the division.

you have aoc, we are going to pack the court. you have chuck sumer threatening you're going to regret this. you've got them saying push back . you have them enticing violence. if you want to talk about old, they have violated their oath when they took their office. end, sorry for the abrupt we have to stop because the house is about to gavel in for their legislative session. live coverage right here on c-span. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]