mandate for the covid-19 vaccine. and the economic security project's natalie foster, on the concept of a guaranteed basic income and whether it would work in the u.s.. "washington journal" is next. ♪ host: good morning. it is the "washington journal" for december 11. that is the view outside the capitol. happy hanukkah to those who are celebrating. the fda overwhelmingly approved pfizer's covid-19 vaccine, which brings it one step closer to approval by the fda. what do you think about this the development and what it would mean for the vaccine ultimately being distributed into united states? here is how you can let us know. 202-748-8000 in the eastern and central time zones. 202-748-8001 in the mountain and

pacific time zone. medical748-8002 for professionals out there who want to comment. you can text us at 202-748-8003. post on twitter at @cspanwj, and our facebook pages available too at facebook.com/cspan. the washington post reports of this meeting, which you can still find online at the says it, by the way, it was the culmination of an all-day meeting during which the panel heard about the safety of the vaccine, including plans to monitor its longer-term safety. a key moment came at 5:30 in the , when it was -- its benefits outweigh the risk for use in individuals 16 years of age and older. here is the result of that question. >> i will read it for the

record. dr. moore voted yes. dr. cohn voted yes. dr. gahn voted yes. dr. pohlman voted yes. dr. corolla voted no. voted yes. no.chaterjee voted dr. fuller voted no. dr. miser abstained. dr. flare voted yes. dr. hildreth voted yes. dr. kim voted no. voted yes. dr. wharton voted yes.

dr. mcinnis voted yes. dr. lee voted yes. mr. tallman voted yes. and that concludes the vote. so we have the vote. that concludes this session of the meeting. host: that was the result of the vote. if you were keeping track, it favor, andd voting in one abstention from the vote yesterday. the new york times follow up on it can to the debate that took place at the meeting said this -- some members asked about the likelihood of serious allergic reactions given that it was recommended this week that people with allergic reactions to medicines and food not get the vaccine, while the investigate two cases of allergic reactions among workers.re pfizer officials said there were no cases of allergic reactions in the trial of 44,000

participants. to go with allergic reactions were excluded from the study. also one of the hotly contested issues was how the broad authorization of vaccines might affect the continuing clinical trials some experts have argued that volunteers who receive the vaccine should get offered the vaccine. but others say it could alter the results of the trial. this is one step closer to full fda approval as far as the authorization process. we are asking what you think about this event. you can watch of this on c-span, by the way, if you want to see the event. call us this morning and let us know what you think. for those of you in the eastern and central time zones, it is 202-748-8000. if you live in the mountain and pacific time zones, it is 202-748-8001. and if you are a medical professional, it is 202-748-8002. you can always text us at 202-748-8003. our social media sites are also available. posting on facebook this morning, miss hernando's adding

that when it comes to this decision by the advisory panel, it is awesome, but the vaccine will not stop transmission. people who are vaccinated will continue to get people sick. another viewer says, i am looking forward to get the vaccine hopefully in the next few weeks. charles on facebook says, do you think if they promoted a healthy lifestyle and certain supplements it would be better than altering people's dna? and another viewer saying, it is time for congress to truly be the people's representatives and take the vaccine in front of their voters. again, you can add your voice to those thoughts. give us a call as well, like bernie is doing. bernie in howard beach, good morning. what do you think of the event yesterday? caller: i am glad certain experts of this independent panel have found that the vaccine, based on the numbers,

it is good, but my question is, i got the feeling that someone was holding a gun on some people. i think that there should be a recount? . don't you? let's have a recount. some of these people were under duress. host: what do you mean by that? caller: what do i mean by that? the same people running this lunacy administration could be influencing the panel. host: what gives you cause, or some type of basis for dating back some of those in the dust for saying that some of those in the panel were acting that way? caller: i am illustrating how corrupt this administration is. act.se of the way they host: do you trust the panel's decision to move this one step closer? caller: i trust science, but i don't trust the administration from being competent -- for

being competent. the president could help one a mask. host: ok. let's go to robert in kentucky. go ahead. caller: good morning. i think that is a little bit of the problem. administration, biden-harris, i think i trust them. i am a republican. but i am not going to put him down. he is our commander-in-chief. but to the pfizer vaccine, lee here in kentucky, there was news 50-50,ay that it is a some are going to take it and some are not. pedro, i personally probably will take it. host: but as far as the vaccine itself, what would convince you to take it or not take it? what convinces you to do so? caller: what convinced me to do so? well, mr. biden and the

democrats have been on tv every day. pretty much presidential to me. mr. trump, i think, may have lost the election of not speaking presidentially. pedro.eat covid, thank you very much. host: that was robert in kentucky. speaking of falling, the associated press conducted a poll on people who would and would not take the vaccine. of all adults, 47% saying they would take it. 27% not sure. 26% saying they would not take it. those under the age of 45, only 36% said they would raise it. 51% from the ages of 45-59. and over 60% of those over 60 years old said they would take the vaccine if it became fully distributed. yesterday's decision by this advisory panel does not

authorize the vaccine and only puts it one step closer to authorization. the panel's decision to move ahead signals the vaccine will probably be greenlighted by the fda soon. ben in minneapolis, you are next. caller: i just want to say, i am one of those people that is not going to take the vaccine. the reason why is because this is not based on science, this is based on media exaggeration and fear. this is like a population control plan, with a agenda 21 and agenda 2030, that is going to use this for the population. host: why not trust the decision made by the advisory panel? caller: why not? because a decade-long decision has been made for people that have the biggest autism rates.

i will not trust the same government that is poisoning my water, to have my conscious decision. if they can poison my water, why would i trust them? host: that is ben in minneapolis. from our texting service, piece in florida saying, the fda -- keith in florida saying, the u.s. is late to the game. the u.k. started vaccinating on monday. he does the math. he adds the comment, the fda is a little slow, don't you think? highlightay, they some of what happens next if the vaccine is approved when it comes to distribution. they got the question, how will vaccines be shipped? they comment, it is shipped in glass vials. a 10-those vile for moderna. degreesbe stored at -94

at below for pfizer. using will us ship fedex. moderna's vaccine shipping is being targeted by the nation's largest medical supply to stupider. also adding that within -- largest supply distributor. they add that this was done by talking to operation warp speed officials. how much vaccine is there was the next question. they add lives of doses are ready to ship of pfizer's vaccine. of th that, 5% will be held back for a safety factor in case we have a truck that goes down or exiting that get lost, in natural disaster hits or power goes out. that is a quote from the director of the army acquisition corps.

there is more about the distribution portion of all of this if you want to read it in the usa today. in mississippi, we will hear from ben. go ahead. caller: i will probably take the vaccine because it is the for.thing we have hope i would like to ask this question, why are you all not having a segment on this president trying to take the election? host: we have done plenty of segments post-election. we are talking about this, back to the vaccine five second, you said you trust the decision by the fda panel? caller: yes. they have been there, a lot of them now, for the last 20 years, ngd they had been ok-i vaccines were different viruses.

oh, yes, i trust the. host: ok. matt is next from tennessee. good morning. caller: how are you doing? host: i am well, thanks. go ahead. caller: i don't really trust the vaccine that much. i don't know what they are doing. host: what causes you not to trust it? caller: it seems too rushed to me. they had just kind of pushed everything's through so fast. i don't really understand how you can push medical science that fast. host: you probably saw, the advisory panel, 17 of those out of 20-plus said they are ready to move it one step forward. that does not give you confidence, i suspect? caller: honestly, no. there is some dark money somewhere behind this.

somebody is funding this, that is not on the up and up. host: james in connecticut, we will hear from him. james, go ahead. caller: how are you doing. you know, i would not take the vaccine. i would not take it because of two reasons, i don't believe the covid virus is real. i believe that if this was a real, and that thing came from china, we would be at war right now. we are not at war, therefore, that is an attack on american soil. i cannot sit in play games with my life because -- sit and play games of my life. so i will not -- i cannot sit and play games with my life. so i will not take the virus. if we go to war with china, i will take it, because then i will know it is real. host: a text with this thought

about the vaccine, saying, why get a vaccine for something that can be survived by smart, healthy eating and living. the president himself tweeting about this on his twitter feed -- president trump saying, while pushing the money drenched by heavily bureaucratic fda, it saved five years in the approval of numerous great new vaccines. it is still a big ole slow turtle. get the vaccines out now, dr. hahn. games, start saving lives. there was an event at the council of foreign relations yesterday in which cdc director robert redfield talked about the process of approval. one of the things he was asked about was political interference. >> politics in the agency and how has political pressure affected it? um, a lotf stories,

of speculation. clearly, the one he referred to, i would never delete and a new email.ete an >> arguing that you had told somebody to delete it. >> and i would never tell .omebody to delete an email i instructed the cdc to ignore dr. alexander's comments, and they did not need to reply to his emails. i testified before congress that, i have always been fully committed to maintaining the agreement. it is a jewel. an independent publication. it doesn't work at the pleasure of the cdc director. it has its own independent group. so i stand by that. doesn't mean people won't try to accuse, it doesn't mean people want try to make up their point onview, but i can say that,

my watch, it is science-based, data-driven. the agency has maintained its integrity. i will concur with you, it is not always easy, and i don't think these agencies should be politicized, you know. director, the n.i.h. director, in certain multiple things, these agencies should not be in the political mix. myself, personally, i am not political. i am a doctor and clinical researcher. i was asked to serve the president and the nation, having come out of 23 years of the army. think yes, but i don't these science-based agencies need to be, as i believe cdc is today and was during my tenure -- rounded in science -- grounded in science and in data.

committee reviews and evaluates data concerning the effectiveness and appropriate use of vaccines. it consists of voting members. their goal test is to consider the quality and relevance of the fda's research and make appropriate recommendations to the commissioner of the fda. the members are selected by the commissioner from authorities knowledgeable about immunology and related scientific and medical fields. the whole hearing from yesterday is still available on our website if you want to see it. we should you the final vote portion. of far as the debate over certain topics regarding pfizer's vaccine, you can see that on our website at the span.org -- at c-span.org. jacob is next. hello. the ones that questioned

the validity of the vaccine -- host: point being? caller: if anybody is questioning the validity of it, shouldn't it be andrew cuomo, who killed more americans than any other mayor or governor? host: what do you think about the decision of the advisory committee yesterday on pfizer's vaccine? caller: what has changed between that andne from before now? host: we will hear from elizabeth. before we do, we should show you what governor cuomo tweeted about the process. saying,, a government vaccine distributio plan must be or credible. the coming 80's hit -- must be equitable. the communities hit hardest by the vaccine can't be the last receive it. my letter to the health and

human services secretary alex azar. when it comes to tracking the vaccine was it is distributed, the usa today reporting that operation warp speed created a system that allows states and local jurisdictions to order and track doses, it records all vaccines shipped, to territories cities and federal entities, according to the chief of plans, operations, and analysis, that works with the center of disease control. there is a lot of information when it comes to distribution in the website of usa today if you want to read it. in massachusetts, elizabeth, you are next. hello. caller: good morning. when trumpof this is got sick he took the drug regeneron and he got well right away. recently, rudy giuliani got sick

with this and he got regeneron. thatwould rather go with one. this lexington has been a little bit -- this vaccine has been a little bit too quick. host: you would go with the therapeutic before a natural vaccine? caller: that's right. that is what i feel about it. people want to take the vaccine, i am not throwing it down, i just don't feel comfortable taking it, because i don't think it is going to do much. it will take. away from your dna, which i am not in favor of, so i would rather go with regeneron if possible, if they could get that out to the public. host: if i may ask, do you take other vaccines? caller: i don't take vaccines. i took one when i was only 10, and i got kind of sick. and i do have allergies so i don't think i would go with the vaccine, this one. i haven't taken one since i was

10. i got the flu may be back in the 1980's. i was sick for about a week, my immune system took over and i got better. but regeneron, they got well so quickly. i think it is a better way to go. host: joel's next in north carolina in davidson. hello. caller: thank you for letting me speak. the fundamental issue with vaccines is there is no accurate test to know what a person's immune status is before they take a vaccine. that has been a long-term issue that hasn't been resolved yet. the other phrase that i like to live with, the miracle isn't why we get sick, it is why we stay healthy. our immune system is a mechanism that keeps us well. host: wouldn't the previous statement apply to all vaccines? many people take vaccines around the united states, to some

effect or another. caller: that's why we do controlled studies to see what is going on in a big population. host: do you not think there is enough studies of this vaccine done? even in light of the advisory committee? caller: i just think the problem is we don't always know what people's immune status is and how well the m&a's -- the buddy takes the vaccine. host: in pennsylvania, good morning. caller: i am with the woman from massachusetts. i don't take the flu shot, haven't taken the flu shot ever. never had the flu. gotten a cold. got my immune system, and that is a natural thing. i get sick for a couple of days, i regenerate, and i am as good as new. vaccine.ike taking any the only vaccines have ever taken were polio, smallpox, and measles when i was a child, and

i have not taken any as an adult. i am 60 years old. i am on no medication. i am very healthy. average diet, average exercise, and if i did get the coronavirus, i have a 99.7% but i am not going to die, so why do i want to poison myself with something i really don't know what is in it, and what the long-term effects are going to be? the people for you, that got the coronavirus, have they ever had a flu shot? have they ever had this one flu shot? because from what i am watching on the internet, these are the people that are getting sicker, that are getting the flu shots year after year after year. i am in the health care field. host: what statistics are you quoting? caller: the people that get the shot year after year, are they the ones getting sick with the

coronavirus? because your body, when you are constantly taking shots to take off a virus, there is no cure for aids, that is a virus, there is no cure for hepatitis c, that is a virus. all this is is a band-aid. why don't we go to our god-given immune system? host: ok. this is from alan in west virginia who says, i will definitely get the vaccine asap. i am a little wary because of how quickly it was developed and the political environment in which it was developed. but the u.k. and canada have already approved it. some states are going to review it for approval indefinitely. on facebook, a viewer says, give it to the gullible. not putting it in me. david from. new hampshire says, if dr. fauci says it is ok, i will get it. michael in oregon saying, realistically, it will take a long time for the vast

majority of us to get vaccinated. i pray that a majority of us will take it. if not, we will never see the end of the virus and 2021 will just be a repeat of 2020. next caller, go ahead. caller: yes, i will definitely take the vaccine. i am 74 years old. in my prior working life, i was a director of reg witchery affairs for a drug company. i can assure you -- i was a director of regulatory affairs for a drug company. in regards to how the studies were run, this is almost micromanaged. it is being done in a hyper-safe manner. where they are saving time is on the manufacturing of this drug. and also, getting that done early in anticipation of approval. this takes months normally. host: so when it comes to vaccine development how long does it typically take and what

about those who have expressed concern about the shortness of time, given that it is less than a year that we are seeing the product? caller: it normally takes 3-5 makingbut it involves submissions along with other companies, you get in line, you get reviewed. back-and-forth, back-and-forth. so this is all hands on deck, knowing the extreme emergency situation we are involved in. but the manufacturing, the scaling of the production levels, they did this ahead of time after they were fairly good,ent that they had a safe, effective drug. that saved a lot of time, and they did that under operation warp speed. this advisory panel is yet another review by the fda itself, that is hopefully happening in the next day or two.

is, thisy last point virus is not going to go away, i don't care how many masks we all where or how we socially distanced. it needs to be stopped. is the only way that we can stop it. host: ok. we will hear from juliet in colorado. caller: hi, thank you for c-span. i will take the vaccine. i will trust the experts. also, long before i will be able to get it, the frontline workers will get it. many of them have science backgrounds, and who knows better what the comparative risk is compared to actually getting the virus than the people who have actually watched this day in and day out for months now? host: that is the basis of your trust for the advisory committee and other people in the process? caller: yes.

also, i read an interesting article on facebook that, it was a professional article that said that the reason they were able to get this done so quickly is been ablehad already to produce mrna, which is the of -- i amivalent going to budge this up -- the protein that carries the virus. mrna can then clone the , and it was actually using the real virus. mrna have beenis figured out a long time ago and because of that, they were able to get this done quickly.

so, we just need to read up a little bit on it. i find it really ironic that the very people that are following conspiracy theories about thenesses are worried about conspiracy theory on vaccinations, which is where we actually have real experts. host: ok, juliet in colorado when iter thoughts comes to the advisory panel giving the green light to pfizer's covid vaccine, one step closer to full approval by the fda. moderna also expected to get approval by next week, or initial advisory committee approval consideration next week. we want to get your thoughts on these events. in our next half hour, give us a call and let us know what you think. 202-748-8000 for the eastern and zones. time

202-748-8001 for the mountain-pacific time zones. and for the medical professionals out there, 202-748-8002. when it comes to distribution, it can also impact, according to some people, what might happen as far as holiday gifts are concerned. from usa today -- observers are calling it a perfect storm while hoping shoppers, who are making more online purchases because of the pandemic, and fewer people traveling this christmas, with shipping already under tremendous pressure due to covid-19-related holiday shopping, constraints in vaccine delivery is another element of disruption to this already fragile mix. that is the managing director of logistics practice for a global consulting firm. it adds, the director of economic research for convoy telling usa today that the timing of the first wave of vaccine distribution kombucha's holiday shipments, since the major -- complicates holiday

shipments. the senate subcommittee hearing yesterday on vaccine distribution and also hearing from some of these distributors who will be involved. here is a portion from yesterday featuring fedex executive richard smith. [video clip] >> there will be no higher priority shipments in our network than vaccine shipments. they will have higher priority than, everything we carry certainly in our fedex express system. we will be using new technologies, i am sure someone will get to a question on that so i will not go into too much our respective monitoring technologies that will allow us to have control of these shipments at all times, to know where they are, and make sure they are delivered. intercede if there is any and for seeing delays, weather-related, on-road traffic delays, we will be able to jump into action. >> i will interrupt you. >> yes.

>> do you have a good working relationship with airports, for example? >> absolutely. >> that you will move into a priority lanes there? >> these shipments will move in our integrated air-ground system, the express network. we are working closely with the fia. we have great relationships with the airports. we are working with the faa. they do have highest priority. to your question on staffing, we staff of like ups does for peak an higher a lot of team members. we know that as this ramps up, we will continue to operate at butated levels post-peak, we will maintain a lot of those team members have staffed up for peak to continue with this vaccine distribution beyond. >> thank you. host: cnbc reporting the post of the distribution will contain walmart the company saying they

will continue to distribute the vaccine what they're approved. saying they are figuring more than 500 thousand stores and sam's club pharmacies to receive the vaccine. the company's website saying, i know we are ready to get back to normal and enjoy life, and these vaccines will help us do that. mike is next, in massachusetts, what do you think about this development? caller: i am happy about it. i am definitely taking the vaccine. i tuned in at 7:20. three things o were said that were not true. elizabeth in somerville was talking about how she thinks these vaccines alter your dna. that is not true. that emily nave deliver mrna into your cells. that mrna is translated into dna that is used -- the mrna

delivers mrna into your cells. the mrna is degraded by typical cell machinery, and it is not like it embeds itself into your dna or something, it is delivering mrna that is used to which goes onein response. an immune host: let me hear from you on where you are confident of the vaccine. caller: i am confident the cause for -- i am confident for different reasons. one is the effects of the virus, which is not just a respiratory disease, it is a vascular disease. receptors of the virus are found all over your body, especially vascularature. it can cause strokes and damage your kidneys and your lungs. i am relatively young, so i am probably fine, but i don't want

any of these lifelong debilitating symptoms that could be permanent in healthy people. concerned, the'm vaccine is a lot more safer than this unknown, novel virus. host: ok. let's hear from patton in mississippi, hello. caller: hey. because the vaccine, there is so much covid-19 here. we can get out in the world better and be able to get out to our jobs and not stay inside of our house. this vaccine may be the one to help us. host: michael in philadelphia. hello. caller: hey.

i have been vaccinated when i was a kid. effectsad -- i had no from it, no ill effects. in the military, i was vaccinated like i was in an assembly-line and got no ill effects from it. so hearing all these people calling in saying that they don't want the vaccine, but puts me closer to the head of the line. i like that, because i want this vaccine. host: michael in philadelphia giving his experience including the military. same with erin in connecticut texting as saying, i would gladly take the vaccine. when i was in the marine corps, we had no say in what vaccines we were given. we had to take -- the reasoning was to protect as many of us as possible and limit possible exposure to others we may come

in contact with -- others we may interact with. some measure sacrifice that will save lives is not too big of an ask. another viewer says, the flu once in 30 years. anecdotal, i know. again, texting is available at 202-748-8003. that, we asko do you include your name, your city, and your state when you do that. san diego, this is jason. hello. caller: good morning. i would like to say that when the therapeutic drug remdesivir, it is for those who have been stricken, like the president and giuliani, that particular drug will bring you back from the brink, but you still have to take your vaccination that they are about to put out, you understand? in fact, if you are already stricken the vaccination is not

going to do you no good, but the remdesivir and that concussion will bring you back, that brought the president back and gave him life. but he is going to still have to thatthe new brexit nation is this vaccination that is about to be loose. host: are you going to take it as well? caller: yes, sir. host: what gives you confidence in doing so? caller: the science gives me confidence. the fact that they can maneuver that therapeutic drugs to attack it and bring it back, they know all about that. that information also have been put into the actual vaccine that will block it. so i have all kinds of confidence in vaccines. i took them in the military. there is no reason not to take

one. host: that is jason in san diego. pfizer's vaccine is a two-stage vaccine. the question the usa today poses looking at it, saying, what happens if you miss that second one when it comes to that? they respond, the vaccine made by pfizer is to be given in two duces 21 days apart. biden is vaccine will have two doses 28 days apart. important,on is not and the immune system responds better when there is a wider gap in vaccinations, an immunologist is quoted as saying. he noted that people are better off getting the second shots and being fully protected according to the authorized schedule. quote, "if there is significant transmission of the disease, as is the case here, we should get the dose exactly as it has been studied." richard in texas, hello.

richard in corpus christi, you are on. sir.r: ok, yes, there is a number of vietnam -- i am a vietnam veteran, and i caught agent orange when i was there which took me to being a diabetic. i take the flu shot every single catchand even at that, i the flu really bad every year. but i am going to take this vaccine for me and my wife. we are in our mid-70s, and we are not going to take a chance. we do believe in the scientists, and i will be taking the injection. host: from john in columbia, maryland, good morning. caller: good morning. not taking this vaccine. i have noticed from the first days of march how it was the

hyped -- being hyped. thousands of channels on my television and i heard the same thing over and over. i have done a lot of research. you did go to youtube or google, that has been censored. the pcr test is very faulty, that is what all these cases are based on. hundreds of doctors have gone on youtube making videos about their death certificate numbers are be inflated. those videos go viral and are pulled down within a day. that is another reason. host: when it comes to the vaccine itself why take it or why not take it, specifically? caller: i think the whole scene -- why would they gave these false tests for pcr and that certificates, for what reason? you just said earlier, most vaccines take at least five years.

most, more. this one is in a couple of months. i am wondering, of the four people in the panel that voted no, i wonder if you would consider having them on. one last point, i am not sure your viewers know that there has been laws passed that vaccine makers have no liability. i would like you to maybe have a guest on about that. host: ok. robert in waldorf, maryland, you are next up. caller: i would like to follow up with what your last caller said. you take the situation, and merry christmas they are using this situation to control the population now. if the state or federal government agency came to you and wanted a dna sample from you, would you allow them to stick a swab up your nose without a warrant to obtain said the a 90? you wouldn't -- to obtain said dna? no, you wouldn't.

everyone has gone out and done this. you have given the state and federal government your dna. how do you know the swabs were not contaminated by the so-called virus anyway? this is nothing more than a political con job. it has worked for them in the election in order to manufacture the mail-in voting situation, what has allowed them to steal the selection. now they realize -- steal this election. now they realize they can control the population by continuing with this. anyone who takes the vaccine is a fool. they could be giving you the placebo. host: what evidence ca convinces you of that? caller: the crooked government lies every day in the media. you can't get the truth from anyone. where is the truth? these are the same people that gave you weapons of mass distraction. these are the same people that

allowed all of these hijackers into our country. host: how does that relate to the vaccine or its distribution? caller: the government is doing the same thing. this is a government scam. how can you trust the government with your health. host: ok. lee in tennessee, hello. caller: yes. i am 73 years old. i have had a stroke. i have copd. i will be taking the vaccine. i am interested in how china has hasloped a vaccine and given away over one million people a vaccine. russia has developed a vaccine and it is mandatory in russia to get the vaccine. i guess there must be a worldwide conspiracy, as the guy in texas is talking about, the whole world is in on this

conspiracy? it's ridiculous. host: ok, we will hear from james in washington, d.c. hello. caller: ok. i will be taking the shot for the virus. i feel if i don't take it, i put everybody, especially myself, i'd risk. anyone who chooses not to take it, it is your choice, but, again, you are putting everyone else at risk. host: ok. that was james in washington, d.c. talking about the latest in vaccine development, the fda approval, or advisory committee giving its green light to the fda. the fda in turn now expected to fully green light pfizer's vaccine. when it comes to these events, here is a statement from the biden transition team saying," today's recommendation by the advisory committee that emergency use authorization be issued in the pfizer/biontech

covid vaccine is a bright light in a dark time. we are grateful to the scientists and public health experts who evaluated the safety vaccine.acy of the the integrity of science led us to this point. our challenge is the distribution, 100 million shots in the first 100 days of the administration. we are putting together an experienced team just to do that." when it comes to matters of the election, a couple of stories to share with you. from the new york times -- four states urging the supreme court justices to turn back texas's lawsuits challenging several states for their results, saying the lawsuit filed by the attorney general in texas and backed by 106 members of congress represents the most coordinated undersized attempt to overturn the will of voters. georgia's attorney general, particularly taken aback by the

texas suit, saying, quote "georgia did what the constitution empowered it to do. it implemented processes for the election and administered the election in the face of logistical challenges brought on by covid-19 and confirmed the election results again and again and again, yet texas has sued georgia anyway." from the washington times -- the work of the electoral college being put interview given the certification done at the state level. this story says, the outcome is not in doubt. according to the results certified in each state, joe biden won 25 states and the district of columbia and earned 306 electoral votes. president trump won 25 states, too but his are more sparsely populated and earned him just 232 electoral votes. in many cases, before democrats even knew the running mate would be kamala harris, a system of

electors was created by the constitution's article ii and certified in the 23rd amendment, though the term electoral college does not appear in the founding document. votes, electors hold two one for vice president and one for president. the only change the constitution may have made was moving the vote to a bigger room. when it comes to the transition process two posts named yesterday -- susan rice, familia in the obama administration who served as national security adviser, will become director of the domestic policy council. mcdonoughnis will be picked to be secretary of veteran affairs. lawren, next up from california. caller: hello? host: hello, you are on. caller: people take in the flu

shot doesn't work -- what --pens is, the flu shot was when they went over to china, what they do is they find the 10 top viruses they think they can -- they think will come over, they get a flu shot from those 10 viruses from those. it is a crapshoot whether those viruses actually make it over there, but they take the 10 worst ones over there and take that and add. host: what do you base that on, caller? caller: from information i have as wellthe news paper, as information i have seen on news channels, and also that is true. what happens is the virus they are now working on covid, they are using the dna, the dna of

the virus. is whatna of the virus they are going to -- the flu shot, you take the flu shot, specifically, your body is going to go in there, make the antivirus and prevent the virus from getting into your system. that is where it is. host: ok. lauren in california from maryland. michael, hello. caller: i want to make a couple of points. one, this virus, the panic is way worse than the virus is. 99.75 survival rate. that is on the cdc's website, i checked that.

two, i personally don't trust the big pharma companies. to put something in my body. they don't make a profit off me being healthy, they make a profit off me being sick. they want me sick later in life. they want me sick now. they love the pandemic because it makes them money. the other guy, some people are a little extreme about it and some people are not. the just have to think logically, what is in the people's interest that are telling you? our leaders are known liars. they lie all the time. all of a sudden they are telling us the truth about the virus? about the effects? i mean, it is just ridiculous to even believe them. host: ok. let's go to debbie in massachusetts. caller: hi, this is debbie. i wouldn't take it, because i have a lot of allergies.

i think it is due to my allergies that i wouldn't be taking it. i did take the pneumococcal pneumonia vaccine. i was rushed to the hospital and put on an eight-day medically induced coma. so i did get it even though i had the vaccine. it is to each their own, to make their own decision,. nobody should be forcing them. i did the math of can't of deaths to ratio of how many cases, and it is 19.5 per state for 50 states on average. they had some states that are going to be with more people come with deaths -- counties and towns and stuff like that. in mass, it is hiring now, but in other ones, it could be low. host: debbie. in massachusetts when it comes to efforts on capitol hill on covid relief, another package of covid relief, bloomberg

reporting this morning that the bipartisan talks on that nearly trillion dollar relief bill are hung up on differences between republicans and democrats on shielding companies from virus-related lawsuits, risking dragging negotiations past next week. republicans and democrats, while they are closer than ever on agreeing to a price tag, resting around the $900 billion dollar figure, there is no signs of a deal anytime soon. senate majority leader urging democrats to drop state for local governments -- drop aid governments. local nessie pelosi and other top immigrants are open to it was in liability lawsuits in exchange for state aid floated by a bipartisan group of negotiators. james in lincoln, illinois, you are next up. caller: i live in lincoln, illinois. i am going to take the vaccine.

i am a 59-year-old black male, and i do trust our government and i trust the scientists. host: ok. steve in new york state. hello. caller: good morning, pedro. i am a 55-year-old white male and i will be holding off on taking the vaccine, until it shows to be proven. my wife has covid. she has been in bed for four days. two of our children have it. i am confident the treatments they are developing will be successful. bottom line is i will wait and see. thank you. host: when you say you are going to wait until it is proven, what evidence do you need to say that it is proven? caller: just the numbers. as the data comes in and we start to see the effects from the cdc on the reaction to allergy issues or other issues who took theaunt

vaccine in the 1970's and it was proven to be safe, but unfortunately, she had a reaction and she was paralyzed. i am just not confident at this point that enough data and results are in on the impacts of the vaccine, so i think it is wise to take it if you are at risk. i have two parents in their 80's. they should be taking it. but i think many of us are strong and healthy and those who are strong and healthy should just rely on the treatment. host: how are your wife and children doing? caller: they are doing fine. my daughter had symptoms for four days. my son did not. my wife has been in bed for four days, but she is recovering. host: any idea of how they contracted it? caller: a tour in college. i think it was just from being in dense populations. one was at virginia tech and one is that elon, pretty large schools. my wife is a schoolteacher and she has been extremely cautious. so we are pretty sure that it

was rapidly transmitted from our children to my wife. host: that is steve in new york state talking about -- steve, west wishes to your wife and your family. david in anderson, south carolina. hi. caller: how. caller: are you doing today? host: pretty good, thank you. caller: we developed a bomb for world war ii and we used it. so i want to trust the scientists to save lives rather than destroy them. host: you say you want to trust the scientists, but do you trust the scientists? caller: yes, i do. because during world war ii,. we. destroyed lives then why don't we save lives now. host: when it comes to the vaccine, what are you trusting in? caller: i trust the scientists, to know what they are doing. i trust the expertise. host: ok. douglas in pleasant garden.

caller: yes, sir. host: douglas, what state is it? caller: north carolina, sir. host: go ahead. caller: basically, i wanted to comment that it is the fda that i don't trust. in light of the president fast tracking all these vaccines and getting the science down, that is not the issue. the fda is not trustable. i say that in regards, as far as their previous track record. who contributes to the fda, who funds the fda, who gets their medications approved or disprov ed. i have lupus and fibromyalgia, ok, and i have taken part in lupus medication studies. it's the fda that i don't trust. i have spoken to some to one of my physicians who had recently been in a conference with an epidemiologist.

the information that they got was all solid as far as how the virus attacks, how covid attacks the body. and the way they were going to use a vaccine and how it would attack the ok? it's not the issue of the science cometh the fda i don't trust. host: one more call from gary, in california. sound like there's a lot of angry people out there. i'm 68, i had open heart surgery . i am very cautious. in the way i have followed the distancing, not the masking come of course. my life has been very mellow and easy, i don't do a lot of outside or interaction.

so i have not really had to change any behaviors. i don't ride on buses, i'm retired. i ride a bicycle so i'm outside. so i'm going to try to maintain my lifestyle, continue to be safe. but what happens, because the inevitable will happen. here in southern california, there is huge numbers. and i'm going to be exposed. do i get one before or after? host: it sound like you're not going to get the vaccine? caller: i would hate to say no and then die. that's the last call on this topic. thank you to all who participated in this first hour. we will continue on with the things related to vaccine and over if the vaccine should be mandated by the government, businesses, or schools. guest, andas our

with thenatalie foster economic security project will join us to talk about how the concept of a guaranteed basic income is making a come among some summit -- among some mayors in the united states. that's coming up on washington journal. ♪ >> 20 years ago, one of the most timely -- highly contested presidential races took place, the 2000 presidential contest between george w. bush and al gore. saturday morning we look back at dionnection with e.j. and william kristol. veditors of the book bush gore, the court cases and the commentary. watch 20 years later, live, saturday at 8:30 on american history tv on c-span three and

c-span's washington journal. >> sunday night on q&a, the 117 condors -- congress begins with the most women ever. we speak to to two millenials of class, about their background, and what they hope to accomplish in office. with the to side american people and the working class. i think government operates best when it is small, accountable, and transparent. and people have the power to control that. i don't think people should work to serve the government. myself,s where i find i'm a pretty conservative member, i will work with members and make our country better place. of equale opportunity

opportunity rather than equal outcome. generation that has never seen a day in our adult lives that we have not been at war. idea of ending forever war is especially important for us. we know the cost of that has had on this domestically and on our generation. one of the things i really want to focus on is rebuilding america standing around the world and make sure that we are ending the forever wars and how we can craft policies that will address the challenges in the future and that we are rebuilding for those future challenges, the things like global pandemics, like climate change. freshmen women of the 117th congress, sunday night at 8:00 eastern on c-span's q&a. >> use your mobile devices and go to c-span.org for the latest

video, live and on-demand, to follow the transition of power. trump, president-elect biden, news conferences and event coverage at c-span.org. washington journal continues. host: our first guest of the morning, dr. joel zinberg of the competitive enterprise institute where he served as a senior fellow and a senior economist in general counsel for the trump administration. thank you for giving us your time this morning. let's start with this announcement yesterday from the advisory panel from the fda. what do you think about this step of the process? step, thean important first of the vaccines that has received that sort of approval. advisoryutside of the and they have reviewed what the

and using the data favorably. i think it's an amazing step. it normally takes about 10 years to develop a new vaccine for novel virus, something that causes a brand-new disease. this was accomplished in about 10 months. it's an absolute triumph. is it open to outside influence as far as we solve the final results yesterday? guest: i don't think so. this has been heavily scrutinized process. it's been more transparent than virtually any other approval. everybody has had concerns about outside influence, and people have to realize that the pharmaceutical companies have to invitee incentive the sort of media and public attention. and the fda has gone out of its way saying they would not bow to

political pressure and would adhere to normal standards. i don't think that people need to be concerned about that. guest: in the first hour we had people respond in light of the news about whether they would take the vaccine or not once it becomes available. there was a recent poll showing an uptick in people saying they would, 63%, versus 50% from earlier. what do you attribute that rise to? guest: under the best of circumstances, people are sometimes reluctant to take vaccines, we know from influenza that there is an annual vaccine that only about 45% of americans will take. and the things they cite as reasons not to are generally concerns about safety. and paul's back in may in covid indicated that people had the same skin's -- that -- and polls back in may indicated be by the

same concerns. and there was concern that there was pressure, people pushing through on the vaccine. and that reduced public confidence. confidence and people who are willing to take the vaccine were probably or definitely dropped from about 70% to under 50%. and now it's balancing up a bit. i think because most of the controversy and criticism has abated after the election. much of the controversy i think was politically generated. many of the people complaining had partisan motives. wet: this brings us to where invited you, a recent op-ed of yours concerning vaccines and whether they should be mandated or the idea of mandating a type of vaccine. you can lay out your argument but i want to ask, where do you see these calls coming from for mandating? guest: about a month ago the new

had atate bar association resolution calling for a mandate in new york state that would encompass the entire state without regard to any sort of religious objection. there's been a proposal in the new york state assembly to do something like that. calls witheen legislators and other states. so yes, there is the potential for this, and certainly historical precedent which goes all the way back to a case in 1905 call jacobson against massachusetts where the supreme court ruled that massachusetts could require a vaccination for smallpox during a smallpox epidemic. i argue in the wall street journal piece that you alluded to that that's not necessarily a good precedent for what's going on here. this,a little bit of

there is a sphere in which the individual may rightfully dispute the authority of a government, especially of the government under the written constitution but it's equally true that every well or society -- the rights of the individual and respect and liberty may at times, under the pressure of great dangers be subject to such restraint, to be employed by reasonable regulations and the safety of the general public may be deemed. go from there as far as how you interpret that. guest: the court was giving states great latitude, which they enjoy under the constitution to protect public safety and public health. -- that is fine. but the court backed down 150 years ago, cautioning instances where the actions taken were either unreasonable or unduly coercive. precaution, are

rarely enforced. and jacobson remains the law today and is used to justify all sorts of government health policies. but people have to understand, a lot has changed since jacobson. the supreme court has recognized various fundamental liberty rights. there is a liberty interest in personal autonomy, including the right to refuse lifesaving medical care. those are rights that were not really recognized back in 1905. in addition, jacobson was dealing with a smallpox epidemic. back in 1905, smallpox was a disease that killed three out of 10 people infected. the survivors were generally scarred, many blinded. that's a pre-severe disease and it calls for severe response. covid is pretty bad, but it's more on the order of about influenza season with somewhere between .2 point six fatality

rates per infection, then smallpox. only has a lotot of grief from the a lot school but a medical degree from columbia university college. dr. joel zinberg is joining us to talk about the idea of mandates when it comes to the covid-19 vaccine. you can call and ask a question at (202) 748-8000for the eastern and central time zones. the mass and pacific time zones, (202) 748-8001. what is your organization? inst: a think tank washington, d.c. that espouses free-market principles and see if regulations are necessary or not and if they impede the economy and human flourishing. that withs go above the idea of the free market and the federal government, could it

mandate some type of requirement to take a vaccine? powersmost of the police are reserved to the states. in other words dealing with public health and public safety. the federal government has very limited powers to mandate this sort of thing. is toly the best place look at the public health service section which allows the government to take certain actions to limit epidemics coming from foreign nations or the spread of infectious disease . but if you look carefully at that statute, it also makes reference to specific actions. things like isolation, quarantine, destruction of animals, fumigation. it does not make any reference to masks, to general health policy. that that section

of the law would allow a mask mandate. notense is that it would but that's being challenged in a case in georgia dealing with ac/dc requirement that limits evictions to the end of the year , whether that section allows that. my suspicion is that it does not. at statekely looking actions. they will control spending, and acas, we saw that in the cases. those powers have limitations. beon't think it would applicable in this setting. host: let's change the hypothetical, let's say i worked for the federal government, could my employer require me to get a covid vaccine? guest: there is precedent here

for employers requiring vaccinations against communicable diseases. every state has a requirement for school-aged children to have childhood vaccines over they go to school. states have requirements on influenza vaccines for people working in health care, hospitals, long-term care settings. haveany entities undertaken to such requirements. york, mountin new sinai, requires all of its staff to get the influenza vaccine. a number of health facilities do the same thing. generally speaking, the courts have allowed that as long as institutions are willing to consider medical contra dictations or religious objections.

not placeg as it is an undue burden on the institution. host: so for those challenges that are medical or religious, do those hold up if they go to a court or trial? record,t's a variable sometimes they do and sometimes they don't. most institutions will try hard to accommodate them. thatcommodation might mean if you are not vaccinated you are required to wear a mask, or it means they move you to a different type of job. one that does not place even patient contact. they try to accommodate those things as best as possible. there, the wrecker very depending upon the situation. fauciwe have heard dr. say that he would not see mandates happen. we have heard the incoming biden administration say that as well.

you have a level of trust in the statements? guest: the biden administration has recognized that they have limited legal authority to do so. there are only certain places they have the authority required . this is clear and things like medical buildings, and perhaps trains and planes that are they don't want to have that legal dispute, they would rather encourage states which have already been encouraged to undertake the mass mandates on their own. and is not as if we have a large number of locations where there are no mandates. call is fromst louisa, from louisville, kentucky. go ahead. caller: hello, thank you for

c-span. this vaccine has not been proven yet. we don't really know the long-term effects of it and is not that the states or the federal government is going to mandate this area it's going to be private businesses. especially essential workers, ups, kroger's, i have two essential workers and neither can take the vaccine and i don't think it's right. and i'm not taking the vaccine if you're going to have a lot of people quitting their job because they will be mandated to take this vaccine which i don't think is right. private entities have a lot of reasons to mandate vaccines. limitthey want to employees and customers getting sick. they want to limit absenteeism, they want a reputational is atage knowing that this safe place to work and you will not get sick coming here, being

a patient of this store or institution. they want to keep people from getting sick because ultimately the outlays of medical healthtures, and insurance premium costs. they have a lot of reasons to do it. not sure what you're referring to in terms of proven, but the vaccines have been tested in large trials, 30,000 to 40,000 people or more. they were relying on well-established history, measures and stiff they were effective or not. and the cdc and the fda have already mandated that this could be close to follow for efficacy evaluations and safety. so we will know very quickly if there are any real problems. i think most people should take

comfort in the fact that there's been a lot of public protection and the fda and cdc have bent over backwards to make sure these vaccines are -- host: is be reported by the fda that it will authorize pfizer's vaccine and it could be rolled out as early as monday. what's your reaction to that? guest: it's great news. had promisedccine that they would have about 50 million doses before the end of the year. it may be a little less than that. moderna is not far behind and they have applied for emergency use authorization as well. they will probably get approval and they promised another 20 million. 40you have anywhere between to 70 million doses, and each person requires two doses, expect somewhere between 20 to

30 million people to be vaccinated because these are three to four weeks apart. that already covers the first hasp of people that the cdc identified as candidates for the vaccine. people who are medical providers, working in hospitals and long-term care facilities, and also the residence who self -- the residents who suffer tremendously. about 45% of deaths have been in long-term care facilities, that's where elderly people and people with underlying medical conditions live. medicalcause of your background and your association with the trump administration, what confidence you have in distribution? guest: i have been in the administration for almost a year. the administration has been planning for a long time, through various channels to distribute the vaccine to state

and local authorities. the pfizer vaccine is a difficult proposition in that it requires extremely low temperatures to preserve the vaccine, so it's a challenge to ship it. pfizericion is that the vaccine will preferentially go to large hospital centers that can ensure that the vaccine will be captain proper conditions. the mentor in a vaccine requires a freezer -- the moderna vaccine requires a freezer but more like the one you and i would have her haven foods, -- that would frozen foods pre-i expect that to be more widely distributed. but the plans have been in place for months. confident that we will have a good rollout. host: here's leon, from delaware. good morning. caller: good morning.

i wanted to make a comment that i trust the pharmaceutical companies and the process they went through. what i don't trust is the incoming president. why aren't we talking about that issue this morning? move onto jeffrey, in greensboro, north carolina. guest: thank you for taking the call. . have a question in greensboro, north carolina, have this int to school. there has been no up date and they stopped taking temperatures which was one of the protocols

and then we had the lady from kentucky, where she was defiant saying it's not a real issue. people have had numerous being sick and dying every day and dr. fauci has a clear understanding this disease and i'm looking at who he is this morning by the information he is and weing on the subject ine never heard him publicly the trump administration explaining when donald trump was iubting and downplaying this

was expecting him to say something about how this was a serious issue and a critical issue in the world today. host: let him respond to that. guest: i was out of the administration when the pandemic began. i was certainly not in the position to speak forward. but the council of economic advisers wrote an economic report dealing with vaccines for the potential pandemic for influenza and how we could and if thatnes pandemic occurred a vaccine would be more readily available and safeguard the health and the and it -- the

economy. it would require relying on the power of the pharmaceutical companies and the free market. that's what we saw with operation warp speed, where the government went ahead and helped and theyhe development wanted to manufacture the vaccines before they were even approved so that when approved there could be a decent supply and we could vaccinate people right away. and you had this unprecedented development of vaccine within 10 months rather than 10 years. the administration, in many regards was ahead of this issue and we did this at the behest of other proponents of the administration, including the national security council.

they were actually the ones who asked the council of economic advisors for the back of north area -- the and forth. host: let's go to rachel, in fort lauderdale. is as: my first question an organ donor recipient, i want to know if the vaccine is a live virus are not. -- worn out. and the other -- or not. and why the world we vaccinate anyone younger than 18 years old? what would be the necessity of that since their immune systems are so strong, other than maybe having a comorbidity they would not need that. those are my two question three thank you.

guest: the two leading vaccine candidates, the pfizer and livena candidates are not vaccines. they are made with a brand-new technology called mrna or messenger rna. this is the first use that that has been approved with this technology because people have been studying this for many years. there is no chance of that and what was the second question? host: why would you administer this to someone younger than 18? caller: that's not in the planet -- guest: that's not in the plant the cdc theted first round will be -- that is

not on the plan at the moment. the cdc will be meeting again to discuss the next round but for the preliminary categories they have been talking about, those are essential workers followed by people with underlying medical conditions or the elderly. children could be far down the line on that store -- that score. and i would add to the vaccine has not really been studied in children yet. and i has gone the lowest don't know what they're going to but nobodyconclude has gone lower than 12. the companies are starting to study the vaccine in children. , we have is a good one known for quite a long time is that covid, mike some other diseases like influenza does not really target the very young and healthy.

don't seem to get the disease in a severe fashion. under 1% of the deaths in this country are in people under the 18. our guest is a senior fellow at the competitive enterprise institute with a medical degree from columbia and the idea of health-care workers through there's a story in usa today about a survey with front-line workers saying only a third of the panel 13,000 nurses said they would voluntarily take a vaccine. another third said they would not. the rest said they were unsure. americancording to the nurses association. as a doctor yourself, how much

leeway do i say to someone who works in us front-line positions that you need to get a vaccine? and we dos a problem have real shortages of nursing personality moment because of the large number -- personnel at the moment. i would get a vaccine. my wife is a physician and she would get a vaccine. any colleague i have spoken to said they would get vaccinated. i think the nurses have to pay more attention to the science and not the rhetoric which we just saw during the election. a lot of this was targeted i think at the trump administration unfairly.

it wasn't what you would expect in the life-threatening epidemic, you would push things to go quickly and that is what has happened you but there's no evidence that there has been any compromise on safety or compromise on looking at the effectiveness of the vaccine. host: as far as a hospital being mandate it,ated when they try to would there be accommodation? guest: i think they would try to mandate it. in the case of nurses there's only so much one can do to accommodate them because they are involved in patient care. i'm hopeful this will continue. host: this is ted, good morning. caller: if you believed from the

beginning of this whole mess, and everything was followed, when we still be in this position now if everything was done correctly? from the beginning? and my second question is do you is a savior vaccine that's everything it's happening ? guest: a lot of people use that phrase, that we should have followed the science, the if you look back at dr. fauci, this is not a criticism, there wereent, people saying i would not wear a

mask i'm i would not change anything you are doing normally. and as the science involved his opinions changed as did many others. you need to look around the world and pretty much regardless , it even every country south korea is seeing rising numbers of cases and deaths. there is not a magic bullet that somebody missed the boat on. everywhere around the world there has been spread. everywhere around the world there has been deaths. a vaccine is something that we can hopefully find out will

limit the spread of the disease. so the buyers will not spread and one of the out -- one of the outstanding questions we have is how effective is the vaccine at limiting transmission of the virus from person-to-person? we do know is that it appears to be highly effective in keeping from getting covid. how we have not studied is somebody already infected from spreading it. that's an important question. host: we have mary, in

wisconsin. my two adultf and children were planning on getting the vaccine. i'm a retired rn, but my adult son has a history of severe allergies and asthma. peanuties an epipen for allergies. is, since the doctors thing the other iterations of the vaccine might ?ause the same reaction guest: the answer is i don't .now it's just two people in the u.k. who have already received the pfizer vaccine that had severe energetic -- allergic reactions. recovered,they have and there is caution for people with a history of severe allergies should perhaps --.

theow that pfizer and various governmental agencies in the u.k. in the u.s. will be looking very carefully at this. as far as i know this will not be in the mentor and a vaccine, which is -- the moderna vaccine which is also an mrna vaccine. this will be clearer as time goes on. all i can say is to follow the advice of your physician because this will get clearer over time. and that information will be out of the medical community. when it comes to states and localities and the powers they have over schools, how much authority do they have to mandate? they mandated that children have vaccines for childhood vaccines. so they would have the authority to do so, as long as they are

willing to make some accommodations. he, people carte blanc with accommodations have good reason for doing that. host: could a school system say, is-- a covid-19 vaccination to attend? guest: yes, they do have rather vaccines. host: lisa, in minnesota. had. been setow long has it back with trump not cooperating with the biden transition team? i would like to ask the guest if he thinks trump or biden won the election. isst: who won the election outside my area of expertise.

the biden administration has already released plans and and i would say in many ways these plans are aspirational. president-elect biden has talked about having 100 million people vaccinated and have first -- in the first 100 days. i don't think there's much you can do to accomplish that. i think the wheels are in motion -- the dais cast -- the guy the die is cast. i'm optimistic we will get close to that amount but i think they have already started to cooperate and i don't think there will be any fallout from the initial reluctance to cooperate. host: on the idea of mandates, what goes through your mind when you see states reintroducing

stay-at-home orders because of concerns over rising numbers? guest: many of the lockdown and stay-at-home orders are blunt instruments. the vulnerable populations are those who are elderly and people with underlying conditions. ,e should protect those folks that means providing personal protective equipment to long-term care facilities, to medical facilities, make sure the vulnerable populations require healthy young people to stay at home. that is not necessarily protect anyone. could you can stay outside and congregate with other young people anyway.

spreade concerned about of indoor conditions and perhaps multigenerational households, but multigenerational households have to take their own initiative to protect vulnerable people. that means grandma and grandpa have to wear a mask and the younger people have to wear masks and not expose their relatives. it does not mean you need a societywide lockdown. host: matthew, in maryland, thank you for calling. caller: thank you for c-span. i have three major things i want to talk about, they are essentially question sprayed the first piggybacks previous callers in relation to the mandate for children in schools. essentially this will be mandatory like everyone has been talking about through companies that will mandate their employees and schools that will

require children to be in with thebundling typical annual vaccinations they receive. but the concern that many citizens have, and myself as well, is as we see a vaccine rollout we are getting new information in regards to side effects, people with high allergies they are saying, or high risk of allergy say they should not take the vaccine. do we see this as being a doctor's notes, saying this person is high risk taking a vaccine so they don't have to take it. the second thing i wanted to the lessonsn is

learned from us. when we initially on the forefront started to see a pandemic like this on the horizon, we have a small window of three to four months into which we can react to this to do social distancing and face mask , to try to shut down the country, to stop the spread of this thing initially, and try to understand it and kilis. and we missed the window. host: let's leave it there because we are short on time. peopleobviously a lot of have concerns about a mandate for schoolchildren. low on thet's priority list. we might reach a point where enough people have been the rates ofith spread and new cases and deaths and such, that we don't reach a point where we need to mandate this for school kids. after all, they are the least

vulnerable to the virus. i think we have to wait and see. a lot of people will be vaccinated before school kids. there are some estimates for the cdc indicating that probably allow more people have been infected than we have confirmed cases, maybe as many as seven or eight times as number of confirmed cases. we have over 50 million confirmed cases already. overmeans we might have 100 million people exposed and many of this people will have antibodies and will be immune. you might be on the way to herd immunity so that you only need another 150 million people. if that's the case, you might never get to the point we are talking about mandates for school kids. phil inom cell, -- from florida, hello. caller: our family situation is

common. grocery store there's usually a disabled young man or pushing the cart sandbagging. that's the direct -- that -- that is a situation in our family. if our young man does not have an advocate saying that he's already vaccine injured and permanently disabled with autism . if we don't want the young man , and theyn a vaccine could so easily be talked into it due to his disability, what kind of protection can families not have ourto disabled family member either forced into the vaccine by his employer, or somehow bullied or swayed into it. my god.

we should be able to say no to have any kind of foreign object put into our body. host: thank you for the call. go ahead. refers to analler unfortunate young man being injured by vaccine as if his autism was caused by vaccine. i know this is a big issue for many people but it does not follow the science. the science says there's no connection between vaccines and autism. for someone to think that they have been injured by vaccine and they are concerned they will be injured by another vaccine i think is not a legitimate fear. as long as people say they do not want to be vaccinated, they have a right to do that. they have to understand that there are certain requirements to people around them.

if somebody's in a situation where they are encountering the public on a daily basis, they have to be considerate of that as well. if there are accommodations that can be made, maybe becomes a stock boy with less contact to the public. that's a way as long as he wears a mask to avoid vaccine. that might be an accommodation. i think this is the reason why the going to require individualized particularized kind of examination and accommodation of what mitigation measures are best suited for particular circumstances that private entities can do. as oppose to generalize governmental mandate. guest: as we start -- host: as we start with mandates, where does your level of concern fda with the news of pfizer

approval. if you are looking at mandates and they are connected to this vaccine, what do you look for as causes of concern? guest: before anyone goes to mandates you first have to see what's the response on a voluntary level. are people willing to be vaccinated? are people in the groups that the cdc has recognized as first priority, are they going to be willing to be vaccinated. if not we can start talking about mandates. and then we can try to target that feel needed. and as i mentioned before, probably the best way to do that is to do it at the private entity level with the particularized narrow basis rather than a generalized government mandate. host: dr. joel zinberg's with the competitive enterprise institute and you can follow along to his work. we thank you for your time this

morning. guest: thank you for having me. host: we start talking about that panel approving pfizer's request. the fda has responded, saying they will quickly approve the vaccine. and distribution to start soon after that. what do you think about this new development? for those in the eastern and central time zone. and for the mountain and pacific time zones, (202) 748-8001. we take your calls only come back. put tv on c-span two has nonfiction books and authors every weekend. coming up, saturday at 1:00, covered from the recent virtual texas festival with authors michael denzel smith and ivan bailey on the 2020 election area and robert draper and his book, to start a war, the george w.

bush's administration decision to go to iraq. and we continue with ellis cove and camberley hamlin on the aclu and the 19th amendment. and jessica lived there and cathedral david on the political, economic, and social issues facing sports. and sin on aro with his book, the hype machine, how social media disruption are -- disrupts our elections, economy, and health. and on afterwards, west virginia kristenty and writer para lonnie, author of loved and wanted, choice, children, and womanhood, how she was denied reproductive choice and health care for her children. interviewed on the tv on c-span2 this weekend.

>> washington journal continues. host: it was reported a short time ago, here's the washington post, the food and drug administration said early on friday it will rapidly work towards authorization of the pfizer biontech coronavirus vaccine. which would kick off an unprecedented effort to vaccinate americans to stop a rampaging pandemic. this came hours after -- the -- so that they can quote execute their plan for timely vaccine distribution. the story adding that the leave from the -- this comes at a 7000 people are hospitalized and a record 3340 seven deaths have been reported by the state health department. this is the latest step when it comes to a vaccine, the fda

saying they will grant an emergency use approval and we want to reaction to that area we have a half hour or more to do that. (202) 748-8000for democrats -- for democrats (202) 748-8000, for republicans (202) 748-8001, for independents (202) 748-8002. you can text us at (202) 748-8003. you can also post on our twitter feed and facebook page. this is richard, in california, starting us off, hello. caller: thank you for having me on. ,his is a lifesaving vaccine but there's been a lot of on how fast the vaccine was put through. it's a different kind of vaccine and other immunizations, with a different mechanism. that's why they were able to do this is really a

lifesaving thing, i work in a medical field and i have some pre-existing conditions and i will be the first in line to get it. else i know feels there's been a politicalization of rights, do you have a right to not wear a mask? to not be social distance? you don't have a right to spread a disease that might kill someone. we are dividing the lines by time zones. you can also post on social media and text us as well. let's go to rooney, in michigan. caller: i wondered for people who have asthma or a similar reaction, can they put it on a sugar cube like they did for the polio vaccine?

so the allergic reactions or what you're concerned about? caller: that's right. host: would you take it at this stage? caller: oh, sure. host: let's go to deborah, in fort worth, texas. i'm a former employee of a clinical research organization. what i think is happening is that it's been politicized, but i also know that from the there areevelopment folks that i think are not really interested in a cure so much as making the money. i also noticed that over the years that i have worked for, i won't mention the name of the company but i'm from new jersey, so you could figure out what pharmaceutical companies are there. we are underrepresented all over, my experience here is that

there are no people development at the -- no people of color at the business development level. given the past history of the united states as it relates to giving vaccine to people of color, it has been something of a debacle. we wind up usually getting the shorter end of the stick. host: because of your medical background, what do you think of the fda giving the emergency use approval? guest: i think they should way little longer -- caller: i think they should way little longer for you and don't know what phase it is, phase 3? i want to know -- i want them to go to face five. i want to know the fallout for all people who do take this. i'm a cancer patient. i do believe there needs to be more study for them to just release it and not know the after effects, the side effects,

the adverse effects that will take place. is in oregon, good morning. caller: why do you think that vaccine reaction is a passive system, rather than an active system [indiscernible] and the cdc cut off ties with them. why not herd immunity? host: how would you answer your own question? not an why is there active reporting system for injuries from vaccines read why don't we have an active system? why are manufacturers not being identified for liability? host: with all of that taken, what do you think of the approval by the fda. that's what we are talking about? want to see the

information on the fda website so i can read for myself. host: marianna, hello. there are people who could be allergic to this, and tracer inpill with no it because they don't need to trace us. not an inoculation, but a pill. why would they want to give us an inoculation and go through all this work and all of the tubing and the needle where we could have a pill? you had it on c-span the other night with a congressman and six special doctors on pulmonary diseases from different major hospitals. maine,hat's marietta in

with the idea of allergic reactions per let's take a back a couple days ago coming out of withn, reported by reuters a medical regulator advising anyone with a history of anaphylaxis to medicine or food to not get the pfizer biontech vaccine. with full guidance on an earlier allergic warning about the shot area as of this morning fda saying the use approval will be done for pfizer's vaccine. this is the headline that you could see we want to make publications this morning. if you want to give us a call on the regional line. if you want to see from yesterday, the advisory committee and their process when it comes to the fda on whether they should approve a vaccine or not. you can watch the debate on our website. brenda, in louisiana, good morning, you are next area -- next. caller: i would like to know ken

davies contract the virus -- i would like to know can babies contract the virus? if this was created in a laboratory and funded by bill gates, how could that be contagious? oklahomae's duane from ? caller: you do have to turn down the television --hello? host: you have to turn on the television we are getting feedback. caller: hello, this is duane from oklahoma. five,hild, ran the age of i caught polio. i'm 66 now. i have lived all my life on crutches. the reason i caught polio was that although my parents love me dearly, they were afraid of the

vaccines for polio. , would like to say to america that as soon as i can get the vaccine, on going to get it. i have copd and other conditions. people to save them from a tragedy cost by love. thank you. kurt, in las vegas, hello. say that would like to -- the health care worker should be mandated to take the vaccine because we don't of the long-term health problems that this vaccine may cause. every want to make health care workers wear a mask or safety glasses, that's fine, but they should not be forced to take this vaccine, because we don't have proof that this vaccine pre

vaccine may cause long-term health problems. host: what do you think about the fda approving emergencies approval today? caller: the gentleman that called before has everything to lose if he does not take the vaccine. but a young person has everything to lose if if they do take the vaccine. because there may be health problems. host: ok. let's go to veronica in ohio. hello. caller: i feel we should take the vaccine because i have a cousin that died from covid. and i have an underlying condition, so i want people around me to take the vaccine. it.my --, she is not taking she has a 13-year-old son, so

she should take it. host: you will take it yourself? caller: yes, i will. host: why are you confident in doing so? caller: i am confident in doing it because so many people have died from covid. so i am confident in doing it. host: andrea joins us from maine. good morning. caller: good morning. i have been a longtime legislator in maine. i am not currently in office, but i served a number of years, and i worked on the vaccine issue about transparency. i am concerned about transparency in this and also concerned that the pharmaceutical companies are dominating the conversation, when there has been such incredibly impressive hearings

at the homeland security committee, the senate, about prophylactics but have been around a number of years that are cheaper, available, and easier to get to people. without the media being able -- being willing to accept that there can be other things people can use, particularly early on for prevention as well as treatment, we are really missing the boat on giving people a real choices with things that have already been proven to work, as well coming to the vaccine. host: when it comes to the vaccine, what has been proven to work? caller: actually, there is a drug that has had incredible results for people. at the hearings, the doctor showed graphs from studies that showed immediate reduction,

immediate. just incredible. incredible results with that. it is safe. it has been used. there has been millions of doses given. it can't hurt anybody. and also, frankly, there were others talking about hydrochloric when --hy drochloroquine. i have a friend who testified at the state legislature in maine who told me about something to use, and i had a company who told me about something that worked with a chlorine-based kind of treatment. host: sounds like you have a medical background. what about the fda green lighting pfizer's vaccine, what does that mean to you? caller: what it means to me is, i am sure people are working hard to get good effects, but it

is moving very fast, and they just haven't put enough time into it. and, as the previous caller suggested, accurately said, they are protected from all liability against negative effect from these things. host: ok, andrea. let's go to jamar in north carolina. caller: i have the same question she had. why is nobody paying attention to those drugs and all the other things, other than the vaccination? people show, i have -- i see people speaking against it and for it, i don't see anybody speaking against it. none of the people you have on your show speak against the vaccination or speak against

mask-wearing -- host: you just said we have people speaking against them. caller: no, i don't see anybody speaking against it in the people who call. host: ok. so when it comes to the vaccine itself -- caller: why don't you have anybody that objects to vaccination, so they can answer questions? host: a discussion on medical issues concerning the vaccine for years. you can go on the website and check it out. where are you on the vaccine, will you take it or not? caller: i will not take it. host: why not? caller: because i have an immune system that can take anything. host: as far as protecting yourself, what is the best effect, how will you plan to protect yourself? caller: boosting my immune system. it has a 99 point -- percent recovery rate? host: ok.

that was jamar in south carolina. will hear from brent next. hello. caller: hello. how are you. host: good. go ahead. caller: i think it is great to have got the vaccines out quickly but i am concerned about transparency, as well. i would like to see what the studies say. i am not against it, i would just like more information. i think there has been a history about lack of transparency when it came to mask-wearing and other things. i would like to see the studies, the cohorts, who has been tested and the actual study information. give back to the american people so that people can have more information. they make better decisions if not worse. humans don't like uncertainty. i think by providing the

information, people will make more important decisions. host: as far as this vaccine where are you? will you take it or not or are you going to wait until you read more about it? caller: i would like more information at this time. host: what would you look to? how much information do you have to acquire in order to make a decision? caller: i would like to see what the study results are. host: ok. lori, in tennessee. caller: hi. i just, i want to take the vaccine, ok, but i know a lot of friends and family are scared to take it. i can't confirm if this doctor was telling us -- i think it was on the today show or something -- anyway, he said after you take it, you don't have to take it every year like a flu shot. and you all confirm that?

host: right now we know that the vaccine will be in two stages. there is a of reporting on that as well. especially with the fda saying they will grant emergency use for pfizer's vaccine, this is reported out just an hour ago or so, if you want to comment or that.t you can find it online and comment on that for the remainder of the time on the show, 202-748-8000 for the eastern and central time zones. 202-748-8001 for the mountain-pacific time zones. writing in usa today concerning the probe on hunter biden, and how that might complicate the president-elect's choice for attorney general, they write that -- they would it job of selecting the nominee for attorney general suddenly became delegate when the president-elect's son disclosed the justice department is investigating his taxes. they quote a lawyer who quoted

that the president-elect himself could benefit by image of the recommending a special future decisions involving his son, distancing the white house and the future attorney general from claims of favoritism that have shadowed the current administration. the same special counsel, richard painter, said it could weigh that any further review is warranted. that is in the usa today. in the washington times, house leader kevin mccarthy expressing concern about representative eric swalwell, saying that he should be removed from the house permanent select committee on intelligence of to reports that alifornia democrat once had relationship with a suspected chinese agent. mr. mccarthy said he was not notified of mr. swalwell's relationship with the woman, after it was suspected she was a

state agent. he says i am asking for a briefing now, he told reporters. he is a national security threat -- that from the minority leader. the house speaker yesterday during her interview with reporters also commented, particularly on the eric swalwell matter. [video clip] rep. pelosi: i don't have any concerns with mr. swallow. with mr. swallow. , who believe and i am among i don't have any concerns with mr. swalloswallwell. swalwell, in the 2015, the leadership of the house and the committee were informed about overtures

from a chinese person were being made to members of congress. known to was made members of congress, it was over . that was the end of any communication with those people. i think we should make sure that everybody knows what they are being subjected to, but i don't know that it means we have to every interneck that comes to the capitol. i think it is unfortunate that mr. mccarthy is trying to make an issue of this when we all found out at the same time. the republican leadership, that several members had in approached. reporter: were you briefed on this? pelosi: at the same moment, we were briefed at the same moment. make sure you know that.

we knew when they knew. recento finish off, a tweet from president trump in which he says, the biden administration -- he refers to that in his own tweet -- will be a scandal plagued mask for years to come. it is better for the united states supreme court to follow the constitution. they must show courage and wisdom. save the usa. louise in texas, go ahead. you are on. caller: yes. louis, i am sorry, go ahead. caller: that is ok. i have had the virus. everything is checked out. i am clear. need to takew if i the test again, since i am

cleared. host: have you talked to a medical professional about that? caller: now, i have not. are you telling me that i should? host: that will be up to you, louis. are you at this point ok with taking a vaccine for covid? caller: i will definitely take it if i am told i need to take it again because i have gone through that and i don't want to go through it again. host: i will refer you to your medical professional. dan in alabama, scottsboro, hello. caller: yes. my wife and i are both participating in the pfizer study. it is a 26-month study, which would extend into mid-2022. they are testing to see what kind of antibodies we are developing. if weld take the vaccine

know that we are actually taking the placebo instead of being given the vaccine in this study. host: talk about the study, what is involved in your part as far as the study? caller: well, we have been tested twice for covid and been negative. we have been given two doses of the vaccine, two weeks apart. then we have to complete a diary every week to indicate if we have any symptoms. host: where do you go for that test? caller: in alabama huntsville. host: you say they administer it to you and you require the results, what have been the results? caller: we have had no symptoms. but, again, we will not know if we have the placebo or the real vaccine until the study is complete. host: why did you choose to

participate in the study? caller: i had been in previous studies and i was in the database, and they contacted me to see if i would qualify for this fund. my wife and i are both 67 years old. host: let's hear from one more viewer, barber in mississippi. barbera fromis meridian, mississippi. i had covid in april. i spent my time in the icu, and i have since tested negative. and i got that a couple of months later, took the test a second time and i tested negative. they have been giving out free tests, and i tested negative. i have been positive ones and negative two times. a good candidate for this vaccine? host: i would it not know.

caller: i would love to take it if it became available. i would be the first one in line. host: what gives you the confidence in taking it? caller: because it is fda-approved. if fauci says it is ok, it is ok by me. host: barbara in meridian mississippi. finishing off this set of calls concerning the fda's decision regarding its covid-19 vaccine -- one of the things coming out of this discussion as far as the impact on americans because of loss of jobs or other economic needs is this idea of a guaranteed basic income, which is being tried by some mayors across the state and even some parts of the world. next, an expert on the topic to talk about what it is and how it could be done in the united states, natalie foster with the economic security project, joins us next on washington journal.

♪ >> american history tv on a span cspan3. coming up this weekend, saturday at 8:30 a.m. live on american history tv and washington journal, and look back on bush v later. years we discussed the landmark decision with a washington post columnist, and the bulwark editor at large. they are coeditors of the book "bush v gore, the court cases and a commentary." at 6 p.m., the gettysburg college civil war institute hosts a discussion on the wartime career of the union general. then at 8:00 p.m. on lectures in history, the university of texas at arlington professor on the work of a social reformer, a leading advocate in

number of mid-19th century causes including abolition and women's rights. then on sunday at 8:00 p.m. eastern on the presidency, a historian discusses jaclyn kennedy's tenure and legacy as first lady, with a businessman and philanthropist david rubenstein. they focus on her historic reservation and cultural work, especially the white house renovation. watch this weekend on c-span3. ♪ >> listen to c-span's podcast, "the weekly." our guest is the senate historian emeritus. he discusses the steps that need to be finalized before president-elect joe biden is sworn in. >> "washington journal"

continues. host: joining us from oakland, california is natalie foster co-founder and cochair of the economic security project here to talk about universal basic income. first, about the project. what is it, and who backs it? guest: we are in nonprofit, strategist, and we challenge the status quo by challenging ideas that build economic security for everyone. we work on the guaranteed income. the idea of reining in corporate power and reinvigorating the anti-monopoly movement. for years ago, my cofounder, who is the president of community change, and chris hughes, the cofounder and i, saw it out -- set out to us the question, how would you guarantee an income in the united states? at that point it was an idea, it was talked about on the internet . we commissioned a bunch of white

papers. we did research, looks at policy. we looked around the world where there had been a number of trials. and we said, let's do it in the united states. so i teamed up with michael tubbs, 30-year-old mayor of stockton, california, on demonstrating guaranteed income in his city, and launched the first mayor-led pilot of the program. 125 families received $500 a month with no strings attached. whichan income floor to no one can fault. it ensured that no one is left behind. in the economic downturn like we're in now, it is a literal lifeline for people. it means they can put food on their table and pay rent at the end of the month. has beenof idea that experimented now in several cities. time for a federal

guarantee income, given the covid crisis we're in. host: so as far as the idea means there are a lot of at the federal government and state level to offer assistance to those who need it especially during down times. why not go that route versus a guaranteed income? guest: we need it all. anywhere in the developed world, we actually have the smallest safety net of anywhere. who is down on their luck, and they will tell you the money is drying up. the support is drying up. you can see that in the foot where-- the food lines you see cars snaking down the highway, waiting in lines for groceries in the richest nation on earth. we have the means to support people, we just need to do it. host: this idea got headlines this week because of a donation from jack dorsey the ceo of twitter giving $15 million to

u.s. mayors. talk about not only the donation, but how mayors take that money, where do they go from here? guest: so mayor michael tubbs launched mayors for a guaranteed income several months ago, and nearly 30 mayors from around the country have joined on. they are saying two things -- one, we need a federal guaranteed income to support people who live in our cities and towns. us, will demonstrate what that idea looks like in our cities. you have big-city mayors like the mayor of al aye, the mayor of atlanta -- the mayor of los angeles in atlanta, of shreveport, of los angeles or all saying, this is an idea whose time has come, and i will demonstrate and be part of the moment to make sure it happens in the united states. so, jack dorsey gave $15 million to help support the demonstrations that are

happening in those cities. host: even though it is a lot of money it is a limited amount of money. you would have to determine exactly who would get that. how exactly would that be determined? randomly chosen in consultation with researchers to make sure you have a sample size of the population where you can actually learn information. part of what they are doing is demonstrating policy. if we wanted we could make a choice in america that everyone has income each month until the economic crisis is over. there are a number of bills in congress that would do that. the eligibility would be based on need. working, for middle-class families who need money would get money each month with most things attached. that is the idea of guaranteed income. at its heart is the idea that people know best what to do with money, they simply don't have it. so there is agency built in.

and there is dignity built in. people deserve dignity in the richest nation on earth, in the richest moment in history. we as a nation can make choices to support them. host: natalie foster our guest until 10:00. if you want to ask weston's about this idea of a guaranteed basic income, you can call on the lines. if you support the idea, 202-748-8000. if you oppose it, 202-748-8001. perhaps you are and decided, 202-748-8002. you can post on social media as well. -- pew research survey found adults under the age of 30 favor ubi.government providing a there is far less support among older americans, 72% of those 65 and older oppose it. 26% are in favor. while majorities of republicans oppose thegroups

highest -- by far the share of any gop age group. what do you make of that? guest: our polling shows that 77% of voters across the aisle are very supportive. we did exit polls coming out of the election asking, do you believe people need checks during the economic crisis? people need monthly checks? among very favorable democrats and even republicans and independents. that is something important here, that there is bipartisan support for checks until the economic crisis is over. this week you had j.p. morgan chase in support of checks, and the poor people's campaign, one of the most important moral voices in america today on economic change. when is the last time those two agreed on something? you have bernie sanders and president trump talking about the need for checks.

in a moment when something bipartisan is solely lacking, we have one in front of us that tomorrow.ould act on host: you talked about bernie sanders and senator josh hawley also made the case on the senate floor yesterday. i suppose people would argue, look these are one time, maybe two times. you are talking something were consistent. it changes a concept a lot? guest: that's right. there are a number of bills in congress that say every month, the bills are coming in, so should the checks. $1200 people got in march is long gone. it was never enough. people need to be a way to put food on the table and pay rent to take care of their families, during these trying times. and that is a way to do that. host: we have calls lined up. first one is from glenn in pennsylvania, a supporter of this idea. you are on with natalie foster of the economic security project. caller: good morning, pedro. first, i got in question, and

then i have a comment. --.omment is for the host: go ahead. caller: yes, sir. host: you said you had a question or a comment. what is the comment? caller: that comment is for the people in georgia, duties -- mcconnell.enator please give us the senate. ,ost: aside from that the question for our guest, what is it? caller: could you come up with some way to lobby mitch mcconnell out of the senate so that four people can be set free? host: ok, ms. foster. go ahead. guest: to your point, in

georgia, we are seeing the idea of checks monthly until the crisis is over coming up in the senate race. both democratic candidates running on the issue in georgia, making the case daily. so that it is clearly something on people's minds. you are right. the georgia senate race is very important to secure the senate. i am hopeful that long before that race is decided, that we will have a bill passed that includes checks until the crisis is over. .ongress could do that tomorrow host: as far as the legislative efforts do they take the form of a tax payment a tax credit how do they work? guest: they go through the irs. anybody who is already a tax filer with irs receives the money. there is a way to apply if you do not file taxes. -10sxpanded to include i and other families not included in the first bill. and all very easy, if we know

this is on irs's list to do each month. each month the checks come for the american people, it gets easier and easier to do. host: for those online that don't support it one is kenneth from missouri. good morning. caller: good morning, ms. foster. i oppose this. if it is short-term, that's line, but long-term, it is socialism and i do not support socialism. short-term until the economy picks up, that is fine. but when you want to run this from now, that is pure socialism. they will stay at home. they will not go to work. so i payment to you oppose this as a long-term. solution. thank you very much. guest: i hear you, sir. there are people who thought that about social security as well.

nearly every big idea in the united states had a lot of initial opposition, with people saying this will fundamentally change the makeup of the united states, and, in fact, social security is a great example. it started as a very small payroll tax. the pipes were laid and we built upon it and it became clear it was so important to eliminate poverty among the elderly. we can eliminate poverty in the united states tomorrow with this idea. another place to look is in alaska, where for the past 40 years, residence there receive a dividend from what is called a permanent fund, a big fund of money they commonly on, oil reserve money that was set aside 40 years ago by a republican governor. it has had bipartisan support for decades. every man, woman, and child receives it. for a family of four, it becomes significant. it is money with no strings attached. we released research this year that shows, no one stopped

working when they received the dividend. they put it toward savings. they pay off something that had not yet been paid, and continued to do the work. americans an important version of what we had. there is a lot of european examples too, but that one is particularly important in alaska. host: there is a woman's at -- a woman at the national economic foundation. she said giving small amounts of cash is bound to make a difference. indeed it has helped improve livelihood. but it does not reveal long-term viability, and how it could be scaled up to serve whole populations. and people who get basic income from charities or aid agencies, have no control over how payments are made to whom, and by what level or period of time.

what do you make of that? guest: i believe a guaranteed income that is targeted that poor, middle class, working families for whom one job is not enough. it, weere to target would have an outsized benefit wholack and brown families work disproportionately low wage jobs in the united states, if we were to target it by income. so i think there is a way in which the income also would support community growth. people can't participate in democracy when they don't have money and they don't have time. when they are working if our job. that is something important be found in stockton, california. tomas, a a man named recipient in stockton. he worked multiple jobs. when the $500 a month started coming in, he chose to stop working one of his third jobs

and spent more time with his children. one saturday he took them to the pool and realized his kids in your how to swim. it was something he had not known before because he had never been able to spend a leisurely afternoon with them, he was always off trying to make ends meet. for $500, he had more time. he chose to spend it with his family. there is a number who will choose to participate in their church, their community to do the types of things they have always wanted to do. it is the agency and the freedom that comes with economic security. host: baltimore, maryland, next on the supporting line. caller: good morning. my question is, when this is past, are we going to be able to get the -- back -- get it retroactive back to august? also, i was wondering, since this is a federal relief will

that be a tax-free? i know that every income you make, you have to pay taxes on it. can you let me know if this will be tax-free and retroactive? guest: so, unfortunately, i can't tell you, because congress has not acted. your next golf should be to your member of congress and say, pass a bill that she your next call should be to your member of congress and say pass the bill and make it retroactive. there are a couple of bills that do that. there is a growing idea to make it retroactive from march it is a policy choice. the good thing about doing guaranteed income through the irs is that it is not taxed. it is income that you have and it can be tax-free, so you would not have to worry about that. host: if it is a policy choice, i suspect that some level it has to be funded. how would you advise funding? what has been done in other experiments to fund it?

guest: what i would say to that question right now, we are facing the biggest economic challenge of our lifetimes. and it is not an idea, not a moment for small ideas or tweaking around the edges. our economy is on the brink and so many families need help and we don't have a resource problem in this country. there is always resources to fight another war. or give tax breaks to the wealthy. it is not a question of resources, it is a question of priorities. right now, this has to be our priority. the american families who are struggling have to be our priority. that said there are a number of ways to pay for big ideas. a number of papers have been written about this. it is simply a political will problem in the united states. host: two questions from twitter that are similar. one question says, how would a guaranteed basic income complement with a jobs guarantee? and another viewer asking about

a guaranteed job, instead of a guaranteed income. guest: it is all part of the 21st-century social contract. a new social contract that says, everyone in the united states deserves to live with dignity, and, yes, there are jobs. think of care jobs in the for example. care is something that will never be automated away. people absolutely want a human being to do that for them. it is slated to be the largest occupation by 2040, yet care jobs are disproportionately low-wage jobs. they are not valued, even though we do value them in the united states. that is an example of work that will have to be done. it needs to pay well, and it hits to be part of the re-think of our social contract. it means the matter what happens, we are in an age of pandemics. we are currently in one. i am sad to say, there are more to come. i live in california.

we have a new fire season every year due to climate change that we worry about. there are days my children cannot go outside. there will be more pandemics, and there needs to be an income floor that everyone has through which they cannot fall that creates resilience in people's lives as well as ba good paying jobs that foo food on the tabled -- as well as good paying jobs that for the people on the table. host: mike in florida who does not support this concept. that i had. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i appreciate the passion in your guest, but any government-run guaranteed income program would be socialism. if you want to the politician to lose an election, you would have them run on that platform. but if this program was run by churches or nonprofits, i would support it. guest: well one thing you and i might agree on one thing the

government does very well is cut checks. it is a simple thing to do, a simple solution to a very complex problem. people who don't need money need money. so give people money. the irs does a good job of doing that. it can move fast and efficiently. in fact, in march when it was clear that this was a problem and congress passed the first stimulus checks, they were out in weeks. by and large, swaths of american people got their checks in weeks. that is testament of the efficiency we need to support families toda. host: a viewer said maybe charges are nonprofits if they were behind it, i would do it. why not leave it to those firms? guest: it is simply too slow and it doesn't cover everyone. the thing policy does well is ensure that everyone the matter who they are -- no matter where

they are, is included. that is the type of response we need today. there is a role for churches and community organizations, i think they would benefit from a guaranteed income, from people, from parishioners and members of their congregation, who would have more time on their hands and more agency to participate in the democratic fiber of the community. the community fibers that those institutions bring us. so i think they can work together beautifully. but this is the role of the government. and i would also say that, people who are struggling right now don't care what label it is, be ablet need to put -- to pay rent and put food on their table. that is what the pulling is showing, that people are not concerned. whatever you call it, they need checks. that is true of monks republicans, democrats, and .ndependents

host:. >> will hear from dennis, hello. . caller: hello. i do believe people need help right now. but throwing cash at the problem is not going to help it. what people need is food and shelter. instead of cash, maybe people should get food stamps, or have bills paid in relation to their mortgage,lectric, that type of thing, rather than cash. guest: i agree with you, that the crisis is much vigor than cash, that cash is not -- that the crisis is much bigger than cash. i am in california, and we are in a housing crisis of epic proportions right now. there is a lot being done to secure housing for people including my town in oakland where the mayor has worked hard to purchase hotel rooms to put people who need housing in.

people also need cash. gible.s fun everyone has different needs each week. cash is the type of thing that supports them wherever they need it. one week it is food, the next week it is rent. one week the transmission goes out in your car cash can move quickly in your life and support you in making your own decisions. i think there is an element of trust here that says, people are the best financial arbiters of their own life. they are the best money managers. they simply don't have the cash to do it. i think that is certainly true. host: is there an element for these type of programs that are tried of fraud and abuse and how is oversight done? guest: right now, a lot of the demonstrations are happening, there have been no instances of that.

what we found in jackson, mississippi, when there is a really important the most russian called the magnolia mother's trust. it is run by a real visionary out of jackson. she has found that the mothers who participate in her program, are nowty of them, 75%, able to cook meals at home as opposed to going out to fast food. they have collectively paid off $10,000 in predatory loans, and all of them report being able to cover their financial needs. she does $1000 a month to single black mothers in jackson, who she has been working with for a long time, partly to challenge the motions of deserve itne -- edness that exist in our policy today. she talks about the need to scale this up to the country. host: natalie foster, co-founder

and cochair of the economic security project, from madison heights, virginia will hear from dorothy. hostcaller: good morning. host: dorothy, you are on. caller: thank you. and thank you for -- i do support guaranteed income. awayse it takes the fear of where the rent and food will come from. we need to support this for all people. a small amount. most people will spend it wisely. it just takes that fear, that of whereng away the next month is coming from. thank you so much, ms. foster, for helping stress this need for guaranteed income. and thank you, c-span. host: thank you. guest: the emotion in your voice

is the emotion that i hear across the country right now as families are struggling. and the stress that comes with not knowing where your next meal will come from. that is one thing that we looked into in stockton, in the stockton, california demonstration, is what will this mean for stress levels, for the anxiety people feel each month? not only before covid, post-covid, it is layer upon layer of anxiety, and having a baseline of financial security takes away one layer of that stress, but one very important layer of that stress. host: there is a story coming across the wire concerning andrew young. he is telling people that he intends to run for mayor of new york city. how did he change the conversation about this idea? guest: andrew is a friend. i have known andrew for a long time. change theid

conversation by running for president on the idea. and i also think, one thing we have learned a lot and then is we don't need to predicate the arguments for this idea on some future concern of robots taking our jobs or automation, we simply need to look at the here ,nd now of the covid experience of the millions and millions of people who are out of work, who can't find work, whose hours have been reduced the end the ability to make ends meet, to make the case for guaranteed income. that was true when dr. king made the case back in the late 1960's, right before he died. in his last book, dr. king wrote, one of the most important ways to abolish poverty would be a guaranteed income. it was true when he wrote that then, than it has been true during the last 50 years of capitalism that did not work for most people, where we have seen

wages stay flat and families have really struggled. one needs to just look at the here and now to make the case as well as the future pandemics, including concerns about the robot apocalypse and robots taking our jobs. host: from our line for don't support, from connecticut, we will hear from donna. hello. caller: hi. thank you for having this. it does sound very socialist -- it does sound very socialistic, handing out checks to people for not doing any work. there is 20 of jobs people can go to at this point. a lot of people are driven or motivated that the government will take care of them so there is no necessity to go out and work or look for a job. there is plenty of entitlement jobs like welfare and ebt cards, rent.viii where they pay

i don't understand why we are coming up with another government program when there is plenty of other stuff out there already in this planet of opportunities. i am not the only one in new england seeing jobs everywhere. i have a place in new hampshire. i drive through several states. i talked to companies throughout the country that i work for, and they all say they are having a hard time finding people to work because they are not motivated to work, waiting on the government to give them some kind of subsidy. host: donna, thank you. guest: let me first say that, a guaranteed income is not meant to be a replacement for work. it sits alongside wages. all studies showed, people continue to work. sum.ally, it is a modest what is being discussed are often quite modest sums. it would not mean people could a job they like or that they want.

i will also say that wages need to be higher in america today. work two or three jobs to put food on their table, and that is not the way it should be. that is not the way capitalism should work. if a should have one job. one job should pay enough. they should have an income floor that supports them no matter what happens in their lives, alongside things like paid leave and universal family care and the ideas i believe makeup a new social contract in america for the way people work today. host: we have a viewer from twitter talking about this idea of those not working, lizzie says, how can $500 a month help anyone that is not working? you address best. is that the dollar figure usually. what is the range of money being distributed? guest: it goes back to these policy choices. there are bills in congress that advocate for $2000 a month until the economic crisis is over.

you have bernie sanders, who teamed up with now vice president-elect kamala harris, then senator harris, and ed markey, to author one of those bills in the senate right after the pandemic hit. a number of bills in the house. there are bills that advocate for more like $500 a month. it is all a policy choice. right now, we are making a choice to do nothing and americans are paying the price, american families are paying the price, who in two weeks will have another rent check do and no support from the government. so i advocate for congress to pass recurring checks until the economic crisis is over. at any level, i think it would support american families. host: when it comes to the state and local level you talk about initially in this program, what is the longest running program and how is it-eating sustained?

guest: right now there is a number of demonstrations to demonstrate what this idea would mean to families. you have the demonstration in stockton, and now a number of cities have announced. st. paul will be doing an interesting demonstration there under mayor carter. a number of other cities have announced compton under mayor brown, will be doing a demonstration called the compton pledge. you have the demonstration in jackson, mississippi, the magnolia mother's trust. these run from $500 to $1000 a month, generally paid for through philanthropy, private dollars saying, i want to demonstrate what this would me if the government did it and took this on as policy -- what this would mean. a few others are using c.a.r.e.s. act dollars, just starting to make that work for the demonstrations. but the mayors are the first to

enough.s will never be a patchwork quilt here and there of support is not the way we want to do things. it needs to come quickly and efficiently, and it needs to be for everyone, no matter how they work or where they live in the united states. host: can you elaborate on that piece? you sent us far as using the c.a.r.e.s. act money for these experiments? guest: there are c.a.r.e.s. act dollars that came to the cities and the states and some of them say this is the best way to use the c.a.r.e.s. act dollars is to give people money directly. host: tyrone is in washington, d.c.,'s supporter of this concept. hello. caller: good morning, c-span, thank you for taking my call. i agree with your guest. up, i would like to bring think there is a generational bias here. debt,r generations are in there is no jobs. they want to have the power to support their own financial needs.

$500 is definitely not going to help me lose my job. i am fortunate not to be fully affected by the pandemic. but i would use the $500, to donate to charities, or even my charge, so i definitely support it -- or even my church. i supported 100%. guest: tyrone, i appreciate several things you said, including the generational these. we do see support from younger people who are graduating into a decimated job market, a job market where they are likely not to do as well as their parents did. that is the first generation in america for whom that is true. that means they are open to bold ideas and don't care what labels historically have been put on them. this is historically about what has been said about going to the moon. all the handwringing that happens in washington, d.c., they just see a future and they know that it is not sustainable

the way it is set up today. so the point about an increased true. is in alaska, it is universal for everyone in alaska to receive the payment. there are millions of dollars donated a year to charity. they have made it very easy with the dividend to donate directly. nonprofits and churches, that sector sees a lot of support from the dividend. so i think that is a great point. it is trust in the people to determine what they need with their own financial lives. host: a few more minutes with our guest. ier is florida, ojav undecided. caller: how are you doing, natalie. -- how about all the drug people that are hooked into drugs? with this money, they will be

even more down in their luck. the communists, they create the problems and then they take advantage of it. such as you mentioned fire season. 10, in season, 9 out of a study by the fire association outalifornia found that 9 of 10 fires are caused by arsonists. in australia, the big fires that were erupting in the whole continent at once, they caught over 200 arsonists. host: let me put you back to the topic at hand what would you specifically like to address with our guest? caller: they are setting fires. the communists are setting fires. i am not exaggerating. host: thank you. would you like to respond to that? guest: i would just say that --

you know -- i don't know -- i don't think he is calling this idea communists, i think he is calling the fire starters communists. all i know is that fire season is a reality in california and it has changed our lives, and it is changing people's work lives. people who can't go outside. it is a crisis that will need to be supported. we need to figure out what to do about it, through crim climate change laws. and we need to create resilience in people's lives and allow them to do what they need to do during a crisis. host: i will note as of yesterday there was a poll released in australia that says the majority of australians would welcome the idea of universal basic income although they say this happened after they started receiving welfare payments because of covid-19 related matters. guest: once before realized what it means to have a guaranteed

income in their lives, it will be very hard to take away. that was the truth with social security in the beginning, although it is more of a political football than i would like it to be, and it is certainly true in alaska. you cannot talk about taking the incident away from alaskans. they believe it to be there commonly owned wealth. that is what we deserved broadly as americans. host: but it goes to the idea of sustainability. and alaska they depend on their oil revenues. ultimately you are talking about tax revenue. guest: sure. we could pass a financial transaction tax, a small fee on high-frequency trading that would generate billions a year to pay for the program. there are a number of ways we could pay for this program. it gets to the fact that these are choices we make as a society, and right now we are choosing to allow people to go hungry, to be evicted from their homes in the middle of the greatest crisis of our lifetime.

that is what we are choosing to do. we could make a different choice in the richest nation on earth to support people at this time and make sure people are not left behind. host: tom in ohio. host: on the line for those who do not support this concept. good morning. caller: i am 80 years old, and i have paid into social security for over 60 years, considerably, and i do not support this here because a lot of people are staying home drunk and on drugs and stuff like that. if you can separate that, the new will support you. thank you -- then i will support you. thank you. guest: one thing i think we can agree on is, let's have a bigger investment in rehab and counseling and mental health support people who are struggling in this country. this is not a silver bullet, it doesn't solve all the problems. there is a lot more work that needs to be done. but that is the type of thing i

think is important to the future of this country. host: caroline in oregon on our line to support. hello. caller: hi natalie. individuals with developmental disabilities. you are high functioning and with independent -- who are high functioning and with independent lives. it is my job to support their independence. the people i work with have a budget of around $758 a month and it is really hard to make ends meet. $500 a month would really change things. i am wondering if this kind of program would be applied to the developmentally disabled ovulation. thank you, -- developmentally disabled population. thank you, natalie. guest: everybody needs and income floor. i have been hearing your example

of what $500 would mean. it is really important for people. people talk about thisk-shipped -shaped about this k recovery. people in the middle are doing fine, they are at home working on zoom. it is people in the lower brackets whose income has been decimated 500. dollars would mean a lot. . i get asked what would that mean for people. they have to make a choice between paying rent or putting food on the table for your children at the end of the month, it is hard to understand what $500 would do for people. increasingly there are people who understand it and who can make the case that it would be a lifeline. host: the website for our guest's organization is economicsecurityproject.org. natalie foster is a cofounder and cochair of the organization. thank you for your time.

guest: thank you for having me. host: that is it for the program today. another one comes your way at 7:00 tomorrow. we will see you then. ♪ ♪ you are watching c-span, created by america's television company as a public service and brought to you today by your television provider. paneling up, a senate looks at the distribution challenges with shipping vaccines. then andrew cuomo holds a briefing on his