something north of 300 million in april. prior to the pandemic, we were focused primarily on business customers. all of that changed. when the pandemic arrived, we understood that we had the opportunity to connect not just families, but people, state institutions, schools. it's been extraordinary. we have worked to scale up incredibly quickly to avoid disruptions, and to be there for people. 8:00 easternht at on the communicators, on c-span two. historical perspective we as joined by david light, area of expertise is the civil war era. biden called on the country to turn the page and

to unite. take us back to america's most divisive presidential election. learn?n we parallels.e are arguablyelection is the most divisive in our history because it resulted in secession , of seven states of the deep response to the election of abraham lincoln. it was also divisive in conception. it was a four-way presidential contest. there were two parties in the spring of 1860, republicans and democrats. republicans split. they had a very divisive convention in charleston, south carolina.

they split into southern and northern democrats. the southern democrats were fiercely determined to protect slavery in the western territories. the republican party was new. it was only six years old. was a northern political party. it stood for stopping the expansion of slavery, the central tenant of their platform, stopping the expansion of slavery by law. it was an election where on the ballot -- many things. a free labor society. society.abor people understood in this election, because of all the threats of disunion have been

the veryr years, existence of the republic was on the ballot. the fourth candidate came into the picture when it became clear -- the democrats had divided, which almost sealed their fate. lincoln, the republican, hated and loads in the south. not even on the ballot in 10 southern states. that shows you have divided this was. a fourth party came into existence literally overnight, they called themselves the constitutional union party. they ran a man named john bell from kentucky. their sole purpose was to do whatever it took to garner votes, especially in the border state regions, to save the union. a four-way election, lincoln the republican. jhansi breckenridge, the southern republican who was at time the vice president of the united states.

stephen douglas, the northern doug -- democrat, would get the second most votes in the selection. and then john bell. it was a four-way election, and lincoln was elected, but with barely 40% of the popular vote. daynority president from one. weeks ofve weeks, six on presidential contest, december 20, south carolina seceded from the union. they would hang out on their own in early-january february when six other slave states of the deep south joined them. -- all bite different processes, some by state level, some by referendum. these votes on

secession were very divided themselves. there was a great deal of division within the south over a wouldd election, which result of course in the creation of the confederate states of byrica, in montgomery, february 1861. abraham lincoln is inaugurated one month later in march, inheriting a disunion. it is the most divisive election we have ever had, and is the only one we ever had where the people who lost the election, or part of the people who lost the election refused to accept its results, and bolted from the united states altogether. or try to. david: a great deal of division today. i wonder how much it concerns you when the term civil war gets thrown around. fromis a column about it the week newspaper, called how

we get to civil war. talking about how divisive we have been in about six weeks since the presidential election. congressmanlican said after last week's supreme court action, perhaps law-abiding states should band ofether and form a union states that will abide by the constitution. how much of that concerns you, how much of that is hyperbole? john: both. it concerns me a great deal. secession -- we have had variations throughout our history. that is allen west by the way, an african-american right-wing republican now from texas, formally i believe from florida. he said that on behalf of the texas republican party. , i must say hated

behind what they say is the constitution. it is frankly not a proper interpretation of the constitution. secession from the union is not constitutional. what it really is, and they can do it, is revolution. int the southern states date 1860 and 1861 was a political revolution. it was not a lawful, sovereign act by states to remove themselves from the union. they do have, as jefferson said in the declaration of independence, the right of a revolution if they choose. but understand, that if you take any type of step of succession, it is a political revolution. it is not a constitutional step. about all thise rhetoric about secession, it comes and goes.

texans --been eight texas nationalist group for a long time in texas. it comes and goes. even the former governor perry flirted with it back in the oughts. what concerns me is this. what history can help us understand is that a tipping point on this kind of rhetoric and action comes when more mainstream, whatever that is --, mainstream republicans went more mainstream people who don't really believe in secession of any kind, find it impossible politically to oppose it. because that is what happened in the south. there were lots of politically conservative, big planters, slaveholders in the south who opposed secession in 18 60, 1861. -- they could not

particularly in states like south carolina, mississippi, louisiana, and then texas. which i believe was the last of the deep south states to secede before the firing on fort sumter. that tipping point that can occur when, shall we say, a of-secessionist version republican resistance to this new government -- that's face it -- let's face it. there has been a lot of republican resistance to even accepting this election, led by mr. trump. when those people who are not themselves secessionists find it difficult to oppose a wave of this kind of secessionist fervor, then we will know we are in very serious trouble. david: our guest, and american history professor at yale

university. you might've heard of this book. with us in this segment of the washington journal, with us until 10:00 a.m. eastern this morning. if you want to join this conversation, as we talk about the history, phone lines as (202) (202) 748-8001 .48-8000 (202) 748-8002 as folks continue to:, i want to go back to early october. joe biden in a speech at gettysburg quoted some of the words of president lincoln's second inaugural address as he talked about the need for this country to come together. here's a bit of what he had to say. >> i give you my word. if i am elected president i will marshal the ingenuity and goodwill of this nation, to turn division into unity, and bring us together. i think people are looking for

that. we can disagree about how we move forward. we must take the first steps, for how we treat one another. how we talk to one another. how we respect one another. in his second inaugural, lincoln said, with malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as god gives us. in us strive the work we are to build up the nation's wounds. bind the nation's wounds. now we have our work, to rebuild america. to move past shadow and suspicion, and so we, you and i together, we press on even now. after hearing the second inaugural address, frederick douglass told president lincoln,

mr. lincoln, that was a sacred effort. we have to be dedicated to our own sacred effort. gettysburg and the new birth of freedom was at hand. we think it's at risk. generation that has followed has been faced with a moment that must answer this question. whether we will allow the sacrifices made here to be in vain or be fulfilled? this is our moment to answer this essential american question for ourselves, and power times. david: president-elect joe biden. i want to focus on those words of the second inaugural address, and their residence during times of political division in this country. something that multiple presidents have looked back to. beautiful prose

poetry is in it? that ending of the second inaugural is asking for the best in us. it is asking for the genuineness of human healing. and forgiveness. that is lincoln, the healer. anyone who is a student of that speech does that in the long before that, link had set that up with a very forthright statement that he was going to prosecute this more -- more -- war to the bitter end to destroy slavery. he said in his words, every drop of blood shed by the last shall be paid by blood shed by the sword. profit -- incoln the

justice,f retributive and the ending of course is asking for healing. barack obama was very fond of drawing upon from that speech at others, abraham lincoln did healer. it is the link we most often need. there are different lincoln's. -- thethe use of biden meeting of frederick douglass. it's one of my favorite moments in his life. douglas attended that speech, he was down to lincoln's left about 12 people deep into the audience outdoors. he followed the presidential carriage back to the white house and demanded to get into the reception, he didn't have an imitation, they let him in. he met with lincoln, lincoln

called them over and asked him, what did you think of my speech? that is when frederick douglass said to lincoln face-to-face, mr. president that was a sacred act. this is asking for the best in us, isn't it? it's asking for this american ideal that we can fight like hell over policy. we can really disagree over visions of government. visions of the future. even our most divisive issues. name your top five and we have plenty of them. in the end, we accept defeat and victory in elections. we accept democratic results. sometimes we don't. the biggest danger to american democracy, nobody needs me to tell them, as we have millions --people in this society

wherever they are getting their information, who do not believe the results of this election. who believe it was somehow rate in other words, stolen is the favorite word. that the process of this election cannot, and should not be trusted. we have millions more, a majority it appears that believe it can be trusted. that the deep danger in this disdain,distrust, even even hatred of our political --tem, our political process not just our democracy, but our pluralism that lies beneath us. is a lot out there of what i call secessionists spirit, it seems to me among people who will never take a

political act to secede from the union. they don't know how. they don't know how to make this happen in the state legislature, but there are a lot of americans, and it has been stoked for years from the right in american politics who disdain government. of our basicany institutions. who do not trust the media, who do not cuss the chagas -- we not trust the congress, who do not trust the presidency. we do have some dysfunctional institutions, some broken institutions. there is a kind of secessionist fervor. you can read it in the comments of many right wing radio posts, tv hosts, and in the press. dinesh desousa who is a favorite spokesman who recently said,

what we have in this country, and i can quote him here, are two different kinds of people. he said there's a great shift that has gone on. "70 million of us," in his tribe. what they really have to do is take themselves and their families out of the union with liberals. he says at the end of this quote, we are out of here. what does out of your mean? where will you go? what when you do when you go there? by what means what you separate yourself? it's that impulse to separate from institutions, the public school, government, state legislature, the epa, on and on. that impulse to separate from that which you somehow don't

believe search your personal interests. democracy, at the end of the day, makes us believe that ideas more than ourselves. when ourselves take over, over these great trees we have, we are in trouble. david: our guest this morning, the professor at the yellow university of american history. that bucky mentioned just a bit ago on frederick douglass, frederick douglass, profit of freedom. plenty of calls. gainesville, florida, a democrat. caller: on healing the nation. things i look at, i am a dreamer. i am a martin luther king man. high-speed rail. from the east coast to the west coast. panels from texas to

california on i 10. theave in our state, defunding of our public school system. money going in that direction. the buying down of america, and we need to stop that trend. we are in this game together. david: john: are you saying there could be big projects that could bring the country back together? caller: absolutely. putting people to work, putting solar powers on i 10. refunding our public education. getting law enforcement under control. this low level bureaucrat who was accosted with a drunk on in florida over covid. it is beyond belief.

that is even in florida. david: i have to applaud. 1992, bill clinton ran on many issues, one issue was major high-speed rail for this country. most of that never happened. parts of this country, particularly the midwest would really benefit from high-speed rail between cities. i am alic schools, product entirely of public schools. i am a public school kid, midwestern public university kid, lucky enough to grow up in the postwar era and go to college in the 60's and 70's when it was cheap. .here are big ideas we could again become a model to the world. think about the interstate

highway system knit us together back in the 50's. it had that impulse of the cold war behind it. we were going to be ready for defense by the interstate highway system. nobody drives on the interstate highways anymore thinking about defense against the soviet union, but we are glad we have them. john: hanover, maryland, this is steve, republican. caller: good morning. i hope this question is not off-topic, but it is relative to the issue of slavery and misinformation. -- when the founding fathers wrote the constitution, the idea -- what was compromised was that a slave would be considered to be 3/5 of a person. yesterday i democrat called up about this issue and said this was disenfranchisement for a slave to vote, but women didn't vote than either.

i have always been of the opinion that this was offered by wasnorth because if a slave considered to be awful person, there would be more representation in congress for the southern states, and they would never -- the united states would never be able to vote out slavery because the south would have to much representation. i would like to have this clarified, i hope you can do this as a history professor. david: you are essentially right. the three fits causes about state representation. it wasn't about franchising or disenfranchising black people. that wasn't even considered. you are right about that. it was a huge advantage to southern states. it was a compromise many northern delegates, let's be honest, at the constitutional convention hated. and did not want to vote for this.

a classic illustration of sometimes you might have to compromise something fundamental to you to get something a bit higher. the 3/5 clause -- i will get into all the numbers, it allowed increased representation in the biggest of the slave states and had a direct impact on at least two presidential elections. it gave the southern states more representation in congress then you would have otherwise had without counting 3/5 of the slaves. causedea that the 3/5 mean that black people are only 3/5 of human beings, that is one way of interpreting it. the idea here was about the power represented in representation. indeed, it took until the civil -- of get rid -- finally that clause.

john: going back to the civil war. we spent time talking about lincoln's second inaugural mostss, going back to that divisive presidential election in history, what did lincoln say in his first inaugural address? david: many thanks. he pleaded -- he sent out a series of olive branch is. the first inaugural is a nice piece of poetry, at least the ending. it is really olive branch as to the south. please do not fear us. we will not attack slavery within the southern states, that was known as the federal consensus. if slaves were considered property under state law, the fed did not have the right to step in and it. he made it clear that his presidency would expose the -- expansion of slavery, but it is full of olive branch is to the south. come to your senses.

he is pleading. this is march 1860 1, 7 states have already seceded from the union. appealing -- a piece of shakespere. he appeals to the better angels of our nature. how many times have we all heard that passage used? are we practicing the better angels of our nature, or the worst angels of our nature? are we peaceful angels? what kind of angels are we? i have a brief quote from lincoln, since you brought up 1860. anotherst inaugural is amazing speech that lincoln wrote, and crafted all have his own speeches. when you're earlier, during the campaign when he is running for president, he is invited from illinois to new york city to speak at the cooper union.

it is a great speech, a famous speech. february, 1860. i encourage everyone to have a look at it, pull it up online. the cooper union speech. in that speech, lincoln breaks down his appeals directly to southerners. he speaks to them directly in the speech. pleads with them not to condemn northern republicans, and think clearly about what they might do if he is elected. he also speaks directly to his fellow republicans. he's trying to be the moderate healer, even before secession happens. union -- i hope out there in the right wing of america, that they would read this. he speaking to southerners.

he says your purpose, plainly stated, is that you will destroy the government unless you be allowed to construe and enforce the constitution as you please. on all points on dispute between you and us, you will rule or ruin in all of that. rule or ruin. is that not the spirit at the bottom of allen west, or anyone else who speaks this kind of secessionist spirit? is it sometimes not the impulse at the base of all of this nonsense we have had to live through for six weeks, of people refusing to accept the selection? what is it you want? do you want to rule? or ruin? there is like in telling southerners on the people of the

1860 election and the secession to follow, if that is what you want, know what you are doing. john: democrat. >> thank you for taking my call. people don'te, read their history anymore. --ple who call for secession they see that they lost what they have. from westometimes virginia to indiana. i see people get false promises. they are taking away their factory, they are taking away everything they have. and they get nothing back. uses theonald trump language that these people love to hear. that he will do much for everything they have. my question is, the history of

this country, the president stays there for years. you can regroup -- go back to campaign and when election. what do you think, when you look at what happened in london, brexit, and what is going on in our country. when you look at brexit, the language is the same as people -- just mentioned are saying we are 70 million, and if we don't get what we want, we are leaving the country or something like that. i believe that we need to look back and think that, people are hurt right now, and when you travel in west virginia and ohio, people are losing their dignity. because they don't have jobs. john: thanks for the call. david: you made a very strong

point, and i agree with you. the worst thing that american liberals, democrats, whatever you want to call them, is to as somethingism unsophisticated, simplistic, and fullest. the worst thing we can do is laugh it away. what populace do, and this guy fierceespecially right-wing populist. let's say what was. grievancesare real at the base of trumpism. there are millions of americans who do not lead in the american dream anymore. the american dream has failed them, factories have left, real jobs has left their acumen -- communities. the pandemic hit and made it all worse. they do not have to have faith in any kind of health care

structures in our society anymore, because we don't have universal health care. they don't know how to have faith that the government can solve anything for them, because they are told every day, and they believe it in many instances, that the government has ruined their lives. there is very real grievance out there among people, especially in regions you were defining. i had an email yesterday from a former student of mine who travels a lot in rural michigan. he happens to be -- where i grew up, i grew up in flint, michigan. he said he would not believe how many confederate flags and trump fromare on the highway where he teaches in indiana up to michigan. he said he would not believe this. actually, i would believe it. especially in the western side of the state.

what democrats have got to do now, if they could ever pull their coalition together. it's a very disparate coalition. the one thing liberals and democrats are best at is fighting amongst themselves. they have to come together around economic policies that reach the very people you are talking about, because if they don't, they have lost them to this kind of radio stoked, television stoked, and trump stoked populism which is not necessarily providing them with any solutions, except tax cuts for people far richer than they are. john: just about 20 minutes left. there a whole for you sir. york, outside of buffalo, republican. caller: good morning.

earlier in the segment the professor made a statement about the constitution and such, and i thought this quote from abraham lincoln was right on the money with the professor was saying, this country and its institutions belong to the people who inhabit it. whenever they should grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it or their revolutionary right to overthrow it. i think that is where the professor was going with his statement. david: that's basically right. if secession is the question, it's not constitutional, it's a revolution. caller: exactly, yes. i think people get that confused, i am a history teacher myself. i am glad you said that, and i figured i give you the quote from lichen, hide buyer -- i

admire mr. lincoln. i think george washington could have been king of this country if you wish, i think he had the army to back him. that show me a lot of character. john: thanks for the call. alan is next, democrat, good morning. caller: good morning. pick fan of the washington journal, longtime viewer, fantastic show. i believe the only nonpartisan -- in regards to what people call in and say. a couple thoughts into question. one, i think you should have a sign in the back with a quote from hm lincoln. he said, no one ever lost money underestimating the intelligence of the american public.

said, there is a sucker born every minute. the second part i want to bring say then people republican party is the party of lincoln. was more of a, liberal than a conservative. democrats at that time were conservatives, they switched ideas around the turn of the 20th century. lastly, the question i would like to ask, i hate to put you on the spot. presidency,on the mitch mcconnell made a statement on behalf of the republican rank-and-file, that we will do nothing to help this president succeed. i believe that is when the great division -- and the republican party became the party of no. i thought it was weird for him

to say at that time, because we were about to enter the greatest recession since the six -- great depression. two wars going on, people losing their savings, homes, their jobs. and he said we will do nothing to help this president succeed. what's what mitch mcconnell says, because it will be what he will do. i cannot agree more with you. inack obama's first election 15 -- 15 million new voters into the american electorate. that obama coalition, which one decisively, scared to help out of the republican party. forces, and their they resisted essentially everything that the obama

administration attempted to do during its eight years. that does not mean that they were not mistakes made by democrats and obama himself as well. seriouslye to take the fact that one of our political parties in this country really does not fundamentally believe in governing. that is the republicans. they believe in using government for those parts of it that can serve their interest groups, and no one knows better and is better at manipulating this that mitch mcconnell. they do not represent in the congress the majority of american voters, because of the very undemocratic institution of the u.s. senate. they don't win popular votes.

seven of the last eight presidential elections, the popular vote has been won by democrats. that's a pattern that is not likely to be broken in times to come, it could be. take mcconnell at his word. john: san diego, california, this is kevin, independent. for c-span and thanks for this topic. i think the country is deeply divided and we need to spend a lot more time talking about a path forward. i have three points. the first is a minor point. i think it is a mistake to talk about the rejection of the 2020 results as something new that is caused by trump. i think in a lot of ways, this is more a reaction to what the democrats did in response to trump winning in 2016, and how that used sham investigations and impeachments to try and overthrow the 2016 collection.

i think the democrats need to look at themselves as a problem here instead of just blaming trump. fundamentally, i think the country is deeply divided for reasons that are beyond the election. philosophy of the right and probablyividualism, associated with the right, collectivism, probably associated with progressives, are just philosophically irreconcilable. that, the country is deeply balkanized now as well. we have millions of people in the country do not even speak english. many of them probably could not identify james madison as the father of the constitution. there is really no country anymore to unite around. there are a lot of reasons the country is divided the on the

election. i actually agree with parts of what you said. selection isn the frankly i think the most helpful thing we have seen in four years. of the american electorate turned out to vote. that demonstrated a certain faith in electoral politics that surprised many people, including me, frankly. that is a good sign. i will leave the investigations aside for the moment. we could have a spirited debate whether the impeachment was proper and constitutional or not. your point about what is irreconcilable i think is the key one. you put your finger on the most dangerous thing. party, youcratic called it collectivism, it's

really believed belief in the uses of government for enhancing the lives of people i would argue. that is what social democracy is in other places that is practice more than we do. or, individualism if you want to call it that, of the american right. there are things about those two extremes are reconcilable. think of policies. controversial, bitterly controversial, social security. the g.i. bill. medicare. protection, which was first created under president nixon. we can go on and on. necessarilyt utterly bipartisan today, but who wants to kill social security? only some rich people who don't really need it. millions of people benefited from the g.i. bill, and millions

of people benefit from medicare. a host of other features. over 80% of americans to get an education in this country at it in a public school. a public school. people, whoority of have higher education in this country, over 80% as well get it from a public university or community college. all --re places where we we all benefit from better roads. we all benefit from better sewage systems. we all benefit from better electrical systems that don't blow down in a thunderstorm. we all benefit from better practices by police. i really don't know anybody who to abolish police, but i know there are a lot of people who think there are reforms police should consider. there are places we can find agreement. i get a little tired sometimes

unity, but unity has to come over some kind of real policy. i do think there are some middles that can be reconciled. both sides want to have to do it for reasons other than just staying in power. john: back to upstate new york. this is rate in syracuse, line for republicans. the last couple callers have been really exceptional on hitting these key points, and i'm going to continue that idea. your guest -- i differ a little bit on what the goal of the people that want so-called trumpism -- they are not looking to overthrow, or form another country. but they are trying to do, and

what they are having a lot of iscess which will continue, to bring the people who are not electorate.wo the the election was stolen, there is no question, the evidence is overwhelming. it is not necessarily driven by democrats versus republicans as much as it is lack of information, and people that just don't follow politics, and therefore they don't recognize the clear signs of the problem in the election. you just stated stolen election as a fact. facts must have evidence. i don't know if we have time to debate that, ipso facto it was

stolen you said, by what evidence? cases where trump's lawyers had no evidence. where you take that argument? is it just a belief? this is what happens with the original secessionist, and then after the war when the south lost and develop the loss because tradition, it was always a set of beliefs looking for history. the idea of a stolen election here in 2020 is a belief. looking for history that does not exist. john: baltimore, maryland. 10 minutes left in our program. at can check out his work history. yell.edu as you have been following along. appreciation of my fellow callers i will be very

brief. prior to the cold war i certain summary services. we did [inaudible] of this election will be hunting us for a long time. sir.minds me -- thank you my father was a 4.5 year veteran in world war ii. he voted republican all of his life. he was a farm boy from rural michigan. reasons.s historical he did not live long enough for really -- for me to debate any of this with him, but above all, my own father was a patriot.

he could love richard nixon and john kennedy in the same breath. we played that clip from joe biden at gettysburg. we just passed the one 57th anniversary of the gettysburg address, where lincoln called for a new birth of freedom. did that happen in the years afterwards? and how many times in this country do you think we have had a new birth of freedom? when do we know we have achieved that? david: that is a great question, i have written about that. yes, a real rebirth was achieved in the wake of the incredible slaughter from the civil war. it was a rebirth of the constitution itself, and really a second american republic, a new republic born out of the three great constitutional amendments, the 13th, 14th, and

15th amendments. every american should understand those three amendments. as one caller said, they should know who james madison is. we should know this three amendments, and all of the other reconstruction acts that came with it. it was an attempt to re-create in american republic around the ideals, under law, of a multiracial democracy. it was defeated by the resistance of the south. white democratic party in the south during reconstruction and afterwards. you could say we had another kind of rebirth, certainly in policy measures, and the progressive era. century, upthe 20th until world war i. this is when americans had to respond to industrialization, and urbanization, and immigration on a scale never before.

we had a rebirth in the 30's out of the great depression, with the new deal, and eventually world war ii. that was a genuine rebirth from tremendous trauma, let's not forget that. my own parents were children of the great depression. it influence all of their values, and all of their assumptions. you could say we had another rebirth -- we did, in the 1960's. the civil rights movement. the 1964 civil rights act, the 1955 voting rights act, changed american political life -- we thought forever. era of are again, in an extended voter suppression, extended concerns for the right to vote. which one side in our politics tries in a thousand ways to limit and suppress, and the other side tries to expand. whetherisagree about

that is good or bad, but that is the truth. so, we have had multiple rebirths. some of them out of broad sacrifice. and some of them out of great political turmoil. but if we are to have a rebirth from this year, and not just the four years of trump. this has been an extended. of testing. testing whether this kind of republic really can work in the 21st century world. to have that new rebirth, it is going to take enormous political and moral imagination, and at some point, some kind of cooperation between these extremes in society. if what we do is stoke the extreme, we may not have any hope. john: just one minute or two left. who leads these rebirths?

we talked about lincoln's call for our rebirth of freedom gettysburg. it's always one person? where can a new rebirth start? david: no. the new deal was not just fdr by any means. fdr brought a whole generation of thinkers and political scientists, and visionaries to washington to rethink an american economy. and to rethink ways to save government itself. 1865.n is gone in april, it was leadership and what was then known as the radical republicans who envisioned the possibilities in section one of the 14th amendment, the equal protection clause in our constitution. the birthright citizen clause in our constitution. that came out of a context that came out of a context and out of the visions of political leadership. we need political leadership

that knows its history, deeply knows its history. name a politician out there you really admire, i bet you they read a lot of history. we need people with the kind of moral, political imagination to use that history to reimagine ourselves in our own time, whatever the opposition. david blight is our guest this morning. we actually have a few minutes more. we will try to get one or two more calls and. fayetteville, north carolina, republican. caller: good morning, thank you. there is a hidden hand that operates in this country. that hidden hand controls the democrats and the republicans. irs and thein the english -- wants to control this country.

americansk, but we as need to redefine our constitution, and we need to break that time with united kingdom. i don't think the brits have much control over us anymore. if they did we would have a parliamentary system, when we? if they had some kind of control , we would probably have a national health insurance program like they do. i am not worried about the brits. they can't hold themselves together right now. scotland will probably secede from the u.k. within the next five years if they are not careful. you mentioned the irs. everybody loves to hate the tax structure, so yeah.

fair, more democratic tax structure is something we can all hope for a name for. that tax structure believes that the wealthy can somehow regenerate all things about the economy. we have so much evidence that that is not true, but it doesn't seem to matter does it? if the right people hold onto power, that is what the tax structure will be. john: ketchum, idaho, independent. caller: good morning. saying thise right revolution started at the george floyd issue. we had to 20 issues burning -- cities burning. statues coming down. -- there is also a revolution going on in mexico right now.

the drug cartels are in control of the country. i think we are tied in with that. thank you for the view of the world from ketchum, idaho. what a beautiful country you have out there. i will never forget my first visit to the snake river canyon. mexico has its own terrible internal problems that are directly related to our immigration issue at the border. is whether spending billions on a wall will solve that. better relations between the united states and mexico, a real diplomatic initiative with mexico about some of its own internal impulses that bring about the immigration problem, is probably a good the immigrats probably a good idea.

yeah, a comprehensive approach to immigration. we have been waiting a long time for that. >> we will have to end it there this morning. professor david blight from yell university, american university professor. come back to us and talk to us down the road. >> thank you to all of the colors out there. c-span's washington journal, every day we take your calls live on the air on the news of the day and we discuss policy issues that impact you. this week we feature our authors week series. one hour segment with each day having a new segment. on his new book, chronicles of american money, and the current cultural divide in the u.s. and the president of the borgen project looks at global poverty. watch c-span's washington journal live at 7:00 eastern sunday morning. join the discussion from your

phone calls, facebook comments, texts and tweets. >> here's what's ahead. president-elect joe biden announces his climate team, including energy and interior secretaries. update on operation warp speed, and the distribution of the covid vaccine. after that, interviews with freshmen members of the 117th congress. >> congress is still working on a second coronavirus relief package, costing an estimated $900 billion. what has been agreed to, extended jobless benefits, stimulus checks for taxpayers. yet to be settled, a new provision on the federal reserve's stability to make business loans. on 2020 one spending, the house and senate have until sunday night at midnight eastern to avoid a government shutdown.