congress, to the white house, watch it live on c-span, on the go using the free c-span radio app. >> coming up tonight on c-span. at 8:00 p.m. a look at the political career of retiring senator lamar alexander. year inn two, book tv's the originsing with and future of the cosmos. on c-span three, programs marking the 400th anniversary of the mayflower's trip from plymouth, england starting with the discussion on the mayflower compact, the set of rules for self-governing by the settlers. that starting at 8:00 on the c-span networks. in one hour, washington journal's sponsor week continues with investigative journalist on her

new book "slanted: how the news media taught us to love censorship and hate journalism." dr. peters salk on lessons learned from the polio vaccine that can be applied to the covid-19 vaccine. ♪ good morning, it's the washington journal for december the 22nd. congress has sent donald trump a $900 billion coronavirus relief direct that includes payments, extended unemployment benefits, money for the ppp, and other categories covered. with the passage of this bill we ift to hear from you on this release package will help you. if you are unemployed and want to give us your expected, (202) 748-8000 -- perspective, (202) 748-8000. the same if you are a furloughed

worker, call (202) 748-8001. (202) 748-8002 if you are an essential worker. all others can call in at (202) 748-8003. you can use that same number to text your response this morning. you can post on our twitter feed @cspanwj. also on our facebook page. going through some details of the bill signed and passed by the house and senate yesterday. here are some of the elements you have heard about, you probably heard about that $600 checked with the treasury secretary saying that once it is signed that money could go out as early as next week. unemployment aid for the tof-employed, also extended 11 weeks the emergency unemployment compensation program and the paycheck protection program which you heard several members of congress talk about yesterday, two hundred $84 billion added to that. some other elements of the bill.

$82 billion for schools and colleges. it would extend a moratorium on the evictions that was set to expire at the end of the year billion for $25 rental assistance and $20 billion for small businesses. and money for music venues programs that cater to low income and underserved communities. there are other figures that we will show you this morning as far as what is in the bill. donald trump is expected to sign it. yesterday in the lead up to the passage in the house and senate you had members talking about elements of this bill and why they think it's important, starting off with the senate majority leader mitch mcconnell. senator mcconnell: there are americans'personal finances, the impossible kitchen table

questions many working families have faced through no fault of their own. we created the paycheck protection program. it saved small businesses and help to millions of american workers keep receiving paychecks rather than pink slips. it would be insanity for us to have saved these jobs all this time only to drop the ball with the end in sight. though this bill will send more than $280 billion to reopen the ppp for a targeted second round. we made sure churches and faith-based organizations will continue to be eligible. millions have already been laid off. republicans tried to stop willits and this package resume a temporary federal supplement to unemployment insurance. forxtends other programs self-employed and gig workers that would've expired.

the particular leadership and direction of donald trump and secretary mnuchin households will receive a second round of direct relief checks, $600 per adult and per child. this is just some of the aid that will be heading americans way in a matter of hours. host: that is on the senate side. at the beginning of the house session at 9:00 in the morning when speaker of the house nancy pelosi took the floor and talked about the importance of passing the bill and what was not included in the bill. rep, pelosi: what we could not get -- --, pelosi: languagesi: adequate to recognize that this coronavirus has taken a horrible toll on our whole country, more

so -- people have died from the , a child who is hispanic had an eight times higher chance of going to a hospital because of the coronavirus than a white child. for african-americans a five times chance more of going to the hospital because of coronavirus. vaccine that we hope will reach everyone as soon as possible. what i am heartbroken about about this bilbo, is while we make an attempt to crush the virus we don't do it adequately enough in terms of recognizing the toll on people of color, but we will have to do that in a public sentiment of it in the demands that we make on governors and others who are in charge of the distribution. we put money in the pockets of the american people, we want to

do more, we are meeting the deadline of december 26 for unemployment insurance which was vital. perspectivetical from yesterday, from your perspective on if elements of this relief bill will help you. (202) 748-8000 if you are unemployed. if you are a furloughed worker, (202) 748-8001. worker,re an essential i want your perspective, (202) 748-8002. all others can reach us at (202) 748-8003. lance and i gust a, georgia tech's sn says when it comes to relieve offered from the covid bill, that extra $600 will help only since he is retired and does not need the extra money. "it isfacebook says going in the bank as a rainy day am working, why would the government send money to those of us who are working and don't need this loan.

yes it's a loan because sooner or later we will have to pay it back in higher taxes." diane says "600 does not even cover rent, it is people in congress saying they give up, good luck suckers." workersjoke, service are suffering come our government stopped caring about the people they served long ago..." a variety of ways you can reach us with your perspective on the bill. new castle, pennsylvania, we will hear from shirley who is unemployed. go ahead. caller: thank you for taking my call. first of all, i do want to say thank god they finally got something through, it will at least help us a little bit. that needother things to be done. everything is in such an up

people, and what i am praying, . and this is what i feel. i feel if he would just please call for martial law and put all of this stuff to rest. host: shirley, back to the topic at hand, you say you are unemployed. caller: yes i am. since march. host: will the extension of unemployment benefits help you directly? caller: yes it will. , itill be $300 a week certainly not going to pay all the bills but it will certainly put a dent in things. host: is that $300 on top of what you get from the commonwealth of pennsylvania? get -- we would yes, that would be the $300 a week. i pray that they can get something settled here. host: let's go to sandy in columbus, ohio, also identifies

as unemployed. caller: thank you for taking my call. on february 24 due to health reasons, i was unable to do my part time. i am 70 years old and have worked for the last six years. host: keep going with your thought. was i got the did unemployment, but what i was saying is that by being a senior i was worried about people that had no money at all, i am receiving some retirement. ,hen you look at the situation the president has not come out. he didn't provide us to be safe, so we could not go back to work. it is really -- i don't understand. i'm so glad were getting a change of administration. there are people out there in food lines that have never been out there before.

host: as far as the second round helping you directly, will it be like last time where it's a bit of a help but you get something due to retirement? caller: yes, but it will be a hell. because of my health situation i need to order in food and so forth, that's a higher cost. island,bert in rhode you are next. caller: good morning. host: good morning. caller: i just think this $600 is a slap in the face. i was just watching to see portions of the bill and what they are doing with it. million so abroad hiv workers can buy new cars? another $24 million to the kennedy center? didn't they just get millions of dollars the last go round?

have 193 million dollars for the fisheries? thancould give us all more $600 to be honest because that money will disappear the second it gets here. i'm so far behind on all my bills. i own a home, i have renters that are not paying rent, it's ridiculous. host: as far as unemployment, the rental property is your only source of income or did you have a job on top of that? caller: i did have a job but i've been unemployed, i'm self-employed. things are not as good as they were. being self-employed, there is an element of this bill that would go directly to those who are self-employed. did you take advantage last time and will you take advantage this time? paperwork,s a lot of and i was approved but things did not go through and i was never contact did. you are on hold for one million

with my can get by savings, so that's what i've been doing. host: that's robert in rhode island. when it comes to entertainment venues, the new york times highlights the fact that there are $15 billion set aside for those venues saying they are independent entertainment businesses like music venues and movie theaters and cultural entities to apply for grants from the small business administration to support six months of payments for employees and cost including rent, utilities, and maintenance. applicants must have lost at least 25% of the revenue to qualify and those who have lost more than 90% will be able to apply first within the first two weeks. the core of these provisions were proposed in the senate in july by democratic senator amy klobuchar of minnesota and

republican senator of texas john cornyn. steve on our line for others about the passage of this bill. steve from baltimore, maryland. you are next. caller: the legislative branch of this country is soon to turn this country into the next great third world country. the outsourcing, the off shoring, the spending of the money, soon to be the next great third world country. host: how does that relate to the passage of this bill? all others because i was self-employed for 27 years , three years ago i was diagnosed with bone cancer due to a misdiagnosis from my general practitioner. collecten i was able to -- host: you are still on go ahead. self-employment taxes or social security disability. i would prefer to be working. we should all be out working. in the meantime, in reference to

this bill along with the other no differentne is from 2008. we thought that was big at 885 billion. we are spending ourselves into oblivion, soon to become the next great third world country. host: that stephen baltimore, maryland. reporting on the relief package unveiled on monday, went through the house and senate in a matter of hours. the senate cleared the massive package by a 92-6 vote after the house approved the package by 300 9-53. wereix republican senators marsha blackburn from tennessee, ,and paul, rick scott, mike lee and ted cruz of texas. kelly is next from illinois, go ahead. caller: yes, i am calling on behalf of the covid bill. i am a teacher's aide at the school and i have been that for 20 years.

i'm just calling on behalf of that to say i am grateful for that because i am in good health -- i have health issues, but i am able to work. any little bit will help. i could complain, but i won't complain because i have been thanking god, he has been keeping me through this. i just want to say, even though there was $900 billion for the covid relief, how will that be spread around the echo and we don't go into a recession? god -- thanking god. caller: spending -- host: spending is a concern? caller: yes, i'm behind on a lot of my bills. my power bill, my water bill, my life insurance. right now i don't have life insurance because i can't pay it. host: was this the same

situation earlier this year when the first round of aid was passed and $1200 was the figure people were getting directly ?cho caller: -- directly caller: yes, that helped me. when they close the schools down i went out of work. host: kelly from illinois giving her story as a school worker. identifies as a furloughed worker in texas, hello. james in texas? good morning. caller: i'm here, good morning. i wanted to call in, i've been watching the show since the pandemic started. i really appreciate the service you all are doing. ofave gotten very tired turning on msnbc or other mainstream media and seeing that we are not getting presented with all the information that is happening. this bill should be a wake-up for the american people that we need to start holding our

representatives accountable and making sure they do things to help us. was $15 billion to help out the arts and different things, while i think that is important there is no need to go -- that needs to go to the citizens. i'm tired of driving around and seeing food lines of people who ofe through no fault their own lost their jobs or businesses have been shut down. you are getting furloughed, all we are trying to do is work and be able to pick our families. the thing we get finally is a $600 payment. i never thought america would get to this point. host: where you furloughed directly due to covid? caller: yes i was. i went back to work and worked for about three weeks, then after that was furloughed again. i work in construction, there is that. it is just terrible turning on the television and seeing what is happening to our country.

i listen to all the different points of view and i think that everybody has the right to make their point, but i wish people would wake up and whether it is democrat or republican, nancy pelosi or anyone on the republican side we need to hold these people accountable. it's ridiculous they can get together and pass the $600 stimulus and sneak off to christmas while everyone else is left holding the bag and we have to pay for it down the line. my kids will have to pay for this. host: james giving his perspective. one element of the relief bill includes $4 billion for mental health substance abuse disorders. "mostshington post saying of the money will likely be distributed through two existing block grants administered by the substance abuse and mental health services administration. one for mental health services and the other for substance abuse and prevention services. programs forgo to suicide prevention, mental

health services for children returning to school, community behavioral health clinics which treat low income payments, as well as emergency grants to states and native american tribes. in trenton, new jersey we will hear from mark identifying as someone who is unemployed. good morning. caller: good morning, how are you? host: fine, go ahead. caller: i've been unemployed since march 17. i worked at a small factory since 40 -- for 40 years. i'm 60 years old. you know how hard it would be to find another job at my age? i should be looking forward to being retiring soon. i received $498 a week from the state here. stopped --nder $600 by the time i paid my health care which is $700 a month, my rent is $1100 a month, that left

me $200 to pay for food, for my electric, and everything else that i need. i'm just glad that they passed toething here, and i'm going think nancy pelosi. i think she really cares about the suffering people, and i'm just glad something got done. earlier inmay ask, the year, did you get the $1200 direct check? caller: i did. that was used to pay for my and everything else i started getting behind on. host: mark in trenton, new jersey giving us his perspective . the lines we have set aside, you may be unemployed, furloughed, or an essential worker. we have a line for all others if you want to give your thoughts. twitter,o so on

facebook, and texting us. the caller mentioned nancy pelosi, usa today telling us what is going on behind the scenes on the senate side when it came to the passing of this legislation, saying in late november lisa murkowski hosted a dinner at her home that included susan collins, mark warner, mitt romney, and joe mansion of west virginia. the senators began hammering out broad outlines of the legislation including stimulus checks, unemployment benefits, and a fresh lifeline for small businesses. it says that this started because joe manchin called susan collins to congratulate her and they talked to other senators who felt they needed to act on stimulus. lawmakers ate take-out pasta and discuss the package, she said the end of the meal, mark warner picked up the tab. they kept nearly daily sue meetings to work on a

compromise, eventually bringing in the house problem solvers caucus, a group of 50 lawmakers from the house of representatives. there is more of the political back-and-forth that led to the passage of this legislation and you can find that in the pages of usa today. brandon in milwaukee, wisconsin you are next. caller: good morning. help,oney will certainly i'm disabled so i'm not too impacted by the whole pandemic. i think it's just a shame. it's a shame that this is happening a few days before christmas and that so many gifts becausehout politicians can't come together. , i saw thespective democrats refusing to compromise because they demanded this massive deal and ultimately they set it all -- settled on a smaller bill. i get so frustrated when that caller praise nancy pelosi.

pelosi and the democrats held americans hostage because they wanted to win the election. they wanted americans to suffer before they would help them. i think it's appalling and they get away with it. it's not going to change. it's just unfortunate. it makes me sad. it's where we are. merry christmas. host: let's hear from redford, michigan on the unemployed line. caller: good morning. in regards to this new bill, i .orked for a home care agency they applied for the ppp loan and got the loan, now they went out of business. that's what a lot of these businesses are doing. the bottom line is this. , if they get these loans they can operate at 100% capacity they are still going to lose money. i know they need help, but i feel like the citizens need the

help more so. this just seems like the politicians don't care. it's just ridiculous how they are doing this in reference to the caller before me, he said nancy pelosi and the democrats are holding the people hostage. it was trump who said he wasn't going to negotiate anything regarding the coronavirus until after the election, then he pulled back and changed his mind. it's not a democrat or republican thing. this coronavirus is hitting both parties. host: when it comes to this new round of spending, do you see anything that will help you directly? caller: a little but not a lot. i rent is 1000, i have a car, have car insurance i have to keep up, then you have your necessity bills. i am grateful for what they are giving, but it really is not

enough. michigant's alicia in giving us her perspectives. some other perspectives from our texting service. harrigan mt. lebanon saying where is the official covid relief bill the president is supposed to sign? it's supposed to be something toe 5000 plus pages, closer 6000, anyone out there read it? on twitter saying $600 is not enough for those of us in the most -- completely unnecessary for some of us very i suggest for those who don't need the money to donate it. mike in sioux falls saying the $600 will help, but the real issue is that the covid relief bill is part of a bigger context when you look at what is included in the omnibus spending package, also including defense spending. that's when you see that regular americans are getting the short end of the stick! other aspects of spending

highlighted in the new york times, $82 billion in education funding, about $54 billion will go to the nation's k-12 schools and more money going to colleges and universities, falling short of what they say they need. governors will receive 4.1 billion in a separate pot of relief funding, $2.7 billion reserved to protect private schools. the bill also includes requirements and restrictions for how private schools that have received funding under the paycheck attention program eligible to receive state funds. that is on the new york times website if you want to read more about the education side of what was passed yesterday. we will hear from mike in stockton, california. good morning. caller: good morning, pedro. i'm just waiting for the american people to wake up and stop paying their taxes.

those people in congress do not represent the american people. they don't care about us, they never have. they have their own friends, they all know one another, they only care about each other and they don't care about the american people. at some point we have to wake up, take responsibility, and throw them out. all of them. stop paying your taxes. host: what is it about this package that makes you think they don't care? caller: pedro! come on. they started mandating we have to buy insurance under obama care, they mandated anything and everything -- host: let's stick to this spending package. what about it makes you think they don't care? caller: the size of it. i have not read the bill, i don't think anyone has, it's over 5000 pages. to gets are supposed $1800 apiece as opposed to an

american citizen. who do they represent? represent big business, they represent the banking empire, and they don't care about us. they are forcing us -- so many americans are suffering now and they offer $600? when they owe $1000 for rent a month or their mortgage? how many people right now are facing foreclosure? they are six months behind in their foreclosure? host: there is a moratorium extension and a rental assistance part of the bill. caller: come on, pedro, do you think that will keep the liens of people in their homes? most people can't afford a home now, the average middle-class person. they think this is an insult. at some point the american people have to wake up and say no more. mike in stockton, california. we will go to mount pleasant,

michigan and carol. caller: i am not going to discuss politics or what's right and wrong. i will give my opinion on it. i am a single mother of two kids young children five and seven to be exact. due to the pandemic my kids are out of school so therefore i was unable to work. because iout of work have to stay home and watch my kids. weekagree with the $300 a extra, i feel like that is feasible. that is an extra $1200 a month. per person but as far as the stimulus goes i feel like it could have been bigger because it has been weeks and some of us who don't qualify for regular unemployment benefits because maybe we were part-time or the company we worked for had under the amount of workers needed to

be able to provide unemployment. $320,ore we are getting the max allotment is $160 a $278 --at is roughly how are we supposed to pay our bills with not even $600 a month? the stimulus should have been bigger to help cover what we are behind. host: that is carolyn mount pleasant, michigan giving her perspective. we have heard your stories and telling us your thoughts. we will continue through till 8:00. who are8-8000 unemployed. if you are furloughed, (202) 748-8001. essential workers, (202) 748-8002. all others at (202) 748-8003. when it comes to the receiving of unemployment benefit, usa today has a story online about

those who are jobless waiting for first rounds of checks for unemployment. a couple lines from this story this morning. the u.s. government does not keep clear tallies of workers who do not receive on them women benefits or a denial. the century foundation, progressive think tank that tracks the payments, estimates that 3 million to 7 million who qualify for unemployment never received a rejection letter or a payment. much more to this story, you can find it online. this is madeleine in fort wayne, indiana, and essential worker, good morning. caller: good morning. say, is there a cap on the number of kids that can get it? but inot that i know of, don't want to speak out of ignorance, so let me check on that. go ahead. caller: ok. an essential worker because

i work for the schools, but i mostly underemployed. happened ien this did not qualify for unemployment even though i lost one of my jobs, a restaurant job. i work at the schools and i work for a restaurant. i had to give up the restaurant job, so i did not qualify for unemployment. us to gets paid through the year, but then there are 16 months a year i don't get a paycheck, 16 weeks a year i don't get a paycheck. unemployment,or so it's been rough. is on the told there

first question you asked, let me add that to the mix. why did you ask that in the first place? i'm curious. caller: at my particular school there are a couple of families in their that have 12 kids. everything, for they are on welfare, they get food lines,, they get food stamps, they get medical care for their kids, they are getting $6,000 and i'm getting 600? host: that is madeleine in fort wayne, indiana. to clarify for the checks portion of this bill which a lot of people are focusing on, the checks are worth about $600 for individuals whose gross adjusted income is under 75,000 in 2019 and couples earn 150,000 under the same income requirements for the first round of checks it goes down for their -- from there if you read certain conditions as far as what you earn.

a lot of detail, cnbc highlighting that the amount of the checks increases by five dollars for every $100 of income above those thresholds. dollarss out at 87,000 for individuals and $174,000 for couples. dependents under the age of 17 are eligible for $600 checks. there is no cap on the number of households that can receive. if a person earns 60,000 dollars in 2019 and has four children under 17 they will be eligible for a $3000 payment. if you go to the miami herald they highlight the fact that u.s. citizens and green card holders were previously excluded from receiving the first round --stimulus checks in april the house and senate in that package include payments up to $600, they say that -- to me go to the floor

republican senator marco rubio and north carolina republican senator applauded the inclusion of mixed families in their legislation. this will ensure that u.s. citizen is eligible to receive an economic impact payment if he or she is married to a foreign national who is not currently a citizen of the united states. noting that the inclusion will rub -- apply retroactively as a refundable tax rebate and that eligibility is included for the next round of eips. let's hear from carl in jacksonville, indiana. say, i i just wanted to heard them earlier somebody praising nancy pelosi about her great work with this package. has been thethis biggest political debacle in my lifetime, and i'm 61 years old. was on your show blaming donald trump.

to pass awilling package back in july. it was blocked. we have an election to influence. that's all i have to say. yesterday on the senate floor senator rand paul,, who voted against the package on the senate floor talking and giving some of the reasons why. to so-called conservatives who are quick to identify the socialism of democrats, if you vote for this spending monstrosity you are no better. when you vote to pass out free money, you lose your soul, and you abandon forever any semblance of moral or physical integrity. the next time you see republicans in high moral judgment complaining and complaining about the spending of democrats and socialism,

remind them that they supported this monstrous bill, the difference between the parties is less adam smith versus marks and more marks versus angles. how bad is our fiscal situation? the federal government brought in 3.3 trillion dollars last year and spent $6.6 trillion. but deficit last year a record busting $3.3 trillion. moreu are looking for covid bailout money we don't have any. no coffers are bare, we have rainy day fund or savings account. congress has spent all the money long ago. host: senator rand paul from yesterday. "it'ser on twitter saying amazing that so many in congress can read a 5000 page bill in hours, but take so long to help

americans to decide on the text of the bill." goyou go to our website and to the congressional chronicle section you will notice a red bar. if you click it that will be the over 5000 pages included in this bill. all of that available to you at c-span.org. let's go to joseph in capitol heights, maryland. good morning. in capital heights, maryland. caller: hello, how are you doing? i'm an essential worker, but the bad thing is they don't give us no money. to be honest i'm thankful for whatever they can give us. what about the people that have been suffering before? it was no big help for them? i think everyone should be eligible. i started blaming pelosi and trump and all them the back-and-forth, but when i learned about the back-and-forth

, that's the whole demographic of our republic. we talk about china this in china that, but our structure and the way we are structured makes it so that we are the only thing anyone can get is a couple of dollars. other than that nobody can become powerful. allah for america. host: mary in potomac, maryland. go ahead. say thei am calling to author of a book called "welfare for the rich: how your tax dollars ends up in millionaires pockets." please invite them to your program, they have described in is reverseis country

socialism. get your taxres dollars, and you are left hanging drive. host: thank you for the suggestion, how does that relate to the passage of the bill? bill thatcause this mcconnell took so long to pass, when there was so much need before, i say that because it's a drop in the bucket. $600, now a is $600 to $800 and it is supposed to help free people -- host: it's a $900 billion bill even though people focus on the $600 aspect. caller: that is what most people will get. in the last bill that was given a huge portion of it went not to

small businesses, but to large givingtions who were money to the republican party members. it is messed up. host: that is mary in potomac, maryland. lindenhurst, new york and we will hear from teresa. caller: hello. i am appalled by this bill. appalled. disgusting, they are not helping the american people, nor are they making any sense in what they are doing. the only thing they are doing is putting more money in their pockets. this is the way i feel, that package means nothing to people that are starving, that are on the streets and homeless. why doesn't congress take 10% of their salary and give it back to

the american people who worked hard for what they have tried to achieve which was taken right away from us. nancy pelosi, give me a break. 100,000 dollar refrigerator, come on people. let's get with the program. stop the nonsense and take care of the american people. host: that is teresa from new york. a couple of people texting us this morning. a viewer from annapolis saying they are fortunate they don't need a check and they will donate it to the poor box at church. miller texting us from gary, indiana. this will help me pay my medical bills, i'm having knee surgery soon and i pay what my insurance does not pay. if you go to the washington post when it comes to medical bills, part of the package dealing with the topic of unexpected medical bills, saying a ban on surprise billing is woven into the

pandemic relief package, which lawmakers were expected to approve late monday. mainly on a bipartisan accord that has tried to outlaw the practice before. the issue involves large bills that patients are sent for care they did not realize was outside of their insurance network. such bills have become increasingly common, even if patients use an in network hospital. there is more about the ban included in this pandemic relief package passed by the senate and house yesterday and expected to be signed by donald trump. know --let us giving thoughts on our twitter feeds and facebook pages. for those of you on the lines this is decatur, georgia. good morning, go ahead. caller: good morning. like to say about this

package, is it really a package, or is it a drop in the bucket? i am unemployed, i am disabled. on top of all of that, i am homeless. i am living in a hotel. the hotel costs $1200. we are barely off the street here. you have other expenses. my health care, it does not exist. they are still asking to pay out my pockets. the thing i'm suffering with from this package is they gave out the stimulus. , and i the post office get my stimulus and my daughter's stimulus, and my disability checks -- guatemala this is not my jurisdiction, it belongs to the local -- mule and

i have been sitting up here suffering and waiting for assistance. theve been denied services, post office refuses to allow me to come get my mail out of their , i am going through it and i keep trying to get help, there is no help there. now the $600 stimulus is going to come through, but how can i receive that if i can't even get my mail because i was robbed on their premises? this package stinks. it does not work. it will not help anyway. as soon you get the $600, how will i.e.d.? i have not eaten, i have lost 20 pounds. host: telling us her story from georgia. in indiana.er, rita caller: hello, pedro. marcheen unemployed since and the stimulus bill that was passed is just not enough for

me. unemployed, i still am, and i applied and qualified for rent assistance, but the only hang up is it is for the state assistance and my landlord will not participate in it, and it's very frustrating, i'm behind on my bills, and i feel that congress, that they make too much and don't have any empathy for people who are struggling and it is very frustrating. host: is unemployment assistance available to you? caller: i have been getting unemployment and it is $90 a week. you can't live off of $90 a week. i challenge congress to live on that and see how they feel.

unemployment at $600 really helped at the time. that was just a blessing. since they eliminated that it has really been a struggle. i am thankful that families, thank god that family has been able to help me. it's very stressful depending on them and i've always been, i worked most of my life since i have been 15 years old and going , and have been working long term and it has been unfortunate. i know everyone is going through this. hoping that things will change with president biden. rita and indiana giving her perspective this morning about this relief bill passed by congress, expected to be signed by donald trump. you could give us your stories

as many have this morning. buzzfeed news reporting about no longer having to provide paid sick leave to workers infected with covid-19 after mitch mcconnell blocked that extension from being included in congress's latest aid package. in march congress passed a law saying that workers can draw two weeks of paid sick leave if they contract covid or two weeks of paid sick leave to care for a quarantining relative, and up to 10 weeks of leave for a child whose school or daycare is closed. buzzfeed news reported that my, was pushing to block the paid leave mandate from being extended. congressional aides confirmed that the extension was left out of the aid bill as a concession of mcconnell. extend a tax credit that subsidizes the cost of business is paying out sick leave until march. the government will continue to foot the bill for businesses that offer paid leave over the next three months, but it will be optional for businesses

topped in and let employees take time off. from jerry on our line for others in maine, go ahead. caller: yes. i have never made over $40,000 a year, but i always found a way to put 10, 20, or $30 a week back. people don't plan ahead for their future. and i'm stillld working. , am drawing social security but people just never plan ahead. i started putting money away because i did not figure social security would be there when i was old enough to draw it area when i first got out of the military i started putting 10, 20, $30 a week, whatever i could spare. i might have to give up one of my luxuries but i would put a little back each week to pay for my future. people don't do that and that's why they are in the situation they are in, thank you.

host: that's cherry in nebraska. another perspective from president biden on his twitter feed saying "i up rod this relief package but our work is far from over. starting in the new year congress will need to immediately get to work to support our covid-19 plan, i message to everyone struggling his help is on the way and he includes a link with a tweet on the subject. theate change included in package in terms of language. this is coral davenport reporting for the new york times saying the bill but not appropriate new government spending, but would authorize 35 billion dollars in existing government funding to be spent on clean energy programs over the next five years including one billion for energy storage technologies that can serve as batteries for wind and solar power and $1.5 million for new solar energy and two point $1 billion for advanced nuclear energy technology and 450

million dollars for technology to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. it would direct federal agencies to update the government program that sees renewable energy waste , that is part of the packages that were passed yesterday when it comes to spending issues and the coronavirus and related topics. paul in ohio on our line for others. go ahead. caller: hello, pedro. the general public gets this perception that when congress gets a bill passed like this that it goes to big corporations and such, and i guarantee you it's not in my situation. would like to hear from other small business owners that only have six or seven employees. this money is going to be used to pay for their salary and wages including their own. we take care of the elderly in my business, the assisted living facility. we were directly impacted by the covid.

we unfortunately had lost a couple of individuals. it directly impacts us and i'm thankful that the government, may be a little late, but i'm thankful for their efforts in providing any type of assistance for small business. it does not just go to big corporations it goes to small, five, 10, 15 employees. i'm thankful, you can't solve every individual problem, need to, or financial heartbreak in the bill. it's possible -- it's impossible. there'small effort and more money that congress can earmark for small business in 2021. it's very expensive. host: all in ohio, business owner giving his perspective on this whole approach.

action on this bill took up a lot of news yesterday, other news as far as the outgoing attorney general of the united states william barr giving his last press conference before he leaves his position on wednesday. one of those topics that came up was the appointment of a special counsel to investigate aspects of the election, saying a special counsel would make it more difficult for mr. biden and his attorney general to close investigations begun under mr. trump. that could energize the throng of trump supporters that falsely believe the election was stolen. the supreme court has rejected the campaign claims that the washington times report this morning. when it comes to william barr you can see his whole press conference at c-span.org. here is a portion dealing with the election. >> the president has continued to make the case that there is fraud in the election. you have made your statement on that in an interview. do you believe there is enough evidence to warrant appointing a

special counsel to look into it? something that he appears to be thinking about, perhaps sidney powell? do you think there is any reason to do that? have you already given your opinion on this to the president and the white house? a.g. barr: um. as you said, i've already commented on fraud. there isst say that fraud in most elections, i think we are too tolerant of it and i think there was fraud in the selection. i was commenting on the extent to which we had looked at suggestions or allegations of systemic or broad-based fraud that would affect the outcome of the election, and i already spoke to that, and i stand by that statement. ofbut about the idea appointing a special counsel? would you answer the question about whether you believe there

is enough there, even with what you said, do you believe there is enough evidence to warrant a special counsel to investigate that? a.g. barr: if i thought a special counsel at this stage was the right tool and was appropriate i would name one, but i haven't, and i won't claim two. host: that whole press conference available at c-span.org. part of the passage of the bill reliefronavirus included a spending bill to keep the government funded. the washington times adding as part of that package, there is more money for the border wall in the spending bill and while u.s. immigrations and customs funding is down slightly, ice will have 50% more detention beds for illegal immigrants then democrats proposed. pat in franklin, new hampshire, good morning. go ahead. caller: it's unfortunate in this package that bill

we did not see anything from any of these representatives that suggested that they would be willing to forfeit their monthss for the upcoming to help with this whole issue. it is so sad that nobody is talking about that. we sent them there to do their jobs, and i feel that they have not done their job. if we would take away their income, maybe they would do their jobs. falls church, virginia this is jason on our line for others. caller: morning. i wanted to point out first off that the lawsuits that have been dismissed by courts have never been dismissed on merit, they have been dismissed -- disappointed in republicans and democrats that they are passing a bill with billions of dollars for foreign countries from egypt to sudan to

ukraine to israel and other countries. i think that when we are dealing with the kind of devastation that we are dealing with in our economy it should be criminal for us to be sending money to foreign countries and to be allowing illegal immigrants to be gaining some kind of money from this bill. it is disgusting that we allow that. in a normal year i think that we should not be funding other foreign countries, but i think that especially now when we are trillions of dollars in debt to be funding foreign countries with millions of dollars is absolutely disgusting and the $600 is just a slap in the face when it has been months and months of nothing and they come back with half of what they gave us last time, which most people either did not get on time or a lot of people did not end up getting. dianeone more call from from fayetteville, new york, go

ahead. 64ler: first off, i'm almost and i remember when president kennedy was shot. my dad was a chief master sergeant for the faa and the air national guard. i'm calling because the stimulus --kage and everything else if the landlords have the freedom of law to do a revenge eviction, i'm in the village of fayetteville and i have always paid my rent on time and i have incurred major code violations which i had the code officer from the village of fayetteville --e up and finally from the fall last year and the whole property was cited. to code officer neglected

take this individual to court to find him -- to force him to do the violation, the first 30 days was on september 5. this was a crumbling foundations, this was encroaching into my unit. with me giving legal advice i stated and gave two notices that i would be withholding my rent, and i told them i have it and would not spend it. long and short, even if renters get the help or if they have a link to the excuse. every type of mailing i sent to the owner, i sent to the mayor of the village of fayetteville and the code officer. host: we are running short on time so go ahead and finish up. i wonder if there's some

way if we can get a bill or legislation passed. stimulus does not help if these out todowners that rent innocent trusting host: that is diane new york. we think you all for participating this morning. you want to hear from our author. sharyl attkisson has written a new book called "slanted: how the news media taught us to love censorship and hate journalism." later on we will be joined by the son of dr. jonas salk. he talked to us but the lessons learned from his father's discovery of the polio vaccine and the parallels to today and the covid-19 vaccine. we will take those conversations when "washington journal" continues. ♪

americans have some form of disability but yet 3%.re in less than of film and tv shows. a majority of those roles are portrayed by nondisabled actors. as somebody with a disability, we what see ourselves represented. not only are we seeing ourselves represented but it is going to help destigmatize disability. getssentation in general society used to everybody. ultimately it makes the world a more inclusive place. started a challenge after seeing people with disabilities unrepresentative -- find camera.

sunday at 8:00 p.m. eastern on q&a. you are watching c-span, your unfiltered view of government. c-span was created by america's television companies in 1979. we are brought to you by these television companies who provide c-span as a public service. >> washington journal continues. "washingtonoften journal." junior hear from ed glhf but today we will hear from cheryl atkinson. -- sharyl atkinson attkisson. you have written books taking a

look at the media, what does this book have apart from the others. ofst: it is the evolution the death of the news which has been observed by most of the people listening and watching today but don't necessarily know what is behind it. in this book i talk about what is happening with social media. this trend in social media is born of the same time of putting coed corporate interest that has controlled news narratives before the focused on social media and internet because they thought the public could still get unfettered access and viewpoints and people so they decided to figure out started that and have done so successfully how to control the information we see online. host: we heard about social media leading up to the election. you are saying before then these trends were happening?

guest: right. big tech for all of its flaws and invading our privacy was not interested in interceding between us and information until 2016 when they were lobbied to do so by special interests who wanted to stop certain narratives and storylines and advance others. it can be traced specifically to 2016, really targeting donald trump with interests that saw him rise in popularity despite the fact that pretty much all news organizations were telling people. for for him, these interests -- telling people don't put for him, these interests could control normal print publications. they started focusing on my. host: who are the special interests? guest: there are many of them. they're not always divided along political and ideological lines. that is the most obvious thing i

think people have seen and put to. there are also corporate industries like the pharmaceutical industry which lobbied our politicians and media organizations and control the narratives we see every day. that was back in the early 2000's. the first pick in street i saw successfully influencing the news in a major way that qualified is what i call censorship, not wanting to air a story at all rather than representing various points, i didn't want people to hear certain scientific studies. the tactic i saw the pharmaceutical industry use was adapted by other political interests. host: tactics such as want -- such as what? guest: hiring crisis management firms, starting nonprofit to figure how to influence news from the corporate level as well as getting into the newsroom by logging with talking points and

other narratives. step, i talked about this in my last book, this industry of figuring out how to influence our information landscape moved into our newsroom in a more direct way. they didn't just figure out how to manipulate us and dictate how we talk about a story from the outside, we hired them into our newsroom's. i talked about how we pay these political consultants and analysts salaries to distribute propaganda and we allow ourselves to be used as tools. they should be paying us, if anything, to have the outlets of the talking points every day to get to these mass audiences. we have invited them to work and our newsrooms as reporters and anchors in many cases. i argued that in many instances we are one and the same in these special interest.

the firewalls have come down between the news division in the interests they are supposed to be reporting on. host: our guest will be with us for the hour. if you want to ask about her reporting and her latest book, "slanted: how the news media taught us to love censorship and hate journalism," you can call us. republicans, 202-748-8001. democrats, 202-748-8000. independents, 202-748-8002. you start pressing the narrative refers to a storyline that influential people want told in order to narrow your views. that is chosen ideas deep within society so that they're no longer west and -- so the questions are no longer permitted. can you elaborate on that? guest: this was unheard of 15 years ago, the notion that a story should be aired or should -- for person should not be interviewed because their ideas were wrong or dangerous.

it used to be we heard from all different viewpoints. now the narrative has taught us -- and i think this has been a successful propaganda effort -- we decide who is right and who is wrong even if we can't know the truth of the matter. then we are to shape what we report to -- to the public by making sure we controversial lies those who are -- controversialize those who are off that narrative. we push instead a one-sided .ersion of somebody's truth if you dig behind that, it is not a fair-minded this is what we think is right, this is what we push out to you because we can't know what is true. the election is a good example. regardless of whether one thinks there was fraud or whatnot, the fact that so many news reports and social media within a day or

two were reporting their sibley wasn't. this -- there simply wasn't. they did not know whether there was fraud or not, they only knew what other people tell them which is what we should be reporting if we are journalists. if we claim to know something we can't know, we declare something to be true and something to be false, and then we turn out to be wrong. i think this contributes to the corrosion of public trust in the media, government, and all our institutions. "to: you add in the book, begin with and narrative always presents multisided issues in a one-sided fashion. the standards and judgments applied to the target smeared by narrative never applied to those advancing the narrative or their allies."

thet: there is a book about verbiage of the narrative, they were greeted against donald trump and his supporters. this is not something said previously if at all. when the other side presents the same source of information as you would say without evidence, they are not called on it. dictates news without evidence to claim something is true, they have no recognition that they are doing the same thing they are accusing somebody also doing. even worse, they are presenting things contrary to the evidence or counter to the evidence that exists. again, with lack of recognition that that is what they are doing. host: you go back to your own experiences in this idea pushing back the narrative. you write about reporting on swine flu and stimulus money in new york. what were the lessons learned

from pushing back? guest: what do you mean? host: pushing back against the narrative. you highlight when you put on the sweatsuit, inc. you encountered. back on-- when you push -- you highlight, the pushback you encountered. this reporting is what good journalists wanted from the people who worked for them. they wanted to get on the ground and find out what was going on. to the extent that it was contrary to the official story line it was applauded. it got to be in my later years at cvs -- at cvs that even -- at it got harder to do

that reporting. powers were pulling strings. boeings the story about and the dreamliner. i was assigned to cover the story of the dreamliner fires. everybody loves the story and then somebody decides it shouldn't air. that was happening more and more. back in 2014 when i thought the trend was industrywide. journalists are speaking of the same thing. some can't talk about it and give up their livelihood, but this is it problem across the. yep journalists who don't like it and then you have a new breed of journalists that are all in you have journalists who

don't like it and then you have a new breed of journalists that are all in. the new journalists have different asked her degrees -- have different master degrees. if they think something -- if , -- say to the right person i think people have to understand that for these people the role of journalism has been redefined into something different than what we were used to. even when they report something that is incorrect, something really bad, the reason you don't see much in the way of apology or why these reporters continue to get rid seats and get promoted is because their mission is accomplished. if your mission is to further the narrative to sway public opinion, your goal is not to represent the facts on the ground so it is okay if you are

wrong because you still accomplish the goal. host: our first call comes from carl he is in berkeley springs, west virginia, republican line. go ahead with your question or comment. old andi am 82 years you are my favorite of all the news people i watch. i am very surprised that washington journal would let you on for an hour. i grew up watching walter cronkite and that bunch. i remember the very evening saidr cronkite came on and the war in vietnam is unwinnable. veteran i thought this was the beginning of opinion in the news.

we are getting more opinions and extent with some news -- mixed in with some news. this laptop they found in delaware, none of the journalists are really curious. they don't want to know what is in it. if they knew what was minute they would have to report on it so they sweep it aside. ma'am, i want to tell you, you are my favorite and you are the most honest journalist on tv. i record your program every time. host: we will let our guests respond. guest: i don't know what to say that, he is always the correct. -- he is obviously correct. i am kidding. i caught the substitution game, the game we played when we see a story such as the hunter biden laptop. anything about the other side,

seems to bes false late if it hurts that site. be curses we should about to question power and authority and look to see what -- ifer investigation you're neutral and objective we apply that to his under investigation -- to whoever is under investigation. side is attacked into his nice and held to a different standard too often than the other side. i agree with that. host: our guest has been with us eight times, i just look on this program -- i just looked on this program. democrats jersey, line. caller: thank you for taking michael. , i remember you

when you were on cbs, was it? guest: and cnn and pbs. caller: it is refreshing to hear you and see you again. i have comments concerning what has been happening for the past four years if i may present my statements and comments. it seems as though for the last four years we have been divided butonly by mr. trump members of congress on one side of the aisle.

that irks me. it irked me when he became 2016.ent in the moment the results came in the following day, the following , i was on a local radio station. i was a regular caller. is thethe host that he curse of america and it has been proven to be so. host: what the what our guest to address? what i want her to address is the censorship that the president tried to place upon the media. host: that is jim in new jersey.

go ahead. i have notguest: studied it from that view. there are plenty who have written about what they think trump has gone -- done wrong. that i instead on topics believe are under covered and underserved. for my viewpoint, i think the censorship i have seen that the media is responsible for and what i have seen on the internet , what we have seen in the weeks building up to the election is more concerning than what i have seen in the political realm from what politicians try to do which is always the case. political figures try to advance their narrative. it is their job. as reporters, we are supposed to be the equalizer. with reporting narratives and try to be neutral and objective when we are reporting simple facts, fair when we are investigating something to the

extent that we can present something that powerful interest are trying to hide. that is what i focus on in my books. host: we have a viewer off our twitter that asks this question saying "i think the president is the one who hates journalism. news" term -- ring a bell?" my book howced in that was started and by whom which i think is interesting. i point out that donald trump co-opted the phrase which was at the dismay of people who tried to -- most people associate that with donald trump. i think there is a lot to be said for how the media has allowed its self to be used in in a way that i

andk is inappropriate changing the definition of journalism in a way that is not good for us. when we do report the facts fairly, i think it is dismissed. what they canre trust out of us because of the reporting we are doing. host: another question asking about if this evolution of journalism affects more ideological groups than others? i spent a chapter going devolution of cnn. i interviewed insiders who have run news divisions of all that works. of those who describe their

leanings with tickly, most of them said they are progressive orlean left yet they were as troubled by the things -- they are progressive or lean left yet they were as troubled by the things i'm talking about. at cnn, we would not have dreamed of inserting our opinions in news stories. most of our reporting had nothing to do with politics. another consequence of the near to is that too much all you see -- is that pretty much all you see are political stories. there is a lot going on in this who don'tth people have ties to washington, d.c. we had a half hour put it will show at night and then we started one at 4:30 in the afternoon during the election year. other than that, our news was ordinary news that wasn't to people. i also talk about it in a

separate chapter on the new york times. it is so disappointing that -- to so many people, including insiders i talked to. there are two chapters talking about those because their downfall has been so obvious. host: who does a fair job as reporting in the way you would see it? guest: i talked in terms of not entire news organizations in a talk not even in terms of fairness. places like cnn when i worked there, they just don't exist. even people who like their news one-sided, they like to see something on the left or on the right, they still when i talked to them say they would like to have a neutral place they could go where they can also check in and know what they are watching -- they don't have to discounted because the site on a place that

might want you to lean left -- because they saw it on a place that might want you to lean left. we need to look for people and reporters at outlets on a particular topic that reports off narrative information that may that -- that powerful interests may not want. i do talk about some reporters and news organizations who are fair. cbs.tioned david martin at i got recommendations from fellow journalists who talked about those who they see as pillars of objectivity in the face of these trends i'm talking about. host: this is very from kentucky on our independent line. this is something i think the republicans have been ignoring.

in the 2016 election, for sick -- 56% of republican voters were over 50-year-old. you can imagine in that for your period how many of those have passed away. -- overther hand, 50% 50% of the democratic voters largender 50 years old, a percentage between 18 and 40 -- 18 and 24. imagine how many of those young people that were 14 years of age in 2016 were 18 years or older in the 2020 elections. it is something being ignored or censored for their just not aware of? -- for they are just not aware of? -- or they are just not aware of? guest: i can't comment

authoritatively on that, i am sorry. but i am concerned among young people today that may start watching news now or in the next couple of years, there is sloped slippage of what some of us -- this slow slippage. of journalism. they have become too -- they have become used to the idea that they will get a one-sided opinion shut down their throat by a media organization instead of neutral information. the second, the censorship trends, they are going to become used to it that this is how it is. make sure we don't see certain information or hear from certain people. that is not the way it was, not the way i grew up, not to wait journalism works or information access should work in america. i'm afraid among young people this is what they know and how

things are. host: this is bill in georgia. democrats line. caller: i would like to talk about the defense authorization hasand the fact that trump threatened to veto it on the ground of confederates -- confederate generals and having a forged name after them as well as the 203 liability shield for social media. what is not being mentioned in -- thatl is the fact offshore accounts are going to be required to report the ownership of those companies. this is something i think is being missed in the media and to me is the biggest story in the defense authorization act. guest: -- host: i don't know if

our guest wants to tackle that but you can if you with -- if you wish. guest: i'm not familiar with that. sorry, i cannot comment. host: what a fox news on journalism -- what do you think about the influence of fox news on journalism. guest: there is a lot about that in the book because some blame fox news about what happened with cnn. cnn and yet some of these people i interviewed were in on the decision-making about what msnbc was going to become, about what cnn was going to become. success ofhow the fox news when they came on the scene and catered to a when theyve audience thought the rest of the media was catered to a liberal audience.

success -- this is according to interviews -- they figured -- they saw that success -- this is according to interviews -- they thought why not just go all out. why not do something that is unabashedly left and appeal to that audience in the same way fox news had done? in termsa lot to that of why cnn became the way it did and how the news has become increasingly split because of the success of fox news. all of the news organizations i have talked about and talk about in the book are likewise subjective, whether left or right or perceive themselves in the middle. i think they have all been inundated by these narratives and interests i'm talking about that make sure they stay on point with the topics of the day these special interests want us to talk about.

even if you are hearing both sides for your hearing right and are thee that these topics and the language used to talk about the topics any given day is the result of the successful application of the narrative. host: do think that applies to the growth we have seen reported of organizations like newsmax and one america news? guest: yes, to one extent i would say there are these outbursts of new places people are turning to because they have become disillusioned and don't like the opinions they're getting from the news they are watching. iffy -- if people feel like they're only going to get opinions from news, they're going to shop around for the opinions they would like. there is a market among the same people watching these news organizations left and right. there is a market for old cnn gete they could turn to factual information that goes

where the facts lead without having to wonder if that is because this reporter or this new cigna station -- this news organization wants me to say something. host: let's hear from wisconsin, republican line. are on.you inler: i got a degree journalism in 1985 and back then it was a given that you were neutral and nonbiased. somehow, i'm not sure what pointed, at some journalists got to believe that their mission in life and their sacred job is to be a citizens advocate and inform the people on the viewpoint they may truly believe is in the best interest

of the people. it is kind of social engineering. sicke gotten physically over the horrible bias in journalism in the past few months. if you what's to be truly concerned and scared, turned back and forth between fox news and msnbc. they are like alternate realities. the true reality is somewhere in the middle, probably. i heard someone say over the past six months or so that people need to do their own research. no. the true free press, people who work full-time and have children and are busy should be able to turn into national news and get a halfts and only spent hour a day getting the facts.

i need to bring up the fact that it is hard to find it. the bbc is not as horribly highest -- highest. ed.bias journalists started a show called "news nation" out of chicago from 7:00 to 10:00 every night. every hour they do some repetition. valance, notre " "balance, not bias." your concerne about what has happened with journalism. i say the same thing that people have to do their own research but people probably think that is what you are therefore. there -- there for.

some people don't have time to watch full of its and their own events i do watch full in their own conch -- watch full their own context like i do. i tell everybody, when you see , it has allported these sources and using the same language, maybe it is true but maybe it is out of context or maybe it is not true. all three of those things are equally as possible. the best question to ask when you see something reported is who wants me to believe that at why? sometimes that leads to the more -- whynt story and it is stories have turned out so

different than what we have --? --t: guest: i think there are some good things that fill the gap because journalists have not done their job in some respects on some topics. yep citizen journalists stepping in more often than not. these are often partisan journalists. you're getting information which is good. but if you think it is slanted or bad on the regular news, you can imagine when there are people who have no pretense of a journalism mission, they are there just to get whatever information they want, they have no obligation to be neutral or fair. you are getting news that you have to set yourself, am i getting the whole story? am i getting something i have to discount because it came from left or right? i think citizen journalism has become important.

i think like everything else, it comes with a bit of peril because of this information landscape where people don't quite know what side something is coming from or they are not sure if they're getting an opinion or fact. they don't necessarily believe what they see. host: this is carol from baltimore. hi, thanks to c-span. i would like to challenge your thought that censorship and narratives just started. the 1968lashed back to mme was speakingr and it was cut away from her because the media did not want to see her talking on tv. from an african-american perspective, the narrative has always been biased. another thing is that they

always talk about trump because he treats ad nauseam. i would like to go. . a day without a tweet they have to report on it because he is president. finally, the black lives matter, i would like to get your thoughts on how that was presented. african-americans were saying let us get a chance to celebrate us. , but in thesting immediate it is rioting. to defund they want the police, that is not what we were saying. i would like to get your perspective on how that is covered. guest: two things i would like to address, you are right. the shaping of news has always been there. and i didn't mean to imply that it is no -- it is new because i know this is true. there is always an element of us deciding as news organizations what people do and don't see.

most news was not reported. we got to choose or took it upon ourselves to save this is what the public needs to see, this is what they don't get to see. plenty narratives and examples of that. i think it has gone to a new level. i described why i think it is different now in the books. as part of black lives matter, i think you are right, there was missing a lot of nuance. i am not an expert in this, but there was violence and riots and there were very legitimate movements of people peacefully protesting and trying to draw attention to certain things. you either got one or the other. they were blended together. half people saying this was a violent movement, it was legitimate and born. of certain bad things. the other half saying there was

no such thing, it was all made up and it was something different entirely. nuance is lost when one side or the other is trying to pursue a particular narrative. all the information is contrary to whatever narrative you're trying to present, it gets put down the memory hole. it is like you are using ash doing a one-sided debate and you are only using the evidence for your own side instead of giving a full rounded view of what is going on. host: from pennsylvania, republican line. anthony, hello. would caller: -- i would like to think c-span for having sharyl attkisson on. i think what she's doing is so necessary. the last four years was nothing but narrative. narrative has become fact for some people. they don't distinguish between what they're getting pushed to the fact.

that scares me and scares the hell out of a lot of people. what we have to do is figure out how to decouple that from a political cause. i am a news junkie, i love c-span. c-span is very good at trying to keep some balance. the other channels do not. how do we decouple cnn and msnbc? how do we decouple them from being a propaganda arm from a political party? thank you. guest: even though i am not an expert analyst and can't tilde future, i don't see these news to whattions going back people saw them as they once were. these interests are talk about the tap become entrenched in interests i am talking about that have become

entrenched in news, this happened years ago. i think it is more obvious in the past couple of years. i think the solution lies in different platforms where they can be neutral or telefax that are often or to -- foretell -- orthat are mutual facts that are mutual document nuetral.that are person inhigh-ranking a news organization seeing because of the fear of these organized backlashes on social media or being canceled or being he is thed, he said news man and wants to tell the truth but the businessman tells me to pull the punches.

what platform what i have put a story out and got the part formed? platformed. i think people are treating platforms that are unfettered from these interests like they used to. there are investors that are looking not so much to make where theylooking at can invest money in this kind of platform where news reporting can be done the old-fashioned way. there are journalists looking to do this. there are groups of people working on the problem. i think it will come up with something in the next four years. it is difficult in the meantime figuring out where to get information. host: if you are from twitter says "what you seem to be telling me is that a journalist's responsibility is to report the narrative from each site -- feet side -- each

side." -- each side?" guest: sometimes you watch a cable channel or read an article and they will say this side says this and this side says that. you are getting the political talking points from each party, something they used to have to convince us to publish and we wouldn't. we learned in journalism school when people give you a press release of their talking points, that. is what they want you to know. it may be -- talking points, that is what they want you to know. your job is to find out if it is newsworthy, what the real facts are behind it. this is something i watched happen at cbs, we used to not report the government's line on something. we might attribute the government and then give context to it with the other side or

find out parts of it are true. then it got to be a point where you a dish -- where we would just report something as fact because a corporation set it --said it with no journalism applied. away -- i saw that drift into the system we have now. i think that is troubling. i think it is no better to give talking points on both side. catherine from san antonio, texas on a republican line. caller: thank you for what you do and also for your courage. i think what you have done in spite of what has happened to you personally and even standing and thest rosenstein things you have done is impressive.

when you say there are don't even see it as narrative i see it as indoctrination. even what happened in the recent past with trying to convince the general public that our president is a russian asset and there are people out there that still believe that is true. it seems almost criminal what our media is able to propagate and get away with and also what has recently happened with the election. if you are a journalist but does work for corporate media and you againsto say something their agenda, they will fire you. in light of that, are there any new sources currently available, independent once you would recommend to people?

used to be a good example but now they have become -- they propagate opinions and narratives or trying to push an agenda. is there anything you would recommend in your professional opinion that people could go to? independent journalists or sources? host: thank you. guest: there discussion in the last chapter of "slanted" about that where i recommend news organizations. i say in this audit time, unfortunately it is up to you to find the reporters and the topics -- there may not be one place that reports all the topics that are fair and accurate but one reporter at a place that does. one of the most chilling things that has happened is that glenn

greenwald started this organization to make sure there was a news organization that was off the narrative. glenn greenwald has been a powerful voice on these things i am talking about. for people who don't know, he quit his own a news organization when they censored a story he had done about hunter biden. this is a left-leaning news organization he created to make sure the news could be published in an unfettered way and he had to leave himself. a great sourcend of information we talk about. i mentioned david martin. . i imagine some outlets in general.

ushink it is kind of up to to find their own outlets. i will give a plug for my sunday show, "full measure." most of what we do is not political, it is news the old-fashioned way. i go around the world and cover stories that impact us in a way that people were perhaps seeing years ago. we are not forcing viewpoints done or throat, we are hearing from all kind of people. host: in today's "new york times" there is an op-ed. she starts pressing this "i'm guilty of violating the espionage act. if charged and convicted, i could spend the rest of my life in prison. the u.s. government is prosecuting a publisher under the espionage act. it could set a precedent that would put me and other

journalists in danger. alongside the guardian and the washington post, we reported on a classified document from the national security agency provided by edward snowden. are you familiar with the espionage act being applied in this matter? guest: no, but i know there are attempts to prosecute for the snowden case and i have some thoughts on that. edward snowden presented important information regardless of how he is viewed. he is an example i wrote about in the second book. as anhed in real time important national security matter of what the nsa was doing to americans. i watched as we started covering that story. then as powerful interests that it did not want us looking their through a shiny ball in another direction and we started playing

"where is waldo." we said is he going to cuba, is he going to rush her, he's going to leave -- is he going to russia, he is going to be at such and such time. we were convinced to forget about covering the content of what he exposed. i saw the same thing happened with julian assange. up andted being wrapped led by the nose as news organizations to cover only part of the story about the personality being discredited. there is something to look at there, but we can do more than one thing at once. don't forget about the material being put out there that i think deserves screwed -- deserve scrutiny. host: from virginia, democrats line. caller: i love to watch your show on sunday nights.

i found it one night after the news. watched your last show where you were talking about your book and talking about these putting forth personal opinions. you showed clips where they said donald trump said this and that, you showed what he really had said. they're trying to shut different be justts up rather you whether you are democrat or republican. i think -- whether you are democrat or republican. i think everyone should have their say. another thing i would like to hear you talk about is i have seen the show on the vaccine court. most people don't probably

realize we have a vaccine court and i would love to hear more on it and i think people would be surprised to know that taxpayers are footing the bill for these lawsuits. i would like to see you do more that are going out to different things -- money that is being wasted. guest: those are all areas of interest i have and i will continue to be on them. some of the stuff you're talking about, if you go to my website there are tabs that talk about the fall the money stories you talk about. there is a health and medical to that talks about faxing court, vaccine stories -- vaccine court, vaccine stories. i agree there is too much of some kinds of reporting and not enough of another.

there was a book written by alberto martinez who was a bernie sanders supporter. it is best as an analytical thinker, he wrote a book about how much additive context reporting on donald trump was. -- howmuch reporting much out of context reporting on donald trump was. his argument is that he is not a trump fan but that trump was bad enough in his own right without the media having to make up stories about him which undermines the media's credibility on other topics. people see that they are in an unfair way. you undermined yourself on the reporting you're going to do when people see a slit in your reporting. they may not believe the next thing you are reporting.

it is everybody -- the next thing you are reporting. report use that may vary with your own if you have a strongly held view or go out and find information to the extent that it is contrary to the narrative you fought. that is a beautiful thing from the standpoint of covering a story. you find a more interesting story if you follow the truths of the facts. you write about the coverage of the president and the application of what a lie is. thing anda specific requires a reporter to claim to know the mind of the person who is supposedly lying. when someone gives contradictory information, it could be for other reasons. it is not the place of a journalist to know what is in a person's mind. there are few places where it is

appropriate for a journalist to claim that a person lied." guest: this thing of calling donald trump a liar is a new thing. when the new york times did it on a headline, the rest of the press followed suit. is a quote who said this wonderful thing, the end of objectivity in journalism. it would be like going to a doctor and him saying don't worry about diet and exercise. objectivity and neutrality are fundamentals of good journalism but they work abandoned in the era of trump. i think the worse of the you -- i think the use of the word --lies" -- i point to

she hillary clinton said was shot at in osmium. -- in bosnia. i was with her on that trip and we were not shot. i did not call her a liar because i don't know if she forgot or had something in her mind. the public hears that and then they start to think you have an ax to grind. it is not necessary. --y're perfectly drawing they're perfectly capable of drawing that conclusion if you say such and such happened, this document confirms it. let them draw their own conclusions. we don't have to push something

down their foot that shifts our own -- down their throat ships out on credibility. host: michael, good morning. ronald reagan got rid of the fairness doctrine. when a reporter reports untruths, you can go on air and rebut what is set. -- what is said. -- if waltercrete reported there was a car wreck, there was a car wreck, end of story. let's start left-wing and right-wing propaganda news. guest: i don't know about the fairness doctrine and as a journalist we never talked about it with me as a reporter.

i think it is going to have to come from within. the government benefits from one-sided reporting. for them to get involved and dictate how to fix it i'm not sure is the answer. very little good comes from other vested interest who have donors and people they work for, ultimately. i think that is not the solution. i think it has to come from the marketplace and within. people talk about removing certain liability protections from the social media companies. i worry removing liability protections would give them more incentive to censor more because they say now we can be sued for these things that people say that are untrue. we have to censor more. the true answer would be for them to step back and saying we don't censor anything except that which is legal.

you have -- which is illegal. you have the tools to block people and interpret what you see online. now they have gone down a slippery slope and they have taken the view it is. their job. host: -- it is their job. host: with three books now, is there anything you're looking forward to in regards to what changes in media reporting? guest: i can't imagine i will stop thinking about this topic and writing books. i'm sure there will be more developments in the next four years. ost: her latest work is "slanted: how the news media taught us to love censorship and hate journalism." -- cheryl atkinson, -- sharyl attkisson, thank you for joining us. guest: thank you. salk willng up, peter

join us, the son of jonas salk. he was talk about the polio vaccine and parallels today with the covid vaccine. that is coming up podcastn to c-span's "the weekly." we are talking to a purdue university political scientist about congress' use of lame-duck sessions to tackle big-ticket legislation. find it where you get your podcasts. c-span for our continuing coverage of the transition of power as president-elect joe biden moves closer to the presidency. with the electoral college votes cast from states across the country, joint is on january 6 live at 1:00 p.m. eastern for the joint session of congress to

count the votes and declare the winner for president and vice president. finally, at noon on generate 20, the inauguration of the 46th president of the united states. our live coverage begins at 7:00 a.m. eastern. from the statehouse congress to the white house, watch it all live on c-span, c-span.org, or listen using the free c-span radio app. >> " washington journal" continues. host: joining us as dr. peter salk, president of the jonas salk legacy foundation, here to talk about the history of vaccines, concerning the polio vaccine and how it applies today. dr. salk, thanks so much for your time. guest: pleasure to be here. host: we are at a point with covid where we have two vaccines being rolled out and administrated. is there historical parallel from when the distribution of the polio vaccine took place? guest: it is a little bit separated in time.

in the polio days, things took a lot longer in terms of vaccine preparation. at theer and his team university of pittsburgh started work on the subject of polio in 1948 to determine how many different types of poliovirus there were come along with others, and then working in earnest on the vaccine starting in about 1950, 1951. first test in children, 19 52. expanding trials in early 1954. that a major 1.8 million schoolchildren national field trial to determine definitively that the vaccine worked, did not work, is it safe, and extended process. there was a second vaccine in the works, as well. bywas being investigated alberto sagan, and he had a different idea for my father. my father was working with a kyl virus vaccine, so the virus was dead, would not be able to cause infection.

sabin believed to produce protective immunity, they needed to use a live but weakened vaccine. it was two approaches, the first vaccine was shown to be safe, effective, and potent, and it was licensed the same evening, april 12, 1950 five, when the results were announced. about six years later, the other vaccine was introduced in the united states at a time where the first vaccine, having been introduced and rolled out had reduced the incidence of polio in this country by around 97%. so it is a complex story. but yes, there certainly is a precedent for having more than one vaccine, and that story is ongoing today in terms of polio and the potential to eradicate polio around the globe. now we're seeing this whole

thing so compressed, which is unbelievable. the technology that is now available, not just two , butaches, live versus kyl using the genetic material of havingus, rna, dna, or genetic material put into a different kind of virus, like a common cold virus or a measles virus, a measles vaccine virus, that will not be harmful but that will direct the body to produce a protective immune response, hopefully, against the virus. then there is purified proteins and so on. just an extraordinary array of possibilities for us all having been compressed into less than a year at this point from when the virus was first discovered and the sequence was first determined. host: there was the multiyear process for your father's work, and you talked about the shortened timeline for the current work with covid-19 what

are your concerns about safety? guest: one always has to keep an eye out for safety. i was probably one of the more concerned people and things started going so quickly. i wanted to be sure that corners were not cut, that adequate animal research had been done in a preliminary fashion, and of course that all safety measures were being followed in the studies underway, knowing that there had been times in the past vaccines have surprised us and turned up with side effects or main effects different than what was imagined. so we absolutely have to be careful all along the way. so i was a little bit concerned because there was whatever political factors and so on and so forth taking place, as well as the absolute need to have a vaccine as soon as possible. but i have been watching the results came out from the two rna vaccines, pfizer and moderna. they are absolutely extraordinary. to have vaccines show that the

agree of effectiveness, around 95%, that just blew me away. i had not been anticipating that things would look as good as that. in the side effect spectrum seems to me to be perfectly reasonable, a sore arm after the second shot, maybe fever, not feel so good, and so on. that is really something i think is tolerable. you have to always be concerned about people who may have the tendency toward a severe election -- allergic reaction to something, so one has to be careful. now that the vaccines are rolling out in larger numbers of people, keeping a very careful eye to see if there is anything that happens less frequently that was not anticipated. host: our guest until 10:00, if you want to ask his thoughts on the grid vaccine being distributed, especially in light of his father's work, you could do so on the lines. (202) 748-8000 for the east and central time zones. (202) 748-8001, mountain and

pacific time zones. again, dr. peter salk joining us, president of the jonas salk legacy foundation. from what i am hearing you saying, at the current stage, doctor, you would take the vaccine yourself? guest: absolutely, no question about it. host: did your father have to do a lot of work alongside the federal government to convince people to take the polio vaccine? guest: the way things work back then, my father was actually trying to be very careful that while the vaccine was still in the research phase, public expectations were not raised unrealistically. because this was a disease -- coronavirus has been with us now on the order of a year, something new, and it has had a major impact. polio, crippling disease. it strikes primarily children, paralyzing. they could lose the ability to breathe, have to be in iron lungs, children could die. the epidemics were getting

stronger and stronger and stronger, larger and larger as time went on. level ofit reached a there being 58,000 cases of polio in this country. in that era, probably somewhere around 600,000 cases a year globally. this was something, particularly in this country, was absolutely on people's minds. parents were terrified. polio was not year-round, for the most part. people would have to avoid amusement parks, swimming pools, movie theaters, and so on in the summertime. not even in the early days did people know how polio was being spread. there was so much mystery involved in absolutely no cure. once you are paralyzed, there could be physical rehabilitation and so on, but you are stuck with what you had at that point. so people supported the idea of a vaccine. in fact, the government did not fund it.

there was no funding for this project. this whole project was undertaken by the national foundation for infantile paralysis, must, linda -- most commonly known as the march of dimes, the fundraising arm, and people contributed dime by dime, dollar by dollar, in movie theaters, on street corners. mothers would march on particular evenings and come to doorsteps. so it was the people of this country, knowing people in this country made for the success not only of the first vaccine but also the second one that i described. on a longi am going time, may have gotten off track. host: as far as building public confidence about it and the historical comparisons, when you see the vice president getting a vaccine, the president-elect getting a vaccine, are those good tools of building public confidence?

guest: absolutely. i think that is very important. my father, in his own right, when it came time to move from the very first, very small trials, starting with kids who already had polio as a safety measure, before he expanded his study into more children in the schools in the pittsburgh area, he and augie laid it -- inoculated his family once it was standardized. that was a demonstration of confidence and also a demonstration of his desire -- ok, time to get our children immunized. there was that famous picture of you yourself getting immunized by your father. do you recall that? instancerecall the before that. that was the second vaccination we got. that happened where the studies had been done. it was publicity set up, so to speak, for confidence. i was first injected two weeks

before that, and that happened in the kitchen of our home outside pittsburgh. i remember that very clearly. none of our family, me, my two younger brothers, like needles. it was an experience that we avoided as much as we could. so the prospect of having my father bring home the vaccine, sterilize the syringes and needles by boiling on the stove, lining us up to put a needle in our arm was not something we look forward to with big pleasure. and why that sticks in my mind so much, that morning, for some reason, very unusual, the needle must have missed a nerve, because i did not feel it. host: in the photograph, you are smiling, in fact. guest: i have absolutely no idea how that happened. host: let's take a call, starting with steve in charleston, south carolina. you are on with dr. peter salk. you andhey, pedro, hope your family are doing well. dr. salk, such a pleasure to talk to you. i am 73, so you know the era i

grew up in. i was in elementary school in the 1950's, and i remember standing in line to get that, and i did not smile. i have a good friend to this day, he did get the disease and still has a slight limp from it. for thethe question, gentle good of the public -- by the way, i will be first in line when i can get that vaccine, i do not mind a bit. but i know it is very controversial. should the vaccine be mandatory? i do not think i had a say-so back when i was a kid standing in line. i think thatow, there are a couple different phases. let's deal with the coronavirus vaccine now. we are in a phase where there is not going to be enough supply to vaccinate everyone. it will be continue to be rolled out 1, 2, three, however many

come along, in stages. so people who want a vaccine they are in -- if the right group, high-priority, and so on, they will be able to take advantage of that. people who do not want the vaccine or are frightened of it and are trying to make up their minds, this is an opportunity to sit back, watch, and wait. what i anticipate is that what happened in the polio days will happen again today. mainly, a year before the gallup came out, 1954, a poll showed half the people in the country were wary about taking advantage of the vaccine, but then it became clear over time that the vaccine was effective and safe, was changing the course of history in terms of polio in this country, allowing parents to relax. people lined up. i think that that is going to happen again. there will be a point, i am sure -- i would be surprised if there is not a point, when the vaccine

is shown to be effective, where it is making a difference in the entire society, when enough people are immunized, that will create a so-called herd effect, an effective community protection, community immunity, so to speak, where even people who have not been vaccinated will benefit from a reduction in the exposure to the virus. but i would anticipate that there will come a time when the vaccine has been so clearly effective and people are going to begin to have to face the will be that there situations, may be situations where the vaccine will become mandatory, such as for school entry or certain businesses or health workers. i do not know the details. that is something that will have to be evaluated on the road. that is going to be quite some time in coming. host: mary is from florida, go ahead. caller: good morning.

first, thank you to "washington journal" for this particular and being able to say thank you to his dad. i am so grateful. i will say thank you to you. 1954, and whenn i heard the news about the vaccine, i sat down and cried. gratitude imagine the as i had my babies. i was so thankful. and thank you for supporting the covid vaccine in your discussion. i live in a retirement community, about 800 of us, more or less, give or take, and hopefully we will all be cooperative. i mean, we are all over 70 and all have comorbid conditions.

i do not know when we will all qualify, although we do have a nursing home and assisted living, so i am sure they are first in line. but i will be right there in the first line they let me stand in. again, thank you, sir. and thank you for that big smile. have a good -- host: go ahead, your response. guest: thank you, mary. i really appreciate hearing what you had to say. yes, i think it will be wonderful when the vaccine is available to those of you in your retirement community, the nursing home there, and when it is available for all of us, that is going to be such a relief to the entire country and as it spreads to the entire world. host: dr. salk, the cdc has a distribution schedule they have put out. what do you think about the schedule? and when the vaccine was

distributed in the 1950's, was there a limited demand, does that mean an onslaught of people were lining up for the vaccine? guest: initially what happened was the national foundation for infant paralysis, march of dimes, had done what operation warp speed had done any sense. they purchased 27 million doses of the vaccine even before the trial results were available just in case, indeed, the vaccine proved to be effective in that large-scale field trial. then they could immediately inoculate all the kids who received placebo in that trial and then be able to begin to open things up further. the federal government had not taken any significant action back then, and there was greater demand than there was supply initially. two manufacturers were making vaccines for the field trial and then another three coming on,

and some complications there. but i think what has happened now -- i am pleased the government stepped in the way it ability oflitate the these companies to manufacture without the again, assurance that they would be able to continue if results were not successful, but they were, so we are in a position where the vaccine is available to begin to roll out. it would be nice if it could go faster than it is at the moment. but we're just faced with the reality, it just is going to take time for there to be enough supply to reach everybody who wants and needs a vaccine. host: jerry in cleveland, ohio, you are on. caller: good. given then is, previous vaccines and issues in

the afro-american community, dotor, in your opinion, what you think needs to happen to build trust concerning this current vaccine? guest: there is no question -- keep going. ,aller: i am a father of six and i am concerned. you know, i do not have enough data to know if this is a good thing for me to do or not. so a lot of my friends, we are concerned because of previous things that were done. i would like to know what, in your opinion, needs to happen to build trust concerning persons of color? guest: yeah, i really understand what you are saying. there certainly has been a long history they can make a person feel that, can they will have trust in what the government is doing and what the medical establishment is doing and so on ? i do think this is a situation where the reality is, as i perceive it, this is a safe process, a necessary one, and

something that will make an enormous difference in your life if you are vaccinated and the lives of your people in your family and your community. but what is important now is -- again, to your question, how to build trust within your community. i think it is just, you know, i will put it bluntly, cannot be a bunch of white people walking in with either medical degrees or government credentials or so on and talk to you and the others in your community and try and convince you or twist your arm. i do not think that is going to work very well. i do think it will be helpful for you to keep your eye on how things are going and watch what is taking place, and i believe you are going to see -- ok, this is working, this is going to be something for me. more people within your community, trusted people, who can evaluate carefully, who

can ask questions, and then communicate with others, with you and others in your community, people whom you trust, that i think is going to be a really important thing in order for people to begin to let down their guard, understandably , to let down their guard and began to come on board. host: on this program last month, we had the opportunity to talk with the house majority whip, and one of the things we talked about was his own expense with getting the polio vaccine. we will let you listen to what he has to say and then get your response. [video clip] >> i was run for the polio vaccine. looks like we are going to have two this time. we had two polio vaccines. but there is a marked difference between the two. the salk vaccine went into the arm, and the other was a drop of serum in a lump of sugar. guess which community got the shot in the arm. i still got the scar. guess which one got the lump of

sugar. we are looking for not just efficiency and effectiveness in the distribution of this vaccine, we are also looking for equity. so we are going to be looking to make sure that everybody is treated fairly. [end of video clip] host: dr. salk, anything to add? guest: absolutely. first of all, absolutely right, there needs to be equity in distribution of the vaccine. and there needs to be a lot of attention put on discussions with people in various communities of color, with people who really understand the process of getting vaccines out. so a lot of attention has been put on that. i have to correct representative clyburn in one thing. my perception, the difference between getting an injection and getting a sugar cube, that did not have to do with what community he belonged to. in the first six years, seven years, all that was available was the injection. then the sugar cube vaccine came along, and i have to say, from a

child's point of view, i sure would have preferred that because i did not like injections. it is a complicated business. there are some side effects with the sugar cube vaccine, the oral vaccine. i will not go into that right now. but it is a bit complex. my perception is there was not ,ny selection that, oh, ok this community will get the shots because, well, you know, or whatever other community will get the sugar cube because it is better or something. that is not the issue. in fact, i think that the injected vaccine, my personal view, was the preferred vaccine at that point. 2000, because of complications of the oral vaccine, it has only been the injected vaccine used today in this country. representative, i hope you feel assured that you did not get the short end of the stick.

host: was there any animosity between you and your father about the development of vaccines? guest: they saw things differently. they were different personalities. my father tended to be very gentle in his communications. dr. sabin had a different style. they disagreed markedly on what would be best in terms of vaccines. this debate, so to speak, still goes on today. there is a global effort to eradicate polio globally. i already mentioned that before vaccines, there were around 600,000 cases of polio globally. with the global eradication program that started officially is now downt number -- depends on how you look at it, and there are complications about that, but it is down into the hundreds of cases globally each year. still some controversy about the

safety of the oral vaccine. there is some controversy about the injected vaccine. will it produce as much protection against the virus spreading from person to person? and there are some new vaccines coming along. it,when it comes down to the real issue in getting rid of polio in the world today, it only partly has to do with the vaccines themselves and the science behind it. it also has to do with the human factors. we have the original wild circulating poliovirus in only two countries in the world, afghanistan and pakistan. along the way and still through today, what is at issue here is why, in those two countries, is in the vaccine getting out to all the children? you have suspicions, political differences, cultural differences, religious differences. it is on a senior-level peer that is why, even in our country

today with coronavirus, we have to be sensitive to the human issues and make sure that everyone feels comfortable, feels onboard, and that we come together as a community, as a single community of people in this country, to get this job done, to get this virus behind us. host: barry in michigan for dr. peter salk. caller: good morning. i would like to thank your family. 1950's, my brother was born with a disease, and the march of dimes jumped right on it. they followed him up for years. it is just a wonderful organization. i remember as a kid, fond memories of running around the neighborhood collecting dimes, and we used to get jokes so big, we cannot even carry them home. and it was just wonderful.

they followed his progress for years, even after he really did not need their help that much anymore. they just followed him for years. now, and hers old has an occasional problem but has been able to live a normal life. and my mother always said that the march of dimes was just as important as the vaccine. so thank you very much. host: dr. salk, any remarks? sayt: first of all, just to that the last couple of people who have asked questions, touching on my own past, was born in michigan when my father and myking in ann arbor, wife was born in cleveland, spent a lot of time there. i apologize, i just wanted to add that little coloring. host: there is a headline this morning that asks a question about of people who got covid should defer a vaccine.

any thoughts on that? personally, i think if someone has covid, there is not a point in being vaccinated at that point. appropriatessary is treatment and management. theres i could be wrong, might be some circumstances where the immune system could use some boosting. but my gut feeling is that that addinga situation where a vaccination is going to do any good if you already are infected with the virus. there may be people who disagree, but that is my own personal view. host: and if you are off of twitter is asking about the process, asking if the syringe should be aspirated before injecting, saying i have noticed many nurses are not aspirating. guest: ok, that is a good question. and the issue here is the injections are being

,dministered intramuscularly and what you want to avoid is accidentally getting into a blood vessel and injecting the vaccine into a blood vessel so it goes intravenously rather than staying in the muscle. i am a physician and cannot remember an occasion, personally, were administering an injection has resulted in an intravenous administration. the blood vessels in your muscles are pretty small. yes, it is a habit to ask -- to aspirate the needle. that means to take the little plunger on the syringe and pullback to make sure blood does not come back into the syringe, indicating that you are in a blood vessel. i would not get very upset about this, frankly. inin, maybe people will call with more training and have strong opinions to the contrary,

but i would say if you get an injection and they do not aspirate the syringe, i really do not think you have much to worry about. host: we have another half hour with dr. peter salk. (202) 748-8000 for those of you in the eastern and central time zones. (202) 748-8001 if you live in the mountain and pacific time zones. nick in alexandria, virginia, you are next. caller: yes, hi. sounds like in the polio vaccine, it was a great thing, happened over a lot of testing, and it was a very devastating illness. it hitsd-19, you know, old people really hard, but for younger people, it has very little risk. guest: some risk, but keep going. caller: much less known, much less tested, and we do have therapeutics. there was a senate hearing i

heard on c-span maybe a week ago where doctors came on and talked about drugs that have decades worth of safety data, they did not talk as much about vitamin d, but that is also known to be very safe. now we have a lot more data about the efficacy of vitamin d and other things against this virus than we do for these vaccines at this point. and silence about those. while at the same time, we have governors shutting down economies across america, and why anyone would have confidence in this vaccine and in these people who are explicitly advocating for censorship, that goes against vaccines, why should we have confidence when we know that social media, we know these authorities are x views andny anti-va are focused, as your guest is

today, on convincing the public to accept this vaccine -- host: ok, we will let him answer the question. dr. salk, go ahead. guest: it is a complex statement which has many different factors to it, so it is hard to know which one to pick up on first. but there are treatments known to be effective with respect to coronavirus, to one extent or another, and those that have been fairly tested in appropriate controlled circumstances are ones that one can place some reliance on. i have not yet begun to read about one of them that you mentioned, but i would be interested to do that and learn about that. on a personal level, when this epidemic first came to our attention, they were early studies, small studies that had --do with hydroxychloroquine i was very frightened at the beginning, before the stay-at-home order in the

california had taken place, really not knowing where this was going to come from, would hospitals be overflowing. i really wanted to have some protection based on those early studies. i got some hydroxychloroquine to have on hand just as a safety protection measure. from the follow-up studies done on a larger scale, more controlled bases, it shows it is not really an effective means of treatment. but there are ways coming along that may not be available for everyone at this point that one can rely on. so that is one point that you raised. i am addressing that as a single one. let me go on to another one. first of all, i am not here to anything. i am sharing my own personal views, my own personal experience, and anyone who feels differently certainly welcome to disagree. my own experience has been that the hesitancy people have about

vaccines, some of it can be helped by having more of an understanding. you may feel that i am a pitch person. i do not feel i am representing anyone other than myself at this point. not representing the government, not representing pharmaceutical company, not try to push anything done anyone's throat. but i think that -- and this is such a very complex issue, there are things to be concerned about with the vaccines. witharly experience vaccines, some surprises took place in the vaccines that actually made matters worse decades ago and cannot be used for that purpose. i have seen it happen a few years ago with the dengue vaccine. these things -- the oral polio vaccine, etc. there are real issues with vaccines that have to be evaluated and taken care of appropriately.

know it will -- i probably arouse your ire by saying it this way, but there are also what i see as imaginary problems with vaccines, that are not supported by data, that cause people to be frightened and people who do not know a lot of the background may not have seen original footage and so on. so this is a complex issue where we do need to be careful, but we should not get thrown off by considerations that really do not hold water about vaccines and being against vaccines in general. i think we are throwing out the baby with the bathwater if we take that approach. host: when you say imaginary situations, such as what? guest: take autism, for example. there just is no evidence that i am aware of that link vaccinations without his him,

yet that is something that has scared people enormously. let me give you one example from early on. back when our child was about to be immunized for diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis vaccine, there were issues because the whooping cough component did cause some significant reactions and so on in kids, and we had to make a decision, would we get our child vaccinated or not, and i'm giving two angles here, and our decision was, you know, there might be side effects, we just could not take advantage of other people in society vaccinating their children and our not contributing to protecting society as a whole. but in those early days, there were concerns that some children who had received the pertussis-containing vaccine would then a short time after having vaccinated again to develop some neurological

syndromes that were very detrimental to their health. was thision was, caused by the vaccination? a long process took place. ultimately it became quite clear, no. vaccinations happen at a certain time in life, and there is a genetically-based syndrome which also happens around the same time. and there would be occasions when a kid gets a vaccine and, incidentally, no cause and effect relationship, will also begin to show symptoms of this genetic illness. those are just two examples of what i would consider to be an imaginary problem that is not actually related to any dangers of having to do with vaccinations. host: back to your father's work, there was something called the cutter incident. what was it, and what did issue about the vaccine at the time? situation.rrendous

during all of the preliminary work, my father and his team took great care to make sure that there would be reproducible ways of inactivating or killing the virus so that you would know that whatever you ended up with in a vaccine bottle was not going to have any live virus remaining. when that huge field trial took place, two manufactures completely vetted their process, the national foundation for infantile paralysis required them to be able to manufacture 11 consecutive batches of vaccines with no trace of any live virus present. when other manufacturers came on board, there was one, cutter, that ignore the fundamental principles my father had laid out. he could not give all the specifics of, ok, industrial, this is the size of the vats and

so on, the formula, follow this recipe. there was a principle involves, which was monitor the inactivation process along the way, and if that is a straight line, you are able to predict how long it will be before you do not have any live virus present, for all intents and purposes. cutter did not do that, and not only that, the government was supervising -- my father supervises laboratories, and when it came to the vaccine being released commercially, that was the government's responsibility to monitor, to have reporting from the pharmaceutical companies, to test for safety. cutter did not even report the failures. when they would make a batch that contained live virus, they threw it out and did not report it to the government, and when the vaccine was licensed for use, cutter, along with other

companies, shipped out the vaccine, and in less than two weeks, kids started coming down with polio who had been injected with the cutter vaccine that contained live virus because they did not follow the correct procedures and the government did not take it up in the testing process. the whole vaccination program was put on hold. the government retooled everything in terms of responsibility and how to monitor and the reporting and testing requirements. never happened again. it was a terrible tragedy. people were frightened. once the cause was known and it was taken care of, the vaccination program got back on track, and it has not been a problem since. host: gary in flint, michigan, go ahead. caller: hello, doctor. old,52, i was four years came down with polio, seemed to

be mainly children that were getting the disease. i was isolated in the community hospital in flint, michigan. and i can remember my folks i amt get near me, but having trouble remembering about the length of that fever that i had which eventually broke. about thecare i had injection of some sort and to my spinal column. if you could speak to that, i would appreciate it. know: you know, i do not exactly how long the fever tends to last and then the paralysis come on. these spinal: business, they probably -- the spinal column business, they probably did a lumbar puncture, spinal tap, to remove some of the fluid around the spinal cord and examine it

microscopically to determine whether or not this was polio that you had. paralysis and is there any residual? host: i am sorry, i already hung up on him. guest: that is ok. host: cheryl from houston, texas, go ahead. caller: hi, i was a child, born in 1944, and i grew up in houston, texas, which was a real hotspot for polio. it was so frightening, i remember my mother used to make my brother and i come in in the afternoons because getting out of the heat, you know, maybe would prevent polio. and there was a hospital built in the texas medical center for children with polio. it used to be called texas crippled children hospital, and now it is texas children's hospital. and we are grateful that the

vaccine for this pandemic has been developed. we are hard science people. my husband is a chemical engineer, my daughter a clinician at a hospital, medical center, and she was fortunate enough to get her first vaccination for covid yesterday at the hospital. friend from church who had polio. is that the official name, poliomyelitis? guest: correct. caller: she had polio as an infant, and now in her older age, she has developed something called post polio syndrome, which a lot of people do not talk about, but apparently if you had polio as a child, when you are older, you can develop some of the symptoms all over again. and she is actually back in a wheelchair because of it. so i am grateful to your father

and to all the medical researchers who worked on vaccinations. we are hard science people, and anybody can have a bad reaction to any medication. you can have a bad reaction to aspirin and get a syndrome. host: ok, thanks for all of that. we will let our guest respond. guest: i appreciate hearing those stories and post polio syndrome, it is a tragedy for people because they have gone through polio and recovered to whatever extent, gone through it, and could lead a very normal life, and then many years later they discover that their muscle function was deteriorating. probably what has happened there fromat the paralysis comes the polio virus damaging the nerves in the spinal cord that control the muscles, and what can happen is, after some of those nerves have been damaged, other nerves can grow in and can

re-innovate the muscles to control their activity. but then because they have had to work very hard, those nerves, over the course of life, they have taken on the job of many other nerves that have been killed, what happens -- this is my view of it -- what can happen is they can begin to wear out and get fatigued and not function as well as before, and that is when the symptoms of this post polio syndrome began to occur. host: we're hearing reports of a new covid-19 strain in the united kingdom. if that comes to the united states, will a new type of vaccine have to be developed? so,t: well, i do not think but this is all relatively new. let me step back a little bit to say that there was a mutation in the coronavirus relatively early on that has resulted in a strain that has become the predominant strain globally, and in that situation, it does not make any difference whether it was the very first strain or whether it

was this strain in which there was a single amino acid, so to speak, mutation, that strain would be completely susceptible, maybe even more susceptible, to the vaccine. with this new situation in the u.k., i do not yet know, do not have a good handle on what is at issue there. the reports i initially heard were that it was perhaps something like 70% to 100% more able to spread among people than the original strain of the virus. i thinkseven times -- that probably was not accurate. and whether or not that new strain will be susceptible, that may be known, but i have not caught up on my reading it enough to determine that. if it were to turn out that the oflet's take another example influenza. influenza is a virus where mutations are occurring all the time, and people are familiar

with getting a seasonal flu shot because from one year to the next, the virus changes and immunity against the previous strain will not protect against the new strain that is circulating. so far, there has not been that indication with this coronavirus. i hope that that will continue to be the case. whether something comes along that will require a reconfiguration of the vaccine, i do not know. i hope not. i am not fully informed on this yet, but i am going to be keeping my on on it -- keeping my eye on it. host: from california, we hear from ron. caller: dr. salk, thank you for your time. in 1946, i came down with polio. i was taken to the hospital, had and myrature of 105, mother set by my side until i was at a critical point, and then the doctor said i would either die the next day or be a life. well, i guess i made it, and it

is because of my mother's prayers. second thing, i had a salk vaccine in about 1948, and then i got a sabin vaccine i think in 1950. there is a difference between bulbar polio and poliomyelitis. it is a mutation. i never would understand the difference between the two, but i think it relates to the current situation with the coronavirus. to,ent from corona 19 what, 50, 100? i do not know the numbers. but any information would be helpful. isst: covid-19 means it was covered in first came out in 2019, so that is a number that will stick with this virus, at least at this point. in terms of bulbar polio, it is not a mutation, not a different kind of virus. there are three different types

of poliovirus that can cause paralysis. means that instead of the infection killing the nerves in the spinal cord which result in paralysis in your arms or your legs or what have you, that the damages done higher up in the brainstem, the bulbar region in the brainstem. it is just the virus attacking the nervous system in a different place, and bulbar more is far significant and severe in terms of the effects on breathing and so on. with mutations taking place, there is a question as to whether this u.k. mutation is allowing the virus to spread more easily, so that is one characteristic. it has to do with its ability to infect and go from one person to another, how easily it will in fact an individual. the ability to be protected by a vaccine, that is a different

thing. because how the virus behaves in terms of its infectiousness is one thing, what the particular chemical -- chemicals are and the shape of those chemicals on the surface of the virus, that is what is important in terms of protection by the immune system. so it is an issue of, has there been a change in the particular spike protein, the main target of the immune system, has that spike protein on the mutant virus changed so that the vaccine against the original spike protein shape will produce antibodies but no longer recognize this different shape on the coronavirus? maybe that is known about this mutated strain. i am not aware of it. two different issues, how the virus behaves in infectiousness, the kind of syndrome it may cause, and its ability to be sensitive to an immune response. host: about 10 more minutes with

our guest. rodney in california, hello. caller: good morning. thank you for being on. when he first came on, you mention polio and i changed the channel and then changed back. c-span is a very clean channel they do not have a slant to the left or right. i am 55, a diabetic. thee i can remember, i took sugar cube, the tetanus shot, basil shot, been taking them for years on a regular basis. being diabetic, had a couple infections, and i believe the tetanus shot gave me -- i had a .inger and a toe amputated that infection was eating away at me, and thank god for the tetanus shot, which saved me. hydra clockmention sick when -- the drug, and i

believe in the science, you guys have been working for years and there is operation warp speed that come together with a vaccine, which i will be taking because i believe in the scientists. i say thank you. and i just wanted to share because i love c-span and watch it every morning. i am retired. i would never do that foolishness again. thank god the tetanus shot saved me when i had my infection. i believe that is why i have not caught the measles or anything else, because i always take the vaccine. and i wish everybody else will when it is ok for the general public to take it. host: thank you, rodney. any response? guest: one. having to do with medications and so on -- one thought to do with medications. any ideas from small studies, observations, suggesting hydroxychloroquine might be an

effective agent, then you have to move into larger scale studies to evaluate that carefully. sometimes it turns out, whoa, that is right, this is a blockbuster medication that will really make a difference because we have tested it thoroughly after initial indications. or it may turn out, you know what, it looked good early on, but when you look at it carefully, it is not holding up to snuff. so have that in mind that they're are all sorts of things. maybe it will turn out to be something effective or maybe it will not you have to wait for proper studies. host: charlie in jackson, mississippi. caller: yes, my experience with polio started when i was about four years old, and they had a special polio hospital in vicksburg, mississippi, that was ran by the nuns. when i turned 18, i was paralyzed.

i remember the whole incident but do not have time to talk about the details. eight,aralyzed for about nine months, maybe a year. but when i started elementary braces andas in stuff. i worked my way through that. but when i was 18, i went in the military. they took me with no notice. and ied 21 in vietnam, played sports and everything. guest: fantastic. caller: and my age of 73 now, i am having all kinds of physical problems. all kind. we do not have time to describe the physical problems i'm having now. and my grandmother always did tell me, don't smoke, don't smoke, but i didn't smoke cigarettes.

i went in the army, and if you did not smoke, you smoked anyway in the 1960's. you know what i'm saying? host: i will see if the doctor has anything to respond to that. the experience of having deterioration after -- it is fantastic that you lived the life that you did and you had the ability to do what you did with sports and so on. i am really sorry that this is coming on now with greater age, this deterioration in function. there are more differ things that will come along that will be helpful for that. at the moment, i just wish you the best in terms of hanging in with it. people who had polio a really strong people. they have had to deal with diversity, and i really hope that strength will continue to carry you through today. host: carl is from st. louis, missouri. good morning. caller: good morning. i am a retired city planner and

getting interested in national planning. i was wondering if the doctor, with his experience with polio, would he recommend that the current commander-in-chief declare world war iii on coronavirus? for the nation, implore that the seas or whatever -- embassies or whatever, could that help with distribution? guest: i think it is really important for those at the top of the government to serve as examples for the people, to be wearing masks. it is so important at this point for us. this is not an issue of my personal freedom, i do not want to wear a mask, the government is trying to force me. it is not it at all.

wearing a mask not only is protecting you, but it is protecting other people in your family, in your community. even with the vaccine being introduced at this point, we have got to keep our guard up. so from the top down, it is really imported that examples be set for how people should respond in order to keep themselves, their families, their community, their country healthy. and we are one nation in a large world. this virus respects no boundaries. it will travel everywhere. and until and unless every country is protected, we're not going to be rid of this threat working in the background. so it is really important to cooperate internationally on helping to get vaccines out to all countries in the world. host: with your experience in distribution, we have heard the incoming president-elect joe biden say that in the first 100 days of his administration, he wants to see 100,000 vaccinations given.

is that feasible? guest: wait, one hundred thousand vaccinations? host: would that be feasible? guest: sounds like it to me, if the supplies are still available. we are going to go through these initial supplies rather quickly before more come into the pipeline. i do not have a handle on the exact numbers, but the spirit is good. we should continue as best we can to get this vaccine to all people who really need it and want. we all need it and want it. in terms of frontline medical workers, essential workers in the population, people in nursing homes, the elderly who are most susceptible, we have just got to keep this thing moving to the point where we're going to come out the other end with everybody being protected and leave the fires behind us. host: so going forward, what are you watching for as vaccinations go out, as they are given? what are you looking for

medically and scientifically? guest: it is going to be important to see what happens to the curve. and what we are seeing -- unfortunately, i do not know if it will be correct for the people in the audience, but in this country, we had a first wave, had a first wave, and anor wave, and we are going through the roof at this point. we had parts of this country where the intensive care units are maxed out. to continue on that trajectory. , we do not curve know how that is going to play out over time. , weaccinations rollout could see some effect. it is going to take time. an example, if you have enough people immunized, the virus will stop spreading. of thehave 90 5% population immunized, it will

stop spending entirely. -- spreading entirely. we do not know what the level is going to need to be for coronavirus, but as many people as possible come on board, the better off we will be. host: we have been talking to , son ofr. peter sock jonah saulk. thank you for your time today. guest: you're welcome, thank you. host: coming up, we take you to an event dealing with vaccinations. that will kickoff the nh -- the nih's vaccination efforts. you will hear from hhs secretary , and dr. anthony fauci. that is it for our program. another edition of washington

journal starts tomorrow. we take you to that event. [no audio]

[no audio]

[no audio] announcer: this morning, alex azar, anthony fauci and dr. francis collins will be receiving the moderna covid-19 vaccine which was recently approved. live coverage from nih headquarters in bethesda, maryland is expected to begin shortly.