land: the untold story of the middle-class." and at 9:00 a.m., biographer and presidential historian craig shirley on president trump's legacy and the future of the republican party. ♪ morning.d it is "washington journal" for christmas eve. you have heard about those being prioritized to receive a covid-19 vaccine, first responders. what do you think of politicians being among that group to be protected? several members of capitol hill have made the case for and against getting the vaccine, and we want to hear from you if they should be at the front of the line. here is how you can reach out to wes, (202) 748-8001, republicans, (202) 748-8000, democrats, and (202) 748-8002 four independents.

if you want to text us, you can do so at (202) 748-8003 or tweet or post on our facebook page at facebook.com/c-span. with politicians getting the vaccine on video and other means, twitter is a place where some members of congress are doing that same thing. presley of massachusetts saying -- today i received my first dose of the covid-19 vaccine as part of the continuity of government plan. i am feeling well. i encourage everyone to take the to take thertunity first let's receive the vaccine in the weeks and months to come. marco rubio, i know i looked away from the needle but i am so glad the covid-19 vaccine is safe and affected that i decide

to take it myself. this prompted reaction from senator rand paul who said, i was asked about getting a vaccine. it is inappropriate for me who has already gotten the virus and has immunity to get it in front of elderly/health-care workers. same goes for aoc or any young healthy person. they should be among last, not first. she said, maybe if the gop had not spent such time undermining public faith in science, masks, and covid itself, i wouldn't have to weigh the potential miss info consequences of what would happen if leaders urged people to take a new vaccine that we weren't taking ourselves. that is some of the twitter response. the continuity of government, it goes to the national security act of 1947. it is the policy of the united states to maintain comprehensive continuity programs to ensure

national security and the preservation of government structure on the united ace constitution, and in alignment with presidential policy directive 40, agencies including the executive office he must --lude the capability and regardless of the threat or condition and with understanding that adequate warning may not be available. the agency has a fully integrated preparedness program and ensure the preservation of this under all conditions. the legal terms from the national security act prompted a column by the washington post this ont -- who wrote the idea of congressional vaccinations -- the very folks who downplayed the virus, partied, and called the vaccine a hoax are getting the vaccine ahead of front line and

essential workers, and even the vulnerable residents in long-term care facilities. though you could make the argument that the capital is a the congress can largely order from every senior citizens menu, that is not what gets them the vaccine and not their vip status, another perk to go with the primo health care and schedules they experience while the country is a mess -- nation is a hot mess. here is how you can let us know your thoughts on this. (202) 748-8001, republicans. (202) 748-8000, democrats. independents, (202) 748-8002. you can text at (202) 748-8003 and post on facebook and twitter. as you are calling in to make those comments, couple of pieces

of news concerning the last 24 hours or so. highlighting the president vetoing the national defense bill which funds the defense department, which congress could override and plans to do, saying the president announced the legislation for not including language to strip social medias of the protections under the decency act, and the president announcing the bill to renew -- remove the names of confederate leaders. the president opposes renaming the bases. that will come back later this month and they plan to do that. the part that is being added to by the president, one recipient of the part was a family member, charles kushner, the father of son-in-law jared kushner, to others who were pardoned in trying to cooperate. , 20 16 campaign

chairman, roger stone, longtime advisor and friend were the most of 26ent names in a list pardons before he left for the holidays. the president was making comments concerning the covid relief bill, calling for increased dollar figures of $2000. topic in ato be the pro forma session at 9:00 to the house, which we will take you to once it gavels in, and take you back to the show once it gavels out. reuters saying democrats in the u.s. house to win quick passage of legislation providing $2000 in direct payments to americans as part of the coronavirus economic relief initiative. bidstakes in this longshot are enormous as millions of americans desperately await some sort of new assistance from washington. you will hear the speaker of the house make that charge and from the opposite, opposing views from the minority leader kevin

mccarthy expected to make comments. look for that at 9:00. to the idea of members of congress and politicians being the first ones up to get the vaccine, the covid-19 vaccine, inyour thoughts, amin temple, texas, democrats line, what do you think western mark caller: what i think about that as they should not only not be the first, they should be the last, the congress and the senate. they hadirst came out, a chance to prepare us for what was going on, but them and the president not telling us the truth, we have over 300,000 deaths right now, and the president, if he would have been impeached like he should have been, he wouldn't be in office now and we wouldn't have those deaths.

members ofe idea of congress being last, why absolute last? caller: they were the ones running around without masks on having these big gatherings and things, making the people that's here think everything is all right. here in texas, they just opened up a new resort in this resort has an inside water function. i passed by there three weeks ago and it was completely packed. kenneth in hear from columbus, georgia, next up. caller: how are you doing? host: i am fine, go ahead. caller: i believe congress should be first. i believe the first thing going on is that there is disarray in the country. the only way to get congress in the country is to lead by example.

unfortunately, our president is not leading by example because of the fact our congress or the senate, because they should not have left to go home until this package was assigned and everybody was taking care of -- was assigned and everybody was taken care of. until we can see a congress that we can see the senate and congress are taking the shots so there is no problem, they can put their arms around people to make sure that they feel like it is safe so we can go and get everybody the shots and they will feel comfortable about taking them. host: so the continuity of government, to make sure government performs even in light of a pandemic, that is an important thing to note in terms of congressmen and members of congress getting the shot first? caller: yes, absolutely. i think that that is important that we see that people who do take the shot, if you start with

people you never see anybody have any results on taking the shot, there is going to be a lot more people leery of taking the shots. ishink the best way to do it to make sure that everybody is comfortable and they are going in line to take the shots instead of so many people who are afraid to take the shots because of the fact of how fast it was produced. host: we will hear from karen in muncie, indiana, our line for democrats. hello. caller: hello. yes, i do have an opinion. i would say if they were doing their job, yes, they would be considered essential workers. but right now, no, put them at the end of the line. all they are interested in is

and who theycks can pardon. host: when it comes to members of congress, if they aren't doing their jobs, tell me how they are not doing their jobs at this point. caller: every time they almost get the bill signed, then there is -- for the relief -- then there is some other problem and they all go home. now they are probably going to go home for christmas, with the government waiting to be shut down, and the people, the starving -- i'm not, but there are starving people out there who are about to be booted out of their houses, and these politicians line up on tv and show how important it is to get shot. no. don't do it. host: karen in indiana giving us her thoughts.

ralph in jamestown, maryland, publican line. what do you think about pot visions -- republican line. what do you think about politicians getting the vaccine first? caller: i don't have any concerns with that. i am one of the nonessentials so i am way down the line. my only wish is that i would wish that the irs would consider me non-essential when it comes to paying taxes. host: why do you not have concerns about politicians being first? caller: it just simply doesn't bother me. go ahead, find, get their shots. -- fine, get their shots. host: that is ralph on the republican line. yes, they should, so the rest of people can have faith in the vaccine. indiana also facebook saying

absolutely not, especially not the ones who played down the pandemic, got sick, and had top-of-the-line health care. let them suffer. most of them are close to their 80's, so yes. greg from facebook saying it should be those essential workers first. that sure as hell isn't congress. can share yourou thoughts on facebook, twitter too, on whether congress people should be prioritized. kansas city, missouri. caller: i don't think they should be prioritized. i think they probably should wait at the bottom of the line to the lowliest of the homeless have been vaccinated. host: as far as the reason why, this idea of keeping government going and making sure there is a continuity of government argument that we have told you about, you think that is not a valid argument? caller: i don't believe it is a valid argument.

host: why not? caller: i don't think the down.ment has ever shut i don't think that shutting down the government would have any impact on our economy. host: we are talking about vaccines and if members should get them first. caller: i don't think they should be vaccinated until the lowliest of the homeless have been vaccinated. hill inis is from the recent days, representative omar, the democrat from minnesota breaking with other members of what is known as the squad by deciding not to get a coronavirus vaccine available to members, saying it was "shameful" that political figures got the vaccine because "importance." serious question, is seemingly

our entire top political leadership getting the vaccine ahead of others because of their age or their importance? if it makes -- it would make sense if it was age, but in fortunately it's unfortunate and shameful. we are not in front of frontline workers. people who need it the most should get it. those are her comments from recent days on this topic. we will go to jeff in waldorf, maryland. caller: i don't think they should get the vaccine first. one of the other things with them getting the vaccine first is look at the stimulus bill they passed. pppthe people who got the money for companies to stay open and keep their employees on the books, they are now going to get that tax break for getting free money. that is ludicrous. host: to the idea of why they

shouldn't get it first, expand on that. caller: because you didn't do nothing while this whole pandemic was going on. mitch mcconnell sat there and tried to block anything that came through the house and senate. basically, it doesn't make sense. why should we be rewarded for doing nothing? host: you saw the tweet from ayanna pressley of boston getting her vaccine. thetory follows up in " boston globe," saying representative presley wanted to boost confidence in the vaccine among black and brown communities whose trust in the health care system has been eroded over experiments. research andur medical institutions, our elected officials, and our collective public health response to make amends and earn the trust of communities of color as we distribute the vaccine and rebuild. herbert in port washington,

maryland. caller: my main thing is they shouldn't get it first. i am 76 years old, i can't get it. why should they get it first? they should be getting it. i need it andme, i cannot get it. i am 76 years old. just because of who they are. they should be ashamed of himself. i will stop you there because partly they connection, but thanks for the call. you can text us at (202) 748-8003. bill in vermont saying -- politicians should be last in line to get vaccinated. that is the best way to grade their performance in distributing the vaccine to the rest of us. bill in connecticut saying -- this is further infantile.

the smart parent figures are getting the vaccine teen. an interpretation of a certain mindset of health. other people have other ways to remain disease-free and those way should be respected. -- let theesota naysayers in congress go first to strike the point home. michelle in illinois saying -- i think anywhere that houses large swaths of people should be prioritized, hospitals, old folks homes, and yes, congress. let's not forget herman cain died. just because we can't see these things being done, doesn't mean they are not happening. twitter and facebook available too if you want. marion, ohio, republican nine, this is rich. caller: hi.

it seems to be complicated who gets it first. first we don't even have one and then who is going to get it first gets to be a big argument, which is important. i think the illegals should get it so we don't get infected. i think biden should rush the border with a whole lot of illegals and in order to do that to make sure they can get in our country, we will give up thanksgiving and christmas. host: where do politicians fall on that list? hello? i think illegals would come ahead because they can affect all of us with the next version. as far as politicians, should they be higher up? should they wait? where should they be? caller: the illegals should come ahead of politicians so we don't get infected. host: you made that point twice. rick and oblong, illinois, democrats line. caller: the image that i can't get out of my head is of matt

gaetz wearing a mask, a gas mask on the floor to mock the fear of the entire country, and i understand the theory of government continuity, but the only thing that seems to be continuous is chaos and dysfunction. so i'm not sure what continuity means at this point. host: so as far as politicians being prioritized, what do you think about that? caller: all frontline workers absolutely first. then our senior citizens. maybe they can prioritize the politicians by their age. least init wrong, at your mind, as a politician -- i know that frontline workers are certain category, but they don't fall into that category as people who need to have this vaccine so the business of government can keep going? caller: i know we need the government to keep going.

the problem is right now is that they are so dysfunctional as far as trying to get a stimulus package passed when it looks like they have a deal. somebody throws in a last-minute snag and we are back to square one again. i do not believe the $2000 will get past. continuity, see any the thing they are stressing. host: rick in illinois, to that last point he brought up when it comes to the covid relief bill, it is attached to the spending bill for congress which needs to be government-funded. 9:00 is when the house will gavel in for a pro forma session , usually just a couple of perfunctory actions and they gather dust gavel out, but you will see leadership -- gavel out, but you will see leadership on the floor to increase the figure of the covid relief bill. when they gavel out, we will

continue with our program. democrats line, anita, go ahead. caller: thanks for having me on this morning. this is a dilemma because it is not just that it is about 600 members of congress that would be vaccinated. it is all their staff, thousands and thousands of people. probablythese vaccines could go to a higher priority first of our frontline workers, high-risk people, even people in supermarkets and walmart cashiers might even be a little head of -- ahead of priority for congress to do all their work, via all the high-tech equipment they have zoom meetings and teleconferences. i think they should wait until they fall into a high risk route but if they will all get together and sit by side and work at fixing these problems, which i don't see any remedy to

at this point, they are so divided, that maybe the whole point of them doing this is actually moot. host: anita from pennsylvania giving her thoughts on politicians and if they should be prioritized. website, it npr's highlights the behind-the-scenes work when it comes to vaccines and members of congress saying it was the senate majority leader, the house speaker, and top democrat chuck schumer among the first wave of members to take part. lawmakers "will be provided with a specific number of covid-19 vaccines to meet long-standing requirements for continuity of government actions." in a monahan writing december 17 note to congress. by december, about 50 lawmakers and more than 200 20 workers tested positive for were presumed so for the illness. this past summer, a florida member's aid died from covid.

without a widespread testing program for its part, the democratically controlled house saw emergency proxy voting, emergency hearings in may, and in november, speaker pelosi triggered a broader covid-19 testing program for congress following new requirement for travelers to the washington area. mark from yukon, oklahoma, independent line. caller: how are you? host: i am well, thanks. go ahead. caller: it is a controversial topic, but if the united states was under attack, that we would then protect the leadership, so this pandemic, i relate it to an attack on the united states and therefore we should protect our politicians by requiring that they take a vaccine in order to ultimately end up in case of an emergency situation as we have, being able to make decisions for

us as a nation. host: if you are interested in finding out when it comes to members of congress and how congress has been impacted by contract out go to u.s., they have -- contract out 105, they have representatives and senators self-quarantining after commenting -- coming into contact with someone with covid-19 or testing positive themselves. that is several times. senators and how representatives performed. oftracks senators, members the house of representatives, and breaks it down individually by legislator to see how that fairs out. if you would like to check that out, go track. u.s.. louis from rapid city, south dakota, republican line.

caller: good morning. i wanted to call and say i am all for the politicians in washington being the first ones to get the virus vaccine. couldn't find a better bunch of guinea pigs anywhere else than in our government, so let's give it to them first in case there is a problem with it. host: louis in rapid city giving his thoughts. one person giving their thoughts on this topic, the kentucky governor andy beshear. he was asked why he received a vaccine. >> i was vaccinated for two reasons. cdcdirector of the personally asked myself and every other governor to get vaccinated publicly as soon as possible to build confidence in this vaccine. we have followed the directions of the cdc. the governor of florida hasn't. it is his refusal to put in a

mass mandate or do what is necessary to stop the current surge, we look at the significant death that state has experienced. maybe he ought to listen to the cdc director a little bit more. the second reason was dr. stack recommended it at the top of every level of government. at the top of the judiciary, the top of the two legislative branches, and the top of the executive branch. we were certainly not the first, about 7000 before, but there is real hesitancy out there. for anybody to broadcast, i didn't just take it, the first lady took it. i would never suggest that to her, it would ultimately be her decision, if i believed it was not fully and entirely safe. that is what i want the people of the commonwealth to know. i believe it in my heart, believe it enough to watch

britney take a vaccine. it is safe and it is a christmas miracle. we have to make sure, especially with this new strand in the united kingdom, that we have 70% or 80% of kentuckians and americans vaccinated. host: that was kentucky governor andy beshear. on his twitter feed, there is a photo of band-aids covering where he and the first lady got the shots. this was dated december 22. patrick in tuscaloosa, alabama, democrats line. caller: thank you for this call. i am concerned about the politicians. gotow that a lot of them the coronavirus, saying it was rounding the corner and everything. it seems to be -- they seem to be the first person in line to take a shot to try to convince everybody that it is safe, but really, they really don't

believe. they're just trying to save yourself. everybody want to save their self. host: you don't think ultimately if they believed in it, they would take the shot? caller: well, they would take it, but really, in other words, everybody really just trying to -- it is going to be really like for rich people. start sellingll the coronavirus on side like drugs. there is going to be a black market for everything. host: patrick in alabama. the moderna vaccine, the second vaccine being distributed across the united states following pfizer's vaccine, you saw pictures of this happening earlier this week on the rollout happened. that, politicians and whether or not they should be prioritized for this.

is (202) 748-8001 for republicans, democrats, (202) 748-8000, independents, (202) 748-8002. you can text (202) 748-8003. one this morning, "the elderly in assisted living facilities are in phase one. congress kind of it is an old folks home. politicians should not beginning the vaccine person left they have a medical issue and age that puts them in the high risk of being in the 0.01% that dies nearly immediately from this pandemic level virus." what i am concerned about our what are the ends act -- what are the exact

ingredients in this coronavirus vaccine and what do they do. i am quoting from health keepers magazine in 2008, an article written by mayor eisenstein, md, jd, and masters of public health, mph. he says vaccines contain midi ingredients of which the public is not aware. host: that aside, the prioritization of palletization's -- of politicians which you think of that? caller: i don't care. host: but why don't you? aldehyde --ol, from are in vaccines in production. host: ok. we will go to rose marie, st. petersburg, florida. you are on. caller: hi. thes just calling to say politicians getting the vaccine -- can you hear me? host: you are on.

go ahead. caller: the politicians getting the vaccine first, one thing about that, i think people in that position have a better chance of social distancing than i do because they have big homes, they have this, they have all of that. for them to get the vaccine first, it just seems kind of selfish, and in a way, they want to show us that it is safe and everything that. thinking,mind, i am do they really get that covid vaccine? because this administration under donald trump have been such croaks, i don't really trust -- been such crooks, i don't really trust them with anything. i do trust the scientists, and i have the utmost respect for dr. fauci. host: when you hear congress saying they want to lead by example in getting the vaccine, do you believe that? caller: some i do and some i don't. it is a deadly thing now.

host: if i may ask, when you say some you do believe in some you don't, how do you decide that? caller: i decide on their behavior as far as how they act in the government because i am a registered voter and i vote all the time. so i go by their past concerns about the people as opposed to ,ust now with the covid virus and everybody is running scared. so i go by their track record. that is what i determine things by, where my choice comes in as far as the politician is concerned. host: that is rose marie in st. peter's regard -- inseam petersburg, florida. from new york, we hear next from cy. caller: good morning. i think this is just an example of the hypocrisy of our political class. they hold themselves out as elitist.

they go to a fancy restaurant. gavin newsom, without a mask. nancy pelosi has a beauty parlor open for her without a mask. it seems the rules don't apply to them. this is another example of why they are held in such low self-esteem. host: how does that apply to them directly getting the vaccines first? caller:caller: because the elitist class feels that they are first, they are better than us. they are entitled. we have to wait our turn. 31-year-oldz is a woman who is not immuno compromised. the old people should get the vaccines. the front-line workers should get the vaccines first. i think this is just selfishness. host: so you would put senator marco rubio on that list, considering his age? caller: yes i what. exactly. it has nothing to do with

republicans or democrats. it has to do with elitism. that's how i feel. host: ok. edward from liverpool, texas, democrats line. caller: yes sir. since theink that politicians already have the therapeutics, they can hop on a chopper and be at a hospital in seconds compared to us, so they've got the therapeutics working for them. it didn't take long to get mr. trump treated or a few others. so why don't we just leave them alone, but all of the people who have no money and no help, put them first? get those people in the hospitals as being first as well because if anything is going wrong with the shots, they are in the hospital. they will be watching each other, seeing if anything is going wrong with these shots. they are in a perfect place to help each other if something does go wrong. so why not just let them go

first? and then after that, those people that say i ain't going to use that shot no matter what , wait a year. for you it costs $1000. you waited a whole year. make it kind of a punishment for waiting so long. i'm taking a shot. i've been taking a flu shot since 15 years ago. only twice did i get sick. so i believe in them. offeringshop they are is a chance for us to quit being the way we are, stuck in these houses in these boxes. can't go out to restaurants, can't go to shows. i'm sick of it. i am going to give it a try. if it kills me, it kills me. i doubt it will kill me because there would already be signs of something going wrong. host: liverpool, texas. that is where edward was giving his thoughts.

we have seen tweets from people. you saw video of this over the past few days. the vice president, mike pence, getting his shot. also, president-elect joe biden , makinghis as well media events of this to demonstrate the efficacy of the shot, the safety of the shot. that is the point they were trying to make. one of the people asked about not getting a shot yet was the president. it was on the sunday shows that the u.s. surgeon general dr. jerome adams addressed the reason why the president had not received a vaccine yet. here's a portion of what he said on sunday. [video clip] >> do you have plans to have president trump get a shot in the arm on camera? >> from a scientific point of view, i will remind people that the president has had covid within the last 90 days. he received a monoclonal added bodies -- monoclonal antibodies. that is one scenario where we

tell people you should hold off on getting a vaccine. >> but that doesn't make you immune. >> politics aside -- well, it does not, but we know that monoclonal antibodies, if you have been administered them, are a potential reason why medically, we would tell you to hold off on the vaccination. host: from our twitter feed, this is tony. "certain leaders should be prioritized, but not all. and majority leaders, the speaker, the vice , anddent and the president leadership in the house and senate." from another twitter feed, "the ones who support science get the vaccines. all others get thoughts and prayers." deborah saying, "the bubble they live and where they convince

themselves they are more important than first responders, elderly, the vulnerable shows me they are completely out of touch." in san antonio, texas, your next. caller: good morning. how are you doing? i was sitting here watching news just moment ago, and one of the questions about should the politicians receive the vaccine first or whatever, my opinion of it is that we voted for these into visuals to be there. they are example leaders. if they are willing to take the vaccine, to go on national tv and tell the world where we are at now -- because we are at the said don't kennedy ask what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country. we areat the point where

at war with the unseen enemy. i'm a veteran. you stand together, and divided you fall. relearn, and then make those opinions. host: how much influence do you think these leaders have to convince other people to do likewise? i think it will be of big importance because the ones saying it won't work, the ones they represent, that is why we put them in their. if this is going to save somebody's life, what do you have to lose to come on tv publicly? give the shots to the leadership because in the military, it starts from the top and works downward. unfortunately, we are at that stage now.

they are the ones leaving this country. host: so when it comes to yourself, do you need to be convinced by other people, like what you have seen on television or by twitter? where are you already convinced you would get one? caller: i was convinced i am going to get one because all i have to do is look around. i have friends and loved ones who have died of this covid. i don't have to read up on it. all i have to do is look around and see what is occurring. yes i will take it. host: ok. caller: and i will try to , but i can't tell them don't take it and i'm not taking it. host: preston in san antonio, texas. we will go to our republican line in michigan and hear from scott. caller: good morning.

to stay online with what you're talking about this morning, i believe that the politicians that are taking the vaccine on camera and make a big fuss about it so that everybody will take it, i believe they are trying to do exactly what they say they are trying to do. they are trying to get everybody to feel comfortable and take it by showing that they are taking it. but the problem that i have with that is that they are basically just being politicians. they are trying to convince somebody to do something. the guy at the top of the heap, the one that is supposed to be setting the tone, mr. biden, people forget that a month ago, he was calling the vaccine the worst thing in the book. he wouldn't do anything that had anything to do with trump. he wouldn't trust that vaccine for nothing until he supposedly won the election. now it is the greatest thing since sliced bread, and he's getting everybody to do it. so they are basically just politicians.

they are serving their purpose for the time right now, and i don't really think it is a big leap versus -- you know, because of buddy gets a vaccine for free. nobody has to pay to get the antibodies. this is not about elite versus the commoner situation. it is strictly now a matter of politicians serving their purpose, which is trying to entice the people to do something that they don't want to do, and once this passes, they will be onto something else because that is what politicians do. host: cot in michigan joining us to give us his thoughts when it comes to more vaccines being purchased by the federal government that's when it comes to -- his thoughts when it comes to -- giving his thoughts. when it comes to more vaccines being purchased by the federal government, as the coronavirus

strains the medical system, the supply increasing by 1/3 the overall amount available by mid-20 tony one averts the possibility of a devastating shortfall in the spring and summer right as the government wasn't as baiting being able to make immunization available to wider segments of the public. more of that in "the washington post" this morning. sue is next from bartlett, illinois, the mike ross line -- democrats line. caller: good morning. i have such bad feelings about the government getting their shots, especially them that have using their mask and promoting not getting the virus. it just kills me with mike pence georgia,e's going to holding these rallies, and there's nobody using masks. they are just promoting this virus to go everywhere. if they would have been from the start buckling down, we would

not be in the position that we are in right now. it has been handled horribly. their legacy is going to be horrible. host: as far politicians getting it, or being on the front, should they in general, democrat, republican, or otherwise be close to the top? caller: you know, i am so flipped on that because you don't want to have -- you know, we need our vice president to cover the president if something happens. but at the same time, these guys -- you from the start know, we are rounding the curve. no we are not. if they were plane crashes or we were at war, i bet they would be different on it. i know that people have the right to go to these rallies, but they are promoting them. if you don't plan a rally,

people aren't going to be going to the. there are 70 people that say it is a hoax -- there are so many people that say it is a hoax, and i never forget our president saying that after november 4, we will not hear about this virus. i think the frontline workers should be number one. areas ofthe way, many the world experiencing cases of covid. usa today highlighting those first cases being recorded in antarctica, saying that three dozen people at a chilean base have tested positive. on tuesday, a regional health minister said that there are 21 infections involving people 's supplye chilean navy ship. the passengers on that ship, which sale from the antarctic peninsula, tested positive, according to the antarctica institute there. they informed the council of

managers at the national antarctic programs on friday, according to a statement mailed to "usa today." from middleton, massachusetts, independent line. hi. caller: i think the basic issue here is who is dying from covid. in way that particular massachusetts now, they just put prisoners in front of the elderly, people 65 or 75 and older. believerecommendation i older shouldd follow, and that is absolute correct. but no one is concentrating on who is dying from this. host: and how does that relate to politicians getting the vaccine? caller: they should not be getting them. over 75 or whoever is or over 65, that's fine. i have no problem with that.

but someone like aoc, she is supposedly rolling up her sleeve to show everybody it is safe. that's absolute baloney. they are doing it for their own personal need forget they are jumping the line. it makes no sense. ohio let's go to brenda in , in way, ohio, if i am saying that right. caller: you're on the money. thank you for taking my call. that we need our politicians because we have other problems besides the virus , and if they are not healthy, they can't solve the problems with our hunger and our joblessness. it is just like when you go on an airplane, when you have to us into the speech from the stewardess. a parent with children is told to put your air mask on first, and then take care of your

children because you can't take care of them. no one is going to be happy with how anything is going to be distributed because everybody has such different opinions. when you go out into the public, you see people that still refuse to wear masks or still think this is nothing. up and congress, people saying i am not going to take this, and other people saying i want to see if science is going to rule it out because our current president, sticking his fingers in so many of our different cures, from the bleach to everything else, i think we've got to start from the top up to take care of all of the problems, and no one is going to be happy with anyway it turns out, but just like you have all your children vaccinated before they go to school, it is just common sense.

the people that want to take the cure are just going to have to go with common sense. host: richard is next, ocean shores, washington, democrats line. caller: yes. i think it should be there priority for the vaccine should be based on their public stand. if they are people that would not wear a mask, refused to social distance, they should be denied the vaccination. everyone from the president down to county commissioners. if they are people that thought the science was a hoax and this whole coronavirus thing was a hoax, they should be given last priority. which mcconnell should be last. these governors like desantis, congressman like jim jordan, do not promote wearing a mask, do not promote social distance. they should be given last priority. host: that is richard in

washington state giving us a call. about 10 more minutes on this topic. a couple more stories to share with you. when it comes to the president-elect and his team and the senate's work and confirming nominees, that is the subject of a story in "wall street journal" this morning, saying senators typically hold key hearings for posts ahead of inauguration. in 2017, the senate confirmed jim mattis as secretary of defense and john kelly as head of homeland security the same day the president was sworn in. chamber meeting on january 3 for the start of the session, and then on the sixth two county vote of the electoral college. the next session day is january 20. it is unclear if committees will meet during those days off to work on nomination. there's more of that in "the wall street journal" this

morning. "the new york times" is following what is going on with those senate races this morning, saying some of those ads in states are not directory related to georgia. "out-of-state media markets that even intersect slightly are being pummeled with marketing. alabama'sed in seventh largest city and overlaps with just one of georgia's 159 counties that is rac more than $500,000 in blue glads booked there. all told, $35 million of advertising has been aired in the states surrounding georgia, according to data from immediate tracking firm. if you want to go to "the new york times," you can do so. "the washington times" this morning taking a look at the

current administration. john durham has been authorized to present information on the grand jury as part of his investigation into the russia collusion probe, saying that the banice department rules to providing classified information unless they receive approval from the agency responsible for classifying the information. to trump conferred the power access classified information to the attorney general william barr, who has no left, and that power transfers by extension to mr. durham loretta -- mr. durham. loretta is joining us from georgia, democrats line. caller: yes, good morning. i just what to say this is another sickening example of the rich and powerful getting ahead of everybody else just like they using -- andd

saying that being an example for everybody else is just ridiculous. thes just an excuse to get shots before everybody else, and as far as the covid deniers are concerned, they don't need shots because they don't believe in covid. it just kills me to look at these people that ran around for almost a whole year talking about covid doesn't exist, covid is around the corner, and then they are right up there getting the shots before everybody else. host: but your initial criticism which that apply to republicans and democrats alike? buter: it applies to both, mainly the republicans because they were running around talking about covid doesn't exist. it was them, not the democrats. it was the republicans. as far as those missing doses are concerned that were supposed to go to the different health care facilities, what is that about?

i think it is about the rich and powerful. i thing it is about the doses being taken off the public sold for huge amounts of money to the rich and powerful because they can pay for anything. host: david is in riverside, california, republican line. caller: yes, isaac not only should the congress get it, i think celebrities should get it like professional athletes. we've got to tell people to get it, and the way to do that is to get the opinion leaders to get it first. host: and those with the most influence will influence others. is that your way of thinking? caller: oh yeah. there's a real problem with the vaccine. people haven't been taking it that much so far. i think people don't know what thereng on come up that is reticence because of politics. but we should fight this disease the way it has been fighting us, so we have to take the vaccine. i have severe allergies, so i can't take it. but i have encouraged my parents

to take it. everyone that can take it should. host: we will hear from jackie ,ext up in pennsylvania democrats line. caller: good morning. i just want to say that i think this whole thing is a nonissue. it is so insignificant. we are talking about a little in the congress with thehis vaccine, governors, maybe 500 or 600 people, considering all of the hundreds of thousands of vaccines that are going out there. so i think this is just an venttunity for people to their frustration with congress, and divisiveness in this whole covid experience. host: and why do you think specifically it is a nonissue since vaccines are now just going out?

caller: it is a nonissue because we are talking about only 500 vaccines. scheme of things, 500 is a drop in the bucket of the amount of vaccines that are going out. ,hese people are public figures and they set an example for other people that might not be willing to take the vaccine, so i think this is just an opportunity for people to vent their frustration or anger with congress. host: margaret in texas, independent line. caller: hello. good morning. we do select that certain people in government who ought to be protected through times like war to be sure that the government keeps on running. that group i think should be the

first to get the vaccines. politiciansthe should simply take their turn by age. forerday i was at my doctor the six-month checkup. i am a senior citizen. he asked what i take it, and i said i certainly would. he said, good. it next year. i have an underlying condition, but i would take this anyway. every year i take the flu vaccine. i take the pneumonia vaccine. it really kind of bothers me that people in this nation, we wake up in the morning and , we live in a scientific world, and all of so much of what we have around us is caused by science, and yet when it comes to this vaccine,

somebody people just simply do not believe in the science and it. host: margaret in texas giving us her thoughts this morning. one more on this topic. we will hear from mike in florida, republican line. go ahead. caller: i would like to hear joe biden say for the people to stop smoking and stop binge drinking. it is patriotic. he said it about masks to build the immune system. that is what we need to do, take care of ourselves. host: so as far as politicians being prioritized, what do you think? caller: i don't think we need the pr. it is a pr show. host: why do you think that? caller: because there's enough people that are willing to take the shot, and some people are calling it a cure. some of these players are calling it a cure. -- some of these colors are calling it a cure. that is a misstatement. host: finishing off the sour on

your thoughts on if politicians could get prioritization when it comes to the vaccine. topics of coronavirus coming up in about an hour from now, when the house goes to that pro forma session. typically they do some is this an gavel out, but we you are expected to see today is an argument for and against increasing the figure currently in the covid relief bill, which is tied to the spending bill. currently that figure is $600. now the president is calling for an increase of $2000. house democratic leadership saying, ok, let's do that. they are planning to bring up that point in a unanimous consent vote today. we are speaking to you here also from the republicans on this. we will gavel in and show you that. the senate also gaveling in on this because missy around 10:00 -- on this chris missy around her neck talk. eveng -- this christmas

around 10:00. coming up, the untold true story of america's middle class. later on in the program, we will speak with reagan biographer and president total historian craig -- and presidential historian shirley on president reagan's legacy. >> coming up tonight on c-span, a look at christmas at the white house and at the home of the vice president, starting with the arrival of the white house christmas tree. tv looks at book u.s. history starting with historian h w brands on his book, "the zealot and the immense of -- and the emancipator." history tv american features early motion pictures,

including public affairs films. >> stay with 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 around the country, join us on january 6 at 1:00 p.m. eastern for the joint session of congress to come the votes and declare the whenever president and vice president. at noon on january 20, the inauguration of the 46th president of the united states. our live coverage begins at seven a clock a.m. eastern from the statehouse to congress to the white house. watch should all live on c-span, on the go at c-span.org, or listen free using the c-span radio app. ♪ >> you are watching c-span, your unfiltered view of government.

c-span was created by america's cable television companies in 1979. today we are brought to you by these television companies to provide c-span to viewers as a public service. ♪ >> "washington journal" continues. host: continuing on with our authors week, we are joined by jim tankersley. he's the author of the book, "the riches of this land, the untold true story of america's middle class." thank you for joining us this week. guest: thank you so much for having me. host: almost anybody, if you tell them the term middle-class, they have their own version of what that looks like. what does the theme of your book reflect? guest: there are a lot of ways you can define the middle-class. for a lot of people you define it by income. how much do you make per year, and does that put you into a certain band of people in the middle of the united states.

but i like to define it somewhat differently because to me, the middle-class is all about economic security, about being able to feel safe and stable and comfortable within your economic situation. week where art of lot of families are playing board games with their families, and i like to identify the middle-class by a board game, the game of life. a game where you roll around the board, get an education and get a job and get married, a house and a car, and retirement security. the entire game basically is all around getting these pieces of life that just make you feel a little less vulnerable, a little less imperiled by the sweeps and dangers of the board. that is how i thing about being in the middle class in america. if you can afford health care and a car and a house, being able to buy your own house, save

for retirement and send your kids to school, that is the sort of economic security i think defines the middle-class, and the people who are trying to get that security are sort of aspirational he middle-class. host: that is usually tied to jobs. one of the things you do in the book is ask a question to get things rolling. you write this. "it is the most important question in american public life. it was amid the rise of populism in the early 2010s that what donald trump did the presidency. now -- incially so 2010s that's what donald trump are the presidency in 2016, and it is especially so now that the country has fallen into the swiftest recession the nation in history, one that laid bare the fragility of the vast majority of workers' lives and dreams in the 21st century." people for alot of

long time in the united states, manufacturing was a real ticket to that sort of job, particularly workers without college degrees. but it is certainly not the only way to get it. there were a lot of other good, middle-class jobs. white-collar jobs, jobs in offices or other blue-collar jobs in manufacturing that have gone away, that have been automated or outsourced over the last several decades, and what we see now in the united states is that a lot of people have lost jobs that maybe felt sort of on the borderline of good. they were starting to pay enough to maybe accrue some of that. maybe they were certain to have benefits, and now they have lost it. of thisirst half recession has been to bring jobs back, but the equally important task is to bring good jobs back. i think for a lot of people, it goes beyond that. it is jobs that give you a sense of purpose, that make you feel like your full talents as a worker are being used, and that

you are able to contribute in a way that not just helps you earn money, but helps america and its economy function really actively and to work in its best possible way so that we can all build a better, stronger, faster growing economy for ourselves and our children. host: portions of the book look back to the period after world war ii. guest: i think it looms large in the american psyche and american economic history as the best of expansion of the middle class, maybe anywhere ever. there are certainly lots of interlocking reasons for that boom. the big one is that after the war, there is this big opportunity for the united states to start rebuilding

and sell ahe world industrially around rebuilding the western world, which we did. that is the story you hear a lot. it is a very white male centered story, but it is not the whole story, and i would argue it is not even the real story. the big story of what happens in the united states economy and what is able to generate the strong growth on top of low unemployment that pulled millions of americans into the middle class is that the economy started to tear down barriers that had held back a huge amount of workers from actually contributing to the country. , most of thear ii high talented, high skill jobs in america were held by white men, and frankly most of the jobs. but then through the war effort, which brought women into the workforce, and the aftermath, which brought millions more in,

through the hard work of civil rights in the ensuing decades that reduced barriers not just for women of all races, but for men of color, black men in particular, the country is able to bring millions of workers who were previously underutilized, undereducated, undervalued into , give them better jobs, and their contribution raised the productivity of the country, and economic research tells us it was this engine that created this magic, nation -- this magic combination which pulled millions into the middle class. the story of the postwar boom is and i think itt, is something we can replicate, even coming out of this recession. we have a lot of very talented

people. women, men of color, white men without college degrees who are being underutilized, and we have a chance to put them all back to work in a much better way and create a second world war ii style boom in the middle class in this country again. host: if you want to ask him questions about the themes of this book, you can do so. we have divided the lines by economic earnings. if you earn below $50,000, it is (202) 748-8000. between $50,000 and $100,000, (202) 748-8001. over $100,000, (202) 748-8002. tweet us your thoughts, text us, and post on our facebook page. you mentioned two categories, and i think of three as well, when it comes to the economy thriving because you said in part, the economy thrives after world war ii in large part made it easier

for people previously shut out to get economic opportunity. talk about the last category. guest: immigrants are very important as well. they were a crucial source of innovation. what we know overtime from the united states economy, what research shows us is that immigrant entrepreneurs create businesses, bring new ideas, develop new ideas. they make the economy work better because they have these fromy innovative traits united states. in particular, the one to bring that innovative entrepreneurial spirit at all levels of the economy have been crucial to the development of our country and our middle-class. we are in a real jam moving forward if we don't have that. we will have a less innovative economy, a less dynamic economy,

and given the way that workforce is shaping up, we are not going to sustain the levels of growth that politicians talk about as being necessary. 3%, 4%, 5%, whatever you want to aim for growth to keep the economy roaring, if we can get it to that level. you need workers to do that, and we don't have enough of them who are here now. there is not a finite pool of jobs in the united states. it is an ever expanding pool as the economy grows, and we are people coming into help create those jobs. for all of those reasons, immigrants, the economic research is really clear. they play a crucial role, and i think they are an important part now as well. specifically, can any of

that be applied to what is going on today? guest: some of it is really basic. in the time before world war ii, a lot of white women in particular didn't work in the formal workforce. educatedhem were not to the same level as wightman. -- as white men. that started to change, where women are now the most educated set of graduates every year in the united states. barriers forocial them to go to work was a big deal. raking down the social barriers for them to go to college was a big deal. you can do a lot more now to invest in helping women, ,articularly lower income women who we know have a harder time completing community college, four-year colleges because it is so economically difficult to balance life at the low-end of the income spectrum and going to school. we can do a lot more to support

them going forward, and we can ofa lot more to keep women all degree status throughout the economy engaged in the workforce throughout their lives. i think this is a real lesson of this and back -- this pandemic. one of the real reasons we struggled as we had this incredibly skilled group of then who have fallen out of labor force entirely when they have children, through basically res and through the failure of policies to support women as they try to take leave and return to the workforce, so better policies come more affordable childcare, and more support within companies for women when they take leave with children, to bring them back without missing a beat, would be really important to put more of the executive jobs, the high-powered jobs that you don't want them knocked off that track

maybe before they had kids. these are couple of things that are echoes from that early period, but i thing the opportunity is there. host: our first call from you comes from geraldine in georgia. thank you. caller: hello, and thank you for taking my call, and for c-span. i want to say please let steve scully come back next year. , i want tokersley ask you a question about this forgotten man. i don't understand how these people that say they are at black, and you look people's history who was brought here to this country and had absolutely nothing. host: geraldine, could you clarify what you want our guest

to answer specifically? caller: yes, i want him to enter the question about this forgotten man, forgotten person in this country. guest: sure. host: thank you, geraldine. go ahead. guest: i think what the caller is alluding to is that so much of our political discourse right now, a lot of white workers have cast themselves as forgotten, whereas i think it is correct that black workers truly are the ones who, throughout history, have been left behind, denied opportunity for so long, and really have never gotten the same opportunity as particularly elite whites have gotten. i think we can and should as a country deal with both. it is both really crucially true that we have a dearth of opportunity comparatively for black americans. i talk a lot in the book about

that. the main character is a lack man from north carolina, and i talk about the need in the hope that we can tap into that potential for opportunity to create more opportunity for black workers in ways that policymakers have not addressed in the past. i also think it is true we have left behind a category of white workers without college degrees, and they are the ones who have gotten a lot of attention from politicians because they have swung so hard politically from one party to the other over the last several election cycles. book,5, i document in the we massively overwrote the story of the left behind white worker because it wasn't an important story, but because we missed the story and we didn't write nearly enough about the left behind, forgotten black worker or latino worker. i think in 2020, we did better, but still not perfectly. in some ways, the outcome of the 2020 election is much more of a

story of working-class black voters than working-class white voters. working-class black voters helped deliver the primaries to joe biden and helped power his victory november. -- his victory in november. we are still a long way off from as the black voters forgotten workers. and i don't like the forgotten man because i think women are often forgotten in these conversations as well. i think it is really important that we keep in mind that workers of all races in the working-class have a lot more income and right now than they them, butat divides historically speaking, we have just a massive gap in opportunity, even among those workers by rates. that is some that we have to pay attention to from policy. host: from the book, you write, "if we want to revive the

middle-class, we need to know how we got the boom after world war ii. we need to start with the classic white tail of america and fill out the part that corrects the lies we have now." hat is part of the book by tankersley, who is with us now. we go now to jim. caller: i love your show. today is my lucky day. conundrum.it of a host: ok, jim. go ahead. caller: first of all, merry christmas and happy holidays to both of you. host: we got that part because her. go ahead. caller: i already turned in my christmas list and didn't have your book on their, so i am going to have to resubmit that to santa, but i will get a copy of it.

i want to ask you a question. you talk about the middle-class. i think that is one of the history pieces missing. unionization, the state of any the pastf indiana in 30 to 40 years have been dismantling unions, and i think the unionization of the middle-class had made it better workers, especially towards retirement. if you could expand on the little bit -- expand on that a little bit. and you talk about bring back the post-world war ii mugging class motif -- post-world war ii arcing class motif. how important are unions to that? 9 i think it is a -- guest: i think it is a great question. we know unions certainly played a great role in that postwar

industrial age in the building of the middle class. one of the other characters in the book is a guy who i really enjoyed spending time with over the years, a man named bob thompson in southern california who had a union job in a rocket plant, basically. it gave him a life and a pension that is very difficult for the kids he talks to today, when they come to his historical society, to imagine. i think the loss of those union jobs has played a real role in this decline of the middle class. part of the difficulty with that is it has rep as i did a shift of the economy from very unionized sectors like manufacturing to traditionally less unionized sectors. it is going to be interesting to see the biden adminstration has made a real emphasis on unionization. i think they are going to try to do some things to make it easier for workers in service industries to unionize.

we will see what kind of results those bring. but given the low union rates in the country right now, part of what i asked thousand the book is the importance of trying to generate the conditions that give all workers bargaining power with their employer, whether they are in a union or not. what that means is if we have historically low unemployment and the economy is growing, workers can demand more benefits , higher salaries. we were starting to see this at the tail end of the pre-pandemic part of this administration after a long expansion that started out of president obama and continued under president trump. we were able to see if you have low unemployment and growth, workers really can demand much higher raises and get them. that doesn't have all the benefits of the unionization for sure, but it gives some of the crucial income benefits of it,

and other things. see what sortwill of strides the biden adminstration can make on union issues. we will also i think see if they can generate that formula of unemployment, which i think is really important for helping all workers, whether they are in a union or not. host: if you are asks a question for the modern-day people. "how can they get jobs when they are all locked down?" guest: i think that is another big problem here. i have been writing a lot about this in my day job at "the times" over the last several months. locked down sort of covers all isner of things, but it true that is long as this virus is raging and people are not going out and doing the kind of economic activities they had ise with the virus, that

more correlated with what the virus is doing then with any restrictions that are being put on. but i think we are going to see what that is like. in the early waves, that is what it looked like. i think that makes it really hard. if you are someone who is having to choose between going out and possibly getting sick to working a job where there is low demand from consumers anyway, that is really tough. i think we are going to see hopefully over the next few , people will be able to get by as the vaccine is distributed, and the economy starts rolling back -- starts roaring back as people are able to get outside and do the things they were doing before, and allow whole industries to come back. that will then generate the activity that brings everybody else. but i think this virus has been

an absolute crushing blow to the middle class and to american workers across the board who have lost their jobs, while people like me who have been able to work from home because their jobs allow it have not been hit nearly as badly economically. i think that has been just a really unfortunate and difficult part of this recession and recovery, and hopefully if all goes well with vaccine deployment, we could come out of that in the coming months. host: here's michael, cleveland, ohio. caller: good morning. merry christmas and happy new year. -- well,uckily everybody i know, family members under $100,000 range. out of every dollar they earn and i have earned in my lifetime , i've paid, at least since the

deal in the 1980's, i've paid andcents to social security $135,000 thereabouts in w-2 wages. everyone gets a 6.2% tax cut. unfortunately i have ever reached that. what do you think is the appropriate level of income that should be for social security? guest: thank you for the question. her christmas -- merry christmas. it is christmas eve, and we are getting into social security tax rates, and i love it. if you are looking at the solvency of the social security program over time, one of the proposals that certainly seems --have bipartisan support not among everyone, certainly -- stopsting the income cap

imposing social security taxes after that threshold of income. to rankif you were order the list of possible things for what could get done in washington, that is very high on the list. i thing it is much more likely to get done then, for example, immediate changes to the benefits structure, although who actualhat any sort of deal on social security would to shore upng like advances long-term. but it is something that i hear a decent amount about when i am talking to people about the book that seems unfair to people because we have an otherwise, in the income tax system, for your labor income, it is an aggressive system. you're supposed to be higher rates the more you earn, and social security works the opposite, where it is flat and drops off.

so i think it is absolutely on moveable as a top possible for lawmakers in washington if and when they move to shore up social security finances. host: if you are just joining us, the book is "the riches of this land, the untold true story of america's mid class." to write come up and needs -- you write, "the group that has long since abuse to the rules of the economy and used it for its broad gain. in overly broad terms, we call group white men with college the economic hierarchy. became of the things i convinced of as i pursued it -- i'm grateful for the advantages

i've had in my life and i'm grateful to my parents, my university, the places i have been able to work in my life. and i feel it is important to point out that i have been able to climb the economic ladder, in part, because of having -- i largelyin small town, a white small town in oregon. a lot of my high school classmates were really smart, worked hard, and they did not go to college because they had a different career track. they were better with their hands. and they have not been able to have the same economic advantages because of the way the economy has worked and the way the policymakers have managed people along the way. i think about that a lot. i think it is important to point out that if you look back over american history, what is now sort of the group that is the elite, the college degree holders, but really over time

it's like a sliver of white men at the top of the income spectrum, they have managed to hold onto a huge amount of benefits and pass them along to their children, pass the opportunities along to their children. and so often they're able to send their kids to better schools, get them into better colleges, and get them through networks into better jobs. aree networks, they informal and controlled by small groups of people, and have not been open to outsiders. that makes it hard if you are a young black woman trying to climb that ladder. it's harder for you. i think it is important to point out those who it is harder for, and who it is easier for, and it that we need to adjust those policies because i think we want to live in a country where everybody has an equal shot. we had believed it was possible

for a long time. i believe that. i believe it is possible to have that equality in opportunity. see us there cs right now. jim tankersley -- host: we have a viewer asking the question, "would health care for all benefit the middle class? would it allow upward mobility? would it allow opportunities for entrepreneurism?" guest: i am not a health care policy expert, so i will caveat this with that. i have wonderful colleagues that spend a lot of time thinking about that very question. i certainly would say that a system in which people's jobs were not necessarily linked to their health care, whether it is a government system, free market system, or whatever, would make it easier to pursue higher paying jobs and better

opportunities. there's a worry that if you are in a job for the health care, you are less likely to leave it. if everybody had access to affordable health care, it would be easier both to switch jobs, but also to start your own ofiness or to do any kind entrepreneurial activity that would really benefit the economy. or take chances, basically. it's harder to take chances if you are right about that security blanket. people who feel economically secure tend to be more likely to take risks and to be entrepreneurs and innovators. i think that is important. so, a health care system, whatever it looks like, that is able to deliver more of that security or less money for people, i think would be important for people. and i am not endorsing any particular health care program here, but i would say that i

think again that everybody agrees that if we could design a system that was more flexible, and had less expensive health care and was affordable for yeah, that would be positive for the economy. host: you are on with jim tankersley. caller: thank you. i am glad that somebody mentioned that the tax structure, where wealthy people are allowed to keep percentage-wise a lot more of their money without needing to put it in the economy. and i think that that has a negative effect on the amount of money that is available for our government to invest in the people. an example, we have a shortage of doctors. we have a new shortage of nurses. in order to get that education

i'm inand i noticed -- silicon valley and there are open becauset are we do not have people to fill them. when reason is because the cost of education is so exorbitant. some people will go ahead and take the chance and get student loans, but then they are saddled with their student loans well into their 40's. so that is money that these or that is taken out of the middle damper,here it's like a basically come on growth. damper, basically, on growth. and we don't seem to have large-scale projects, like the interstate highway system as an example.

our transportation system is it'sfragmented and, um basically old, as far as technology is concerned. youe if you go to korea, have these beautiful high-speed rail systems and they move people from one end of the country to the other. we are not investing in these types of things. host: you put a lot out there for our guests. we will let him respond -- guest. we will do him respond. guest: it is a good question and i appreciate it. i think i will start with the very first point that was made about the ways in which the wealthy are able to pay lower taxes and keep money out of the economy. it's something i have been talking about with economists for a long time. we tax capital gains, investment income, the dividends, at a lower rate than we tax labor

income, for higher and people in the united states. -- higher end people in the united states. it was on purpose. they thought we needed a bias towards encouraging investment in the tax code for people, but i have talked to even conservative economists who have said, listen, that is rewarding legacy wealth and it dampens consumer spending and other things. so we should equalize labor and capital tax rates, so that essentially no matter how you earn a dollar, whether it is from a stock and a dividend, or you went to work for an extra hour this month, depending on your income range it is taxed the same way. so, a progressive system that texas labor and capital at the same rate. xes labor andat ta

capital at the same rate. that is, there is a way to equalize the taxes, and you can bring one up or bring one down. but it would incentivize the economy. and that could lead to more spending, more growth and perhaps, depending on how you landed it, more tax -- lend it, got more tax revenue for education or investing in large and researcher programs. you know, both of which productivitynsider enhancing and it would be an attractive investment you might look at. host: how would you characterize the incoming administration, what they want to do for those at the higher income levels and how it might impact them and of the overall economy? guest: it is pretty straightforward. they want to raise taxes at the top on people making more than

$4000 -- $400,000. they can raise rates on capital. a small tax increase on labor. and business tax increases, they want to tax corporations more, particularly multinational corporations through some mechanisms related to partial the taxs or tweaks of cuts from donald trump. and they want to take that money and they want to spend it on infrastructure. they want to do a big infrastructure plan that includes a bunch of clean energy spending to reduce carbon emissions, by putting people to work. they have a lot of plans. this is the largest amount of proposed taxes and spending and dollar figures we have ever seen from a democratic presidential nominee. it's very unclear. a lot depends on what happens in the runoff elections in georgia next month. but if they do not win both of

bem, they will be -- it will highly unlikely they will be able to do the tax side of the agenda because republicans seem unwilling to vote to raise taxes. even if they do win those, they will have a very narrow majority in the senate, and they will be limited to the degree they could implement that entire agenda. that said, washington is in the mood now where the deficits a not matter as much as they did. there are real economic reasons for that, the interest rates are very low. so you might see them do some of the spending, the infrastructure, that the proposed, with less of a pay for than the president elect proposed in the campaign. i think it will be one of the big stories of the next year. effortsy, the virus and to stimulate the economy will be the biggest right away. along with efforts to rollout

the vaccine and the health policy angles of the virus. but, yeah, i think that whether they can implement what they see as a medium term agenda for the middle class, which also includes a lot of racial and gender-based opportunity opening initiatives, but it is unclear how they will be able to do that or what they can do bags they could've orders. they have a lot of -- by executive orders. they have a lot of ambitions and so we do not know how much they will be able to fulfill any of them. host: is there enough money at the higher income levels to satisfy all their desires? guest: i do not think it is limited by money. it might be limited by priorities. it's true that if you are just trying to dollar for dollar pay health carew, a plan, if researcher plan and a

bunch of other things solely by raising taxes on the rich, you would run up to constraints on how much you could raise. signaling itn is does not need to pay for things dollar for dollar right now. and a lot of economists are going in does not need to. i think more importantly, there are things they can do that do not cost a lot of money, or things that congress could do. opening up opportunities to people does not have to mean just spending tax dollars. aggressively pursuing antidiscrimination efforts inside companies. that is something the government can do. it could mean doing a lot of ways in which you invest existing dollars to more equitably distribute them. there's a lot they can do without massive amounts of spending, but there's also a lot

that does require a lot of spending. so, again, this is why i say prioritization may be the most important thing. what we saw with president obama is he had big plans when he came in, and he was able to do a couple of them, and health care law, stemless bill and then some regulation -- a stimulus bill and then some regulation. that was about it. i would argue that joe biden has more sprawling and social programs designed, and he will have a much smaller majority, if he has a majority in the senate at all, than president obama did, so there are real questions on whether he will be able to implement those policies. host: here is mike in new york. go ahead. caller: i wonder if we could -- if you could give me some thoughts. the first thing is social security would be in better shape if they had made some of

that money available for the lending, like to the student loans, even at a low percent. that would have benefited the whole country. the second thing is, the problems we have outside of the virus can almost always be pointed directly at lobbying. i cannot think of a single item, whether it be people dying from inacco, the situation we are economically, uh, the large tax breaks for the rich, everything henefiting them -- on bot sides, there is so much money going into congress that the situation is so lopsided toward the rich that the average person has been on the losing end of this. the other thing i would mention offenderp is the big here, but it is on both sides --

the gop label themselves as conservative, and the real thing is conservative now stands for you conservative wealth for the wealthy. and i wonder if you could elaborate on that. guest: sure. thank you so much. i think it is clear, on the last point, that the struggles of the middle class have spanned decades, including all manners of party control. there have been times when republicans held the entire government, when democrats held the entire government, and when there has been a divided government. we have only had one stretch of middle-class growth, like really rapid middle-class growth in that time and it was the second half of the clinton administration in the 1990's. that was a divided government. but we have not seen -- you are right, we do not have a lobbying group that's just

typical american workers, who get together and their only lobby is there vote. and that is important. it matters. but they are so often just sort of handed -- of pandered to, then not delivered to. this hit home for me when i was a reporter in ohio, early in my career, before the recession or financial crisis, when you could see the industrial decline of the state. and i recounted in the book that i was driving across the state covering a senate race and gubernatorial race, and i stopped at one of dozens of rallies i was going to and i watched the eyes glaze over as they listened to a gubernatorial candidate promised to bring the jobs back, because they had heard it for years. they had heard it for more than years. and they have still been hearing it for this whole time.

and i think that people have become cynical about it. it has led to poisonous things in our politics. when people are promised the things they had can be restored, or opportunity can be reopened and it is not, they get angry. you are right, they do not have a well organized, lobbying group to punish lawmakers with campaign donation purposes. but it is also true that politicians have to be responsive to the voters, otherwise they get huge backlash effects. i think that is what we saw in 2016, that the election of president trump was in part -- there were other things going on and i go through the range of but in the boat -- book, they felt they were lied to and it they bought the idea that donald trump was a businessman who knew how to do it. who takesave a viewer

us back in history, saying that "if you brought back the tax levels of the 1940's and 1950's, you could build infrastructure again." guest: i think it is important to note a couple things. i do not think correlation is causation. i do not think we had a booming middle-class because of the tax structure then, but that is not to say it was in spite of it either. i am saying that may be not the variable that was the big driver there. it may be true we could be raising more revenue. there are problems with that tax code also. i certainly think that a better, more efficient tax code could raise a lot more revenue, including more revenue from the top, which is probably what the viewer is getting at in the 1940's and 1950's, when it was higher at the top. so there are better ways to raise money, more efficiently in more economically, and if he

wanted to raise more money, to get more revenue. host: john in florida, hello. caller: hello, thank you for taking my call. i wish your guest would explain thesituation in alaska with citizens getting checks as part of the exploitation of the natural resources of oil, and how that can be applied in the lower 48. i'm wondering if you have a state like florida, where you have a lot of sunshine, a lot of tourists, and if the citizens were in that kind of economy, could betaxation spread among the citizens, because they contribute to the surge in visitors. and that could also apply to puerto rico, hawaii and the

virgin islands, in my opinion. how does that work? how can we apply it in the lower 48? thank you. guest: that is a fun question. i actually would recommend everyone, if you are still looking for a book to give at you would like something on this topic, my friend annie lowery has a book that came out a while back. it's on universal basic income. and the idea of giving everyone money, which alaska does in this fund related to the oil resources there. and she goes through all of the arguments about it. and she makes compelling stuff. so, i have written less about it than she has, but it is a really -- i would outsource my answer

to her. specifically to the point of youism, a tourism state, i could -- i take that you could dedicate a hotel tax or the revenue from a hotel tax straight to sending a check to every resident of florida, puerto rico or hawaii in the same way that those estates often dedicate revenues from tourism taxes to other things. you could send it rather straight to people. obviously, the concern many of the states have is if you make the taxes too high, you become uncompetitive with other states that do not have those taxes. if florida has one, but hawaii doesn't, it could be more attractive for people to go to hawaii. but the mechanics are it would work exactly that way. host: the houses is having a debate on capitol hill over the size of economic impact checks,

$600 moving to $2000 being considered today in the house. as far as the dollar figure, what does it do economically -- would it make a difference? guest: i think it does make a difference. it's true for the people on the lower end, who have lost jobs or have lost income from their jobs, but not fully lost their jobs, in particular, it could be a really big benefit because they are the ones that are struggling the most in this economy. it is probably much less effective to send checks to people who have not lost any income. we have seen many of those, a lot of that money has been saved. areou are someone who, you in a middle-class family that has been able to work from home or you have been able to go to work safely, continually at your job, and you have your same salary and hours, and you're

suddenly getting a $2000 check -- that's wonderful for you personally, but for the macroeconomy is less likely that you will spend it right away, than if you spent in money on other things. and i thing that that is -- when i talk to economists about the stimulus package, one thing that several of them expressed has been that the discussion around it has been centered on the size of the checks, when it is things like the additional unemployment benefits, additional aid to businesses impacted by shutdowns, or even additional aid to state and local governments, which is not largely in this bill, that many economists considered to have a higher multiplier and more of an effect on the overall health of the economy than checks that help some people a great deal and others just sort of socked the money away. host: a few more minutes with

our guest. mark, go ahead with your question or comment. caller: thank you. thank you for writing your book, jim. i tried to look up your information to see what your family roots were, as far as organize the labor. it seems to me that organized labor, of which i am a member, and the son and grandson of a union coalminer. i'm a carpenter myself. but it seems to me that it is folks like us, especially back in the day, we were able to educate our children and let them go to college. you seem to be a sound that may have grown up and have fought for the workers, instead of turning your back on them. i ran off and joined the marine corps and became a combat engineer and i've also worked at u.s. embassies, so i knew that benghazi was not the embassy in tripoli, for those who are so

confused. i swung a hammer as a civilian, could never make more than $12 an hour in florida. within a year or so, i was in new jersey, but still resided in florida, but i was making three times those wages. i would work a 12 hour shift and we made doubletime on sundays. and i thought it was a millionaire. it has been a gift to me and my own personal life, but think what happened in our country as we got confused when you listen to the current president capture people with the language, and they thought that he was the person that stood up for them. but i would ask people who still think that that political party, they do not stand for organized labor, they want to make the country a right to work nation. and i wish -- host: i will have to leave it there. go ahead. guest: very briefly, i am a

guild member at the new york times. i have worked for union and nonunion places in my career, so full disclosure there. my mother is a retired school librarian and was a member of a teachers union. those are my family ties to unions. i think that in general, what the caller brings up is the importance of the dignity of work. we hear about it a lot, but i just want to recognize and appreciate the caller, who works really hard and has been able to make a good wage out of it. i think everybody should be able to do that. our economy works better when people who work hard are rewarded for the fruits of their labor. wet: james in albuquerque, are running short on time, so go ahead. caller: i see labor as having no say in washington. the corporations have all the say. inyou had codetermination

the corporate work room, then labor would finally have a say. that's my comment. thanks for taking my call. guest: it is an interesting idea, something that is done more in europe than here. but i will say that one thing that has really struck me watching joe biden's transition events in the last month, is how much he talks about how he is a union guy and he will put union people at the table in his administration. and when i talk to people within the labor movement, they seem optimistic about that. something to wait and see. he's also been talking to business groups. one place he told a bunch of ceos, about a month ago, that labor would have a seat at the table in his administration, but he would be talking to business, too. we will see how that plays out. host: nelson in florida. good morning. caller: good morning.

im a retired firefighter and was an active member of the union, so i am not antiunion. haveg said that, i also read extensively about history and the economy. we have to behat careful what we wish for. the vast majority of tax revenue that has gone into the coffers of the united states has been from the wealthy. trump,or to president 30%top 3% were putting in of all taxes. in the top 25% were putting 85% of all taxes. have beenttom 45% paying no taxes at all. host: we will have to leave it there.

i apologize for that. guest: he is talking about income taxes. the bottle 45% do pay taxes, payuding -- bottom 45% do taxes, including taxes in their communities. we do have a progressive system that raises much money from the rich. we also have an economy that delivers much higher spoils to the rich and then everyone else. we have to keep both of those things in mind when we are talking about policy. host: you write about what happened in history and what it means for the current folks in the middle class. when do you see things changing? what has to happen in order to make the changes? guest: i think that there is a lot that we can do. i lay out some proposals in the book, but the most important thing to do as a country is to have a values change. it's hard. i know i sound naive, but if we

could dedicate ourselves to finishing the work of civil rights and to truly equalizing opportunity for women and for men, for black and latino and other nonwhite americans, and white americans, if we could commit ourselves to building a country like that where the workers joined together across race and gender lines and demand better pay, i think we would have a stronger economy that would work for everyone. host: our guest works for the new york times as a tax reporter and is the author of "the riches of this land: the untold, true story of america's middle class." jim tankersley joining us as part of authors week. guest: thank you. host: again, the houses is about to go into that pro forma session. here is what you can expect. nancy pelosi plans to go to the floor and ask for a unanimous consent vote for a stand-alone bill that would increase the amount of direct payments in the

most recent covid bill, the increase from $600 to $2000. we expect to hear from kevin mccarthy. to revisear from him language to oversee spending in the ominous package. after that, we will come back and we will be joined by a presidential historian, craig shirley, who will talk about president trump's legacy and his influence on the republican party. we now take you to the house of representatives.