general nominee. at 3 p.m., the senate returns to consider the nominations of the housing secretary and the attorney general. in the evening, california governor gavin newsom delivers his annual state of the state address. on c-span three, the senate health committee meets at 10 a.m. for a hearing on the federal response to the coronavirus. in the afternoon, house speaker nancy pelosi and other speak at a conference hosted by the national league of cities. and there is more live coverage on our website with the house appropriations subcommittee hearing on the fda foreign drug inspection program. that gets underway at 10 a.m. eastern and you will find it at www.c-span.org. coming up this morning, new york representative talks covid-19 relief and the recent jobs report. the ohio representative warren

davidson joins us to discuss stock market manipulation and other news of the day. later, amy walter of the cook political report talks political volatility and whether it's come -- whether it's become the new normal. "washington journal" is next. ♪ host: u.s. house comes in today at noon with the intention of taking up and passing the final version of president biden's one point $9 trillion covid relief plan. it would mark the first legislative win of his new presidency. good morning, welcome to washington journal. the president so far has relied on a flurry of executive orders to forward his agenda, including two yesterday on international women's day, one of them establishing a white house gender policy council and that is what we want to talk about,

your thoughts on that. the first two lines are for women only. the first, (202) 748-8000 if you support the idea of a white house gender policy council. if you oppose the idea, the line is (202) 748-8001. for all others, (202) 748-8002. if you would like to send us a text, include your name and where you are texting from, (202) 748-8003. on twitter, we are @cspanwj and we will look for your facebook posts as well at facebook.com/c-span. the reporting this morning from npr on the announcement made in the white house briefing room yesterday, the policy council, president biden marked international women's day by signing two executive orders geared at promoting gender equality in the united states and around the world and in a statement the president said "in our nation and as in all nations, women have fought for

justice, shattered barriers [video clip] >> the council will tackle a

number of issues, working to combat systemic violence, discrimination, including sexual harassment and focus on increasing opportunities by addressing the structural barriers to the female participation in the labor force, decreasing the wage and wealth gap and addressing the caregiving needs of american families in supporting care workers, ensuring access to comprehensive health care and strengthening efforts to prevent gender-based violence and develop a national action plan that establishes a governmentwide approach both domestically and globally, promoting equity and opportunity with leadership and work for advanced gender equality globally through diplomacy, trade, and defense. host: reformulated and established yesterday by president biden, if you are a woman who that, (202) 748-8000.

if you are a woman who opposes that, (202) 748-8001. we welcome all others at (202) 748-8002. an opinion piece from a publication in florida, "the oracle," gender policy is a performative act to celebrate international women's day, where joe biden announced to the formulation of the white house gender policy council to discuss current feminist issues in america and provide female perspectives to white house affairs, potentially a step forward for american women but it seems to be more of a performative act to further prevent real change on a federal level. having the first ever female vice president is not the solution to feminist matters. the council is a reformation of the white house council on women and girls created under the former obama administration and is intended to provide biden with a feminist perspective as he makes decisions."

they write "obama's counsel was founded on similar intentions but was dismantled under president trump and it did not directly do anything concrete like completing initiatives or passing legislation. that's from "the oracle." david, riverside, california. good morning. caller: thank you, good morning. i don't think the democrats should be in charge of a policy on gender after they passed the equality act that denied gender altogether. as the democrats have called republicans climate deniers for not believing in the science of climate change, right? now they are denying gender, which any doctor or five-year-old child can tell you the difference between a boy and a girl. i can't imagine what's happening to us as a country. host: the measure passed by the

house a couple of weeks ago, this is from "usa today," "equality act may boost lgbtq classwork." they write "it would discriminate -- it would distinguish host: here's more from that piece on -- in "usa today" this morning. they say that five states have laws that forbid teachers from discussing lgbtq topics in a positive light. in contrast, five states, as well as some counties in maryland and virginia, have laws

that mandate lgbtq inclusive curriculum. even in states where restrictive laws him to exist, some don't feel comfortable teaching these topics because of a lack of support on the micro level, within the school district, parent, or principal host: yesterday was international women's day and yesterday on the house floor marjorie taylor greene of georgia spoke about the passage of the equality act and her opposition to it. [video clip] >> on international women's day i would like to discuss the equality act, it has completely destroyed women's rights and taken away women's rights in sports, completely canceled women and i think it's a terrible thing that has happened to the women in america who have come so far. our grandmothers and mothers

worked so hard to achieve our rights and with the passage of the equality act they have put men in the girls bathrooms, playing fields, and seem to care less about women's rights whatsoever and have completely destroyed religious freedoms and violated our freedoms and rights in every single way. the equality act is atrocious and people. it completely erases gender. god created us in his image, he created us. women deserve our sports and our privacy and should not have the invasion of biological men in any of these areas. host: starting the program this morning asking you about the creation of the gender policy council at the white house. for the women who support that, (202) 748-8000. women who oppose that, (202) 748-8001. for all others, (202) 748-8002. the u.s. house comes in at 10

a.m. eastern for morning speeches and getting down to legislative work at noon eastern , which may include the $1.9 trillion covid relief plan. here to talk about that with us is eric wasson, congressional reporter at bloomberg. good morning. the house is not even set to take it up yet, they are not even in the rules committee yet. is it a certainty they will take it up today? guest: it's a matter of paperwork. they were adding amendments in the middle of the day on saturday, proofreading from chuck schumer at the very end. to put it all together in one document a lot of line by line reading has to go on and they have to make sure it complies with the parliamentarian to make sure it's kosher.

they are just waiting for that. there's no evidence that this is a ruse, they don't have the votes from who i talked to and even the progressives who were upset about the scaling back in the senate will be on board and i'm not sensing the kind of doubt that we have seen in the past of it not being able to pass the house. pelosi said it could be wednesday morning but rules committee officials say that even if they get it tuesday night, they are ready to roll the dice and roll the bill out. host: the price tag does not appear to have changed much, but some things have changed in the version that was passed on saturday, correct? guest: yes, originally there was a minimum wage increase that was ruled out of order by parliamentarians. there was a threshold to try to add it back in but six members of the democratic caucus said that it shouldn't be waived, showing this strong support for the wage that many sought and in

addition there was a long drama on friday with joe mansion of west virginia, who was going to back ending it in july and they did it on september 6 and kept it where it is currently rather than increasing it to 400 per week, what the house had passed. there were additional myriad other changes and amendments that were made on for-profit higher education rules, extra benefits for homeless youth. these are often integrated but they don't really rise to the level of controversy that unemployment insurance change did and we are not seeing the kinds of defections that could bring the bill down, though they can only afford to lose four members. yesterday a moderate democrat who voted against the house bill came out in favor of it, saying that the modifications in the senate wrought him on board. host: you and your colleagues

were writing about a potential sequel once they finish work on this. how far down the road is that and what might it include? guest: that's right and we are in a crucial phase right now as members of congress, with the administration, the president could roll it out within weeks. an attempt to perhaps even greatly exceed what's been centered on infrastructure. there has been a lot of trouble trying to do it in a bipartisan way but the debate among democrats is what to add on to that as a vehicle to do big things like create a public option to change the optics on immigration and to do manufacturing on the renaissance , it's the idea that there's only enough bandwidth for one major package and will they break it up. a lot of that's going on right now. last night in the house democrats talked about the

bipartisan opportunity. republicans are saying it can't just go on the national credit card and be deficit driven. are these the tax increases democrats would want? a lot of problems and i recommend reading the story that stephen and i did on the bloomberg website, laying it all out. host: the original bill passed the house on a partyline vote, no republicans supported it on saturday, we are pretty much expecting the same vote tally today, wednesday, whenever the final vote comes up. guest: that's right, no sign of republican support for this. politically the party seemed divided by trump's last few weeks there, controversy over the riots, but opposition of this bill has allowed party leaders to ignite the flock once again and it is serving an interesting political unifying moment for them but on

infrastructure i think they will be willing to do some sort of deal. it just might not be the same size and scope that democrats are envisioning. host: eric wasson --, erik wasson, thank you. if you support the gender equality council, if you are a woman who supports the idea, it's (202) 748-8000. if you are a woman who opposes the idea, (202) 748-8001. for all others, it's (202) 748-8002. let's go to gabriel in maryland. good morning. caller: good morning, thank you for having me. host: you bet. caller: i'm in support of the commission of the gender equality council in the sense

that when we look at historically the things that have happened, the policies that have happened that are set up against women, it is time that women are given more priority. especially when it comes to the way they deal with sexual harassment. even though there are times when women have to realize that when they are given priority views, if somebody sexually harasses you, don't wait until 10, 15 years down the line to bring it up. women go through a lot and must be considered with topmost priority because their position has always been looking at, looking at what i may call as

[indiscernible] where is they do a lot going to work, cooking at home, taking care of the children and all of the rest of the things that women do that men do not do. we are not good men unless we are good at taking care of children, most men. if we consider what women go through and do what they desire, that's all i have for now. host: tammy, dallas, good morning. guest: good morning. i oppose that. as far as teaching our children, our kids that, that's not normal for a child to hear that. the changing sex gender as a young child? they don't understand. i oppose that. as far as women's rights, them going to -- men going to the bathroom with us and stuff, to me god didn't make that for men

to change sex like that because at the end of the day a man is going to be a man and a woman is going to be a woman. so, i oppose that and am very against that. host: here's robert, calling from golden valley, arizona. hey there. caller: good morning. i support the gender policy. we have kids arguing with their parents about what their teachers teach them. a potato is technically a tuber, which is self pollinating. it has both genders. there is a third gender, it's called hermaphrodite and they are born that way. to say that there is only two genders is kind of offensive to them. just in new word generation aren't spiritually tied down

like the older generation. they believe more that the goddess is equal to the god, that men and women should be equal, which they should be. and technically a male brain is different from a female brain by the chemicals in it. testosterone and estrogen. the transgender community has, you know, the brain doesn't match the body. if you can color your hair, change or i, change your body, you know, why stand in their way? host: let me ask you, what do you think of a white house based policy council, what kind of change do you think they can affect versus say the legislative process of passing laws on the federal here and state level? caller: well, for me i think

sexualizing children in any way is wrong. talking about things they don't understand. but lying to them is also wrong. on a federal level, there should be protection for trans children. and when they are old enough they should be able to make their own decisions about their bodies. i'm just so tired of this there's only two genders. the last time i checked, hermaphrodite s was born from aphrodite and i could blame her, i blame god for the third gender that is natural in plants, animals, and humans. host: the policy was one of two announced yesterday on international women's day. from "the new york times," "biden will revisit rules on

campus attacks repealed by trump , taking a look at all policies on sex and gender discrimination, beginning his promised effort to dismantle trump era rules should host: one to show you the comments from jennifer klein, the cochair, one of the cochairs of the gender policy council. [video clip] >> i would note that the american rescue plan has a number of provisions in it that will bring immediate relief to women and help them get back to work and those range from individual payments that will go

to individuals and to families, you know, child poverty will be reduced by half. there is a child tax credit that is of significant value to parents and women in particular. unemployment insurance. helping schools reopen safely so that kids can get back into school, stabilizing the child care industry and helping parents be able to afford childcare. there is so much in there that will provide immediate relief to women and help them get back to work. and as we said, there are longer-term structural changes that need to be addressed. i referenced the caregiving crisis. one of the reasons women are leaving work, first it's because they are in industries that are under stress like hospitality, retail. but also because they have caregiving needs they can't meet. thinking about, again, there are

pieces of this in the american rescue plan, but thinking about paid family and medical leave, building and making childcare more affordable, helping with long-term care for sick or aging relatives. addressing the issues of the caregivers we are depending on that need additional adequate wages and dignity in the work that they do. there is a long-term plan but i don't want to underestimate what needs to be done to get women back to work, kids back to school for crushing this pandemic. host: the opening our question this morning, asking you about the creation of the gender policy council at the white house. some reaction by social media and text, and you can send us a text at (202) 748-8003. carol in panama city says yes, were more women should be in

charge across the board. the days of men only being in charge is so outdated. there are some in 2020 believe a woman should not be president, which is ludicrous when we already have female leaders across the globe. sue in new jersey, more government overreaching. mlb says not sure why we need this since we are going to have a working mlj and the only way to change things is through laws and of the council is simply a well-meaning gesture, it's good dialogue but nothing more in this one says women's issue should be study to further enable the american experience, equality throughout the great nation helping to catapult the sensible guidance of many american issues. many will oppose this infringement into women's private spaces and unfair competition, says william in middletown. let's hear from evelyn in georgia. good morning. caller: good morning.

it distresses me when they try to take unusual occurrences and try to call them normal. there is such a fine line of what's normal and what isn't. you don't want to be judgmental and you don't want to leave anyone out, but you cannot take something that is different and call it, let it be dominant over what is right. i'm failing to express myself the way i want to, but you don't take what is wrong and call it right. i know you've got to be fair to everyone, but you cannot change the laws of nature and you are doing a disservice to boys and girls when you try to inflict on us that men can be and vice

versa, really. it's a safety issue as well. you don't need men in women's restrooms. we are already attacked and abused in so many ways. you don't need to add another element of opportunity for men to abuse women. host: is that one of your concerns from a policy council like this? that those kinds of issues could come up, that there could be incidences of men who identify as women in women's restrooms? caller: yes. it's very much a concern. it's easy to say anything. it's easy for someone to appear to be transgender when really they are just using it for an excuse to invade and hurt women

and little girls and even boys. this is a slippery slope and sometimes it's like pouring water out. you can't put it back into the bottle. host: lynn, maine, who supports the council. good morning. caller: good morning. host: you are on the air. go ahead. caller: yes, good morning. i support the bill. i think it's good policy. i think it's a wonderful idea. i hope that they will look at public universities and how women are affected there. host: tell us a little bit more specifically. what's your concerns in terms of that? caller: you know, i just think that it is good to have a federal policy so that if a woman working for a public

university is having problems with how they are being dealt with, they will be able to go to a higher level. host: yesterday was international women's day. kristi noem tweeted about that yesterday. she said that in south dakota they are celebrating international women's day by defending women's sports and she said she was excited to sign the bill soon and the bill she's talking about is reported here in the associated press, where she said she would sign a bill passed by the legislature to bar transgender girls and women from participating in female sports leagues. however whether it ultimately takes permanent effect in the state will ultimately be decided in federal court as no transgender girl currently plays in a female sports lee in south dakota according to the high

school athletics association. (202) 748-8000 four women who support the policy council, (202) 748-8001 if you oppose the idea. we welcome your comments on social media as well. highlands, new jersey, up next. deborah, good morning. caller: good morning. my thoughts on this are mixed. but i do support the policy. i realize that policy cannot solve everything. it's only helpful for starting a discussion in our society, which we've long had and not been able to resolve or come to any consensus on. we have a lot of fears. vulnerable people for various reasons, both male and female in this country, feel vulnerable, feel afraid.

there are differences in genders , in how people present in their body, structure, chemistry. it's very complicated. all that i think is necessary is that we examine our feelings, our thoughts, and discuss with each other how it is we could make everyone feel safe. and still value every person. i do not believe that any person that wishes to harm someone else or dominate over someone else should be the dominant legal force in this country or any country on the globe and that is the sickness, the mental illness that we as a species have on this globe and until we figure out how to resolve our

differences and our strengths and our weaknesses and value each person who is just trying to make a contribution to the human race in a positive way while they live, until we can figure out how to do that better than we have, we will continue down this path of eating each other alive and eventually nobody will survive. that's what i want everybody to understand. that's my comprehension at my age and point in life that i'm at right now. host: appreciate you weighing in on that. mike, good morning. caller: i support the act for several reasons. the first being it's just an expansion and codification of a supreme court decision last year. and i believe that without this

act that transgender men and women, boys and girls, won't receive the same protections that other protected classes received. i heard several callers make what i believe is a silly argument about bad men going into bathrooms that's just going in there pretending to be a woman. which is overly cynical. i'm a man and i can't see myself dressing up as a woman just to pretend to go into a woman's bathroom. furthermore, i'm sure that's happening anyway. are you going to have a genital check at the bathroom door? it's a silly argument that i hear against this bill. transgender people deserve rights. host: mike talking specifically about the equality act that passed in congress. denise is up next in oakdale,

california. caller: the last caller, that is absurd. plenty of men would like to go in women's bathrooms and do lewd things, ok? i also like to say that while everybody is being distracted with all this nonsense, ok, people need to realize that the democrats are trying to destroy our society, our moral values. they are trying to destroy our economy with all these social programs and they are running through like nothing, ok? they didn't win the election, they cheated with the election and the media can say all they want that most of america is behind them, but they are not. the whole world knows that and for any parents still willing to give their kids back to school, i know a wonderful teacher, few of them, but the people in

charge of the school, the department of education in charge of these ridiculous programs, they are trying to sexualize your children at a young age and they want to teach them in prekindergarten, first, second, and third grade about genders, being a boy or a girl? that is perverted. that is just not right. i suggest that parents start getting together themselves to figure out an alternative to school that they can come up with by themselves instead of putting them back into public education. they are indoctrinating them enough and nobody is behind with the democrats are doing right now. they are destroying our country. host: president biden announcing military appointments of female generals, this is reported by "the new york times," their promotions were delayed over fears of the trump reaction.

they were nominated to delete four-star commands -- to delete four-star commands -- elite four star commands. host: vice president kamala harris in american history yesterday. [video clip] >> during the american revolution women rode on horseback to transport sensitive information through enemy territory. in the civil war women disguised themselves as men and fought for the union army.

in world war ii women served as borrowers, waves, wasps. and today they are sanctioned around the world. -- stationed around the world. it's only been five years since all combat jobs have been open to women, women have been in the line of fire risking their lives to protect our nation long before that. today we know that women make up 15% of the active duty military and 19% of our enlisted officers and we also know that women want to serve and that our military is stronger when they do. look no further than these generals for proof. reproved -- recruiting more women into the military, adjusting policies to retain

women, enforcing policies to protect women and make sure they are heard and advancing more women on fair and equal footing will without any question make our nation safer. host: the vice president, yesterday. if you support the gender policy council, (202) 748-8000. if you are woman who opposes the idea, (202) 748-8001. for all others, it's (202) 748-8002. margaret from illinois says -- i do not support, just as abortion is a medical issue, gender identity is also. the federal government should not be involved. transgender women being lumped in with women's rights is offensive and unfair and transgender issues should be addressed separately,

transgender women are not synonymous with women. lee tweets, ever been to europe? many bathrooms are unisex, this is not a problem. lee says that research and discussion never hurts and it is good to focus on helping people in a fair way based on facts, data, and science. john on facebook says that if everyone is supposed to be treated equally, why do we need another nonelected counsel? one more from florida, dell, saying that putting the gender issue on the front burner is ridiculous, there are more important issues like drug addiction. biden is putting fringe issues front and center. back to your calls, we hear from stephen oak ridge, tennessee. caller: hey, good morning, bill.

i'm 72 years old. i taught school from 1974 until like 2005. here's some observations i have seen over the years. first off, teachers can tell what a child's sexuality is going to be as early as third and fourth grade. my wife taught third graders they can tell. i had a lot of kids where i knew they were going to be gay and that's just the way it is. also, about one out of every 1000 people is born and the doctors cannot tell if they are male and female and the sexes assigned to them. -- sex is assigned to them. in my class in 1967 there was a girl in their and she always showered in the teachers shower and one day another girl decided to buy and pulled back the curtain and the girl had both

female and male genitalia. her family took her out of school, it was the last time we saw that girl. was that fair? personally i don't think so. children, girls are more likely to be abused by a family member or a close family friend. not in a restroom. last thing, you know, this whole thing from my experience, it seems to be that homosexuality runs in families. i have a very close friend who has an aunt who is gay. married a wonderful woman who has a sister who is gay. they have two girls, one of which is gay. i have another friend with a gay brother who married a woman homosexually in their family and they have a gay daughter. you know, this whole thing about fear and emotion, you know,

people are people and people have been like this since the beginning. host: as a former teacher, steve, where do you think the introduction of the knowledge of gender identity should be taught to kids? does that begin with sex education classes in what, fifth, sixth grades in public school or so? caller: that's a question i haven't thought much about, bill, but i would say middle school. i think that's where it becomes apparent to a lot of kids that they are not whatever you want to call them, normal, which i don't think is the right word, but i will tell you some thing else interesting about that. where i taught as far as sex education is concerned, parents were given the opportunity to opt out of sex education and it was amazing to me how many parents would opt out of having

their children taught about sex and sexuality by trained professionals. i don't know, but take emotion out of it. it's that simple. thanks for letting me have this much time. i love c-span, i love all y'all. keep up the good work. host: good to hear from you, thank you. bedford, joseph, hello. caller: i'm totally against it. you can't have a dozen distant -- a dozen different bathrooms for people identifying as this or that. a male has male dna, female female dna. this you are whatever you say you are is nonsense. i'm an old white guy, i could say i'm a young japanese schoolgirl but that don't make it true and why one perversion is allowed to force their beliefs on the rest of society is not fair. it's a perversion, no different

than pedophilia, bestie halliday. it's all the same at the end of the day. host: so, you think somebody identifying as another gender is a perversion? caller: yes, it is. a male has a -- has a male dna, a female has a female dna. i'm a male, i could put on a skirt and abroad and it don't make me a female. -- a bra and it don't make me a female. host: michael, california. caller: to the lady who called earlier about education and how the liberals are taking over the schools, just point out that 75% of the educational books in the united states are published in texas. hardly a bastion of liberalism. i will say this, take religion out of stuff and you might have your brains work. think you.

don't believe in fantasy, believe in reality. host: congressional leaders announcing another retirement in the senate. this is the headline at "the hill," dealing a blow to the mcconnell inner circle, "retirement of roy blunt means another member of the gop inner circle means there's more of a shift towards the trump brand of populism. rob portman of ohio said he wouldn't be seeking reelection next year host: here's part of the announcement made by senator blunt yesterday. [video clip] >> i have tried to do my best in this job. out of 12,000 votes in the congress am sure i wasn't right every time, but we can only make

that information based on the decision -- make that decision based on the information you have at the time. after multiple elections, i won't be a candidate for the senate next year. i want to thank my family and the great team that came together to help me work for you . most importantly, thanks to the missourians, whether you voted for me or not, there's still a lot to do and i look forward to every day this year as i continue to work for you in the senate. another lesson i learned here, finish strong and i intend to. thanks for giving me the chance to work for you. host: continuing the conversation on the gender council being created by the white house, the headline is " taking steps to ensure fair and

equal competition." in this opinion piece from fox news, "dreams of female athletes have come under threat to allow biological males to compete against them in a misguided attempt at fairness. let's be clear, biological host: reaction from viewers and listeners and by text, this one from new york. absolutely not in terms of supporting the policy counsel. it's just government interference giving government control over beliefs and lies,

as promised by the previous administration. lucy says "the gender policy counsel is a great idea, any counsel like this is to educate and create understanding to try to alleviate no. if people have an issue with this, the problem is on them, not the council. too much, too soon, going to the surface. on facebook, elaine says "seems like we have a new executive order every day, we are being buried in them. diana opposes them. she's in lawton, oklahoma. hi there. caller: thank you for listening to me. i oppose this thing. gender, the guy from tennessee supposed to be a teacher teaching our kids to be imposters, he ought to have his head checked. his mother, his sisters, his

friends. that's ridiculous. god borned us to be the gender we were born and we should live out that gender. host: ok. to maggie, supporting this, springfield, virginia, good morning. caller: the first comment i want to make is that trans women are women. . the movement for gender equality has to include trans women and trans men. but i think part of this that is so upsetting to me and why i think it furthers the need for this policy counsel is that a lot of the comments are about men showing up in bathrooms or men disguising themselves to compete in women's sports. that's a completely different group of people than trans women

who are looking for inclusive equitable opportunities to be a part of our society, which everybody should have and everyone deserves. i think the gender policy counsel is great stuff. but another step in our society to be inclusive and equitable should allow americans to experience the right benefits and opportunities that we all deserve. host: appreciate your comments, you're breaking up their little, we will let you go. front page today, cdc guidance eases rules for an ocular -- inoculation. "designed to ease restrictions for americans who are fully vaccinated, guidance saying that those who have received a full course may get together from -- with other fully vaccinated individuals inside their homes without masks or physical distancing, visiting with other

unvaccinated people from other households who are at low risk for severe disease." usa today rights -- writes host: here's linda in morehead, minnesota. there you are, linda. go ahead. caller: good morning. i have a comment i would like to make with regards to the genders. i am unbiased and i think that they all deserve rights. i feel that the rights are all people -- of all people are covered. they comes to the point where for transgender people, we need to look at their freedom of

choice. if they choose to be transgender , i accept that. they have the right to that choice and i have the right to my choice. i don't want to have a transgender into my area. because i don't know. they may appear to be a woman, they may be a man. that's ok. i find it offensive to myself and i find it infringes upon my right to privacy. if my six-year-old granddaughter , i need to go into that restroom with her, because i never know if there is an imposter. and if parents are choosing to -- host: when you say imposter, trying to understand, you mean somebody pretending to be

transgender? caller: right, a predator. i cannot, if a man or a woman, there's predators out there. my son is a man of small stature. i don't want him to be a victim. as well as myself, i'm an older woman of small stature. ok? i need to defend myself. he needs to defend himself. i care not, man or woman, never know. host: you talked about your rights. how do we get to a place where the people who i -- who do identify as another gender have their rights recognized and respected? is it through federal law? through state law? will this policy counsel be able to help affect something like that? caller: we are duplicating rights here, crossing paths.

this new lgbtq, i believe that is already covered in our human rights amendment. we are all equals, i care not about your gender rights, it's all covered under human rights, our civil rights. the right to freedom of choice. host: that was linda in montana. we go to burlington, vermont. rebecca, good morning. caller: good morning, thank you for having me on. i just want to read a piece from deuteronomy 22, "the women shall not wear that which pertain it to a man neither shall a man put on a woman's garment, for all that do so are an abomination to the lord thy god." god gives us free will to choose but it doesn't mean that what i

choose to do is god's will. i choose either god's will or the will of the flesh. we have free will to do that, but again that doesn't mean that god is obstructing of the choice. thank you for having me on. host: a couple of comments from social media, this text from tim, saying that the gender qualification counsel is another progressive avenue to break down the fabric that makes america. progressives are out to destroy family, god, and white men, they hate america." on twitter, "i support the council." this from william, "women's issues should be fully studied and equality throughout this great nation will catapult the sense of sensible, lawful guidance through many issues and many will impose this infringement into private spaces

for women in unfair competition. grove city, ohio. caller: back in the 1960's, one of the psychology courses i was taking, we had a book written by john sm money, named man boy woman girl. in it there are biological pictures of people's genitalia, ok? you don't see the other part of their bodies, just the genitalia. you want to know something? some of these people have both vaginas and penises, ok? your audience that keeps calling in and keeps saying that it's a woman or a man, nature doesn't differentiate that well and neither does god. a lot of people are getting hung up on the god thing, thinking that god only makes women and

men and stuff like that. when you talk about god, i always wonder, what if this is god. host: the policy counsel, section one, advancing gender, equity, and equality as a matter of human rights, they say. it's a strategic imperative that reduces -- that increases access to education, improves health outcomes, fostering democracy. the full participation of all people, women and girls across all aspects of society is essential to the economic well-being and health of the nation and it is the policy of this administration to establish and pursue a comprehensive approach to ensure the federal government is working to provide equal rights and opportunities regardless of gender and gender identity, including by promoting

workplace diversity, fairness, and inclusion across the federal workforce and military as intended to advance gender equity and equality with sensitivity to the experiences of those who suffer discrimination based on multiple factors, including membership in an underserved community. edward, saulsberry, north carolina, good morning. caller: good morning, how you doing? host: fine, thanks. caller: ok. what i wanted to say, i agree with it. i'm 75 years old. i've known a lot of people, worked around a lot of different people and i've never had a problem with people with their situation. in the military, they have been fighting these wars all their lives. no matter it's at home or work, women going through a lot. these people never bother

anybody, they are hard workers and they are your friends. people really need to keep their minds on something else. like they made us in his image and they should stay out of people's business and leave them alone. don't worry about these people, leave them alone. host: bobby is next up, lake city, hello. caller: good morning. i just had to throw in a comment here with regard to the lady who made the comment on bathrooms and transgender people and predators. there are no recorded events of predators, transgender people, attacking anybody in bathrooms. i'm 21 years of postop transgender and my position in life is simply i want a life not a label. i like being called bobby, not transgendered. if people would respect me with as much respect as i have for

them, we would all get along great. host: compare your life now to 21 years ago, before you had the surgery. how are you doing? caller: simple answer there, i'm doing good. i have quite a few friends, i'm accepted in the community. i don't have any problems. people are getting all drummed up by the politicians. it's absolutely ridiculous. we are just people, you know? we are no different than anybody else. we get up in the morning, put our clothes on, go to work, do what we do in life. all this stuff comes out of the politics, somebody to hate. so that's kind of where it's at with me. i enjoy life. i love life. what i go back to where i was? no. i love being who i am. host: can i ask you one more

question? how early on in your life did you recognize that something was different about you? whether you knew right away that you were the wrong gender or had that feeling that you needed to change something in your life? caller: i would say probably at age 40, i got to a point where i knew something wasn't right. i didn't go through gender surgery until i was 50. shortly after the surgery, the first three years, the first year after surgery i kept asking myself if i had done the right thing. the second year after surgery, i got kind of mad because i wished i'd been able to do it a lot earlier. the third year i accepted this is who i am, this is who i'm going to be and i'm going to enjoy my life. i made a promise to myself that i wasn't going to be abused by anybody and i've kept that promise. quiet people gin up all this

hate -- why people gin up all this hate is ridiculous. personally, i don't understand host: i am glad you called in this morning. this is from the washington times. biden reviews trump's title ix. the first executive order dealt with title ix, the law that prohibits sex based discrimination in schools and colleges. mr. wyden ordered the -- two review its policies on title ix to make sure they do not act with the policies that the educational environment must be free of violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity. it directs the department to evaluate the trump administration's title ix administrations. those --that title ix prohibits

such harassment. virginia foxx said mr. biden was picking and choosing who gets to process. "the right to due process is a cornerstone of american democracy. perhaps resident biden has forgotten that the presumption of the innocent has protected liberal elites from sexual allegations. college students should be offered the same protections." in maine, supporting the gender policy council, good morning. caller: absolutely and thank you. i want to say to the people who are quoting scripture to justify their prejudices that if you look closely you will find that that says you shouldn't eat selfish and makes milk and meat.

anyone eating lobster or cheeseburgers is in trouble. the bible says you should not mix women and will -- linen and wool in one cloth. the bible says more about caring for each other and caring for the least among us and caring for the widow and orphan. i feel we should pay more attention to that. host: william in georgia, good morning. caller: good morning. i think that it oils down to a fundamental question of whether or not being gay or lesbian is a choice. it is so obvious that people are born gay or lesbian and it is not a choice that people look at.

host: do you feel the same way with people who have gender identity issues? caller: yes i do. a person will say okay man -- say a gay man who is actually woman and would like to represent himself as a woman, i don't have any problem with that. i think it is just carrying on. the fact that if he was unbelieving he has feminine qualities and feminine ideas and sees himself as a woman, i don't have any problem with that.

host: a couple comments on twitter. "i support the council and its objectives which include prevent gender-based violence." "biden is pandering to women, lgbtq, african-americans, and minorities to get their votes. the equality act trumps the trump agenda but what else is new in politics?" "if it was not needed, biden would not be establishing this council. he is repairing the damage done by the former president." from bill on facebook "no debt relief or rental assistance." patricia in chicken, hello there -- patricia in michigan, hello there. caller: just a couple of things. this woman was quoting deuteronomy which is in the old

testament book in the bible which is the laws. if you're going to go with the law she said -- you have to look at everything. there is a lot of stuff we don't do anymore. let's go to the new testament. jesus died and he loved everybody. god loves and he sent his son to die for everybody. there is no respecter. there is in our constitution a pursuit of happiness. i know people who were suppressed and afraid to come out. don't they deserve to be happy? now they are happy. let's all be happy and love each other. host: jackson is next in louisiana. caller: i wanted to point out something.

when it comes to what used to be referred to as a mental disorder such as gender dysphoria which is no longer viewed as such. i'm curious is not like bipolar and multiple personality disorders will start to normalize. just like someone says i am no longer a woman, now i am a man. this is my personality today, i'm actually three different people. whatever on monday, lucy on tuesday, or whatever. host: this is the washington post about allegations against andrew cuomo. they are reporting about the response so far from the president. "allegations against cuomo.

president biden stood at a lectern to commemorate international women's day flanked by two women general c had nominated. he signed executive orders on sexual assault lauded by women's groups. a storm was gathering around a long time rent, governor andrew cuomo, who is faced allegations of unwanted touching from five women, including four who work from him. andrew cuomo has denied the allegations but they have prompted calls from new york democrats for his resignation which joe biden -- president biden has declined to join. a dilemma facing a president who has positioned himself as a champion of women's rights. he spent his earliest weeks supporting a policy supporting women but is now being tested by a policy -- -- tested by a

scandal surrounding a prominent immigrant with whom he has had a long elation ship." we are talking about the gender counsel, what are your thoughts? caller: i am for the council being established because we have to have certain rules towards other people. women wanted to write to vote, slaves wanted to be free -- women wanted the right to vote, slaves wanted to be free. some people want to be gay. people quoting the bible, i have two problems with that. if it was true, god would not have created the child. if we are supposed to be in the image of the lord -- think about that. biased people are biased.

people want to live. there are two types of people in the world, either you are a bigot or you are not. if they have to have a policy, welcome to the government. they can have a policy for everything. i think people need to step back , think about what they're doing , and what would god do? host: our program continues in just a moment. we will be joined by adriano espaillat to talk about the coronavirus relief will. -- relief bill. we will talk about the recent job reports. later, warren davidson will talk about his work on the financial services, the latest on gamestop , and other stock market manipulation. that is ahead. ♪ >> book tv on c-span two has top

nonfiction books and authors every weekend. sunday night on "afterwards," charles kessler talks about his book "crisis of the two constitutions." he is interviewed by george nason university professor. at 10:00, walter isaacson looks at the developer of the method for genome editing in his book "the code breaker." at 11:05, journalist gail lemon reports on kurdish women warriors fighting and winning against isis. watch book tv this weekend on c-span two.

>> washington journal continues. host: we are joined by congressman adriano espaillat from new york city who represent the 13th district. good morning, congressman. guest: good morning. host: let's start with the covid really ill which passed in the house and came back to the senate over the weekend. it passed on a partyline vote. you and your colleagues will likely begin work on it today. some changes were made in the senate. can you still so the $1.9 trillion measure? guest: no question about it. i'm excited we will begin the discussion today and ultimately pass it today. america is still hurting. they need a lot of help. i am surprised more republicans did not come on board. this is a robust recovery bill that will go to all corners of america to help us move forward.

host: what will happen with the push for the $15 national minimum wage. guest: we will continue to bates that. -- continue to debate that. we have that in new york and it helped my district. it was the difference between having a couple bring in -- dollars a week and bringing in $1200 a week. they will not go on a caribbean vacation with that kind of money in their pocket, they will go to the grocery store and get those items they need on a daily basis. it is really a shot in the arm to the economy, to be small mom and pop businesses that are needed. i am surprised republicans could not see this and chose to gang up against it.

host: you did the -- of course, the $1.9 trillion plan will have four key dollars for individuals -- will have $1400 for individuals. let's talk about how you saw that help your district in new york city. 160 billion -- 106 billion dollars for vaccines and testing -- where is that money going first in your district. guest: the vaccination money is direly needed. we must continue to vaccinate people across the city and country. the variant will become dominant in a week or two in new york city so let's vaccinate to push back and contain it. we must continue to do that in every corner of every

neighborhood. the state and local government money is so important. even if we dump a lot of money in the state municipalities across the country, they are hurting financially and they have to make cuts to vital programs dear to lots of families around the country. this will help us survive fiscally and allow us to continue to provide the services families need across america. the small business money is very important because there really trying to open. they were shut down and that really devastated new york city. now they are struggling to open up. i think it is important we help them. restaurants are really hurting. new york state will get $100 billion. this is more that we got out of hurricane sandy relief.

this is the biggest plan of recovery in history of america for new york state. i'm excited for it. new york city must come up again and lead the nation again. our economy must be restored. host: we welcome your calls and questions for commerce men adriano espaillat -- for congressman adriano espaillat. for democrats it is 202-748-8000 . republicans it is 202-748-8001. for all others it is 202-748-8002. congressman, republicans, and particularly mitt romney. he said there is money that states and localities don't. i want you to react to what he had to say. [video clip] >> i believe we make better legislation if we have two parties that work together. we have crafted a piece of legislation our party has not had any involvement in.

we tried, we went to the white house and the president was very gracious in listening to us but did not accept our proposals. we have before us a piece of legislation that has the benefit of only one party. there are some errors in that and some things i think we need to fix. one is in regard to states and localities. the president -- at the time the president put his bill out, it was an assumption the states had massive losses. the data that has come out has shown the states did not have those kinds of losses. 21 states are seeing rising revenue. states like florida don't need more money, oklahoma does not need more money, utah does not need more money. california has record surpluses, billions of dollars in surplus. under this legislation, california at the state level gets $26 more. -- $26 billion more.

this is on top of their surplus here. think about that. we will be asking the american people to let us borrow money from china and others, passed that to our kids and grandkids so we could send money to state that california who don't need the money. host: congressman, your argument about mitt romney saying they have rising revenues. why do you think that money is needed in the bill? guest: we are in the middle of a pandemic still. we give you an example. the mta runs our subway system. they run it's based on ridership. ridership is down so it is down dramatically. if we don't open our subway system our city will never open up.

they need money so we put eight -- $8 billion in the funding to restore the mta and make sure it will be able to open up our transportation system. some folks look at it and say what does that have to do with the covid recovery? it has everything to do with it. without a timely transportation system, we would not be able to open up our economy. again, the system runs on a ridership or mila -- ridership formula. most states and municipalities are still hurting. businesses are still shut down. unemployment -- i know we had an improvement in the unemployment rate. there are lots of people who are not working yet. people are still afraid, the virus is still out there, let's help the states and

municipalities and to get back on our feet. why do we have to wrestle with $100 on the unemployment benefit? there was a big what to do about $300 or $400. forgot's sake -- for god's sake, we are going to have a debate about $100? let's give it to people. let's inject money into the economy and make sure our small businesses which continue to be the biggest employers across the country have something to stand on. let's be good. big government i think is good government. we can restore back our economy in a safe and responsible way. let's be the america we know it could be. let's be the strong america for everybody. host: let me ask you about border issues and immigration which are becoming a bigger

problem earlier in the administration. the new york times this morning, "a surge in micra children detained is surging on the borders -- in migrant children detained is surging on the borders. the biden administration struggles to find room in shelters according to documents obtained by the new york times. congress is developing the u.s. citizenship act of 2021. it would provide an eight-year path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants in the u.s., bolster asylum systems and add technologies to secure the southern border. are you behind that effort and how soon do you think the house might take that up? guest: this is a very personal issue to me as i came to this great nation without documents. i came on a visitor's visa, over

stood my visa, and now i am a congressman. this country gives a promise to everybody. we need to make sure no children are split from their parents. that is a moral commitment that the moral -- that the biden administration must stand by. we are working on a bill with the biden administration. the hispanic caucus is taking a look at that bill and comparing it to what we developed to make sure we strengthened it. in many cases, many provisions of the biden bill are even stronger than what we are bringing forward. you're making sure children are not split from their parents. this is a fundamental piece of that bill we must ensure happens . no child should be split. i was involved in bringing mothers and their children together at the height of the

horrific period of our history when children were split from their mothers' arms. i know firsthand how tragic that is. we must not allow that to happen. america must be a beacon of opportunity. humanity must avail with this issue. -- must prevail with this issue. host: what does the biden administration have to do to distinguish itself as different from the trump administration policies? guest: it must have a human face. that means let's make sure -- for example -- we provide for the nation of venezuela and we already did. there is a brutal dictatorship there and the people are hungry. let's make sure children and families are not split, that

children are not incarcerated in dingy and inhumane facilities. i saw it was going on firsthand in those facilities, many of which are run by private companies where the profit incentive is the number one goal. let's make sure we we are night families -- we we read -- let's make sure we reunite families. when families are united, america is stronger. how could we have a disparate test it is pretty -- a disparity? we are calling for a stronger america get splitting families apart? let's reunite families, provide dreamers with the opportunity to move forward. that makes america stronger. this is to be a comprehensive bill. we are going to do the dream act and the farmworkers bill before we get to the biden comprehensive will.

-- comprehensive bill. this is an important piece of legislation we should take up around march. host: the l.a. times was reporting on that story "the biden administration giving temper status to thousands of venezuelans -- giving temporary status to thousands of venezuelans." let's get to calls. from buffalo, new york. good morning. caller: good morning, representative. you talked about the minimum wage. upstate is complete different than downstate. it is hurting our small businesses. we are not sure when it comes to the $15 an hour -- i think it is steep. i think they should lower it a little bit and maybe it would get past. i don't see how it is beneficial. thank you.

guest: good to hear from you from buffalo. i love buffalo. new york city also has that dynamic where in some boroughs the cost of living is more dynamic than others. the cost of living in the east side versus the west side of manhattan is very high as opposed to the bronx. $15 an hour did not break the back of neighborhoods like the bronx. it increased the purchasing power of consumers. consumers, if you give them an extra $100 a week, they will go to the grocery store. they will go to the local business and spend it there. they will motivate that economy. frank mindy roosevelt implemented -- franklin d roosevelt implemented the minimum wage in the middle of the great depression.

as people were in job lines across the city and people were committing suicide because the economy collapsed. he had the vision to move forward and clement minimum wage -- and implement the minimum wage. it proved to be very effective. it proved to be the biggest stimulus package. $15 an hour is not a lot. how can you survive anywhere in america with devon dollars and $.25 -- america with $7.25? with $1200 a week they can pay rent and maybe even save extra money and be able to spend more in the local economy. i think that is good for any part of america, including buffalo. host: here is jd in arkansas. good morning.

caller: i have a couple of suggestions that might appease some of the republicans opposed to this bill. on the $1400 stimulus, instead of sending out checks, why don't you send out debit cards with a time limit on it and people could call in and activate the debit cards were not use them at all if they didn't want to? it is just an idea. on the minimum wage, won't that be tied to the cost of living the same way social security is tied to it? move it up to nine dollars and then tie it to the cost of living year after year. guest: i like the debit card idea. i don't know if i would put a deadline on it but i think that is a great idea. the minimum wage piece should be

indexed. it has been a while since we got a raise. it has been a while since working-class america has gotten in a raise. to index it would be a smart thing. we don't have to go back to it. it would just increase as the cost of living increases. if we were to increase the minimum wage taking into account those increases in the cost of living in the last 15 to 20 years, it brings us up to maybe even above $15. host: you said the minimum wage in new york city is now $15? guest: that is correct and it stabilized my neighborhood. it gave purchasing power to consumers to pay rent, not to be stressed out without knowing how to make ends meet. they get extra money to buy milk, bread, go to the pharmacy.

they don't have to co-pay prescription drugs. they have extra money in their pocket. it is not a lot but it is important for the economy and mom and pop businesses struggling to meet. host: this is a call from arizona. pablo, go ahead. guest: you talked about -- caller: you talked about big government doing great things. can you give me an example? guest: i think the $1400 you will get in the middle of a time of great pressure is great for you and your family. if you are unemployed and you are depending on $300, it is a great day for america. if you want schools to reopen in a safe way, having $130 billion to make sure schools are safe

and your children are not put in a dangerous position is a great thing for america. these are all measures -- by the way, this is the first time the house puts forth our own visit -- our own vision. we were bipartisan in the last packages. we got this from the senate. we knew we were in the middle of a great axis -- a great crisis. we adapted and said let's go for it. this is the first time we put forward our plan. the republican members of congress refused to acknowledge that people are hurting across america. this is a great bill and i look forward to fort. host: congressman adriano espaillat representing hatton. thank you -- representing manhattan. thank you for being with us this morning. guest: thank you very much.

host: we are joined by congressman warren davidson. we will talk about a number of things, including his efforts to look into the gamestop frenzy. he serves on the financial services committee. later, amy walter of the cook political report joins us to talk about her new column called "volatility is the new normal." ♪ >> public health leaders testify to a senate committee about the u.s. covid-19 response one year after the pandemic began and give an update from the front lines. watch live starting at 10:00 a.m. on c-span3, online at c-span.org, or listen on the free radio app. >> governor gavin newsom delivers a state of a state -- the state of the state address

in los angeles. watch live at c-span2 or listen live on the free radio app. ♪ >> you are watching c-span, your unfiltered view of government. c-span was created by america's television companies in 1979. today, we are brought to you by these companies who provide c-span to viewers as a public service. >> washington journal continues. host: our next guest is congressman warren davidson from ohio. he sits on the financial services committee and is a member of the freedom caucus. he is here to talk about things happening in the u.s. house. the biggest thing is a $1.9 trillion relief plan. it comes to the floor today. you will be voting on it today. as it comes with no republican

support, what is your take on it? guest: no republican supported it in the house. the only thing bipartisan about this bill is the opposition. it highlights -- they white house press secretary called it the most progressive bill in american history. it is not really a relief bill, it is the most progressive bill. host: assuming it passes in the house and is signed by the president, how will house republicans try to move forward with your agenda? particularly the freedom caucus, what efforts will you have to respond to it? guest: in congress, we fight by putting. we don't have the votes, unfortunately. we have to call attention to the overstepped and the fallacies out there.

only 9% of this is actually going to direct covid relief. a huge percentage of it is what makes it the most progressive bill in american history. there is 120% loan forgiveness for minority-only farmers and ranchers. if the american people support that, they should celebrate it. but the administration doesn't want to talk about those policies because they know they are not popular with the public. host: we asked congressman adriano espaillat about the moneys for state and localities. what is the situation in ohio? guest: i had a bill since last year called the "flexibility for states and localities act." what they need is flexibility out of the money spent. there is roughly 25% of the

money already spent in a bipartisan fashion that is still sitting on the books unused. part of the reason is because it -- because there are tight conditions on what the money can be used for. they moved the deadline out but have not increased the flexibility. they need flexibility out of the money they already have. there should be conditions on the money. in ohio, we reformed our pension system. only 4% of our budget goes to pensions. states like illinois have not reformed their pensions stems -- their pension systems. is that this takes money from ohio taxpayers and bails out illinois's pensions. it is punishment for companies that have -- for states that have showed discipline. host: you serve on the house financial services committee.

your committee held a hearing into the gamestop issue and the rapid rise in gamestop stock. the principles in that hearing, including folks from robin hood and reddit. what did you learn from that hearing? guest: one of the things that made national attention was the dynamic of a reddit read -- read it spread -- reddit thread creating a long. versus wall street sing this company is going to be -- they were making a short. people on robin hood refitting of the story as the hedge fund billionaires will lose money to

these smalltime investors. it captivated the public's attention. we dug down into the mechanics behind it. some of it is free speech. can you say on reddit what you could say on a bloomberg terminal or do you get a special status on bloomberg? as robin hood's ceo highlighted, the data traded creates an inherent problem that market participants benefit from. investors and companies trying to execute these trades would benefit from getting tutees -- there was a point where gamestop was shorted. you can't deliver -- gamestop was 140% shorted. you can't deliver 100 push 40 --

140% of shares. there is it true market structure issue that needs to be addressed. host: for most americans, it is hard to tell a good guy and a bad guy. guest: a lot of the reaction was that the good guys were these smalltime investors and the bad guys were wall street. that is kind of the dynamic that is inherent. if you look into it, there was a piece where robin hood suspended trading and saying they are being bad guys and manipulating people. you drill down and see there was a market structure issue. the question is are we going to respond to that the right way? the sec and regulators for securities are responding by shutting down speech. they suspended trading just a friday or two ago on about 15 or

more stocks. who is going to be the next roaring kitty? mr. gill who highlighted the potential of gamestop and created the phrase "diamond hands" you he held on and was rewarded for it -- because he held on and was rewarded for it. somebody on a reddit thread or some other form says i believe in this company and it has a future, they are saying that is causing market manipulation. the reality is this is just the democratic access to capital. if they respond by suspending trading or reforming the markets -- if we respond -- if we don't respond by reforming the markets, we will have more people lucked out of investing.

we have to get to real-time settlements so no one can have multiple claims to the censure. host: our guest is warren davidson. we welcome your comments. for democrats it is 202-748-8000 , republicans it is 202-748-8001 , and for all others it is 202-748-8002. you had a piece published and you talk about the broader issue about where people can participate in the market. you write that with the federal reserve keeping interest rates near zero, there is little reason for americans to hold cash in traditional accounts. the dollar has lost its value and buying power has defended the value of currency. this is inflated asset prices, distorted markets, and has posed a risk to the markets. do you think in the aftermath of

the gamestop frenzy it will be harder for smalltime investors through robin hood or other similar platforms to be able to participate in the market? guest: i think it will be easier in the sense that robin hood raised more capital. they are inspiring more people to copy and launch trading platforms. the question is are activators going to cut off that participation like they did by suspending trading in stocks that had previously been ignored by the market? if the regulators cap it and protect a deal flow for the existing incumbents, that is the real issue. it is incumbent on people to find those alternatives. when you print an additional $2 trillion -- when we say let's spend one point $9 trillion --

$1.9 trillion, that is destroying the value of other dollars. that is growing the wealth gap. wealthy people have more securities and disposable income and less cash tied up. to the extent people can, they have to keep up with this. that is why they are moving investments to things that can see growth. they will be more and more demand as you see in the destruction of the dollar through fiscal and monetary policy. i hope regulators can deal with structural issues. host: those regulators regulate based on the loss you write in congress. is there an appetite to address that issue? guest: we have committed to having follow-up hearings. i hope to have a good dialogue

with one of the companies that settled trades. they sent clearing for the shares. when people buy shares on robin hood, they don't really buy them, they have a claim. then two days later those are really settled. they set reserve requirements for a company like robin hood to be able to trade for the day. we will have hearings to talk about that. my hope is that this will produce real legislation. initially, when you see somebody who's reaction like alexandria ocasio-cortez's having the same reaction like ted cruz, this is encouraging because there could be a bipartisan solution here. since then, i'm not sure, there has been lobbying to preserve the status quo.

host: let's hear from callers. we will go to lynn in las vegas, nevada. caller: why don't each congressperson to a covid bill pertaining to their district? find out how much businesses have lost, whatever, and have her district money numbers on that and bring that to a vote? $1400 isn't going to do a lot for people who have been waiting a year. if you have not figured out a different way to take care of or handle your business, you're going to a homeless shelter.

that $1400, the congressman before said people will appreciate it. yeah we appreciate it but what is it truly costing us. guest: i appreciate your suggestion. a couple of my colleagues have talked about that. once this $1.9 trillion passes, your spending over $6 trillion for covid relief in a year. most of that was bipartisan, the last $2 trillion was partisan. we would be somewhere between 10 and $15 per congressional district. my district has 730,000 people in it. if our office controlled $10 billion of relief, how much of it district how much of a difference we could make. it -- how much of a difference we could make. even when you communicate how

much is that per congressional district, is that much money really flowing into my district? it does not feel like it. host: are there oversight hearings on how the covid money has been spent? guest: yes there was a commission. our committee has oversight of treasury, broadly. small business has oversight of small business and so forth. committees oversee health and human services, the national institutes of health. there was a separate oversight panel and congress has its own oversight committee. there have been a lot of hearings about it. we think about being accountable, each member of congress stands for election every two years. the idea that congress controls a certain pot of money to influence outcomes in their district is an interesting idea. host: mary is up next in california, go ahead. caller: representative davidson,

my question is have you ever noticed the lines of cars where people are in the lines for food and vaccines? guest: well yeah i'm a we were at a food drive -- yeah, we were at a food drive in november. there was a congressional challenge and one of our members turned a way of distributing food into enough off it -- into a non-office. -- into a nonprofit. there were food boxes that help distribute food over and above the normal food stamps programs, supplemental nutrition, all of that stuff. we had these boxes. they got involved and distributed over one million

pounds of root -- pounds of food. we participated in that drive. in other places you see news coverage of it. that was the one i was involved in. early on he saw lines for testing -- early on we saw lines or pop testing -- lines for testing. people stand -- people wait in lines in their cars or pop vaccines. in their cars for vaccines. massive parts of our economy displaced workers and caused damage for individual families, businesses, and communities. host: the wall street journal has a picture of the capital and defense and the razor wire.

"review of capitol police finds caps in -- find some gaps -- finds gaps." what did you hear? guest: i went to a hearing last night. i thought general buchanan had a good observation. the idea that you have to hold somebody accountable was one of the failures. speaker pelosi fired the sergeant at arms and the police chief the day after or the day of january 6. it was a complete failure of leadership. we experienced officers who were ready and willing to do the right thing but they were not able because they did not have

the right training or command and control systems. when they assumed they had reaction force, that was far from quick. there were a lot of failures of leadership. i am encouraged his senate has replaced their sergeant at arms with an external hire. i think the house should do the same. one of the key recommendations is that the chief needs to be more empowered. you can do that with a similar structure but you have to make that structure so they can hire or fire the police chief and create a stronger police chief for the capitol police. right now, someone was to be part of the capitol police, they can come in at an entry-level with any experience. they don't come in laterally as a lieutenant or captain in the police force.

i think you need some cross-pollination to get back on the right track. there are a lot of other recommendations. i think it is important this fence is torn down. it is the people's house and has to be successful -- has to be accessible. it does need to be secured and we can do that without this fortress. host: let's hear from ohio on republican line. caller: i have a real problem. i have listened to senators speak to us as american people and tell us we are going to give you $1400. the money you have is the money that the american people are working for. you always make the same amount of money every year, every month. it does not fluctuate because of the poverty level but for the

american people it fluctuates. i find you arrogant. i am trying to figure out why congress allows the liens of dollars to be sent to other countries that have nothing to do with us. i don't want to pay for other countries. i don't -- i want to know why the student loan interest rates were not brought down when others were. guest: thank you for your questions. there are valid concerns. will rogers said he is thankful he is not getting all the government he is paying for. he probably paid a lot of taxes. i think a lot of republicans are rooting for smaller government. the american people are getting more government than they are paying or.

the government spends more money than they bring in. the revenues are going out. despite -- the revenues are going up. they are still growing over 3%. spending has gone up more and people look to the government to be the giver of things. that is a pit in history. the government should be the protector of our system. they should be the protector of freedoms that exist. instead, the government has morphed to the giver of everything. a government big enough to give everything is big enough to take away every. we are seeing -- to take away everything. we are seeing that now. i think we have to get a smaller, more accountable government. we are a long way away from that with the current level of spending. one of your other concerns as

foreign aid. there is like $12 in this package. how is -- $12 billion in this package. before an eight issue could be helpful in some cases -- the funds in foreign aid could be help with some cases. how -- but my thought is how can we give money to drinking water in pakistan when there is not a bridge from ohio into kentucky? host: your appearance on fox couple of weeks ago -- this would be for the seat for rob portman, correct? guest: i was not considering senator.

when i first ran for congress, i was not planning to run for congress. speaker boehner resigned and someone stopped in my office and suggested it would be great if there was an army ranger business guy in the race. i told my wife about it and told her we left about it. she said we would be great at that. she said this would be for our country and i decided to do it. one of the questions is always what are you going to run for next. so many people run to go onto the next. it is humbling to have my name come up in other things. i am energized in the house. but when brown won the senate race in 2018, i said if i am still doing this i will consider it because i do not consider him to reflect ohio values.

i have looked at the governor's race. i am flattered by people who think i would be a good governor. host: do you think the governor is correct in continuing some covid restrictions? guest: i don't think he was correct in imposing most of them. the question is how is it an interview almost a year later? he has never communicated an objective strategy -- an exit strategy. the real problem is that she has ignored the legislature, as have many governors across the country. we have a republic on the we can't keep it by just empowering one person per state. they should be accountable to a legislature and the legislatures are accountable to the people.

if the people want that and it passed a law, that is one thing. but for the governors to rule by edict is a problem. host: let's hear from david from south carolina on the republican line. caller: good morning. i have three quick points. what is your impression of the fact that we are spending 10 to one on states and localities versus small businesses? i thought the major problem with the reaction to the pandemic was the closing of businesses. that was the biggest hit we took. it says something about priorities. the second point, can you discuss the benefit to federal workers who are allowed to be paid to stay home if their children are staying home from

school less than five days a week? last one is about unity. i would suggest we end all language that -- i would say and all racial language. policy was on the right track -- pelosi was on the right track when she said to end all language related to gender. host: congressman davidson? guest: with the divisive factors, for example, coke had training for how to be less white. imagine encouraging somebody to be less black or mexican.

i think we should try to be more american. people are coming towards our border because they view this as a land of opportunity. this place is so special. one of our mottos is "out of many, one." this is so special because of that. there are critical theory marxists that want to tear that down. caret down, destroy it and divide us -- tear it down, destroy it and divide us. you talked about businesses. a lot of the money that went to this is did not go directly to businesses. the payroll protection plan, people think of that as businesses.

it was targeted for companies under 500 employees. we spent around $500 billion on that. billion. this is a package that comes in after that. there is more money in it. what did that mean? my district has 730,000 people. over 100,000 people stay on payroll. they kept getting paid what they are normally getting paid. they kept getting benefits where they are normally getting benefits. even if they were closed, they are in a better position to recover. if they were not arbitrarily forced to close or limit their occupancy to 25% or 30% they could grow faster. when you look at the public's reaction, at least in my district is the are ready to go back. most of our schools went back on time in the fall. those that were closed have since opened. there are very few schools still closed her in-person learning in

ohio 8th district. that program worked well. they kept people and their jobs. 80% of funds went to businesses that took $150,000 or less. those are just smaller employers. we have about 9000 of those kind of loans in our district. it really made a difference. what will happen with states and localities? people bail out those that have been irresponsible broadly. the flexibility is the existing these places need. not just my district were state. that is from talking to colleagues across the island across the country. federal benefits say we will have a special program if you have kids that stay home. the federal government is an employer. they offer benefits packages in most places. very few americans have that in the workplace, but many do.

it highlights the nature of this pandemic. the government imposed mandates that have artificially closed our economy and caused far too much collateral damage. it is tragic we have lost so many lives but it's been entirely avoidable. when we pay out these benefits that many white-collar workers are getting, the blue-collar workers or service workers that could not go back to work are being disproportionately affected. the right answer is more transfer payments, more wealth this should be asian, or economic -- more wealth distribution, more economic opportunity. is out of step to be doing these things for federal workers that is inaccessible for most in america. host: congressman warren davidson, thank you for being with us this morning. guest: thank you. host: morehead.

we are joined by amy walter, who was with us up next to talk about her article. national editor on volatility. his political volatility the new normal? that is ahead. ♪ >> lisa monico and associate attorney general nominee testify at their confirmation hearing before the senate judiciary committee. live coverage begins this morning get 9:30 a.m. eastern on c-span2. >> nancy pelosi and several of the nation's mayors speak today at a conference. this car purchase at 12:30 p.m. eastern on c-span3, online at c-span.org, or listen on the free c-span radio app.

>> visit c-span's online store at c-spanshop.org. 117th congress in session, we are taking preorders for the congressional directory. every purchase supports nonprofit operations. shop today at c-spanshop.org. >> washington journal continued. host: with us next is amy walter , national editor of the cook political report. the peace we are talking about is titled "volatility is the new normal." it seems like this is something we all knew but this puts it into focus. it has been a volatile couple of decades, not just years. guest: we tend to think -- i'm of a certain age. i have been in washington now. it hurts a little bit to say how old i am but i have been in washington for almost 30 years.

when i came to washington politics had been volatile but there was a certain level of stability. democrats had control of the house of representatives for 40 years, since the 1950's. uninterrupted control of the house. much of that time democrats at uninterrupted control of the senate. republicans would win the white house with a brief interpersonal by democrats. while you could see members come and go, the stability was something we got used two. after 1994, and really since the turn of the 21st century we have known nothing but volatility in our own -- what's been happening outside of politics. 9/11. the financial crash in 2009. covid. our politics has followed suit. control of congress has slipped in 20 years.

the house has slipped three times, the senate four times. it took 40 years for the house to flip once. what we are seeing is the toll on bipartisanship. what we are entering now is more of a proletarian -- parliamentarian kind of government where people vote for party rather than person. back at the turn of the 21st century we had 30 senators who represented states that the party did not win. now we only have six of those. one gets a lot of outside attention, joe mansion from west virginia. anne susan collins from maine because they are such an anomaly. host: there is a lot of

interesting information in terms of flips. in the house you are the democrats controlled the house for 40 straight years, 1954 to 1994. democratic control of the senate lasted for 25 years, 1955 to 1980. 1952 to 191988, republicans won seven of 10 presidential elections. most of those who work in politics today don't know of a time when control of the house, senator whitehouse was not up for grabs. those of the people i want to ask about. the people not necessarily elected officials but who work in offices, k street, lobbying. they know nothing but volatility. guest: this is an interesting point. there is a combination of those of us who grew up in that moment, who grew up in the 1980's and 1990's and the relative political stability,

and those who came of age post 2000 and know nothing but that. it is really the members that have been the biggest change. we have very few members in the house or senate. in the house it is something like 80% have been there since just 2006. most folks don't remember not just what it was like in the early and late 1990's, but in the relatively calm period when republicans of the house for five straight terms, five straight years in the early 2000. -- 2000's. you have a bifurcation which is where this tension is between folks who are saying joe biden has been part of washington for 50 years. he talks about how much he loved this era of working across the

aisle. friendships with republicans who can bring the unity back. yet structurally washington is so much different than the place he came to when he first was elected. even the place he came to when he was vice president in 2009, or when the senate -- the last time a senate was 50-50 in 2000 you have a different makeup of senators and the time they were raised in. you have those kind of folks and new members coming in saying, what is this you talk of, this bipartisanship? what is this, this era before 2006? it is like when you were a kid and your parents would talk to you about, well, in my day we would do x, y, z. you were talking about a time that does not exist anymore.

stop trying to put us back into that box. we are not going back. host: amy walter is our guest. your calls and comments are welcome. democrats, (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001. all others, (202) 748-8002. you mentioned the toll on bipartisanship with all this volatility. you write a large enough -- on the large federal level. does the same happening down ballot in the states? guest: that is exactly what we are starting to see. the states are acting like the federal were more of these members are being elected really on the basis of their party affiliation more than on their individual merit. as we see fewer voters split tickets at the federal level,

very few people know about for a presidential candidate of one party and a down ballot candidates of another party. it is changing the makeup of delegations at the state level. and the expectations at the state level. states where the place that -- the laboratories of democracy. you can do things at the state level you can't at the federal level because people were more willing to be -- i guess it was more of a parochial politics. all politics is local. now all politics has become national. that is true all the way down the ballot. we are seeing county commission races that you get the national influence shadowing over it. even back in 2010, many state

legislative races, the issue was obamacare. that's a federal law. the state legislators had nothing to do with it but it was used as a cudgel by republicans against democrats and states as a signaling of the way to say if you don't like barack obama, who for me. don't foot for this democrat even though this democrat has absolutely no influence at all on what is going on in washington. host: it felt after january 6 it could have been the peak volatility. there could have been the moment where all that volatility came to a head and after that bipartisanship may be into coming together. guest: it sure felt that way. i absolutely agree. there was this window where it felt as if you finally had

republicans and democrats coming to the same conclusion. this was absolutely terrifying, outrageous, filled in all the blanks. a deep frustration with the way in which the president had acted that day. and continuing into the next day with the tweeting and encouraging. it looked like this was the breaking point. and then we got to the reality of the moment, which is the president -- president trump really set this new standard that there was no going back. there was no apologizing. there would be no moment where it was ok to acknowledge your own party or the leader of your party was somehow wrong. we saw very quickly this dissolved.

then talking to staff on the hill, and i'm sure you're hearing this, the environment there, especially among members and staff is more toxic than it was before january 6, because -- especially among democrats. many say i don't feel safe, not just because people came in to try to physically break into the capitol. tried to abduct or kill or do violent things to the people who work here. but that my republican colleagues were complicit in that, or condoned it in some way. my republican colleagues came back to the chamber after this violation and continued to support these baseless allegations that the election was stolen or fraudulent. that actually -- the irony is it

could have been exactly that. ok, a moment like this is where the fever breaks. instead it only made the toxicity deeper. host: let me ask you about potential uncertainty, if not volatility in the 2022 senate race with roy blunt announcing -- one of the senior leaders in a close ally of mitch mcconnell will not be running for reelection. he makes the fifth republican not to be running in 2022. how much uncertainty does that add to mitch mcconnell? guest: absolutely. this is the fifth republican retirement, which in some ways he would say what is that saying? republicans are very close to being able to take control of the senate. they just need to pick up a seat or two and they get the

majority. we see the senior republicans, the more establishment republicans, the ones aligned with mcconnell, who came of age at a different era during the era we discussed, many served either in congress or in the senate when george w. bush was president. not just since obama or trump was president. you are losing the institutionalists. the real question, the volatility question is who replaces them in the senate? these are red states. missouri will be really tough. there was a time when it was considered a swing start. it is a pretty red state and there is not a deep enter democrats in the state. alabama another place where you're using an institutionalist and senator shelby, another deep red state.

even ohio. you were talking ohio in the previous segment. that was a swing state. it is more of a red state now. what kind of republicans come out of those primaries? how engaged will former president trump those primaries? it seems more likely you are going to get more of a trump-like replacement to these establishment republicans. meaning the senate becomes much more -- the republican side of the senate is much more in president trump's damage than one that we had before he came into office. host: let's hear from the viewers. evy in georgia on the republican line. caller: good morning, amy. do you hear me? guest: i do. caller: amy, you and charlie with the cook report are our

national voices when it relates to a view that has gone on for years. you have kept your honor in that regard, and charlie as well. peak volatility of bipartisanship -- and i read the article -- being lost, but lost to her realignment of -- it's a realignment to a complicity to and ideology based on fealty other than policy agenda. i am a suburban, upper middle income postgraduate and medical doctor. my husband is the same. i also, an african-american woman. i was part of a traditional republican bridge from the 1800s

until the 1960's. i live in a community -- i'm visiting my nine-year-old mother here in georgia since covid to care for her. i live in middleburg, virginia. i know the region and i have family all over the country. we have reunions in kansas. i love downtown kansas. i think we are having a realignment of demographics as opposed to policy. it intersects with policy because -- we are retiring. my children are in their 30's and 40's who are now up-and-coming physicians. they are part of a larger society that deals with health and education. my mother was a librarian in a 6500 town.

i'm talking about how politics brings together people. i am a part of the suburban women who voted and see educated women like myself -- this is about my perspective of who it is i look up to. people who are a part of my lifestyle. i'm an episcopalian. i am a part of that bush episcopalian, presbyterian kind of republican policy and social construct we thought of back in the day that we no longer think of. republicans say they are for working-class. i changed over to voting for democrats after the daddy bush because i saw the party. i have friends who are democrats. woman with choices like you who are educated and well-rounded and well-traveled and well-versed, we make choices based on a different thought

pattern i think. i support the ideology of public education. my parents sent me and i sent my children to harvard, columbia, duke. does or private schools but we paid for it. now we have a party that wants private schools to get off public -- host: you have a lot of points and i appreciate your call. amy walter, feel free to respond. guest: evy is making good points about realignment. this is why i love covering politics and what i find so interesting is that coalitions of the two parties are not permanent. they change. sometimes they change based on big events. sometimes because of personalities, ideologies. it feels as if our identity is much more of an issue then ideology in terms of how voters are taking their party.

this has been going on for some time. i remember looking back at the 2000 election. you had al gore winning in some of the wealthiest counties in america and george w. bush winning in some of the least wealthy parts of america. the idea that economics is the driver for everybody. devote your pocketbook. that has been something of a myth for some time. that voters use values. the use cues about what they want america to be as the driver for their vote. it is not as simple as they pick a policy or go through a checklist and say which is the party that fits all my issues, i will pick that one. in the era of trump, he made it very clear you could only pick one side. this was not a malleable thing.

you are either on my side or on the enemy's side. with me or against me. there is no way you can be both. you cannot be that bridge. you talked about being a bridge. there are some things you agree with. no, we have a very clear path forward. if you believe these things, you are a real american. if you don't, you are not a real american. that divide has gotten deeper. it is not necessarily lighter but it definitely got deeper. -- wider but it definitely got deeper. we are seeing the divide driven by where you live. the density divide is what some folks call it. the inner suburbs that are closer to big metro areas are

big for republican and now becoming much more democratic. the fewer people in a region,, small town rural america, now it's almost entirely republican. host: louisville, kentucky. bernie on the democrats line. caller: good morning. january 6 seems like it cannot be talked about enough. i was watching c-span that morning with pedro. i had a busy day. he suggested i get the radio app. i listened to the radio and every thing is going to plan. people are doing their speeches. then all at once something broke. at that point i had to rush home. it felt like a 9/11 moment. it was just i had to get home. i had to be with my wife to watch what was happening.

it was terrifying. it seems like back in 2010, with the tea party and newt gingrich, we had some of the same volatility going on. i did not know. i have to ask, i see a picture of gwen ifill behind you. are you the new host for "washington week"? this is a softball question. we have been through a lot of different hosts and you are fantastic. guest: that is so kind of you. yes, behind me that is the postage stamp put out last year in her honor for black history month. that is blown up and framed. a friend gave that to me. it sits behind me as a reminder she still sits on my shoulder. she was my mentor and friend.

i still continue to think of her every day, every moment and try to imagine how she would be processing this era we are in. you made a good point about january 6. i was in something of the same boat. i had c-span on because i knew it would be a big day in terms of listening to the speeches. i wanted to hear how republicans were sort of processing -- this is before the attack. how republicans were making the argument about overturning the electoral college votes. i wanted to see how many republicans were going to be supportive of that. i wanted to see how democrats were going to counter that. if i'm being honest, i was focusing more on the election that happened the day before, the runoffs for the senate race. the numbers and trying to make sense of that. out of the corner of my eye

looking at what was going on on the hill, and like you i was drawn to it in a way that felt very similar to september 11. hearing from friends and staff who were there at that moment, the amount of trauma and terror they felt was quite remarkable. i do think it has had an impact. i think for americans outside of washington they saw that as a critical moment and i think it is impacting the way folks are dealing with each other. the difference between 2010 and now is the feeling that these forces are out of control now. when you saw the tea party and we will take washington back, it was rhetorical. now you hear those things and

you see people coming to state capitals with machine guns or other weapons. they are not actual machine guns but bigger guns that can do a lot of damage. you see more and more threats against members. listening to the hearings about january 6 from both the fbi director who is saying we are seeing unbelievable explosion in domestic terrorism threats, especially white supremacist groups. you hear from the chief of the capitol police saying the number of threats against individual lawmakers west through the roof. this feels like a very scary time. i think -- i am here in washington. i live close to the capital. these things are very personal

for me. i think for folks who don't live in and around this region, the idea there are people now who do believe so firmly the only way to succeed is through a level of violence, that makes its way to other places. and against out of just the washington -- and it gets just out of the washington focus. that is a worrying trend. i hope because the fbi has been focused on this, other law enforcement, that he gets tamped down. -- it gets tamped down. when you see it kidnapping plot against the governor of michigan, i worry this could not just be an outlier. host: we are talking about the volatility in politics with our guest amy walter, national editor of the cook political report. nelson is next in florida, republican line. caller: good morning.

thank you for taking my call. ms. walter, i listen to you every monday on pbs news hour. i know you try to be objective. you do a pretty good job of it overall but you do also have your biases. one of your comments was essentially blaming president trump for the scenario that exists today and the hostility of the different political parties and the way people think. yet i remember in 2016 dachshund 2016 i was a never trumper and i voted for gary johnson but in 2020 i voted for trump. in 2016, they were talking about impeachment before he was sworn into office. a lot of what has been going on today regarding the right wing

aspect of the movements you are talking about is indirect reaction -- in direct reaction to left-wing movements taking place in the last five years. particularly antifa and black lives matter and their continuing riots to this day in portland, oregon and other regions of the country. all the law enforcement should be used in order to prosecute those individuals who invaded the capital but the same should be done for those individuals who attacked public buildings in those other states. that is not being talked about and that is not being emphasized on the part of the government. particularly the democratic party. host: amy walter?

guest: appreciate your comments. the first is, yes, i agree. donald trump did not invent the polarization. this has been around for a long, long time, for this volatility. this really can go back to the turn of the 21st century. i do think the deepening of it -- he played a role in that in encouraging this divide and encouraging the sort of way in which he approached politics was a zero-sum game. all or not. he did not invent it but he also did not tamp it down. he helped to keep that flame brewing. the big difference with him what happened at the capital and what is happening in portland or other cities with antifa, joe

biden never encouraged, supported anything that suggested people should go and take over -- take things into their own hands. we had a president of the united states who has an obligation to defend every one of those institutions and defend the united states capitol. the events of january 6 was not just a language the president used that day. he was the language leading up for all the election was a fraud. baseless claims that had eroded faith of the public in our voting institutions. that is very difficult to get back. when you lose faith in democratic institutions, that leads to a very dark place. i think we are now moving into a

new presidency. we will see continued polarization. we will see the parties divided, but i'm hoping we see it is not encouraged. the flames are at least tamp to a much lower level. host: on voting rights, erwin from madison, wisconsin. do you believe hr-1, the voting rights bill will affect local politics. amy walter, you have states passing tougher voting laws. georgia just passed a couple of bills yesterday. and the efforts by the biden administration, executive orders coming from the president on voting. what is your view of this? guest: the federal government;s involvement -- government's involvement in voting is not as significant as the states. states set so many rules for

everything from the times the polls are open to who can vote by mail and who can't and the requirements for voter id. those are set by the state. we have a federal system and that is not going anywhere. the bill that passed the house is unlikely to make its way through the senate. the filibuster goblet. i think the laws that will be the most significant in 2022 and beyond are the ones passing now in places like georgia. the real question in my mind is, these are laws that are basically a reaction to the left election were democrats did much better, voted much more frequently by mail. what happens when we are not in a pandemic? what happens when it is republican voters who say i want to vote by mail but it's gotten a lot more complicated? for there are many more rules i have to follow, i guess i will

just not vote. it may hurt their own voting base more so than they think. host: one more call here. alecia in columbia, maryland. caller: good morning, bill and good morning miss walters and good morning america. before i say what i want to say, let me thank you and also would you kindly answer a question? maybe i misunderstood. did you say when you have any airings of the hearings and other things from the white house -- not the white house, the house, that they approve or ask you what to run on c-span, or does c-span have its own -- host: we make our own editorial

decisions. we are committed to running the house and senate gavel-to-gavel coverage of the house and senate. every other hearing or white house briefing ,our team makes a decision on a day by day or hour-by-hour basis. let me finish with you -- caller: let me finish with you and then i will leave my comment. host: ask amy walter a question. caller: i have senior moments so you have to forgive me for my long pauses. there was a hearing on the -- about the 6th. you ran multiple stuff. however, when the defense came on friday you did not show the

tape of -- you showed most of what the democrats had said -- host: i am not familiar wealth what we ran or not that day. everything we covered would be on our website. if you can move to your question for amy walter we would appreciate it. you can find everything we covered at c-span.org. caller: i wanted to make a comment. you are young enough to be my daughter. i came through washington the first time in 1960. president eisenhower had invited me for children and youth conference. that was the first time i saw the big city. i'm telling you, being from our -- my eyes were big everywhere.

because of the influence washington and the way they influence, i went to the capital and so forth. a senator showed us around. i got very interested in politics. as soon as i got out of college, i started writing to the senators and representatives. they would always respond. i have gotten some things from my own way. host: i will let you go. amy walter, some final thoughts? you have been doing what you have a doing since 1991. other than the volatility you write about at the cook political report, what are your

observations? guest: i appreciate what she said about being wowed by this place. i think that is what keeps me going. this is still a really inspiring place. it is a lot bigger and busier than it was when i first came here. it felt a little sleepier back then. you are surrounded by incredibly talented people. all of whom come here because they believe they will make a difference. you may not agree with the issues they want to make a difference on but you should have some support and encouragement for people who think they can make a difference. that they can still come and have a role in our democracy. that i appreciate. just the final thing, one reason i love covering campaigns is i get to meet these folks as candidates. it keeps you humble and keeps

you really in touch with how diverse america is. the folks who come run for congress look a lot like america. to understand and appreciate that, come here, meet some members. don't just read reports about the two or three they get all the attention. they really believe they will get something done. they don't get a lot of attention. they don't get a lot of fame or instagram followers. they are just here doing their job. host: amy walter, national editor for the cook political report, great to happy with us this morning. guest: things a lot, bill. host: there is just a bit more ahead. we will turn the attention to your top public policy issue. democrats use the line we have been using, (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001. for independents and others, (202) 748-8002. we will be back in a minute.

♪ >> here is a look at what is live today on c-span. the house is back at 10:00 a.m. eastern for general speeches, followed by legislative business at noon. members are working on an organized labor bill that makes it easier for workers to unionize. it is possible the senate passed $1.9 trillion covid-19 really help could be brought to the -- relief bill could be brought to the floor for about. the senate judiciary committee holds a hearing for lisa monico, an associate attorney general nominee bonita gupta. the senate returns for nominations of marcia fudge as housing secretary and merrick garland is attorney general. in the evening, california governor gavin newsom delivers his annual state of the state address. on c-span3, the senate health committee meets at 10:00 a.m.

for a hearing on the federal response to the coronavirus. in the afternoon, nancy pelosi others speak at a conference hosted by the national league of cities. there is more coverage on our website with the house appropriations subcommittee hearing on the fda foreign drug inspection program. that gets at 10:00 a.m. eastern. you will find it at c-span.org. >> washington journal continued. host: we have until 10:00 eastern this morning when the house comes in for the morning speeches. they are in at noon and may later today begin consideration of the $1.9 trillion covid relief package. the senate is in at 3:00 this afternoon. at some point they will take up the nomination of marcia fudge to head the hhs -- excuse me, they had housing and urban development. that's coming this afternoon. they may move forward on the nomination of merrick garland to be attorney general.

writing about the nomination of deb haaland to head interior. "senator sustain -- daines and loomis announced they have placed a hold on deb haaland's nomination for interior, a move that will force schumer to take a procedural step to overcome the objection. she has the votes to be confirmed." asking about your top public policy issue. for democrats. -- (202) 748-8000 free democrats. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. all others, (202) 748-8002. front page of the washington times on the latest, newest justice amy coney barrett. a surprising moderate. she frustrates conservatives,. alex oh you're right amy coney barrett, billed as a jurist in the mold of antonin scalia a is

raising eyebrows with early rulings where she sided with moderate. she brought with her mentor when she joined the moderates and liberals on the bench and rejected a pro-trump challenge to pennsylvania's election laws and leaving and leaving in place some covid-19 restrictions on houses of worship. she cast votes on a few pivotal cases and align herself with more with the moderate chief justice john roberts and brett kavanaugh then with conservative colleagues like neil gorsuch, sam alito and clarence thomas. "i heard conservatives express frustration." you can read more at the washington times. miller place, new york, democrats line. anthony, go ahead. caller: hi. i would hope you could forward my queries or desire to have this programming brought the c-span, to professor susan

swain. yesterday was the anniversary of the fukushima accident. in 2010, c-span studentcam winners won the grand prize. they had espoused the safety of nuclear power. it was only 11 months later this disaster unfolded whereby we now have three breached nuclear reactors created by general electric. those reactors were designed in protest of the engineers on the project that resigned their positions with general electric because they said if the reactors lost water, exactly what occurred will occur. we live in a world where we in denial to the fact nuclear power is going to be our undoing. a nuclear reactor burns 600 times hotter than the sun. when you have three in unison, not to mention sure noble -- sure no -- chyrnoble.

you can -- yucca mountain is no place to store the waste. the reactors relicensed. the only way they relicensed is they said they would reduce waste by 1996. not only that, they reloaded. they removed the old waste in reloaded up the reactors. now they are going to relicense them for another 50 or 60 years. those reactors were designed to only last 30 years, 40 tops and they were supposed to be shut down. host: mateo in the nation's capital, independently. caller: good morning. i was wondering, because a lot of times i listen to this program, some of the questions people ask our little bit --

where is there reality? -- their reality? is it a little embarrassing to ask people if they say if they believe in the rule of law? some of these people would say yes, but then how can they say that even the supreme court would sometimes say there is no case of this. these people would insist, oh no, the election was stolen or something like this. timmy -- to me where is the kind of thinking these people have? is it embarrassing to ask these people something like a question like that? to meet is so confusing. -- to me it is so confusing. how can there reality be so far

out there and yet they think this is their reality? this is how they exist and how they believe and they live their life. host: you are asking should we as hosts ask people about what? why they believe what they believe? caller: basically yes. how is it possible for them to be believing that way or thinking that way or behaving that way? host: if you watch this program with some regularity, the purpose is to hear from viewers and callers. the purpose is to hear from you, the viewers of this program. we are facilitators of conversation. sometimes, like i'm doing with you now, it involves asking questions and having a back and forth. if we all had back-and-forth conversations with every caller

it makes it difficult to get a fair amount in. i understand your question and appreciated. victoria and minnesota -- tory, minnesota. jenny. caller: thank you for c-span. i have got a question that -- for my own clarification. i was under the impression, the assumption our senate is still split 50-50. 50 republicans, 50 democrats with the vice president casting the tie-breaking vote. i watched all of the amendments. i watch c-span constantly. it seems as though there were only 49 republican senators voting, and almost every amendment was failed with a 49-50 vote. can you tell me what happened? i'm confused.

host: i don't know where the -- to be technically correct, it is 50 on the democratic caucus, two are independent senators. i don't know if there was a senator missing from those votes on saturday. i'm sure as soon as i say this our producer will be tweeting it. i will look for that but thank you for the information. the senate is in later today at 3:00 eastern. the house coming up in about 10 minutes. it was dan sullivan of alaska who was the missing vote on many of those amendments. the senate coming in at 3:00, the house at 10:00 for morning speeches and legislative work at noon. the status of the coronavirus relief bill still up in the air. this is from roll call. final relief vote could slip to wednesday. they say the vote on that is the chamber waits on the senate descendents amendment -- amended

version back to the house. the house rules committee as of this morning has not scheduled a rules meeting. they have to have a rules session before that makes its way onto the house floor. new baltimore, michigan, max. caller: thank you for taking my call. i wanted to make a couple of comments. i was listening to the lady previously from georgia who is taking care of her 90-year-old mother. i worked for chrysler for 33 years in a factory. i have friends that are carpenters, roofers, people that work in grocery stores. i truly believe that all the people in washington, the politicians are elite educated, ivy league people. they have no idea what a workingman does. all the workingmen in america

want is a good job. even if it isn't a good job, fair pay and can take care of his family, be able to come home at night and have your meal and a good night sleep and be able to go on with life. they don't want to have big boats and all this stuff because they know they can't do it. if politicians would work in a factory or roof house, they would find out what actually working people do. that is just my viewpoint. host: to our previous caller, we asked about the missing vote on the republican side. the answer from the hill. dan sullivan, republican returned to alaska for a funeral amid the debate over the weekend. timothy in kingsport, tennessee. there you are. caller: yes, sir. thank you for c-span for

allowing us to make these comments. yes, i was watching a comment about how sometimes d.c. can be a little overwhelming to normal people. i was watching the riots when they was happening. i was asked what was going on. considering my location in tennessee, i made this comment that is davy crockett, they congressman from my part of tennessee was still alive and serving, he would not have'been standing on the speakers desk telling them to open the door. it did not matter if they were republican or democrat, these people were hiding. they are so important that they get paid six figures today one thing, push one button that he is yes or no. they could not do that right.

that is why the people were there, to let them know they were not doing the job they were elected. i understand your guest talked about a lot of them came up there that don't make the national news, they don't have their instagram following and they think they are going to make a difference. sometimes you have to sit back and say, like the last caller said, the normal american is out here trying to pay his bills, keep his kids in a house, keep his people fed, keep his kids in school. he's not making six figures. yet these people just push a button. that was my comment. host: willmar, minnesota. marvin, go ahead. caller: thank you for having me. my concern is that republican-democratic party.

they were split way back before donald trump even became president. before he was even sworn into office they were hollering impeachment already. they have been divided way back. this $15 an hour thing they are trying to pass, while, i grew up as a farmboy. i know there are a lot of people that work to try but they are not even capable of doing their work. they are not even worth five dollars an hour. the whole thing there is it should be up to the employer to be able to pay what he wants. the other situation we are running into now is going to be the high cost of energy, which it was during the whole obama administration. we are taking money out of the poor people's pockets by raising energy costs driving to work every day. this whole situation is going

the wrong direction. i am thankful that minnesota is a republican controlled state or we would be spending money got a reasonable doubt. host: some comments on top public policy issues. the john lewis voting rights act, hr-1 passed in the house. they will ruin easter the same with a ruined christmas for many families. pat says ease of access to the ballot for all citizens. why do we need the federal minimum wage when the state of their own minimum wage levels? libby says mail ballots are pretty much abolished now that georgia passed their voter suppression bill. only the physically disabled can

vote by mail. georgia will turn out again in 20, 22 2024 and beyond -- 2022, 2024 and beyond. caller: hello. demonte in north carolina. how are you? i have been looking into the policies that president biden has done, even down to the trans rights for international women day. i think it is phenomenal. when it comes to raising the federal wage, granted the federal wage has been $7.25 for over a decade. i think i was 17 at that time. i was getting paid $9.25, which was over the federal wage of $7.25. i do support having a minimum

wage of $15 over the course of four to seven years. within the american rescue plan the minimum wage should have at least $11.50, or $12. we are in a global pandemic. we have to make sure the essential workers are taking the health courses, making sure they have ppe while working. not only that, making sure they have health care. if they are working and they are working and making $7.25, more than likely they don't have health care. host: thank you for all your calls this morning. we are back here tomorrow morning at 7:00 a.m. eastern, as we are every day. we will take you live next to the u.s. house. they are coming in for morning speeches with legislative business beginning at noon eastern. we will see you tomorrow. [captioning performed by the national captioninst