congressman bob barr. later, rhonda collins of the national association of tax professionals will answer tax preparation questions. we will take your calls. you can join the conversation on facebook and twitter. washington journal is next. ♪ host: good morning and welcome to washington journal. the covid-19 pandemic adding devastating -- pandemic having devastating effects on american education, with many students suddenly forced to be online learners. while a few have thrived, many have struggled to adapt as schools try to figure out how to educate and innovate at the same time. with coronavirus vaccines now throughout the country, it is time to look back. what lessons did we learn about public and private education?

how do we help those students who fall behind? what do you have to say about the pandemic one year later and its impact on schools and learning? we will open up special lines. parents, we want to hear your experience. your line will be (202) 748-8000 . students, this is about you. students watching, we want to hear from you at (202) 748-8001. educators, you have been on the front lines, teachers, administrators, your number will be (202) 748-8002. everyone else, your opinion still counts. we want to know what you think at (202) 748-8003. you can text us your response at (202) 748-8003. we are always reading on social media, on twitter @cspanwj and on facebook at facebook.com/c-span. it has been about a year since the coronavirus pandemic began

in the u.s. and schools around the country have been struggling to decide what they are going to do. some schools stayed open. some closed. some went to a hybrid situation, but now president joe biden is calling on schools to reopen and trying to figure out how to do that. he spoke about this in his primetime address. here is what president joe biden had to say. [video clip] >> with the passage of the american rescue plan -- and i think again the house and senate for passing it -- and the plan to vaccinate teachers and school staff, including bus drivers, we can accelerate massive, nationwide efforts to reopen schools safely, and meet my goal of 100 million shots of opening a majority of k-8 schools my first 100 days in office.

this will be the number one priority of my new secretary of education, miguel cardona. host: while president biden is working on that, and that new bill, they have -- on that, in that new bill, they have money for testing in schools. in today's hill newspaper, i will read a couple paragraphs on what the biden white house is trying to do. "the ministry shall implement testing programs in schools. the department of health and human services will be giving away grants to schools to help with testing efforts of their students and faculty, the white house said in a press release thursday. the schools will be giving tests

-- will be given tests to help. the initiative is to expand testing in schools and congregate settings through new coordinating centers that will help identify capacity and match it up to need." once again, this is part of the administration's plan to get schools open again. we want to know how you think the educational system is doing. parents, teachers, educators, we want to hear from you this morning about how this past year has gone. let's go to our phone lines and start with dahlia, calling from miami, florida. good morning. caller: good morning. i am a grandparent. i have two grandchildren. my grandson is an ap 5.0 student

and my granddaughter is not gifted. my grandson had the experience at the end of last year from a teacher who showed up in class wearing a t-shirt saying defund the police, knowing full well that there were students whose parents were in law-enforcement. my daughter-in-law went to the principal. he did nothing. now, they are going to private school and i am very happy that they are. children should not be submitted to politics by the teachers. that was all wrong. host: let's go to steve, calling from san jose, california. good morning. caller: good morning. i am so disgusted with the way that our public education and

unions have reacted to the coronavirus. if there ever was any doubt before, it has been totally removed in regards to whether or not the unions and the public education has the best interest of our children at heart. they have used every excuse possible to delay educating our children. there is no doubt at all. one has to ask, is it in the best interest of the democratic party to educate our children so that they can get good paying jobs, and i say no, it is not, because if they can de-educate, keep our children stupid, then our children will forever need

the handouts that the timid credit party has to offer. that the democratic party has to offer. host: what would you say to a teacher who has not been vaccinated and has to go back to a school where the children have also not? caller: there is a wealth of proof out there from almost the very beginning that the spread of the virus from children to adults is almost nonexistent. you can look to europe, who has had their public educational schools open a whole lot longer than the u.s. has. the unions have used this virus to get concessions that have nothing to do with the virus. why don't you -- why don't you show us an article about what the unions are demanding? please do that. host: let's look at the death

statistics that have come from the centers for disease control on the coronavirus. and we see here from the statistics that there have been children who have died from covid-19 in the past year. the people who have died from the coronavirus, the children are actually the lowest number, but we still had 210 children between zero and 17 who have died from coronavirus. as we can see, the largest numbers are from 65 to 84. you can go all the way from 50 to 84 to see where the largest numbers are for people who have died from coronavirus and from covid-19, so that seems to be the age of the teachers. it might not be out of -- to

wonder, if you are a teacher, whether you are in a dangerous situation. kathleen in mississippi, good morning. caller: good morning. in texas, they have a tornado on the ground. my concern is we live here. we know what's going on here. it is like prosecute the prosecutors. it would be like 1952 or 1954. we got a new school bill. i went to the school for a while. some came down with covid. they let them out. everything has been shut down since march 12, 2020. everything is online. we have to call in, drive-thru

for curbside pickup. all the brick-and-mortar stores are gone. we have had hurricanes and storms going on, two going on almost three years. we have vaccines and [indiscernible] this is been going on for two years. what i want to explain, lying is lying. i hope you will interpret my word, but the truth shall set you free. host: david from little neck, new york. can you hear me? -- david from little neck, new york. caller: can you hear me? host: yes. go ahead. caller: my fifth graders were in and out of school most of the

year, having to stay home and do remote learning. i feel like i had good control. we had great internet. we had devices. i lost my job in april due to covid so i have been home doing the -- not really teaching, but managing them into helping and keeping an eye on them, and i think that the home learning should be something that should be implemented year round so kids do not have an excuse if they stay home or are sick or if there is a snow day. host: when you say home learning, are you talking completely online learning? would you advocate for that full-time? caller: i do and i think the teachers unions were against it and are against it because they understand the power of the internet and the ability to teach kids. it might create a situation where you need fewer teachers,

so they advocated not to have a camera in class, but i feel that there should always be a camera in class and if you cannot go into class that day because your parents have something to do or cannot take you to school, you should be able to continue to learn from home and it should be a tool like you would have been corporate america where a lot of -- like you would have in corporate america where a lot of people -- they were not partnering with parents. they took a position that it is better to stay safe at home then go out -- at home than go out and take a risk. i see a lot of teachers who want to teach who are being held back by these draconian rules. host: on the house floor on

wednesday, pennsylvania republican glenn thompson came out and called for the immediate reopening of the nation's schools. here's what he had to say. [video clip] rep. thompson: just one year ago, we entered a covid crackdown. businesses and schools shut their doors, some of them for good. across the nation, they continue to feel this pain. far too many schoolchildren have been confirmed -- confined to virtual learning. the implications of students being left out of class are bigger than parents being inconvenienced or students missing friends. every day that we wait to reopen schools is another day we look the other way as youth mental health continues to plummet. every day we wait to reopen schools is another day students fall behind. mr. speaker, allowing american schoolchildren to return to the classroom is long overdue. it is time to listen to the

science. it is time to put the students first. it is time to reopen our schools. host: let's see what some of our social media followers have to say about the state of education one year into the pandemic. here's a post from facebook that says "extreme fatigue on children and parents." a text that says "unions for teachers and democratic politicians are responsible for schools not opening. other countries have had schools open for a long time. the cdc is not a barometer of truthful statistics." another says "my son attends private school and they have been open. without students, private schools would have gone bankrupt. there is no way to pay private school tuition for online learning only. there will be a huge void in learning between private schools and public education. there have only been a few cases

since the school has been open." another "the school has been open all year with no difficulties. the problem has been with politicians who look at -- with politicians. look at who is running your state. we are putting our country's students behind." another text says "the pandemic has shown education for students has to meet the individual. some students have done better in the home environment than they would at school." one last text that says "i will homeschool until the danger from the trump virus is behind us." we want to know what you think about education one year into the pandemic. let's go to robert, calling from lindenhurst, new york. good morning. caller: good morning. how are you? host: just fine. go ahead, robert. caller: i'm an educator. i am a school psychologist at a

middle school. a year ago today, we had a pandemic, here in new york, that was killing thousands. we did not know what was going on. the schools had to shut down. teachers are people. they did not want to bring the virus home to loved ones or elderly people, people my age. we have elderly parents we are caring for as well as children. everything shut down. in my district, we had enough money to do what the cdc had written -- cdc had recommended, open windows, bring kids back, social distance, improve ventilation, which was expensive. in my district, we opened in september. brought kids back. some children chose to stay home. it can be done. i hear a lot of things against union members. if the district does not have a safe place for people to work,

the disease will only spread, so in those districts, they need money and that is what the biden plan is doing, money for ventilation, more space. what we did in my school is instead of 25 kids, maybe 12. you are doubling space. that's money. you have to find space. doubling teachers, that's money. that's what the biden plan is doing. host: quickly -- did your school add on extra teachers because they had to have fewer students per classroom? caller: yes. it costs money. where does it come from? in a wealthy district, the resources were there. there are many districts here, predominantly nonwhite -- they don't have the money. where will it come from? if you bring students back with

the same system we had before the pandemic, you will spread the disease. host: let's go to sean calling from laurel, maryland. good morning. caller: i want to pick up on what he just said. here in maryland, when our school system told us that your child goes third as an american citizen, we had to wait until spring time for our daughter in pre-k. i called my son's high school to ask when they would reopen. i am being told by the principal, so-called, that they don't know because he is seven years old. i am like, why are you in the school? now i am being called a racist. if they are putting any of these

kids -- than how will the room be for our children? that is getting the school set up for that. host: let's go to tom, calling from ohio. good morning. caller: good morning. my son is a teacher in florida. he teaches in class, has all year. that night, he goes home and does the online stuff on top of that. when they opened the school, they said, if any school gets over 25% infection rate, they would shut it down. his school has been over 25% for a while now.

25% of the kids are homesick with the covid and they will not shut it down and he cannot get a shot. some people need to start thinking about this from the teachers point of view. he works all day and then goes home and works at night tutoring kids online. thank you. host: let's talk to curtis, who is calling from hinesville georgia -- hinesville, georgia. curtis, good morning. caller: good morning. host: go ahead. caller: interesting conversation. about this time last year, our school completely shut down. we went to the online learning system, which was trial and error, but we got through it. september, the parents had a choice to come back hybrid. now, i am a teacher's aide.

i work with approximately 75 to 80 children daily. i am telling you, masks work, ok ? we do all the social distancing. i wash my hands after every class i leave to make sure of that. masks do work. one of the things that is missing is the social impact on these children. it is very difficult to gauge how the children are reacting, but i can tell you that, every morning, they come in, have smiles on their faces, and we provide a positive education. our teachers do not have the luxury of some. they have to teach online and in the classroom, so we don't have the ability to hire teachers to teach from the hybrid -- from the online learning piece of the equation, but i am just saying i am exposed, i have been exposed daily to children. i go to the gymnasium daily.

i think masks do work and washing your hands. so let's wake up, america. host: curtis, let me ask you this question. what grade levels are you dealing with, high school, grade school, elementary, and how often do you have to tell children to put their masks on? caller: first grade. we have to remind them all the time to put their masks on. you are dealing with six and seven-year-olds. they probably do not understand it, but we remind them daily. we remind them all the time we have to wear our masks, so sometimes it is challenging, but the children are there in the classroom and the children that are hybrid are receiving a positive education. are they missing things? sure -- socializing, going out and playing. so it is a challenge. in these union states, it is despicable. very despicable. host: that was going to be my

next question. many states have moved teachers to the front of the line for a vaccine so they can get their schools back open safely. has georgia done that for its teachers? caller: our district is starting the vaccination program today. as a matter of fact, i will receive my first moderna shot today at 3:00 and i am looking forward to it and, like i say, i love going in, seeing those children. you cannot see their smiles, but you know they are having a good time and it is a positive environment for them. we have to keep that up. we have to think of the social aspect of these children, integrating with their peers and having fun and going out and playing. learning is such a key to that. there are kids, since we shut down, that are falling behind

and it is very hard to catch all of them up. it is a work in process. we have a positive environment in our school and i want to give a big shout out to all the teachers i work with. thank you. host: let's go to eric, calling from breckenridge, michigan. good morning. caller: good morning. host: go ahead, eric. eric, are you still there? i think we lost eric. let's go to dan, calling from woodbridge, virginia. dan, good morning. caller: good morning. how is it going? host: just fine. go ahead. caller: i have to say several things. we are in virginia and, you know, i don't understand why they can't just let the teachers get the shop before bringing our kids back to school. -- get the shot before bringing our kids back to school. we have had several deaths in

the county we're in just from employees giving out lunches and stuff. i do not understand why we cannot be a little bit more patient. we are almost there. it is sad, with our governor, we are in 50th place as far as the virus being taken care of and it is sad how people cannot wait until we can get back, you know? it is just a couple more minutes. to hear about your child and lose your child over education -- ok. would you rather have a dead kid or you are being dead -- dead kid or your being dead because he brought home the virus to you? i'm sorry. to me, most of the problem is that people have never tried to

raise their kids every day, and now they cannot handle it. i am sorry about that, but just be patient. the time is coming. help is coming. my son is 12 years old, a straight a student, and he struggles sometimes with the stuff at home, but i do not understand either why if the kids are struggling with the work at home, why can't they just stop giving such amounts of work until we can figure this thing out? host: let's go to carl, calling from knoxville, tennessee. good morning. caller: good morning. i called you all about two weeks ago and what we need to do is look at this covid package. this covid package has a lot of money going overseas that needs to be used in this country. we are even sending vaccinations overseas that our people need.

when i called in last time, it was about joe biden not doing anything for the elderly on social security. well, he still hasn't. host: d with -- do you have anything to say about education and learning, the topic this morning? caller: if he would quit sending stuff overseas and let us use it, that would take care of a lot of teachers, a lot of students. this is exactly why donald trump got elected, because we are too busy taking care of people overseas to take care of our own. this package is a joke when it comes to dealing with covid. host: let's go to jim, calling from belton, missouri. good morning. caller: good morning. how are you? i have about three things. first of all, children are resilient and adaptable to this.

virtual and over the computer learning. i see holes in the system, but overall, once again, i believe the children will adapt as long as they are urged in the right direction. that's one. number two, and this is on the political side, i think this format this morning is being used by anti-unionists and populists to spread a message that has nothing to do with -- that doesn't have any focus, that is -- on if the children will be able to rebound from this. it seems to me to be a scare tactic. that is all i have for you. thank you. host: on the house floor tuesday, connecticut democratic representative jahana hayes, a former high school teacher, spoke in support of provisions in the covid relief bill for reopening schools. here's what she said. [video clip]

rep. hayes: madame speaker, i rise in support of the american rescue plan. i was thrilled to hear my colleagues on the others out of the i'll speak up about reopening schools. these are words i have been waiting to hear. i looked up the law to read it and was disappointed that this bill offers no support, no assistance, no funding for school reopening. the american rescue plan, on the other hand, invests in helping k-12 schools reopen safely and addresses learning lost in the classroom. the bill provides nearly 100 $30 billion to help schools take the steps recommended by the cdc's to ensure students and educators -- by the cdc to ensure students and educators can return safely, including ventilation systems, reducing class-size, implement and guidelines, purchasing ppe, and hiring support staff. as someone who has spent over a decade in the classroom, this is what every teacher in america is

looking for, every parent. this is what is necessary to reopen schools safely not just in communities that are largely democrat but also in republican communities. all of her children will benefit from the provisions in this bill. -- all of our children will benefit from the provisions in this bill. it also sets aside money to get kids back into the classroom by providing comprehensive afterschool programs, summer learning, extended school days, reengineering -- re-engaging students who have been absent, and hiring nurses to care for students well-being. i am happy to see parts of my own legislation included, which will not only make sure we are not laying off support staff and personnel to meet our students but to make sure there are not budget cuts in light of the catastrophic shortfalls expected as a result of this pandemic. i am so proud to be part of a body that came up with this

legislation that gives america's schools exactly what they need, that gives america's children to support this necessary, and reopens our economy by investing $130 billion. host: let's look at what some of our social media followers are saying about the state of education one year into the pandemic. here is one tweet that says "i think schools are doing an amazing job considering the circumstances, especially the teachers who have had to adapt to different situations. i have three kids and i appreciate the principals and teachers in their work." another tweet says "of course private schools had to open somehow, but parents who can afford private school are more likely in jobs that are remote. the children are the only ones out of home and as long as they are protected, the only ones at risk are teachers."

another tweet says "it makes no sense to vaccinate teachers right before summer vacation. teachers and school staff should have been the same vaccine priority as health care workers." another tweet says "it seems many people do not realize not every district has updated school buildings, classrooms and the money for ppe. thankfully, president biden has allocated money to open schools." another tweet says "kids do not magically arrive in the classroom. they need safe transportation as well. it seems many politicians are expressing disingenuous concern for children." once again, schools around the nation are all doing different things when it comes to deciding whether to open fully in person or go hybrid or go completely online. here is a map that has been made showing all of the different decisions that different states are making.

you can see, as the colors get darker, those are the states that her back fully in person. as the colors get lighter, those are states doing either hybrid or online education. as you can see from this map, many states are making their own decisions, some different from others, about whether they should be back fully in person, go to a hybrid, where you go to school sometimes and go online sometimes, or you go fully online. each state has been making its own decision. they are all making different decisions. what are the citizens in your state doing? how is that process going? we want to hear from you. let's start from rachel -- let's start with rachel, calling from olympia, washington. good morning. caller: good morning. host: go ahead. caller: i will start with a year ago my daughter called and

told me about some -- host: are you still there? i think we lost rachel. let's go to tony, calling from woodbridge, virginia. good morning. caller: good morning. how is everybody? for my personal experience, it has been kind of hard to have kids at home and for them to be learning and we are doing our best. good parents are the ones who always look out for their kids and not let them study went -- -- study went -- study when -- you know, that's been an issue. when kids are failing, it is not because of them, it is the parents. my second point is we are part

of a failed trump administration education. things have happened as a result of something, right? from should know a year ago -- try should know, a year ago -- trump should know, the year ago, when this happened, giving money to states so they can improve their online education. unfortunately, trump did the same thing, let the states take care of themselves for the vaccine. he did not do anything, not even the vaccine, the one he is claiming he helped for, so we are a product of a failed education program. trump nominated an education person who was always in trouble politically. as parents, we have to go to work. parents who are doing well with

their kids are the ones who take care of them. host: let's go to rick, calling from california. good morning. caller: hello? host: go ahead, rick. caller: yes. my daughter is a teacher and she has a daughter, my granddaughter, in private school. she is able to go to private school because the heating system in her school has been broken for a year. it will take a lot more money to fix these old schools ventilation systems to make it safe. we will get through this. and i agree with the previous caller that parents who are involved with kids education are the ones who will succeed the most, but unfortunately, not all family structures are ideal for

children. it is a sad situation there. i run a youth football league. it is not related to schools particularly. it is unfortunate. you. -- goodbye. host: education week has an article tracking the number of teachers who have died from covid-19. i want to bring you what education says -- what education week says has been the impact on teachers of covid. the story says "as of march 11, 2021, at least 882 active and retired k-12 educators and personnel have died of covid-19. of those, 244 were active teachers. this is according to education week.

at least 240 four active teachers have died of covid-19 and at least 880 two active and retired educators and personnel have died of covid. -- died of covid" apparently comet is having the impact on teachers as well. larry, good morning. caller: this has been nothing but a total disaster. it is a chinese biological weapon. the ingredients is nanite. schoolchildren are committing suicide. this is out of control. it is said. there are naive and ignorant people who do not want to face reality. host: let's go to mike, calling from florida. good morning. caller: good morning.

thanks for taking my call. i used to live up in new york and i can tell you the unions have a lot to do with teachers not going back to teach. the unions are holding them back, telling them to stay home. they have gotten lazy. host: don't you think perhaps it is the teacher saying we do not want to die from covid-19? caller: caller: yeah. -- caller: yeah. they have been saying that, of course, but there is a time when it is over. you have to go back and teacher children. that is what they accepted the job for. i guarantee that if they said they are going to hire all new people, that will get them moving, but if they do not say that, they will never move. that's for sure. it is a union state, just like california. host: are you saying florida is a union state? caller: no, new york.

the states that have teachers out of the school system are union states and they will stretch it as long as they can. host: you are in florida. what is the education system doing in florida? caller: they are going to school like nothing ever happened. we have not seen hardly a difference. we have the best governor in the country. i do not understand it. new york will never go back. it is the unions, the political system. it is a nightmare joke, it is a shame. host: you called in on the parent line. how old are your children and what greater than? -- and what grade are they in? caller: my kids are grown. i can just tell you that that is what is going on. host: let's go to valentina

calling from tampa, florida. good morning. caller: hi. my name is valentina and i am nine years old and i recently went back to school in january because my parents felt like it was the best for me and i missed i friends and we feel like even though coronavirus is still going around, the cases have gone down a little bit better and because my mom got annoyed at me for coming into her room all the time and because i wanted to go back to school and it felt like it was the best for

me, but it is up to your parents to see what you want to do, but that was my parents decision. host: valentina, what grade are you in? caller: fourth grade. host: are you happy to be back in school or were you having fun at home learning on the computer? caller: to be honest, when i first started e-learning, it seemed fun, but when i got into fourth grade, it was just boring. but i like going back to school because i get to see all my friends and my teachers, but we do not really get to see each other, but it is still much more better in my opinion because we are back to school. host: valentina, are you remembering to wear your mask and are your friends remember in two wear your masks -- friends

remembering to wear their masks? caller: yeah. the only time we can take off our masks is lunch. host: and everybody is washing their hands? caller: yes. every day, my teacher, whenever we walk into the classroom, we always have to wash our hands, sanitize our hands, and then wipe down our desks. so every time we come back from a place, we have to use hand sanitizer and wash our hands. and we have to go outside. our school has done a very good job keeping us safe. host: one more question for you. what is your favorite subject

now that you are back in school? caller: my favorite subject has always been either math or music. host: great job. let's talk to jan, calling from north carolina. jan, good morning. caller: good morning. i am so glad i got to hear from the child in fourth grade right before me. it is difficult to generalize about what is going on in schools because in north carolina, every county system, every school system is doing something different. systems all around hours are back in what we call -- around ours are back in what we call plan a since the fall. as far as unions, north carolina is a right to work state, so we do not really have a union forcing the hand of the governor

or anyone else, but the school board in our system decided to look at metrics. that was a wise move. we are back. as the child said, everybody is washing. children in our system are doing a great job mostly, but is still a feeling, as far as -- mostly, but it is still a feeling, as far as educators go -- we are starting to get vaccinated, but we are operating a restaurant three times a day. ventilation is not always good. our buildings are not consistently constructed. we have buildings that were built in the 1960's and 50's. and you cannot generalize about how the schools are ready to go back. educators have worked very hard. the worst scenario in my opinion

was when teachers were teaching hybrid models. some still are. the load is unimaginable, the teaching load. the way you check on children as far as the constant calling of families, which, you know, good teachers have always done, but it has been a load that i have never seen and i have taught in north carolina for over 40 years. host: on tuesday, publicly -- public health leaders testified before the senate health committee on the u.s. coronavirus response. he is -- here is gop senator bill cassidy, a doctor, asking a doctor about the ability of schools to reopen now. here is that exchange.

[video clip] we found that the teachers and the students who are infected typically brought the infection, in fact always brought the infection to school. what is your opinion on reopening schools now? >> senator cassidy, have been pretty vocal over the past several months and that i think -- months in that i think as we put in place universal masking. we should go ahead and vaccinate teachers and staff. it would add an important layer protection, but there is no doubt we can get schools open in the way that keeps kids, teachers and staff safe. host: welcome back. we will look at what some social

media followers are saying about returning to school and the impact on schools and learning from the pandemic. here is one text that says "kids cannot be taught if teachers get sick from covid, yet many parents and gop officials want teachers to put their own lives at risk to open schools just to make them happy. vaccinate teachers first before pushing them into a still dangerous environment." here is a text that says " immediate solution -- vaccinate all adults in the school building." another text says "the cost of education should not be life itself." another text that says "teachers should have been in the classroom teaching unless they were over 65 or had health issues." another text that says "the cdc said teachers did not need vaccines to go back to school, but now they are taking vaccines from the 65 plus crowd.

95% of appointments booked our teachers. -- booked are teachers. i am almost 67 and i have zero vaccinations." one last text that says "is it safe to open when teachers are vaccinated but students are not?" we want to know what you think. let's go to jim, calling from hopewell, virginia. good morning. caller: hello. what a trade. i have been listening to c-span since 1998. my student, my daughter, she is a junior in school and it has not been too rough for her, but a lot of her friends -- she has had a couple friends who have gotten pregnant. a number of the boys here have gotten trouble. -- gotten in trouble.

on homecoming, they have a parade through the town. it is a small town next to a military base, which means we get a lot of students from other countries, but i do not think they should shut down. they shut down and all the kids went to walmart. then they removed the basketball goals. it was ridiculous. my daughter plays golf. she gets to be outside quite a bit. some of the students wear masks when they play. but my daughter, since then, since school has been closed, she did get a part-time job, so when school started back up on last tuesday or monday -- she did not go back. she is doing it at home.

my wife is involved in her education. host: let's go to gino in maryland. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for c-span and allowing myself and others to have this platform. as i am listening to some of the callers, i really do understand the level of concern and, more importantly, i pray for all the people who have lost their lives and have been affected, but in regards to school, i have two students in high school. we have opted to have them continue to distance learn. schools will be opening starting monday, but this is a very difficult situation. i am tired of the teachers getting blamed, ok? the thing is this -- i am fine with the schools opening up but they must have a plan and strategy to have everyone vaccinated. i am disconcerted.

every channel i turn to, teachers are being blamed. i think the entire school should be vaccinated -- teachers, cafeteria workers, senior staff, and students as well, but i understand that is not able to happen now. host: let me ask you this question. what made you decide to continue online learning instead of building -- instead of sending your children back hybrid or full-time? as a parent in maryland, they gave us the same option. i wonder what made you stay online. caller: great question. for my kids, they have adjusted. to be honest with you, i am not comfortable with sending them back right now. brandon -- granted, i understand parents with special needs and things of that nature, so the situation is different. i have empathy for all parents and students as well, but my

kids struggled initially but have adjusted well. they still keep in contact with their friends via social media. and they are still making straight a's. in fact, they have made straight a's for the last five or six years. my wife and i are extremely hands-on so we take a proactive approach in our kids lives and hold them accountable. they are still doing chores, working hard, exercising. we have to make the best of the situation. this will change soon, hopefully, but everyone, take a step back, stop pointing the finger. we love the kids, the students, everyone affiliated with the schools, because it is a tough job. host: tom from birmingham, michigan, good morning. caller: good morning. i have a three-year-old and a five-year-old. the five-year-old we decided to switch to a private school. as a physician, i want to make a couple points.

the sentiment of the previous gentlemen, it is my personal perspective that teachers do not get paid enough. i want to make that clear. but some of the science that was discussed before in the recording you let everyone here is correct. schools tend to be such a relatively safe environment that the closure of schools, if anything, pushes people and children out on average into more risky environments. many cases are brought into the schools, reflecting the outside community. we have to think about the total risk to a society. death risk is not simply from covid. we see the suicide rates. it is all around here. we are lucky around here that we did not have a completed suicide. we have had many attempted suicides. we cannot look at it as a

zero-sum game. we take risks all the time. we cannot just stop driving. i do not think i need to go on about that. host: you say you moved your child from public to private. was that so your child could continue in person learning? caller: yes. i work. my wife works. we try to keep an eye on her as best we can. she is smart as heck, but i came down one day, saw her in the fetal position with the video off, mute on. she was not doing well. the schools really should have had virtual academies set up way back for other reasons, to be more prepared. she could have done better, but the ad hoc way many have been put together is not allowing kids -- certainly not mine.

so we had to make a decision and that regard. -- decision in that regard. we have to look at the totality of what has happened with lockdown measures. heart disease, stroke, dementia, diabetes up. we have to look at the total risk. when you brought up the number of total teachers that have passed, that is less than, equal to, or above that would happen from anything, whether it comes to heart disease, which we certainly do not enough for a disease that is preventable. we have to look at the total risk to society. we need to have the mitigation measures, get everyone who is qualified to be vaccinated vaccinated, but the risk to society -- host: let's go to carlton,

calling from louisville, kentucky. good morning. are you there? caller: yes. host: go ahead, carlton. caller: yes, i am trying to figure out why people are blaming the unions for the schools not being reopened. can someone out there explain that to me? i appreciate c-span for everything that they have done for the united states. thank you. host: let's go to amy, calling from flushing, new york. good morning. caller: good morning. good to talk to you again. i'm a new york city teacher. i was given the opportunity to be vaccinated in january. i am fully vaccinated. i have been in the classroom since september. i am a special needs teacher and two thirds of our parents opted for their children to not receive in person learning in

september. right now, we have gone up to where all of our kids from pre-k to fifth are in school five days a week that did opt for it, but i am still doing remote with some kids because they -- because their parents do not feel comfortable with them being in school. others went out of state and felt it was more convenient to continue remote. host: let's go to jenna, calling from williamsport, pennsylvania. good morning. caller: good morning. i am a special education teacher for williamsport school district . i have been teaching for 28 years. it has been a learning curve. we teach remote learning. our students are back, but they still have an option to be remote, and it is difficult. it is a learning curve for all of us, especially when i teach

hands-on with my students, but as a community and a school district, we are all working together to get the best education for the students. host: quick question for you before we run out of time. how are you teaching online and in person at the same time, or are they separated into two groups, one online and doing something different for the group in person? caller: we doing morning meeting and at 8:00, 10:00, noon and 2:00, we me as a whole group. my students that are at home are on the computer and we are on the computer. the district gave all the students chrome books, so we are all learning together. i am doing live lesson all the students. what i do every friday, i drop off a packet of papers so the kids have hard copies , plus i do live lessons throughout the day. host: are you finding students

are able to keep up with online and in person? caller: they are. i have amazing staff that work with me, and we are 18. we are there for the kids and we miss the kids, love the kids. i work in an amazing district that we go above and beyond. host: all right. let's stop there, because we are going to move on to our next topic. with next hour on "washington journal," we will look at recent legislation passed by the house, expanding background checks on gun purchases. brady president kris brown joins us next. later on, we will hear from former republican congressman bob barr and current nra board member. we will be right back. ♪ >> sunday night on "q&a,"

catholic theologian, author, and distinguished senior fellow at the ethics and public policy center, george weigel, talks about some of the people he profiles in "not forgotten," his new book of elegies and reminiscences. >> henry hyde, sargent shriver, and other portraits here -- lindy boggs, a longtime member of congress -- these were people who went into public life and public service to get things done. some of them were sparkling speakers and whips. some of them were dour norwegians. some were utter charmers, like lindy boggs. but they were all people who wanted to achieve things not so much for themselves but for their country, their constituents, for the common good. george weigel sunday night at 8:00 p.m.

eastern on "q&a." you can also listen to "q&a" as a podcast. ♪ >> american history tv on c-span 3, exploring the people and events that tell the american story, every weekend. today at 2:00 p.m. eastern, the university of torture professor john morrow recounts the story of eugene bullard. at 6:00 p.m. eastern from the civil war, brad stone looks at the role animals served in the civil war, from transporting supplies to serving as regimental mascots. sunday at 2:00 p.m. eastern, the life and legacy of sojourner truth, who self emancipated in 1826 and spoke out on abolition and women's rights. and at 8:00, a look at the personal and political

partnership between franklin and eleanor roosevelt through home movies. exploring the american story. watch american this weekend on c-span 3. >> "washington journal" continues. host: we are back, and we are going to spend the next hour talking about the house-passed legislation that would expand gun background checks. we are joined by brady president kris brown. discusses recent -- we are joined by brady president kris brown. good morning. guest: good morning. host: the house passed two pieces of legislation on gun laws. what is your reaction? guest: we are thrilled, and we are so pleased with the house leadership, from speaker pelosi to steny hoyer to wit clyburn, and, of course the chair of the

gun violence prevention task force. -- and was elected on having sensible gun laws. this was a historic vote. it is not the first time since 2018 that we had votes in the last two bills. the last congress we did as well, both enjoyed bipartisan report -- support. and as the president of brady, founded by jim and sarah brady, who created our nation's background check system, which has stopped more than 3.5 million sales of guns to prohibited purchases across the country, we believe in this system strongly and apply both bills. what they do -- and i can talk about it in a little more detail -- they strengthen our nation's background check system, which is our best protection that we have in this country to ensure that individuals who should not

have guns do not have them. and that is why our background check system enjoys such strong support across this country. i think pizza may be less popular than the background check system, and efforts to broaden and strengthen them are broadly supported throughout the country. host: let's give viewers background formation on what the bill actually does. the first bill, which was sponsored by preventative mike thompson, would establish background check requirement for gun sales between private parties, prohibiting transfers unless a licensed gun dealer, manufacturer, or importer first takes possession of the firearm to conduct a background check. the legislation would not apply to certain transfers, such as a gift between the spouses. that past 227-203, with 8 republicans report -- voting for and one democrat against.

there is also the enhanced background checks act, which was sponsored by representative jim clyburn. it would increase the amount of time that firearm sellers must wait to receive a completed background check before transferring a firearm to an unlicensed buyer from 3 days to 10 days. that bill passed the house 219-210, with two republicans voting for the legislation and two democrats voting against it. know what is the importance of those two pieces of legislation? what actual change will those praying, if it is passed by the senate and signed by the president? guest: great question. you mentioned the two bills that passed, hr-8, which causes certain gaps in the background check system and ensures a background check is done before every gun sale, and hr-1446,

which closes what is called the charleston loophole. let me explain whath each does. r-8 fixes a g -- hr-8 fixes a gap in the system. jim and sarah past the brady background check law about 27 years ago, just a few weeks ago. during that time, there was no such thing as the internet, and gun shows were not big business. today, they are. as a result of the way that the background check law was passed -- drafted at the time, focused on federally licensed firearms dealers as being the entities required to conduct background checks. that is how the legislation was worded. fast-forward to today, and there are entities that effectively act as ffl's and are selling at gun shows, and under federal law, they are not required to

run a background check, technically. some states have strengthened their laws, but others have not, and the system is designed to ensure a background check occurs before every gun sale. hr-8 ensures regardless where a gun is sold, whether over the internet or at a gun show or at an ffl, that a background check is conducted. there are exceptions to the background check requirement to have always been enshrined in federal law. so if you are doing an enter- -- inter-familial transfer, that is accepted, that is purely a gift. hr-1446 addresses a different issue. that issue, the so-called charleston loophole, exists

because, right now, under federal law, if you go to purchase a gun, and the gun dealer conducts a background check, as they are required to do if they are an ffl, and that background check does not come back instantaneously -- mind you, 90% of all background checks do, come back within 90 seconds -- if that back on check takes longer for any reason, typically because if there is something on someone's wrecker that needs to be investigated, than if more than 3 days pass from when the background check is initiated, the default rule is the sale proceeds anyway, even when no background check has come back. it is called the charleston loophole, because that is how the shooter, who shot the parishioners and the pastor at ame church in charleston was shot, by a shooter who never

should have had his gun but obtained it on the fourth day, when no background check had come back after the dealer called him and said you can come get the gun. what this does is extends the time period for a background check to be completed to 10 days. some states have already done that. then it says, if a background check still has not come back after that 10 day period, the person seeking to purchase the gun can petition the fbi for a completion of that check, and the fbi has 10 additional days to complete that check. in its simplest form, that is the bill, 1446, that closes the charleston loophole and gives the fbi sufficient time to complete background checks on individuals, many of whom need the fbi to complete those checks, but also, it protects individuals across this country from a sale proceeding where no

background check has come back on the person yet. and there is not a small percentage of those with flags that make them prohibited purchasers. in other words, if the background check had come back in time, it would show this person should not be sold the gun, so it is just giving more time for the fbi to complete that process. host: let me remind our viewers that they can take part in this conversation. if you support the house bill that expands gun background checks, we want to hear from you at (202) 748-8000. if you oppose the house bill that would expand gun background checks, we want to hear from you at (202) 748-8001. keep in mind, you can always text us at (202) 748-8003. and we are always reading on social media, on twitter, @cspanwj, and on facebook,

facebook.com/cspan. now i want you to respond to this. wednesday, a georgia republican spoke on the house floor about the legislation and why he thinks it should not pass. here is what he said. [video clip] >> bottom line is we all know that, by definition, criminals do not abide by the law, and that applies also when they are purchasing firearms. nothing in this bill prohibits this type of individual from obtaining firearms. in fact, the majority of individuals imprisoned for committing crimes with firearms obtained their firearms through theft, the underground market, family members, and the like. but what this bill does is threaten everyday american citizens with up to a year in prison and $100,000 fine for exercising their second amendment right in doing common practices.

and to say this does not create a national gun registry -- you cannot accomplish what is in this bill without a gun registry. the reality is universal background checks do not stop mass shootings. we do not have mass shootings because of a lack of background checks. this bill will not make our community safer. in fact what it will do is because law-abiding citizens to lose more of their second amendment rights. we should not be focused, here in congress, and taking those rights away. we actually should be strengthening the enforcement of laws we already have to make our community safer. host: respond to representative hice there. guest: let me just say it will be no surprise to any of your viewers that i disagree with almost everything that he said. but i will agree, yes, let us strengthen enforcement. that is a tired, old talking point that representatives like

him trot out whenever they are opposed to commonsense measures to enhance the brady background check system, but they put no teeth in it. they say those words, but then they do not fund the atf, do not provide more enforcement authority for organizations and agencies to actually ensure that gun dealers abide by the law. on that i agree, and brady has long said that. that me tell you what i disagree with -- basically everything else he said, because it is just not true. this would not create a registry, absolutely not. there is no way for that to happen from this bill. if it did, we were already have one, because the brady law largely accomplishes all of this. this is just visiting -- fixing gaps in the system that have taken place because 27 years have passed and because the designation of the entity that is required to conduct the background checks, back when the

bill was passed in 1993, was a federally licensed firearms dealer. the because of the internet and gun shows, we have many entities who are effectively acting that way who are not technically required to conduct checks. he also made the false assertion that is sort of a strange thing to make for a lawmaker and very troubling -- that criminals are just going to commit crime, no matter what you do. why would we have any law if that is the case? people will just thieve, commit murder -- that is not insistent with any notion upon which our entire democracy and rule of law is placed. and if it really did not work, well, no one who passed this bill 27 years ago got that memo, because these are the same, tired old talking points that were trotted forward, same about the registration, saying it will

not vote, save lives that were put forward 27 years ago. but here is the thing, and this is uncontestable, because it comes from the fbi. since the brady law was enacted, we have stopped more than 3.5 million sales of guns to individuals who are prohibited purchasers. i use that term because that is what congress defined. these are individuals like convicted felons, convicted domestic abusers that we all agree should not have guns. so i couldn't disagree more, and i will say that i am not alone. you cannot find many places in america today where americans do not agree that this system is really important and that it needs to be strengthened. he is in a distinct minority in terms of his views. host: let's go to some of our callers. let's start with john, calling from liverpool, new york. good morning. caller: how you doing?

i definitely support the background checks. generally speaking, i am in favor of everything i am hearing from the gun control people, the limitation of large bullet magazines, we need that. for expanded background checks. anything that makes common sense. and i really like the way the democrats use -- they used to use "gun control." now it is "common sense gun control." i think what we need is a return to commonsense in this country, and not just on guns, on many things. not to get off topic, but we need some common sense immigration control, we have stopped caravans coming in left and right. it is all about common sense across-the-board, regardless of what the issue is. let's use some common sense.

host: go ahead and respond. guest: i cannot agree more on the points with respect to commonsense gun measures. i want to say, while we had brady obviously -- while we at brady are obviously thrilled that these bills to strengthen the system is a critical first step, john is right. we have an epidemic of gun violence. we lose 40,000 people a year, 41 thousand last year, on average to gun violence. we have had a huge surge in gun violence due to what is called panic purchases, and two thirds of those deaths are suicides. we need comprehensive -- two

address comprehensively the issue of gun violence. every day gun violence that happens in communities across this country is not often discussed. the impact in particular on black and brown communities is devastating, entire communities impacted by this and suffering but a form of ptsd that makes living, basic living, incredibly difficult. so let's be sure -- i want to be sure, as the head of brady, to make a point that these two bills are really important, but so are regulating high-capacity magazines, so is addressing funding for violent intervention programs across this country that are absolutely critical, cdc funding, and ending family fire. that is the death or injury of individuals with unsecured guns in their own home, and that is driving 8 kids a day to be killed or injured with guns in the home, and it is driving suicides and other forms of violence. we need to tackle this as a

public of epidemic, and that is why i am so proud we have president biden who really understands this issue and treats it like that, when key leaders in his administration, like ambassador rice, the head of the domestic policy council, are very focused on that issue. that is appropriate. we can tackle and fix these issues in a way that is 100% consistent with the second amendment. we do not have to choose between our right to safety and our right to own guns. host: let's talk to david, calling from georgia. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you to "washington journal ." i just had to call and correct her on -- he is saying 90% -- she is saying 90% of background checks come back instantly. it is just the opposite. 10% to 15% come back instantly. this system is so bogged down,

cannot just take the information and spill out in that kind of timeframe. i've friends from oregon to west virginia to texas to the midwest , to the tip of florida, and they all tell me the same thing. that it takes too long. the system is tii vigge -- the system is too bogged up. any seller will tell you. so i just had to correct her on that. host: go ahead and respond there. guest: i am using statistics from the fbi. while there are individuals, and i cannot counter it, just keep in mind we have hundreds of thousands of gun sales that happen during any given year. when i say 90% of those happen instantaneously, i mean within seconds, and then 97% of them happen within a minute. the rest of them, yes, they may

be delayed, and that is not a small number, given the volume of gun sales we have every year, but that is why closing the charleston loophole is so important. we think the default rule should be that a gun sale does not occur until a background check is happened that has happened -- has happened. i am sensitive to the point i think the caller is making, and i do want to say our data does not come from the air. it comes straight from the fbi. ultimately, we believe the fbi needs to have appropriate resources to ensure the background check system works as intended, and that means the right data in the system -- i apologize -- the right data in the system and it means enough staffing to meaningfully ensure the background check system works the way that it should. i will tell you the president who invested in that the most is barack obama. he put more resources for

executive action, i might add, to the fbi then had been put there in a very long time. and i hope that we will reassess , in this congress, the appropriate staffing levels to ensure that it continues to work just as it should, which is really to ensure that an instantaneous or nearly instantaneous check can occur for every single gun sale. host: let's talk to bobby, calling from tuscaloosa, alabama. good morning. caller: yes. i totally support the new background checks on guns, because it would give -- it will not stop it all, because anyone who really wants to do harm will find a way to do that harm. but i have a question. i had a friend, her father passed away, and he had long

guns, hunting guns. he loved to hunt. he had two handguns. so her, not knowing anything about guns -- i advertised them for sale in bulletin, and they were sold. and i had a daughter who was in school and worked at night, lived in birmingham, alabama, so i bought her a gun, and she learned how to use it. so the question is, you are saying, for instance, if i passed away, and i do have a revolver, that my wife, she couldn't give that to a friend of mine or a brother of mine? how would she dispose of that? how will a private citizen dispose of a gun, if someone passed, and they had long guns or revolvers, and they want to sell it to someone? would you speak on that for me, please? guest: yes, thank you for that. really good question.

the way hr-8 -- and you're referencing hr-8, because that is the one that requires background checks with certain exceptions. one is inter-familial transfer. your hypothetical would not count as that. it would count as a transfer in a will from one family member to another. but if it is transfer that way, and then your wife, which i think is your hypothetical, wants to transfer it to a friend, a background check would need to be done in that instance. that sounds cumbersome, but really it is not. the system that has been put in place to facilitate this -- keep in mind, half of all states have closed the gap already, and there are systems in place, with federally licensed firearms dealers to do this, just go to a local dealer, and they complete the check with your friend. that is how the compliance works.

why is that the rule? because if we had a carve about that basically said any transfer between two individuals -- if you are friends, it has to be stated as individuals -- could proceed, that would create a huge loophole that a mack truck could drive through it. and to use the analogy that the person on the floor was using, that criminals will just find a way through -- well, we have tightened it, so it really makes that impossible. inter-familial transfers, yes, but transfers between two individuals not related would be subject to a check that would happen at any local ffl. that is the way it is designed to work. host: what are these two bills

chances in the senate right now? do you all expect a quick passage, no passage, a filibuster? guest: that is a really good question. i was really pleased to listen to leader schumer's remarks after hr-8 and hr-1446 passed. what a difference an election makes. leader schumer is committed to at least bring hr-8 to the floor for a vote. i hope that will also include hr-1446. both of these measures are critically important. ultimately what has happened in the last session of congress is the house of representatives passed both these measures, and it sat at mitch mcconnell's graveyard, along with thousands of other bills. the differences bringing it to the floor.

and forcing votes on this issue. we do have some republicans who will absolutely vote for this bill. we know that. we have work to do. to bring others along. what i will say about it is this -- we are working day and night. we have hundreds of thousands of people across this country who care passionately that this gets done. no member of the senate wants to take this vote and vote against this bill, really, in the end. they do not want to do that, because we will make this an election issue. the american people will be unforgiving around this issue. if, for whatever reason, we find delay around bringing this to the senate floor, or we cannot get enough votes, because as you noted in the question, to overcome the filibuster, what this is emblematic of is we have

to get rid of the filibuster. if we cannot get this done when 9 out of every 10 americans thinks this has to happen, it is the only room in all of america where you cannot get 90% of the people occupying that room to agree that this needs to happen. for us, we will push very hard to ensure that these get votes. we will push very hard to ensure that we are getting the kind of support we need, but if ultimately we cannot get the 60, it means we need to end the filibuster. host: let's talk to sarah, calling from new hampshire. caller: good morning. i've been a gun owner my entire adult life. my question is, if i pass a background check, why would i have to wait 5 days? say i have been threatened by my

partner, i've gone to get the restraining order, now i want to protect myself, i pass a background check, now i have to wait 5 days in which that person has an opportunity to killand, k five days ago. i do not think that is fair. the other thing is that i lost a lot of my constitutional rights under the patriot act and now i am losing my second amendment rights, and laws like the person said, criminals break laws, they do not care about laws, and to say that we should not have laws is nonsensical and does not make sense. i have done trades online, and met the person, this is our law, meet them at the gun store, they

have to go through a background check or i have to gun through the background check and we do it through the gun store. i think that takes care of that. i agree that gun shows are a loophole. there should be a way to do background checks at the gun store. host: go ahead and respond before we run out of time. caller: absolutely -- guest: absolutely. i am not sure what the caller what she was referencing in terms of the five day waiting period. that might be a state law, some states have waiting periods. there is nothing in the adderall law that requires a waiting -- any federal law that requires a waiting period. the 10 days is just to complete the background check. the second it is completed the sale can proceed but there is no waiting period. in response to her comment though that one of the things

that waiting periods have proven in studies that i have read to reduce the risk of is suicide. and so, it is something that merits much more attention. her final point is really important. what i described in terms of how a transfer would happen between individuals that she commented on at the end based on what your prior caller asks, -- asked, that is easy and that is how she experienced it herself, and that is exactly the system that we are creating federally, nationwide that will facilitate those kind of transfers from happening going forward, not a difficult thing. host: we would like to thank kris brown for talking us through the house legislation. thank you for your time. guest: thank you, it is a pleasure. host: in a few minutes we will continue our discussion on the legislation expanding background

checks on gun purchases with former republican congressman bob barr and current nra board member, but we want to show you a portion of the house floor debate on background checks. here's republican scott perry of pennsylvania and democrat mike thompson who sponsored one of the two bills. [video clip] >> just yesterday afternoon, 3:00, and atlanta, an armed robber walked into chick-fil-a. and rob the place. think about that. you are in there with their children, getting a meal in the middle of the day and some becomes an with a gun and put each -- and put your life at risk and everybody in the place is at risk. did that guy get the background check? we do not know, but odds are they didn't. odds are, news flash, they do not follow the law and robbing the chick-fil-a at 3:00 in the

afternoon in atlanta is not in accordance with the law. but, and armed citizen stopped the robbery using his firearm, illegally obtained, saved everybody in the place. you know who is happy, the people in the chick-fil-a are happy that the guy who bought the gun legally was there to save them and their children. that is who is happy. this legislation, mr. speaker, disarms the person who operated his firearm illegally. that is what it does. it does arms and says to the criminal keep on not abiding by the law. you got your weapon illegally and you will keep doing it because it does not stop them from doing anything. it stops the guy who is going to get his firearm illegally and end the crime in his community. no charges are pending on that individual in atlanta that stopped the crime. no charges pending. he followed the law. this law, this bill seeks to

punish people who wants to follow the law, and that is what is going to happen. you know was what -- do you know what will happen when we do this, they will be more crime and more unauthorized weapons and less people defending themselves in our community. that is what is happening. >> mr. speaker, that is nonsense, what was said is not accurate. the only thing that this bill does is require a background check. if someone has legally purchased a firearm and passed a background check nobody will take the gun away from them. they legally purchased it. they passed the background check. so, out with that kind of nonsense and that type of scare tactics is not complementary to the decorum of this house, and it does not speak to the bill. i yield back. [end video clip] host: we are back and we are going to continue our discussion on the house passed bill to

expand gun background checks. now we are joined by former republican congressman bob barr of georgia, a current nra board member and a chair of the liberty guard. good morning. guest: good morning, great to be with you all. host: first we want to get your reaction for the two house passed bills that would tighten background checks, what do you think? they -- guest: they certainly garner a lot of support in congress and the senate, perhaps not enough to pass under the current operational rules which include a filibuster, but neither will stop the problem in america, which is criminals use a lot -- utilizing firearms for illegal purchases. extending the background check as hrh does and, if you read it carefully it can be construed to or used to extend the period for

a background check indefinitely because you have a 10 day business day window, initially which does not include holidays or weekends and then the petitioner, the proposed purchase -- purchaser, applicant what have to submit a petition, and wait an additional 10 days. you are talking about a month. to require a citizen of this country to have to wait a month, at least a month before they can exercise a constitutionally guaranteed right is outrageous, and highly inconsistent with the reading and the purpose of the second amendment. the so-called gun show loophole which was never a loophole. when congress passed it any years ago, they looked at it from a rolloff standpoint and regulated those sales that were properly within the jurisdiction of the federal government, that

is commercial sales. it was never the intent of the congress to have to regulate sales between private individuals. a private individual selling a firearm to another private individual have to go to uncle sam and get uncle sam's permission from the fbi before they exercise a constitutionally guaranteed right. they should not. at the heart, both pieces of legislation are constitutionally inconsistent with the constitution, and neither will address the problem of crime in america committed by criminals. by definition, every citizen who goes to purchase and has his or her name submitted for a background check is a law-abiding citizen. now, yes, are there problems in the system, yes. let us address those problems,

not essentially throw out the entire system. host: to be clear, are you saying that you are against these two pieces of legislation, or against the whole background check system as a whole? guest: no. the current system, overall works well. are there problems and do some things slip through? yes. will things slip through if this legislation goes through, certainly, there has never been a perfect piece of legislation, so, what i'm i am -- what i am against is all of the time and effort spent passing these types of measures when there are legitimate and constitutionally consistent measures such as tightening up the requirements for reporting into the system into the first place, providing penalties for individual bureaucrats in positions in government that do not stand the

information in properly. to reinforce the way that the nix system works, and people -- who are regulated by the federal government, even if a young salesperson receives approval from the fbi for a sale to go forward, if there is something that bothers them, they do not have to allow the gun to go forward. and, there was a reasonable suspicion or that the people will commit a crime with that, so they are liable for it. there already effects in the system if in fact people tasked with carrying out properly do their job better than they sometimes in the past have. host: representative barr,

georgia representative lucy mcbath spoke about a background check legislation and white needs to become law. here is what she said. [video clip] >> i am completely grateful for all of the hard work and for all of the efforts that has been placed into making this happen today, and i would just like to take my hat off for a moment, the hat that i wear as a member of the united states house of representatives and to think each and every one of might -- thank each and every one of my colleagues in leadership. as a mother, who lost her child to the gun violence that every of us has been fighting so hard to eradicate, speaker, i want to thank you. mr. thompson, thank you for allowing me to be a part of championing this life-changing

legislation. i spend time with you, i came down to charleston after emmanuel, and i am more grateful to be able to help you pass this legislation, because no one deserves that kind of pain and anguish that people are suffering, especially those who have come to god and sat in church and lost their lives. senator blumenthal were, senator murphy, chairman nadler, thank you. you have been championing this legislation long before i got here, and all of the times that i sat in committee hearings, waiting for this legislation to pass, and watching you time and time again put forth amendments that were shot down for this moment to be able to be here with you, thank you for that.

and, as a mother and survivor, we thank you. there are so many survivors and family members who have been waiting and waiting. and, today we have the real possibility to make a difference and save lives. i thank you, on behalf of all of the organizations, leaders, and frontline volunteers that have been championing for this moment. thank you. [end video clip] host: how do you respond to people who say that this legislation is needed? guest: i am not going to respond to someone's personal tragedy and emotional appeal. but what bothers me, in addition is looking down the road if these pieces pass and you bring forward a mother, or a father, or a husband, or wife who has been unable to purchase a firearm because of these vastly

extended periods of time and they come before congress and say i lost a loved one because you the congress passed a law that did not allow me to exercise my second amendment rights to protect myself then that would provide for me a similar type of emotional appeal and opposition to what the congress is doing. it cuts both ways. host: let me remind our viewers that they can join in on the conversation. if you support the house bill that has been passed to increase gun background checks we want you to call 202-748-8000. if you oppose the two house bills that were passed to increase gun background checks we want you to call at 202-748-8001. keep in mind that you can always text us at 202-748-8003, and we are always reading on social media and twitter and facebook.

representative barr, chuck schumer has said that he will bring this bill to the senate floor. do you see there being enough support from democrats and republicans to get it passed through the senate? guest: not at this time. as i believe you probably already discussed with your previous guests, ms. brown. there is a move by the senate majority, the 50-50 majority that is controlled by the democratic party, there is a move to do away or at least a lot of support to do away with the filibuster so these important measures can be passed by a simple majority. in those circumstances, the chances for these measures passing the senate would be greatly heightened. but under the current rules, that require 10 additional votes in order to cut off debate and move to a vote, so effectively

requires a 60 vote majority to move this legislation forward for a vote, i do not see that happening at this time. host: let us let some of our viewers take part. we will start with don from pennsylvania. good morning. caller: good morning. just a couple of things. first of all, as i read the second amendment, there are two words that all second amendment people seem to ignore is the words well-regulated. and also, when i hear people complaining about this bill will do nothing to stop gun violence. well, my question to you is what whale? i support the bill, but i do not think it goes far enough. i do not know what your guest would propose as a solution to gun violence or do we ignore it? host: go ahead and respond. guest: i did propose an

important measure or change in policy, and that is to hold bureaucrats' feet to the fire. those men and women in state, local, and federal government to make sure that the current background system works so that information that would be a prohibitive factor for a person to buy a firearm gets into the system on a timely basis so you do not have people who are ineligible to purchase a firearm such as convicted felons that they are able to slip through, because somebody did not put their name in the system that should have, and there has been legislation proposed in the past to tighten up the way that the current system is operating. that would help. also, of course, you have to keep in mind also that ffl's,

gun retailers are prohibited from selling a firearm to somebody who is not eligible, even if they pass the system if they believe that a person is trying to purchase it for another person that is a straw purchase. that is illegal. it is also illegal to transport firearms across state lines for the purpose of the legal resale or actions. so, my point to your call and i appreciate his interest in these matters, it is important. the main problems that we currently face in all levels of government is ineffective, enforcement of existing laws. firearms are the most heavily regulated commodity in trade and business nowadays. there are hundreds and thousands , if you include all the state

restrictions and local restrictions, that have to do with firearms. they are very highly regulated and we need to do a better job of attacking the root causes of crime, and better enforcement of existing laws. host: kathy from gainesville, new york. caller: good morning. i had two issues that i would like to state. in terms of closing the loophole and extending the number of days when they have to wait for the background check, i just see that is so backwards to proper management. the problem is that even with computers we cannot get the background checks in time. why doesn't -- lawsuits are taking years, background checks could take years, fix the problem, leave the law alone. they have a problem. the trouble in charlottesville, if the government got the background check in a timely manner, that would not have happened, why does it have to

come against our constitutional rights. a second point, my concern about the background checks is what the criteria are, like who can change it? i do not think anyone should be proud that 3.5 million people did not get to get a gun. maybe 1% of those it was based on something that was incorrect or incorrect information. i do not like it, so i oppose both of them. host: go ahead and respond. guest: with regard to the intermediate question, what prohibits a person under current law from purchasing a firearm, there are a number of so-called prohibitory elements within federal law already. if they have been convicted of a felony under state or federal law, they are prohibited from lawfully purchasing or possessing a firearm.

if a person has surrendered their citizenship, if a person has been dishonorably discharged from the military. if a person has been adjudged mentally defective or deficient, weird language. there are a list of elements that prohibit a person currently from purchasing a firearm. with regard to the caller's first point, it follows and i think very correctly from the point i was making before, which is with all of the laws currently on the books we need better enforcement of the laws, particularly by people in government who are tasked with making sure that information gets into the background check system on a timely basis. there have been a number of incidents where horrific crimes have been committed because somebody in government failed in their duty to uphold the law and make sure that the information

was placed in the system. additionally, even if these pieces were to be passed and signed by president biden, however many months or years thereafter, there is another mass shooting, the response by the democrats and others who support this legislation would not be, well, we passed the law and it has not been effective so we will do a better job of enforcing it, their response would be, we still do not have enough gun control laws, so we have to passmore, and you do not have to be a rocket scientist to look down the road and see what in fact those additional measures would be. there is already talk in the congress, by some democrats to pass a law that would require a registry of all firearm owners, similar to laws now that require registration of automobiles. none of this is going to end gun

control advocates' efforts. they will be at this until in their mind they think they can reach nirvana and there is not going to be any gun crime any longer. host: betty from illinois. good morning. caller: good morning. i am from chicago, and i am so tired of babies getting killed in chicago. and, when nothing was done about those little babies in connecticut, i do not know what it is going to take for the people to wake up about the guns , and for this man he keeps saying the democrats. it is not a democrat or republican, this is a problem for everybody's children. i am scared for my kids to go out. i wish he would stop saying that nothing will be done. thank you so much. host: go ahead and respond. guest: the lady makes an important point that neither i

nor any people i know would disagree with and that is none of us should have to live in a city or environment where they are afraid to let their children go outside for fear of being shot. or, sometimes now we have seen this in chicago in recent years, and some american cities like detroit where children inside an apartment or inside a home or hit by a stray bullet fired by a gang member or somebody else committing a crime. in some areas you do not need to be afraid to have your children go outside there is a danger within the house, and this is, i think not so much a failure of insufficient gun laws, but a failure by local authorities to support law enforcement, to give law enforcement the tools that it needs and to do a better job of identifying criminals prone to commit gun violence than is currently the case.

if in fact, for example, the parkland shooting a couple of years ago. if in fact all of the red flags, which were there, had been acted on and there were laws allowing them to be acted on that tragedy would have never happened. in most of these instances it has nothing to do with federal gun laws, it has to do with local and state officials not providing the support for law enforcement and recognizing problems early on rather than waiting until it is too late. host: brianne from -- brian from illinois. go ahead. caller: yes. i have a problem with this. they are whittling away our rights constantly. i lost my rights and 2002, but that is another story. in chicago, they put that woman up there, she lost her kid and that is terrible.

but there are kids being shot every day in chicago. there are kids being shot every day in new york. you have this new autonomous zone with the floyd memorial, a guy was shot there. you had an washington, d.c. were two teenagers were riddled to death in a truck in washington, d.c.. these are criminals with guns doing this. so, what the democrats are doing is beyond me. these are black children being shot in the cities, you know? i am sorry that the white woman -- i am white, i am sorry that her child was shot by a crazed individual, but maybe if somebody was there with a legal gun could have stopped this. you understand? all of the stuff that is going down now, people have lost their minds and the democrats are the worst thing for this country that i have ever seen in my

life. host: go ahead and respond. guest: i really do not think denigrating mothers and grandmothers who have lost children by saying boo hoo, that is not appropriate, these are real tragedies. simply because somebody who has lost a relative may see a different solution to the problem than i do, i would never downplay or denigrate them. i think that is highly improper. host: michael from texarkana, arkansas. good morning. caller: good morning america, and seized. i am a disabled veteran and i served in combat. here is something, the elephant in the room. look at the country that has very few weapons in their

society, do not have mass shootings. i believe in the second amendment. everyone had a flintlock rifles and pistols. then, do that when it was written. they had no idea about automatic weapons that we had today, weapons that could fire 800 rounds per minute and mow down people like slaughtered cattle. you need to get a grip. secondly, these open carry people. if i am a bad guy with a gun, you are my first target, how dumb can you be. if i see you carrying a gun, you are my first target. i learned that in combat. you need to look at the elephant in the room. restrict people -- restrict multi-firing weapons. go back to the flintlock rifle if you want to fire the cash follow the second amendment. guest: that shows a serious lack of any sort of common sense about what the second amendment means.

it is not restricting the right to keep and bear arms only to the firearms available 250 years ago. as the supreme court has said in the heller division in the d.c. case -- decision in the d.c. case in 2008. if you read what was intended by the language, it means those firearms are available to the citizenry and that right shall not be infringed, those firearms that are in normal usage and procession by citizen -- possession by citizens. that does not mean flintlock rifles, that is silly. with regard to the earlier point which is equally wrong, fully automatic firearms are not available to citizens in this country other than in very specific highly regulated circumstances. so, a fully automatic ar-15 platform rifle or other rifles like the ruger mini do not fire

automatically and it is illegal for the average citizen to possess one. as your caller may know from having served in vietnam as he said, that a far better rifle to use for close in shooting of individuals are shotguns. yes, an ar-15 platform rifle, a very ergonomically appropriate rifle for the human being to use , you can fire fairly rapidly, but she so can any number of other firearms. the law we are seeing proposed to outlaw ar-15 and similar rifles, similar to what they passed 20 years ago and then only had a 10 year lifespan, those firearms are being sought to be banned because they look

mean. we have gone through that before. and, it is silly to say an ar-15 should be banned, but another rifle of equal caliber and firepower should not be because it does not look mean. we should be getting away from that, and apparently for a lot of democrats in the congress, we are not. host: regina from apollo, pennsylvania. good morning. caller: good morning. former representatives barr, i remember you are a representative, i am opposed to any more gun legislation so i want to make that clear. but, a few years back, you mentioned how bureaucrats are not keeping up with the instance -- national instant check system.

and, senator korman had legislation to clean up that national instant check system, i believe right after the man that was discharged from the military , he was discharged dishonorably because he was involved with family abuse. he went into the church in texas and shot -- you know what i am referring to, correct? and then he was stopped by a gun owner who actually was smart enough and quick enough to kill before that man could do more. what i got from that whole scenario was, is there anyone else sponsoring legislation that moves the bureaucrats to do anything about this? or do we play the same game of the national instant check system is way behind in the check ups and delays. i understood that that would delay your ability to get a gun because they cannot keep up now or, what is the problem.

what would motivate and what legislation on our side would make them do their job and make the national instant check system? we can talk and say we do not do it. do you understand? unless you physically go in there and make them do this, what is ahead as an option. host: go-ahead and respond. guest: a very good question and your caller understands the root of what part of this problem is, and that is information that should prohibit a person from possessing a firearm, a convicted felon or some of the other enumerated measures currently in federal law, that information has to get into the system on a timely basis. it might be a local conviction, it might be a dishonorable discharge petition in the

military, but what we have seen in a number of tragic incidences , like the one you referred to, i think it was in sugar land, texas. the information did not get into the system because somebody failed in their responsibility to do so. and, there are things that should be done and can be done to stop that. in other words, to ensure that employees get the information into the system in a proper way on a timely basis, and make them liable if they do not do it. for example, if it is a federal employee and they make a mistake, the law should apply -- should provide the opportunity to fire them, and yet it is virtually impossible to fire federal employees. you can also provide civil liabilities for individuals in government who fail in their responsibility to make sure that the information gets into the system and is acted on. it is a very good point, and

points out some very real things that could be done rather than limiting the rights of law-abiding citizens to possess a firearm, which is what these bills would do. host: we would like to thank former representatives bob barr for being with us and talking about the house passed gun legislation. thank you for your time. guest: my pleasure. host: coming up next, rhonda collins of the national association of tax professionals will be here to answer your federal tax preparation questions. stick with us, we will be right back. ♪ >> book tv on c-span2 has top nonfiction books and authors every weekend. sunday night at 9:00 p.m. eastern on afterwords, charles kessler talks about "prices of

the two constitutions: the rise, decline, and recovery of american greatness." he is interviewed by a george mason university law professor. then at 10:00, walter isaacson looks at the developer of the crisper method for genome editing in "the code breaker." at 11:05, in her book "the daughters of kobani" a journalist reports on a group of female kurdish warriors that are fighting and winning against isis in syria. watch book tv on c-span2. sunday night on q and a, catholic theologian and distinguished senior fellow talks about some of the people he profiles in "not forgotten" his book of reminiscences.

>> scoop jackson, sargent shriver and other of my portraits, lindy boggs, a longtime member of congress, these were people who went into public life and service to get rings done. and, some of them were sparkling speakers and wit like henry hyde. some of them were dour, norwegians, and some of them were utter charmers, but they were all people who wanted to achieve things, not so much for themselves, but for their country and constituents and the common good. >> sunday night at 8:00 eastern on q&a, which you can listen to as a podcast where you can get your podcasts. ♪ >> you are watching c-span, your unfiltered view of government. c-span was created by america's

cable television companies in 1979. today we are brought to you by these television companies to provide c-span2 viewers as a public service. >> "washington journal" continues. host: we are back with rhonda collins of the national association of tax professionals and she is here to answer our federal tax preparation questions as we move towards spring and tax filing deadlines. that morning. -- good morning. can you hear us? guest: yes, can you hear me. host: we can hear you now. guest: how are you. host: i am doing great. guest: let us set this -- host: let us set the stage, what are the major tax changes from 2019 to the 2020 tax year? guest: i think that so many acts

getting past, we have seen so many changes, especially with the american rescue plan act passed this week. some of the exciting things that have come out of that one is that people are asking about the unemployment, the first $10,200 being nontaxable, the advanced premium tax credit being that you do not have to pay it back if you need -- if you meet certain qualifications, those are two of the big things. cobra being extended, the child tax care credit, dependent credit, family and sick pay leave. the employee retention credit, those are the few of the most exciting items that we are dealing with. host: all of the provisions that were in the american rescue plan, are they available for people to use in this current tax filing year?

or are these things that will go into effect for 2021, 2022? guest:. couple of them are for the 2020 tax year and some are for 2021. for instance, unemployment and the advanced premium tax credit are retro, meaning that they apply to the 2020 year, so if we want to talk about the unemployment, that benefit has been extended, a three hundred dollar weekly benefit extended to september 6 of 2021. the first $10,200 per taxpayer, so if you are filing with a spouse and you both received unemployment, over $10,200, that first could be excluded from taxable income and if the caveat is if your modified adjusted gross income is under 150,000. if it is over $150,000 there is

no exclusion and that amount is fully taxable. that is one of the biggest changes. the irs issued a statement last evening, we did a presentation on our website trying to explain and decipher what it is about and what happens for those who have not already filed as opposed to those who have already filed that fall into this scenario. the other one is the advanced premium tax credit, meaning that if you were advanced this credit for health insurance, and you got too much in the past he would have to pay that back. due to all of the changes in the year 2020, do not have to pay that amount back, you can keep it. if you've already filed a return, we are waiting for guidance on how you would go about getting that amount refunded to you that you actually paid that you did not have to. those are two of the biggest changes for the 20 tony tax

return. most of the other provisions apply to the 2021 tax year. host: let us learn more about those premium tax credits. can you explain to us what those are about? guest: the premium tax credit reduces the health care premiums for low and middle income families. so, what happens is that you, at the beginning of the year, you fill out paperwork to determine how much you might qualify for assistance regarding your health insurance. at the end of the year when you are doing your tax return you do a true up, and if you were advanced too much credit you are supposed to pay the credit back. for 2020, they are saying no repayment is required if you got an excess of this credit. for those who already filed we are still waiting on guidance

from the irs as how to get the money refunded. we will -- will we need to file an amended return or what is the process to get that refunded? host: speaking on waiting on guidance, we know that last year they extended the deadline to file because we were in the middle of a pandemic. 500,000 plus deaths later, we are still in the middle of a pandemic. do we see any extension for the time to file? where will it still be april 15? guest: right now it is still april 15. we have been in contact with our irs liaisons almost weekly to see if the deadline will be extended, to june or july, or even may. as of today, we are looking at an april 15 deadline. it has not been extended. host: let we remind -- let me remind our reviewers that --

viewers that we can take part. we will open up regional lines for the conversation. if you are in the eastern or central time zones you call in at 202-748-8000. if you are in the pacific or mountain time zones, your number will be 202-748-8001. keep in mind that you can always text your questions at 202-748-8003. and, we are always reading on social media on twitter and facebook. let us get some more basic information for the 2020 tax year. what are going to be the tax brackets, i believe there will be seven, and what will those black -- brackets depend on and how do you know which one you will fall into?

guest: for the various tax brackets for 2020, as you said there are seven taxable income groups ranging from 10% all the way up to 37%, and that the patent -- and that is calculated based on your filing status, the type of income that you have. when it comes down to is ultimately you are starting out with your 1040 and adding all of the income you earned minus your adjustment and coming down to an adjustable growth and less a few more items coming down to a taxable income number, and based upon that number and where it falls determines what tax bracket you fall into. host: one of our social media followers has a question that i am on -- sure that it is on a lot of people's minds. he says "after the question on everybody's mind.

our household get $6,400 in 2021 and -- in checks for the irs relief. will any of that be taxable as income? he says the answer is no. what do you think? guest: stimulus payments are not taxable income, they were designed to stimulate the economy and helps tax -- help taxpayers. they are not patent -- they are not taxpayer -- taxable, number one and two, and three just coming out. host: for our viewers, can you tell us what the difference is between a tax credit and a tax deduction? what are -- what is the difference? guest: that is a great question. a tax credit, if you think of that as in the form of a tax credit is a percentage off.

a deduction is a dollar amount. if you are going to the store to purchase an item and you were getting a credit it would be like being 50% on. a tax deduction would be like adding $50 off. so, there are several deductions, and when you look at what we call common above the nine -- above the line deductions, if you look at all of the income on 1040 and then you have deductions, above the line deductions. student loan deduction, ira deduction. those would be things that are deductions versus a credit, which is the earned income credit, child income credit, those are based on you income, -- your income and filing status. a tax credit gives you a dollar

dollar reduction, while the deduction lowers your taxable income. does that help? host: that helps a lot. let me ask one more question. a lot of people got unemployment insurance over the last year because of the coronavirus pandemic. do people owe taxes on the aid they received from unemployment insurance? guest: the unemployment that they received, depending upon how much they received and what their adjusted growth income, there unemployment may be taxable. as i previously said, they are allowing $10,200 per taxpayer to be exempt from tax. if you received 25,000 or, let us say 20,000, $10,200 of that will not be subject to tax in the difference would, assuming that your adjusted gross income

is under $150,000. with your unemployment you cannot say if it is taxable or not, it is dependent on the other income that you earned that is being reported on your tax return. host: i am sure our callers have plenty of questions, so let us start with charles from alexandria, virginia. good morning. caller: good morning. this is charles' wife. host: sorry, go ahead. caller: that is all right. my family and i sold land in november of last year. and we have a settlement sheet that we are trying to figure out. what expenses can we include in our tax filing from that settlement sheet? for instance the agent commission, title cost, and stuff like that. what actually can we deduct?

guest: great question. the land that you sold, was not held for an investment? caller: it was gifted to be by my mom. guest: so, if it was gifted to you, i am not sure if you are familiar with the term, at the time you had the land gifted to you did you get a fair market valuation to determine what the base would be? caller: we just got it from the tax bills that they get they showed what the land would be and there was an abandon house on the property. but the people who actually bought it bought it for the land and the house was a tear down. the land that we acquired in 2014, and we just sold it november of last year. guest: ok, this is a great question. i would say -- we have a

research department here at the national association of tax professionals. normally when you are selling investment property you would look at the fair market value, which would be the date that you inherited the land as compared to the sales price, and then with the basis of the land you are going to add in the selling expenses, so the commission that you paid the realtor, and other items, the basic settlement statements that you could include in their to come to a true basis. compare that to the sales price, and that will be your gain or loss on the sale of the land. definitely include one of the items in the commissions for the realtor. host: another situation that many people face over the last year that was new for them is working from home. the pandemic forest many people to work remotely -- forced many

people to work remotely. can they deduct their home office and related costs as a deduction on their taxes? guest: we wish that they could. that question comes through on a daily basis. if you are a w-2 employee, you cannot claim a home office deduction. prior to the tcja, you could actually claim on reimport -- unreimbursed employee deductions, but now, unfortunately no home office deduction. however, if you are an independent contractor being paid on a form 1099 miscellaneous, that is a different scenario and there you might be able to claim the deduction and there are two ways. there is a simplified method and

an actual method. if you keep track of all of your actual expenses you canada -- deduct the expenses and you cannot use the home office deduction to generate a loss on your business. the other method is a simplified method with no recordkeeping and claim up to five dollars per 300 for -- square feet per $1500 deduction. unfortunately, all of us who are working home who are grateful to have our job and still getting a w-2, we cannot claim the deduction. host: what about business expenses like you had to buy your own paper or your own computer, or buy your own pencils and all of those things that you would normally get at work, but you had to buy for yourself at home? are any of those deductions? guest: no. if you are getting a w-2, those

would be business expenses that you cannot deduct. hopefully you have a great employer like i do who compensates me for those items. host: let us go back to the phone lines and talk to gilbert who is calling from birmingham, alabama. good morning. caller: good morning to c-span and ms. collins for coming. with the economic stimulus check , a lot of people have not received the first one. on the 1044, could you explain in somewhat brevity about the non-filing position for those people who did not file an income tax in 2019 that they did not have the information on? there are a lot of people who have not received their stimulus checks because they now have information on file. could you go into detail for that on me? i would appreciate it and the

listening audience would also. guest: this is regarding the first stimulus check that many of the taxpayers have not yet received payment for, is that correct? host: he has already gone. guest: ok, that is too bad. the irs is definitely trying to get all of those payments out. to the folks who are deserving of the stimulus payments. so, i wish he was back and we could help them. host: let us go to doug calling from key largo, florida. good morning. caller: good morning. i was curious. i do not know if i did not read the bill or anything, but i heard that the people in prison were getting the stimulus check, and i am curious if that is true or not. guest: that is true, originally when the stimulus was released the first payment, those

incarcerated did not get the stimulus payment. the rules changed, and subsequently those who are incarcerated are eligible for the stimulus payment, so yes they are getting it. host: let us be specific about what stimulus payment you are talking about, the original one that was done by congress during the trump administration, the second one, the current one, or all three? guest: let me -- i know for sure the first one, but i am not sure on all three. so, that one i do not have the answer for. as we go on we will keep looking, how is that? host: perfect. paul from providence, rhode island. in morning. -- good morning. caller: how are you?

host: fine. go ahead. caller: i am calling because i received the first check but the second check for $600, i have not received that yet and i do not have a home computer or direct deposits. guest: so he has not received his second stimulus check? host: that is what he said. guest: if you have not received the second stimulus check, when you file, there is a recovery rebate credit worksheet, and you will basically reconcile the payment you got versus the one you are entitled to and that will be reconciled on the tax return. if you are entitled to more on a stimulus payment that will come in the form of a refund. no worries, you have the opportunity to fix that on your

2020 tax return. host: here's the answer to the question about the stimulus payment, i went to factcheck.org to answer the caller's question about the stimulus payments and prisoners. "senator john of wyoming defended his vote against the american rescue plan act by claiming that the legislation would provide $1400 stimulus checks to prisoners and illegal immigrants who should not receive them. last year when he and his fellow republicans controlled the senate and the white house he voted for the coronavirus aid, relief, and economic security act in march and consolidation appropriations act in december. those bills, which included stimulus checks of up to $100,000 -- $1200 and $600 respectively and it did tonight checks to any nonresident individual that is now said that is inefficient."

it seemed like all provided payments to prisoners. but getting back to the tax issues that we are talking about. what happens to parents who homeschooled their children from home during the pandemic? can they claim an educator deduction? guest: unfortunately they cannot. i wish i had better news, but they do not meet the requirements of an educator, the required number of hours that they have to teach. i am sure many of them feel that way. unfortunately, they are not entitled to the $250 educator expense duction. -- deduction. but we appreciate everything they are doing. host: let us go back to our phone lines and go to maryland. caller: good morning.

i have a couple of comments. my husband and i both make six figures. this tax cuts and jobs bill that was passed a couple of years ago by the republicans has virtually removed all deductions we used a claim. with we are not careful, we end up owing. my husband and i also have kids, as well. what i had to do was go into my w4 form online and change the amount of money that i wanted withheld from my check for each pay period. if i do not do that, we would owe money. me and my husband own a home, we have a rental home, we have children. they removed a lot of

deductions, for example the $750,000 limit on the home. i work from home. i have been working from home for seven years and i can no longer claim that. i think you have already addressed that. there are many things, i can go down the list. i find that that is very -- for me to have to go in and try to calculate and figure out how much extra i need withheld from my check come up before, it would withhold the correct amount because we both make six figures and i would hit the single button so they could withhold at the highest rate, and now hitting that button does not change it significantly at all. it is almost like they want people to owe more money to the irs. i know several people in the same category. host: go ahead and respond.

guest: we have heard a lot of complaints about the new w4 form that was supposed to make things easier and it sometimes does not feel like it makes things easier. the best advice i could give you, look at your tax return and pretty much do what we call a pro forma of what you think your income will be for the next year. your deductions, coming down to your taxable income and the might of tax you will owe, and divide that by the number of payments you have so you have a general idea of what should come out of your paycheck to put on your w4 form. it does not hurt if pay changes your situation changes to revisit that halfway through the year, or even quarterly. i agree with you, the w4 used to be much easier. you could check single, zero, here is the additional amount i want out and it felt like it had

you covered. it feels like there are a lot more questions that go with it. as tax professionals, we will look at the current income, project what we think next euro be in order to help us fill out the client's w4 correctly. i feel your pain on that one. host: let's talk to mark, who is calling from lexington, north carolina. caller: good morning. i make about $40,000 a year and i was furloughed and i have about $4000 i need to report as unemployment insurance. since it is under the $10,200, do i need to report what the unemployment is, or do i put it on the 1040 form? do they figure it out or do i just submit it? caller: great question.

a little more guidance came out last night. the irs is working on a worksheet for taxpayers to help them with the amount. you would not want to not report it. you want to report it on the tax return, but going through the worksheet, there will be a line for the exclusion. the exclusion would be a negative. if you meet the requirements, you are under the $150,000, it sounds like you will not be subject to any of the unemployment being taxable. if you did not recorded on the tax return, the irs, there would be a matching issue. normally, the federal or state would send out a 1099g and it reports the amount of unemployment you received. when you were completing your tax return, they are expecting to see that i'm not on the 1099g . if you do not put it on there, you would end up likely getting a notice from the irs about a

matching issue. they know it is there but they do not see it on your return. you will reported as income and it sounds like a deduction for an outcome of zero. host: speaking of the irs, many people file extensions on their taxes. right now, we will assume that the tax filing date will be april 15. if you file an extension, does that mean you end up paying more taxes? guest: no, it does not mean you end up paying more. the extension is the extension of time to file your tax return, not the extension of time to pay your tax liability. even though you are extending your return, say to october 15, you are still expected to pay your tax liability by april 15. you potentially could end up paying a little bit more if you do not -- if you end up having your tax liabilities greater

than the amount you paid in april. you could also be subject, depending on the amount of underpayment, you could be subject to penalties and interest. the big thing people get confused about is the extension of time is just to extend the filing of the return, not the payment. the irs especially to pay by april 15. host: which is something that has always confused me. if you are extending the time to figure out what you owe, how do you know how much to pay in april? guest: you have to do an estimation. you do the best you can on your tax return that information you have and you might want to do a little safe harbor amount, add an additional amount, bump the income up if you are unclear to cover yourself to prevent penalty and interest. host: let's go back to our phone lines and talk to margaret, who is calling from florida. good morning.

caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i have a little bit of a dilemma, this concerns 2019 taxes. we would have qualified for the first stimulus, probably under the 2018 taxes, but in 2019, we sold a home. my cpa filed my taxes electronically, probably late march, early april, and when i noticed that the government cashed my check, i was putting my papers away and took another look at the cost basis that my cpa used on the sale of the house and i realized he took the buyer's portion and not the seller's portion, meaning the commission, and i thought, that is wrong. we had to file an amended return. we filed it april 28. last year, you had to file it by

mail. they could not file that electronically. that was april 28 sprint i have still not received any of that refund. i have contacted the irs periodically. they told me a few weeks ago -- and i found out late last year -- that it was entered may 1. because of covid, they have not processed it. to make a long story short, we received a stimulus payment based on 2018 in may. my husband and i received a credit card. i called our sheriff because it looked like a scam. it was $2400 print it look like a scam. the sheriff got back with me and said it is fine. it came in a plain white envelope. long story short, we deposited that money into our account. january of this year, they still have not processed my 2019.

i received in my name alone a stimulus check for $600. my husband, when i went online and looked at his -- they were not sure about him. in other words, i have $3000. i probably would not have qualified because of that sale of the house. that was over the $150,000 threshold. are they going to come after me for that money? guest: that is a loaded question with a lot of information. hopefully the cpa that you still have is able to help you out with that. it sounds like once you complete the recovery rebate worksheet, determine what happened, where you are and what the bottom line is at this point. the question is, are you thinking you might have to pay

some money back you received? host: she already dropped off. guest: depending on her situation, probably know, if it is an advanced on the credit. hopefully her cpa is able to help her. host: here is a question for you -- we all saw the troubles the post office had during the christmas and the voting seasons. would you suggest or recommend to people who file their taxes by mail or file them electronically? guest: i definitely recommend them to be filed electronically. the process can take some much longer if they are filed by mail. our recommendation is, if they can file electronically, to do that. that is the best way to file taxes. host: do you recommend hiring a

cpa or using some of the various home tax programs you can buy from your stores, or just going to the irs, getting the book and figuring it out yourself? guest: it really depends on the comfort level of the individual. if they feel comfortable and they understand the questions, they are going to use software and work through the various interview screens, maybe they have a simple return -- not too many complicated things -- and they feel they can do it on their own, that is wonderful. if there is something they don't understand because there are summary changes this year and that may not get a credit they are entitled to, not pick up income they should have, definitely reach out to a tax professional. we have a link on our website if they want to find a tax professional in their area. we can help them out. host: one of our social media

followers has a question for you about tax credits. they ask, can you discuss the difference between refundable tax credits versus ordinary tax credits? guest: a refundable tax credit -- lengthy -- versus an ordinary -- let's see, versus an ordinary tax credit. let's say the education credit, it happens to be both. part of it is to reduce your tax liability. i guess you would call that an ordinary credit. the other half is a refundable credit, dollar for dollar refunded to you. something is fully refundable, almost dollar for dollar increase, versus an ordinary credit that reduces your taxable income. some credits that reduce your

taxable income -- let's say the credit is higher than your taxable income -- you do not get the difference paid to you, it is basically a lost credit. host: let's talk to charlotte, who is calling from baltimore, maryland. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i have a dilemma. i am a social security disability recipient and my aunt left me some money in october. i did not move it right away. what are my tax liability is? can i still move it without being penalized? guest: when you say she left you some money, did you get an inherited ira? caller: it was a check. guest: it was just a check? can you disclose the dollar amount? caller: $103,000.

guest: based upon that scenario, you would want to work with a tax professional to look at all of the different applications that might go with that -- good and bad. not knowing your entire scenario, i would hate to give you tax advice on this program. definitely get a tax professional. they know all the details and exactly how to treat this type of receiving of income. host: speaking of getting in trouble -- can you talk to us about how irs penalties and interest rates work? and what happens if you just ignore the penalties and interest rates? guest: a lot of folks, when they see some mail from the irs, they are hesitant to open it. some folks do not want to open the envelope because they are nervous about it. sometimes the notice is not as

bad as you think. it might just be -- for instance, one of the most common notices is a cp2000. the irs is just missing some information. they might have changed the tax return because they are denying a credit you claimed because they are missing a piece of information. a common one would be the credit for education. it is as simple as maybe they want a -- form from the school. if you can decipher what it is they are looking for, great. if not, contact a tax professional. if you cannot respond, the penalties and interest increase. it is not something you want to ignore. you want to open it and address it because it will not go away. host: let's talk to richard, who is calling from arkansas. good morning. caller: good morning.

we have always mailed in our tax returns, and last year i mailed it in, no problem. due to the covid thing, we did not get our refund for three months. they had not processed it yet, we never got the first stimulus check. the reason i found out why was because some yo-yo in the irs entered our tax return into the computer as we were dependents on someone else's return. i sent in an amended form, we have not heard a word about it. we did receive the second check. i am planning to electronic file this year. i have never done that. i am on social security, my wife does not make a whole lot. it is not worth paying to have somebody do it. i have never e-filed before.

i cannot find a worksheet for line 30. i went ahead and wrote in the $2400 because we never received any of it and we are way below -- we should get it. anyway, when i electronically file, how do you get the w2's in there, how do you sign your return? i have never done this before and i don't know where to even start. because they screwed it up last year, i want to e-file it myself this year and, so far, i am just kind of sitting here and staring at my written copy. guest: great question. any of the commercial software out there can walk you through. it sounds like your return may

not be as complicated as you think it might be. if you started the return on one of the commercial softwares come up walked through the interview screen, it will ask you questions, starting off with entering your w2. the screen will have a picture of your w2 and you will enter the boxes and it will walk you through all of the income items, all of your potential deductions and credits, anything that might be out of the ordinary, which it does not sound like you have any. it will walk you through the stimulus payment. at the end of the program after you are done entering your information, you can preview your tax return so you can check it against maybe a prior one that you file, and then you will electronically file. there is no signature as if you were preparing get by paper, where you actually have to sign and date it. do not do that when you are electronically filing, per se. if you use one of the commercial

softwares or go to the irs website and you qualify doing it for free, it will walk you through step-by-step on what to do. i do not think it will be as difficult as you think. you just need to get started. host: for our small business owners out there and are independent contractors, hopefully they will hire a cpa to do their taxes, but if they are doing them their selves and they got a ppp loan, is that ppp loan taxable? guest: that is such a loaded question. the ppp loan, for those who have a small business and they are not sure what the ppp loan was spent on, what are the requirements to use the loan, those folks, if they are a small business and received the money and are not sure how to do their taxes, the best advice we can give is to seek out a tax professional to help them.

host: let's talk to bill who is calling from sandy hook, connecticut. good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. i am dealing with the irs about the social security benefits worksheet. we went over it several times and the math is correct. the irs said they came out with a higher calculation the nike met with and they -- then i came out with. i am just wondering if ms. colli ns could maybe highlight something i might have overlooked or is in publication 915 that would address my problem. guest: great question. as far as the calculation, whenever they say that they have

a different calculation than you, did they provide you with their calculation so you could crosscheck their calculation with yours to identify the difference? caller: you are talking mathematically? guest: yes. caller: i have done that, they suggest i get publication 915. i am wondering if there is something in that 915 that would preclude me from using the social security benefits worksheet because the worksheet in the booklet, i followed the instructions and rechecked it. i am just wondering, in that publication 915, if you know anything that might preclude me from using the social security benefits worksheet or something i missed that is in that publication. guest: i do not, right here,

specifically to that question, but we would love to be able to assist you. you might want to contact our research department at natp.com. we also have several members who volunteer their time to help folks out with questions. perhaps you might want to give us a call. it could have something to do with maybe if you received a lump sum benefit. we would love to help you with your situation. host: as we move toward the top of the hour, let's begin to wrap up this conversation by asking you -- what are some last-minute tax strategies that taxpayers can use in order to reduce our tax bill now? guest: the best thing you can do, is if you are using a tax

professional, bring all of the documents you received. make sure you are working with a reputable tax professional who is asking you all of the questions to make sure you are not missing one of the new credits that has been addressed in the various bills that have been passed. make sure you are including all the income you received. the worst thing that can happen is to file a return, we find out it is not complete and accurate, resulting in an amended return. the best thing you can do is gather the documents you have received, compare those against last year, find a reputable tax professional to assist you this year, especially with all the changes we have encountered. host: are there certain tax deductions the taxpayers should take advantage of that are normally skipped over? guest: i would not say per se that there are ones normally skipped over, what with all the changes, may be there is a

deduction that in the past you did not qualify for because your income was too high. for example, student loan interest. you have to look year over year. depending on credits that are income driven, you might not qualify. with all the changes this year, something you might have qualified for in the past you might qualify for this year. not forget to mention those credits when you are working with your tax professional. host: let's talk to keith from new jersey. good morning. are you there? caller: yes, i am there. host: we can hear you. caller: we have an adult autistic son, we got the stimulus checks but he did not. several people in the same program got checks and we were scratching our heads as to why.

he filed a tax return and claimed his self as a dependent and they all claimed their children as dependents, but their children should not file. i am wondering if this time around he is going to get a check, because he is out of work. he lost all the income he would have had because of covid. guest: did you say you will be claiming him as a dependent on your tax return this year? host: yes. -- caller: yes. it still turns out to be cheaper. guest: with the third stimulus payment, i want to say yes, he will qualify for the stimulus payment with you claiming him as a dependent. a lot of the restrictions with the first two stimulus payments have been basically taken away. yes, you will definitely qualify. caller: great. thanks. guest: sure. host: for those people who lost

loved ones to the pandemic or for any other reason last year, do they have to file taxes for that person for 2020, or do they contact the irs and said this person is deceased? how do you handle the tax burden for a deceased loved one? guest: someone has to file basically on their behalf a final tax return. yes, in that year of death, there is a final tax return that needs to be filed. the irs will not do that for them. perhaps a family member, a spouse that is still alive, they need to file a final form, 1040. host: let's talk to bill from pennsylvania. caller: thank you for taking my call.

i will try to make this quick. i was running my taxes through a software package. i did a conversion from traditional to a roth ira. it is telling me i have made excess roth contributions, even though i have not contributed anything to a roth ira. i did a conversion, but not a contribution. is that possible? guest: you said you are using a commercial software? it sounds like you might want to go back through the interview screens, perhaps a box was checked incorrectly. i would definitely go back and check your entries. with a lot of these commercial softwares, they do have live advice, tax professionals the could help you. also, there could be an income limitation. that is what i would suggest for your situation. caller: i thought the income

limitation had been a limited recently. ok. if they have tax professionals, of course you always have to pay before they talk to you. i would like to know the answer before i pay. it is confusing. i think the irs should consider mike laster print -- like last year. host: one more question before we let you go. what happens if you are audited? guest: you definitely call a tax professional to assist you. it might not be as bad as it sounds. you might just be missing some information. we would recommend hiring a tax professional to assist you if you are going under audit with

the irs. host: we would like to thank rhonda collins with the national association of tax professionals for being here with us this morning and walking us through some of the changes as we get ready to file our taxes for 2020. thank you so much for your time. guest: thank you very much. have a great day. host: we would like to thank all of our viewers, guests, and all of our callers for joining us on washington journal. stay safe, wash your hands and join us tomorrow morning for another edition of washington journal. have a great day everyone. ♪ [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2021] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] ♪

>> you are watching span, your unfiltered view of government. c-span was created by america's cable television companies in 1979. today, we are brought you by these television companies who provide c-span to viewers as a public service. sunday night on q&a, an author and distinguished fellow talks about some of the people he profiles in his new book. >> henry and i, scoop jackson and others, a longtime member of congress, these were people who went into public life in public service to get things done. some of them were sparkling speakers, some of them were

norwegians, like scoop jackson. some of them were charmers, but they were all people who wanted to achieve things, not so much for themselves, but for their country, for their constituents, for the common good. >> sunday night at 8:00 eastern on c-span's q&a. you can also listen to q&a as a podcast where you get your podcasts. the senate energy committee looks at climate change and energy sector. los angeles mayor eric garcetti, xcel energy ceo ben fowke testified about the state of the natural gas and nuclear power industries.