of these are featured on c-span.org. ♪ c-span is your unfiltered view of government. it is funded by these and more including charter. >> charter has invested billions, upgrading technology, empowering opportunity in communities big and small. charter is connecting us. >> charter communications supports c-span as a public service along with these other television writers, giving you a front-row seat to democracy. >> coming up on "washington journal," the week in the white house. and the associated press previews the weekend in congress and president's legislative agenda. afterwards we look in what is in

george's new voting law with greg blustein. in a discussion on the development of the pfizer vaccine. "washington journal" is next. ♪ host: good morning, on this monday, april 12. at the white house later today, president biden holding a meeting with democrats and republicans on his to trillion dollar infrastructure plan -- his $2 trillion infrastructure plan. congress comes back to session with a busy schedule. -- designed to protect employees who face gender discrimination. the senate with a number of confirmation votes, including wendy sherman to serve as deputy secretary of state.

a report on capitol hill security in the next few days. tomorrow, former house speaker john boehner's book will be officially released. that is our starting point on this monday morning. the book is titled "on the house : a washington memoir." we would love to hear from you. our phone lines are open. (202)-748-8001, that is our line for republicans. (202)-748-8000 for democrats. if you an independent, (202)-748-8002. join us on twitter and facebook. you can send us a text message at (202)-748-8003. this is the headline from usa today. saying john boehner rebukes the current day gop and here is an excerpt from the book.

speaker boehner saying under the new rules of crazy town, i may have been speaker, but i did not hold all the power. by 2013, the chaos caucus in the house had bit up -- had built up their own power base thanks to fawning right ways -- right wing media. they had a new lunatic leading the way who is not even a house member. there is nothing more dangerous than a reckless a whole who thinks he is smarter than everybody else. ladies and gentlemen, meet senator ted cruz. he enlisted the crazy caucus of the gop in what was truly a dumbass idea, not that anybody asked me. sitting down on cbs's sunday morning and the speaker was asked about that reference. >> you write in your book that you became mayor of crazy town. what does that mean? >> by 2010, talk radio had been around for a while. by 2010 we had the internet and we started to have apps, and people really didn't need the

party as much as they used to need them. members, candidates could create themselves out of nothing. >> the new modes of indication gained those rebellious members a direct line to the party base, playing to the crowd rather than accomplish things in congress became the route to success. >> there is a lure to be a noisemaker, instead of a policymaker. >> making policy means finding common ground with the opposition. for noisemakers, that was assigned sign that boehner was a sellout. >> i thought if i could get half of a loaf and live to fight for the rest, that was a deal. no way, no way, sellout. when under percent all my way or nothing. >> from partisan media attacking -- for partisan media, attacking boehner was good for business. host: cbs from sunday morning and the interview with former house speaker john boehner.

jonathan swan with this tweet. when speaker boehner was recording his audiobook, i was told by sources that during these sessions, he would deviate from the book text and insert random violent attacks on senator ted cruz and he includes some of that. we won't listen to it because it includes profanity but you can go to jonathan swan's twitter handle. more from the book on the house, speaker boehner saying taking control of the house represented is in 2010 put me in line to be the next speaker of the house over the largest freshman republican class in history, 87 newly elected members of the gop. as i was presiding over a large group of people who never sat in congress, i felt i owed them a little tutorial on governing. i had to explain how to get things done. a lot of that went straight through the ears of most of them, especially the ones who did not have the brains that got in the way. incrementalism, compromise, that wasn't there thing. a lot of them wanted to blow up washington. insider has this, ted cruz

deriding former speaker been are -- former speaker boehner, calling it a drunken bloated scorn. that from insider. more from the interview on cbs's sunday morning, and which the former house speaker talked about what it was like to negotiate with president obama and kratz on any legislation. [video clip] >> i am negotiating with the white house and i've got no position. because my guys would not vote for anything. some of these members, i'm not quite sure what they are for. they are against everything, but i've never been able to determine what they are for. when you are in the majority party, you've got a responsibility to govern, not just make noise. >> boehner is describing a system still in place where ideologues create a culture of fear. >> a good member tried to do the right thing and sometimes it was hard to do the right thing because they were hearing from the far right, or the crazy

right, the knucklehead right, that they were sellouts. they didn't want to be accused of that, so it put all of these members in a really tough spot. host: that is from john boehner the former house speaker. our phone lines are open. republicans, (202)-748-8001. democrats, (202)-748-8000. bob is joining us from tennessee on the republican line. welcome to the conversation. caller: thank you for taking my call. all i've got to say about john boehner is if he wants to start calling people dumb masses -- dumbasses, he should look in the mirror. host: on the state of the union yesterday, governor asa hutchinson was asked about boehner's book. he served in the house when boehner was also in the house of representatives. this is the arkansas governor on cnn. [video clip] >> in his new memoir, your former house colleague, john boehner writes that the current republican is unrecognizable to

him. he writes quote, i don't think i could get elected in today's republican party. i don't think ronald reagan could either. you are not to similar from boehner in the fact that you are a pro-business, small government rating conservative -- reagan conservative. is this still your republican party? >> it is, and you think about the republican party today, we need to remind ourselves, let's get back to our principles, let's stop the personality decisions that we have and focus on the historic role that we have played, which is a voice for smaller government, not bigger government, not government solutions but free enterprise solutions. while i am also a social conservative, i do believe we have to balance that with the important question, is this a fight that government needs to get in, or is this a role of the church or is this the restraint of government that we need, to

not only preach but to practice as well, and that led me to the veto that you described. it is a conservative position to say that is not the role of government. host: reaction from john boehner's book on the sunday programs, including cnn's state of the union. the divided mind and politics of john boehner. tell us what you think about the former speaker's comments. linda is joining us from mississippi, democrats line. caller: good morning. john boehner is speaking about the way it was, when he was speaker of the house, but he hasn't changed. republicans do not want to get anything done. they want to be allowed. nothing will ever get done, because they stand on the sidelines and throw rocks and

bottles, but no legislation, no work for the people. i think someone is finally telling the truth, and that is him. host: this is from ngm, a tweet saying john boehner is better than any gop in office. he is 100% frank and honest, unlike the rest of his party. don't forget, he is no saint now that he is retired. he led crazy town. that is from edward. let's go to gary, joining us from ohio. good morning. caller: good morning. i watched john boehner back when he was speaker of the house under obama, and i compared him to who we have now and in his book, i think he is right about ted cruz and jim jordan. it seems like all they do is complain, and when they get criticized, they just try to run away from it with their tail

between their legs. i support john boehner and his book, because i think what he said about crews and jordan -- cruz and jordan, all they do is complain, they don't take time to fix the situation. i support him, i think he is right on the money, with what he is talking about. that's all i've got to say. host: stephen ohio sent us a text message. you can do so at (202)-748-8003. getting a -- giving a hated republican his 15 minutes of fame as long as he criticizes ella republicans. sophia is joining us next from new york, republican line. caller: good morning steve. it is the happiest week for me. i'm going to say something about john boehner, because that is the subject. we always jump to something else. the day of the first of april

was a good day. i knew they were going to do to you and shepard smith from fox news, that william barr, tucker carlsen and president trump pushed him to retire. now he's got a job with whoever. anywhere -- anyway, what they did to you was because the 12 months you have primetime 8:00 p.m., you took their slot. that is when they run out of the end. they did everything -- savannah guthrie -- thank you for coming back. we missed you.

[inaudible] i moved here four years ago, so i asked myself, why is that they always ask me if i am a republican? they go by the zip code. anyway, i am so happy it is you. all of them anchor people, they are jealous of you. that is right. thank you and have a nice weekend. host: sophia from the bronx in new york. francesca chambers is joining us. a busy week in washington. let's begin with some action on capitol hill and at the white house. a meeting the president is going to have with members of congress, democrats and republicans. give us details, who will be at the table and what is on the agenda in terms of the issue of bipartisanship? guest: it is truly in for

structure week in washington as lawmakers come back from the recess, and it is kicking off with a meeting at the white house with the president, vice president and a bicameral and bipartisan group of lawmakers. that meeting will have california's senator and also democrats and republicans. you can expect to hear from -- hear about the corporate tax rate. president biden is proposing to raise it from the current 21% to 28%. that is something republicans have said they've but he mentally oppose. you can also hear a lot of conversation about whether or not this planned the president has put forward pays for itself. the white house proposes to pay for eight years of spending and we have seen that emerge as a sticking point. meanwhile you have moderate democrats asking for the $10,000

deduction cap on state and local taxes. -- septa put forth, -- set to put forth, that they might not be able to get to pass. host: when it comes to that tax hike from 21% to 28% over the next 15 years,, is there room for compromise? would republicans agree to any tax hike to pay for this? guest: the white house has said that they are willing to compromise on this package, and that is what we are waiting to see, just how much either side really is willing to compromise on something like this. chris coons said he spoke to republicans who can just not get behind that corporate tax increase, that they could get something -- get behind something like a mileage or gas

tax, but the white house does not want to go that route because the president said he will not raise taxes on anyone making under $400,000 a year in this country, and such taxes could be seen as an indirect tax on those individuals. host: we learned the president will have an official visit by the japanese promised her, his first face-to-face meeting with the world leader. that will take place at the white house on friday. caller: that's right. it speaks to the strategic and economic military alliance that the two countries have amid a rising china. you can expect a hear the president talk more about that. last week, he raised the concept of a rising china during a speech about his interceptor bill, saying the chinese are not waiting to invest in their infrastructure and their digital infrastructure. one would expect that president biden could use the meeting with the japanese promised her this friday to continue to raise that argument is a reason why his infrastructure package needs to

be passed. host: we also learned that the wife of the late senator, john mccain will be nominated to the u.s. ambassador to the world food program, based in rome. what other nominations can we expect to see confirmed this week? guest: nominations are something that haven't been going through quickly right now, given that both the white house and -- have been focused on covid relief and the infrastructure package. it is a shorter week here in washington. not clear how many of them will get through, certainly something the senate and white house say they are focused on. host: the president delivering a speech before a joint session of congress, initially scheduled for earlier this spring. now we are hearing at the end of this month. what do you know about that? guest: could you repeat that? host: whether or not the president will deliver a speech before a joint session of congress? guest: we heard from the white

house on wednesday, we expect it to take place but certainly much later than we expected. first we had been told that the white house was looking to get the president's relief package passed first. we have seen that and now we are working on the infra-structure package. that is absolutely in time. we will hear about him putting out a budget and how he sees his priorities playing into his larger priorities over the next four years. host: for those who watch the regular daily briefing with the press secretary, they will see the room half empty because of covid protocols. can you ask plane the process for you and others to be in the room and how it is determined? guest: within the room, there were 14 seats on a rotation. we have several pools of reporters, the folks who were there meeting with the president. you have a radio floor, a tv floor, a print floor every

single day during those briefings, but you also have reporters from networks and other print reporters in that room, and they are all on rotation. we are not able to have the full 49 seat briefing room, given the covid restrictions but certainly as vaccinations increase, we hope we could return to some sort of normal and the briefing room soon. host: francesca chambers, thanks very much for being with us. guest: thanks so much. host: this is from david who said i wish he spoke like that when he was the speaker. he would have gotten respect. easy to say things now when there are no consequences. it is all about party alignment. they could care less about being brave because their careers would be very short. host: this is the headline from the new york times. in the new book, speaker boehner saying he regrets the clinton impeachment. an excerpt from the book, he says i know we said at the time,

bill clinton was impeached for lying under oath. in my view, republicans impeached him for one reason only. tom delay leaved impeaching clinton would win us all of these health seats and be a big win politically and he commenced enough of the membership in the gop base that that was true. back to your phone calls. steve is joining us from california, republican line. caller: let's start with a little levity. why can't democrats unscrew light bulbs? because they are too busy screwing every thing else up. why can't republicans unscrew a lightbulb? that is because they only know how to turn to the left. both parties have never come out of crazy town, and now that boehner is out of congress, he is speaking to the truth of what went on. everything that went on when he was in there is on tape, how he

refused to compromise with anything that was going on in the government at the time. i believe one quote he had was, it is not what you can get done, it is what you prevent getting done. that's about all it is. welcome back steve. host: thanks for the call. this tweet says controversy sells but who is buying? next up is thomas, joining us from pennsylvania. caller: i just want to say thank you so much for your reappearance. i had missed you. you are one of my favorite moderators. i had the great pleasure of meeting john mcardle input -- in philadelphia pennsylvania. i am really surprised to see --

i never cared for john boehner in the past. host: thanks very much for the call. let's go to ken, from california. good morning. caller: good morning. just wanted to make a quick comment. i have not read the book yet, i am looking forward to that. i really believe the part of the problem with the republican party is that for years, people listened to paul harvey throughout the united states, that were republicans and they believed what the man had to say, and then the religosity of the man. he had a lot of faithful followers, and when he left the scene, all they were left with was lumbar and -- limbaugh and

hannity and these clowns and they have not been a service to the republican party from any aspect. that is kind of where i think these people went off track, with the advice and the consultation they were receiving. other than that, i am looking forward to reading the book. host: thanks for the call. this is from kurt on our facebook page, saying the democrats hated boehner back then and eventually so did republicans. he turned on his party and his party has not forgotten. he is stuck in no man's land now. you can send us your comments on twitter and facebook. our next caller is joining us just outside of washington, silver spring, maryland. caller: good morning. i just wanted to say, i am 26 and when i started watching politics and getting into politics, those were the people,

john boehner, mitt romney, john mccain where the people that i used to look up to. looking at what john boehner was mentioning, the current republican party is a whole different mess. i kind of agree with some of the points he brought up, with some of the people that he mentioned in the books, with ted cruz and these politicians, not having the backbone to stand up to what happened with the donald trump mess we had the last four years. looking at the republican party, i remember this video where -- i think it was a town hall meeting and some but he questioned president obama's patriotism. the thing he said was, just

because me and him do not agree on politics or certain ideas, that doesn't make him less of an american. i think that is one thing that a lot of times we see with republicans is that if you disagree with something, you are automatically less american than their ideal or whatever the case might be. i personally think what he is saying has some truth to it, even though some people might hate him for what he has done in the past, when obama was in power, and some of the things he has done but in all honesty, i think he has done a better job trying to work with the obama administration in some of the stuff they tried to pass. he did not have the backing of the party, and he tried to pass as much as possible, without giving too much to the

democrats. host: we will leave it there. it sounds like you are listening in the car on c-span radio. caller: correct. host: you can listen on the free c-span radio app. this is from mylan, who says leadership in corporate america is crazy town. d.c. does not corner the market, believe me. more from the book by former house speaker john boehner. he talked about the elections and what happened after 2020, saying quote, i will admit i was not prepared for what came after the election. trump refusing to accept the results, and stoking the flames of conspiracy that turned into violence in the seat of our democracy. the building over which i once presided. watching it was scary and sad. it should have been a wake-up call for a return to public insanity. whatever they are doing or not doing, none of it will compared to one of the lowest points in american democracy that we live through in january of 2021.

the headline from yahoo! news is speaker boehner blaming trump for the deadly capital insurrection. he talked about it yesterday on cbs sunday morning. [video clip] >> in the book, you write about political terrorists. is this the outgrowth of the mindset you have been describing? >> no question. this is the most extreme example of political terrorism. >> would you say donald trump is a political terrorist? >> donald trump is a product of the political divisions that we have seen grow in our country over the last 20 years. host: that, courtesy of cbs. some of the demonstrations the took place outside the capital into late afternoon of january 6. rita is joining us from alabama, independent line. thank you for waiting. caller: good morning. what has happened to all of

these hotheads, like hannity, jordan, cruz and all of these trump people. what happened in the washington, d.c., that shows what this country is made of. that is all i've got to say. host: tom is next, republican line. caller: good morning. my comment is that who do these networks think they are fooling? all you have to do is be a republican who speaks out against the republican party, in particular, donald trump and you get the greatest interview anybody, anyplace could ever ask for. but if you are the son of the vice president, and you got a

computer that disposes illegality's, you can say i just don't know, when the head of the intelligence agency is saying that it is his computer without a doubt. my message to john boehner and his republicans is this, we are just fine with what we think and what we are doing. we don't need you. you can go ahead and keep going on these networks, but we know what we want. we want law and order. we want smaller government. we don't think black people are so stupid that they can't go get an id card for voting. thank you very much. host: thanks for adding your voice. this is from another viewer. you can follow us on twitter. this comment, i was not impressed with boehner when he was speaker.

too much money went to special interests and legislation that hurt america, especially kids and grandkids stuck with his debt. is one virtue was his ineffectiveness. pelosi is far more destructive and she is efficient at harming us. this is the headline from politico.com, a speech that former president trump delivered at rnc fundraiser at mar-a-lago, is resort in south florida, referring to john boehner -- to mitch mcconnell as a dumb sob. former president trump ripping into the senate republican leader, before a republican national committee donor retreat saturday evening, deriding him as a done dumb sonuvabitch. he veered off of his 50 minute speech, saying he was disappointed in former vice president mike pence, calling last years for the dental election a fraud and mocking dr. anthony fauci. on fox news sunday, yesterday,

chris wallace asking south dakota republican senator john flynn, part of the gop leadership in the senate, about those remarks. we will have that in just a minute. [video clip] >> your reaction to president trump at a meeting of the rnc, big donors in florida yesterday, calling mitch mcconnell a dumb blank. >> right. right, well a lot of that rhetoric is part of the style and tone that comes with the former president, but i think he and mitch mcconnell have a common goal, and that is getting the majority back in 2022 and in the end, hopefully that will be the thing that unites us, because we want to defeat and succeed against the democrats and get that majority back, that is the best way to do it. host: that is from republican senator john flynn. another half-hour of your calls and comments. we are getting your reaction to this book by former house speaker john boehner, titled "on

the house, a washington memoir." our democrat -- our phone lines are open, if you are democrat, (202)-748-8000. republicans, (202)-748-8001. if you are independent, (202)-748-8002. this tweet from a viewer in the virgin islands, saying john, too little too late. if he was a real leader, he would have led with his heart except -- instead of for political expediency. from scotch plains, new jersey, and a, republican line. -- bernadette, republican line. caller: welcome back. it is telling that the democrats never criticize each other. i don't know why republicans keep criticizing each other all the time. we should remember ronald reagan's mantra of the 11th commandment, never criticize another republican. i think democrats have learned that better than we have.

i wish we would stop criticizing each other. that is why they get things done , when we are always fighting among each other. i don't know why boehner has done this, and i don't know why i voted for trump. i am very upset with him. he is not listening to ronald reagan's commandment. i wish we would stop criticizing each other. democrats don't do it, and they get farther with legislation than we do. host: bernadette, thank you. this is from another viewer on twitter. i remember he and senator mcconnell in six t minutes and thinking mcconnell was the sane one but it shows how it is all a joke to these gop guys. usually they are not so dumb. after government they sound a lot saner. our next caller is from chicago, democrats line. caller: i didn't read the book,

but to comment on john boehner, he seems like he had a a lot of pressure on him by his own party, when he was in power. i'm not a bit surprised, the fact that he has written the book, because he had jordan and i can add more to that bunch, that all they do is argue. i never hear them come up with an idea, and right quick, i appreciate you being back on the year. -- on the air. somebody please tell me, what legislation that a republican wrote or tried to pass that directly helped people? i am talking about trickle-down. thank you. host: john boehner's new book is on the front page of inside usa today. interview with susan page. let's get back to your phone calls. darlene is joining us from new

york. your view on john boehner? he compared himself to being the mayor of crazy town when he was speaker. caller: hello. i just wanted to say, john boehner is speaking his truth, and i believe he is showing the republicans exactly how they are reflecting their party now, that they are standing for not the american values, that the majority of the american people represent. it has given rise to hate and division, and i'm glad he wrote this book, and i hope people really read it and wake up. thank you. host: louise is next from virginia, republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. i wanted to make a comment, not about this trivia. i want it mccook, to about -- we

have a lot of things going on, from myanmar, burma and the democracy, suppose a democracy -- supposed democracy. ended up killing thousands, and now there is a military coup, and we are supposed to get involved in that. this is just ridiculous. host: thanks. that is a story that has been dominating the headlines over the past couple of days. a likely story inside the new york times, if you are interested from yesterday. this is from steve on twitter, going back to former house speaker john boehner, saying he is telling the truth. because whatever awful he and his fellow republicans were involved in, it seems like acts of sainthood compared to today's rick publican cult -- today's republican cult. -- saying we did not mince

words. here is an excerpt from that story, saying speaker boehner and his book titled, on the house, claimed that reid called the house a dictatorship of the speaker back in 2013, amidst tens negotiations during the obama administration. the former speaker wrote, that if i were a dictator, do you think i'd let these people get away with screwing me over all the time? read was a ruthless pastored who knew what -- ruthless bastard. i went over and got into his face and said do you even think all of that s---coming out of your mouth? reid on this past saturday responding to the expert, telling gemma acosta that the deal is john boehner and i got a lot done, but we did not mince words. that, from the interview with thehill.com. rahm emanuel, the former mayor

of chicago, and former white house chief of staff weighing in on john boehner's new book. >> john boehner has a book out. >> the former house speaker. >> he talked about galvanizing what would be the tea party and taking back control, and then he got eaten by it. that is exactly what has happened with donald trump. mitch mcconnell and the rest of the leadership thought they could use donald trump for their own advantages and now they are being eaten by it. boehner's experience that he talks about in the book, what is happening to the public and party with fox being taken over the -- for the tea party, that is what is happening to the rest of the party with donald trump. they cannot shake him, and it is going to be a problem because it is going to be his evens as of the past that has a thing to do with the american people -- that has nothing to do with the american people. host: you can listen on the free c-span radio app. more from john boehner's book. he writes the following.

there is something very destructive, not to mention delusional about the notion that there is some plot deep within the nation's capital, in the fbi, and the federal courts, in the intelligence community to undermine democratically elected officials. therese is joining us next from tennessee, republican line. caller: good morning. can you tell me of all the things going on in this country right now? that this is an important topic that you feel you had to do a whole segment on? host: what else would you want us to talk about? caller: let's talk about the infrastructure bill. it is not really an if instructor bill, that joe biden is trying to get through. it is a social environmental justice program he is trying to push through. host: we will do that at 8:00, so stick around for that. caller: what about the riots last night? anything but john boehner's book. do you have anyone on there,

attacking joe biden or the democrats? it is just so clear what you are doing. you are nothing but -- i don't even know how to say what you are doing. host: thank you for adding your voice to the conversation. this is an open forum, and we appreciate your comments and reaction and feedback and points of view and open discussion. michael is joining us from north carolina, on the democrats line. caller: yes, i had a question. if i am not mistaken, wasn't john boehner the one who got the meeting with the pope and stuff? i think he said something to the pope like pray for me and the pope told him, no, pray for me. host: the pope came to capitol hill in september of 2015 and it was the next day that john boehner announced he was going to step down as speaker of the house. caller: exactly.

i thought that was kind of american of him, just to say god still lives and when the pope told him, you pray for me, that kind of got to him. i will remember that. i will never forget that. host: thanks for the call. we will go to roy from montana, independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. i'm going to be 80 pretty soon, so i have seen a lot of changes in the nation. i think what is really standing out is the change of the people in the united states, in our standards. up until the 1970's or 1980's, a

review of the nation was ask not what your country can do for you but what you could do for your country. that pretty well stood up until the 1970's in the 1980's, with the riots and demonstrations and suddenly, the entitlement program, we turned into having our government have to fix everything, and we have someone entitlement programs. host: so when you see the debt approaching almost $30 trillion, what is your reaction? caller: that was my next comment, is that neither party is considering the national debt. president trump increased that more than any other president in history, and biden is doing the

same thing. i worked hard to set myself up for retirement, where i could take care of myself. in the last year, money keeps coming in, and it is a giveaway nation. i don't really understand it. i don't understand the republican party. i was raised republican. i left with mitt romney. our party made sure the candidates had moral standards, and suddenly that does not seem to matter to the voting population. we see that with trump. i didn't vote for trump. i didn't vote for hillary. i went third-party, because

neither one of them had the ethical standards i thought were needed for a president of the united states. host: i will leave it there. did you just turn 80 or you are about to? caller: in two months, i will turn 80. i couldn't vote for kennedy because you had to be 21 but it is amazing, but we are going to tolerate now. what has happened to the republican party. trump is destroying the republican party. host: i will leave it there. happy birthday in two months. this on our facebook page, i

wish he spoke like that when he was speaker. he would have gotten respect. easy to say things now and there are no consequences. they could care less about being brave. their careers will be very short. this is from mark, saying crazy town is a great way of putting it. the house revisited of's is one of the most inefficient groups. how difficult is it for the party in power to load up their bills and pass it? it is not difficult until it gets to the senate. a couple callers mentioning infrastructure. that meeting will take place today between democrats and republicans at the white house, and this story from -- biden's if researcher tax hike awarding some democrats about the impact on wealthy voters. can president joe biden keep the loyalty of the wealthy suburban americans, who helped put him in the white house, many of them former republicans, even when he pushes for tax increases to fund priorities such as infrastructure? that is the challenge ahead for the biden administration, a week after the president detailing

the $2 trillion if researcher plenty proposed -- infrastructure plan he proposed. even supporters say the president and his allies have some work to do to convince voters. that story this morning, from -- ron is joining us from california. good morning. caller: good morning steve. congratulations, i am so glad to see you back back in "washington journal." i think people forget a lot of history. there was a guy by the name of pat buchanan who ran for political office back in the day. he said there was a coarsening of our culture and he was -- and he said it was such a bad situation that people lost all the coram. what people fail to really grasp

is -- lost all decorum. what people fail to really grasp is the tea party, the leftovers of ross perot, and in those days, ross perot was the third party, third rail, and did everything heat -- they did every thing they could to take him out, and they did but the bottom line of that story is he was giving us straight talk and then after the straight talk, one other people ran on the straight talk express, remember that? there wasn't any -- the trump administration did something to our country and our world, because when he started coarsening up the conversation , that had incredible ramifications across the world, including places like brazil and turkey. people don't understand that.

even in england, they had the same thing, this coarsening coming on. in one way, i am really glad that we have returned to some sense of decorum, and i think that is going to have some longer-lasting effects on the whole world. as far as the republican party is concerned, we have to regroup and reset, and go back to the days -- there was a great guy by the name of bob lipp -- bob livingston who was speaker of the house before newt gingrich. host: he was from louisiana. caller: he was. bob livingston was from louisiana, and he was a man of great honor and culture, but they took him out because they said he had an affair with someone. that seems to be the trend, that we accuse people of sexual problems but when it comes to the -- when it comes to trump,

he's got a teflon coating, so that one didn't count. host: he admitted to the affair, on the house floor. final thoughts? this is the headline from the washington post. the scop in case putting policing on trial. the story puts out -- points out that department leaders delivering an unprecedented condemnation. the case continues today. all of it has been streamed on our website at cspan.org, you can listen to it on c-span2. in case you missed it during our live coverage, it will re-air every evening at 8:00 p.m. eastern time on c-span2. the full schedule is available on our website, cspan.org. we will go to wisconsin, randy on the republican line. welcome to the conversation. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. a couple things quick. number one, john boehner kind of

squealed on himself, because he said when he got speaker of the house, he had all of those new congressmen that came in and it was hard to control them and they didn't want to play ball. that is what this country needs, new ideas coming into washington. the people in washington just went ready to accept, it was either like he said, they're way or the highway. that is not the way washington should work. that is why i am such a believer in term limits to get new people into washington, so they get new fresh ideas of what this country does, especially when you get them in, and they are not from washington, they are from all over the united states. they've got such great ideas. one more thing. i know it is not on the docket today but the problems they are having with cops and shootings,

it should start at school and have a respect for what the police do, teaching them all the training they go through, teaching them what not to monkey with guns or to stay away from drugs and have it every year. there should be a class on that for these kids, all the way up through school. maybe, that is one way we could curb all of our problems in this country. that is just one. thanks again. host: the headline from usa today, susan page, the washington bureau chief with speaker boehner, saying trump abused his loyalist, referring to the insurrections that took place on jenny murray six. robert has this tweet, what a non-news story. what is going on with the cuomo investigation, which was the

topic when the story first broke. our next caller joining us from chicago, democrats line. caller: good morning. i know conservatives are going to be negative of boehner on this, but all the speakers going back to gingrich, boehner and ryan, they have all been republican speakers and they have all had -- control of the entire congress and the white house, and they have been unable to do anything because they've always employed the keep it simple for the stupid strategy. you can't legislate with that kind of strategy. that is why you had one caller that said what have they done while speaker? they only passed one bill with the primary directive of the

american people. that was under w when they passed prescription drugs. they weren't even able to pass that except that the democrats came on board. they had control of the entire government at different points over the last 20 years, and they haven't been able to do nothing. they couldn't even do simple things that congress is supposed to do like pass a budget. that is why we have continuing resolutions. any time they have had control, they have never been able to pass a budget. they have dumbed down the public with this stupidity, and that doesn't work. you had the last caller talking about alternatives -- talking about term limits. this is what you don't have term limit because you don't have a bunch of people who don't have the knowledge or the ability to govern, and they can't get anything done. you can bring it all the new people in and they won't get anything done. host: this is from cory st.

john, saying boehner made a understatement. congress is comprised of toxicity and brinkmanship. boehner contributive to the atmosphere at the time when he was speaker of the house. i guess both of these things can be true at the same time. meanwhile from foxnews.com, sean hannity is the target of criticism by the former house speaker, calling jumping of the worst speaker in the history of the republican party. we will go back to your phone calls. our next caller joining us from illinois. caller: good morning. what do i think about john boehner? his book, about the same thing i would think of joe biden being in the white house, talking about the georgia law for the vote, and joe biden set up with the kkk all his life, but he

wants to talk about -- i think stacey abrams started it. she's got an excuse. she is too young to know how terrible jim crow was, but joe biden standing up for the kkk, knows exactly all about the crow era. ethic about the same thing of john boehner as i do joe biden. thank you. host: from -- magazine, former how speaker john boehner sounds off on gop crazy town in the new tell-all. your comments on social media, this is from jan who says if her stricter will benefit all, not just middle-class americans. wealthy people drive on roads and drink water too, and they can help pay. we will have more on that at the top of the hour. lisa mascaro will be joining us from the associated press. john boehner's new book will be

out tomorrow. excerpts have been published throughout news sites. caller: john boehner and paul ryan, their inaction and impotence to what metaclass americans and conservatives in america, their inaction gave us donald trump. john was a feckless useless gop member. he was probably top of the dogs, top of the list as far as being part of the swamp. he made millions of dollars off of being speaker of the house, as is paul ryan now. donald trump saw this, came in and he did a wonderful job. thank god he worked hard to get that vaccine. where would we be without donald trump? host: we will turn our attention to one of the individuals involved in the pfizer vaccine

develop and, coming up at 9:00 eastern time. this is from politico.com, panic rooms, birth certificates in the birth of gop paranoia. an excerpt from the book by john boehner saying the 2020 midterm elections, voters small over the place gave president obama what he himself called a shellacking and was it ever. you could be a total moronic elected just by having an r next to your name. we did pick up a fair amount in that category. that is from politico.com. our phone lines are open. (202)-748-8000 if you're a democrat and (202)-748-8001 if you are a republican. reaction to the book by john boehner. he says in the book that under the new house rules of crazy town, i might have been speaker, but i did not hold all the power. 2013, the chaos caucus in the house had built up their own power base thanks to the fawning right-wing media and the outrage driven media cash, and now they had a new lunatic, referring to senator ted cruz.

the book is called john boehner on the house. donald is next from alabama -- i'm sorry, from florida. caller: yes. host: good morning. caller: good morning. i am not from alabama, i am from florida. host: yes, go ahead. can you turn the volume down on your set, because we are getting some feedback? caller: i've got it on mute. host: go ahead please. caller: everybody's talking but none of them are trying to get to the root cause of what is going on. as far as i'm concerned, i believe in the 1960's, the supreme court decided that to take the 10 commandments out of school. that started the slide down to

where we are headed now. jesus said any kingdom divided against itself is bound for desolation, not just destruction but desolation. hi believe that this is what is going to happen -- i believe that this is what is going to happen because our leaders that we elected are destroying the united states with this i am a democrat, i am a republican, i am independent. they never stand for the people. host: this is from rick in california, wrote a book? who cares. boehner supporting the wheat industry needs a drug test. his thoughts mean nothing to me. all a distraction from the border. more of your conversation on our facebook page, or continuing on twitter. one more look at the book cover. "on the house, a washington

memoir," by former speaker of the house john boehner who stepped down in 2014. the associated press's lisa mascaro is going adjourn -- is going to join us in congress returns following a lengthy break. later, we will explain what is in the georgia voting law. the atlanta journal-constitution's greg bluestein is joining us from atlanta. you are watching and listening to c-span's "washington journal. " we will be back in a moment. ♪ >> the senate returns today at 3:00 p.m. eastern to continue work on the nomination of deputy transportation secretary. the number two post under pete buttigieg. later in the week, senators will begin working on more nominations, including wendy sherman to be deputy secretary of state, and gary gensler to chair the securities and

exchange commission. the house returns tuesday at 7:00 eastern for allegedly do business and will vote to postpone a 2% across-the-board cuts all medicare payments until the end of the year. during the week, the house will debate house will debate equal pay for women legislation, as well as a bill on workplace violence against health-care and social services workers. watch live coverage of the house on c-span, the senate on c-span two, and follow congressional coverage anytime at c-span.org or listen on the free c-span radio app. >> today, house republican conference chair liz cheney discusses the future of the republican party and the conservative movement. she'll will be speaking at georgetown university's institute of public service. watch live at 5:00 -- 5:30 eastern. >> c-span is your unfiltered

view of government, created by america's television companies in 1979. today, we are brought to you by these television companies who provide c-span to viewers as a public service. >> washington journal continues. host: joining us is lisa mascaro, the chief congressional correspondent for the associated press. lawmakers back in washington this week to meet on infrastructure, a bipartisan meeting. is there room for compromise between the democrats and republicans? guest: good morning, steve. that will be a fascinating meeting at the white house. president joe biden has been reaching out, trying to court republicans over his infrastructure plan. they say it is all talk and no action.

they see what happens on the covid relief bill, where he had one meeting with republican senators, and then had democrats passed the relief bill on their own. there is a lot of skepticism coming into this meeting. yet, at the same time, this has been a kind of issue were all sides can come together. everybody needs roads and bridges and broadband across communities, so there is some interest from republicans to work with the president. but we will see. democrats are in a hurry to get a lot of this done while they can. it is unclear if they will wait around to hammer out some sort of broad compromise with republicans. host: let me get your reaction to what the number three in the house of representatives, liz cheney, said the other day. she supported an infrastructure bill put forth by president

trump, opposes the one put forth by president biden. she explains. >> it is a different proposal, obviously. less than 6% of this proposal president biden has put forward is focused on infrastructure. the national association of manufacturers said we would probably lose over a million jobs if this is enacted. in addition to the corporate tax increases in the bill, you'll see middle-class increases. this is a pattern we watch the democrats used time and again where they massively increase spending, expand the size and scope of the federal government, and then they come back around and impose middle-class tax increases. those are not things that we support, not things i support. host: two things from that conversation. is it only 6% for roads and bridges? guest: this is a great question, what is infrastructure? we are seeing president biden take a sort of new definition of

infrastructure, going beyond the idea of roads and bridges. of course there is broadband, but even more encompassing, he is talking about what we call the care economy, leaning into this idea of human infrastructure. building v.a. hospitals, childcare centers, centers to care for elderly and disabled people. it is a broader sense. i think that is sort of a new thinking, one that republicans have not fully embraced. democrats seem to be interested in the way the president is approaching it. republicans, as you heard from liz cheney, mitch mcconnell in the senate, they may want to stick with a more traditional version of that. then, of course, it is the corporate tax like that president biden is proposing to pay for it is also a bit of a nonstarter for republicans. host: let's turn to another

issue that we will hear more about, capitol hill security, with another security officer that will i in honor because of what happened this month, and the inspector general report expected to release details on what they can do to increase security. what are we expecting? guest: that's right. officer william evans will lie in state on tuesday. it is an honor to have a civilian lie in the rotunda. he was killed two saturdays ago when a man charged one of the security stations near the senate entrance to the capital -- capitol. security has still been extremely tight, three months now since the january 6 insurrection. we were just beginning to bring

some of the security fencing down. there has been razor wired fencing all around the capital, quite a large perimeter, and it is not the infrastructure that people walk around the capitol. it is supposed to be the people's house, the representative place where people can come and talk to their lawmakers. it was not the image lawmakers wanted to give. however, there was the january 6 insurrection, so there was a lot of security. security has been tightened. as it was starting to come down, there was this incident. officer evans will lie in state at the same time we are expected to hear very soon from house democrats who are putting forward a supplemental security bill that will have funding for all sorts of new ways to beef up

security around the capitol. speaker pelosi had a massive review done after the january 6 insurrection. the report came back with lots of recommendations. we will be seeing some of that. at the same time, the inspector general, michael bolton, will be testifying on thursday before the house. we have seen a number of security officials coming to testify before the house and senate about what happened on january 6. we still don't have a full picture of all of the breakdowns. there was just a multi-hour gap from when the pro-trump supporters came to the capito l, and that it became violent and the siege began and they stormed into the capitol.

there were multiple hours before calm was restored, could clear the building. congress is looking at happened, looking at the gaps, what can be approved. host: you mentioned that 18-year veteran, billy evans, flags being flown at half staff in his honor. the fourth police officer to be killed, the second in the last couple months. i want to go back to the issue of infrastructure. yesterday on face the nation speaker pelosi was asked about that but also asked about security for the capitol, and what the next steps are for members of congress. [video clip] >> we are talking about money and we want to make sure it is the appropriate amount, not more or less than what we need, and appropriately prioritized to

again open up the capital so it is the temple of democracy it is, so that people can come and be there without adequate protection, so they can do so safely. the appropriations committee had that responsibility in addition to the jurisdiction, house administration. we are in a good place. we think it is the appropriate prioritizing we are putting forward. legislation is always a conversation. host: one quick follow-up and then we will get to the viewer calls. how do lawmakers strike a balance? there was initially a talk about putting a wall across the capitol. anyone that has been to washington knows it is a very accessible space. how do you have security issues dealt with but also that open this that we have become so familiar with. washington, d.c.? we are not hearing you at the

moment. guest: i'm so sorry. you are absolutely right. that is the balance the lawmakers are trying to strike. remember before 9/11, you can walk up to the capitol and visit. certainly that is not the case after the september 11 attacks. security, metal detectors, all of that, but the grounds are still open. for the people on capitol hill, you see all sorts of people enjoying the park-like grounds at the capitol. in the summer months, many tourists taking cell, photos in front of the capitol. people from all over the world, and take pictures, celebrate the fact that they are visiting the nation's capital. it is this icon of democracy the world over. that is the balance that we saw

after the january 6 insurrection, the perimeter was really pushed out and people were not able to enter those grounds. i think that is what lawmakers will have to wrestle with. there have been proposals for retractable fencing, something that can go out and then be brought back in in certain situations. that is what they will have to wrestle with. soon, we will see some of those proposals. i don't have any numbers yet for how much they are looking to spend, but there will be proposals for increased security here at the capitol. host: gwen is joining us from detroit. lisa mascaro is the chief congressional correspondent for the associated press. caller: good morning. hi, lisa. what i'm concerned about with

republicans and democrats working together, it seems like with everything that has gone on with the capitol writing -- rio ting, the big lie about the election, now with the voting thing, it is a snowball effect. it seems to me and the republicans are already showing what they are interested in, and it is not working with the democrats. but like joe manchin is saying, he can get a couple of people to come together, but when i think needs to be done, because of this snowballing effect -- this is causing this to happen, and it is all based on a lie. i think president biden should demand that the republicans

speak publicly that the election was legitimate. that is the only way their supporters will know that it is true. they need to come out and speak publicly that this is legitimate before they negotiate. if they refuse to come out and tell the truth, then get ready to filibuster. they are not going to tell the truth. they are not going to cooperate in the way they should, that is best for the american people to slow all of this down, stop this rolling effect. host: thanks for the call. we will get a response. guest: the caller brings up this issue confronting the nation now where they needs to be some trust in the civic space, the functioning of democracy. that is a trouble spot.

a lot of historians, elections experts, watchers of american politics will say, there is a time for the country to come together and sort of understand we want to have faith in our institutions, faith in our government, maybe not to solve all problems, certainly, but to function. the election really challenged that. the questions over the results. i think that is something the country will have to work on, to get back to a place where we do trust a little bit in each other to conduct the business of the government. host: mark stone makes this reference on our twitter page. republicans would vote for an infrastructure bill that included roads, bridges, etc. it should be a separate bill for day care centers, etc.

at least half of that bill has nothing to do with roads and bridges. guest: this is the prerogative of the party in charge. the president is the president. he can decide how to present it. congress is in charge of passing the bills. they can decide how to put it together or carve it up in pieces. there is truth to what the republicans are saying. maybe they would just support a smaller bill, yet, maybe not. there are still a lot of questions about how republicans would even pay for their smaller infrastructure bill. they talk about user fees, gas taxes, tolls, and things like this. there is still debate among republicans about how they would pay for their smaller infrastructure bill. there is this question out there of why democrats are mushing it all together in one bill, but

that is their prerogative, they are the party in charge. they can put it forward how they want. succeed or fail, we will see. it will be a quick but also long debate. there will be several weeks of sort of sausage making here on capitol hill as they try to put these proposals together. we will hear some hearings, discussions, like today's at the white house. speaker pelosi said she would like to see something past out of the house before the fourth of july. even that seems ambitious. maybe this could stretch on all summer. i think people hear a lot about infrastructure, how to pay for it, what the country really needs. you look across the country, there is some truth to the fact that there has not been a ton of investment in recent years in these systems. there is a bit of a hunger from

the mayors, county leaders to make some investment. whether congress can get there -- it is a narrowly divided house, senate -- these are fragile majorities. we will see what biden can do in bringing folks together, get something done here or not. host: in missouri, carly, you are next. caller: steve, i sure am happy to see you back. host: good to be back, thank you. caller: you are welcome at my house anytime. you just had a text message addressing the same issue i wanted to address. i don't know why republicans don't get together -- or democrats, i don't care -- just get together and do a standalone bill. like the other person suggested.

roads, bridges, water, broadband, power grid, and just that. that is what we all here in the country think of as infrastructure. why do they bundle everything up so that it doesn't pass? sometimes i think it is deliberate. i will shut up and let her comment. host: thanks, carla. lisa mascaro? guest: it is back to that question. from the president's point of view, democrats point of view, they are trying to use as much as they can. you don't have a lot of opportunities to pass big bills, so they are trying to -- some would say loaded up with extras. they would say, look, are veterans hospitals extras, childcare centers extra? that sort of thing.

there is the broader question of how you pay for it. what the democrats are thinking, if they push it together into one bill, you can do something big like this corporate tax hike. they are talking about raising rates on corporation from 21% to 28%, which is not as high as it was -- 35% -- but higher than it fell in the trunk-era tax break. again, republicans and others, like the caller, is saying, be realistic, focus on something doable. that is an argument, and we will see where they end up. in a lot of ways it is a bit of a negotiation.

make your best offer and see where it lies. that said, they have the majority. president biden has put forward a very expansive view of what he would like to do, so i think they will try to go big, see what they can get or not. host: quickly, let me go through the numbers with two members of the house now a part of the biden cabinet, and after the passing of alcee hastings, right now, 218 democrats in the house of representatives, 211 republicans, so a narrow majority for speaker pelosi. how does that influence her decision on getting things through, especially when there are folks that want to see things scaled back? guest: there is era room for

error. we have talked about joe manchin in the senate, but he is maybe one of 10 centrist senators on the democratic side who have sort of concerns about different things. in the house, it is just a few-vote margin, two or three votes that speaker pelosi can lose on any given day. she has these centrist members from regions where republicans win, and she has some of the most liberal members. of course, everyone knows congresswoman sandra oh because you cortez -- alexandria ocasio-cortez. it is difficult for speaker pelosi and leader schumer. that is what republicans are counting on, that democrats cannot keep this unruly coalition together, and yet,

democrats showed on the covid release bill, they were able to keep together. i know in private conversations president biden has had with democrats, he has urged them to sort of remember what they can do if they all hold together, don't start splintering. it is a tall order. they all have their constituents, personal beliefs. as i mentioned, it will be a weeks long, if not months long process. that is a long opportunity. and these are fragile majorities. three seats in the senate, -- i'm sorry, three in the house, zero in the senate. it is just very, very fragile. i have written before that democrats are operating like they are on time and they are

try to do as much as they can, not only because of the election around the corner, but knowing they don't have a lot of room right now for error. host: a number of hearings we will be covering on the c-span network, including the house and senate intelligence committees. hearing from cia director christopher wray and others. we are talking with lisa mascaro, chief congressional correspondent for the associated press. next caller is jerry in new jersey. independent line. go ahead, you are on the air. caller: my question is about transparency and the insurrection. the washington, d.c. cop that was killed, for weeks we hear that he was hit in the head with a fire extinguisher, but now we know that is not true. does anybody know how he

actually died? at the border, no photographers, no press. all this transparency is not transparent. i would like to know what is really going on. they want to do away with the filibuster but the dems used a 327 times in 2020 alone, so where is the transparency? host: let's go back to the death of officer sicknick. what was the cause of death, do we know? guest: i have not checked this past week but i believe that is still under investigation. there was a lot of mayhem that day, and there have been different reports. was the fire extinguisher thrown , there was repellent, pepper spray-type substances that were put out. of course, he did not feel well

later that day, went to the hospital, and died of his injuries. it is something that they are investigating. i cannot remember off the top of my head but i believe that investigation is still ongoing and we have not seen the final report there. obviously, at the border, we are always working for greater access, the conditions, what is happening with the migrants crossing. often happens this time of year, but we are seeing record numbers of families and young people. always working for more transparency to be able to see and report, understand the conditions, so we can bring that information in a most honest way to our readers all across the nation and globe. host: can i cut in on

investigations? house ethics is now looking into matt gaetz. how will that unfold, what will happen? guest: the ethics committee meets behind closed doors, we don't have a lot of opportunity -- to the caller's point --but congressman gaetz is under scrutiny for his actions, including a county assessor in florida for sexual misconduct and other potential wrongdoing. it appears to be a widening investigation, federal authorities are looking at lots of folks in florida associated with the congressman. of course, came into congress

from florida in 2017, a big ally of former president trump. it was interesting when the ethics committee announced the investigation friday. it is a bipartisan decision. the chairman is a democrat, the top ranking member is a republican. they agreed to open that investigation. that is the most we have heard from republican leadership about congressman gates. -- gaetz. they have not said that he needs to step aside or put a pause on any of his responsibilities while this is going on, the committee announcing the investigation. it is one of the most clear signs that these are allegations that he is facing. that said, the committee does tend to work quietly behind the scenes. we will not have a lot of

insight into that until they start releasing their findings. that could be sometime. host: the seminole county tax collector at the center of this investigation in the orlando area, the headline from the new york times, behind the gaetz case is a problematic tax collector. anthony in pennsylvania, good morning. caller: good morning, steve. welcome back. just wanted to say that to you because i thought you were a bipartisan guy. i hope you continue to be that. ms. mascara row, i have three things i want to say. can you tell us about what these infrastructure bills goes off, paying off democratic donors, is this just a slush fund for democrats to pay back other democrats? host: stay on the line and we will get a follow-up.

guest: i don't know that i would characterize it that way. we don't really have any evidence that that would be going on right now. if you look at where the money would go, certainly they have some broad categories, and it would be up to congress to actually write the bill, put in more specifics. we are talking about roads and bridges and water systems, p orts, infrastructure, facilities to care for children, elderly, veterans. i just don't know that we would have evidence that that sort of payoff to any particular people or group. host: we have a minute left. did you want to follow-up? caller: thank you for the answer. i totally disagree, but i want to say two things. the wall around the capitol.

we have people flooding through the border. you scream loudly about getting the wall finished so we can get some border control. you want to put a ball around the capitol, but the border, it doesn't make sense to me. the other thing is voter id. if voter id was everywhere on after the ballots, we wouldn't be having a discussion about who believes the election is a fraud. we know the election was a fraud because there was no signature verification. they cannot find 400,000 signatures on georgia ballots because there is no evidence. host: we will dear what the georgia election law in a moment. your thoughts about the wall across the border and the capitol ? guest: the ball at the border will be an ongoing issue.

of course, president trump really wanted to fortify the wall, make it even more. democrats and others will say may be a wall isn't the most effective way to keep people out. there is a lot of rugged terrain down there, some of the property folks don't want to give their property through eminent domain to the government to build a wall. there are a lot of thorny issues about actually building a physical infrastructure, a lot of talk about what can be done through remote surveillance, are there ways to deter people from crossing illegally. i think a ball is just an ongoing issue and question. folks are probably just pretty divided about how they feel about that issue, whether it is the best way to protect the border. host: back to work week for members of congress. the house and senate in session this week.

live coverage on c-span and c-span2. lisa mascaro is the chief congressional correspondent for the associated press. thanks for joining us this morning, we appreciate it. coming up, taking a closer look at what is in the georgia voting law, and how it impacts voters in that state. we will be speaking to greg bluestein of the atlanta journal constitution. later, the former chief medical officer from pfizer joining us on the development of the pfizer vaccine. it is a monday morning, the 12th of april. stay with us. ♪ >> listen to c-span's podcast the weekly. this week, the workplace after the pandemic, with kim hart. she will talk about a newly released poll which indicates most employees prefer working remotely.

>> 87% of the people surveyed said they want to work remotely at least one day a week. a lot of people want to work more than that. only 13% said they want to work full time site the way they use to. that is a huge seachange for employers who are used to having everyone in the office every day, people commuting, wanting to live closely to their jobs. that is no longer as important. >> monday afternoon, a discussion about supply chain vulnerabilities hosted by the woodrow center, live at 1:00 eastern on c-span, online at c-span.org or listen live with every c-span radio app. >> go to c-span.org/coronavirus for the federal response to the pandemic. it is easy to find the latest briefings and the biden

administration's response using the interactive gallery of maps to find cases worldwide. >> washington journal continues. host: joining us from atlanta is greg bluestein, he covers politics for the atlanta journal constitution. thank you for being on c-span. guest: thank you for having me. host: let's talk about the new voting law signed by governor kemp. it would remove the secretary of state from that states election board, shorten the time to request absentee ballots, requiring voter ids for all mail-in ballots, ban food and water distribution within 25 feet of voters, although you are allowed to bring your own as you wait in line. one drop per county, 23 in the more populous counties. it reduces the number of days allowed for absentee voting from

180 to 78. it also bans mobile voting centers such as rv's. why was this law put in place? guest: that is the question lawmakers and politicians and voters are grappling with right now in georgia because of the sharp fallout of this package of legislation. republicans say these are needed changes to restore the integrity and confidence in the vote in georgia, and that some of the changes were spurred from the 2018 election in georgia, needed political will to be passed. what democrats eagerly point out is that crisis of confidence was rooted in president donald trump's falsehoods about election fraud in georgia and other battleground states, and that that is what prompted this crisis of confidence. there are some changes that are

contingency driven but a lot of these changes are not, and amounts to more obstacles to vote for people who in the last election cycle embraced absentee voting, some of the newer technologies, methods to vote like ballot drop boxes, which will be severely limited under this new law. host: that led major league baseball to pull the all-star game from atlanta, now taking place at coors field in denver, colorado. pressure from companies based in georgia like delta and coca-cola. can you explain? guest: as the pressure mounted from activists, voting rights activists from democrats and other critics of the law, pressure focused on george's major corporations to speak out against these changes.

in other states, too, but in georgia, business groups play an outsized role in civic debates. in the last few years, coca-cola, all of these atlanta-based fortune 500 companies have had a seat at the table for major decisions not only involving their bottom line but infrastructure, reputational programs, religious liberty debate, tax hikes, all of those things they have played a seminal role. now you have activists saying voting rights is a fundamental issue for american democracy. where are you on this debate? many of them sidestepped it, many of them still are, mild statements about how they support fairness and integrity at the ballot box. but one week after governor kemp signed this action into law, delta and coca-cola, two of the city's namebrand corporate

firms, both come out on the same day with very staunch statements about these restrictions, which led of course to very staunch push back from governor kemp and other republicans saying they don't believe this allows to restricting voting rights, but secondly, where were you earlier on when you had the chance to speak out against this? there are dueling calls for boy boycotts. of course, that led major league baseball to move the all-star game. a big blow to the local economy there. it became a rallying cry for republicans around this election law, particularly around governor ryan kemp, who is facing a tough election battle next year. host: we have our phone set aside if you are a georgia resident, (202) 748-8003.

taking a closer look at what is in the new georgia election law. lines divided up between democrats, republicans, and independents. you can also join us online. the secretary of state, brad raffensperger, who became the center of controversy with former president trump critical of claims that there was election fraud across the state, he was taken off the election board, or his position was. why? guest: he will no longer have a boat, he will have a role, but not a vote. that is pushback on secretary of state raffensperger's stance on the elections that they were free and fair. he has been one of the most outspoken defenders of the election. of course, he oversaw the election, so he had an integral role in the 2020 election in georgia. he defied former president trump's calls to find enough

votes to overturn the election. he also infuriated many republicans for not promoting concerns about widespread election fraud, saying over and over again that there was no evidence of any sort of systemic irregularities in georgia's vote. so this is payback from republican lawmakers who will now have technically a majority. republicans already had a majority on the five-member board, but now the legislature. three of the five members of this legislature has a decisive say over election policies that come before the state elections board. of course, we have the 2022 election where the secretary of state position is up for grabs. if a democrat wins the seat, which is likely with how close the elections are getting, this is also a hedge against a democratic secretary of state

down the road. the legislature is likely to stay in republican hands the matter what happens in statewide offices in georgia. host: let's go to cindy in norwalk, connecticut. caller: thank you for taking my call. so, you listed a bunch of things that were in the election law, the whole debacle about the water. i am in connecticut. as you know, a very liberal state where it is almost wholly democratically run on the local level and statewide, but yet, we do not have early voting. i don't know if you see the hypocrisy in all of this. before trump was in office, these things could have been changed, and they were not. so that is a little suspect right there. campaigns are never allowed to approach people online. at that point, the campaigning

is over. you can donate water for the georgia voters. it just has to be given to the poll workers to be put out for general use. that is something that you guys always leave out. so it is a little just ingenuous. as far as early voting, i am for that. i think three months is an advance is a little too much. a lot can happen in three weeks, much less three months. when there are two strong candidates and i am undecided, debates are important. i don't think voting should take place before there are debates. i don't know why people are afraid of debates but they seem to be these days. i do agree with no excuse absentee balloting. i don't see why there is no middle ground, it is so partisan. host: let me leave it there. you put a couple of issues on the table including early voting and weekend voting. under the law, are more days

added in georgia to allow people to vote? guest: great question. before the general election, they are. there are counties already that offer, especially larger metro atlanta counties, that offer more we can voting. but under this law -- we are talking dozens of counties in georgia -- under this law, dozens of mostly smaller, rural counties will be required to add another day of weekend voting before the november election. the runoff is a different situation. we had a nine-week runoff for the senate in georgia come extended to january 5. under this new law -- this is another consensus issue -- the runoff was shortened to about four weeks. that also means less time for early voting, would also mean

that early voting wouldn't extend three weeks before the runoff, but one week. it shortens the amount of weekend and early voting for a runoff period. for a general election, it expands it in some cases. host: so much focus on the issue of water. if you are in line, you can drink water, you can bring water, and poll workers can offer you water. guest: in georgia -- and i have witnessed this many times. this is one of the most unfortunate things about covering politics in georgia, watching this happen. very dense, populous metro atlanta re-sinks, -- precincts, sometimes the lines will go on for five hours. some voters will bring lawn chairs to sit on. others are not prepared. outside groups will come and bring pizza, hot chocolate,

snacks two people waiting in line, to make sure they stay in line. critics of that worried -- and there is no evidence this is happening at any large-scale -- that electioneering is happening. as they are being offered cokes, hey, vote for x, y, z. so there are buffer zones set up 25 feet outside of the lines, but of course you can still bring your own food and water. outside groups cannot handed over to people directly waiting in line but they can give it to elections officials who can set up stands, water tables for people waiting in these long lines, to make sure they stay in those lines and don't give up their right to vote. host: we are taking an in-depth look at what is in the georgia voting law . our guest is greg bluestein of the atlanta

journal-constitution. caller: good morning. it is insulting to think that people cannot have an id. you have to have an idea to go to the doctor's office, to sign up for social programs. you need to have an id to buy sudafed in a drugstore. to say it is a hardship for people to have to prove their identity is insulting, too stupid to figure out how to get an id and identify themselves. host: on the issue of voter id, what is required under the georgia law? guest: this is a great question. under georgia law, you would be required to have a form of id to verify your id for absentee voters for the first time, those who vote mail-in. this was prompted by a surge of mail-in voting. in 2019, we saw a couple hundred

thousand. in 2020, more than a million. there has been no evidence of widespread fraud with these mail-in ballots but an ajc poll in january showed a broad majority of georgia voters do support some sort of verifying of id for people that vote by mail. that was 74% of georgia voters who like the idea. critics say it makes it harder for people who are in more rural areas, older people who are not as savvy technologically to get some form of identification if they don't have a driver's license. the state offers them in multiple ways, but there was the thought that a small number of people would be disenfranchised. overall, 90% of registered voters have driver's licenses.

this is in part because of georgia's automatic voter registration rules that says when you sign up for a driver's license, you opted in to register to vote. host: next up is gwen from birmingham, alabama. caller: good morning. so glad to see you back, steve. my favorite. i want to say this, if the voting was so intact in georgia, why would they want to come in and make all of these different voting laws? i really hate to always sound racial, but black people know. we have felt the stain of not being able to vote. we have felt the sting of

jellybeans in a jar. we know. we felt it. we know that black people came out in record numbers in georgia and voted. we know what it is. i really wish kemp would stop lying. what was so hurtful to me, that young black lady, she is a part of the legislature in georgia. she knocked on that door to be a part of what was going on with kemp. then they had a slave plantation picture behind them. how do you think that makes us feel? i am not saying all white people because we have some beautiful people in the world. if not for some of those white people, we would not be where we are today. this is the united states of america. we have to unite to be better. but kemp sitting there with all of those white men with a slave

plantation picture behind them, how do you think that makes us feel as black people? we know what this georgia law is, they don't want black people to vote. but we are going to go out and encourage our young people, people that don't have id. you are not going to stop us from voting. voting is very patriotic to black people. we are going to come out and vote. mr. bluestein, i think that they made a big mistake, i really do. host: thank you for the call. your response? guest: this is exactly what georgia democrats are saying, that this will only energize georgia democrats, people that want to come out in droves for senator raphael warnock who is up for election.

it is something we saw in the 2018 election. if you look at the race between stacey abrams and brian kemp, even though both of them were known for their stances on voting rights -- brian kemp being the secretary of state at the time in charge of georgia election policy, d.c. abrams as a national -- stacey abrams as a national voting rights advocate. it turned out to be that way in part because democrats realized, in talking about voting rights, they were concerned it could hamper turnout. it could also energize turnout from voters like we just heard. it is the foundational cornerstone right of democracy. if you tell people that there are no obstacles to vote, they will find other ways to make sure that they are heard. that is why you heard so much in 2020 about a plan to vote,

multiple avenues to vote. if you have issues voting by mail, make sure you vote early. if you have issues voting early, make sure you vote on election day. those types of issues will end up energizing democrats. but remember, republicans are rallying around this as well. governor kemp has repeatedly been under fire from donald trump and his allies, and his standing seems improved with republicans right now because of his defense of this bill. it is having a railing on the right as well. host: we are talking with greg bluestein who covers politics for the atlanta journal-constitution, focusing on the georgia voting law. this on our twitter page. 36 states require some sort of voter id. also this from mary. i love how georgia republicans assume their voting rights will not come back to haunt them with their turnout. jan says it's been pointed out

that if they at polling places, the lines will not be as long. lizzie says, people know what went on in georgia during the presidential election. it was corrupt. george in atlanta. good morning. caller: yes, i would like to speak about, since 2005, georgia had the law that you can vote by ballot. the republicans put in place. all of a sudden, now, we are looking at the republican party getting mad because they lost the election. it amazes me that people across the country will talk about george's voting laws when they should mind their own business. georgia knows how to run their own elections, we have done it for hundreds of years. for someone to say that we don't know what we are doing, pay attention to your own state.

we are a state that will take care of itself. when our governor sits here and lets our president talk to him like a dog, lets our secretary of state being treated like a dog, i don't understand where we are going in this country. thank you. host: greg bluestein, your reaction? guest: this speaks doing issue that governor kemp faces, even though it feels like his standing has improved with republicans. former president trump has still vowed revenge on not just governor kemp but other state elected officials, including secretary of state brad raffensperger, for not heeding his calls for overturning the election in georgia. but we will see in the next few weeks in georgia is the beginnings of a pro-trump republican ticket challenging

sitting public and incumbents, who in trump world, feel like they didn't do enough to help his claims of election fraud. we could see a challenger to governor kemp this week. we already saw president trump endorse a challenger to raffensperger. last week, i reported that lieutenant governor jeff duncan, who is also in trump's crosshairs is not even running for election in part because he is disgusted with his own party's stance on election rules and also that he knows he will face a formidable republican challenger as well that could run with trump's endorsement but at least as a pro-trump candidate. you are seeing trump's influence continue not only on this election law, which voting rights advocates point out is rooted in his false claims of election fraud in georgia, but also his enduring political

influence in georgia is very strong in the republican party. host: let's get back to calls. betty is joining us in georgia. good morning. caller: good morning, how are you? host: where in georgia are you calling from? caller: i am in atlanta. on the voter id issue, i have a problem with the voter id, but in a lot of ruble areas, there are older people. you cannot get id without a birth certificate, you cannot get a birth certificate without a social security card. also, they would have to try to make a copy. how can they make a copy? it cost them to go somewhere, they don't have the technology. that is one of the issues there. another thing that needs to be addressed, why are they addressing the long lines in the heavily democratic areas? if you have to stand in line 8,

10 hours, but only 30 minutes in other areas, that is an issue. i have one question, with the change of secretary of state to the border of the legislator, does that mean they can now overturn the election? host: to that point, greg bluestein? guest: let me answer the third one first, overturning the election. it doesn't mean overturning the election. republicans already have control of the state elections board. this would just give the republican legislature more control of the board. there is another law that allows the legislature to replace underperforming elections officials, and that is seen as direct scrutiny of fulton county, georgia's most populous county, also well-known for being plagued by election problems over the last decade or two.

what that means is you replace an elections official, cannot overturn the election results. those election officials have a lot of leeway over how certain ballots are counted. whether or not provisionals are counted. this is not an issue this year, but there was in previous elections, whether or not signatures on the ballots are mismatched and should be counted. episodes in 2018 where one suburban county rejected signature mismatches at a higher rate than others. those election officials have a large say in how those local matters are handled. in an election as close as we had in georgia last year, about 11,000 votes dividing trump and biden, that could come into play. when it comes to the long lines, voters i talked to in georgia,

in the june primary where you had eight-hour lines for early voting, there was finger-pointing between democrats, republicans, republicans. voters didn't care about that. they just wanted to vote. it is frustrating as a reporter to see voters bringing lawn chairs as an accessory to the ballot. that is why many are hoping that georgia can become an example to standardize all of this, standardize election laws, and pave the way for more voting machines, more ballot access in very congested populous districts, so that you don't have 6, 7, 8-hour lines. i don't know that you can eliminate lines but you can make sure there are more machines. a lot of these lines also have poorly trained all workers who

are doing their best, may not know how to use the voting machines, or technical glitches. one line i reported on, they didn't have the right parts for the computer. they didn't have enough provisional simple as that and they did not have enough provisional ballots for those waiting in line. i was also awestruck by the voters who said even if it takes all day, i am staying here to vote. not everyone can do that, of course, but i did interview voters who said if it takes eight hours, i will stay eight hours to vote. host: robert, you are next. caller: thanks for taking my call. a lot of people called and said people are too stupid to get an id -- people don't understand if somebody complains, you have to look into it. you have a president that acted like a crook, that wanted 11,000 votes.

all of a sudden, certain places they may want to access the vote. when someone said they are stupid -- you have to look into things. you cannot just call people stupid. all of the sudden, [indiscernible] i think she should look into things and not call people stupid. look into things all of a sudden, the vote is a problem. people just generalized things, and people should know. when people complain about something, they are separate things but i think people should come together for the people that do not generalize things and look into things, all of the sudden the vote in certain places. host: thank you for the call. we will get a response. guest: i don't want to engage in name-calling and the people that

watch the show, who might work in ajcs, who are engaged do not need to worry about the new obstacles to voting because they are informed, but what voting rights advocates worry about is people that are not in tune, who would look to vote and the primary or the general election and don't realize there are new verification standards for voting by mail. there is a smaller window to vote by mail. all of these different changes, there is limited widespread use of ballot drop boxes. all of these changes we have been talking about have not filtered down to folks who were only marginally extended in georgia politics and will tune in closer to the election. that is a decent chunk of the population. that is the concern -- people in remote areas who don't realize

they need id verification. there are many ways for them to get that pit we are trying to promote those ways in our news coverage, showing people how they can sign up for free voter id, but still it is a new obstacle they have to overcome, not necessarily a hard one, but a new obstacle nonetheless they have to jump over in order to vote. host: the website is ajc.com. greg bluestein, his expertise, government and politics. a longtime friend of the number could thank you for being with us. guest: thank you. host: i want to share a story that has gotten a lot of attention the last couple of hours -- a headline from the star in minneapolis, "violence flares," after a brooklyn center police officer shooting a man during a traffic stop inflaming

raw tension between police and king remembers in the midst of the derek chauvin trial. police shot dante right. they said he drove for a short distance after he was shot, crashed his car and died at the scene. this is from senator tina smith. a difficult night in minnesota. we mourn with his family is another black man's live -- life is lost. we are told the prosecution should rep up today on the derek chauvin trial. when we come back, we want to turn our attention to the issue of the pfizer vaccine and one of the individuals behind the vaccine, dr. mace rothenberg joining us from nashville, tennessee. "washington journal" on this

monday morning could we are back in just a moment. >> weeknights this month we are featuring american history tv programs as a preview of what is available every weekend on c-span three. tonight, the space shuttle's 40th anniversary pan on april 12, 1941, -- we start with the 1979 nasa film where dreams come true. the film highlights the contribution of women and minorities to nasa and much of the work relates to the fledgling space shuttle program. watch tonight beginning at 8:00 p.m. eastern and enjoy american history tv every weekend on c-span3. c-spanshop.org is the new online store. order a copy of the congressional directory, a compact, spiral-bound book for every member of congress. also, contact information for

state governors and the biden administration cabinet. order your copy at c-span shop.org. every purchase helps support c-span's nonprofit operation. >> "washington journal" continues. host: we take a much closer look at covid-19 more than a year after the first case broke and now with half of a million americans that have died from the virus, we want to focus on the development of the vaccine could we are given -- dividing lines. if you have received a vaccine, 202-748-8000. if you are waiting for a vaccine, 202-748-8001. if you have decided not to get the vaccine, 202-748-8002. a be you are not sure -- we have a line for that as well, 202-748-8003. dr. mace rothenberg is joining

us. thank you for being with us. explain your role in the development of the vaccine? guest: for the past two years i was chief medical officer for pfizer. i have since retired. our group was involved in making sure that information about vaccine was complete, accurate, and up to date, to make sure people who were either offering the vaccine or receiving the vaccine had the information they need to make the right decision. my group is also involved in making sure that the safety was monitored very carefully within the clinical crop -- trials and after. member, many more people will receive the clinical trials after the -- and before emergency authorization. it is called for michael vigilance, and that was squarely in the responsibly of my organization. host: i want to ask about some news, this is a headline from

cnbc, based on the study from israel, the covid variant, coming from loss -- south africa, it was able to break through the pfizer vaccine -- the story points out it was able to evade some of the protections in the vaccine. explain the story and the significance of this in terms of how we deal with these variants. guest: when we hear about a variant having resistance to the vaccine we have to understand where the information is coming from, because a lot of it to date has come from laboratory, and what that has shown is some of these variants require a higher concentration to be killed, but the level of antibody generated by the vaccine is so much higher than that it really has no clinical significance. recent reports indicate that in some cases the level of antibodies achieved in an individual may not have been high enough to overcome that level of resistance in that particular variant and the individual got sick, i think we

have to be very careful not to blow this out of proportion, that these are very rare, individual cases, and the vast majority of individuals who are infected with the coronavirus and you have received a pfizer mnr -- mrna vaccine are radically protected. -- adequately protected. host: when did coronavirus first enter your radar screen --radar screen? guest: as everyone did in december, 2019, when we heard about the cases in a small town known as wuhan. just a coincidence it had special significance because i was scheduled to visit wuhan in march, 2020, because part of my organization is based in wuhan. we were following it carefully. as the story emerged, we realized it was probably not safe for me to go there, so we canceled the trip. but actually what we were seeing also was the fact that this was

not limited to wuhan. this was spreading. we were very concerned about making sure that our colleagues who are based in wuhan were safe and were able to be protected from this to the extent possible of what we knew at that time and then we had to understand the impact this had, not just in china, but on a worldwide basis, especially with regard to the ability for us to continue to produce our medicines insights around the world, and also to make sure we are going to be able to take appropriate steps to address this challenge that was becoming more and more apparent -- it was going to be a worldwide challenge we had to step up and meet. host: you have heard the argument from many americans, the vaccines are not safe -- i am not going to get one. address that? guest: one of the things people are concerned about is the short period of time that it took to develop the vaccine.

in the case of the pfizer mrna vaccine, it was 7.5 months from the time the first person received one of the vaccine candidates to the time it received emergency use authorization -- that is a short period of time, so people wonder what was sacrificed in trying to do that as quickly as possible. i had first-hand insight into that, and i can tell you that no corners were cut, no measures were abandoned or compromised, that would give us anything less than a full understanding of the safety and efficacy of this vaccine, and even though this happen in short period of time, and that happened in part because there were so many cases of covid in the population, we were able to get the trials completed faster -- when we brought the application for emergency use authorization forward to regulatory agencies, they had all information with

the complete level of confidence that we knew this vaccine had favorable benefit/risk relationships. we had good insights into the safety, and only we, but regulatory -- authorities around the world felt the benefits vastly outweighed the risks and it is something that was not only going to be useful but absolutely essential in helping us in the pandemic. host: the pfizer vaccine, the moderna vaccine is a two-step process and the vaccines need to be kept in cold temperature. johnson & johnson is one vaccine, it does not need to be in a cold temperature. why? explain the difference as we look at some of the vaccine in your distribution facilities. guest: right. so, for the mrna vaccines, they are encapsulated in lipid nano particles which are unstable and have to be kept at a low temperature. when this was first being

developed at pfizer and biontech the conditions used were also low temperatures, -80 degrees celsius. that is where we had the experience, and that is what, once we get the eua emergency authorization, that is what pfizer had to have all the sites it here too -- keep it at very low temperature until it was very -- ready to be administered . since that time, companies have had a chance -- more of a chance to test the vaccine for stability at less stringent conditions, and just recently, the fda and the european agency as well have now relaxed those requirements so, no longer does the pfizer biontech vaccine have to be kept at -80. it can be kept at -20 four up to two weeks. there are more facilities around the world that have those resources and it can reach more

places than it could before. host: you talk about the distribution -- it came up yesterday on nbc's "meet the press, with secretary of state tony blinken. he was asked by chuck todd about the u.s. role in the distribution globally here here's part of the interview. [video clip] secretary blinken: we have a significant response ability we will be the world leader. until the majority of the world is vaccinated will be a problem for us because as long as the virus is replicating it could be mutating, coming back to hit us, but similarly the world has a strong interest in making sure we are vaccinated because the same thing applies. if the virus is replicating here and mutating here, that will be a problem for the rest of the world. we have taken a leadership role. we have rejoined the world health organization -- where the largest contributor to covax, the inis -- national facility to

make vaccines more available to do we have an important relationship with india, japan, austria, to increase vaccine production around the world, and we have made some loans to our nearest neighbors, mexico and canada. as we get more comfortable with where we are and vaccinating every american, we are then looking at what more we can do around the world. host: can you elaborate on what the secretary of state was talking about, specifically pfizer's role in the global distribution? guest: i think secretary blinken described it very well. there is a responsibility that pfizer and large pharma companies that have vaccines have to the world, because unless this is something that is controlled on a worldwide basis, it is going to continue to have impact, not only in other countries, but in the united states because we are so reliant upon one another for supplies, materials, and trade. i think this is very important.

this could have been and was predicted, that when you have initial production, not everyone can get it at the same time. it has to be prioritized. we saw that in the united states, where the first groups to be vaccinated where those that were most vulnerable. the same kind of prioritization has to be considered in terms of saying who is going to be the next group to get this. pfizer, even though it is a u.s.-based company, it has international scope and responsibility and it recognizes this. as a result, even before pfizer knew the results of the clinical trial, it was scaling up mass production of the vaccine to do everything it could to make sure that if the vaccine worked and if it received emergency youth authorization, that as many doses could go out as quickly as possible. in addition, pfizer was upgrading its facilities,

reaching out and using new facilities to produce new vaccines. in addition, one of the important steps that was actually prompted by the pandemic and this crisis was a willingness of competitor companies, other large pharma companies to band together, work together to cooperate to produce the vaccine. so, in fact, not only is the pfizer biontech vaccine being produced at those locations, but auction -- actually a virus and sanofi have offered their vaccine production facilities to upscale the production and make it more available on a worldwide basis. i think these are significant steps that have been taken to address this very problem of meeting the needs of not only americans, but people around the world in developed and in developing countries, to make sure we are able to eradicate this pandemic, to and to this pandemic, and to allow economies

to open, travel to reopen, and to us to get back to our lives. host: one final point and i want to bring in viewers and listeners -- moving forward, whether it is treatment for cancer in future vaccines, what are the lessons over the last 12 to 13 months in developing the covid vaccine? guest: one of the early decisions that was made at pfizer was to initiate something called project lightspeed. that looked at every step along the way of clinical development -- a process that takes years for medicines or vaccines and to see what can be done to shorten that -- processes done in sequence, could they be overlapped or done in parallel? what would be the risk, the benefits? a process that would normally take years with an truncated to 7.5 months in the case of the covid-19 vaccine. in addition, communication across organizations within the

company was essential. everyone recognized from what the ceo laid out early on -- this was the highest priority for the company, so whenever anyone called up to address an issue related to the vaccine, people stopped what they are doing. they took the call. they entered the meeting to be able to manage problems in real time to keep things going, to make sure this is everybody's top priority. that was an important lesson as well. what was also learned is that in dire situations like this, that others beyond just the company are willing to interact in a more real-time basis, so when pfizer reached out to the fda to request a meeting to get guidance on the next step for the vaccine's development or a question that it had, rather than having to submit it in

writing, prepare a briefing document, get it scheduled, a process that could take four to eight weeks, the call was responded to immediately or later on that day. you can see when you have everyone recognized this is such a high priority, has such meaning no matter where you sit in the ecosystem, you can really band together and get things done quickly and at a high quality without sacrificing any element of quality or safety. host: we are talking with dr. mace rothenberg, joining us from nashville, tennessee, the former chief medical officer for pfizer and also was on the faculty of the vanderbilt medical center and for that the university of texas health center in san antonio. rochester, michigan. good morning. caller: good morning can i have a question. my husband and i came down with covid about two weeks ago. we are doing fine.

we did not get a vaccination. we had put in for it, and changed our minds to get it, but it was too late for us. we are doing fine now, but i have a question. i was asymptomatic, so i got a test, after he got covid, and i headed. now that we are not, almost 14 days, we are doing well -- what do we do now? do we need to go get vaccinated? do we have antibodies? i don't know what the protocol is. host: thank you, caller. guest: get vaccinated. your body, when exposed to the virus will generate an antibiotic response that will help the body fight off the infection and retell it in the future, but what has been found is the level of antibodies produced with a vaccination, especially in people who have had prior infections is many fold higher, 10, 100 fold higher than what your body had

generated to the natural infection. that is one reason to get the vaccine. the second is we don't know how long-lasting the immunity might be from the natural infection. so if it was not a very strong reaction, that antibiotic response could wane over time. what we believe is that with the vaccinations, it is not only the anti-bodies, the short-term way your body manages and fights off a viral infection, but other elements, memory b cells, memory t cells, upper t cells, better able to be trained, and even after the infection is gone, they stay around, and they stay around for a long time. how long, we don't know, but now data are coming out that they are around six months, or probably longer. i think for those reasons, even in people who have had the virus, and had covid-19, is

still important for you to get the vaccination as well. host: this from sheila -- tell me these vaccine producers can predict adverse reactions 5, 10 years down the road. guest: the answer is obvious and no one has 5, 10 years experience with the vaccine because we don't have five or 10 years of this variant of the coronavirus but we can draw on prior experiences -- understanding there are only side effects that have been characterized very well for this and other vaccines in the future, and in rare cases will you see late-occurring side effects, but every individual has to make up their own mind to weigh what we know about the disease of covid-19 -- what that can do to you, it cannot only make you sick, he could land you in the intensive care unit, it

could cause not only short-term but long-term disability, we are learning, and it can kill you. it is about a 1% to 2% fatality rate in the short-term, versus what we know about the vaccines, and when it comes to the mrna vaccines, the side effects are very well-characterized. the vast majority of cases are mild to moderate, some rare cases, less than 10% might be more severe but they are transient, usually gone within 24 to 48 hours and no individual has been documented to have died from receiving the vaccine directly due to the vaccine. so, you have to weigh the uncertainty of what may happen five to 10 years from now with a very real and present danger of dying from covid-19 pit the choice is yours. host: fully visor pfizer --

fully vaccinated. no side effects. finally holding my one-year-old nephew. when my hopes for him, he grows up and becomes a scientist. did you want to comment? guest: i think that is great. i think we cannot underestimate that impact of that vaccination as well -- it is not just simply saying ok, you have got the vaccination, now continued to do everything you were doing before you got the vaccination and keep yourself separated and isolated, it really is beginning to allow us to get our lives back, to allow us to travel, as the cdc has indicated now, with a little more comfortable -- comfort. still with precautions, but it is still an important step in allowing people to get their lives back. it is interacting with friends and family, having expenses that have been denied for the past year.

let's not underestimate the value of that, the importance of that, and the role of the vaccine in allowing people to regain that. host: william from connecticut says thank you -- the first pfizer dose is in, waiting for the second on april 19. bless those who work, technology and expedited the final research and production. linda, minneapolis, you are on the air with dr. mace rothenberg . caller: good morning. thanks for taking my call. i have a comment and a question. i will make the comment -- you just spoke about people being able to get together -- by the way, i am over 80 and i have had two of the pfizer, and thank you very, very much, but i have noticed my friends, my contemporaries have really come in my view, opened up to doing things since they have been vaccinated, and i am still, kind of, cautious. i wonder specifically about the gathering together in small

group to have dinner in somebody's home. of that kind of worries me. i know that that kind of worries me. i know friends that are doing that, they are eager to get together. it is understandable. i would like your opinion on that. the next question is what about a booster? do we need one thank you. guest: great question. congratulations. it sounds like you are doing great. in terms of gathering together, as we are going alone, we are getting more experience in terms of an epidemiologic perspective. i think everyone knows there are certain high risk behaviors that still should be avoided, gathering with large crowds indoors, people not socially distanced, people who are not wearing masks -- those are things that should still be avoided, but if you are vaccinated, you can gather together with other people who

are also vaccinated and socially distanced, that, i think, now, we recognizes a lower risk situation. i think that is something -- this is something, just to keep your eyes and ears open. as we get more experience and information, sometimes from real-world expense, clinical trials, -- experience, clinical trials, we will give more guidance. it is a gray zone. some people are more willing to push that than others. keep your eyes and ears open that there will be more guidance on this. with regard to the booster, it gets back to a point made earlier. there is data to suggest that in people, very strong levels of antibody persist, at least six months. it is likely to be found at 12 months as well. we don't know yet is is that going to last a lifetime or will lil wayne and if -- or will it wayne, and if it does will it

make people more susceptible to catching and coming down with covid-19, and a corollary is with the resistance to some of these mutations, is that also going to generate the need for a booster and with the booster be the same original vaccine or could the vaccine be modified, and i can tell you there are efforts underway to evaluate a modified vaccine that could have greater activity against some of the resistance mutations. stay tuned for this. there is a lot of work going out to answer that very question. host: chattanooga, tennessee, marvin. good morning. thank you for waiting period -- waiting period caller: good morning -- waiting period --waiting. caller: good morning. i am a vietnam veteran. i was in vietnam when agent orange was spread. this is something in my opinion the government allowed to come into our bodies and allowed to

exist for all of these years. it has been 53 years and i am still dealing with what our country has allowed industries and pharmaceutical companies because of greed and whatever to put into our bodies. now, i have to preface that because over the years i have become addicted to these things in my 70's. i have realized that i am addicted to all of these medications that i cannot throw away until the day that i die. now as far as this covid is concerned, this vaccine is concerned, i hope that the general public will take it and decide whether or not we are going to live or we are going to die. unfortunately we have information about this spanish

flu. are the booster shots and the flu shots being taken today still a result of the vaccination of the spanish flu -- that would be my question. host: marvin, we will get a response. thank you very much. guest: and if you could also in your response explain what a booster shot does. a booster shot is given after the initial vaccination, some period afterwards to enhance the body's immune response. then there are booster shots that may be given later on, and those can actually, once again, increase the body's level of immunity against particular disease in case immunity from the first vaccination swing. that is the important part of that. interestingly, there is a report just recently of a blood sample being obtained from somebody who

is alive during the spanish flu of 1918, 19 19, and they are able to detect antibodies from that original spanish flu pick there is evidence bodies can retain memory against an infection for decades, so that is very important to know. i think this is something we have to recognize, and now we have much greater, more advanced technology, so we can begin to say are the levels in an individual adequate to protect them and to protect them against the variants that might be evolving over the next few months and years, or at one point -- what point does the benefit of another vaccination outweigh the risk, and that we should proceed with that. host: just a follow from our twitter page, how much did

operation warp speed weigh in on the development of the vaccine? guest: i think it had different impact on different companies. pfizer did not take any research and development contributions from the federal government. i think that needs to be made very clear. pfizer did have a contract and does have a contract with the federal government to purchase the vaccine if the vaccine was effective. if the vaccine didn't work, the $1 billion to $2 billion pfizer invested in the research and develop it would be gone, would be a loss. it was a decision made to maintain the speed of the program, the independence with adequate oversight. project warp speed was also involved in distribution of the vaccine once emergency use authorization was administered. some companies did receive assistance and accept assistance

for the research and development aspect of that, and some of those have actually made it through the process. host: the head of operation warp speed addressing the issue of emergency use authorization by pfizer. here is what he had to say. >> for seven months we realize the greatest public/private partnership in modern times -- doctors, scientists, researchers , factory workers, hundreds more have all come together for a singular purpose -- that purpose, save lives and end the pandemic appeared we checked our egos at the door. we worked collectively to solve the problem, and we have achieved success as identified last night by the fda when they approved eua of the pfizer vaccine. now we will begin distribution of safe and effective vaccines to the american people. you have heard me refer to today

as d-day -- some people assumed i meant day of distribution. in fact, d-day in military designates the day the mission begins. d-day was a pivotal turning point in world war ii. it was the beginning of the end. d-day was the beginning of the end, and that is where we are today. host: that from last today -- last december and one of the leading individuals in the developing of the vaccine is our guest, dr. mace rothenberg, former chief medical officer for pfizer. back to your phone calls. greg. alexandria, virginia. thank you for waiting period -- waiting. caller: thank you. i have had the vaccine and my only reaction was a headache after the second those. my question is related to vaccine-related death -- what has been reported and confirmed.

i know they collect information and i think in february they reported maybe a little over 100 confirmed deaths related to the vaccine, and you can correct me if i am wrong -- my question really is has there been any evidence or data to suggest that there may be underlying conditions, health problems or maybe genes that would otherwise make people not a good candidate for the vaccine? host: we will get a response. guest: let me make it clear when we are talking about the pfizer biontech vaccine there have been no deaths that have occurred directly as a result of the vaccine alone. there have been deaths reported with other vaccines and they are beginning to look into the reasons for this, but i think that needs to be clarified.

the second part of the question was? guest: in terms of the long-term effects. --host: in terms of the long-term effects. guest: most of the effects are within the first 24, 48 hours, they can be fever, headache, chills, fatigue, and they will have varying levels of severity -- sometimes people do find they interfere with daily living, but they usually resolve within 48 hours. in terms of individuals who may be at higher risk for that, it really has not been a pattern -- it seems younger people may have a higher incident -- incidence of those effects than older people and some have postulated that is due to stronger immune reactions to the vaccine, and there been some reports of individuals that have had other

cheek reactions a few minutes after receiving the vaccinations. they have had some shortness of wrath, blood pressure, but -- shortness of breath, brad -- blood pressure, but those resolve in a matter of hours as well. it is very difficult to it and if i individuals who are at increased risk for side effects, but there are warnings and precautions about individuals who should be monitored and considered. host: is the vaccine different for an adult then it would be for a child? guest: it is the same vaccine, but it would be a different dose. the trial is underway right now for the pfizer biontech vaccine.

pfizer has submitted supplemental emergency use authorization for the vaccine to be used in children 12 to 15 years old. when you think about those children who are 12 to 15 as well as the 16 and 17-year-olds in the trial, that is about 9% of the u.s. population. when we talk about heard immunity -- herd immunity, we are not talking about just adults, but the entire population. having data on younger individuals will help us achieve the level of herd immunity throughout the population at all ages. host: austin, texas. good morning. caller: good morning. i had my first pfizer vaccine and i had a zero side effects. today i go for my second one. when i thought about it -- i am 63. i thought i should have had stronger side effects that would have correlated with having a stronger immune system and

reaction, but at the time i was taking daily ibuprofen and the ranting for allergies and arthritis. so, the last couple of days i have been off of those in case they interfere. my question is do these interfere with your immune response and efficacy of the vaccine, and if so, should the public be more aware? to what -- thank you. guest: it is good news that the side effects do not correlate the site -- the immune response. you may have had a good immune response and not felt anything. there are some theoretical concerns it might blunt the immune response, but there is no hard data. the recommendation is for new visuals to continue the medicines they are taking, but not to necessarily start a medicine, tylenol, ibuprofen,

unit dissipation of having side effects. host: but if you do have the side effects, chills, or a fever, then can you take medicine? guest: yes, you can. host: i will. geordie --jodey, good morning. caller: kai, steve. nice to have you back. i want to call in and follow up on a couple of the calls i made in my decision to get the vaccine, not just for myself, my family -- my father has cancer, it sarah what i found -- etc.. what i found is -- i think c-span for an abundance of information and people representing information, let the gentleman here, to gather my facts and determine whether or not it is safe to get the vaccine, and what i have determined is that the pfizer, for myself and my family is the best -- i am hoping to receive that may 1.

i did and do have concerns over the moderna vaccine, from which i believe my 91-year-old grandmother was affected greatly from. she had underlying factors, and had long covid side effects when she was mild or symptomatic are your go, i truly believe it is the right thing to do, if not for yourself come in the world -- words of rachel maddow, who got her shot, do it for everyone else. host: thank you. guest: if i could comment on that -- when i have been asked by others which vaccine you should take my my response has been the that is offered, because we could have our favorite based on one piece of data or another, but the most important thing is to get vaccinated. every single one of the vaccines far exceeds the threshold set by the fda, the cdc for what they

would consider an effective vaccine. the original threshold was 50% efficacy. when the vaccine was underdevelopment, those of us working at pfizer speculated -- what could we imagine, hope for, and we speculated maybe 65%, 70%, even as high as 75%, so on that day, november 8, when the independent data and safety monitoring committee met and reveal the data that the vaccine was 95% effective, that wildly exceeded our greatest expectations, but i think we have to recognize that all the vaccines that have been reported now have efficacy 70% and above, which is very substantial, can be very protective. please, if you are offered any vaccine, take it. host: to that point, pfizer is a two-step process, johnson & johnson is one vaccine. what is the difference? guest: it is the basis that the

pfizer and moderna vaccine's are encapsulated in lipid nanoparticles, so it is the preparation and the way the vaccine works. the ashes on it and johnson & johnson vaccines are -- astrazeneca and johnson & johnson vaccines are dna vaccines. they are different ways of achieving the same result. all the vaccines will cause your own body to produce little proteins that look exactly like the spike proteins we have seen in the picture of the coronavirus, and that is what infect cells and the body then recognizes those spike proteins, creates antibodies and prevents the bible spike proteins from infecting the cells. they are different ways of achieving the same goals. host: les from morgan. caller: hello, doctor.

guest: hello. caller: my concern is i have an immune deficiency that is called igg4, and i have to have fusions, and they are, like, $20,000 a fusion. so, my concern is, people that have igg4, mostly are hispanic and colored, and my concern is their life, and they sometimes don't know this is in their system, and it can cause death, because what it does is it causes your lymph nodes to grow and it can cause tumors and stuff like that.

my concern is their safety and mine in getting the shot. i am trying to appeal right now so i can get the shot, but the pills cause a stomach cramp instead of getting the fusion. host: thanks for the cop we will get a response. dr. rothenberg? guest: one of the things everyone realizes is there are a number of unanswered questions here in terms of people who might have an underlying condition, taking certain medicines, or may have had some particular history, and how that might impact the effectiveness of a vaccine, or whether that individual should maybe not take the vaccine. two date, there have been a number of trials that have been set up. i would urge the caller to reach out to their local medical center or university medical center to find out if they are

studying this very question, because that will help not only that individual, but others. it is really important that we learn about some of these populations, and whether they get the full benefit of the vaccine, whether they are at increased risk, whether they need a booster dose, etc.. i think it is important for people to come forward to be able to receive the vaccine, but also for physicians and researchers to take blood samples and see how well an immune response they mount. i think they could learn a lot, but we don't have all the answers yet -- this is an opportunity to contribute to the body of knowledge. host: for anyone interested, the cdc has information, including the ingredients of the pfizer vaccine, a q&a session of what you should look out for, and an overview on the safety issues. the website is cdc.gov.

paul in potomac, maryland. you next pretty good morning. caller: good morning. as a friend and colleague of mace rothenberg both in san antonio and at the national cancer institute, i hold a high regard for both mace, and certainly pfizer. my wife and i were both extremely fortunate to get the pfizer vaccine. i at the v.a. in washington, my wife at johns hopkins and howard county. we have had no ill effects other than to be a sore arm for a couple of days. we have been feeling very good ever since. again, i want to reach out to mace and pfizer for creating a fantastic vaccine in short period of time. i was also at the sabin vaccine institute, and i feel very fortunate for getting the vaccine, mace.

host: thanks for calling on the friends and family line. [laughter] let me move on to maureen joining us from illinois. 2i-4 waiting period -- thank you for waiting period caller: hello, dr. rothenberg. on march 19 i had my first moderna shot, and after two days i was bragging how nothing happened, and after two days i got chills and i started feeling better. the problem is i had a ct scan done last week and it showed lumps under my armpits, and said i should hurry and get a mammogram and maybe have a biopsy combat then i found out that this can possibly cause the lumps under my breasts from the injection -- i don't know which

way to go, should i get the shot on friday, should i not, i am scheduled to get a mammogram, but i don't know what to do. host: maureen, thank you for the called kid good luck to you. guest: marine, thank you for calling. you raise an important issue and one that concerns many individuals. after people receive a vaccination, usually in the upper arm and deltoid muscle, in some individuals that has caused lymph nodes to swell and that is understandable because lymph nodes are where the immune cells track. for most people it is not noticeable. some people have very significant and somewhat uncomfortable lymph nodes under their arm, for individuals that have had a history of rest cancer, it is also a site where breast cancer could recur. that was a great concern to individuals and physicians. so, as this was seen, people

began to recognize it is being seen more and more. the question was what did it represent -- the breast cancer coming back, simply the immune response to the vaccination? thankfully it was due to the immune response to the vaccination, and just waiting a few days, those lymph nodes went down, and then there is nothing under the arm that was of concern. so, what the recommendations are right now is not to have a mammogram soon after the vaccine for that very reason, but to wait a short while, may be weeks, maybe a month -- the delay is not going to endanger a light from getting a follow-up mammogram but will allow an accurate view of what is going on. thank you for raising that important point. host: a quick follow-up -- if you get the pfizer vaccine you need to stay with pfizer, correct, you cannot mix up the

two? guest: that is the recommendation. there have been some cases where people have gotten one and got the other by mistake and companies are following those individuals to see how they respond, how they do, but the recommendation is to stay with the one you started with. host: miguel joining us from maryland. good morning. are you with us? one more time. i think we lost you. i'm sorry. alisha -- andrea is next from connecticut. caller: yes i am so happy to talk to you. i have contacted the cdc, the board of health in our state, the nih and i cannot get this answer. i know everyone is particular and their body is different from everybody else. i got the shot on the 25th. i have autoimmune issues. my doctor has always said to me your glass is half-full, and if you get stressed out, it

overflows, so i had seven autoimmune diseases including severe allergies. i have been on allergy medication for 30 years nonstop. i did stop it because i did read dr. fauci's recommendation not to take any allergy medication. it is difficult when you are on it constantly. i stopped it about five days, i stopped my nsaids, prednisone, six weeks before i had booked the shot. so i got the shot, we drove home, and immediately i could not get out of the car. my whole body was hit, and i cap saying because i have a body that is attacking itself, was this the case that because something foreign came in and my body is already hyperactive and i did not want to blunt the shot with taking anything, i suffered -- i suffered for four days,

finally called my doctor, and said -- she said take nsaids. don't be ridiculous could i wanted to know, because it is not really out there that people shouldn't be taking their allergy medication at least two days before, and then he prednisone's. do you feel that is possibly what happened to me because i have so many autoimmune diseases that my body just went crazy because it is already crazy to begin with? host: andrea, thank you. guest: i'm so sorry to hear you had such difficult he with the vaccination. you raised two issues -- one is that everybody who gets the vaccine, any vaccine should login and register withv -- with vsafe -- a centralized program sponsored by the centers for disease that asks you a very

simple list of questions about side effects and it is only through this way that we will be able to get a much larger experience and insight into the range of side effects that the tens of millions of people who are getting that have gotten the vaccine are experiencing. so, please, everyone who is getting vaccinated, register with the safe. the second question is if i understand the recommendations correctly, it is not to stop any medicines you need to treat an underlying disease. i think the recommendation is don't start taking it to try and prevent a side effect, but if you needed for treating underlying disease, by all means continue taking it because the potential risk of that and suppressing or blunting the immune response is theoretical. the risk of stopping a medicine you are taking to keep in autoimmune disease is very real. so, please be careful.

worked closely with your doctor. hopefully your second shot will be easier than your first. host: sharon is joining us. good morning. you are on the air with dr. rothenberg. caller: yes. early on i checked on the cdc website about any people or categories that would be excluded from taking any of these vaccines, and i found six of them. most of them were autoimmune issues, and i am number six with lucas. now, i take infusions to suppress my immune system. it seems common sense to me and it seems like a huge lack of information coming from anyone having to do with vaccines. host: qip get a response. cdc has this on its own page. your response?

guest: the point you made early on, there is a lack of information -- i would urge university centers to look at that -- there are a number of. we are looking to see how they tolerate the vaccine, how they respond to the vaccine, what can be done to make sure they are able to keep the balance of controlling the immune disease, at the same time they are getting the immune protection from the vaccine. it is a balancing act. the caution right now is that we don't have information on these and it should be a discussion with your individual physician about the risks and potential benefit in your particular situation. host: maria, atlanta, georgia. good morning. caller: good morning, dr., good morning, steve. so glad to hear you -- see you

back. it was what the lady -- what she said on lupus. i am a lupus patient. i don't want to take the vaccine. i am scared to put all of this stuff in my system. i go to the doctor friday and i have to make the decision, but i feel like i don't want all of the stuff mixed up in me with lucas, my seizures, maybe you can convince me, because right now i am scared. host: thank you. guest: yeah, i don't feel i need to convince you of anything, but have you feel you have the information you need to make a decision for your self. i understand you have an immune system that is revved up and not functioning the way it should and is causing some harm, one worries that getting a vaccine

in that situation is going to make things worse, but, again, we don't have clinical trials on this to address this specifically right now but theoretically, this is something that is going to rev up the immune system but in a way that is very different that has been revved up for the immune disease that you have. this is really focused on generating a particular protein that is associated only with the virus. it is not going to be something that will attack normal tissues in your body. it is going to provide you with a level of protection -- what level of protection, we don't know. this is something, if you do participate in clinical trial, we can find out, know more and give more guidance to people in your situation. host: kalamazoo.

quick question. caller: for people not receiving vaccines, at what point will that affect the people that have received their vaccine -- will the virus mutate to the point where we will have to start the process all over thank you, luta response. -- we will get a response. guest: as more people are vaccinated, you shrink the pool of people who are still more susceptible to getting infected by the virus. that gets back to the point of the fact that this is not just an american issue of getting all americans vaccinated, but it is also a global issue because we are so connected. the pools of unvaccinated individuals could easily travel back and forth, so i think it is really important for us to get as many people vaccinated around the world as possible to really

put an end to this pandemic. host: one final point because often, drug companies are competing against each other in this case, there has been a partnership between the pharmaceutical companies in the federal government. moving forward, with us change the way we are seeing these partnerships operate in another potential pandemic? guest: absolutely. a five-point plan was issued soon after the pandemic was called and it really rang out how companies would be willing to share their knowledge, share their resources, share their expertise in order to band together against this pandemic. but it was recognized that this would be shortsighted to make it specific for covid-19 but actually how to use this level of cooperation to be able to be prepared for the next challenge we may face in the future. it is not a question of if, but when. host: the former chief medical officer for pfizer, joining us on this monday from nashville. thank you for being with us. guest: