asked back on street protests in washington dc. we will take your calls and you can join the conversation on facebook and twitter. washington journal is next. ♪ [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2021] host: welcome to the washington journal. if you think the government should do more, dial in at (202) 748-8000. if you disagree, dial in at (202) 748-8001. if you are not sure, call in to (202) 748-8002. text us and tell us what you think about the government solving our nations problems or send us a tweet. you can also go to

facebook.com/c-span and post comments they. take a look at a recent headline. big government is back. in the article they say in a new pull, finding that many americans say that the president should do more to solve the country's problems. others say they are doing too much. on these numbers, they note this is essentially unchanged from the trump era when the majority supported a more active government. they are a departure from the obama era. 57% of those under 35. 66% of seniors.

82% of democrats think that the government should be doing more compared to 60% of independents and 20% of republicans. your thoughts on whether the government should be doing more to solve the nation's problems. here is the president and his joint address to congress. pres. biden: in our first 100 days together, we are vaccinating a nation. we are creating hundreds of thousands of new jobs, delivering results that people can feel in their own minds, opening doors of opportunity. that is the essence of america, democracy in action. we the people. it is time to remember that we the people by the government. you and i, not some distant

capital. not some powerful force that we have no control over. it is we the people. franklin roosevelt reminded us that we do our part. we all do our part. that is all i am asking, that we do our part. if we do that, we will prove that democracy is doable and strong. america will be in the future. the future belongs to america. host: do your share. the numbers are on your screen. if you disagree, we want to hear from you as well. that is our conversation.

what is the role of government? listen to republican leader mitch mcconnell, the minority leader from kentucky, and his reaction to what president biden had to say about his role in government. this >> we heard about the jobs plan at exactly the time that our nation needs a recovery. it would leave american workers with lower wages at the end of the day. we heard about the family plan. instead of empowering all kinds of families with flexibility, this one would subsidize specific paths. washington can call the shots from early childhood through college graduation. there is more. there was hostility toward the

second amendment rights. there was support for a bill for voter id in all 50 states. making the commission a partisan body. legalizing valid harvesting, so -- here is the bottom line. more than a year ago, a top house democrats said it provided a tremendous opportunity to restructure things to fit our vision. while last night president biden said much the same that they intend to turn crisis into opportunity. host: the minority leader from earlier this week. do you agree with him that the government should not do as much as it is doing to solve the

nation's problems? you are on the line. tell us why the president should do more. >> good morning. at the end of the day, what are we talking about with joe biden? president biden and what he is trying to do. government is the only thing that can speak truth to power. we know who they are. they have all the power because at the end of the day, they are the ones that finance the politicians. we working stiffs do not stand a chance. why don't we have universal health care? it is because the plutocrats, the oligarchs do not want that. who speaks truth to power for us

regular people? it is the government. host: what about grassroots efforts to change things like the minimum wage and get the federal government to act? >> grassroots efforts do not work. the only thing that politicians listen to our money and votes. grassroots efforts are good, but they do not have the money. as far as getting the people to vote, it is very difficult, especially nowadays with our divided electorate. half of the electorate report -- supports the republicans and half of the electorate supports the democrats. we saw that with joe biden. especially with the electoral college, you could have a president or a legend president

win the popular vote and lives in the electoral college. host: what about campaigns from the last couple of election cycles and his loyal following? do you think that pushed democrats to talk, to push those issues? >> sure. it has brought up those issues for the democratic party, but why are they not passing? who is in the way? it is joe manchin. unless we get everyone on board, and's -- including senator manchin, these things are not going anywhere. greta: doug, you are not sure. how come? >> in some ways, the government

is doing too much and in some ways, the government is doing too little. the government should not be restricting a woman's right to abortion. the restrictions being placed on that are too much. restrictions being put on a person's right to vote, saying you cannot vote early. you cannot give somebody food or water in the line while they are waiting to vote. that is doing too much. in other ways, the government is not doing enough. every country in the world, every developed country in the world provides health care for their populace, funded by taxes, which end up being a lot less for people in cost and it does

the u.s. system, which is based on insurance companies, which are making a lot of money off the top and cost doctors a lot more to fill in all of these forms. the bernie sanders idea, raising the minimum wage, all the other developed countries have higher minimum wages than we do. like the first caller said, with their funding of the government has encouraged congress to do things to help big business, even though other policies would help the people and population more. you same know.

the government should not do more. how come? >> i called the wrong line. i think the problem is that a lot of republicans do not believe in democracy anymore. they are up in arms about abortions, but i do not see washington working at all. it will have to be one party to move things along. it is a shame. give us your issues that you think the government should play a role in. >> i did not get into that question. i do not know how to answer that. i would like to see the parties work together. thank you. robert on facebook says private

industry does more to solve everyday problems in government. do you agree with robert? michael hoffman says no, no, and no. each state has its own problems and none are exactly the same. each one of our communities is different and a big federal government might fix some problems but not all. also, 83. if the government is not here to solve problems, why have one? you say no? why not? >> good morning. i actually dialed the wrong number like the last color. i'm sorry. -- caller.

i'm sorry. in this time of crisis in the country, i most definitely believe with a couple of the colors -- callers, there has to be a minimum wage, a living wage. people expect people with kids to go and work for nine dollars and $10 an hour? that is ridiculous. greta: why not leave that up to state? if you live in michigan, your cost of living is not as expensive as new york city or somewhere else. why not leave it up to state? >> i can tell you why. in michigan, we have governor whitmer, a democrat, but the

congress is controlled by republicans. the republicans do not want to do anything but derail everything that this woman tries to do. she is all for a minimum wage hike, but republicans are wanting to pay people seven dollars an hour while they are in the back making all kinds of money. they do not know what it is like to go without a meal or a check. they cannot relate to the normal people working, who have lost everything. we need universal health care. this country, most definitely can do that. we are right on the border with canada. everybody will say, you cannot use canada as an example. yes, you can. if we adopted another system or another way of doing things,

this country can do anything that it wants. it can enact health care for everybody. greta: what do you do for a living? >> i am a welder. greta: do you make more than the minimum wage? >> i do. greta: are you in a union? >> no. but i might get into the union soon. where i work, it is not unionized. greta: how much do you pay? can you estimate annually how much you have to pay for your health care? >> actually -- if i looked at everything, i would say i probably pay anywhere from $100 to $200 for health care, but i have great health care.

i am very fortunate. another thing is, michigan just allowed for people to get a two year associate degree. there were over 40,000 people who signed up for the plan, which i think is excellent. especially with the infrastructure bill that will get past. the gentleman from pennsylvania said, joe manchin might stand in the way of this. he has been a politician for a while. he knows what needs to be done in this country. the infrastructure bill? a lot of americans support this. greta: do you support the price tag?

the price tag that they democrats want to spend? >> absolutely. if we look at other developing countries, especially in china, you can go and see some of the infrastructure that they have in this country and then look at the u.s. we look like we are in the stone age. the u.s. -- greta: the u.s. is behind countries like china when it comes to infrastructure. >> absolutely. we need to compete in the 21st century and still have a working class. i have friends who are union workers and they do good.

they are all excited about the infrastructure bill because it is endless work. greta: candace, good morning. >> i agree with the president, that things that made the country manuel should be considered infrastructure. we had to take care of people. much more taxes than corporations do. so that they can take care of these problems, so that they can handle the social network. so that the minimum wage can be addressed. so that people can live well. ask people in european countries that are socialized -- everyone is so against socialization but

social security is the biggest socialized piece that we have. i do not think that anyone -- i know that many republicans and conservatives do not want to give up social security. wealthy people collect their social security. socialized medicine is so that people can be taken care of. without it, the nation does not run. i live in the supposedly most multistate in the nation and one that pays one of the highest tax rates, but still i pay more to the federal government than i do to my state government. greta: the president's plan for solving the nation's infrastructure problems has a price tag around $2.2 trillion.

much of it for bridges, roads and other transportation. he is wanting to spend on job-training, as well as $300 billion on the drinking water infrastructure, more broadband and our electrical grades. 300 billion to build and retrofit affordable housing. do you think this is the role for government? spending this much to improve our nation's infrastructure? what other problems do you think the government should be solving? >> more should be done by the states. i have been studying the new

deal for months now. one of the first things people need to understand is unemployment was averaged 12% to 14% during the entire new deal up until 1940. in 1937, there was a recession. unemployment went up to 20.5% for almost two years. it coincided with the beginning of the year. he was unhappy that some of the major programs were ruled unconstitutional the prior couple of years. the new deal -- when fdr was elected, he van on a platform of

reducing government spending by 25% and balancing the budget. if you look at the socialist program -- this is not made up stuff. he got 23 million votes for his platform to reduce spending and balance the budget. he followed, point by point, the socialist program. it is unbelievable. what they are doing now is the same thing that roosevelt did, but on steroids. is a multiple. people do not understand it is taking money out of the free markets, where individuals make decisions. one of the things i have been

reading about the wealth of nations, jon stewart on liberty. i am 70 years old and i thought, they are writing about philosophy from a viewpoint that cannot be valid. not to now. greta: what prompted you to start reading and looking at fdr? >> i had not focused on the depression and the new deal until the last few months because of the things that are going on. all the historical things i had been reading. it is such a big part of our history. i took a departure from going to read about the president's in order, reading about all these

types of things. i stopped to spend several months reading about these titans of industry and what was involved in all of that. how that played into the history of the u.s. and the u.s.'s role. until after world war i, we were a secondary power. he became the world's banking giant after world war i. greta: thank you for calling in to share your perspective on this. what is the government responsible for is usually the question when a question like this pops up. justin and kelsey vale, california. you are not sure. >> only because i am not sure where the focus is going to be.

we have homeless people coexisting with billionaires and abysmal reeducation rates. we are dealing with the longest war we have ever dealt with. i am concerned about what the government is doing and where it will be focused. i think the focus should be on our people. i know many people who were victims of the opioid crisis and the rising prices of housing. it is one thing after another. we need to focus on making the quality of life better, otherwise it is not worth being an american anymore. greta: how old are you? >> i am 30 years old. greta: what do you do for a living? >> i make sodium. greta: do you make good money? >> i am doing ok for myself but

not enough to raise a family. i live in an apartment and i have roommates. greta: listen to what chuck schumer had to say on the senate floor this week about the role of government and president biden's address to congress. >> the story of the first 100 days is about shots going into arms, text going into pocket, life getting back to normal and the economy picking up a lot of steam. after one of the most difficult years in history, we have made extraordinary progress. we cannot rest. we have a lot more to do. we want to keep this country going at a strong rate of growth , creating new jobs, making america healthier.

president biden proposed common sense investments and policy that will provide a pathway to success for working people and for america as a whole. the president's focus on jobs and helping families and workers succeed was very much welcomed. america is breathing a sigh of relief to see joe biden in that chair and not the previous president who all too often, even in those speeches, he appealed to the worst instincts of people. president biden's plan will help to restore that once an eight american optimism that has been shaken for the last four years. greta: do you agree with him that the government needs to do more to solve our problems?

if so, dial in at (202) 748-8000 . if you disagree, call in at (202) 748-8001. and if you are not sure, call in at (202) 748-8002. you can also send us a tweet. or you can go to facebook.com/c-span. there are problems only the government can solve. whether it is disaster relief or climate change. businesses are concerned about shareholder value, not concerned about the welfare of the people. that is the role of the government. george in kansas, what do you say? >> how are you? greta: i am doing well. you? >> i am doing well. i am a retired soldier and i am

very conservative. i do believe that the government has a very important role to play, unfortunately i think our government is broken, broken so badly that it has a very hard time doing its job. the job is outlined in the constitution, but it cannot do them. what i would like to see the government be able to do is to act, and act in the best interest of the american people them instead of the best interest of the people sitting in the building behind you. greta: what are those activities that the government should be doing? >> obviously government is responsible for government is responsible for enforcing our borders. well, i do not know anyone who agrees that they are enforcing the southern border properly. maybe there are some who believe

that. i do not. that is a good example. i think there are other things the government should be doing but are not doing very well. for example, the business of making america energy independent. i think we are well on the road to doing that, but, when we cancel the pipeline and make some of the other decisions that we have made about energy and focus on doing things that are impractical or at least at this time are impractical, i think government ought to do better at that, but they do not. that is why the gas here in my area now costs me more than a dollar more a gallon than it did on election day. i think a government could do

better. government is like a tool bag. when i have a job around the house that needs to be done, i get a tool out of my tool bag and use it. if that tool is broken, then i have to look for another tool in my tool bag. if all the tools are broken, which is the way i view the federal government right now, then i cannot get that job done. i appreciate you taking my call. sandy sends us a tweet to say i believe the government has to do more. for example, six states have no requirements for carbon monoxide detectors and homes. one of them is texas. when they had the massive power outages, people were lighting girls in their home. take a look at president biden's first 100 days compared actions taken by previous presidents. this is from nbc.

the executive orders signed by president biden the first 100 days come in at 42 compared to 30 for president trump, 19 for president obama, and 11 under president george w. bush. pieces of legislation signed of the first hundred days, president trump leads with 29 pieces of legislation. president biden, 11. president obama, 14. president george w. bush, seven. solo formal news conferences, president biden has held one am a same as president trump in the first 100 days. president obama held six while bush held two and president clinton held four. joint news conferences, president biden with one, president trump with eight. president bush, three. should the government do more to solve our nation's problems? in athens, georgia, good morning

to you. you are not sure. caller: i am not sure. first of all, how much do i love c-span? host: i do not know. how much? caller: i love c-span. the guy from texas, he is doing what we need to have done from the -- for the american people. you will see the value in being an american. georgia, you are right. this conservatism that made america what it is is no longer there. we are not educating ourselves. if we focus on educating ourselves and learning the history of the united states and how it is the light guiding a whole planet, we do not have to be concerned about what the government is doing. for the people, by the people. i have not done all i could do, but i am trying now to be better

, to be a better american, trying to make america great. trying to make the compassion we deserve and desire a reality. people come here in droves because they know the rule of law, the opportunities here. we have to do better as people, educate ourselves. i will talk to you in 30 days. host: dave, you are a no on this question. caller: absolutely. listening to the stuff you said at the beginning of the program and some of your first few callers, it seems to me there is a national stockholm syndrome in terms of the government. we are basically asking for more abuse. i do not understand how anyone with a rational mind could be thinking you need more government at this point.

all you see around you is largess. i suppose it is like a frog in the boiling water. it is hard to tell after a while. it has been a long time of mismanagement. your prior caller said simple things like priorities like the border. every country in the planet has a border policy and enforces it, but we cannot seem to do that. it seems to be such a conflicted issue. these people who have mismanaged this basic, fundamental aspect of a nation, they are asking for more. they want the federal government to tell you how to put carbon monoxide meters in your house. this is a nanny state gone awry. there is no -- host: what do you do for a living and where do you want to see the government out of your life? caller: i would say, what i do

is i am an independent consultant. i work independently. i definitely organize my life or having minimum impact with any form of control, so i have a flexible, free existence. aside from that, you can see politics is seeping into every nook and cranny of this culture. it is not just a political process. this is affecting households all over the country. everybody is divided over absurd propaganda issues. that is the effect of your federal government. we are not talking about local issues. look on much time is spent simply talking about these politicians at the federal level. that was not the plan for this republic. these are political celebrities

when -- hanging on every word. host: give me names. who are you talking about? caller: i think it is pretty hard to ignore. i guarantee if you polled any american, they can easily tell you the federal echelon of political structure but they could not tell you who runs the town because their brain is literally focused on this upper part of the political spectrum. it is wrong all around. host: let me go to another call. edward in new york. what do you want the government to do? caller: i want the government to succeed. i am 77 years old. this country was a country that we could do things. we were not afraid. i do not think we need to be

afraid now. we have a crumley infrastructure . roads, bridges -- crumbling infrastructure. roads, bridges. it is time to upgrade. we do not need to be afraid of spending, borrowing, and getting our country up-to-date. we can do it. the government has a part to play. that is my thoughts. host: mike is not sure in new york. caller: i am not sure about one big thing. i am for the tax increases, but we are not seeing details on any of this. it is like writing a blank check. i would like to see details. i am sure over the years amenities like amtrak, the infrastructure, it is crumbling. the gop answer to that is to

privatize it, which is b.s. the same thing with our water systems. they just want to sell them to private entities and let them make profits, which has been a disaster around the world. i am for spending money. raise taxes on the rich. people like jeff bezos, he can afford to pay his share for one. i am not singling him out, but -- he has been a blessing in this covid-19 virus epidemic. if it was not for that, a lot of america would not be getting stuff to their house, everything from medicine to whatever they have needed. look what trump did to the mail system. host: you are for spending money. you want more details. are you for spending money on this, the american families plan? 800 billion dollars to permanent lee extend the child tax credit, the earned income tax credit,

child and dependent care credit, and the affordable care act premium credit. that will cost $800 billion. 200 when he $5 billion for low and middle income families. he wants to have universal preschool at a cost of 200 billion dollars and two years of free community college, which will cost or hundred $9 billion. are you for spending -- $109 billion. are you for spending on those initiatives? caller: let's take one thing at a time. education should not be free. help people out, but what about the cost of education at the upper levels? the amount of money they are charging people to go to college is insane. i cannot spend -- figure out for the life of me where they get these numbers from. colleges like harvard, they could have free college just on

their endowments forever. why are they charging this crazy amount of money? and all the way down the line. i am not going to get into what professors make and everybody else makes, but the amount of money people are paying for stuff today is whatever they will bear. the only reason housing is so high is because interest rates are so low so everybody takes advantage of it. they can afford a bigger payment. we are charging more. it is highway robbery all along the way. i will say one thing. one thing has been in front of our face for years. if you want to find out what is wrong with america, look at lobbying. there is the number one problem we have in america. if people have to disclose where money is coming from, 100% of it every day day by day, it is going to be a different world. all the gop stands for in front

of our face, they are conservative. forget what that meant in the past. conservative now means you can serve -- conserve wealth for the wealthy. host: nbc's headline recently, big government is back. the trump influenced -- candy trump influence gop stop it? -- can the trump influenced gop stop it? listen to his reaction and what he wants to do with government. [video clip] >> president biden clearly believes that government made america great. and only government can keep us great. senator scott, with whom i agree, believes the president could not be more wrong. what made america great and what will ensure our future -- ordinary people doing extraordinary things. that is the difference today

between them a kratz and republicans. democrats put their faith in government. republicans put their faith in people. i was disappointed in president biden's speech. it is clear to me that he could have done his speech in about 30 seconds. he could have walked up and said, i am president biden. thank you for watching. here's my message. i want all of you to send every bit of your money and freedom to washington. thank you for watching. that is just philosophy. i do not agree with that. host: john kennedy from louisiana. now it is your turn to tell him and other decision-makers in washington what you think the role of government should be. should it be more active? gordon, kansas city, kansas, you say no.

we are listening. you say no you do not think the government should be more active. caller: i think this new so-called president is doing everything he can as revenge against the republicans. you can look down the pipeline that he canceled. it runs through red states. he is doing everything for revenge against president trump. i would like to remind these people from new york and places like that that are saying tax and spend and spend that, if we did not have to pay 1800 billion dollars -- eight hundred billion dollars in interest each year, they might work at mcdonald's and make $15 an hour. they are crazy. host: ellen texts us to say in a free society government at all

levels should not be all things to all people. david, you say yes. caller: really there is nothing else out there. i am an investor. put money into your house to keep it up or else got no house. i have lived here for 62 years. i look around the highways, the infrastructure. it all needs to be replaced. we need to put money into these things. we need to help our society. i went through the recession. i lived on 150 dollars a week for three years. i worked in architecture. we could solve that problem if we started infrastructure than. but we did not. people were in the way. too much money is spent. you have to put money in to money out. host: george, good morning.

has it been 30 days? caller: yes. i called on march 31. host: good to hear you again. you say not sure. caller: as always, i hope you guys get some animal rights. if you're a mother, happy mother's day. host: thank you, george. caller: i think the government should somehow encourage, incentivize corporations to get them involved in societal problems. i do not know how to do that. i do not know how to incentivize corporations to do that. maybe someone out there with a greater mind can do that. i also think government -- every

time government does not solve one of their problems, society's problems, they should be penalized, primarily lifetime politicians penalized monetarily . i think warren buffett said the easiest way to balance the budget is not pay anybody in congress until it is done. money is what motivates most people. that might be a good idea. host: thank you for watching and calling in. arnie in florida, we will go to you next. just listen and talk through your phone. you are going to be distracted by the television, so mute it. all right. i am going to move on.

mike, rockford illinois. caller: first, it was tremendous . i believe you were on air six hours. you should be given an award for what you did. the government, what they should be doing, i believe, is, like this infrastructure, we know it is going to happen. they are going to build power stations might rebuild roads, and privatize it, just like they did with nuclear plants. we were supposed to have free energy after we put up these nuclear plants and they sold them to electric companies. this public-private partnership is the problem. it is going to be the four letter word for years to come.

they are going to sell our highways for a thin coat of asphalt and sensors to china. they are going to sell our ports. it sounds like china is doing it to many countries. they are giving infrastructure money and buying ports. that is one of the main problems . the senators we elect to represent us seem to go to washington to represent their party, their agenda. that is the big problem. they are not representing us once they go to washington. they are representing the agenda. host: tim, it is your turn. caller: good morning, greta. how are you? host: i am doing well. caller: all we have to do is look to the preamble of the constitution to see what government should be doing. promoting the general welfare.

if you look at the history of the world war ii g.i. bill, which was a generous g.i. bill, better than the vietnam bill that i went to school on, it paid six dollars for every dollar invested. educated people make much more and pay more in taxes than people who are not educated. host: tim scott and north carolina. ronnie says no. caller: i think the government should stop giving us money because we cannot keep workers at our jobs and it is causing a big strain on all -- everybody at work. i think they should stop giving us money and let everybody start going back to work.

host: what do you do for a living? caller: i work at -- and the toyota industry, motor manufacturing. automobile industry. host: have you been able to report to work or were you shut down at times due to the pandemic? caller: we were shut down whenever -- at the beginning of all this, but it did not happen for very long. i have worked other places too and the plastic industry and will -- it was not shut down long either. i think i would have been fine without a handout this whole time. host: you received unemployment for how long? caller: unemployment for 30 days, but then i would have been fine with just that. i did not need stimulus checks. host: i see.

caller: i think we would have been fine if we all just got our masks on. host: what did you do with those stimulus checks? caller: well, it just flowed off into the regular -- i still got some of all the money. i have not spent it all on anything or nothing. it is just going on bills, like regular paychecks. host: davis, ohio. you are not sure? caller: i think it is a complex issue so i cannot be completely sure. i am calling in because i have looked at this infrastructure. people think of infrastructure, i hear these callers going bridges and roads.

that is 115 billion dollars, about 5%. you could say the broadband part and building out these electric vehicle stations and other things, you can get that number closer to $600 billion. calling this an infrastructure bill is a misnomer and deception. the thing about solutions is there is trade off. there is no solution to social problems or other kinds of government problems, social problems we have. there are trade-offs. talking about who is paying for this, they do not want to pay. we will print money and borrow. there are a lot of things involved that are not being discussed. host: philip on facebook says government is the cause of problems. keep dialing in this morning.

should the government do more to solve problems? if you say yes, (202) 748-8000. if you say no, (202) 748-8001 . if you are not sure, (202) 748-8002. suzanne, what do you want to see the government do? caller: thank you for taking my call. i believe that, until there is true equity and justice in america, the government needs to correct mistakes we have made throughout our history. there are many, but one i was -- still feel pretty passionate about is the g.i. bill. my father was in the service for 30 years, retired, went to

college full time on the g.i. bill. his black, retired friends, they did not get the same benefit. because my dad got to go to college, i ended up going to college. but his peers' kids did not have the same benefit. until our country corrects the mistakes we have made from jim crow laws -- i live in south carolina. our governor has not accepted medicaid expansion. until the system is fair for all americans, the government needs to correct its mistakes. thank you. host: here is a facebook post. to standardize things more, like voting. it can be done with enough left over for states rights. government problem-solving in this way needs new terminology.

we need standards as other countries do. we need practical standards. ray and north carolina. -- in north carolina. caller: i have a question nobody is asking. when we have these people come to the united states, they get food stamps, benefits from the government but they send them out the country to support their country. the money is not spent in america. you would not have all these problems if the money was not sent out of this country. it would be pushed back into infrastructure. do you understand? host: kelly in bluefield, west virginia. how come you are not sure? caller: i think we have been sold out by our politicians, democrats and republicans, even biden saying buy america. go to mall march, -- walmart,

which produces so much everything, and try to buy american. you cannot find it anywhere. so i just -- not sure the government will ever do anything to solve the problems in america. guest: have you lived in west virginia your whole life? caller: my whole life. host: what do you do? caller: i am retired now. i worked for a caterpillar dealership. host: when did you rely on government in your life? caller: well, i guess i retired a couple years ago and went on social security. i did have a 401(k), which i cannot use now. the money is there, but if i start taking it out they are going to tax me so bad it is

pitiful. host: when can you start taking it out? caller: i know they have this minimum withdrawal you have to take every year and then they tax that. the money is there, but i did save money. i am not having any problems now, but -- host: are you on medicare? caller: no, i am a veteran. i am on the veterans' insurance plan. i would like to buy american, but you cannot find it anywhere. host: when did you serve? caller: i was in vietnam from 1969 to 1971. host: you might be interested in our last hour of today's washington journal.

we are going to focus on a joint conversation with american history tv on c-span3. you're going to talk about mayday -- we are going to talk about mayday protests in may of 1971. caller: thank you. host: dana in flint, michigan, you are a yes. caller: yes. i'm interested in having cool age children -- school age children and the community to be educated on civics to help further guide us from propaganda from foreign companies or foreign entities that mean us harm. also, super foods for our brain. and to study employees, military employees, who take bribes from foreign entities to distract us

about the ufo situation. i do not believe there are martians on board, so the allege and interest in foreign entities to get them to believe that. host: phil, you say no. caller: i do say no. i do like the idea of the previous caller because it might be useful to determine what the word government actually means. government is that entity that has a monopoly on violence. the constitution provides two promises to the american citizen. premise number one, we will protect the american citizen from foreign aggressions. number two, protect the american citizen from their neighbor. they do that with police and the court of law. if the government is just this, it would be so much better off.

every problem that the american citizen has, whether real or imagined could best be addressed through the free market system. thanks. host: are you still there? caller: yeah. host: what do you do for a living? caller: i worked as a consultant with computer science, things like that. most of my working life i was a bartender. i also was in the marine corps as well. i have read hobbes and locke and montague. the big heavy hitters as far as what government is and what it should be doing. it answers all the big questions that you had. host: what do you like about main philosophy, their approach to government? caller: well, the previous government that we had was lepage and he was a pretty

hard-core republican as far as in unnecessary programs. we have janet mills now and she is a liberal. and i am opposed relate to that sort of silence, spending money that you don't have. although i am a proud mainr. the thing about mainer that makes me the proudest as the independent street politicians. host: would you put senator susan collins that category? caller: susan collins is a republican but she also provides a moderate voice. i do believe that compromises -- there really can't be one party or the other party wouldn't get much done. the two party system needs to be overhauled as well. there are things that can be done within the bounds of the constitution.

the government doesn't make any money. in order for it to spend any money, they first pick someone's pocket. the government's only power, every millimeter of power the government has comes out of the end of the barrel of a gun. if you don't understand that, you are naive. the less they do, the better off everyone is going to be. you don't need to go to them with problems. the real role of the government is to keep your neighbors from killing you. it is as simple as that to describe it. host: we are going to return to the conversation later on in washington journal. up next, we are going to talk with stephen, the founder of the reload. we will discuss his new publication that focuses on firearms reporting and analysis. and like i said, later on we are going to focus on the mayday

1971 anti-vietnam war protest. we will talk with lawrence roberts who has written about those events here on the washington journal and our friends from american history tv on c-span3 will join us for that conversation this morning. you are looking at a live shot on the washington all of the vietnam memorial. we will be right back. ♪ announcer: monday night on the communicators, brookings institution vice president darrell west discusses his book turning point: policymakingera in the era of artificial intelligence. >> is not just one revolution taking place. it is 10 or 20 or 30 things

taking place simultaneously. in every sector. in domestic policy applications as well as national defense. there is a long chapter on national defense and military applications of ai. i think than is the unusual aspect of this period. and what makes it difficult to deal with, there is just so much change taking place on a widespread scale in a very short time and we are all struggling to deal with it. announcer: darrell west, monday night on the communicators on c-span 2. ♪

announcer: washington journal continues. we are host: turning our attention to gun policy and media coverage. joining us is the founder of the reload. what is the reload? guest: the reload is my new publication that focuses on serious firearms journalism as well as expert analysis. i watched just about a week ago -- i launched just about a week ago, so it has been a pretty exciting last week. it is focused on firearms journalism. host: why did you start it? guest: i've been doing firearms reporting for almost a decade now.

i just think there's a real opportunity for more serious approach to hard news focus on firearms. there is a lot of misinformation that gets spread out there and in addition to that, there is a lot of hot takes, i guess you could say, when it comes to guns, and that is most of what we have in media when you are dealing with gun reporting or gun writing at all. i just think there is an opportunity for something different. host: do you have an angle to your coverage? guest: i tried to just present a fax-first approach using my expertise and experience covering firearms and owning them and building them and training people in the safe use of them. i tried to take that and inform

my reporting on it so that it is accurate and relevant. host: how are you funded? guest: it is actually an independent publication that is funded entirely by readers. people can subscribe for a membership if they believe in what i'm trying to do and they want more content. they buy a membership right now and that is how it is funded. there is no corporate backing or funding from any of the gun groups or anything like that. host: what reaction have you received from the gun groups on both sides? the nra or the anti-gun violence groups on the other? guest: we've actually had subscribers from all different gun groups as far as the nra or giffords or second amendment foundation. i think it has been well-received so far, people are

coming from not just the gun groups, but also from the hill, the senate and the house to subscribe to this new publication, looking for, i think, a serious approach to this topic. host: let's talk about gun policy. the president signing executive actions, some of them would close regulatory loopholes to stop proliferation of guns, clarify statutory restrictions and stabilizing prices and polished model legislation for states. $1 billion in grant programs to communities to prevent gun violence and it requires justice department to issue an annual report on firearms trafficking. what impact, if any, will these have on gun violence, preventing it? guest: some of those are less controversial like the violence interrupting program funding or

the gun trafficking reports. but there are significant controversies around the first two you mentioned, where the president plans to essentially try to ban so-called ghost guns, which are basically unfinished firearms parts that are sold not as firearms, and so they are not regulated in the same way, and then the pistol brace issue as well could impact millions of americans who over the last decade or so, pistol brace is especially have become extremely popular in america and you have upwards of 40 million of these devices already legally owned in the country according to a recent report from the congressional research centers. and so depending on how the regulation actually plays out,

that could have a very large effect on gun ownership. these people who own these devices, basically they consider some of these to be short barrel rifles, which have an extra degree of regulation and potentially having one of those unregistered could make you a felon. so if they change the definition of what, which of these braces is a regular firearm and which is a short barrel rifle under the law, that could turn a lot of people into felons, potentially. we haven't seen the final draft of that yet. a similar situation with ghost guns, or unfinished receivers, where i was actually able to obtain a draft and publish it last week and it was very

significant broaden the atf's power in regulating what is and isn't a firearm to begin with. it could have an impact on how those devices are sold in similarly, whether or not possessing an unfinished firearms receiver, the part that the rest of the gun is built around, essentially, whether that is illegal or not. it could have a very sizable impact if there's two executive actions. host: let me invite our viewers to join in on this conversation. we want to hear from you what you support and what you oppose from legislation. this debate is happening in washington, we want to know your thoughts. democrats, (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001. (202) 748-8002 independents. you can also text with your

first name, city and state. you can do so at (202) 748-8003. let's listen to president biden from his joint address to congress this past week and what he said he wants congress to do on gun control. biden: i will do everything in my power to protect the american people, but it is time for congress to act as well. [applause] biden: look. [applause] biden: i don't want to become confrontational, we need more senate republicans to join the overall majority of democrat colleagues in closing loopholes acquired and background check purchases of guns. we need a ban on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. don't tell me it can't be done. we did it before, and work. talk to most responsible gun

owners and hunters. there is no possible justification for having 100 rounds and a weapon. -- in a weapon. what, do you think deer wear kevlar vests? there are too many people today who are able to buy a gun who should not be able to buy a gun. these kinds of reforms have overwhelming support from the american people including many gun owners. the country supports reform and congress should act. it shouldn't be a red or blue issue. and no amendment to the constitution is absolute. host: where does the debate stand, and possible action on the items that the president was calling for? guest: a lot of what the president wants and has publicly called for is just not realistic right now with the makeup of congress, especially in the senate. i know he was complaining about republicans, obviously democrats

control the senate, they passed a universal background check bill through the house, but it is one that even moderate senate democrats don't support, and have publicly said they don't support. right now, the senate is working on a compromise package, i guess, for the universal background check bill which would get more than 50 votes on it. of course, it doesn't seem likely that they are going to find a compromise on background checks at this point. and so it's unlikely that they are going to pass in this congress, any sort of significant gun control bill. host: as you noted, moderate democrats are opposed and interestingly enough, the cameraman took a cutaway shot while the president was making those remarks calling for that action to senator joe manchin,

the democrat of west virginia. what about his role? guest: absolutely. he plays a key role just like in every legislation right now in the senate and he is supposed to hr-8 which is the background check bill because it expands not just the private sales, but also to any transfer of guns outside of certain exceptions like between family members or for hunting. it is actually much broader than the bill that he and pat toomey had proposed back in 2013. looking through the senate makeup now, it is hard to see how we've been getting to 54 votes on even a manchin-toomey style compromise at this point. with the assault weapons ban at the president mentioned in his speech, that's not even likely

to pass the house at this point. they didn't pass an assault weapons ban last session and the divide in the house is even tighter this time around. and also you tend to see controversial legislation make it through when it has more of a likelihood of becoming a law. it is unlikely that you're going to see an assault weapons ban at the federal level even past the house at this point, let alone the senate. host: massachusetts, democratic caller. caller: hi. fantastic, unbelievable morning. longtime caller. i want to say that we know that the country is divided into people who own guns and people who would never dream of owning guns and i'm in the latter category. something that could be added to washington journal on a regular basis, bringing us visual-based

information woven into the communication. for example, i asked her to go to google and pull up a picture of whatever the hell a hand braces. you said 40 million of these exist, then he spoke about the technology of the guns and actually changing the whole basis of what qualifies as a gun. so bring us pictures while he is talking of what these parts are and how they work, because then we can really understand and communicate with each other. sir, you are doing an excellent job with words, i just want them to help you out with some images. the other thing is on a bigger point, there is a man named edward tufte, he came from yale, and he wrote about the visual display of information. he purchased a set of three coffee table books. he may be dead right now, but he must have menses. -- mentees.

when i worked at the library of congress, they sent me to a one-day seminar that he did, educating the world on this, and it is absolutely brilliant. if nothing else, do a segment on his book and his work because let's use our visual cortex. host: you made your point. any thoughts? guest: obviously pictures are always helpful but i think i could try to explain a bit more about what is the difference between a pistol brace and a normal stock. the way the law works, the difference between a pistol or a handgun and a rifle doesn't have to do with the design of the gun, necessarily, or the caliber of round that it fires. it more has to do with how it is intended to be used or designed to be used. you can have an ar-15-style

firearm that is actually classified as a pistol because it is designed not to be pressed against your shoulder while firing. a pistol brace is something that is designed to wrap around the shooters forearm to provide support while shooting one-handed and not designed to be pressed against the shoulder like a traditional stock of a rifle. that is where the controversy over these devices comes in, because it is sort of somewhat a subjective area of law, which turns something that, if it had a normal stock on it, would be a short barrel rifle and would require registration with the atf and a tax stamp and it would be a felony to own one without registration into something that is a normal firearm that you

would buy just like you would a handgun in most states and doesn't require that extra federal regulation. so that's where the controversy comes in here. a pistol brace is designed to strap to the shooter's forearm and help them brace while they are shooting, whereas a stockist designed to press against the shoulder and so that is the key distinction. host: georgia, democratic caller. caller: good morning. listen, i don't understand, why would people be opposed to getting rid of these braces? what is the problem with that? if you don't want to be a felon, throw the brace away. on the other issue of guns, why shouldn't people by manufactured guns through legal gun sellers?

i don't understand. i don't get it. guest: the firearms community, often people don't like to be told to turn in their guns. this is sort of a running thing, they don't see any reason why this brace makes the gun more dangerous or less dangerous, they don't believe that it would have an impact on crimes, necessarily, and they don't want to be felons for owning something that they bought legally, perhaps years ago. on the second point, and most people do buy guns through the traditional channels, fully manufactured firearms, they go through the background check process, that is how most guns are sold, homemade firearms have been a staple of american

society since even for the founding. it is not unusual thing for someone to be able to build their own weapons. even with this new regulation that the president wants, it wouldn't outlaw the building of your own guns at home. it would try to go after the sales of the needed base components. it would make it more difficult to obtain the base parts to build guns at home, but it would not technically outlaw them. i think that is something that has been part of american tradition for really since the country has existed. host: mary in auburn, new york, independent. caller: hello, i have a couple of comments. my first one is it just came

over the news that 997 people had been shot in chicago just this year. and we know that they are not all legal guns. my second question is when you fill out a background application, what would happen to you if you lie on that application? like you say you are not drug addicted. and i would appreciate your answer and thank you very much. guest: sure, certainly. if you lie on the background check for form 4473 when you go to purchase a gun, that is a federal felony. and also a state felony as well. there is some concern around how often it is prosecuted, especially at the federal level. there is some talk about that on the hill, as something that is potentially compromised

legislation. the term that gets thrown around washington is lie and try which is where someone who is either a convicted felon or has a domestic violence misdemeanor conviction, or somebody who is not legally allowed to own guns goes to a gun store, fills out the background check, lies on the part that disqualifies them, and then i guess should try and see if they will make it through the system anyway, and if they get caught, that technically is a felony. it is an outline on a form, and often times it goes on prosecuted, especially at the federal level. that is an area where you might see some bipartisan agreement on trying to come up with a solution. that could be part of the compromise bill in congress. host: texas, a question for you.

why do some receivers have serial numbers and some don't? what is the difference? guest: the difference is the key to the so-called ghost guns. the complaint from president biden and the atf is that if you do sell an unfinished receiver, you don't have to serialize it. there is some point basically that you have to decide when a block of metal goes from just being a block of metal to being a finished firearm, it is subject to all the regulations that come along with that, including engraving a serial number on it if you want to sell it to another person. the way it works right now, there is a colloquial term of 80% lower is where the idea is that it is 80% finished.

it is not acceptable, but that is the marketing term when people use for these sorts of unfinished vices where it is filled out to a certain point but it doesn't have key parts of the gun finished, and so you can sell it as not a firearm, basically, and it is not regulated as a firearm. and then that person would have to take it and finish the process, cutting out the metal parts on their own at home and when you build your own firearm, if you don't intend to sell it to other people as part of the commercial enterprise, you don't need to serialize that under the law. and so that's where it is sort of a gray area. what constitutes a finished firearm? right now, the atf has a pretty decent guideline where essentially if you can't take

apart and build it into a working firearm, then it is not a finished receiver. if you need to do substantial work to finish the firearm on your own, with machinery or even drill presses in some cases, then it is not a firearm. if you can take that part and build it into a finished gone without doing significant modifications, then it is a firearm. that is when you have to serialize it, the sales are all regulated. what the president wants to do essentially, what the atf wants to do is broaden that definition out to go much further back in the practice of making the gun. and making those unfinished parts in order to subject the whole process to the normal

licensing requirements of finished parts. host: how prevalent are these ghost guns? guest: it is hard to know. that is one of the atf's points. because these aren't serialized, you can't trace then, you can't know how many there are. in the draft regulation that i published, they gave some estimates for how many firearms, how many of these on serialized firearms show up in crimes and according to their numbers, it has been increasing overall for several years. it has been about 8000. they said that these kinds of firearms have shown up in about

300 homicides or attempted homicides. details on whether the firearms were used in those situations or if they were just at the scene. it is not exactly clear. part of that is intentional. some people don't want the government to have a record of their firearm, and that can be normal law-abiding people who feel that way, is a philosophical commitment, they don't believe the government should be able to track american public's gun ownership. that is part of why some people would want to build the sorts of firearms as well. host: let's go to florida, our republican line. caller: the previous caller mentioned about background checks. the other thing president biden mentioned that people who

legally tried to purchase a firearm shouldn't be punished. my question is, how about a hunter who had previous drug arrests, and he purchases a gun and to my knowledge, nothing happened to him. more murders, especially in chicago and other places, are done by handguns. the press -- host: we are running out of time, so i will have stephen respond to that. guest: as far as hunter biden goes, he did purchase a gun, i believe it was 2018. there was some discussion over whether or not he could legally do that at the time, because he had a well-documented history of drug use. you are not allowed to own guns

or purchase guns, that is one of the questions on the background check, whether or not you are a user of illegal drugs. there may have been some -- there is an open question as to whether or not he broke that law . those cases tend to be very difficult to prove, because the court standard from the experts i spoke to at the time, the court standard is essentially that you have to be an active user of drugs and it has to have been over a long period of time to establish that you were addicted to them as part of the standard in federal law, so it is difficult to prove those kinds of cases. obviously in hunter's case, he has been a republic about his drug use but he says that he stopped just before this time when he would have bought the gun. there is obviously some question

about that, but that is why he was not arrested. in that case, you would have to prove he was using drugs when he purchased the gun, essentially in that period of time. if he had taken a short period of rescued from his addiction and -- of wrist beauty -- of respite from his addiction, he would be eligible to buy guns again. additionally, the point about handguns versus -- is irrelevant one in the sense that the caller is right that handguns are by far the most common firearms used in homicides, according to the fbi, as a pain -- as compared to ar-15's which are basically a subset of rifles that get a lot of attention, because they are at the center

of a political debate over the -- over whether they should be banned again, but they are not commonly used in crime. they are part of the rifle category in the fbi numbers, which was about 400 to 500 murders a year, which is far less than the 10,000 or so handguns and even less than knives or blunt objects or fists , according to fbi data. host: you can follow the gun policy debate if you go to thereload.com. stephen gotowski is the founder. coming up next, we will return to our question to all of you, should the government do more to solve the nation's problems? there are the phone lines on your screen. start dialing in now. after that, we will go to our last hour to talk about mayday,

1971, anti-vietnam protests. lawrence roberts was there and has written a book about it. he will join us for that conversation. american history tv and "washington journal" in our last hour. the vietnam memorial on your screen as we go to break. we will be right back. ♪ >> listen to c-span's podcast, the weekly. we will discuss the latest census numbers. >> the objection suggested that floor seat -- 40 would add two seats and texas would add three, for a shift of six from the coasts to the midwest.

that is the big difference, when it comes to not just congressional representation but the electoral college counts. suburban seats, especially in the sunbelt have become more competitive. you also had a number of hispanic seats. democratic seats look more competitive as well. >> find c-span's the weekly, where you get your podcasts. >> tonight on q&a, investigative journalist lawrence roberts talks about his book, mayday, 1971, which examines the spring offensive win tens of thousands of anti-vietnam war protesters, including vietnam war veterans, king to washington, d.c. in an effort to shut down the federal government. >> the story is a much larger one, about how we as a nation,

at a people and individuals -- as a people and individuals, the people stick by their principles or are they caught up in their own selfish ambitions? it is a story between an embattled president, richard nixon, who confronts a social movement in the streets, the antiwar movement, just as he is fighting to get reelected. what constitutional lines did he cross, in an effort to stay in power? >> investigative journalist lawrence roberts, tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span's q&a. >> go to c-span.org/coronavirus for the federal response to the pandemic.

it is easy to find the latest briefings in the biden administration's response. use the interactive gallery of maps follow cases in the u.s. and worldwide. c-spanshop.org is the website for the c-span store and every purchase helps support our nonprofit operations. go there to order a copy of the congressional directory with contact information for members of congress and the biden administration and cabinet. ahead of mother's day, see our latest apparel. go to cspanshop.org. >> "washington journal" continues. host: and we are back with a conversation from earlier this morning, continuing now on the washington journal. should the government do more to solve the nation's problems? an nbc headline recently reads big government is back, can the

trump influenced gop stop at? in that article, they cited a new poll that found 55% says the government should do more to prompt -- should do more to solve problems while 41% said the government is doing things that should be left to the individual and businesses. look how it breaks down when asked by people if they think -- of those that want the government to do more. 57% of those under 35 want the government to do more. 56% of seniors, lowest earners and middle income, 55% of them said the government should do more. 82% of democrats, compared to 60% of independents. only 23% of republicans. sam in massachusetts, you are not sure. why not? caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. happy mother's day.

i don't know what the problem is with the government, but i can tell you this. that we had 20 years of unnecessary war that we found the money for. that money could have been used here. we've got all those people who are affected by the war, that is an of the cost to this country -- that is another cost to this country. i think what they should do tomorrow morning is every buddy that works for the government on down -- everybody that works for the government on down to get a drug test. they are making these laws that we have to live by, but how do they live? everybody, cops, everybody. if you want to fix the problem, let's start at the top. host: warren, you see the government should not be doing more -- you say the government should not be doing more. caller: they should not. host: how come?

caller: the reason being is that the government, the more they get involved, it seems to be the more complicated and the more problems that are caused. host: give me an example. caller: for example, unemployment. you can't get people to work now. i own a business, i am having trouble finding people to work, because they are getting more staying home than they would if they were working. i can't afford to pay $15 an hour. i can't afford to pay that. host:host: what is your business? caller: construction. host: what can you pay? what do you pay? caller: i start the workers out at about $12 an hour, and then as they work, i've got some workers that have been with me for a while that are making $25

an hour. that's about the top i pay. i can't afford to step in and pay everybody $25 across-the-board. it goes by experience, it goes by how long you have been with me. host: so when the pandemic hit, i assume business went down and you had to lay people off. those folks are not coming back? caller: what i did, i have a small business. i only have eight workers. i had to lay off four, and i kept four on, because i still had work to be done. the four that i had to lay off, the four lowest guys, when i went to call them back, they were saying listen, we are making more now than if we were working, and now all they have

to do is say like they've told me, and it is true, all they have to say is that they are worried about coronavirus, and they don't have to work. they can collect unemployment. host: alan in chicago, you say yes what is the role of government? caller: yes ma'am. always a pleasure to see you. i firmly believe the government should play a bigger role, that is why the federal government was created in the first place, to promote the general welfare. nobody can deny that during the 1950's and 1960's, we had our greatest economic boom because of a high tax on millionaires and billionaires, and we built the interstate highways, we sent a whole generation to college for free on the g.i. bill, and the economy boomed, it paid off.

the private sector will never do anything to upgrade the country. that is capitalism, they are there to make money, not to build roads or schools or provide freshwater. i'm going with john keyes, saying that it takes the middle class, a large group that has disposable income debt -- disposable income to get the country going. the private sector will never do that. i am all for a bigger government. you need regulations over businesses, so they don't take advantage of the common person. a man by himself against a corporation will always lose but

united, we have a chance to win. host: as we wait for more of your calls, listen to the president and his joint address this week, talking about how he sees the role of government. [video clip] >> in our first 100 days together, we have restored people's faith in democracy and we are vaccinating a nation, we are creating hundreds of thousands of new jobs. we are delivering real results to people that they can see and feel in their own lives, opening doors of opportunity, guaranteeing more fairness and justice. that is the essence of america, democracy in action. our constitution opens with the words as true as it sounds, we the people. it is time to remember we the people of the government, you and i, not some force in a distant capital, not some powerful force that we have no control over. it is us. it is we the people. another era whenever democracy

was tested, franklin roosevelt reminded us we do our part, we all do our part. that is all i'm asking, that we do our part, all of us. if we do that, we will meet the senate challenge and prove that democracy is durable and strong. autocrats will not win the future, we will, america will. the future belongs to america. host: do you agree with president biden, on the government playing a more active role in solving the problems? carol, you say no, from north carolina. caller: yes ma'am, because all the deferrals they are doing for people to not pay mortgage payments. a lot of us are paying our mortgage payments. people aren't working because they are getting the increase in their unemployment. you've got the tax deferral for kids going on.

if somebody has four or five kids, they can make over $12,000 plus their income and whatever they get from the tax return. it is only going to make things worse. the housing bubble has not even burst yet. what are they going to do when that happens whenever it happens? that is 30% of the economy. they are doing all of this stuff now. what are they going to do when that happens? host: mark, michigan, you are not sure. welcome to the conversation. caller: yes ma'am. i am trying to figure out, the government should try identifying what the problem is and then tell us how they are going to solve it in essence. we have in the past five or eight years, we have had the -- if we throw it up into the atmosphere, we could bring down the heat energy from the aurora

borealis and then maybe dispense that energy into the tv tubes? all we need is a refrigerator regulator to regular energy from the battery into the electric grid. that attitude could heat -- we could basically solve what building roads, but that technology is out there and we are not even playing with it right now. we have the excuse that we can't afford to do what we are doing today. from that standpoint, i don't know, we've got -- excuse me. host: we will leave it there and get two more calls in a minute. we showed you president biden from the joint address. we want to show you the republican point of view, the reaction from what they heard from the president. here is kentucky republican mitch mcconnell. [video clip]

>> we heard about the so-called jobs plan, packed with punitive tax hikes and executive -- at exec we a time when our nation is recovering. experts say it would leave american workers with lower wages at the end of the day. we heard about the so-called family plan, another gigantic tax and spend. instead of power -- instead of empowering families with >> ability, this would just subsidize specific paths, that democrats deem best. washington can call the shots from early childhood through college graduation. but wait. there is more. there was hostility toward the second amendment rights of american citizens. there was support for democrats sweeping election takeover bill that would neuter voter id in all 50 states. by the way, it would make the federal election commission a bite -- a partisan body, and legalize ballot harvesting where

people can showup carrying stacks of other people's ballots. here is the bottom line. recall that more than a year ago at the outset of the pandemic, top house democrats said this crisis provided the left a tremendous opportunity to restructure things to fit our vision. last night, president biden said much the same, that his administration intends to turn a crisis into opportunity. host: the minority leader from kentucky, mitch mcconnell. you heard him say that democrats want the government to have a role in your life from early education through high school. do you think the government should have that role, or any other public policy issue? terry in texas, you say no. good morning, you're on the air. it is your turn. terry in west point.

all right, you've got to turn down that television. to you and others, just listen and talk for your phone. dennis in iowa. caller: i would like to remind people that it is the republicans who want to tell women what they can or can't do with their bodies. it is a joke, when i hear republicans blaming democrats for abortion, when in fact in 1973, it was richard nixon and a republican supreme court that made abortions legal, not the democrats. republicans, stop your damn lining, and think -- lying, and thank you very much. host: jim, you say no. caller: i say no for the simple reason that first of all, i am not a party guy.

i don't belong to the democratic or republican party. i am a free constitutional american. that is what i go by, the constitution. government has interfered an error life too much with the taxes, raising it whenever they choose, telling us what we can have and what we can't have. putting their place. they work for the people. we the people does not mean the government. biden, pelosi, harris, i don't like what the democrats are trying to propose. it is a socialist world, and i am a veteran, honorably served. it is up to us. i don't know why we can't just fire them, why we have to go through a process of gathering so many votes, because it is not good for red, yellow, black or white, what they are doing in this country. they want to turn us into russia and china. that is what i have observed since ronald reagan, when he

gave away all the reparations that were supposed to be paid for world war ii, and he for gave that. host: robert is a no, as well in south beach. caller: how are you doing? host: i am doing well. how do you want government out of your life? caller: i don't want government out of my life. but we need to do is do less. you don't need to have children living with you forever in your household. government is trying to do that to the american people. people can think for themselves. they just need guidance, and at certain times may be a bit of help, but right now, the way the government is spending money is ridiculous. children today, their children are the ones going -- you are going to be paying for it over a long period of time. the government needs to do less

because less is more. the border crisis is ridiculous. the amount of money they are giving to the american people, just to give them money, and not allowing them to work -- i traveled through the myrtle beach area and there are so many hiring signs. people are looking for people to work for them, and they are getting more money to stay-at-home, because the government is too involved. they are -- they need to do a little bit less, trust of the american people. i was a democrat for many years but the democratic party has switched and the direction they are going right now is only going to ruin this country. host: mary in florida, you say yes. good morning to you. caller: good morning. i say the government is elected by the people, and we have a

representative form of government, so we send them there to actually solve problems for us. that is why we send them to washington. we don't send them to be obstructionist. we send them to solve problems. the problem is we have been fighting too many wars, and we have too much corporate welfare, and we have too many people, rich people who aren't paying taxes. this is why we don't have any money. it is expensive to fight wars, but god for bid that our government would help the people out in a time of need through no fault of their own, when they have a pandemic to deal with. corporate welfare is real. rich people getting no taxes, that is not fair to the average people. we send people to washington, and if we are not a representative government

anymore, then someone needs to talk about that. we send people to washington to solve problems. that is why we pay them. host: walter in michigan, it is your turn. good morning. caller: hello. i believe there should be more involvement. it is due to deregulation, we don't have regulations in this country, you have more problems and it will -- more in the long run. otherwise the country runs amok and there are a lot of people that are hurting in this country. host: we lost you. let's go on to mark in massachusetts. you are not sure.

caller: hello? host: good morning. you are not sure, tell us why. caller: i am not sure, but i know one thing for sure. a capitalist country cannot survive without some kind of social programs. people going to high school, collecting unemployment or social security, we cannot survive without some type of social programs. one other thing. host: let me ask you this. where do you want the government out of your life? caller: they are not really in it. i think they should understand my problems but not solve them. people and corporations should not be more able -- and not be able to donate more than $100 to anyone. host: our next collet -- our next caller in california, you say yes. caller: i think the government should do everything they can to help americans. reaganomics is dead.

the stuff that the gop is pushing about personal responsible tea is great when it is a level playing field, but it is not level now. we need help. corporations and rich people need to pay taxes. they don't now, and they should. poor people and middle-class people need a little help, a little help to make it easier. that is all i want. that means the government needs to step in and make rich people, big companies pay their fair share in taxes. host: where should the government helped out the little people? -- help out the little people? caller: i think childcare. my kids are grown, but i can't imagine how much better it would have been if i did not have to worry about where my kids were, between 2:30 and 6:00 every day. you know how much that would help out every family in america? it would save -- i have lost

friends over childcare. just that one little thing would have saved my life when i was younger, and that is just one example of how government can help. host: monday at 11:00, government accountability and transparency hearing before the house oversight committee. live coverage on c-span, cspan.org or on the c-span radio app. up next, tens of thousands of anti-vietnam war protesters converged on washington, d.c. in the spring of 1971. more than 7000 of them were arrested in a siegel day. on c-span and c-span3's american history tv, we look back at 50 years of american forces he is the author as mayday, a white house at more, and an

untold history of america's biggest mass arrest. a look at those 1970 one protests from a washington dc metropolitan to pinpoint -- police department film titled, the whole world is watching. [police chatter] >> [chanting the whole world is watching] >> masses of people attracts worldwide news coverage and attention. the protest organizer, it is a vital and necessary tactic. on april 24 1971 -- april 24, 1971, they held a massive

demonstration in washington dc. some 175,000 people from all walks of life marched from the white house to the capital. washington has grown accustomed to this method of voicing dissent. this was an organized demonstration. the demonstrators came, their positions on the war, racial discrimination and other issues were made known. throughout the rally, officers were directed to maintain a low visibility profile. their role was to protect the constitutional rights of citizens, intervening only to meet unusual situations. there were few laws broken and few arrests. most returned to their homes, jobs or schools, but some come

who came to break the peace stayed on at west potomac park. for them the april 24 rally was only a prelude to mayday, an opportunity to shut down the federal government. >> the country should respond from coast-to-coast with demonstrations can the and communities across the country. >> these violence prone members decided that the style, discipline and tactics were no longer acceptable. greta: good morning and welcome back to the washington journal. you are looking at the vietnam memorial in the nation's capital. in our last hour of the washington journal, we are focusing on the mayday

anti-vietnam war protest. joining us is lawrence roberts. mr. roberts, thank you for being with us. lawrence: thank you for having me. i am looking forward to it. greta: let's look what is going on with the vietnam war at the time. lawrence: let me paint a picture. it was also sunday morning, may 2. president richard nixon and his aides ordered hundreds of d.c. policeman riot squad to clear out a park down by the potomac river, in which tens of thousands of mostly young people had been camping, in preparation for what would be the most audacious protest and all of the antiwar movement. people had come from all over

the country to camp in west potomac park to get ready for this traffic blockade, which was sort of a last-ditch effort after six years of the movement, to force the government to pull all of the u.s. troops out of vietnam. greta: why did they come? what was happening that they decided that they needed to descend on washington? lawrence: the war had been going on for six years in intense way. the movement started almost the same time that the war did, by people who believed that the war was ethically wrong or was unwinnable, or was draining the resources of the country that should have been put towards domestic problems. millions of people were on the streets over those years,

picketing, parading and marching, petitioning and working on political campaigns. the war had been started primarily by president lyndon johnson back in 1965. johnson was in some ways run out of the white house by the growing antiwar sentiment in the country. richard nixon was elected in 1968. one of the reasons he was elected was his promise to end the war. rather than ending the war, he was expanding it geographically. in 1971, in february, troops were sent south. that triggered another run of the movement, which was in the

spring of 1971. we have dozens of antiwar groups who came together in this chaotic choreography, starting in mid april of 1971 and going through mid-may. they were designed to bolster support. the finale of this protest was to be the most audacious one, which was the blockade of the street and bridges. that is why they were camped, getting ready for protest. the nixon administration was increasingly worried about the effect of all the protests, so they secretly revoked the permit on saturday and sunday morning, they sent in the police to clear

out the park, in the hopes that the people who would come in would disperse and go home, and there would be no protest monday morning, but that is not what happened. greta: i want to show the viewers, on april 7, 1971, in his address -- let's listen. >> the hardest thing that a president has to do is to present posthumously, the nation's highest honor, the medal of honor. to mothers or fathers, or widows who have lost their lives but have come in the process, saved the lives of others. we had an awards ceremony.

at that ceremony, i remember one of the recipients. this is carl taylor from pennsylvania. her husband was a marine sergeant. he charged an enemy machine gun. he lost his life. in the process others were saved. after i presented her the metal, i -- medal, i shook hands with her children. as i was about to move to the next recipient, kevin suddenly stood at attention and saluted. i found it rather difficult to

get my thoughts together for the next presentation. my fellow americans, i want to end this war in a way that is worthy of the sacrifice of carl taylor. i think that he would want me to and it in a way that would increase the chances that kevin and carl, and all those children around the world could grow up in a world where none of them would have to die in war. greta: what impact those words have on the following days and lead up to may 2, 1971? lawrence: nixon was in a precarious position at this point, in april of 1971. i mentioned earlier that he had

sent forces into laos. that triggered a lot of antiwar sentiment. he was getting ready to run for reelection and the polls had him at the lowest approval rating, probably because of the laos invasion of his first term. he mused at the time that he might not get the nomination from his party to run again. he was very determined to make sure that the coming string of antiwar demonstrations, which they knew about, did not move of the opinion. the speech was important. he spent days working on it. afterwards, if you spent time listening to the tapes, the nixon tapes in the white house, which i did, in my book. you can hear the delight of the

president and his chief of staff as the polls showed a little bump in approval. he was trying to seize the high ground before the protests began. one thing that they were worried about was that for the first time, the protests would include a substantial number of vietnam veterans against the war, coming back from the fighting to say that they disagreed with u.s. policy and thought that the war should be ended. nixon said in his speech that he wanted to wind down the war but did not want to give a firm date for the withdrawal of troops, despite the pressure. the speech was intended to bolster support before the protests, and it initially

succeeded. greta: tell us more about who attended these protests. lawrence: the mayday protest was a finale of a string of protests that began in mid april. more than 1000 marched to arlington cemetery and camped on the national mall near the capital. the end of their protest was to return the medals and ribbons, by hurling them over a fence. it was an extremely emotional event. they were followed by a huge coalition of group, everybody from crude -- church groups and unions to the most radical groups came together. it was the largest march that d.c. had seen, up until that

point. following that, there was a series of smaller demonstrations leading up to the mayday protest , which was meant to be a three day blockade of the city to force more attention onto their cause. the people who came to town for that came from across the country. all 50 states were represented. people came in from buses and vehicles were parked along the river. people who felt that the marching, the parading and petitioning was not enough. what was needed was a more forceful act. they believed this was the time for mass civil disobedience, as

a way to put their bodies on the line come out of a belief that the war was wrong and it needed to end. it was originally scheduled for actual mayday, may 1, but they decided it made the most sense to have the blockade at rush hour, monday, may 3. greta: who were the leaders? who organized it? lawrence: the main leaders were a guy named davis, who was a long time icon of the new left. he helped to form the largest group, students for a democratic society. he was one of the founders for that and later became one of the chicago seven. your viewers might remember that trial based on demonstrations

outside the democratic national convention. he'd came to believe that what was needed was a protest to calm attention to the cause. david was a 55-year-old, longtime pacifist who had worked on the anti-nuclear bomb movement and had been a resistor of the tract during world war ii . he was sort of an apostle of nonviolence, this idea of force without violence. he could have mass civil disobedience without an edge to it. that was a way to push the powers that be in the direction that you wanted them to go. greta: we are talking about the mayday protest.

more than 10 times as many protesters were arrested during mayday and during the birth the citizens. we want you to join the conversation. for eastern, (202) 748-8000. for pacific guest: --for pacific (202) 748-8001. if you are in d.c. or were an officer at the time, please dial (202) 748-8002. you were there. please tell us your story. lawrence: i had participated in some of the antiwar marches. like many of the people who came down to d.c. for mayday, i also

believe that it was time for a more forceful demonstration. i guess i was part of it. it was an extremely chaotic day. monday, may 3 at rush hour, starting about 5:30 in the morning, those who had come down for mayday came out into the street. everyone was assigned. they divided into smaller groups and each one was given a place to go. it was in order to block traffic. just to be ready for when police came. during the morning, it was getting to be done. he saw clumps of people walking all over the city, into their

assigned areas. almost immediately, you started hearing sirens, teargas, waiting around, -- later on in the morning, the mass arrests began. greta: we want to show you the predawn event of that day. this is from a washington dc police department film on the mayday protest called, the whole world is watching. >> monday's tax makes called for civil disobedience. targets were broken into two areas, traffic circles and bridges. mayday leaders felt like if they were blocked during early morning rush-hour, government business would be stopped. >> we are going to see to it

that the thousands of government workers, who have a right to go to work peacefully are not affected by those few militants who presume that they have the right to break the peace at home. >> predawn washington was client. >> i will be back very shortly. >> keeping the bridge clear of demonstrators was a sign, allowing more policemen to be assigned to demonstration targets. at 4:30 a.m., inbound traffic was heavy but flowing normally as federal employees sought to avoid disruption.

at 6:00 a.m., police, protesters and commuters converged. 1000 demonstrators blocked dupont circle. 1000 swarmed onto washington circle. over 1000 more in georgetown. some sat in busy intersections, taunting police. some through trash or slashed tires. greta: lawrence roberts, you vote a book about that day. what did you learn about what that was like for the protesters?

lawrence: i think what you are watching before was essentially the police version of what happened that day. they produced that film not long after the protest. it is a propaganda film. what it does not say is that the tax makes the police used and the nixon administration used turned out to be entirely unconstitutional. in the end, the federal courts throughout, based -- threw out every single arrest that was made that day and the subsequent two days after that. 12,000 people were taken into custody and kept in detention without charges. police launched a dragnet, were they arrested people that had been sitting in the streets and anyone who looked like they might have been a protester.

they had long hair and were wearing hippie style clothing. they were swept up the first day . they had not been breaking any laws at all. that kind of throwing out, the rejection of the tactics that were used, the violation of fourth amendment rights, it is not addressed at all in the police version of events. in my book, i try to show a 360° view of that day. i tried to show the white house point of view of what was going on inside the police department and the justice department, as well as the demonstrations. it was fascinating, to me. it was a history that i felt needed to be revived because it

really was almost a forgotten moment, when you had all these forces of 60's and early 70's in america, the ones that characterized this tumultuous decade, all clashing in washington at the same time. i noted in the book that a lot of nixon's reaction to mayday and the decision to bend or break constitutional rules was really sowing the seeds of ultimately minimize of the administration and the watergate scandal essentially began on mayday. greta: john, you were in washington that day. caller: we all went to the intersection that we had been assigned and were quickly arrested.

we were detained. we were taken to the coliseum, but we were never actually charged with anything. we were held for 24 hours or longer, until we were finally released. greta: what made you come to washington? caller: the word. we knew what was going on. it happened every day. this was after kent state and jackson state. nixon's vietnamese nation -- changed the color of the corpses. they were still tens of thousands of vietnamese dying and it had failed with the effort to invade laos, but

still, people were dying and the war was going on and on. people were very frustrated that traditional means of protest would not be sufficient. greta: after you got arrested, what was your thinking? caller: it was strange. we were bundled off of buses, but we were never really charged, unless you went through another line. we had not stopped the government, which was the rhetoric at the time, but we had used nonviolence to show that people were very serious about this. i started out in the civil rights movement. i was very familiar with the theory and practice of nonviolent action.

i think it was a great manifestation of that, the seriousness. there was some craziness that place later in the day after the initial round of arrests, but on the whole, it was a disciplined way of showing your conviction that life should not be going on as normal while the war was going on. greta: do you feel like you and the other protesters were successful that day? caller: yes and no. the veterans starting out and the mass protests that happened on saturday, they all expressed strong sentiment to the country and it helped to intensify that sentiment. we have some counter reaction

that it creates some negativity, but it was such an overwhelming manifestation of peoples seriousness, that it led to people going on and working locally, pushing for congress to stop funding the war. ultimately, that is what contributed most to ending the war. lawrence: right. i think that is right. most people came out of that extreme conviction that it was time to do more to end the war. the response of the nixon administration was informed by by what had happened in the previous week's of these protests. i mentioned that the speech that nixon gave on april 7 had given him a bump in approval and the

handling of the war, but as soon as the protests started, the white house was getting alarmed because they noticed that public opinion was going in the opposite direction. they were worried that a successful shutdown of the city by protesters would put more pressure on them. it would make them look weak. nixon was famous for holding these secret war councils. one of the things that they did was revoke this camping permit where everyone had spent the weekend. nixon also, over the initial objections of the pentagon called in 10,000 active duty military to washington. the pentagon wanted him to properly invoke the insurrection act. we saw some echo this during the

trump administration, but the president ordered that they be brought without any public proclamation because he did not want to show what he was really doing behind-the-scenes. they infiltrated many of the groups that were planning the protest. there were undercover agents. a lot of things that later on were at the watergate it led to openly his resignation. >> we are talking about the day day 1971 vietnam antiwar protest. our camera is at the national

mall in washington dc. our camera is looking out along the wall of the vietnam memorial with a view of the washington in the background. . guest: you talked -- you talked about camping out. where was extra law enforcement put in washington dc? guest: the campground was not far from where the vietnam war memorial is. it is essentially in this area of west potomac park between the jefferson end lincoln memorial's between some parkland along the rivers edge. you could see the washington monument and the distance. it was very much a feeling of being near the heart of washington. when the police deployed and the military deployed on the morning of may 3, rush hour, they were

sent all over the city. you may notice in the film that the police produced to show what a great job they were doing they had a picture of this tactical manual that was in no way secret. it was handed out to protesters by the organizers of mayday. it was reprinted in college newspapers. the police had a good sense of where people would go pick -- would go and they deployed their forces primarily. they guarded bridges and the prisoners police took to a practice field out side of robert f kennedy memorial stadium, which had a chain-link fence around it. later on as john sudden, people

were tracked over -- trucked over to an arena. host: let's go to mike calling from west virginia. he was a protester on that day. thank you for calling in. caller: i was there. i was four years in the service. i spent a year over in southeast asia. all those soldiers who was there at the time, i am listed -- i enlisted. the reason i went there was because of nixon. i could not vote until i was 21. it was -- i voted for nixon because he promised us he was

going to end the war and he didn't. that is why i went there. i was in the back. i did not get arrested. i was with other people that served, but the main reason i went was because nixon did not tell us the truth. that is how i feel about it and most of the guys i served with, when we got out of high school you did not have a choice unless your parents had money to send you a college. i serve my country and i am proud of it. host: mr. roberts, your thoughts after listening to mike. guest: there was so much disaffection within the military. hundreds of thousands of young men volunteered or were drafted to go to vietnam.

it is safe to say most of them felt when they went to they were doing something honorable. they were there to contain communism as they were told by the government and once they got there they fought bravely to keep themselves and their buddieshost:host: paul in massaw

old were you? caller: i was only 21 -- exactly 21. host: tell us your experience that day. caller: i met the vets against the war in the jamaica plain hospital in boston. a month before i was with john kerry, and my brother and we did a protest for the vets on the boston common.

with those people we got to go to washington, and we stayed three days at the howard johnson hotel. we played american university the night before with ralph nader and myself and my brother. boko haram played -- we were on the big stage. i got pictures of phil oakes. he was my hero at the time. when the stormtroopers came in, we got to play because they left one microphone on and we were an acoustic group. we played for an hour while the writing -- fighting and protesting was happening. we threw our instruments to the people in the crowd. we escaped and got to umass. we flew to umass and played at a

protest at umass. they did not know about the fighting. it was not on the news that the stormtroopers came and everyone got it up and arrested. when we got to umass, we were reporters. thank you for your book lawrence. it was my first time getting to read about what happened. i am still a musician. it was only because my friends suffered their that i protested -- suffered there that i protested. i was a college performer. thanks for having me on. host: before you go, do you remember what was the rationale to have a rock concert during these protests? dear member what you were told? caller: i wrote two songs.

one is called 'i am not your soldier.' the other -- host: what did they say to you? caller: they finally heard a song that was about the way they felt. this was not a song that was on the radio. these were songs we played. and enjoyed -- we had to sing them. we were not trying to make a hit record. we never recorded the songs. it was just the way we felt, and they heard that. arrowsmith, those kind of and -- we were some of the few groups in boston who said " we have to stop this." host: can you sing for us or tell us the lyrics? caller: you are no soldier, so

your a man like me. why can't you look, why can't you see? walk away, and remember this moment for the rest of your life because i have. guest: fascinating. one of the things that often gets lost, this notion that the culture at the time was not just radical politics. there was a counterculture, cultural revolution going on throughout the 60's and early 70's. renny davis decided to push for this idea of civil disobedience and d.c. as a way to attract more people he set up an all day rock concert that would start on saturday and go through sunday in order to set up for the may 3

protests. the opening group for the mayday concert at west potomac park was the beach boys who were on a revival tour and they showed up and played. then bands played all through the night with thousands, tens of thousands out with their lean to's and sleeping blankets. on sunday morning while the bands were still playing, a band called claude jones, which is a good, local d.c. band, police swept into the park with helmets, nightsticks said " everyone has to leave here by noon." no doubt, the cultural part of

things end of the music was part of the reason why so many gathered in that park. the government had believed, government and performance embedded with the antiwar groups, believed that about 4000 or 5000 which are up for mayday but instead there were nearly 50,000. that is part of what triggered this overreaction. host: neil was one of those 50,000. neil from round rock, texas. how old were you? caller: i was 18 at the time. host: why did you come to washington? caller: i learned the government had lied to the american people, lied about the basis of the war, and i was terribly angered by that. i educated myself and decided that i had to go.

host: what was it like when you got here? i stayed -- caller: i stayed with friends at georgetown and got to dupont circle as a new yorker. i had the model that people would be warned. if you do not leave you will be arrested. it was nothing like that. police just swept in, grabbed us up before we knew what was going on. host: when you were grabbed by the police, tell us about that. where did they put you? caller: they initially put us in the prison yard at the d.c.

prison. it was a rather surreal -

filled every jail in the city. nobody could even sit down and we were kept in there for hours. many were taken to the yard that neil described. the overflow was taken to this football practice field and ultimately many ended up inside this arena. thousands of people, maybe most of them were swept up while they were not violating any rules at all. so there were no real charges lodged against them -- there couldn't be. many of those folks when they were asked their names subsequently by the police were trying to process the folks in there and create some kind of a record that could be used at court, on the advice of themselves, on the advice of others and there they were given false names. they filed civil suits on behalf

of the protesters and the courts ordered millions of dollars of compensation to these demonstrators. the aclu set out to find people who deserve these checks. some of the folks who were arrested during the three days got checks for as much as $3200. others got there $10 collateral back but they could not find hundreds of these folks because they had either given false names or cannot be located. host: james in bakersfield, california, you are next. caller: good morning. i was 10 years old at the time. now i am a 30 year veteran. i always thought then and i still think today at the vietnam war was a noble effort against communism to contain and to defeat it work not carried out very well. the timeframe of may, i always

thought from the history books, i understood it to correspond with the communist revolution. i noticed the red cover of your book and i saw the one poster -- one protester in the police video carrying around a red flag. i thought that was why mayday was chosen. the other item i will say, you have a generation that was protesting against authority, but now on the other end of it 50 years later you have this generation who are now at the end of their professional lives in power and they seem to be more pro-centralized government. i wonder if mr. robertson could

comment on that. guest: interesting questions. international mayday, international workers day, i don't know if it was invented by the communists but it was meant as international workers day. there is no connection between the mayday protests and that other than may. spring is the best time to carry out protests like this before whether reasons and things like that -- like this for weather reasons and things like that. i do not think there is a communist underpinning 12 of this -- underpinning to all of this. as to what happens to people after their rebellious youth that think every individual story is different.

the baby boomer generation like any other splintered into a lot of other things and people carry within them what they would call the values of the 60's. some people didn't change and moved towards a more conservative stance. host: garrett in providence, rhode island was one of those protesters. how old were you? tell us your story. caller: i was 19 years old. i was not arrested. i was walking around the campus area where police had instructions to arrest anyone who did not have id. i was a former student and so was the person i was with. i had my id with me so i was not arrested. he did not and he was arrested. i read lawrence's book and first

of all, kudos. it is not only a good understanding of mayday, but a good understanding of the antiwar movement in general. obviously you had in-depth interviews of a lot of different people like the chief of police in washington. i wonder, were they anxious to talk to you? reluctant to talk to you? do they see it now like most of us do as a police overreaction or do they think it was justified? are there any people on the government side who you would have liked to talk to but who were not willing to talk to you? guest: thank you garrett for the kind words. yes, i think your experience of that day, of people sweeping

through george washington university and other university campuses arresting anyone without an id was something that was common. in terms of people talking about that time, i think unfortunately many of the people who were essential to the decision-making back in the day for example the deputy attorney general, he is not around anymore. jared wilson, police chief of washington was around and was very generous with his time in discussing with me all of the events of those days and what was behind his decision to ultimately follow nixon's orders to doom mass arrest -- to do mass arrests. he did the job he was hired to do that day and despite government lawsuits that were successful against the government, he did not express

regret for doing what he thought he had to do to keep the city open that day. i think he was a man of integrity who was caught between a paranoid white house and his desire to keep the streets from becoming violent. host: leading up to that day, while folks are camping out in washington dc, what was the camping experience like, thousands in close proximity to each other. were you one of them? what was it like? caller: i was not in the campground that weekend in may. from all accounts, it was like a festival. you had music that went on for hours and hours. some characteristics of the rock

festivals of the 60's. people were playing games. they had frisbees, dogs, people bought flutes and guitars and were playing in their tents and lean to's. it was not an angry protest in that sense at all. it was a festival. people at the time, the technology for music was portable cassette players. they had been around for a few years so people would bring tape send trade them and bring -- tapes and trade them and bring the various music of the 60's. that was the atmosphere when sunday morning, suddenly they looked up in the mist of the dawn and saw helmeted police coming to push them out of the park. host: our guest notes that

50,000 came to d.c., 12,000 arrested, the largest mass arrest in american history. rick, good morning -- ruth, good morning to you. caller: good morning. i did go to some protests in washington dc. i do remember the beach boys, but i do not remember that protest. after all the things that happened, including the kent state shootings the year before and subsequent national student strike, after all of that, mr. nixon said " business as usual." i felt so dejected i guess, because it seemed like all this effort was put forth, and yet it

was not getting through. host: i'm going to stop at that point. lawrence roberts? guest: one of the enduring questions of this time is to what extent did the antiwar movement, the vietnam antiwar movement stop the war, shorten the war, constrain the military? historians debate this. it is hard to say what would have happened if there was no antiwar move it. there is no question if you listen to the nixon tapes and if you study the johnson administration as well, there is no question the antiwar movement, domestic opposition to the war constrained the military from doing more intense options, more serious invasions of north vietnam, of using more weapons

of war, potentially using tactical nuclear weapons, which was on the table at one point. there is no question that the antiwar movement was at least partly responsible for lyndon johnson's decision not to seek another term in 1968. during the period that we are talking about, the spring of 1971, that was the time when nixon and henry kissinger decided to soften the terms of their secret talks with hanoi. the u.s. had insisted that no date for a pullout of u.s. troops could be set. they drop that demand during

this period.\ the juxtaposition suggests that the antiwar movement had something to do with that decision. all the marching the antiwar movement did, it was not just people in the streets -- polls showed that most americans thought the war was wrong. a plurality of americans thought that if the cost of getting out meant that the communist in south vietnam would have a part in the government and the coalition government, that was something to do in order to end the war. host: what was the lasting impact do you think of mayday, that weekend and that monday? guest: i think it had a fundamental effect on politics and government. all of the lawsuits that came

out of mayday that established the rights of dissent on the streets of d.c. and elsewhere chilled the possibility of more kinds of legal mass arrests in the country. cases that come out of that are still cited in legal manuals all across the country. it had a huge effect on nixon in a strange way in the sense that it stoped his -- it stoked his dark side. host: the book mayday 1971: a white house at war, a revolt in the streets and the untold history of america's biggest

mass arrest. guest: thank you for having me. host: throughout todays' conversation you have been -- throughout today's conversation and have been watching video of the protests. you can watch a re-air of this is segment tomorrow at 8:00 p.m. on c-span3. thank you all for watching today. we appreciate it. we will be back here tomorrow morning at 7:00 a.m. eastern time. ♪

>> tonight on q and a, investigative journalist lawrence roberts talks about his book mayday 1971, which examines the spring offensive when thousands of antiwar protesters came to washington dc in an effort to check on the federal government. >> it is a story about how we as

a nation, as individuals dealt with one of those instances in american history -- do people stick by their principles are are they caught up in their own self-preservation? it is a story of the clash between an embattled president, richard nixon, who confronts a social movement in the streets. what constitutional lines did he cross, did his administration cross in an effort to stay in power? >> lawrence roberts tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span's q&a. vice president kamala harris spoken baltimore on thursday about the