military force against iraq. house members rereturn for legislative business today at 5:00 p.m. eastern. the senate is back with work on national nations expected throughout the week. they are in at 3:00 p.m. eastern with a confirmation vote set for 5:30 p.m. on judge brown-jackson to serve on the d.c. serkt court of appeals. the second highest court in the united states. watch the senate live on c-span 2 and the house live on c-span. >> coming up this morning on washington journal, white house reporter for the hill discusses president bind's schedule. role call deputy editor jason dick and then rachelellehuus.wic

and international studies. also, a look at the cost of covid hospitalization and treatment with the university of michigan assistant professor dr. kao-ping chua. before to join your -- with your phone calls and weeds. washington journal is next. ♪ host: good morning. that is president biden arriving in belgium yesterday ahead of the 31st nato summit. the gathering follows the g7 summit in england over the weekend. this morning, we want to know what is your confidence level in president biden? handling -- president biden's handling of foreign affairs? republicans, call in at (202) 748-8000. democrats, (202) 748-8001. independents, (202) 748-8002. you can also tell us what you think if you text at the number

(202) 748-8003. please include your first name, city, and state. or you can send us a tweet with the handle @cspanwj. you can also join the conversation on facebook.com/cspan. take a look at this recent poll done by abc. when they asked americans the question of confidence in the president foreign policy -- president's foreign policy, 57% said they had confidence in the president. 52% trust president to negotiate on america's behalf with world leaders. 49% trust biden to negotiate with putin. 44% say america's leadership in the world has gotten stronger under president biden. 36% say it has gotten weaker. what do you say to those questions posed in that poll? we want to know your opinion this morning. here is president biden yesterday after leaving his

first g7 summit. here is what he had to say about the event. [video clip] >> the only way we are going to meet the global threats is by working together with our partners and allies. i conveyed to each of the -- my g7 counterparts that the united states is going to do our part. america is back at the table. america is back at the table. the lack of participation in the past and full engagement was noticed significantly not only by leaders in those countries but by the people in the g7 countries. america is back in the business of leading the world alongside nations who share our most deeply held values. so the bottom line is i was pleased with the outcome of the entire conference and i noticed

a lot of coverage of my individual comments made by my colleagues about how we were all getting along together. the truth of the matter is we did. it was not about me but about america. i felt enthusiasm that america was back at the table and fully engaged. host: president biden yesterday following the g7 summit in england. right now, he is in brussels for the nato summit, his first as president. moments ago, he sat down with the head of nato, the secretary-general, for a meeting. we can show you some of that video coming up. later today he will hold a news conference. he will take questions following one of the first gatherings at the nato summit. there is a look at the nato summit in brussels, where leaders have walked around the

blue carpet to face photographers and camera technicians as they head into -- for the first meetings of today. so your confidence level in president biden. you heard him say america is back. you you agree -- do you agree? the five takeaways from the g7 summit according to politico reporting over the weekend, take a look at what they say. biden gave them a boost, they say, but did leaders deliver on big issues like climate, coronavirus, and china? politico rights no coal goal. activists from group extinction rebellion parked a van across the road from the venue. it did not impact the leaders but protesters highlighted the size of the gap between climate reality and g7 political realities. the g7 failure to set an end date on coal was only the most

glaring failure. they rejected a proposal to help with production of diesel cars and barely touched a bill the developing world says must be paid to bring their own emissions to heal. so no coal goal is what they write in political -- in politico. china emerged as one of the main topics for the g7 leaders. the president of china has tightened his grip on hong kong and stepped up china's military presence around taiwan, will international attention on the plight of muslims has grown romantically. that was another take away according to politico. what were your takeaways from the g7 summit? dan in arkansas, you are a republican. what is your confidence level in president biden? caller: no confidence. he don't know what he is doing. trump got us out of a mess. he is getting us back in it. where is the money going to come

from to pay them guys off? it is going to come out of your taxes. it is crazy. host: you were happy president trump got out of many of these agreements. we lost dan. what are your thoughts on president biden's handling of foreign policy? that is our question this morning. me show you -- let me show you more for the president had to say. he held a news conference yesterday and he was asked about vladimir putin. the president is scheduled to meet wednesday with the russian president here and following that, he is going to hold a news conference. yesterday, he was asked directly about the russian president and working with him. [video clip] >> why do you think vladimir putin has not changed his behavior in spite of everything the u.s. has done to this point? >> he is vladimir putin.

i'm not going to get into much more than that because i have to sit down with him. i am happy to talk after that. >> today he said russia would be ready to hand over cyber criminals to the united states if the u.s. would do the same to russia. and in agreement came out of this meeting. are you open to that kind of trade? >> i'm open to, if there is crimes committed against russia, and in fact the people committing those crimes are being harbored in the united states, i am committed to holding them accountable. i was told as i was flying here that he said that. i think that is potentially a good sign of progress. host: president biden when he was asked about his upcoming meeting with the russian president and how to negotiate with the president. how do you think the president should handle russia? do you like what he has been saying so far?

listen to the former secretary of state, mike pompeo. he was on yesterday's fox news sunday. here is what he had to say about president biden and the russian president. [video clip] >> when these two men sit down tuesday -- on wednesday, are you worried about what is going to happen? >> i heard secretary blinken say the right words, that we want to find the places we can work alongside the russians. we try to do that, too. there was no administration tougher on russia. we worked diligently to support ukraine. we left nato 400 billion dollars stronger than we took over appearing we built out that relationship between the united states and nato in a way that put pressure on vladimir putin. what i look for is the actions. it will not be about what is said, whether the tone is right. it will be about the actions the united states government is prepared to take to preserve and defend american interests and stop russian malign activity

around the world. when you hear president biden talk about being back, back is the russians taking crimea. that is not a back the united states can afford to allow to happen. we need to move forward and defend the united states against the threats vladimir putin made pose, whether cyber or kinetic or other information networks that president biden -- larry putin will try to force upon america if president biden is weak. host: you are looking at a picture of brussels, belgium, where president biden for his first time as president is attending a nato summit with the rest of our nato allies here in his message, according to the white house, is america is back and he is going to try to strengthen the transatlantic relationship. what is your confidence level in president biden? you heard mr. pompeo say that he is looking for action from this administration. mike mccall says it is time to

consider hitting back at russia. he is a top republican on the house foreign affairs committee and he says the president needs to demonstrate with putin there will be consequences to your actions if you continue to do this. wally in colorado, a republican. what do you think of the president's performance in foreign policy so far? caller: i think it is -- he is the most incompetent president we have ever had come as far as i'm concerned. there is not a bra made that could support that boob. host: what do you point to when you think he is incompetent? caller: he is barely coherent at times he is senile. it is just a question of time. who is this guy? he does not represent the united states of america, and -- not the republic.

democrats may love him. he is a communist. so are they all. it is ridiculous that he got voted. he is on godly -- ungodly. he is an ungodly man and we got the worst president we could possibly have had ever. host: what mistakes has he made, wally? caller: xl pipeline, taking credit for warp speed, you name it. everything he does he botches. he lies. host: we lost wally. rick in boston, massachusetts, democratic caller. caller: i think biden is doing a last drop -- good job. all trump did was lie when he was in office. i think biden is going to do a good job and i think most

republicans, especially in the senate, every one of them should be arrested and go to jail for the stupid nonsense they did on january 6. hillary clinton, they talked about that. host: how do you think president biden should handle russia? caller: i think he should kick the ambassador out of here. they had that clown president. i believe the russians. i do not believe our intelligence agency. they should put him in jail. why do these people keep thinking trump is going to get elected? that guy got 18 lawsuits against him. host: all right, rick. mary kay in new jersey, democratic caller. what do you like about this president?

what do you like about his foreign policy agenda? caller: i do like his foreign policy agenda. first of all, he has extreme experience and i think the people surrounding him have experience. what i do not appreciate is all the take you have from politico and pompeo. where are the people like the secretary of state from the united states? and the dumb question peter alexander asked. what do you expect the president to say about putin? please, let's have more evenhandedness and stop having so much negativity about this biden administration. host: we are going to show you both sides. we will show you what the headlines are. we will show you what reporters are observing and reporting about. we are going to show you what

people are saying as well, from both sides of the aisle. you asked about the secretary of state, antony blinken. he was on cbs's face the nation. this is what he had to say about the u.s. dealing with russia. [video clip] >> on the one hand, the u.s. is working with russia to revive the nuclear deal with iran. on the other hand, the washington post reports russia is preparing to supply iran with advanced satellite systems which threaten u.s. interests. are the russians going to pay a penalty for offering those systems or do we need them in the new -- nuclear talks so we will move past that? >> when it comes to nuclear talks, we are not trading other issues or interests for the sake of nuclear talks. they will stand or fall on their own merit and their own weight. i wanted to be clear about that. i am not going to get ahead of the president.

i suspect he will take this up with president putin in a couple days. these meeting with president putin is not happening in a vacuum. the president will be coming off of the nato summit, the meeting with european union leaders. when we bring world's democracies together, it is a powerful force militarily, economically, diplomatically. a major poll showed confidence in american leadership across these countries is up from 17% a year ago. we are now in a position as a result of reinvigorated american leadership to work and bring these countries together in common cause, and common purpose, including dealing with challenges from russia or china. host: secretary of state antony blinken. he referenced polls. take a look at the abc episodes poll. most americans, confident in biden's handling of world

affairs. that is what we are asking all of you this morning. john in tennessee, a republican. caller: thank you for taking my call. i am in total disagreement with biden's foreign affairs. he has created and started problems in the middle east, giving money to iran, giving money to hamas. he is absolutely doing the wrong thing. host: what problems in the middle east are you referencing? >> -- caller: we just saw it on tv with the bombing in israel. if biden had not released that money -- the foreign affairs he is doing is going around and giving away money. they are all laughing at him and they are all happy he is doing that. it is crazy. host: john's thought there,

republican in tennessee. this is the associated press headline. israel swears in a new coalition, ending agyeman netanyahu -- benjamin netanyahu's long rule. naftali bennett became prime minister after a vote, promising to heal a nation and preside over parties with ideological differences. netanyahu made clear he has no intention of ajit -- exiting the political stage. let's go to a democratic caller. what do you think about president biden's foreign policy? caller: i agree with president biden's foreign policy but what concerns me is listening to some of these people that call in and just put him down so bad, call him senile and all the other

things. we need to support our president and continue to stand as one nation. host: do you remember the saying politics stops at the water's edge? when a president went overseas, that is political -- his lyrical rivals did not criticize him when he was overseas. -- political rivals did not do size him overseas. caller: 100%. i was raised military. i was raised that we respect our president. i do not understand some of the callers and how dirty they get. when pressed he was president, i would never call into a news station and use the language, even though i disagree with him, because our allies -- people who are against us love it. our nation needs to grow up.

host: what countries are you concerned about? where do you have concerns about foreign policy? caller: i believe china is loving this. i think russia is loving -- i mean, january 6. russia absolutely loved this. what concerned me is the fact that every country witnessed our capital being attacked by our own and how easy it was. we should have some kind of -- they did so many meetings on benghazi. we cannot have hearings like that? where hillary clinton came for 11 hours? why can't we get president trump to come in for 11 hours and talk about what happened and jeff sessions -- not jeff sessions. host: i'm going to leave it there. more of your calls coming up,

your confidence in president biden's handling of foreign affairs. send us text messages. post on twitter as well as facebook. joining us this morning is morgan chalfant with the hill newspaper to talk about the president's schedule. what is on the agenda today in brussels for the nato summit? guest: president biden is meeting with nato leaders today. he's meeting with the secretary-general this morning. he has a meeting with turkish president erdogan today. he will proceed through these nato meetings and hold a summit with european union leaders later this week before he meets with vladimir putin in geneva. he has a packed schedule following the g7 summit over the weekend. host: what is he going to tell nato leaders? guest: his focus is on

reaffirming u.s. support for article five. they are supposed to discuss a myriad of issues, including the more traditional challenges that nato faces, including russia and defense cooperation but also emerging challenges like the challenge posed by china and the security realm and its activities in technology and cyber. leaders are expected to talk about climate change and the security challenges that poses. there is quite a bit on the agenda for the nato summit for these next couple days. host: what are nato leaders expected to say to him? guest: i think there's going to be -- this foreign trip that president biden is taking has been about reaffirming u.s. support for its alliances with european partners and partners in asia.

a lot of experts say there is relief on the part of members of nato and other european allies that we are taking back the foreign policy of president trump because of how unilateral some of the actions he took -- he was always pressing nato countries to spend more. president biden is going in with a different rhetoric and trying to affirm u.s. support for nato and commitment to nato. there is going to be some talk about that. there will be talk about china. that is certainly an emerging security challenge not only for nato but it is a big focus of president biden's foreign and domestic policy and a big priority for the white house, to discuss issues related to china. host: are there cracks in the alliance when it comes to afghanistan? guest: afghanistan is going to

be a big topic. it is going to be about figuring out how this drawdown works and how they ensure there is a plan for making sure security in afghanistan stays and they can maintain security even as the u.s. and other nato partners withdraw forces. we could see some disagreement over the next couple days. host: how is the white house couching this upcoming meeting with president putin? guest: the white house is handling it with low expectations. the meeting with putin is a big challenge for biden. he has to balance his effort to confront the russian president on provocations and behavior he has had, whether cyber attacks in our elections, the poisoning and jailing of alexei navalny,

ukraine, which russia continues to be occupying, but biden also wants to find a way to move the relationship forward and cooperate with russia on issues of mutual concern, like climate change and the coronavirus pandemic. the white house has been trying to set expectations low for this meeting, seeing if there is a way to move forward. it is certainly a high-stakes meeting with biden. host: domestically, what is the white house pushing? where are they on infrastructure negotiations? guest: as we saw last week, there was a collapse of those talks between the white house and a group of republicans. currently, biden has tasked senior officials to engage with a second group, a bipartisan group including joe manchin, senator cassidy talking about

another proposal they have put forth, a one point $4 trillion proposal for infrastructure. those talks are continuing. there has not been a ton of news on that front. once biden returns, i think we will see more focus on that. the white house does say it is trying to move on two tracks at once, trying to push forward the possibility of using budget reconciliation while also engaging in bipartisan negotiations to see if there is common ground on infrastructure. host: you can follow morgan chalfant's reporting if you go to thehill.com. you can also follow her on twitter. thank you for your time. the president is going to meet with the russian president wednesday. take a look at his schedule today. he is meeting with the prime minister's of estonia, the president of latvia, the

president of lithuania. he has been greeted by the nato secretary-general. they will have a photo with nato leaders. that is on the agenda today as well as participating in the summit. a bilateral meeting with the president of turkey and then he will have that news conference from nato headquarters. we will have coverage of the news conference with the president at 12:50 p.m. eastern time. you can watch it right here on c-span, on our website, or download the free c-span radio app and listen along to the questions and answers from the president. john, california. you are a republican. what is your confidence level in president biden? caller: good morning. good to be on c-span again. i would like to say i am concerned about the direction that hunter biden's foreign policy is taking. i said hunter biden because joe biden's foreign policy, the template is clearly laid out in

joe biden -- hunter biden's laptop. this is a policy of money laundering, corruption, all proven cases. he has taken our foreign policy back to the obama era, pay for play. that is a concern for every american. this president's son is under an active criminal investigation. host: ron in missouri, democratic caller. you are next. caller: let me. the lady earlier. these people, the vitriol these people come with. let me say this. at least mr. biden, our president, does not comport himself like some frat boy. if the man drink, it would have been something. the way trump comported himself in front of putin in helsinki --

i do not think we have to worry about that. i am with the lady earlier. the vitriol they display toward this man -- i watch fox news occasionally. just to see the vitriol these people come with. they are all angry people. it comes from the lie from the orange, lion coward. we have got to come together, people. please stop letting the republicans call in. host: rick in california since is a text. the border policy is a failure. we need a sovereign defense solution. i am an american citizen, not a global list. defund teachers unions, not police. and bonnie says we should come

up with a tax rate for fortune 500 companies and the elite. that is hurt we to us. another says having a competent and experienced president like biden, our allies are no longer alienated. you also have this text from chicago. keeping those seeking asylum in mexico is not a solution to our migration problem, given the fact that asylum recurs have a legal -- asylum-seekers have a legal right to seek asylum in the united states. in ohio, and it -- and independent. what do you say about president biden's foreign policy agenda? caller: i am scared. almost everyone i am talking to, i did voters. there are people paying attention. this has got to be realized by the people that are not seeing it and are not paying attention.

the fact that we had a big problem with joe biden running originally when he was under -- should have been under investigation. it seems our fbi is a biden, obama, and hillary clinton organization. it has to be vetted and we have to have better security, especially our military needs support. this is sad for this whole country. host: which country is the biggest threat to the united states and why? caller: right now, i would have to say china. china, hands down. they are positioning themselves. they are very open about it. if you are paying attention, you can get that information. they are open about taking over. that is coming. it is evident.

the various broadcasts that are suppressing that information like big tech and some of the democrat owned stations is very disturbing because it is oppressing people here and especially a president on twitter. when you have john brennan and maxine waters spewing the vitriol that other fellow, i do not know what other vitriol he is talking about, but people with common sense know the difference. host: let's listen to president biden's talk about china. he was asked about it at a news conference yesterday. he talked about the need for transparency. host: i think china has to start to act more responsibly in terms of international norms on human race and transparency.

-- human rights and transparency. transparency matters across the board. for example, one of the things others raise and i raise at the g7 is that we do not know -- we have not had access to laboratories to determine whether -- i have not reached a conclusion because our intelligence community has not, whether this was a consequence of a marketplace of a bat interfacing with animals and the environment that caused this covid-19 or whether it was an experiment gone awry in a laboratory. it is important to know the answer because we have to build a system whereby we can know when we see another lack of

transparency that might produce another pandemic. we have to have access here in the world has to have access. we are trying to figure out at the g7 whether we can put together an international basis upon which we could have a bottom line with what the transparency accounted for. host: president biden on china yesterday when he was asked about the country and the leadership of it at yesterday's news conference. take a look at the headline on the front page of the washington journal. -- take a look at how china responded to the g7 summit. they sent out from their embassy in the u.k. -- their spokesman was quoted as saying the so-called rules based international summit advocated for the -- at the g7 summit, we always believe countries are equal and that world affairs

should be handled through consultation by all countries. the days when global decisions were dictated by a small group of countries are long gone. china belongs to the g20. those leaders are expected to gather in october. in texas, and independent. good morning. caller: good morning. i have been a viewer of c-span since the first day of operation in 1979. if you offered that politics stop at the water's edge, i think that is given to when we are overseas we do not speak highly of the united states rather than criticizing somebody that is overseas. perhaps i am wrong. i would like to disassociate myself with the comments from the fellow from california. it is laughable to talk about

vitriol being hurled at biden when trump just went through four years of it and more. it is crazy. host: let's stick to foreign policy. what concerns you? caller: the complete opening of the southern border. i am in texas. things are destroyed, frankly. acquiescence to china, general weakness. the middle east was in good shape and now it is blowing up. everything he can do wrong and his cohorts, because he is not in charge of this -- i do not say that with any pleasure. everything they can get wrong, they are doing. it is not by accident. they know what they are up to.

it is very, very sad. guest: -- host: you mentioned the border in central america. central american women are fleeing domestic violence amid a pandemic and few find refuge in the united states. the washington post reports that, though president biden signed several executive orders to rollback president trump's most draconian policies, including one that sent asylum-seekers back to mexico to await court hearings, another of other rulings that affect domestic survivors remain in place. biden has ordered a review of the entire asylum system. that is from the washington post this morning. there is also the politico reporting about border wall funds. you can find that -- it is roll

call. their headline is that the biden administration offered plans for unused border wall funding. roll call reports the money would be used for border technology, cleanup of wall sites, and schools from military personnel and more. patrick in naples, florida, democratic caller. caller: good morning and thank you for taking my call. if a picture tells a thousand words and you saw a picture of trump when he walked out of his private meeting with putin, putin looked like the cat who swallowed the canary and trump looks like a boy that just got caught underneath the bleachers looking up somebody's skirt. when putin is done talking with biden, he is not going to have that grin on his face.

when people talk about hunter biden and the bidens being so corrupt, you need to go back. we will not know this until we get all his financial records, but how much money the russians, especially putin's people, have given trump over the years. he is not a billionaire. he is a pocket puppet of putin. i am getting upset with americans who want to side with these putin puppets. they are passing laws that are the same thing they passed in russia. what is wrong with people? host: what laws are you referring to, patrick? caller: in florida, another putin puppet, desantis, passed a law that if 20 people gather they are considered a riot.

we cannot stand up to these people anymore because they are passing laws that will make us criminals. it is sad that that many americans believe in this guy here at the difference between him and a statesman and a spokesman or showman really shows because more people in this world now trust americans then don't. host: i want to show you and others from nbc's interview with the russian president what he had to say when he responded to accusations that he is a killer. [video clip] >> the late john mccain and congress called you a killer. when president trump was told you are a killer, he did not deny it. when president biden was asked whether he believes you are a killer, he said, i do. are you a killer?

>> over my tenure, i have gotten use to all kinds of angles and pretense and reasons. none of it surprises me. as far as harsh rhetoric, i think this is an expression of u.s. culture. of course, hollywood, there are underlying themes in hollywood, macho. by the way, not here, it is not considered normal here. >> i do not think i heard you answer the direct question. >> i did answer. i have heard dozens of such accusations, especially during our counterterrorism efforts in north caucasus. when that happens, who calls somebody whom is not something i worry about in the least. host: the russian president in

an nbc interview. take a look at what president biden had to say about u.s.-russian relations at that conference yesterday. [video clip] >> i think he is right that it is a low point. it depends on how he responds back, which in many cases he has not. as i told him when i was running and when i got elected, before i was sworn in, that i was were to find out whether he did engage in trying to interfere in our election. i was going to take a look at whether he was involved in the cyber security breach that occurred. if i did, i was going to respond. i checked it out. i had access to the intelligence. he was engaged in those activities. i made it clear i would respond again. i always found -- i do not mean to suggest that the press should

not know, but this is not a contest about who can do better in front of a press conference to try to embarrass each other. it is about making myself very clear, what the conditions are to get a better relationship with russia. we are not looking for conflict. we are looking to resolve actions which we think are inconsistent with international norms. where we can work together, we may be able to do that in terms of strategic doctrines. we are ready to do it. there is even talk of the ability to work together on climate. the bottom line is i think the best way to deal with this is for he and i to meet, he and i to have our discussion. i know you do not doubt that i will be straightforward with him about our concerns. i will make clear my view of how that meeting turned out and he will make clear from his

perspective how it turned out. host: take a look at this. the nato alliance, the leaders of the countries that make up that alliance have gathered in brussels. this is a life picture this morning. you can see the prime minister of canada, the president of germany, all on that stage for what they call a family photo. those are our nato allies, gathered together in belgium for a summit that begins today and continues throughout the day. the president will have a news conference following today's nato summit at 12:50 p.m. eastern time. he will take questions about the meetings, what was promised, and where leaders disagree. this morning, we are asking you your confidence level in president biden's handling of foreign affairs as he continues with his first overseas trip as

president. he began with the g7 summit yesterday, meeting with the queen of england. wednesday, he will meet with president putin. james in san diego, california, a republican. what is your confidence level in president biden's handling of foreign affairs? caller: i'm glad you asked that question. number one, -- oracle loves that idea because she lived in east germany before germany was united. the president is going to have a private meeting with putin. i believe that was really trumped on when trump tried to do the same thing. everybody criticized him tremendously. i would like to know how much money russia has in this portfolio. number four, let's talk about

ukraine. i believe when president biden was the vice president, obama sent medical aid instead of weapons. trump sent weapons for ukraine to be able to protect itself. let's talk about china. when china decides to take taiwan, for the rights of navigation and so forth. i have not seen anything on this. how do you explain all of those come aggression? -- all of those, gretchen? host: james in california, a republican caller. we are asking your opinion of president biden's foreign policy. you can see leaders gathering as they watch a video presentation. they will go off to the summit meeting.

the alliance of the nato leaders and headquarters there in brussels, belgium, the agenda includes countries like china but also what to do about afghanistan and strengthening the transatlantic relationship, according to the white house. then you have article five that binds all these countries together in the nato alliance. that is the parties agree an armed attack against one or more of them in europe or north america shall be considered an attack against them all. they agree that, if such an attack occurs, each of them, recognized by article 51 of the charter of the united nations will assist the parties so attacked in concert with the other parties such action as deemed necessary, including the

use of armed force to restore and maintain the security of the north atlantic area. that is article five. as he wants the leaders depart the stage and go behind closed doors for their meeting. mark in a new hampshire, an independent. what is your confidence level? caller: it is nice to see our new president, joe biden, represent america well in cornwall, meeting prime minister boris johnson and queen elizabeth and now heading to brussels, belgium for the nato summit. i think the big question will be how he will handle president vladimir putin when they meet because our last president was criticized that he would talk big but when he met putin putin would manhandle him. i hope president joe biden is strong with vladimir putin.

hopefully we find out what happened with our elections in the way of what's russia involved in trying to manipulate our elections -- what's russia involved in trying to manipulate our elections and the cyber attacks from people in russia that slowed our gas and maybe hurt our economy. i hope president biden is strong on putin, willing to work with him but to say, you guys are going to attack us, there is going to be a price to pay. host: sergio in stanford, connecticut, a republican. how do you think president biden has done so far in his first trip overseas? caller: can i make a comment about the southern border? i waited about 15 minutes to say that. host: that is foreign policy go ahead. caller: i came here from italy. i am an immigrant. i some but thighs with anybody that wants to be an immigrant. i sympathize with all of that,

but i do have a problem with these people from guatemala, honduras. i was watching the united states soccer national team a few nights ago. they were plain honduras. if italy had mistreated me -- if i lived under a dictatorship, if they missed treated me badly these people say they do, when i was at the game watching the game i would have been waving that american flag for allowing me to come here. instead, they were recently honduras flag. so what does that tell you --? how oppressed could these people have been? host: on your screen, the president has left what is called the family photo of the nato leaders, all the leaders who make up the nato alliance.

the press has been allowed into the conference room, where the leaders will gather around that table and discuss the issues at hand. there is the president of germany at the table. you saw president biden come in as well. let's watch for a little bit here as we watch the president get his notes and talk to the other leaders from the nato alliance.

host: we understand this meeting will be closed to the press. the press will be asked to leave and they will meet with the leaders to discuss issues and then the president will have a news conference. that will take place at 12:50 p.m. eastern. you can watch it right here on c-span or go to our website, download the free c-span radio app, and you can also listen to what the president has to say. lauren in florida, democratic caller. what is your confidence level in president biden's foreign policy? caller: 100% compared to what we had these last four years. this man is a grown-up. he asked grown up. he talks to other people from other countries in a great way. you can just see it. he is presidential. the other guy would call names. i do not even want to mention his name because he was a mess. that is all i have to say.

host: in fort texas, democratic caller. caller: good morning. host: your confidence level? caller: i think the president would be diplomatic and you great for the country and he will not hide behind closed doors and tell us he was tough on putin. he was an embarrassment to the united states. he was weak and a mockery. he was the weakest we ever had. host: listen to what the french president, emmanuel macron, had to say after a bilateral meeting or ahead of a bilateral meeting with president biden. this is from the g7 summit in cornwall, england. [video clip] >> we have had a good couple days so far, had the chance to spend some time with president macron, get to know him.

we have some things we have to talk about but things are going well. as we say back in the united states, we are on the same page. thank you. >> thank you, mr. president. we have to deal with this pandemic of covid-19. we have to face a lot of crises, climate change. for all these issues, what we need is cooperation. i think it is great to have the u.s. president willing to cooperate. what you demonstrated is partnership and we do appreciate. >> i think we can do a lot, too.

the united states is back. we feel strongly about the cohesion of nato. i think the european union is an incredibly strong and vibrant entity that has a lot to do with the ability of western europe to not only handle economic issues but provide the backbone and support for nato. we are very supportive. host: you heard the french president praising president biden for being a president that wants to be "part of the club." that was from the g7 summit. listen to what the united kingdom prime minister had to say about u.k.-u.s. relationships. [video clip] [video clip] >> first, on the issue of the relationship between the u.k.

and the united states and what has happened over the last few years, it is the drop of all prime minister's, my job, to have close working relationships with the president of the united states. what may be useful in building the partnership with joe biden has been the common interests we have in attacking climate change, which we have discussed extensively. the campaign i have been running for a long time on female education, which she shares. but the whole idea of leveling up, which is at the core of what this government is trying to do, using infrastructure, using skills, technology to give people access to jobs around the

country. that is something -- the president is engaged in a big program that bears summers and to a lot of that agenda. when it comes to building back better for the world and making sure we build back greenert together, i think we are on the same page. it has been very refreshing to listen to him. host: the british foreign minister on u.s.-u.k. relationships. what you think about the president's foreign policy performance so far? caller: so far on performance, i do not have a lot to go on but i can look at his history as part of the obama administration, eight years of appeasement. secretary gates made the

statement that for the last four decades joe biden has been on the wrong side of history in terms of national security and foreign policy. i do not think he is going to stray far from his past. president biden said something i chuckled about. he was talking about china and how china needs to be transparent with information concerning the virus. where is that transparency with the southern border? since they have taken control, they have shut down media access to the southern border. you cannot get a camera or crew there. is that america? is that america? the other question i had, will the nato countries -- are they

still current in their dues in terms of membership? that was one of the things that president trump was vocal about, and i think it may even upset some of the nato members that they were being called out for not paying their dues. are they current on their dues and membership, or have they fallen back to lagging behind? host: that is a great question and one we will ask coming up at 8:30 a.m. eastern time. we will talk with rachel ellehuus, deputy director of the europe, russia & eurasia program at csis and washington, d.c. hopefully you can hear her answer. it is a good one. caller: good morning.

-- good morning. this guy is a complete disaster. we had them on their knees. and then he said -- so they could send missiles to israel. he opened up the border. we have a lot of room at the border for letting everybody come in. our gas prices have gone up. he gave the pipeline to russia. this guy is a disaster. china is sending us about $50 billion a year. he sent them 500 -- 500 billion dollars, $600 billion a year. host: richard, i will leave it there. the president will be taking questions from reporters today, following the nato meeting in brussels.

you can watch it at 12:50 p.m. eastern time, or on c-span.org or you can download the free c-span radio app and listen there as well. we will take a break. and we come back, both chambers of congress are back in business and we will get a preview of the week ahead with jason dick. later, president biden is at the nato summit today. we will talk about the issues and ask the question about nato dues with rachel ellehuus. we will be right back. ♪ >> tonight, on the communicators , a roundtable discussion on telecom issues and potential regulation, affecting social media, and antitrust. >> we have politicians on both sides of the aisle who want the same thing.

they want some regulation on tech companies but are coming at it from different angles. that is where we are seeing what you mentioned, the piecemeal approach, where they clearly want something but they can't agree on want -- what. >> the democrat have control of the house, senate and white house. they have made it clear that part of their agenda will be criticizing and pursuing reforms that would affect major social media companies. they can't come to a cohesive reform agenda and piecemeal at this point. >> they will either be forced to be ro khanna up -- broken up. they would possibly have to fundamentally change the way they do business. >> tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern, regulating social media and big tech on the communicators on c-span2.

>> washington journal continues. host: joining us is jason dick, the deputy editor of roll call, here to talk about the week ahead. both chambers are back in congress. what is on the agenda in the house? guest: a lot. this will be a busy month of june. the house has been out since before memorial day. they have a lot of catching up to do on the floor. the first thing on the agenda is a pair of bills. one would basically rescind the authorization of use of military force from 2002 and the iraq war. there is a growing consensus that this authorization of use of military force is not necessary and they will be able to conduct activities around the globe to keep the country safe, using the previous

authorizations of use of military force. this one that specifically authorizes force in iraq -- military force in iraq is not necessary. there is legislation by juan vargas that would enhance transparency requirements for what is called esg requirements and proxy statements for public companies. this is saying this is what a company is doing to enhance their environmental profile. this has become a really big topic in light of some of the social justice movements we have seen in the country in the past year or so. this is important to a lot of investors who want to make better decisions, based on how a company behaves on issues that are important to them. host: we are talking about the week ahead in congress. let me tea up the lines for viewers. what do you want to see congress

working on? to republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. you can text us at (202) 748-8003. jason dick, what about the upper chamber? what is on the agenda? guest: this is going to be a big moment in the biden administration for the judiciary, in particular. they will vote to confirm his first appellate judge, a district court judge in d.c. she would be filling the seat of merrick garland, d.c. circuit judge -- the d.c. circuit judge the second most powerful court on the land. she is thought of as a attentional supreme court nominee herself. president barack obama

considered her for the seat of antonin scalia. he went with garland instead. garland was never considered by the senate, who was led by republicans at sign -- at the time. she will be his first appellate court nominee to be confirmed. and we will see as the supreme court starts to wrap up its term, whether there will be any retirements. there is speculation about stephen breyer. bill clinton nominated him to the court. it could be that interesting beginning of supreme court drama -- the beginning of supreme court drama for the summer. she would be the first black woman on the supreme court. and also, juneteenth. there is a lot of symbolic value to having this confirmation vote today. it also shows that the confirmation process for the judiciary is getting into high gear. host: the front page of roll

call.com, staffers inspect -- expect infrastructure bills to pass but little else. where do the negotiations stand on infrastructure? guest: is moving forward on a dual track right now. the house later on this month, not this week, but probably the last month of june, the senate majority leader will pass a service transportation bill somewhere in the round of $500 billion to $600 billion. that is expected to be part of the eventual big infrastructure package that democratic leaders want to pass this year. in the senate, things are a little more mixed. they passed a different service transportation bill last month that had bipartisan support. a lot of democrats are not happy with some of the things that were left out, like climate and so forth. on the other hand, we have this

group of 10 senators, five democrats and five republicans, have been negotiating among themselves on the broader infrastructure package. they are looking at a $1.2 trillion package. that is a little bit less than the president has said that he wanted and that he was negotiating. he said he would like to make sure the country is on the road to recovery and continues that way. but, it is getting closer to his number that was upwards of $2 trillion. the president is not going to get back from europe until later on this week. he will not have any meetings, necessarily, with any of those folks. the more support they can get on a bipartisan level for something moser to what he wants, that shows movement and that could move later this summer. host: where do -- i mean you talked about a dual track, who

is involved in a bipartisan proposal? guest: is an interesting mix. on one hand, you have susan collins, someone who has been the -- at the center of a lot of these negotiations for decades. and mitt romney, a first-term senator. he comes to the senate with a wealth of experience as a gop presidential nominee and a former governor. among democrats, you have people like jon tester, someone who comes from a republican leaning state in montana and knows how to win elections and explain tough votes and work across party lines in his state and among some of his colleagues in the senate. just those three names alone shows geographic diversity and shows an ideological diversity. and hopefully we will get some things going.

rob portman, a retiring senator from ohio, also comes with a wealth of experience in the house and working as a member of the george w. bush administration and as a senator. this seems to show that there is some support. and also, when people with that sort of wide pallet get together, that gives cover to other people in their respective caucuses and sins a signal to the leadership that there is broad support here and we want this to happen. host: if you have questions on infrastructure, call in this morning. that is on the -- if that is on the top of your to do list for congress, we will take your questions and comments about that. any other policy agendas as well. republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000.

independents, (202) 748-8002. text us, first name, city and state, at (202) 748-8003. here is a text, any movement from joe manchin on voting rights? guest: not that i am aware of. joe manchin of west virginia is a democratic senator. he came out a little over a week ago with an op-ed in his hometown newspaper, the charleston gazette mail and said he was opposed to the current voting rights legislation, hr one and s one, because it is not bipartisan. some people have said that you have to have partners willing to meet you in order to be bipartisan. but, it doesn't seem like there is a lot of movement there. what is interesting about this is there are a lot of items in the voting rights bill that joe manchin is supposed to. he wants to make sure that it is

bipartisan so it can be a lasting piece of legislature. he has voiced support for the voting rights reauthorization act, named after john lewis, a democrat from georgia and a key figure in the civil rights movement. he got a boost from merrick garland on friday, who said this would be a good idea to pass it. we also -- he said we also need the broader package to set the minimum standards for voting rights in the country. not a lot of movement with joe manchin. it does seem that there is going to be more pressure on him. we have both chambers back in for the first time in quite a while. the senate is still on track to consider chuck schumer -- on track. chuck schumer said he wants the senate to consider the voting rights act by the end of this month, the end of this session. they have two more weeks in the senate to do it.

we will be looking at it very closely toward the middle and the end of this week, to see where that starts coming up in the discussion. host: jason dick is with us. the deputy editor for roll call, here to take your questions and comments about the agenda. what do you want to see congress working on? christine in richmond, virginia, democratic caller. caller: my question was about climate change. where is that as part of the infrastructure bill? guest: right now -- sorry. right now, this has cost a lot of consternation among summit -- senate democrats. sheldon whitehouse has spent a number of years on the floor, trying to call attention to this, saying there is not enough provisions in the infrastructure package to assuage him about addressing climate change. this is one of the things when

people say don't forget you need to get everybody on board on this with democrats. there is not enough going on with climate change to a stage -- assuage people like sheldon whitehouse. we will see where that goes. the president may have given him and democrats some kind of coverage over the weekend with the -- when the g7 said they wanted to stop supporting any new coal-based power generation and were committing to cutting emissions in g7 countries. it is not the same thing as legislation and an infrastructure package, wears -- where it is codified in the united states. host: the biden administration offers plans for unused border wall funds. what do they want to do with this money? guest: as you recall, the trump

administration, during the debate over the wall, they could not get the money they wanted from the corporations committees to construct the wall on the southern border. one of the things the administration did is they reappropriated money from construction budgets to constructing parts of the wall. the biden administration wants to put that money back into military construction accounts. they want to repair some of the damage that was done to some of the areas, particularly in southern california and so forth , which dealt with erosion. one of the walls goes across the beach, separating mexico and california. in the military construction budgets in particular, these are the things, weapons are not going to warfare aspects of the pentagon's budget.

housing -- this is how housing is constructed on basis. these are literally the building blocks of the military and how they rebuild basis and repair things -- bases and repair things. we are not talking about a ton of money but it was a symbolic move that biden wanted to make and will put some relief in areas that were feeling strained . military construction has been a fairly popular spending line with congress, because they like to be able to report -- say they are replacing housing and infrastructure. it will replenish a lot of that. host: paul in mississippi, democratic caller. good morning. it is your turn. caller: yes. i would like to know what that colonial pipeline the russian hackers shut down, i think it

was snowden who played a part in that. is he still in russia? guest: i'm not aware of edward snowden's whereabouts. last i heard, he was in russia. i have not seen any news coverage about his involvement in the ransomware issue. certainly the u.s. intelligence agencies and law enforcement has identified russian hackers as responsible for that. host: what more will congress do on the colonial pipeline cyberattack? guest: it looks like they are going to try to make sure that any time there is some sort of cyber hack of a pipeline, but also any infrastructure that affects people's lives or their data, you will have to disclose that to the united states so people are aware and law enforcement is aware. one of the things that happened, the ransomware that was paid out

in bitcoin to these hackers on the colonial pipeline was recovered, some of it was recovered by federal law enforcement in the united states. when the federal government gets involved in these things, it is like any kind of ransom situation. they are able to do a lot more than just a private company who would want to quietly pay things to avoid any kind of publish the. -- publicity. host: mike in alabama, democratic caller. caller: yes. i want to know what the gentleman thinks will ever come of the search for what happened in the january 6 insurrection and the possible involvement of members of congress and the senate in the republican party. guest: right now, chuck schumer

is in the legislation -- the legislation stalled in the senate. it got 54 votes and that was not enough because it needed 60 votes. right now, it has stalled. chuck schumer has said he intends to bring it up again. as we find out more and more about what happened on january 6, who was involved and so forth, i think the pressure will only increase. whether that is enough to get a few more votes is unclear. during this vote in may on the january 6 commission, we had several absences. we don't know if it would have gotten us to 60. we know there were three more yes votes, getting us to 57. that is getting really close to getting that legislation passed.

we saw the relief of a joint citic committee report -- senate committee report that detailed the failures from a campus -- on a campus security level, particularly from the u.s. capitol police. that is being conducted by current officeholders who are subject to a lot of pressure. i think we have not heard the last of this about january 6. there is a member versus member lawsuit, eric swallow is suing mo brooks, a republican in alabama who is running for senate. for his role in inciting the violence on january 6. this issue is not going away. at roll call, we have made sure that we are continuing to keep an eye on and report on a lot of the issues that are surrounding u.s. capitol police. i would think we have not heard the last of it. host: jason dick, tell our

viewers about the stories servicing about the department of justice under the trump administration, seeking data about don mcgahn. guest: this was a bombshell in the last week, where we found out the trump administration and the justice department had subpoenaed not just the records of generalists, we are used to -- maybe not used to -- that is something we have seen in history dating back to the nixon administration, where journalists are targeted for their reporting on things. but then it got to something we have not seen, which was the justice department wanted the metadata from phones, basically seeing where information was being sent and received, whether members of the intelligence committee, specifically adam schiff and eric swalwell were leaking information.

and members of the family, including one minor. it was this bonkers moment, where people in journalism have long had to tread this precarious line from time to time, reporting on national security and so forth, because that attracts the attention of who is giving them this information in the government and they may find themselves the target of a leak investigation. the first time we saw this with members of congress was this past week. the senate committee, headed by richard durbin, said they will look into this. if necessary, they would subpoena jeff sessions and william barr to find out what was going on. the doj inspector general said they would look into it and find out what happened. as you mentioned, greta, don

mcgahn was subject to a probe where the administration subpoenaed his records with apple. several journalists have been targeted and members of congress have been subjected to a gag order. they could not share that information with don mcgahn. that is a huge violation because it goes beyond a political opponent. don mcgahn was the white house counsel. it is unclear. what they were looking for was whether he was talking to the press or otherwise leaking information about the president during the impeachment investigations or what have you. i can't help but think there are more shoes to drop, we use the expression that there is one shoe and a second shoe. this seems like a closet full of shoes that may be dropping. host: roll call is reporting the house committee has unveiled a

bipartisan big tech antitrust agenda. these are five bills that would trend the monopolies of the technology firms -- trim the monopolies of technology firms like amazon, apple, facebook and google. guest: this might be one of the more bipartisan issues because it does not split evenly among democrats and republicans. a lot of democrats from california and silicon valley, these are their constituents. they have to be careful in how hard they go after them. and then, on the republican side, you have people who, traditionally the publicans have been associated with more big businessis, these -- businesses. josh hawley made his name going after big tech. in both sectors, i would think you could get some real bipartisan support on this. it is unclear how much of a priority this will be with leadership.

it might be a situation where they have hearings, they may let people run off some steam on it. -- let off some steam on it. we have such a busy year ahead of us with spending and the voting rights act in particular, i don't know where it fits into getting on the floor and getting into legislation. it is only june. maybe that will pick up some momentum as we go along. host: nelson in redwood city, california. independent. caller: good morning. host: good morning. caller: voting rights, which after four decades, going from republican to independent after they started censoring everybody, my thing is voting rights, there will be a march today, not just with african-americans but with poor white folks in west virginia, that they are going to stand up. those poles are probably true --

polls are probably true, west virginia is not this far-right state that everybody makes it out to be because they voted for trump. they voted for the most two liberal democrats, mike dukakis and david humphrey. 9% voted for wallace in 1968. they voted for bill clinton twice, along with tennessee. what people have done with this right-wing version of the word conservatism, they have made it a culture war. so now, they have gotten people who, the average white person in tennessee and west virginia, they are not racist people. they voted for people of different parties. newt gingrich and rush limbaugh have made everybody who is a democrat the enemy. but tennessee and west virginia

voted twice for clinton, even though he was for partial-birth abortions. it is a right-wing thing where they make everybody the enemy who is not part of their group. that's all i have to say. guest: he brings up a good point. west virginia is a very individual place. i spent two years there as part of the -- i was working with the americorps program for coming to d.c. it does not fit into this cookie-cutter mold of partisansh ip. joe manchin has shown he understands his voters probably better than most people who have ever been familiar with politics in the state. shelley capito was the lead negotiator for republicans with joe biden on the infrastructure package before talks broke down before joe biden headed to europe.

west virginia is one of these places that is truly -- it does not fitly -- fit neatly into the box of right-wing or left-wing. those labels don't really matter as much to people there. host: terrence in brooklyn, a republican. caller: good morning. this guy, jason dick, he sounds like -- jason dick, he sounds like a democratic opportunist. he used the term "we." he is talking with democratic talking points. host: which one? what did he say, specifically? caller: he used the term "we" on several occasions when he was talking about democrats. he is a democratic opportunist -- opportunist. guest: the filibuster, every few

generations we get a big question on whether we are going to change the filibuster. it is a 50-50 senate. there is a lot of pressure to pass installation. if you keep your congress together, you get to block things. particularly with the voting rights legislation, before and then it will continue to be an issue. there will continue to be a lot of pressure on people like joe manchin and kyrsten sinema, to change their views. i don't see that happening anytime soon. joe manchin seems pretty deliberate that he wants to keep the filibuster the way it is. there is also talk in the democratic caucus that kyrsten sinema and joe manchin are giving coverage to other people who don't necessarily want to see that filibuster go away. joe manchin has taken a lot of arrows on the filibuster issue but he is not the only person

who is supporting it. he seems to be at the focal point of it. i don't think we will see any kind of rules change anytime soon. host: jason dick, the deputy editor for roll call. you can follow their reporting of capitol hill at roll call.com. thank you. we appreciate it. we will take a break. when we come back, we will turn our attention back to the nato summit in brussels, belgium. we will talk to rachel ellehuus, the deputy director of the russia, europe and eurasia program at csis. later, dr. carlton discusses his research into the cost of covid hospitalizations. >> c-span's landmark cases explores the stories and constitutional drama between -- behind significant supreme court decisions. for the next few weeks, watch

key episodes from our series, sunday at nine at -- 9:45 p.m. eastern. korematsu v the united states. the court voted 6-3 in favor of the united states. watch landmark cases, sunday night at 9:45 p.m. eastern on c-span, online at c-span.org or listen on the c-span radio app. >> tonight on the communicators, a roundtable discussion on telecom issues and potential regulation affecting social media, antitrust and big tech. >> we have politicians from both sides of the aisle that sort of want the same thing. they want more regulation on tech companies but they are coming at it from different angles. i think that is where we are seeing what you mentioned, the piecemeal approach where they

clearly want something but they can't seem to agree on what. >> the democrats have control of the house, senate and white house. they have made it clear that part of the agenda will be criticizing and pursuing reforms that will change social media companies. they can't come to a cohesive reform agenda. it is piecemeal at this point. >> they will either be forced to be broken up to divest pieces of their company, and they would possibly have to fundamentally change the way they do business. >> tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern, regulating social media and big tech on the communicators on c-span2. ♪

>> washington journal continues. host: rachel ellehuus is the deputy director for the center for strategic and international studies russia, europe and eurasia program, joining us to talk about the president at his first nato summit in brussels, belgium. i want to begin with the agenda today. guest: thank you very much and good morning. there is a very robust agenda. there is regular business that the alliance needs to do at the summit, which is reinforcing the

defense posture and making sure the alliance is properly funded. i would look toward some new areas that made up will discuss -- nato will discuss today. possibly even china. host: how many countries are part of the nato alliance? guest: there are currently 30 and there is a mixture of networks and partnerships stretching as far across as the asia-pacific. host: what is the definition of a nato member? guest: nato members are countries who have applied for memory ship and gone through a vigorous process to become members. if there is a certain criteria about control of the military, providing your fair share in terms of professionalizing that military and it is a robust process that requires approval from each individual never stay.

the bar is quite high. host: what are the benefits? guest: the primary benefit is collective security. article five is the cornerstone of the nato alliance. it says an attack against one member state constitutes an attack against all of them. the one time that was invoked was in the sense of the united states after the attacks of 9/11. host: what do you have to pay or do to continue to be a member of nato? guest: nato has two forms of funding. it has indirect funding. that would be the defense budget of member states. and it has a small amount of direct or common funding. in the case of the u.s., that constitutes a very small percentage of the budget that goes into the alliance. that covers operating costs, things like a small headquarters presence. i would not say allies paid dues per se but they have an obligation to contribute their fair share, both in terms of

common funding to keep nato up and running, but more importantly to keep up their own defenses. listeners are probably familiar with the requirements from the whales summit to send 2% of gdp on defense and 20% on modernization. host: and where has the united states fallen on our payments over the last -- during the trump administration and what has the biden administration said? guest: those indirect payments toward the common funding are relatively fixed. those are allocated, according to a country's gdp. certainly, the united states defense budget is over 2%. it is worth recognizing that the u.s. has global commitments. 3.1% of the u.s. defense budget is not solely going to nato contributions. that is for the united states defense posture, globally. host: what then -- what has the

biden administration said about how they will contribute, going forward? guest: certainly at this summit, responsibility sharing and burden sharing will be key. the defense investment pledge started in 2017 was put forward under the obama-biden administration. since then, non-nato allies -- since then, nato allies other than the united states have increased their spending for seven consecutive years. one could say that pledge has been delivered on and allies are moving toward spending that 2%. i think biden will reinforce that message. he will also look not just at 2% but he will look at how allies are spending that in terms of contributions and procurements to the alignments -- alliance. host: what was your reaction to the editorial board when they

wrote on april 18, some of the into gone funds, they call it bidens defense budgets, some of it will go to to get climate change. that means fewer resources to fight for core fighting capabilities. washington cannot ask the military to deter emboldened great prior -- powers and fight climate change on a declining budget. the blunt truth is the u.s. is no longer certain to win a great power war. china's military maneuvers in the western pacific are at a new level of intensity. guest: nato has shown it is able to do a number of things simultaneously. i would not say it is necessarily true that nato -- because nato is often involved in climate change. even the pandemic, if we look at how nato has been so agile and responding to the coronavirus

pandemic, that gives us faith they can say -- do the same in terms of climate. nato recognizes that their job is to look at the security implications of climate change. for example, how resilient is a base to a natural disaster? how many emissions targets can the alliance help to reduce when it operates in training and exercises and even overseas operations? i think nato, as an alliance, has proven it is agile in its ability to respond to transnational security challenges like the pandemic and climate change, while still maintaining that core capability to determine defense against adversaries. host: we want to welcome viewers into the discussion. you can dial in. republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002.

text us with the same area code, (202) 748-8003. you have to include your first name, city and state. what about afghanistan, rachel ellehuus? remind us about what the president has said about u.s. policy toward afghanistan and how do you think -- what have the nato leaders said in response? guest: we are currently in the process of u.s. and allied forces moving out of afghanistan. but the president's message has been that even if the united states and nato are leaving militarily, they remain committed to the future of afghanistan. when you look at what is likely to come out of the summit, i would expect to see a commitment to a continued civilian presence in the country, with things like getting government institutions

up and running, making sure corruption does not take over. there will probably also be a financial commitment to funding the afghan national security forces and hopefully a commitment to train those security forces in a country such as iraq. the clear message is even if we are drawing down the curtain in afghanistan, the commitment to a secure and stable future in afghanistan remains. host: we will hear from paul, first. indianapolis, independent. caller: good morning. host: good morning. caller: i spent the last 12 years in retirement, keeping track of nato's capabilities. the sad truth is that over 90% of nato's deployable forces speak english. in other words, people who can go from there home base to that area to defend them are british.

the germans have spent little on troops deployable outside of germany. the spanish, the french, these people contribute very little to the border defense. people like the greeks use their pensions and say it is military spending. nato is -- the germans have said recently that they will cut back on their defense spending. the real problem is nato is a broken reed. the united states can do better outside of nato. host: your reaction? guest: paul has a point in pointing out that there -- that allies contribute differently in the alliance. the bottom line, all countries should be committed, to the

article five commitment. the strength of the german military forces, for example, but also responding in cyberspace. i recognize that a lot of these countries have, throughout the 90's and most of the 2000s -- throughout the 1990's and most of the 2000s have reoriented their defense posture to peacekeeping or crisis management. what nato has been doing is rebuilding the core capacity for collective defense and heavy fighting. the way that heavy fighting looks in the future is not necessarily how it looked during the cold war. when a country germany is rebuilding its forces, there will be an element of the war fighting capacity that paul referred to. but there will also be cyber and hyper capabilities -- hybrid capabilities that will be important.

deploy ability and sustainability are important. but improving the quality and quantity of forces, the biden administration plans to shine a spotlight on that. as paul said, let's make sure the increased spending is not going toward pensions or legacy capabilities but is improving the output of the alliance. host: rachel ellehuus, is president putin a threat to the nato alliance? guest: well, i'm not -- [laughter] i'm not sure i would put it that way that putin personally is a threat. his behavior and russia's defense posture presents challenges and a threat to the at lyons -- alliance. look at russia's military buildup, that is concerning to allies, particularly when the arctic is been an area of cooperation and low tension. the cyber attacks that we have

seen recently, which putin claims are not being executed by the russian state, but we sort of traced those groups executing attacks took russian territories. that is a threat to the alliance. militarily, the fact that russians -- russia is masking troops in ukraine, a country that borders nato allies is certainly a concern and threat to the alliance. all things considered, i do think russia is a threat to nato. there are some small, discrete areas where russia is a partner. without russia's cooperation, we won't make any meaningful cooperation progress on strategic stability or arms-control. host: here is a text from one of our viewers in california who says russia's government and its private businesses have been fortunate with not getting attacked from ransomware and

cyber criminals. can you explain why the russians have been so lucky and not been a victim of these attacks? guest: i can't cite a specific example. but i do not think that russia has been immune to the cyber attacks. the u.s. and european societies are relatively transparent. when there is a serious cyber attack or a breach in russia, it is not on the front page of the news. i have no doubt that nato's -- russia's defenses have been breached in the past and russia has been the victim of a cyber attack, it is just not something they are advertising. host: does article five of the nato alliance extend to cyber attacks? guest: it does. that is a wonderful question. at the inception, it applies to more conventional domains. in between 19, the alliance agreed to make cyber and

operational domain -- in 2019, the alliance agreed to make cyber and operational domain, alongside conventional domains. host: what cyber attacks do you believe that we have seen over recent years should have triggered an article five or have none of them? guest: the one challenge for nato is that, in cyberspace, the capabilities that would be used to defend against or respond to a cyber attack are owned by -- it is established by countries rather than by nato as a whole. the responses attended to be national -- attend to be national with -- tend to be national when there is a cyber attack.

they intended to put forward a new cyber doctrine that would allow for more collective action. in a sense, catching up with the fact that cyber is in fact under the article five umbrella. host: we will go to north carolina, republican, welcome to the conversation. caller: republican until i am able to withdraw. they have moved too far to the right. i no longer support them and their candidates. i would like to see president biden approach nato about opposing sanctions for two countries. one is russia for human violations -- human rights violations they make, putting bounties on our troops and attacking countries that used to be independent. the other is israel, because of a are not honoring -- because they are not honoring borders

that were set up for them when we helped reestablish them. if we shut down all trade into their countries and all trade coming out, they might change their mind about what they want to do and how they respond. and russia would bury criminals and ransomware, they have an obligation to help human beings be protected. thank you. host: your reaction? guest: i think that is a valid comment and the role of china is something president biden will be talking with e.u. counterparts. rather than nato, it turns -- it tends to be the european union that brings sanctions on a

country like russia. you have seen that coordination between the biden administration and the european union in terms of sanctions on belarus and ukraine and on russia for the imprisonment, a real attempt to coordinate those sanctions and statements, under a belief that when that action is coordinated and reinforced on both sides of the atlantic, you have a better chance of improving the behavior or deterring bad behavior. sanctions have their limits. i think that is why it is important that nato allies are meeting today to signal really -- military resolve toward russia as well. host: we talked about russia but what about china? guest: china will be interesting. one of the things nato will do at the summit today is launch an update of their strategic concept. the strategic concept sets the direction of travel for the alliance with a level of ambition for the alliance, and

opportunities and threats to nato. the last strategic concept was from 2010. it does not mention climate or china. i would be looking for an update on language on china in that strategic concept. the question is how china will be characterized. will it be characterized as a challenge? will it be characterized as a threat as russia currently is? how much will allies agree that it is nato's responsibility to respond to the challenges china presents? many of those challenges are economic, rather than military in nature. i expect to see some movement from nato in terms of -- much of which china has invested in. i expect action in the u.s.-e.u. summit, where some of the tools and economic measures will be

more relevant with regard to china. host: what was your reaction, seeing the statement out of the chinese embassy in the united kingdom after the g7 summit, when they said they always believe that countries, big or small, strong or weak, poor or rich our equals -- are equals. the days when global decisions were dictated by a small group of countries are long gone? guest: china is, if nothing else, adept at image projection. if you look at china's presence in europe, they are very focused on presenting china in a positive light. providing masks and other medical equipment was an attempt to improve the chinese image in the eye of europeans. whether that is working is an open question.

a lot of countries, particularly in europe, who may have been buying the more positive image of china, are less hold into it -- into it. -- how that has a vote and aggressive -- evoked an aggressive response from china. we take those words with a dose of skepticism. climate change does not get solved without their cooperation. the pandemic is something that is transnational. we can't stop it without them. we need their help. i appreciate bidens message where we have to be tough but there are also areas where we have to have a basis of cooperation with china. host: chris in massachusetts, democratic caller. the morning.

-- good morning. caller: you said russia was a threat to nato. i would like to remind you that in the spring of 1998, i think it was, that gorbachev was given a promise by james baker that italy -- that in return for the dissolution of the warsaw pact and the reunification of germany, nato would stop pushing borders one inch eastward. since then, nato has pushed its borders to the soviet entity in the baltic state, it has made its wishes for the soviet socialist republic of georgia to become part of nato and it has also lobbied for ukraine to become part of nato.

so, can you please tell me who is the villain in this? it is confusing to me. by the way, this has been -- this has been -- the national archives just released this. it is all factual. thanks. guest: thanks for your question. i am certainly familiar with both sides of -- not really the argument -- but on what was or was not intended. i have seen those statements and all i can tell you is that only the people in the room really know what happens there. i think there is an understanding that even if, at the time, there were assurances given that nato would not enlarge eastward, those were somehow limited in time and depended on certain conditions,

which russia also breached. i always try to keep in mind the broader principles of the agreement, which is that they have a right to self-determination. if a country like with the when you want to be a member of a certain alliance, they should have freedom of association to apply to and join the alliance. if it were nato or cst a, that is there -- csto, that is their choice. those are principles russia helped to establish and has abided by in large measures. it surprises me when this right is thrown away by the wayside. host: tim, democratic caller. caller: thank you for taking my phone call. i would like to bring forth

something that has been happening from 1974 in the eastern mediterranean, where turkey invaded cyprus. a nato ally, and is infringing upon the territorial borders of greece. i would think that nato would start to address this matter. it has been how many years, now? almost 50 years that this has been happening. host: ok. rachel ellehuus? guest: cyprus is a difficult issue. it is a divided island. despite several attempts to resolve the dispute between the

turkish and greece, resolution has not been in the cards. the u.n. attempted and found little common ground. what nato can do, given turkey and greece are both members of the alliance, is try to defuse these tensions. a few months ago, when there were tensions, a general stepped in and had consulted talks on decreasing tensions in the region. that is in the interest of both greece and turkey. that speaks to nato's memory ship and the benefits thereof. if they were outside of nato, tensions would have turned into a much more serious situation. host: here is a tweet from mark that says if russia is a threat to nato, why is germany and eastern europe buying gas from

them, lining their pockets with no ins that can be used against nato? guest: i think the caller is referring to nord stream 2, an energy pipeline that would take russia's gas onto the european continent, primarily germany. every country has domestic economic interests that sometimes are at odds with security and defense aspects. the nord stream 2 issue has divided the alliance. countries in the north of europe, particularly in the baltic states and central europe, they see nord stream 2 as increasing europe's dependence on russia. and they want to see a resolution. what i can say is the biden administration, recently, even though they did not think that imposing sanctions on the

pipeline would have the intended effect of stopping the pipeline, they are now trying the route of diplomacy, whereby they try to work with germany and other european countries today's resources. in some cases, the economic nature is at odds, but on the good side, we made it perfectly aware of trying to resolve that through tough diplomacy. caller: good morning. here we are, i don't know how many years later. our relationship with other countries doesn't seem to fit

what the democracy stands for. if we keep pushing our democracy across the globe, are we taking away heritage of other countries? host: that is a good point to end on. what is the future of nato? guest: if you look back at the north atlantic treaty, the principles speak about every members commitment to liberty, democracy, the things the caller pointed out. in joining the nato alliance, countries signed up for this. these are not abstract words. they are foundations of the alliance. out of respect for these values and principles, you don't get political cohesion that allows nato allies to act for common

purpose and to step up. in my view, the future of nato is based on these foundational values in remembering why countries joined the alliance. that is because they are stronger together rather than facing challenges individually. host: thank you for the conversation this morning. up next, we are turning our attention to covert hospitalizations and insurance companies. we are talking with michigan assistant professor dr. kao-ping chua about the cost of these hospitalizations and treatment. we will be right back. ♪ >> house members return for

legislative business today at 5 p.m. eastern. the senate is in at 3 p.m. eastern set for five -- for judge jackson. watch the senate to live on c-span two and the house live on c-span. c-span shop.org -- he still time to order the congressional directory with contact information from embers of congress and the biden administration. >> washington journal continues. host: joining us this morning is dr. kao-ping chua.

he is in -- an assistant professor at university of michigan, and discussing the research of covid-19 and hospitalization. we are focusing on the pandemic end of the response, and this week, we are focusing on hospitalization and treatments. we want viewers to call in with questions and comments about that. let's begin -- if you go into the hospital for covid-19, what are the costs associated with being hospitalized? guest: back in 2020, most insurers rid of the cost of hospitalization. host: what is the new policy?

guest: it depends on which insurance you have. if you are not insured by a company, you can be stuck with the bill like $3800. host: so that could be a potential average bill under this new price sharing policy, and $1500 for medicare advantage? guest: correct. host: why the new policy? guest: each insurers make that decision. they are still increasing and

now is the right time to let their cost-sharing waivers expire. i think the other reason is that , in 2020, the cost of medical care is waiving of cost-sharing. [indiscernible] host: during the height of the pandemic, people were paying their premiums but they were not going to the doctor outside of covid related treatment. how did insurance companies do in 2020? guest: a lot of them ended up

sending out a lot less money and were actually forced to issue rebates. host: they were forced to issue rebates because they did not meet the criteria? guest: yes. they did not meet minimum spending requirements. host: what did congress say about forcing insurance companies to pay for covid related expensive -- expenses? guest: in 2020, the provision act forced insurance companies to cover covert hospitalization in full. there is currently a mandate for insurers to cover all costs related to covid vaccination. they voluntarily waived

cost-sharing in 2020. host: we are asking our viewers to call in with questions or comments about insurance companies and covid-19 expenses. eastern, (202) 748-8000, mountain pacific, (202) 748-8001 -- we want to know what it cost you. guest: [indiscernible] host: why is that? guest: the government mandate and the cares act and 2020 that

required -- host: what were hospitals doing if someone did not have insurance, but sought treatment for covid-19? guest: the hospitals had the opportunity to provide a refund under the cares act. [indiscernible] host: do you recommend if patients -- what do you recommend if patients received bills when they were not supposed to? guest: [indiscernible]

we are seeing in the hospital. they can cover certain costs in which the doctor or hospital admitted -- if patients do wind up getting a bill, they can foot that to make sure it was not an error. host: you are referring to these numbers from your study that prior, 71% were billed for hospitalization related service and for medicare advantage insurers, 49% billed for hospitalization services. that bill that -- that average

was $277. guest: the charge for -- host: we will go to donna in somerville, massachusetts. caller: i used to be a former federal employee. i have several blue cross blue steel standard options. i would like to know -- the blue

cross standard option 104 -- i just went in for a test, i was tested negative. i had to covid-19 tests in april of last year. july 31 july the 31st, 2020. i didn't need any hospitalization. host: what is your question? [indiscernible]

i think that is a question for your insurance company. guest: i agree. it is hard for me to comment without going through insurers. host: linda from pennsylvania. go ahead with your question or comment. caller: i have to turn down the tv, it is distracting. there was a situation in january of this year were a coworker's direct relative was positive for covid. that information was shared with my employer, and my employer mandated that our small office staff, everyone go for a rapid test. it seemed like there was not a choice.

the rapid test was $75. i have applied to my insurance company to get reimbursed for the $75, but i haven't heard back yet. i already have coworkers that their insurance company denied the reimbursement of the $75. that doesn't seem fair. is there anything my coworkers can do instead of paying for this out of their pocket? guest: i agree it is not fair. again, it is hard for me to comment. there is controversy about whether insurance will cover when talking about risk for covid-19 exposure. that came after january.

my advice would be to continue to appeal to your insurer. host: from new york. caller: everybody keeps talking about -- is that true or false? guest: i'm sorry, i couldn't catch the question. caller: online, the government saying they are paying $50,000 for each covid patient. [indiscernible] guest: the average amount reimbursed to hospitals by medicare for medicare patient is about $20,000.

host: related to that, is the money the hospitals receive -- one of our viewers on twitter saying how is the need for additional covid funding to hospitals determined? what happened to that money, do you know? the government gave hospitals money to respond to covid-19. guest: what the federal government has done -- to minimize -- [indiscernible]

verse it for -- they can reimburse it. host: another tweet. if the unvaccinated make up all of those hospitalized, will ensure his baby surcharge those who won't get vaccinated or reward those who do? guest: [indiscernible]

[no audio] guest: -- that much variation. host: when you look back on the study did, what stands out to that viewers should know? guest: if you're hospitalized for covid, the likelihood you

will get a bill -- if you do have to get a bill and you think it was knots was to be sent, you should call your -- not supposed to be sent, you should call your insurance company. host: if you want to learn more about the study, -- thank you for your time this morning. we will take a short break. and we come back, return to our question. our discussion from earlier. what is your confidence level and president biden's handling of foreign affairs. there are the numbers on your screen, start dialing in now. ♪

host: president biden in brussels, belgium. meetings are underway for the 31st nato summit. the first for this president of the united states. he is still on his overseas trip , he started with the g7 summit in england. after news conference, he made his way to brussels for the nato summit. the meeting with the president at 12:50 pm eastern.

we will take questions about what transpired in brussels, then he will continue on his trip, meeting with president putin on wednesday. your confidence level in the president handling foreign affairs. take a look at a recent poll from abc news. they found 57% of you have confidence in biden to do the right thing in regard to oral affairs. 52% trust the president to negotiate on america's behalf with world leaders. 49% of you said you trust the president to negotiate with putin. 44% say america's leadership in the world got stronger under this president. 36% say it has gotten weaker. do you agree or disagree with those numbers this morning? we want to hear from you. for republicans, (202) 748-8001. , democrats (202) 748-8000,

and independents (202) 748-8002. join us on twitter. you can go to facebook.com/c-span as well. the g7, what happened at that gathering. >> we are will work -- will work together with our partners and allies. the united states is going to do our part. america is back at the table. the lack of participation in the past and full engagement was noticed significantly, and only by leaders of those countries,

but leaders of g7 countries. america is back in the business of leading the world. so, the bottom line is, i was very pleased with the outcome of the entire conference. i noticed there was a lot of coverage of my individual comments by my colleagues about how we were all getting on. i felt it was not about me, it was about america. i felt a genuine sense of enthusiasm. host: president biden saying america is back at the table. take a look at two headlines about the g7 summit.

g7 leaders pressure beijing on human rights violations, then you have the new york times front-page headline. persist unity returns to the g7 summit. a democratic collar, you are up first. caller: good morning. i have a lot of confidence in biden. he has a lot of experience. i know europe is extremely happy . i am very pleased. host: which other countries keep you awake at night or to be concerned about america? caller: russia bothers me deeply. hacking into some of our

companies, that bothers me a lot. host: what kind of tone do you think the president should have in his meeting with the russian president on wednesday? caller: a calm, assertive, firm tone. keep it calm, keep it matter-of-fact. we don't like what you're doing, stop it. host: from north carolina, and independent. what do you think? caller: it is a big step up from one of the previous presidents. he showed a commitment to multilateral foreign affairs. he should commitment to working with allies across the atlantic in dealing with china, like i

have seen in cornwall. host: what in cornwall specifically? caller: if i remember correctly, i read a few articles in the financial times. several issues that were discussed in cornwall -- toughening their response into new high-tech threats and changing how governments respond to china. biden putting to use a target subsidy to help industries in the u.s. compete more effectively. host: here's the president at his news conference yesterday

when asked about china and transparency from that country. >> i think china has to act more responsibly in terms of international norms and transparency. transparency matters across the board. i think the idea that -- one of the things i raised and that others raised is that we have not had access to determine whether or not -- i have not reached a conclusion, because our intelligence community hasn't. whether or not this was a consequence from the marketplace of bat and the environment that caused covid-19, or whether it was an experiment gone awry in a lab. it is important to know the

answer to that. we have to build a system whereby we can know when we see another lack of transparency, we might produce another pandemic. we have that access. the world has that access. we are trying to figure out if we can put together an international basis upon which we can have a bottom line of what the transparency is accounting for. host: president biden on china and his handling of the covid-19 pandemic. now, from a politico, the takeaways they say of the g7 summit include the chiding of china.

china emerged as one of the main topics for the g7 leaders. two years on since their physical meeting. the president has tighten his grip on hong kong and step of china's military presidents -- presence around taiwan. and on -- in unequivocal language, the g7 leaders mentioned contentious issues that will roil beijing, including a call for another investigation into the origins of the coronavirus in china, and the road initiative that has built massive infrastructure in a developing countries. use saw the wall street journal headline about the g7 leaders pressuring beijing on human rights violations. how did china respond? from its embassy in the u.k., they put out a statement yesterday saying we always believe that countries, big or

small, strong or weak, poor or rich, our equals. world affairs should be handled through consultations by all countries. the days when global decisions were dictated by a few countries are long gone. a democratic caller. caller: i think he is doing a good job. he is knowledgeable and respectful. respect is the main ingredient that differs from our most recent president. biden clearly respects these other nations, including those we are not friendly with. that respect is going to get him and the united states far ahead from where we have been in the last four years. host: did he show respect to russian president vladimir putin? caller: i believe so. host: why do you think that

would work? caller: he needs to be respected. it is critical. it is the lack of respect from his fellows that make them so dangerous. i think biden shows both strength and commitment and respect for this russian premier. host: do you think russia would respond better to action and not words? caller: i don't think that includes action. i don't think respect and action are opposites. host: let's listen to the president when he was asked about his upcoming meeting on wednesday with mr. pruden. >> on to ask about a comment said today. why do you think he has not changed his behavior in spite of everything the u.s. has done at this point? host: he's glad we.

-- >> he's glad mayor pete -- vladimir putin. >> he said russia would be ready to hand over cyber criminals to the united states if the u.s. would do the same. are you open to that kind of a trade? >> i am open to -- if there are crimes committed against russia and the people committing those crimes are being harbored in the united states, i am committed to holding them accountable. i was told as i was flying here that he said that. i think that is potentially a good sign of progress. host: that meeting with the russian president takes place on wednesday. yesterday, on fox news sunday, the former secretary of state was asked about president biden invite me up and's meeting --

and putin's meeting. >> are you worried about what is going to happen? >> i heard secretary blinken say the right words. we want to find places we can work with the russians. but there is no administration that was tougher on russia. we worked diligently to support ukraine. we built up the u.s. military. we left nato $400 billion stronger than we took over. we built that rate -- relationship between united states and nato in a way that put pressure on putin. it won't be about the tone, it will be about the actions the united states government is prepared to take to preserve and defend american interests and stop russian online activity around the world. when you hear biden talk about taking us back, back is the russians taken crimea on the watch of president obama. a fifth of ukraine, that is not a back the united states can

afford to allow to happen. we need to continue to defend against the threats pruden may pose, whether it is cyber or kinetic. or any under -- any other information putin maple was. -- may may was. may pose. host: biden arrived in brussels yesterday. this morning, he and other leaders arrived in a formal ceremony at nato headquarters where they met with the head of nato, the secretary-general there. the president had a one-on-one meeting with the secretary-general ahead of all of the leaders gathering for what they call a family photo, where they pose for the cameras.

then president biden and his allies met in a room around a table to discuss the future of nato and what each country would like to see from the alliance. all taking place today in belgium, than the president will hold a news conference at nato had coulters -- headquarters at 12:50 eastern time. belgium is six hours ahead of us. you will hear from the president right here on c-span. or watch on our website, c-span.org. you can also down of the free c-span radio app. from the pole, they found the majority of americans trust president joe biden to negotiate on the usb have with our foreign counterparts -- u.s. behalf with our foreign counterparts. republicans dial in (202)

748-8001, democrats (202) 748-8000, independence (202) 748-8002. you are a democrat, what do you say? caller: i want to speak about what he just said, that they supplied the weapons to crimea. no, they got caught trying to do some slick stuff over there, it was across the united states. that's why they did what they said. host: why do you have confidence in this president? caller: i've been knowing joe biden for a long time. host: ok. take a look at what libby said on facebook. i just a three-year-old to juggle find crystal more than i trust anyone in the current administration handling foreign or domestic affairs.

i realize it is early in the game, but so far, more talk than action. our adversaries must know we are serious about taking action. then benjamin on facebook. he may be nicer, but his foreign policy is trump's foreign policy. democratic caller, what do you say? caller: our president is weak, and i think he is going to throw the u.s. to the chinese or to the russians, because he has never done anything in his whole life in congress. even when he was vice president, maybe i shouldn't say it this way, but he was a slouch. nothing. host: larry, republican.

caller: yes, thank you. i don't believe biden is strong enough to confront anyone, russians or chinese. all i believe he is doing at these meetings is appeasing what the foreign government leaders want to hear. i got thrown off twitter because i made the comment that i wondered if biden was going to tell putin that he was going to take him out behind the barn and whip him. i see biden is a very weak man. i see him as a weak individual, physically and mentally. i don't believe he has the capacity to deal anything ordeal for america in any way. thank you and have a wonderful day. host: take a look at what the french president had to say about president biden's first

meetings overseas. >> we have had it a good couple days so far. i had a chance to spend some time with president macron, get to know him. we have some things we have to talk about later, but things are going well. or as we say back in the states, we are on the same page. thank you. >> thank you, mr. president. the conversations we had, we have to deal with this pandemic, covid-19. climate change, we need cooperation. it is great to have a u.s. president a part of it and

willing to cooperate. i think what you demonstrate is leadership is partnership, and we appreciate it. >> i think we can do a lot, too. the united states is back. we feel very strongly about the cohesion of nato, and i for one think that the european union is an incredibly strong and vibrant entity. it has a lot to do with the ability of helping europe handle not only its economic issues, but provide the backbone and support for nato. we are very supportive. host: your reaction to hearing the president of france there, with president biden, praising him for having a president that is in the club.

does that give you confidence or not? from south carolina, democratic caller. caller: it gives me a lot of confidence in joe biden as president. i think he is capable of handling foreign affairs. we need someone to be able to mediate and be equal with our foreign countries. we have dealt with foreign countries in a disruptive way for a long time, and i think president biden has the confidence, the intelligence to handle foreign affairs, whether it be russia, france -- he has that confidence. that is all i have to say, thank you. host: eric on facebook says it will be a continuation of the bush clinton bush obama trump foreign policy. empty rhetoric, but no

substantive improvements to our dysfunctional immigration laws. -- new factions for arms text money. robin on facebook says relieved. president biden is the damage trump did on an international stage. biden has not been left out of meetings, that is for starters. i republican, what do you say? caller: i think this president is weak. i think trump was a stronger leader for the united states of america. if president biden can't take care of the u.s., he can't take care of foreign affairs. our borders are ridiculous. our taxes are going up. this is a very weak man. he may sound soft, but we need a

fighter for our country. that is all i have to say. host: the vent tweeting at 9:30 this morning. our nato alliance is stronger than ever. today, i am joining our 29 allies to discuss our collective defense including from russian aggression, challenges from china, cyber activity, and climate change. the president in brussels is six hours ahead of us, so he has had a busy morning already. the schedule included meeting with prime minister of estonia, the and of lafayette, and up in of lithuania. then, family photo as you saw with nato leaders. he bent his it in the nato summit -- key then -- he then participated in the nato summit.

you will be able to watch and listen on c-span as well as on c-span.org or go to our c-span radio app and listen there. according to a poll, 57% of you have confidence in biden to do the right thing regarding world affairs. 52% of you trust biden to negotiate on america's behalf. when asked if you trust the president to negotiate with putin, 49% said yes. the poll also includes questions about america's leadership in the world. 44% say it has gotten stronger under the president, while 36% said it has gotten weaker. we want your reaction to that pole and your confidence level in the president. peter in new hampshire, republican. caller: i have no confidence in joe biden as president, and there are good reasons why. donald trump was a hands-on

president. the minute trump announced that he was going to run, they were on top of him because for them in washington, it is a swamp as usual. business as usual, whether it is co-opt -- corrupt or not. biden is going to cave, in joe biden is a figurehead, like all presidents. the truth of the matter is the people in washington, d.c., the people in power, our obama holdovers. who is fooling who? host: when you say biden is going to cave, what are you referring to? caller: let's take a look at the pipeline. this administration had no problem shutting down the keystone pipeline, but they had

-- handed the keys to the kingdom to russia and ukraine to complete the gas project to germany. as far as i can tell, it looks like merkel is just as bad as joe biden. what they don't seem to understand over there in germany is that all putin has to do is shuts the flow of fuel off to germany, then germany is back to burning coal as usual. nothing changes. nothing is changing. host: the president was asked about his reaction to president putin saying relations with the u.s. are at a low point. here is what he had to say. >> it is a low point. it depends on how he responds to acting consistently with international norms, which in many cases, he has not. i told him when i was running,

and when i got elected, before i was sworn in, but i was going to find out whether or not he did in fact engage and trying to interfere in our election. i was going to take a look at whether he was involved in the cyber security breach that occurred, etc. if you did, i was going to respond. i checked it out, i had access to all the intelligence, he was engaged in those activities, and i made it clear that i would respond again. i always found -- and i don't mean to suggest that the press should not know, but this is not a contest about who can do better in front of a press conference or try to embarrass each other. it is about making myself very clear what the conditions are to get a better relationship with russia. we are not looking for conflict. we are looking to resolve those actions which we think are

inconsistent with international norms. where we can work together, we may be able to do that in terms of some strategic doctrine that may be able to work together. there is even talk there may be the ability to work together on climate. the bottom line is, and i think the best way to deal with this is for he and i to meet, to have our discussion. i know you don't doubt that i will be straightforward with him about our concerns, and i will make clear in my view of how that meeting turned out, he will make clear from his perspective how it turned out. host: president biden at his conference yesterday. you can watch that conference in its entirety if you go to our website, c-span.org. when you hit play on the video player, you will see gold stars we remarked key moments or points of interest from that news conference. if you can't watch the whole

thing, or looking for a certain part, you will be able to find it. your confidence and president biden's handling of foreign affairs. francesca on facebook rights total confidence to deal with anything that comes his way. from pennsylvania, people think biden is doing well in other countries, but what is he doing in the u.s.? destroying union jobs, higher gas prices, higher taxes, open borders. americans live here, not overseas. i democratic caller for massachusetts. caller: thank you for taking my call. i am a supporter of the president. i supported his campaign, and i support him as the president of the united states of america. i think he is mature, and we needed a mature person at this time in our history.

i watch the gentleman who he replaced, and i was very disappointed. i watched his career for a long time. i lived in queens back in the late 60's, early 70's. i remember his caring, his activities. i am speaking of trump now. during the time his father was still alive, i watched him in the case where the lady would speed up in central park, i watched how he took the wrong position and did not pay attention to the inspectors. i watched him talk about the military, hurt his father talk to him about the military. i know he avoided the draft. i know he told his kids to avoid

the draft. host: what is your point? caller: i am trying to let people know, trying to testify, that we have a good president, a good man, a good human being. what we need to do is support him. some of the colors are not doing that, some of them are still dealing with trump, and trump is not the president anymore. in fact, trump try to take over this country by force on january the sixth. that is my point. host: we will go to tom in illinois. republican. caller: hi. trump is flawed as a candidate because nobody searched him out. he is in with russia and china.

i mean, biden is. biden is. host: was that a correction from your wife? caller: yes. i don't have any confidence in him at all. the secretary of state under obama said that he was never right on any foreign policy, and if you want to get along with leaders around the world, you give them more money, and that is what he is doing. he is imposing 15% u.s. tax audit. don't people see this? it is ridiculous. of course i'm not going to like him. when someone gives you money, you are happy. host: larry, a republican, as well. caller: i don't have any confidence.

no one has bought up this issue, but we have a number of iranian ships that are traveling with missiles. is biden going to do anything about it? he has a question of china, about where the virus started. with all of the information he has in his hand, he has a question? russia sent blankets to the u.k. -- ukraine. he has no clue about our own sovereignty, no border control. he is going after the u.n. who for its complicit nation -- nature with china over the virus. come allah -- kamala is embarrassing. she's going to take corrupt countries with our tax dollars,

and those dollars will not make it to the people that need it that are the reason why they are coming to even their own country. i have no confidence in this president whatsoever. host: dennis from wisconsin. caller: hello. i think biden is doing a great job. he knows what he is doing. host: what gives you that confidence? caller: because of him. his personality, everything. that is who he is. he knows what he is doing, how do you think he got in there? how did he get the job? host: frank, independent. what do you say? caller: i say it doesn't matter if you have confidence in joe biden or not, because it is not joe biden, but the people around

him who are advising him. this is the obama 2.0 administration, who is horrible at foreign policy. i do not trust john perry for a second, and as long as those two and others are advising the president, then no. i have zero confidence in this administration. thank you for taking my call. host: the president started out his first overseas trip at the g7 summit in england. listen to what the prime minister of britain had to say about u.s.-u.k. relations. >> first of all, on the whole issue of the relationship between the u.k. and the united states and what has happened over the last few years. it is the job of all prime ministers, everyone who does my job, to have a close working

relationship with the president of the united states. what has been helpful and useful in building the partnership with joe biden, who has been the common interest we have in tackling climate change, which we discussed extensively, the campaign i have been running for a long time on female education, which she completely shares -- the whole idea of leveling up, which is at the core of what this government is trying to do. using infrastructure, using better skills and technology to give people access to high wage, high skill jobs around the country. that is something the president is engaged in a big program that bears some resemblance to a lot of that agenda. when it comes to building back

better for the world and making sure we build back green or -- greener together, we are on the same page. it has been very refreshing to listen to him. host: the prime minister of britain there. nick, independent. what is your confidence level and biden's handling of foreign affairs? caller: the same as national affairs. less than zero. all you had to do was watch his first interview. he is calling on reporters by name. who then give their question, then looks down at a sheet of paper to get the answer. somebody please tell me that is not pre-position and gone through ahead of time. at least trump would speak off-the-cuff. may not always like what he had to say, but he told it was. i don't think biden has a clue on what is going on. host: nick new jersey,

democratic caller. caller: good morning. i have confidence in joe biden and his presidency and confronting the problems we all face. one of them is climate change. it is here, now, not something in the future. we are seeing the effects. it is going to wreck the economy. this decade is crucial. scientists by and large said it that we have to get things done in the next 10 years. you can see some people picking up on that. carmi factors, many of them saying they are no longer making gas powered vehicles. also, joe biden is standing up to putin. she has to be stopped, not like -- key -- he has to be stopped, not like donald trump.

you can see the reception he is receiving by allied nations. i have full confidence in mr. biden. host: christine, from west virginia. republican. caller: i have full confidence in president biden. why is because i don't see him calling names. he is doing a good job with france and the rest of them, and he will take on those who interfered in our election, which i believe is a cyberattack. i wonder, when we shut down for the coronavirus and republicans were calling it a hoax, that donald trump called it a hoax by democrats -- know everything shut down, now everything is reopening.

she put that tariff on everything. could that be bringing up the lumber? what is causing the inflation over here in america? i believe it is terrorists, and joe biden should do something about that. host: according to white house officials, the president is preparing intensely for pruden's -- for putin's tactics. that meeting taking place on wednesday. thanks for calling in today and being part of the conversation. we will be back here tomorrow morning at 7:00 a.m. eastern time. >> coming up today on c-span in

about an hour, discussion about cybersecurity with the chair of the senate intelligence committee, hosted by the washington post. live at 11:00 a.m. eastern. after meeting with world leaders and nato officials, president biden will hold a news conference at nato headquarters in brussels, belgium. live at 12:50 on c-span. you can also watch live online at c-span.org or listen live on the free c-span radio app. the u.s. house returns from -- returns for legislative work today. house members will gavel in at 5:00 p.m. eastern time and work on a resolution authorizing the use of military force against iraq. any requested votes will take place after 6:30 eastern. watch the house live here on c-span. >> later today, a house panel looks at unlawful evictions during the coronavirus pandemic and what can be done to assist tenants. watch live at 3:00 p.m. eastern on c-span, online c-spano.org

or listen liven. , a roundtable discussion -- tonight on the comedic eaters, a roundtable discussion on regulation affecting social media, antitrust and big tech. >> we have politicians from both sides of the aisle that sort of want the same thing. they want more regulation on tech companies, but they are coming at it from different angles and that is where we are seeing what you mentioned, this kind of piecemeal approach where they clearly want something but can't seem to agree on what. >> the democrats have control of the house, senate and white house, and they have made it clear that part of their agenda will be criticizing and potentially pursuing reforms that would affect the major social media companies. the only issue is they can't really come to a cohesive reform agenda. it is sort of piecemeal at this point.

>> the fear for tech companies is that they will either be forced to be broken up into pieces, to divest pieces of the company they previously purchased, and that they would possibly have to fundamentally change the way they do business. >> tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern, regulating social media and big tech, on the communicators, on c-span2. >> c-span is your unfiltered view of government. we are funded by these television companies and more, including comcast. >> this is way more than that. >> comcast is partnering with 1000 committee centers to create wi-fi enabled -- so low income families can get the tools they need to be ready for anything. >> comcast supports c-span as a public service, along with these other television providers, giving you a front row seat to democracy.