two at 9:30 a.m., fema administrator deeann criswell testifies before the committee on agency readiness. at 11:00 a.m. on c-span3, a house committee hearing on the army's 22 need to budget -- 2022 budget. at 3:00 p.m., a house subcommittee looks at the financial services industries commitment towards economic and racial justice. coming up in an hour, congressman mark pocan talks about president biden's economic proposals. the wisconsin democrat serves on the house of appropriations committee. at 8:30, more on the president's proposals with representative jason smith, ranking member on the house budget committee. at 9:00 a.m., center for innovation and research david

becker on the's lawsuit against georgia, over its voting law and efforts on both federal and state levels to change voting laws. ♪ host: this is "washington journal" for june 29. a new survey from reuters found the united states ranking last among 46 countries when it comes to public trust in the media. out of 92,000 respondents, the united states, only 29% said they can trust the news most of the time. in our next hour we will get your thoughts on what you think and be done to improve it. 202-748-8000 free democrats,

202-748-8001 for down -- for republicans. 202-748-8002 for independents. if you want to reach out via text, 202-748-8003. facebook available at facebook.com/c-span and @cspanwj is how you can reach us on twitter and instagram. findings of the report and to explain is a business analyst. good morning to you. guest: thank you. host: can you explain what the poynter institute is. guest: a nonprofit school for journalists, we are based in st. petersburg, florida and we also own the tampa bay times. host: when it comes to the reuters institute report, we will show people from what your writeup is on it about the u.s. ranking last among 46 countries in that trust in media.

fill in the blanks for us. how did that come to be? guest: i think the simplest explanation is not a total explanation is the extreme degree of polarization politically here. which is no news that that exists, but that it translates into that dramatically low rate compared to all kinds of different countries, you'll get another country like canada was more like 54%, finland at 65%. that space is really -- the u.s.'s dramatic lagging. host: 29% of respondents in the u.s. say when it comes to trust in news in the united states, that the amount of trust. can you talk about that figure? guest: i did ask the author of the report what they mean.

fairly simply they ask the question do you trust the media most of the time. and most of the news you see most of the time. they assume the visuals define what it means. it's kind of a broad category. it doesn't necessarily mean every fact is questioned. but we reach the point of what happened on january 6, the fact of the matter is much in dispute. host: 44% of those responding say trust in the news i use in wind, to trust in the news that comes up in searches, 22%, a 13% for news on social media. what you think of these low numbers. you mentioned january 26 -- january 6,, -- what factors do you think men -- affected that.

guest: one of the findings was that people who identified themselves being on the right, they have by far the least trust. i think that builds over time. a good question for your viewers weather that does have to do with a left tilt in some of the networks. it certainly was very much exacerbated by president trump with his constant belittling of the press. host: when it came to this matter of trust, the reuters institute ranked some of these categories. on the top of the list was local tv news seeing the most trust followed by the networks and then the wall street journal and the like. were you impressed by the figure

local news ranked so high? guest: that is a plus. we participate in some similar research here. a big increase in trust when we talk about local news. that means several things. less of the polarization politically that you see, may partly the subject matter. some of those who are very mistrustful now the national media have a more favorable view of local. i'm from a long career in newspapers and magazines in print media. we need to remind ourselves that local tv news is somewhat more popular and somewhat more credible. we will get into other findings which is when it comes to what people want from local news, the

coronavirus was certainly very high over the last year. but very consistently they want basic information and tv does a fine job of that. >> one of the tracks they do is for sources of news, the various sources involved in the finding here, social media and online media gaining high marks particularly on social media, what's been the growth as far as that as an avenue of people received news content? >> i think that sort of a double edge finding because we know looking into their smartphones. and in the last several years particularly to mobile devices. and that means that a story from your local newspaper, from the new york times, from cnn may be

consumed online, may be consumed by people who just come for the one story because of the subject matter. that's how the news is being relayed and consumed. at the same time there is a general impression of what goes around on social media, that it is a mix from legitimate reported sources and rumors and so-called fake news. the overall credibility of social media as you mentioned earlier is low. at the same time, the more serious media is sort of entwined with that being the way news is consumed. host: you mentioned other findings. this is one report on their take on trust in public media. how does that compare to other studies or surveys on similar

topics. are the same trends happening? >> i think it was very consistent with other studies i've seen. as i mentioned in my peace, of the notion of trust and building trust is really a preoccupation in media and among media scholars. a terrific study arm of the industry has spent much time on kind of breaking down what trust is and how there may be gaps between what journalists think and what the consumers think. there is a lot of hard work on that topic and it's a little discouraging to see that in spite of that, the score is what it is. they are serving different countries. most countries because of the coronavirus coverage, a trust rating went up some over the last year.

that was not the case in the u.s.. it stuck where it was at the 29% level. host: one survey looking at trust in public media. where do we go from here, particularly in light of the finding of this report. what does it mean for media companies involved. is this something media, please worry about more than consumers of media. >> guest: the media companies and journalists, that's what they do. that's the most important thing in their lives. it's not the same way for consumers. certainly there's a fair number of people who don't find it interesting, they find it repetitive and depressing. but the sort of length -- link there is the media needs to continue to work on trust. it also underscores the work of

finding out what an audience wants and delivering a product that has some quality to it is more important than ever. for local media, local newspapers which are having to -- having a difficult time financially these days, it's only overstated a little bit to say it's a matter of life and death. host: rick analyzes the business of media for the poynter institute. you can find his work at p oynter.org. mr. admits, thanks for your time and walking through the report with us. guest: thanks again. host: if you look at the countries involved, of the united states ranking last on this list, finland topping the list and also topping those of the people who expressed trust in northern europe with finland, denmark, norway, ireland and the

u.k.. you go to north america as you heard our guest mention, a 45% of those in canada expressing trust in the media, of the united states coming in last with 29%. those of the numbers and statistics from that. we are inviting you to get your comment as well in the first hour about your level of public -- trust in public media and what you think and be done to improve it. 202-748-8001 for republicans, 202-748-8000 free democrats and independent -- for democrats, and independents, 202-748-8002. you can post on twitter and instagram @cspanwj. starting us off is ed in georgia. republican line, thanks for waiting on this topic of trust in public media. caller: what gets me about the media is every year the amount

of people in the united states that are coming up missing, that list keeps growing and then -- many of these people never found dead or alive. some of the people in this country carry mechanical -- the cannibal gene. host: i don't know if that relates to your trust in public media. that's the topic we are talking about. we are talking about trust in public media. caller: that's what i'm saying. how can you trust the media when you have these people, you can't find any of your loved ones. host: ok. we will go to tony. tony in florida. you are next, good morning. tony in florida, hello. caller: this country is so divided. the reason it is so divided,

everybody has their own point of view. you have to understand misinformation and conspiracy theories, some beliefs in the far-right media. he was saying that he should've won and that biden stole it. some people believe that. most of the trump supporters believe that and it's not true. many people don't trust the other side. the reality is biden won. conspiracy theories, propaganda, misinformation, that's why we have a lot of people who don't trust the media because the far right-wing media is can it make

you think twice. they're kind of like brainwashed to eater -- alternative facts. host: 29% of folks as far as our collective trust in the media, a low figure. is your figure that low. do you have a low trust of public media? caller: i think they are at the right number. 29%, just think about it. most of america says they believe the facts. but then there in far-right media with misinformation, propaganda, disinformation. they are brainwashed and there cannot believe alternative facts. host: we will go to paul in kentucky.

good morning you are next. caller: i don't believe a thing the media says. they've been lying about president trump the last five or six years. they talk about russia, you talk about millions of lies. that's why nobody trusts the media. they've been doing it ever since the vietnam war. it's gotten ridiculous. talk of the trump organization to be indicted. not one thing is ever been proven. the man is been investigated more than any man in history. not one thing has been proved but we've got to report it. host: so given your level of trust, do you still consume media and if so, what do you watch?

caller: somebody talking about some russians. how they got news, you go through a lot of media. you read between the lines. host: what do you personally watch as far as the things you watch for media? guest: -- caller: i watch a lot of the media. i watch fox news, but also watch cnn, newsmax, msnbc and they are so consumed of president trump, that's all they talk about 24 hours a day. where's the proof? they don't have one bit of proof. they are all a bunch of liars. host: we are inviting you to

share your thoughts as well. caller: hey, how are you. my main point is i think a lot of the distrust stems from a sense that media kind of pulls people apart rather than trying to unify them. i think it was exacerbated by trump because trump kind of, there is like a split between corporate america and everyday americans. there's people in the cities and then this people in rural america. in that split is being exacerbated by the media. it is not ok to be out of the loop. and i think a lot of people feel that coming through in the media. and that causes the majority of

division. host: do you think that is the role of the media to either unite or divide. do you think it is a role that could unite people? caller: it is merely to get facts. once you have people offering up opinions, you are spinning it. i guess you could argue that even in the walter cronkite days, which is what people like to go back to, you could argue may be that media was being spun and if you want to get really tinfoil hat, the cia runs the news corporation's. , but i think there's a certain amount of spin that comes with the news, but when it is one-sided and there's a majority of the country that's kind of being painted, now i guess i'm talking about trump supporters, they were painted as racists and

, you are brushing a whole partition of society with a broad brush and i think that is like the powder keg. but i think there is a mistrust. when you have opinions, not facts. host: your trust in public media, that's what we are asking you for the remainder of this hour. you can reach out to us on the phone. many of you have. 202-748-8001 republicans, 202-748-8000 democrats. 202-748-8002 independents. some of you texting as well. jamie says report the news truthfully and your mayor -- your numbers may come up.

this is the liver tony and on twitter saying their only goal is to make money and the best way to make money is to scare people and shock them. from ray texting is from colorado saying we had to change ourselves and admit our biases before we can assess and reassess media trust. from mark stone from twitter, i don't trust the media or politicians, how many times does the washington post or new york times report a story with anonymous sources that are 100% incorrect? they are clearly pushing a certain agenda. you can post on our social media sites your thoughts @cspanwj. from ronnie in irving, texas, a democrats line. caller: good morning. i think all the mistrust comes from every network, whether it's liberal or conservative. they have their opinions. i believe the mainstream, they

at least give the facts, where is fox news, newsmax, they are totally one-sided and they slant the facts like they proved over and over again with trump. they basically tell lies. the mainstream media, they might throw opinions in their but they do put out the basic facts whereas your right-wing nut media outlets do not. they give one-sided basically lies. >> what sources of news would you describe or release define as mainstream in your mind. >> the network agency, abc, nbc, cbs, basically them. your cable news channels of course, there 24/7 so they will have more opinionated different

kinds of stuff. but having said that, i still believe the cnn's, the msnbc, they do give the facts, where is fox news, newsmax and all of them types, they are totally one slanted lies, they do not give the facts, they lied to fit their narrative in the past four years it was whatever trump was spouting. host: can i ask have you spent any significant time watching those networks? caller: i watch them all. i watch fox news when i can stomach it and i have for the past four years. i like to get a sampling of all of it. that's what i feel in my opinion , your mainstream and your cable networks, except for fox news, they do give a lot of opinions, but in the end they get the

facts out there. where's fox news is nothing more , it's more of an entertainment network then a news network in my opinion. host: ronnie in texas giving his thoughts. the reuters institute when it comes to the reach of those respondents who took a survey when it comes to tv, radio and print, most of them when it comes to weekly viewing of local tv news stopping that list. that was followed by fox news, cnn, abc, nbc/msnbc and cbs news. followed by local radio news and the regional local paper. those saying they consume that off-line news at least three days per week. local tv news at the top of that list. you can find more of this by the way at reuters institute. we posted it as well if you want to take a look when it comes to

trust in public media, you can give your thoughts or your opinion. from pasadena, maryland, independent line. caller: how are you doing? guest: fine -- host: fine, thanks. caller: i'm lost as far as news is concerned. it's all propaganda, the left or right. my girlfriend is absolutely a genius and i asked her show me some legitimate news. where did she get it from. she sent some huffington. we were on there and it's all propaganda. and if there was news it would be all sad anyway. i don't know where you go to get news. current events that are being reported without opinion, it's all sides have been chosen. you got to pick sides. and it's all propaganda. there is no news.

anywhere. host: so that said, are there sources where you go repeatedly? host: i'd hate to say it because -- but i like listening to tucker carlsen, but he gets me angry. there's no news you can watch it's really news. -- that doesn't get you angry anymore. from fox to cnn, it's just all propaganda. i try not to watch any of it anymore. i do like watching tucker because he gets into some nitty-gritty and that's pretty good, but it's people entertainment almost. host: tim in maryland. let's hear from tennessee, republican line.

this is clara. caller: good morning. i get my information from multiple sources like a lot of your callers to because of lost confidence and faith in the media. i noticed some other countries -- i go to some other countries to see what they are reporting. i wish you people in the media would understand that when you spin stories, like the covid, it puts our public safety -- it puts us at risk, our safety at risk. i've lost trust and faith in the news media. i actually think by them reporting opinions and working with the cia and people that have lots of money that can buy influence, it puts american citizens at risk. as far as the media goes, even

one of your own hosts was caught up in distorting information and working with a particular party. i do come to you for a lot of information, i do watch your show a lot. but i've just lost confidence. i feel insecure because of the way stories are spun. it's not just -- it affects us in more ways than just what we see on tv for entertainment. that's my opinion. host: as far as trust building, is there a way to restore that? caller: well yes, like a lot of the other callers who have called in, i don't mean you personally, but the media has become so one-sided. they don't report just the facts

anymore. when i see something that i question, i assure you i even go to other countries for their sources to see what they are reporting. i don't really trust anything that's reported anymore. i watch to see what the actions are. not just what you say, but how it influences what is done. host: ok. that is clara in tennessee. james is next, baltimore, maryland. independent line. caller: hello. i trust the mainstream media, i do not trust the cable news networks. they seem to be giving more of opinions and propaganda. i get my news, i watch bbc news hour and a watch the news hour

on pbs because they give stories and depth and they report the news, they don't give opinions. they say this is what's happening and that's it. but when i watch fox news and getting opinions and not facts. when i watch cnn, it's the same thing. but i watch them so that i can be well informed and so that i know when i'm -- what i'm listening to these actually facts, it's actually what's going on. i can understand why people think the january 6 day was a hoax or the coronavirus thing was a hoax. none of those were hoax. those were actual facts prayed we had new stations saying these were not really happening. thank you. host: democrats line.

caller: yes. i'm calling mostly to talk about your program. i'm born in montana and raised in texas and i would like for you to know that you did not give any more time to mother earth today than 30 seconds to a minute. we've been on black history day for a week. would you please understand what my problem is with this station. you need to start listening to a tribal native person. try to do better. host: i will just point you to

our website at c-span.org if you go to the video library and you type in tribal nation issues, i will give you my take on it, we've done plenty of segments looking at issues on the tribal nation, the leadership joining us to talk about those issues. i would invite you to check out the network for that, the video library at c-span.org to get a better sense of what we've done on that issue. from columbia, mississippi, democrats line. caller: my problem is quite simple. our last president, every time a black leader -- a black person was raising a voice, he did not make it a left-wing or

right-wing conversation. host: so relate that to trust in public media which we are talking about. caller: on fox and places like that, they hold that feeling that black social leaders are traitors instead of trying to help black people. host: pew research is another organization that does regular surveys on a lot of topics including media consumption issues. a recent one of theirs takes a look at which organization publishes a story and how they view it. saying half of adults point to the news organization the published the story as an important factor in determining its trustworthiness. while a similar share point to the sources that are cited.

30% site there got instinct. the person is shared with them, 23%. or the engagement it's received on social media, that was according to a survey between march the eighth and the 14th of 12,000 plus adults. pew research is where you find that. the headline, americans pointed the outlet that publishes it. pew research is how you can see that. we will do this about a half hour more. if you want to do about your -- if you want to talk about your public trust in media, when it comes to their rankings, public trust of news in the united states last among 29 countries. -- among -- countries. 29% trust the media. let's go to russell in west

virginia. republican line. caller: hello. host: you are on. caller: i'm a republican because i heard trump yesterday on c-span and he was telling things that were the truth and they believe them, they started saying democrats started believing him when he said the virus was from china lab. host: but when it comes to media outlets themselves, how much do you believe them? caller: sometimes i don't believe them all. i'm part of a group and i -- i have mental health problems and it stresses me out. i'm trying to get back to president trump, they believe him now after they talked about

him like a dog and tried to impeach him twice. host: ok. we go to dumb freeze, virginia, angela. caller: good morning. i want to take c-span to the -- because you were doing a lot of shady things. never there were some of the rallies. i can remember some of the data. so you have the call in and you would have a divided by political parties and then you would just switch and divided by regions of the country. i don't watch c-span every day, but during the time trump was in office, every time i turned to c-span it was always put to the caller something negative about president trump. but every time i watch it, you don't put things to the callers about biden. biden is a disaster and he lost. host: back to the political lines.

if you watch this for any length of time, most of the coverage we do calling programs we will divide via political lines. sometimes we divide areas of the country. i think you're talking about going back to the campaign as far as last year is concerned in the lead up, we arity rally a former president and of the rally of the candidate joe biden at the time. you can go back and see the number of times we divided by political party. if that's what you are referencing specifically. as far as president biden we have had journalists and people, legislators coming up to talk about the biden administration, whether they support issues it does or oppose it. if you had a follow-up, go ahead. caller: yeah, well, you had that seltzer guy from cnn on and you divided by region and i didn't understand why you divided it -- why you didn't divided by

political party but maybe you had a reason for that. it just seems suspect. as far as biden is concerned and the way you presented questions to your callers during trump's time, it is so different and it made me lose trust in the sense, i am one of your winners from your 25 year viewer. i had a type of trust in see -- c-span. you helped me find my political footing. now i'm losing trust. i just don't trust you. i just don't. host: i hope you will keep watching. over time, i know people expressed certain opinions about the network but keep watching. we did have brian seltzer on this program recently. as far as talking about issues related to the media, talking about a book he wrote about fox

news and also about the idea of discussion focused programs versus news-based programming. here is a little bit of that discussion. [video clip] >> i make the case fox has moved far towards opinion shows and reduce the number of hours of news and that's measurable. this newscast on one and a talk show on another. they have fewer newscast and a lot more talkshows per their fewer bureaus than other news outlets. not as many people gathering news at fox. i think that's a bad thing for conservatives in the gop because we need more news coverage from fox in order to let conservative america know what's going on. cnn has programs like mine that are discussion programs and analysis programs and then we have a lot of newscast where you see correspondence in the field doing live reporting. we have a mix of that and it's

certainly true in the trump years we leaned more on perspective, a point of view, sometimes on commentary. you think about all the anchors who deliver monologues, myself included. there was a technique in the trump years to cut through the noise and get to what is true. those formats are continuing. they are away to communicate with the audience. i don't view those as opinion monologues, i view them as analysis. are we staying connected to the facts. i was thinking at the with the newsroom is revealing. >> that's just one take on the media landscape by brian seltzer. we invited them to talk about this idea of polarization when it comes to what the media could do within itself to bring more

balance to what the coverage is and how it reaches others. >> do you think the national media be it cable or syndicate, print or television or social media has made the division in this country worse, yes or no. >> yes. i think it is plain. it's partly the media are catered to their more and more fragmented audience which helps increase the polarization, there's always been hype and sensationalism and news programs , whether it's political news or general news. social media is also a trend where people are finding and sharing and re-tweeting the most extreme things. i think all those trends coming together make it a very divisive

time. i don't think the media are helping to bring people together. i think it would be better if they have more balance panels, balance discussions. i wish you had more republicans on cnn and msnbc, more democrats on fox. you are building coverage for people to make up their mind on what's productive day in and day out, this is the era we are living in. these companies are making decent money and narrowcasting -- decent money narrowcasting to their audience. they probably won't change what they are doing. in terms of having credibility, i think that's not what it was 10 or 15, 20 years ago. >> both those segments on the same day and you can find those whole segments on c-span.org. democrats line from new york, this is from margaret. caller: i think you are

fabulous. i think biden is great. i don't know what everybody else is thinking. host: we are talking about trust in public media. caller: i trust. i want the truth. host: what goes into deciding how you trust and why you trust it? what would you say the main reason you trust public media currently? caller: when i hear it, i trusted, i see it, it's good. you are fabulous up there. host: let's go to barbie. in tennessee, independent line. caller: i want to talk about roger ailes for a minute. roger ailes had a background in theater. before he started his communication company and obviously before fox news, when he was a young man he was an

actor on off-broadway and producing plays in theater. he got into communications business, it was a timing thing. it had to do with cable, cable news, when it was starting, so my point here is any network or cable news channel that has commercials attached to it, advertisements for the money, it's almost like they are actors. the people are actors. you guys aren't. c-span is not. npr may be a little bit of that. i watch c-span a kate, occasionally pbs newshour, the

bbc world news, so i know what's going on in the world and i think people have to have a little bit -- you have to think about the history of news. cable hasn't always been around. you have to thing about the money these people are making off of the advertisers. one of the reasons i enjoy c-span so much is because there are no commercials. also on public television, the commercials, of course they are offered drugs, but the commercials are giving those people lots of money. host: do you think the commercial aspects directly drives news content then? caller: absolutely. without a doubt. host: what convinces you of that? caller: because of the money, because of how rich those people are.

not going to get hoodwinked by a bunch of rich people making money off of lies. host: we will hear from ned in florida. republican line. caller: good morning, thanks for taking my call. i believe the biggest reason the people don't have faith in the media anymore is because they've lost their credibility. you listen to like on cnn every night whenever trump was president it was 99% negative, never anything good. when you had brian seltzer on cnn saying this mostly peaceful protest but you've got the buildings burning behind them. and people go what you mean it's mostly peaceful, buildings are burning behind you. then they spend so much time on

the negative stuff, but when they are wrong, they never come back and say it. you can take the michael brown incident. half the people in the country believe that happened. that didn't happen. that did not happen. just like the rush of collusion with trump rate it didn't happen. but half the people in the country believe it. because if the news media are wrong they never come back and tell you the truth and let you know what is what. host: for some of the callers that have called in saying if they watch fox news or newsmax or another outlet saying its overly positive, especially of the previous administration, when you hear those accusations, what do you think of those? caller: personally i think -- everybody has got their own opinion, i don't think i can go to cnn or msnbc and get in the

truth. if you want to get your best news, you listen to talk radio. you can learn more from that than anything. host: but is that listening more to opinion then news, how do you divide that line? caller: because the subjects that are brought up. you will hear things and learn things that shall never hear on the news on the tv. and that's a fact. you can learn a lot by listening. you can just listen across the board and learn a lot more than you will learn from the cable news because so opinionated. when they are wrong, when you've got walter brennan and you've got all these people who say we've seen the evidence, and there is no evidence. the credibility goes out the window. host: tim from kentucky saying

all the news media are opinion talkshows. very little news what's going on in the world. plus they repeat the same stories consistently. the bbc gives more news on our own country. jason from new york saying i listen to sky australian news and you can see what other countries really think about you. george alexander from facebook saying when people like brian seltzer, joy reed, rachel maddow , mainstream media has become a complete joke. sherry from facebook saying we need to get back to journalism. when your name is on it stood for something. when fact checking was important. various social media outlets for our program, facebook, twitter, also instagram, you make those thoughts of yours known. we will hear from greg in boca raton, florida. >> a few quick points.

first of all, i don't think trust is relevant because we live in a system based on freedom and competition. it's not illegal to promote hate or division, so i don't think privately owned media can be trusted, needs to be on publicly to serve the public interest. people complaining about polarization are really anti-american because they are the ones who say they believe in freedom but the first one to censor you online or whenever they get a chance they will censor you. it's kind of strange. so i think people are confused as to whether or not they really like freedom and competition and privately owned media. i think the whole border crisis is fake news. host: but if it's a public thing is you emphasize, who then determines the content for the general public and how is that not swayed either way? caller: because we have to try

news principles based on serving the public interest that promotes trust and honesty like the media in scandinavia, they do a pretty good job of being objective and not being political as to one party. if you really believe in competition, that should be ok. it all depends on whether we want a more collective agreement on things or if we like competition. host: he mentioned aspects of social media. the front page of the wall street journal talking about a lawsuit brought against facebook tossed out by a judge brought by the federal trade commission. the judge in washington on monday granted social media china's request to dismiss a lawsuit filed by the trade commission and state attorneys general in december.

the dismissal which came in a pair of rulings came before any pretrial proceedings. the ftc lawsuit was legally insufficient because it did not plead enough allegations to support monopolization claims against facebook. the judge said the commission can try again in 30 days to attempt to file an amended lawsuit. this is from diane in kansas, publican line. caller: good morning. i'd be lost without c-span. my go to source for objective information, especially the hearings c-span runs are extremely informative. there's no more walter cronkite. abc, nbc and cbs, which were the most objective sources of news just don't care.

there's nothing that's ever on their about the hunter biden situation, what he's been accused of. they just don't cover it. i have a friend who does not have cable. all she watches his regular news and pbs. she's a very intelligent, masters degree person. i bring stuff up to her she's never heard of and it's big news because major networks don't cover it all. it's like what is going on there, is it producers, somebody is picking and choosing and omitting -- the last thing i want to bring up. with facebook they are posting all the time now, they even censored a c-span hearing that

was covered on the senate. inconsistent with their policies. how can that be? it was a federal hearing. you are seeing it more and more often. host: which hearing was this? caller: i don't recall which hearing it was. i believe a senate hearing with regard to dr. fauci testifying. host: what led you to determine that facebook censored the hearing? caller: they posted right on facebook. host: only because our hearings, when we air them online, we air them on our network at c-span.org to give people the opportunity to watch. i know that sometimes clips get posted to facebook and various

other social media sites. they have their policies depending on that, i don't know if that was a direct censorship issue as far as the hearing you are talking about, whether that's done on c-span and honor social media sites as well. let's go to bernie in kentucky, democrats line. caller: hello pedro. john meacham was on your show -- on a show on c-span and he said that journalism and media are not exactly the same thing. whenever there is a natural disaster or there's a huge story. the three things that will show up her first responders, police, and reporters. they put themselves in danger like the rest. as far as the media goes, c-span i have never heard you all

uttering ill word about anyone. all you do is report the facts. for some people, facts do not do what they want them to do. so as far as the media goes, i have my favorites, i was watching on january 6, the reporting you all dade on january 6 and in fact i was watching on that day. i don't know what people's problem is with the media. host: january 6, a lot of that still available on our website as far as the events that took place that day. i'll point you to the website if you want to take a look at things going on there. all of that available on our website. when it comes to legislative acts -- efforts. senator ron wyden has introduced legislation when it comes to protecting certain data when it comes to journalists saying the

bill he is introduced is called protect reporters from excessive state suppression act. it goes further than past efforts to greet a federal shield to safeguard phone and email records which are often held by third-party providers. they go on to say calls for such laws increased after the justice department disclosed it took phone email records from reporters and software identified sources of disclosure of classified information, angry first amended advocates who say such seizures have a chilling effect. last thursday at a hearing at the house on civility in congress and it was one representative who asked journalist and author amanda ripley about the influence social media, particularly partisan social media had on traditional news media. [video clip] >> what can we do to help education professionals help some of the techniques journalists use may be damaging

the fabric of this institution. >> i'm glad you asked because i do think part of creating new incentives, they have to involve the news media. that is part of what's driving these incentives. i often think there should be a warning that pops up that says eight out of 10 americans do not use this service. just because it does really work. it is not designed for us to calibrate those messages. so the ones that are negative are searing. there are conservatives on twitter as well, but in any case there's only very activist left and very activist right, a 20% of the country. but they are more than twice as likely to post about politics and social media. you get this really distorted

view. we cannot calibrate it. so i think there are some people working on overlays for twitter, which i have debate tested a couple. but i would encourage more of that. there's one that puts a label. it's not twitter doing it, but a label that says this is probably a spot. or it says this person post extreme content that's not representative of whatever you want. it's not to be perfect, but it tells them i found when i used it i immediately was able to let things roll that i might not have otherwise. dr. grant can maybe speak more to this. but there's ones we know, the way we process information has almost nothing to do with the way it is displayed to us. so there are other -- there are better ways to collect feedback

then twitter for sure. i think the news media needs to get more creative. get more creative about covering political conflict. host: robert in frostburg, maryland, independent line. caller: good morning. i'm a vietnam veteran and what i see the division in my country taking place now just disturbs me deeply. what people forget is they say history repeats itself. we are talking about the media this morning. what i see happening with our media is the same thing that happened in germany. when you had a guy named joe -- dr. joseph goebbels who went on

the german radio and poisoned people's minds. and you see the same thing going on here in the united states. sean hannity does the same thing good people who believe in this country but are easily misled. the bottom line is who profits from that decision -- from that division. the profiteers from that and we had a civil war. the war was based on the facts that these greedy people on plantations in the south made great money on exploiting the backs of the common man. that led to that civil war. host: one more call. david, new jersey, republican line. caller: my point is that abc,

nbc, cbs, cnn, msnbc, they have not one conservative anchor. they do not have conservatives on their editorial slate. you look at two examples. look at the coverage that was given to the border when trump was here. not the media cannot even get into the cowtown and see what is going on. they are perfectly happy with this peer my second point is that you look at what is considered the worst journalists, because are not journalists, george stephanopoulos, you michelle synder -- yamiche alcindor. the worst of all is chuck todd. they are democratic activists, and yet they spout off their opinion is if they are independent. host: thank you to all of you

who have participated this morning. we have two members of congress to talk about issues on capitol hill. first up will be mark pocan of wisconsin. later on, we will be joined by the top up of can on the budget committee, jason smith of missouri. this topics and more coming up.

host: our first guest serves the second district of wisconsin, representative mark pocan, democrat from that state. he also serves on the appropriations committee. that president has released his budget. some of the top line numbers have drawn attention from both sides when it comes to 6 trillion in spending for 2022 of a back up to age trillion by 2031. when you look at those numbers, how do you react? guest: a lot of this has been spending that we have needed to do, especially around infrastructure and i know that there is a couple bills possibly moving. there is going to be possibly a bipartisan compromise is going to be moving forward with some of the fiscal infrastructure, some of the human information structure and other budgetary matters will move forward with

possibly reconciliation. the bottom line is we need to seriously invest in information structure, both human and physical. we have not done this for a long time. how may times during tough new station? we had it turned out to be not infrastructure week. it is long overdue. it will help people get back to work post-covid. iac this is very necessary for this country to thrive. host: i mention you hear from republicans is an appropriator. at the health can we put out a press release in light of the budget. they said that president's plan would increase government spending to $6 trillion a year and would equal 25% of economic output by 2031. what is your reaction to the potential impact of the budget if it is passed as the president wants, particularly criticisms from house republicans? guest: we need to do that help the economy going. some industries have been devastated through covid. i talked with a lot of small

business owners. i one myself. still, there is a fight you are swimming upstream. we need help on that front. i would also remind everyone that, while this money is helping everybody across the country, when the republicans want to spend trillions for tax cuts that ultimately, over 80% went to the top 1%. they thought that was just fine. i would argue that it's really poor spending just for the most wealthy and to those who make contributions to conservative candidates. this is better spending to help the economy get going. this is something that more americans will benefit from. i understand why they do not want to talk about their tax cut for the wealthy, but i want to talk about our investments for everybody else. the president presents this as a blueprint. when you see these numbers, how much do you think it will change as it goes to the process for your committee and others? guest: some of this on the

infrastructure side, who knows exactly. it has been an interesting path to follow as far as the appropriations process. i think the numbers are going to be pretty consistent with what the president put out. host: our guest with us to talk let issues of monetary matters and other things. if you want to ask him questions, (202) 748-8001 for republicans. (202) 748-8000 for democrats. (202) 748-8002 for independentss. you can text questions to (202) 748-8003. as a sidebar to discussions of appropriations, you also serve on the defense spending reduction caucus. what is this budget for the president do specifically for defense spending? guest: this is something that for a long time we have put an awful lot of money into the pentagon with almost no oversight. we do not out of the pentagon like everything else. we often get money that is

wasted. we have contractors that could break the law and are still getting funding. during the trip and most ration, there was a 20% increase in defense spending in a time of relative peace. there is a an increase even in the biden budget. that 1.7% is 150% of the entire cdc budget. at a time that her biggest national threat has been covid, the amount of money that actually goes toward something like covid is just a fraction compared to what we spend with defense contractors. we want to get a better bat -- a better grasp on that. let us be sure that we are investing in things that i would argue are really in the defense of this country, like stopping covid and climate change and not just putting this money into defense contractors' pockets.

host: $150 billion is a request for 22. procurement would go down. what do you think about that difference as far as rises in some places, would it comes to procurement, downgrade? guest: the part that really matters is 1.7 percent increase, and again at a time of relative peace, when we've already increased in left four years 20%. we always say how much are we can add we talk about spending. no b looks closely at it. we do not audit. how many weapons programs have eagerly heard about? the most recent aircraft carrier that we had, there's a problem when you flush toilets. it is hundreds of thousands of dollars of chemicals that you have to flashed on the toilet to make sure they operate. that is officially the definition of flushing money

down the toilet. and yet, we do not have any checks and balances for that type of misuse. we are arguing that we should, just like every other federal program, we need to have that kind of oversight. host: truck infrastructure. we think about these negotiations? does the senate side, primarily. but what is the president thinking? are you ok with the number figures being tossed around? guest: you are going to realize that 10 people have a plan, but the rest of us are also going to have a say in that and the reconciliation process hopefully running on a parallel track. it is nice that some republicans are actually willing to come to the table, but that is five out of 100. our real problem is that we do not have republicans coming to the table to negotiate. at some point, we are still going to serve the meal.

it is important for the american people. i hope it is not just five republicans were deciding that have to be part of the process, but we get dozens or maybe hundreds. host: we have seen progresses call for bigger numbers. compared to is currently be discussed, are you satisfied? guest: we will have that debate when it comes to the house. right now, is among 10 people. i guess the other 500 plus of us will have a say as well. host: from mark, massachusetts, independent line. caller: good morning. defense spending. how it impacts all the other spending is what i want to talk about. can you speak on the f-35 fighter, which i just read is a $2 trillion failure?

i've been up to wisconsin. i love it, madison and the university of wisconsin at platts -- platteville. guest: the f-35 has been plagued of many problems. yet, the problem is is that if this were any other federal agency, you would stop the expenditure, figure out what is going on, and decide whether to move forward. here, you throw more money as the problem and decided at some point how much more money you want to throw at it. you never really talk when you going to stop throwing money at. that is why we need more oversight over the pentagon budget. the f-35 is like a lot of issues. we've had some missile programs that have failed miserably, this cup them, star them up again, they have failed miserably again. no one ever looked at the fact

that billions of dollars have been thrown away. we need to have more responsibility, especially with these private contractors paired i went to make sure that we are protecting those who serve our country in the military and their pay and benefits. but a lot of this other money, there is fraud, waste, and abuse. but many of these contractors that she been fined for breaking the law and are still able to continue getting money. where else does that happen? except for in the pentagon. i want to give the same scrutiny to pentagon spending that we do to others. host: the president's request $174 billion heard the navy, 207 billion, up. the airport, $200 billion. our next call from west virginia, democrat fine. caller: i want to know why

congress cannot get more about what they do. within a polemic, when the state said they would not pay the extra unemployment, i think that all other covid money should be cut off to the states until they do what you guys voted on to do. you have this dividing and the parties, but it comes down to if congress decided they needed to have that and it would help the economy and they want to fight the democrats on this, democrats need to get tougher. they need to figure out they are not playing with a normal situation. there already calls within the democratic already to get some guts and talk about what is actually possible. guest: bluntly, you are right. we have states that are completely abusing what we intended to do. part of it is that we did large

bills. the american recovery act was one of the largest bills we passed in decades. it is having a great impact. we are seeing the positive nature it is having an helping people with covid, getting schools reopen, shots in arms, people back in jobs. the problem is that states have found loopholes. even in wisconsin, he found a loop hole around not doing that maintenance of education funding when the -- when we give them additional education dollars. they're going to go back and start over again after we told them they may not get the funds. it is following the language shall be put into law. some have found clever loopholes, but specifically to unemployment, some industries -- i am a small business owner since i was in my 20's. some industries have been devastated. convention and meeting. then use, restaurants and

taverns. they need help even more than other businesses. taking away unemployment from those workers in that area is illogical come at and it will hurt those industries. the states i do that are doing that just to spur political, rhetorical fights rather than helping their constituents. we need to fight that. i hope you have the hotline to your elected officials. because your state is one of those. host: you have heard the president and you yourself mentioned his desire for the passage of the american families plan with some current tax credits extended. also money for child care, paid family leave, universal preschool. how would you make the case that this is sustainable? guest: if you look at all the money that we have done in tech specs for the wealthy, the

trains were talking about -- in tax breaks for the wealthy, the trillions we were talking about earlier. this money goes to working people, people aspiring in the middle class. this is going to benefit them majority. it is good policy to lift people out of poverty. if you live free blood poverty, you take care of a lot of other problems and the funding that has to go to alleviating those poems. it is fascinating and raising -- it raises the level for everyone. i am happy that biden has put these out there. they will have a dramatic effect if we can get them done in the form he is suggesting, but for republicans to not even be serious enough to come to the table to negotiate most of this is the sad part. we need republicans to care about their country and their district as much as we are. and not just weights to make a point for the 2022 election. if you think like that, we will never get anything done. host: what is the vehicle to pay

for all these things? how do you make it sustainable? guest: biden has put out a number of proposals from things like slightly raising the corporate tax rates not even halfway where it was in 2017, going after the companies who their money overseas. to his credit, he has other countries agreeing that we should have some minimum tax rates around the country, just not a race to biden. when he is doing on revenue is think that our common sense that will benefit in the long run and make sure that people who are really wealthy who pay a lower rate of tax than the average working person are paying a similar amount. that is what we need to do and is exactly what biden is doing. using things like that at some of the funding sources. host: peter, pennsylvania, republican line. caller: my comments is more broad. i would like to know the source

of this accusation that 80% of the previous administration's tax break went to this 1% that you have referred to twice now. can you specifically provide the audience with the source of that conclusion, that accusation, talking point? guest: or fact is we call it. it is written to the law. in 10 years time, it is 83 or 86%. it is that over 80% of the money goes to the top 1%. that is great for the top 1% but not so much for the other 99%, because that was externally focused built by republicans to those people, but right now in a time like cobit and trying to reopen the economy, we have to do the opposite. get that money out as broadly as

possible, have it go from the grassroots up. that is how you have a sustainable economic growth that will benefit everyone. it is in the law itself. the congressional budget office has given us these numbers. the good news is that it truly is a fact in the traditional definition of a fact, but is because what the law says. host: stephen, baltimore, democrats line. caller: isn't it the legislative duty branch -- the legislative branch's job when we spend taxpayers' dollars on things such as $200,000 to flush countable stanley plane's toilet, is that the branch's job to follow the money? isn't that why you are on an appropriations committee? don't they have the power to stop these type of programs

right in their tracks? i see the failure in this country always coming back to the legislative branch, because the legislative branch makes the rules, makes the laws, and this is how it has been done -- here we are, trillions, and trillions of dollars in the hole. the legislative branch's failure is so big that i think we are going to become the next great third world country. guest: there is some truth to what you're saying. i do think the oversight committee -- and it would not necessarily be the oversight -- the appropriations committee that would have that oversight should push harder to get scrutiny needed. the problem is that traditionally the way the dod works is that they have resisted audits. they have a separate fund for

years that i, i give joe biden credit, he put it onto the base budget. that was totally unseen and had no input from members of congress. art if it is how we have let this happen. the real reason is that the defense industrial complex is in every person's district. they try to make it about jobs rather than are we spending money efficiently. it is how much are we are going to increase the budget without ever questioning how much we are flushing down the toilet. that is the real problem. we have got some structural problems with pentagon spending that we have to be able to have more ability to have that oversight, but i do not disagree that in some areas, we need committees to be more aggressive. i do think it is unique around pentagon spending.

a lot of that money is hidden, even from members of congress. host: mike, ohio, independent line. caller: thank you for the opportunity. i have two concerns. one is what happened to the protects the right to organize act? two is from what i understand, there is an attempt to not only by republicans, but by corporate democrat at the u.s. chamber of commerce and wall street to privatize the infrastructure bill. nothing could be more dangerous than that. it has been proven as a failure in other countries and in this country. as a retired operating engineer in ohio, i have big concerns

about that. if you would address both of these things. guest: i can address the first portable easier. we passed the proactive to protect the right to organize twice. the hold up right now is in the senate. having 85050 -- a 50-50 majority in the senate with the filibuster, we need to put pressure around the senate. the proactive levels the fight for the average working person. the second part, there is a lot of things being said right now. mainly by 10 people. remember, there is a form 35 people in the house and 100 in the senate. 10 are being vocal. you're going to find many of us that are not going to let things happen and are going to make it

so that this bill does not have the oversight that we want. we want to invest in infrastructure, traditional, roads, bridges, but also schools, broadband, water delivery systems, energy grid, as well as the human infrastructure part. we have been very clear that nothing is going to move in the house. nancy pelosi has been extremely clear without having a parallel track for the human infrastructure. i can assure you that we will watch very closely paired one of the things i think we need to do is make sure there is more protection for working people in whatever we do with the instruction bill, because if we are going to put this much of our text pair money into it, it should be done in a high road, not giving the companies who are competing for lowest wages. should be done by people who had the very skill set that you had. we need to protect workers with whatever we do on infrastructure. host: you are the cochair of the lgbtq+ caucus.

could you tell us a bull bit about the caucus? guest: this is pride month. lots of folks are focusing on equality. we have another bill, much like in the last conversation, that passed the last two congresses is. the equality act. it would really address a patchwork of state laws we have around nondiscrimination. for the lgbtq+ community, in a majority of states, you can get married on a saturday legally as of six years ago, but you can lose your lease the very next day. that is in a majority of states in this country. they do not have the same protections as a place like wisconsin. we were the first estate in the country to have those protections. this law would take care of that and fill and most of the areas that have protections around credit, housing. it is important to note that the only group of people that it is still legal to discriminate against is the lgbtq+ community.

that is why we need the equality act. that's when the major pieces of legislation we are working on. host: this currently sitting in the senate. what is the result of senator schumer to get it the senate? what is the hurdle? guest: he is a strong supporter. the hurdle is arcane rules that did not come from our founding father but has default since then -- devolved since then. what we need the senate to do is make everyone take a quiz on the history of the filibuster, make that quits public. maybe then, we can realize that it is not sacrosanct and it is stopping progress. host: after those changes, are there other avenues that the house can pursue to get these protections? guest: you can oyster executive orders. the president is doing executive -- you can always try executive

orders. ultimately, we need a statute. we need the senate to figure out rules that match where we are as a country right now. you cannot let anyone person hold up progress. in this case, this is another example of why the filibuster searcy had -- has to be seriously reformed her time to go. host: tim, ohio, republican line. caller: i was wondering why can't they take money out of the discretionary budgets and put more of that and allocate it toward the health program? guest: some of the good news is -- i should've said this in the beginning. think it is roughly a 16% increase in discretionary spending going to nondefense. that is a very good thing. versus 1.7 percent on the defense side. the problem is the scope of that

money still, as i mentioned, just let increase in defense spending is already 150% of everything we spent on the center for disease control. many of us think that we should look at the fence and that definition is broadly as possible. the biggest thing to defend this country and last year and a half has been a way to deal with covid. the more dollars that we have in the defense budget should go toward the defense of this country in terms of health care and climate change. host: two quick questions. speaker pelosi forms a select commission to take a look at the events of generate six. should a definite time under put on the work of this committee? guest: i do not know if that is as important as finally having a committee to take a look at this. it is been rather sad and pathetic to watch people who are here on january six. many spoke on the for that day, very loudly and clearly who now

are afraid of donald trump's wrath and are acting like nothing happened. that is sad for this country. those of first attack in several hundred years on our nation's capitol. we need to get to the bottom of what happened. anyone who does not think that is making a poor choice. host: one other question from eight -- a texter. are you going to run for ron johnson's seat in 2022? guest: i've explained that i think the senate rules are odd. i do not know if that is a place where i want to spend my time. i love being on the appropriations committee. that is the best place to put my values and think about where we invest our nation's money. i think i get form are down there than it being the u.s. senate. ron johnson, am quite sure, is not going to win.

60% of people do not want him to win. we have a large democratic primary with a lot of great candidates. i am very convinced that ron johnson will have a lot more free time after november 22. host: representative mark pocan, democrat or wisconsin. member of the appropriations committee. thank you for your time. coming up. another perspective with the lead republican on the budget committee. representative deutch since, republican -- representative jason smith, republican of missouri.

>> live today on the c-span network. the house returns at 10:00 a.m. eastern for general speeches. shortly after, we will join the house science, space, and technology committee. looking at federal wildland fire science, research opportunities, and the impact of climate change on wildfires. the house returns at noon to work on several bills, including creating a select midi -- committee to investigate the january 6 attack on the u.s. capitol. at 9:30 a.m., fema administrator deanne criswell testifies.

at 11 a.m., the fiscal year 2022 budget. at 3:00 p.m., a house subcommittee looks at the financial services industry's commitment towards economic and racial justice. >> june 13, and it one, the new york has began publishing the pentagon papers, a history of the vietnam war. this event subsequently led to the creation of a special investigative unit in the nixon white house, which became -- author michael dobbs, formerly of the washington post, has written a book titled king richard, which takes a look at that special unit, which eventually resulted in the resignation of the president of the u.s. 50 years later, dobbs focuses on

watergate. >> listened and c-span.org/podcast. host: rim percentage of jason smith, republican of missouri. -- representative jason ranking member of the budget committee what was your initial response to the 2020 to request from president biden? guest: it was the latest budget request in the history of congress. quite disappointed. he released it on the friday before memorial day. usually, when you're trying to release something, the friday before a holiday weekend, you are not wanting the good that is inside of it to be readily available to a lot of folks. we started going to the 72 pages, it was quite disturbing.

you saw over $69 trillion in spending, the largest amount in our nation's history. it also had tax collections of over 55 trillion dollars. tax increases that would in fact make our taxes higher than that in communist china. adding to the deficit. all most 17 trillion dollars over 10 years. some items in the biden budget that should alarm a lot of folks. $80 billion set aside to hire a 7000 new irs auditors -- hire 87 ,000 new irs auditors. when i travel across missouri, where people have concerns with is the irs. this budget is a true betrayal of the working class.

it is quite disappointing, because we do not need more tax increases. we do not need more wasteful spending. we do not need more things affecting the lives and livelihoods of all americans. host: when it comes to let irs piece, the administration says it is to go after those who avoid taxes regularly. why is that not a worthy pursuit? guest: i just think about the obama-biden administration, where you were targeting conservatives and easing the irs as a weapon. this is a huge fear. will this administration you set additional $80 million to more than double the irs to target different americans? it was quite alarming to me just in the last couple weeks. we saw in the president's budget he is wanting to increase taxes on some of the wealthiest americans and also the lowest

income americans, but for sums of a reason, there was a leak from the irs that showed the tax returns and some of the wealthiest americans. that is crazy. it is almost as pushing the narrative that is quite alarming. host: when it comes to the idea spending overall, your budget committee counterpart was on this program talking to us about this idea of the proposals come as bigger idea of deficit spending. i want to play you what he had to say and get your response. >> the federal government is not like any other user of currency, not like any household, any business, any state or local government. we assure our own currency, and we can spend enough to meet the needs of the american people. the only constraint being that we do have to worry about inflation from that spending. what some if people say, we are

so much debt and our grandchildren are going to -- is going to be on their backs. that is not the way it works. i think the american people need an education about how the monetary system does work. i remember when paul ryan was chair of the budget committee and even before, and all these forecasts of gloom and doom. we're going to a switch debt. interest rates are going to crowd out other spending. we basically doubled the national debt in 2009 until last year before the pandemic. none of the things that people warned were going to happen happen and we did not have inflation. we had record low interest rates rather than higher interest rates. the dollar was trading at the normal levels vis-a-vis other currencies. a lot of economists now have begin to say, wait a minute,

maybe we have been thinking about debt in the wrong way. even fed chair jay powell has basically said, we have the fiscal space to do what we need to do right now to make the investments we need to make to build the kind of economy for the future that we all hope we will have. the -- host: how do you respond? guest: i could not disagree more strongly. his comments clearly are out of touch with reality. whatever -- whenever you travel across missouri come across america, what they are telling you -- a pole just last week said -- a poll just last week said 83% of americans are concerned with rising inflation. in the last couple weeks, inflation had the highest number year to year that our country has ever seen. what that means is that every american is paying more to buy gas in their car, to put food on their table come to put clothes

on their backs, and medicine in their cabinet. with the chairman to say that inflation is not an issue and that we can just print our own currency, it shows how out of touch a lot of washington democrats are, because every american that i talked to across missouri says that we need to have more people in washington that knows what it is like to sign out front of a paycheck rather than just the back. they need to balance their money. this reckless spending that we have been seeing -- the trillions of dollars -- is what is driving inflation, what is driving the cost of working-class americans to put food on their table, close on the back, and gas in their car. i could not disagree more strongly with the chairman. i would encourage him to come to rural america, to southeast missouri, interceded struggles. 70% of americans surveyed last week says that they are worried

about the price of food. that is a real concern. host: jason sudekis -- representative jason smith joining us. (202) 748-8000 four democrats. (202) 748-8001 four republicans. (202) 748-8002 for independents. first call from missouri. david. caller: good morning. i am from your state. i have three things concerning infrastructure. one thing is that i also have a house in webster groves. the water company is owned by foreign german company. if we rebuild all the water pipes, which they do need it, are we just helping some foreign private business? that is something that really has to be looked at.

they are not doing their job as it is. never to two -- number two is that there are things with mdot. wasteful spending, bonuses given to supervisors, slashing things like gloves to keep their spending low so they can give bonuses. that is not right. in the contract to build our highways, sometimes they do not give a warranty on their work. we will be out there busting on ice on the ramps that have gone the wrong kind of drainage. then they will come back and fix it for more money. thirdly, i am not all negative, but i do suggest that we need to start the job corps program again to teach forest fire training. i am a graduate from the job corps.

we went out on fires. i was in nebraska. we went to wyoming area we need that with this weather climate change. host: color, you put those points out there. let our guest tackle this. guest: i'm glad you are calling from god's country in southeast missouri. on the job corps, we do have a couple of incredible training centers in our congressional district. actually, what we refer to as the boot of missouri. great programs that definitely help folks. we need to continue that investment. in fact, in regards to infrastructure, iec eight very strong bipartisan -- i see a very strong bipartisan support for real infrastructure. we are talking about roads, bridges, ports, dams, water infrastructure, it is concerning to me that what you are talking

about on webster road. you have a foreign ownership of water supply. that is definitely not what we need. we need to be self-reliant and make sure that we are not reliant on the chinese, the germans, or whoever that may be. but i have said all along that if we want to pass the bipartisan infrastructure package, it needs to go towards real infrastructure -- roads, bridges, dams, airports. you could get a two thirds majority in the house and the senate without raising taxes. you could do that by using unspent money in the prior six covid packages. over a trillion dollars is left. there is no need to tax americans additional money for this infrastructure package. the original proposal the president biden had of $2.3 trillion -- let me tell you how

much that is. you could build the national interstate highway system four times in today's dollars. that is a lot of money. if we focus on real aspects of roads and bridges and ports. we can get it done. host: michigan, republican line, marion. caller: please do not hang up on me. i haven't making two statements. reality. i am from another country. two countries. i have lived in russia and poland one poland was a socialist country. i am seeing america turning into that. they are trying to take our freedom. the other one is you as a man

questioning mostly republicans, you, i can tell by your physical reaction, your emotional reaction, you do not like people from the republican party talking on the costs because you try and turn this off. host: i hate to interfere. an apologist. we take questions from everybody. you have questions for our guest directly? caller: president trump did everything he promised. actions speak louder than words. host: thank you. guest: her sentiment is the sentiment that we hear from a lot of folks across the country. they are concerned with what is going on in washington.

republicans who serve and washington, d.c. are very disturbed. in less than five months that biden has been president, we have seen many crises. brothers economic crisis, the inflation crisis, or the border crisis paired when i went to the borders a few weeks back, but i thought was so disturbing. we had more people illegally cross the southern border than the entire population of kansas city, missouri. i was there. i was with border patrol heard i saw a family of five literally get coached by the criminal cartel on the southern border on how to cross the border and to surrender to border patrol. you know there they were from? they were not from south america. they were not from mexico. they were from europe. they were a family of five from romania. they had these plastic wristbands, because they paid the criminal cartel 10 to 15

thousand dollars each to cross the border and get defective residency in the u.s. the reason why is that the policies that the biden administration completely reversed that were working. was unfortunate in washington right now is that a lot of time that democrats are not only operating on doing the opposite of what prompted just because they did not like trump. that caller is expressing a lot of the sentiment that americans feel and what a lot of republicans in the house feel. host: you're talking about infrastructure earlier. what are your first impressions of the framework of what has come out from the white house on if structure? guest: what happened last week is a complete disaster. i would say senate republicans have whiplash. they were in a meeting on thursday. they have a meeting for a long time to try to get a bipartisan agreement there was a great press conference with the president.

saying they have a bipartisan infrastructure package. less than three hours later, biden comes out and says, no, i will veto that agreement if you do not pass a reconciliation bill that contains all of my progressive wish list items. then, he walked it back on saturday, saying, no, we do have an agreement. he was four before he was against it. now he is for it. that kind of bait and switch mentality is the worst of washington, d.c. that causes a lot of issues in trying to pass a bipartisan infrastructure package. we just do not know who we are negotiating with. which biden? are we negotiating with president biden? are we negotiating with those who are surrounding him that after he comes to an agreement come back and try to walk him back to different policy? with that kind of instability, because it's a huge problem in trying to pass a unified package. host: we have a text.

it goes back to the conversation about the irs. do you believe it is ok for corporations and wealthy individuals to pay zero or close to zero in federal taxes? how do we make them old fair share? guest: we need to make sure everyone pays their fair share. but we do not need to target certain americans just because of their background. for example, in the obama-biden admits ration they clearly targeted -- administration, they clearly targeted different organizations faced on the fact that they may have conservative titles. that is unacceptable. that is something we need to be mindful of. but in regards to making sure that companies pay their fair share, absolutely. we need to make sure that all americans pay their fair share. host: why do you equate the targeting that you talk about with this desire where people avoid not paying taxes. guest: pedro, would you arm the

irs with 87,000 more auditors to target americans and give them $80 billion, that is pretty scary. i point to what happened the last couple of weeks. president biden and the irs are pushing for higher taxes on the wealthiest. but guess what? there was a leak from the irs that released some of the most wealthy, high-profile american'' tax returns to see how they are paying. right there tells you that the irs is arming and weaponizing themselves. i asked secretary yellen about that situation. they cannot toe where it came from. the factor that is coming out should scare every american. host: our guest is a ranking member of the budget committee. representative jason smith, republican of missouri. michigan, sue, independent line. caller: on the infrastructure

bill, isn't there a stipulation about how they are going to dismantle the suburbs? on the family leave act, the question is, this act really want to give extra money for days off, is that only for the federal government? or is that for the businesses? if you are a small business, who is going to pay for that? my last comment is that i heard that the left wants to get rid of our american flag and have the lgbtq or whatever it is flag. guest: there is a lot of different items are there. first off, there have been numerous different infrastructure packages. the quote agreements that they had this weekend, it is not even on paper. there has not this there is not a bill that has been drafted. the devil is in the details. we do not know exactly what is in all those plans.

what you are talking about disgracing the american flag, that is something i take -- really upsets me. we are looking at the fourth of july of them the next week. so many men and women died defending our country and defending the stars and stripes. when we have woke one hit wonder liberals trying to get rid of our flag, because the color racist and they want another -- because they call it racist and they want another. working-class americans love to let that flaig lie on top of their barns, their homes, their businesses. to try to replace the american flag just because of rhetoric coming from some hollywood has bands is absolutely ridiculous. host: neal, missouri, democrats line. caller: high -- hi.

i have been calling to tell you, i do not think you have a clue as to what the people in the state really want. all you are doing is going over and over whatever trump says, whatever mitch mcconnell says. you are right up there with the bonds, the hollies -- the b lunts, the hawleys. all you want is for the wealthy to get wealthy. you have distractions. yet this game going -- would not want to pay no taxes, we do not want to pay no benefits, but we want all the cream off the crop. you guys need to get a clue, because this thing has voted for expanded medicare, which are dear sweet governor has thrown in the trash can. these are programs that help needy people and let them live

their lives. all you people can do is say, no, no, no to everything that is ever brought up by the democrats . mitch mcconnell has been like that since the first days obama was elected. it is whatever the democrats want i am against. host: neil in missouri. guest: i can feel your frustration, but let me tell you , i come from a pedigree and from a family that is not someone typically serving in washington. my dad was an auto mechanic and a minister. my mother worked on an assembly line until they moved those jobs to mexico. my mom went to work on that assembly line to provide health care when we were freshman. i was the first in my family to graduate college. i am from a true working-class family. i live and run the same farm that has been in my family for

four generations. i will say this right now. my grandparents, when i came home from college, just to wash my hands at christmas dinner and thanksgiving, i had to go outside and pump water out of a cistern. they had an outhouse, no running water. i know what it is like to represent a state if people are struggling just to get by, just to put food on their table, close on their backs, and medicine in their cabinet -- clothes on their backs, and medicine in the cabinet. i just traveled 16 counties in missouri listening to farmers, families, small business owners. those concerns are the concerns that i am advocating in washington about your it it is not about what republicans want. it is not about what democrats want. it is what the working-class needs and what the working have to survive. all these folks in the swamp trying to destroy our way of life is what we are fighting

about. sir, i am sorry if you are try to paint me with everyone else. i will tell you. i am from southeast missouri. i care about working-class and i'm going to fight for the working-class regardless of what party is with me. host: the caller had mentioned roy blunt. he is retiring. what is your level of interest in his seat? guest: i am considering the race. whenever i look at the announced candidates, i would put my conservative record and my record for fighting for worker class families, farmers, and small businesses against any of them. definitely considering it. but we are some-eight months out. i -- 7-8 months out. i was elected to rep the people missouri paper -- to represent the people of missouri. that is my focus. i have met with president trump

multiple times for it had a great relationship with him. i was a state co-chair in 2015 -2020. worked alongside him in cutting our taxes. that 2017 act, i was one of the sponsors that helped create the largest tax cut in the history of the u.s. i worked with trump to remove unnecessary burdens and regulations on our small businesses, family farmers. i continue to work with him today. host: you brought that up only because some of our callers will say look at republicans who voted for the package but not also support packages by this invitation. now you are being critical. how do you square those two? guest: that is a bogus claim. when you look at the tax cut and jobs act. the very first year, we had increased revenues. every year since we passed the tax cut and jobs act, our

revenues increased from year to year. it did not add to the deficit. look at the cbo scores. look at everything. look at reality from 2017. a family of four who made less than $61,000 a year in southeast missouri, under the tax cut and jobs act, did not have to pay a dollar in federal taxes. that was an increase of almost $20,000. that was a huge win -- those increase of almost a tray thousand dollars of those who do not have tax liability. that was a huge win. host: marcy, go ahead. caller: caller: yes. they put a pretty name on a bill and people are voting --people are supporting the name of the bill, versus what the meaning of

it is. but it is --what exactly is human infrastructure? we have redesigned infrastructure. i have been watching the house for the last couple of years. there will be a committee that puts a bill together and when it makes it to the floor, the democrats have changed it completely into something that they know will not make it through the senate. they will tell you it will not make it through the senate. that is what the committees are for is to put bills together. host: apologies. we will leave it there and let our guest respond. guest: actions speak louder than words and they have been redefining almost every term. let's look back at the original package. they tried to save -- less than 9% of all the spending of the

$1.9 trillion actually went towards health care spending and putting shots in people's arms. you are seeing that with the human infrastructure bill. we had the acting director in our committee and they are even changing the word woman and mother, replacing it with birthing people and further person. they are trying to strip away motherhood from moms. that is the most important title . it is not about executive, ceo or congressman. this administration is trying to redefine all terms and redefine mother, woman and replacing it with her than people and birthing person. -- birthing people and

birthing person. host: suing the state of georgia over its recent voting law. joining us, david becker. we will have that conversation, when we return. ♪ >> c-span landmark cases explores the stories and constitutional drama behind supreme court decisions. the landmark case ron -- miranda versus arizona. he was arrested for suspicion of kidnapping and rape. the supreme court ruled that it was inadmissible because he was not notified before being questioned of his fifth and sixth amendment rights.

watch landmark cases sunday night on c-span, online at c-span.org or listen on the c-span radio app. >> c-span shop.org is the c-span story. there is a collection of products. you still have time to order the congressional directory with contact information for members of congress and the biden administration. go to c-span shop.org. >> washington journal continues. host: david becker is the founder and director for election innovation research. he served in that position from 1988 to 2005. thank you for joining us this morning.

can you remind folks of the center, its work and who supports you financially? guest: it was founded in 2016. we founded it to really work with election officials all around the country to help them make elections more convenient and secure. that would be a particularly important issue. we are completely nonpartisan and nonprofit. we are largely founded by foundations across the country. host: we are looking at georgia's voting law. can you talk about what the justice department is after on this one? guest: it is an interesting

lawsuit, alleging that the recent georgia law violates section two of the voting rights act, which prohibits any election law or procedure that would discriminate or impede the vote. that portion of the voting right act is quite powerful. it still has very strong effects. there is a purpose for that. if it is passed with the purpose of denying the vote, that would be prohibited. that is what the justice department is alleging here. they i alleging that it was implemented with the purpose of impeding the right to vote on account of race. host: what is the justice

department using as evidence to make a case to file the suit? guest: it is a purpose case. they are looking at the specific provisions and the nature of the deliberations around the passing of the law. there are provisions that we know that make it harder to request a mail-in ballot in georgia. they make it difficult to place drop boxes that are convenient for voters. restrictions on the ability and criminalization of food and water -- those kinds of things will be evidence, in and of themselves. they looked at the manner in which it was passed. it was a very small bill

initially and in a matter of hours became a 90 page bill that was pretty much rushed through and signed by the governor. that rushed process presented testimony from voters, particularly voters of color and could be evidence that it was passed with focus. host: here to talk about the filing of the lawsuit against georgia. if you want to ask him questions about that and larger issues of voting rights, call to let us know. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. (202) 748-8002 for democrats. we will show you a little bit from last week, announcing the lawsuit against georgia. here is some of what he said. >> today, the department of

justice is suing the state of georgia. recent drug -- changes were enacted with a purpose of denying or abridging the right of black georgians to vote on account of their race or color in violation of section two of the voting act. several studies show that georgia experience record voter turnout and participation rates. approximately two thirds cast a ballot in the november election, just over the national average. this is because for celebration. in march 2021, georgia legislature passed a law. many of it -- many make it harder for people to vote. they enacted those restrictions with the purpose of denying or abridging the right to vote, on account of race or color.

host: what, if any does history tell us about these suits? how does it determine if they can be successful or not? guest: it is important to hear what the attorney general said in this case. he is pointing out that the voting laws and other voting laws in georgia were well established and have been there for years, passed by republican legislatures and signed by republican governors. they would always find that once it appeared that people of color were taking advantage of some of the convenient voting option did the legislature appear to have concerns about it. that might be evidence offered in court, when this case is

ultimately heard. it is really hard to come down on one side or the other. this is not a slamdunk case on either side. to show the kind of process they went through and the circumstances that might have applied to why they decided to change the long-standing procedures in georgia, only after the former lost the november election and they lost the runoff elections in january. host: do you have an example of arguments that they will provide? guest: it will try to show that there were nonracial reasons to pass the law. we have heard from legislators that tried to pass these laws that they were about election integrity.

we will see what happens there. there is a broader point considered all around the country. we can go on and on. these laws are being passed not in response to the gym it concerns but being passed in response to a lie, something they are insecure about concerning the election. this was the most secure, transparent election in american history. if you do not believe president biden won the election, you cannot believe president trump won the election in 2016. we had more paper ballots than ever before. we had a full, statewide recount . every single presidential ballot was counted by hand.

more audits statewide, more cooperation on the security front than ever before. we saw more pre-election litigation clarifying the rules. both campaigns won some and lost some, but we knew what the rules were. we saw more postelection litigation, including trump appointed judges ruling that the election was secure and the results were confirmed. the idea that we are taking some steps backward these laws is troubling. we should be looking at states like kentucky. they got together and try to figure out ways to make elections more acceptable, convenient and secure. that is the model for the nation. host: let's hear from the democrat line.

good morning. go ahead. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i am in the sixth district here. we have not had long lines or any complaints about voting machines. i have friends in other districts who have had very long lines and they have had some issues with getting access to voting machines. they opened up the poles and the machines do not work or there is no electricity. those are in areas where there are people of color. my question is, why is it necessary to have a bill written about voting problems, when it is not addressing the real

voting problems? most people are smart enough not to allow someone to give them a bottle of water in line, to affect their vote. that is a kindness. the way that the bill was written and the way that the bill was passed, i thought it was a slap in the face to the people in georgia. people who do not live here talk about that frequently, about ballots under the table. they went on national tv on 60 minutes and explained, in detail about the ballots under the table and what was going on with that. they addressed rudy giuliani claim about the ballots in the suitcases under the table. host: you put a lot out there, so we will let our guests respond. guest: they actually had

provisions to allow13 for more machines -- to allow for more machines. you raise an important point, where you get completely, one party passing laws in the state, you often get the situation where they are passing to affect future elections and affect their outcome. that is not only bad policy, it is a bad idea. it also does not work we saw that in georgia, specifically where the former president spread lies about election rigging in georgia, and between the november election and the january runoff. his own supporters believed those lies and turned out a lower rate.

you have to be really careful about that. again, you raise an important point. the election was absolutely verified by members of both parties who did an amazing job. there is absolutely zero evidence, despite many attempts, that there was any fraud, of any kind that would have affected the outcome in georgia. a trump appointed judge confirmed that in georgia. that issue with the alleged suitcase of ballots -- that was merely an issue where, normally people would have gone home at a certain point and continued counting at a later point, but they working -- were working so

diligently. it was another batch of ballots. they were going to continue to count these ballots during the process. it was completely transparent. the ballots in georgia recounted three times, three different ways, once entirely by hand in a process observed by both parties. host: diane is in vermont on the republican line. caller: this is almost laughable. when the guest makes statements about the most secure election in our lifetime, i am wondering which ones were insecure and were those even legitimate at all? the statements about no significant fraud is also quite laughable.

there is evidence coming up every day that you just do not want to see. they have made it to the courts but they have not made heard. -- not been made heard. the people of the u.s. do not have standing as a reason is laughable. machines should not be making these decisions. none of this should be happening the way that it is happening. the federal government should not be running state elections. for the federal government to insert itself yet again into something that is none of their business -- we know our people. we know what is going on and we vote locally for our representatives. we are not being represented. i find it laughable that your guest can sit here and say this was the safest and most secure election when we have the most

evidence we have ever seen. guest: unfortunately, i hear this quite a bit. i understand her frustration. she and others like her have been lied to repeatedly. they cannot accept the fact that they were defeated. they have been victimized. there is a culture of people who are basically working to in the dark -- keep people in the dark. the facts are pretty simple. you can believe the attorney general or his own fbi director.

this was the most verified, transparent, scrutinized election in american history. our voter lists are more up-to-date and accurate than ever before thanks to the efforts to share information across state lines that allows them to keep their voter lists up-to-date and remove voters that are no longer eligible in their state. 95% of all voters in the u.s. voted on paper ballots, including every single voter in all of the battleground states. that has never happened before. we only had about 75% to 80% do that. others had majority or no paper ballots in 2016, all moving to paper ballots in 2020. the state audited those ballots and the machines did not make a difference because we had an audit of the paper ballots that

looked at what the actual count was and verified the machine count. these are just the facts. i want to encourage people to recognize that there are people out there trying to keep you angry and divided from your fellow citizens, trying to make you doubt our democracy and decisions. they are doing the work that the chinese party has not been successful with throughout the years. democracy cannot serve its citizens. right now, we have domestic actors because they cannot significant -- except significant laws. they are trying to make you doubt our own elections and system of government. the 2020 election was not all that close. it was the widest margin. 7 million for president biden.

while 10,000 or 20,000, 150,000 voted margins and states like michigan might seem narrow -- in the realm of recounts and audits, those are landside. those were very significant, large-scale victories in those states. the michigan victory was twice the margin, but we are not talking about north carolina. it shows you the nature of this. president trump, at the time, could have asked for recounts and they were all paper, for the first time ever. he did not do that. they confirmed the results, and

he chose not to become pennsylvania and michigan. it tells you a lot about what he thought his chances were. host: mr. becker, the timing of the announcement by the attorney general was on the year anniversary of another supreme court case regarding voting issues. talk about how it impacted voting rights law. guest: it was a decision rendered in 2013. it was called section five. it required certain states with a history of discrimination, predominantly in the deep south, not exclusively but predominantly, it required them to submit the changes for clearance before they put them into effect. those changes were almost always approved.

i worked in the justice department and did some work myself. they put minority voters in a worse position than they were before. that existed -- the court decided that the coverage formula based on registration meets back in the 60's and 70's -- eight no longer related to the states that were covered. since there was no coverage formula, it could not be enforced anymore. mostly states like georgia, mississippi, alabama, etc.. the last effort to renew was

2006, and it was passed unanimously. it was overwhelmingly bipartisan. there is a john lewis voting rights advancement act that was presented and offered that would restore to portions of the state. if they pass a state law like we are seeing in georgia, those would have to go to the justice department to be precleared. state legislators know that this exists. they are very careful of what we see over time. we had a careful about laws. in some ways, we are seeing that

play out here. caller: i am a first time caller. thank you for taking my call. i have a couple questions that i would like clarification on. exactly why is it -- the ballot by mail. are you saying they do not know how to ask for a ballet? most people go to vote with families and friends. friends go and passing out food or water. are you saying that blacks do not know how to do this? i would like this point clarified for me. guest: i am not saying any of those things.

for the first time, it was used more so by democrats and african-american voters did the question that the doj is as is, why now? was this a concern only when it became widespread and used a man --among american voters? if you target certain voting procedures that are preferred by particular minority groups, that could be a violation of federal law. it should be considered by the courts. issues related to the provision of food and water in line, it is the same thing. given that long lines were more

prevalent in areas with high concentrations of minority voters, if they targeted that, based on that idea, that would be potentially a violation of federal law as well. it is something that needs to be looked at. it is not whether they are capable, it is whether barriers should be placed in front of any voters, including minority voters, in the first place. caller: hello. i had a couple questions for you, but i wanted to make a comment about your response to the lady from vermont. her point was that elections are local and state run. there is fraud. your long-winded answer, attacking her for being a trump supporter. she did not say she was a trump supporter. your long answer about trump,

trump sycophants or whatever --i found that really poor, on your part, to attack her like that when her question was really that the u.s. government should not take over state elections. furthermore, about voter fraud, i do not know if you know this, but one time in memphis, 10 or 12 years ago, harold ford's -- the ford funeral home was very popular and they were voting absentee ballots. her election got overturned and it had to go on to another election, a special election. she did win, but there are instances of fraud in the media.

if you only care about it once or rarely --in indiana, we had absentee ballot fraud. the democrat chairman was having people from outside the city limit send in absentee ballots. host: with all that said, what would you like our guest to address? caller: i have been reading about the new georgia law. one thing you have said it restricts the drop off containers, but they did not have dropbox is before the 2020 election. host: we will need -- leave it there. guest: on the instance of fraud, the color is right.

they are rant -- caller is right. there are instances but they are rare. it absolutely does happen. we discovered --we know how much there is. they have found about 1000 cases . they looked into this issue and could not find any instances of fraud. same with president trump's commission on election integrity. they could not demonstrate any instances of fraud. there were no allegations --no evidence of widespread fraud. this was not a fraud case.

there were dropbox is in 2020 and the courts knew that there would be voters on both sides. the rule of law prevailed. it is an incredible integrity measure. they eliminate the middleman from the return ballot. every election official will tell you that there is a way to make sure of the integrity of the election. i cannot agree more that it is important. because it is absolutely crucial. one of the reasons that the lawsuit that they attempted to bring to the u.s. supreme court, saying that they should control how other states run their election, that was rejected by the u.s. supreme court, that kind of intrusion is significant. the u.s. supreme court recognized that and we have

local control of elections that we wanted and we worked extraordinarily well. of course, some people were disappointed with that. caller: good morning. it sounds like the gop is going back to where they do not want everybody to vote because they know it is bad for them. they are coming out with so many voter laws and to me, i understand that they need to show verification, but, if we are having problem with the ids, why don't we start using fingerprints for that? that is my question. guest: one of the things that i want to make clear, with

professional election officials, easy, convenient, acceptable voting is not in conflict. the more people who vote earlier by mail, the more integrity a system has because we identify instances of potential fraud, malfunctions or events in advance of election day. they are actually pushing against some of the more partisan efforts to try to restrict elections and in some ways negatively impact integrity. people on the board in arizona, along with the reporter there -- all of them are republicans and all of them have been absolute leaders to make elections more

acceptable and secure. that is what the election professionals are. host: david becker. you can reach the website. thank you for your time today. we will finish off the program by inviting you to participate in our forum. if it affects you, give us a call and tell us about it. republicans call (202) 748-8001. democrats at (202) 748-8002. we will take your questions when washington journal continues. ♪ >> book tv on c-span two has topped --

saturday at 10:00 p.m. eastern, former xerox ceo, the first black female ceo of a fortune 500 company on american business and the corporate world. interviewed by felicia davis. join our conversation with bullets or prize-winning author and historian as she talks about american presidents, slavery and emancipation. her latest book on juneteenth. taking your calls, facebook comments, email and tweeps. >> washington journal continues. host: give us a call and let us

know about it. republicans at (202) 748-8001. democrats at (202) 748-8002. and the independence at (202) 748-8003. other ways you can post can be used for both twitter and instagram. kyle griffin relating to the last segment says senator amy klobuchar has announced a field carry on voting rights that will take waste july 19. this will be the first field hearing held in 20 years. witnesses will testify about the new voter restrictions and you can stay tuned for that, especially if that plays out in july. president biden is set to visit wisconsin to talk about the efforts on infrastructure, particularly the bipartisan

framework that you heard some of our guests referenced during the course of the morning. no details on the publishing, but the president is going to wisconsin to talk about that. we will start off with griff in maine. go ahead. you are first step. caller: the question i have is from the gentleman's experience. do we have sufficient experience , need or use of foreign language, different languages, when people are trying to vote? how did they do that in the different states? what is he suggesting is the best way, if any, to do that? host: our guest has left us from our last segment, but tell me about your interest in the question. caller: we have some people in

maine who are recent immigrants and my parents were immigrants or my grandparents were immigrants and i was wondering how is that handled over the years and how might it have been improved to ensure that people who are citizens understand the language and understand how to deal with it in something other than english? host: billy from texas on the republican line. go ahead. caller: i want to know what everybody thinks about this lady --they ought to be removed from the olympics and punished for not standing for america. have a great day and god bless.

caller: i would like to talk about the dallas county voting law that says, if you are going to vote and you have been voting since 1960, and he won't --you no longer have a driver's license -- you go to get your voter id. host: ok. what is your interest in it? caller: it happened to my friend. host: ok. that is that he in texas -- betty in texas. any comments about this

bipartisan agreement that you have heard talked about between the white house and republicans? you heard our previous guest talk about it as well. talk about what is going on when it comes to the infrastructure package. particularly as it plays out in the house and the senate. you can keep watching on c-span one and two respectively. everything that is playing al, particularly when it comes to matters of infrastructure, you can find it there. richard in missouri. hello. caller: about medical care for seniors. it has come to the point where if the government is going to get into this medical deal, it

needs universities to train doctors and dentists and they would take the insurance companies and profit. they need to do it right. training enough people, if you are a truck driver, you are a truck driver. you are trained, what you are and it is getting to where it is a money game instead of a medical deal. that is the way i see it. host: greg from tulsa, oklahoma. caller: i would like to say that they should be committed for not restraining himself with the belligerent people who are calling and attacking him. i think that we need in iq test some of these halfwits will not be able to vote and that should be your determination on whether

you should be able to vote or not. host: let's go to savannah, georgia. this is larry. caller: i tried calling when the other gentleman was here but i could not get through them. i wanted to say that the reason for increasing the mail-in ballot was because of the covid virus. i am a black man and i am insulted that blacks cannot afford an id card or cannot figure out how to vote. blacks are affected by they changes and not whites? host: the sixth day of searching occurring in florida, searching for any survivors. the white house press secretary was asking about the federal role in the investigation of what happened in that florida

condo collapse. here is a bit from that. >> and the president's briefing, has he been given any information about the chance for survivors still existing and does he believe that there is a federal role in examining the kinds of infrastructure within that building that have come to many's people's minds? >> i would say that he does believe that there should be an investigation and a member of the resource team, building science expert is being sent to the scene. officials from osha and the fbi have all been employed safe side, under their own authority to help participate and provide expertise in that effort, so we want to play any constructive role that we can, getting to the bottom of it and preventing it

from happening in the future. obviously, he would refer to local authorities, making that assessment. host: you can see more on our website at c-span.org. when it comes to events of international new, wall street journal reporting that militias backed by tehran attacked troops in iraq and syria. multiple rockets were fired at u.s. troops and they responded by firing artillery at the rocket launching positions. it occurred --it came as the biden administration warned that it stood ready to defend the troops. that is the wall street journal this morning. let's go to alan in arkansas. caller: good morning. you owe me some extra time. you cut me off, my last call six weeks ago.

be considerate and let me make my point. there are two. a quick comment --i think that you should challenge those like that. all americans, saying if we believe in limited government, we are somehow under communist china? that guy, how you get guests like that, i think i should be invited as a guest and should get a 30 minute segment, but i called six weeks ago to make a point about the january 6 riot, the so-called riot and a gentleman had called before from massachusetts to make the same point. i say this respectfully, but you cut him off. i tried to follow a few minutes later and you cut me off. i would like to make the point host: --point. host: go ahead and make your

point. caller: that you go, sherry. you have to look at statistical -- i took a graduate course into statistics and you have to look at the statistical probability. the charlottesville riot, where you had a governor and other democrats ordering the police to pull back, knowing that there would be a riot. the counterprotesters, the so-called antifa folks, sure enough, they got it, but certain people were fired. look it up. all the reports show that all the democrats were fired for what they did. host: your thoughts on january sixth? caller: you have to let me make the point. they had an anniversary valley a year later where they had the right crowd and back in

washington dc, to celebrate, ready for people showed up, 34 of these characters, but 1000 antifa protesters showed up. it is all in the news. then you have on january 6, the perfect opportunity for antifa and black lives matter protesters to show up and here is a trump rally in d.c., led by a group of federal fbi -- host: please make your point. caller: they have redacted federal molds or whatever in the capital, leading this crowd, in their, but here is the point. there were no antifa protesters there on january 6. host: how do you know that definitively? caller: they were spitting,

throwing and throne can -- caller: -- host: we will go to wisconsin. democrat line. caller: what i would like to talk about is the minimum wage. it is seven dollars 20 five cents and it has been there for a very long time. i think that president obama said it was going to be 10 dollars an hour for federal workers, if in fact they put the cola on the seven dollars 20 five cents, it would be around nine dollars for approximately $.80 more. it seems like cola, which is used in so many wage things, social security being the main one.

they do not want to give $15 an hour. if they would have put the cola on it. we are talking about $.90 more. i think that would be a very simple solution. pedro, what do you think of that? host: i will not give an opinion , but if somebody else is wanting to do that, they are free to do so. caller: i just wanted to mention fair income taxes. just like any other business, utilities and whatnot. you and i will pay federal income tax next year.

when somebody tells you the corporation is going to pay their fair share, this is what it is. thank you. host: the senate republican leader and minority leader in the senate spoke about the current negotiation going on between the white house and senators on this framework infrastructure deal. he gave his thoughts on it and this is what he had to say. >> i appreciate him saying he will do it separately, but he does not determine that. they determine the order of things and what i am asking the president to do is call the majority leader and the speaker to deal with these issues separately because none of the republicans, during the negotiations and the democrats that were in the group talked about it being a link to anything else, but the linkage

can only be determined by the speaker and majority leader. host: here is elizabeth from arkansas. caller: for many years, i have been watching how easy it has become to pay our taxes and i have strongly felt it should be just as easy, if not easier to vote for everyone. they have done so much to make it easy to file taxes. there are all kinds of ways to do it but it is difficult for some people to vote in this country and i think that is totally ridiculous. thank you. host: let's hear from patty from pennsylvania. caller: good morning. i think every city --everybody should be allowed to vote, in person or by mail.

we are a free country with a democracy and it is insulting to black people. we have gone through all this time and there is so much that needs to be done. host: now we will hear from carolina. caller: mine is about the program that has an average. 16 to 20 years old. seeing -- seeking a vocation or trade.

crimes are being committed by these young people, committing crimes for selling drugs and to commit murders. host: just a tip for people trying to get on, if you have your television on, please turn that down. the interference sometimes comes through the conversation. this is keith. hello. caller: good morning, pedro. a while ago, a black guy called in and said it is a big problem to get an id to vote. it is not hard to get at id.

somebody could help them get. it is only a problem for democrats. you know? we all know he cheated. in the long run, we will see that in a few years or so. everybody sit back and relax. host: keith and indiana. when it comes to vaccinations in the u.s., reporting that young pete will are a factor in achieving immunity, saying since vaccine became available, health departments have focused on varying degrees of success, including people living in rural communities, conservatives, but in recent days, they have identified young adult as a sick

challenge for our country where there is a peak. a federal report showed one third of adults reported being vaccinated, especially with low rates among people who are black, among those 24 and younger and among those who had lower incomes and no health insurance. more of that in the new york times this morning. the next call is from chris in atlanta, georgia. caller: hello? i would like to make two statements, one about the infrastructure. the first should be about water. some people have a hard time getting water and other parts have plenty of water. in my second statement,

everybody in this country, right now who is 18 years old and older, who are citizens and probably registered to vote can vote. it is up to the individual to get out and vote. i have to walk three miles to do my voting, but i do it. they need to get out and do it. host: republican mine, good morning. caller: good morning. my question is, president biden and democrats keep blaming the republicans for all the troubles. i would like to just add, why resident biden is not doing something about this. host: what fighting are you

talking about? caller: in portland. fighting, burning, shooting and stealing, whatever. i cannot understand why you do not want to do something about it. host: when it comes to voting machines, reporting that they will not be using most of the voting equipment after it had been with contractors for its november results, according to the county. the potential cost is so far unknown. halfway through a $6 million lease the equipment, but it is unclear if they want to pay the rest of the money or if the county or senate will be on the hook. the secretary of state shared concerns about whether hundred of -- hundreds of counting machines are safe to use.

many are not certified to handle election equipment in the u.s. and that is from central this morning. william is next. the house is just about to come in, so go ahead and make your statements. caller: can you hear me? good morning. it is humiliation of black folk, over and over, these people calling in saying that we are lacking. we built this country. it is time for these young, black folks to get out some real black politicians and openness thing up. we need our own holidays because the more we do -- we are still

treated like second-class citizens, even the elite black people. we have had enough. host: that is william from jacksonville, florida. the house of representatives is about to come in for its session. stay close. you can follow and monitor along on our website at c-span.org. we now take you to the house. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the chair lays before the house a communication from the speaker. the clerk: the speaker's room, washington, d.c., june 29, 2021. i hereby appoint the honorable thomas r. suozzi to act as speaker pro tempore on this day. signed, nancy pelosi, speaker of the house of representatives. the speaker pro temproe: pursuant te