"he has not written a memoir so much as a report from the front, make that many fronts." we talk with him about his time in vietnam and the soviet union among other things. >> on this episode of book notes+. listen on c-span.org/podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts. former congressman and current club for growth president david mcintosh is here with us on set on "washington journal." first remind us what club for growth is in what you do there. guest: thank you. it is great to be back live with everybody. host: we like it as well. guest: club for growth is the largest conservative political organization in the country. we have got a couple different components. our nonprofit advocates for

lower regulations and smaller government. and we have a pack where our members will bundle contributions to candidates the pack endorses, and that helps them enormously. we have about 10,000 members that will contribute -- they get to pick which candidates they want to support. then we have a super pac, a club for growth action that provides independent expenditures. if we endorse a candidate, this cycle we endorsed ted budd for the senate, we sent out a letters to our members, they contribute to his campaign through our pack, and the super pac is raising money. we have $5.2 million raised already to help him in his primary. we will come in and run our own ads, telling the voters of north carolina he is the best pick for the next and arter -- next senator. host: you join us at the tail end of a week where senate democrats and the biden administration rolled out the $3.5 trillion package calling it

human infrastructure, a variety of environmental, social, education programs. what was your reaction on tuesday night when senator schumer came out with that number? guest: what i realized is you have got, as the democrats are faced with a situation where they want to include tax increases, that will be part of the bill, and they want to expand the welfare programs. they call it human infrastructure but there are no buildings, roads, no real physical infrastructure. it is being -- infrastructure that is being paid for with that. when they decided to go all democrats on the bill, they have to negotiate with moderate mainstream democrats, the radical left, bernie sanders, and get everyone on board. if they were to get a bipartisan bill, they would have to negotiate with republicans and probably a lot less spending and more deficit created. host: a bipartisan

infrastructure framework is being worked on right now. senator schumer once to finalize the details by next week. do use apart -- do you support to that bill negotiated with a group of republicans and democrats. guest: we have not seen the details yet so we do not know when they say it is all paid for what that means. two, i think it will be hard to keep them on separate tracks. in the end, that infrastructure bill could be motor fuel for the larger tax increase spending bill. nancy pelosi has basically said that. she will not consider any infrastructure bill until she gets the tax increases and everything on reconciliation. host: and that reconciliation process, how hard is that to move something through reconciliation, and when you are in congress, where big bills like this moved through a reconciliation process? how often was that used? guest: we used a much more regular budget process when i was in congress.

most of the times, we would do all 10 or 11 of the spending bills separately. they would pass, be signed, vetoed, negotiated back and forth between the house and senate. then for a while, both sides threw up their hands when they had these big bills. now they try to put it into reconciliation, which is code word for 50 votes rather than 60 votes. there are rules limiting what you can do in that bill, but they are putting all sorts of spending through it. we never used to do that. we put the spending separately. reconciliation was for things like social security, medicare, taxes. host: david mcintosh with the club for growth with us until 8:40 a.m. eastern so go ahead and call with your questions or comments. we begin our program today talking about the enhanced child tax credit checks that started hitting bank accounts yesterday. part of that $1.9 trillion

american rescue plan passed in march. were you in support of expanding the child tax cut it -- tax credit program? guest: no. affectively that his welfare run through the tax code. that is refundable and people get it whether they pay taxes or not. they run it through the tax code because it sounds like a tax cut when it really is just another payment program. i think what we have got to be careful with and we were against the covid relief bill because of the huge debt it increased, but it also disrupted the market. you see all of these extra payments create a huge incentive for people not to go back to work. if you have eaten in a restaurant recently, you know maybe they don't have as many servers as they used to, and this is a result as -- result of this covid bill playing out. host: the enhanced child tax credit was a program -- the child tax credit was a program back in 1997.

this just adds more money to it and a different way of getting the money out. the program started in 1997. were you in congress for the debates over those original tax credits? do you remember the idea? guest: no i don't, when they made it a refundable tax credit. it was probably wrapped up in a package i did support, so i may have ended up voting for the bigger bill, but i think it was a bad -- host: back then it was not a refundable tax credit, it was a credit you got on your tax bill. guest: which that make sense to me if you're going -- makes sense to me if you're going to do a child tax credit as a reduction in your taxes. that is like the child exemption, only through a credit. we have always had that as a way of recognizing families with middle income have extra expenses when they have children. but when you start turning it into a "refundable," then it becomes more like a welfare program. host: john is out of clifton,

parks new york, an independent. good morning. you are on with of the -- you are on with david mcintosh from the david mcintosh. caller: thank you for what c-span does. -- from the club for growth. caller: thank you for what c-span does. this trickle down economics, which you base your stances on and everything, how is that putting these billions of dollars into space instead of improving the conditions of the workers that make these people the richest man on earth? i would like a better understanding. you are talking about welfare and everything else, but yet at the same token you ignore these stances where these billionaires are pouring money into space, the people able to fly with them are also billionaires and millionaires. guest: first of all, i am happy

it is not a government program where they are forcing taxpayers to spend the millions of dollars on something like that. my view is if somebody has been successful in creating a business and making money and the customers have rewarded them so become -- so they become a billionaire, if they want to spend it on a rocket out of space, that is their choice. if they want to spend it on building mansions, they can do that. i do not think it is the right role of government to tell people how to spend their money. host: maximus on twitter with this question, why is the club for growth anti-trump and pro liz cheney? is that a correct description? guest: no. that is an interesting question. we have not endorsed in the primary but we are looking for a challenger in liz cheney because she voted for a lot of compromises on the democrats on a lot of the big spending bills. down in texas right now, there is a special election going on

in texas six. ron white and his now widow susan was down there. often times we will align with trump's alignments but other less regulation, growing the economy and pick candidates that way. host: who is jake elsie? guest: he is her opponent. the two interestingly about this race, they call this a jungle primary, democrats and republicans vote together. the democrats were -- they did not turn out so two republicans ended up being the final two choices, susan wright and jake elsie. host: giving a flavor on what that does in getting involved in races. we want to show one of your ads in the texas six race against jacobs he -- jake.

here's the ad [video clip] >> bill crystal bakhtin publicans -- backed republicans who tried to -- maybe the most vicious never trump hitman said he was impressed and gave him a campaign contribution. he trashed conservatives and bashed ted cruz. jake elsie is wrong about trump and bad for office. host: how many congressional races do you plan on getting involved in or a better question, how much money do plan on spending in the 2022 cycle. guest: last cycle we raised $103 million, it was a record for us. we are hoping to increase that and have even more funds available in the next cycle. host: in a midterm? guest: in a midterm. we have a

>> real deficit was all of the spending that was also done. that happened during the trump presidency and now during the biden presidency.

we oppose both. we don't think the spending bills are good for the economy and they expand areas and interfere with economic growth. host: where you think you oppose the most in the biden administration question guest: for -- administration? guest: the president made a persuasive case that china, for example, is not a level playing field and he wanted to use the tariffs to force them back to the negotiating table. our view was if the goal is in the end to reduce tariffs, we can understand what you are doing technically to use them in the short-term. host: this is jackie, an independent. good morning. caller: i am a history buff.

i remember the lee atwater dear -- lee atwater strategy. it sounds like your organization is really a cover for the racist beliefs and actions of any party that would seek to help african-americans, because the southern strategy said we can no longer use the "n" word, but if we use lower the taxes, smaller government, all those things, he said it will hurt blacks more than whites. guest: i couldn't disagree more. our policy helps blacks and other minorities. we saw that during the trump years or they had the record unemployment, low unemployment for blacks and other minorities. we have for an economic policy that helps everybody and frankly that is better than a big

government policy that tends to help the rich and the elite. that is why you see a lot of the billionaires in millionaires supporting the democrats in the last election. they like big government because they can afford to pay for it and they get all of the benefits , whereas a lot of times minority families, they need the entry-level jobs that lower taxes create. guest: if you are against big government, why did you work for the government? you are an elected official or you were an elected official. for years we have heard from the

conservatives about big government and how terrible big government is, but why would they run for office? isn't that kind of like a vegetarian wanting to be a butcher mark -- a butcher? guest: no, i don't get is. people in indiana elected me to go and fight for those principles. i went for six years, got a lot done and fought for them and went back into the private sector. let me address one of the concerns is that growth only for republicans or businesses. often times we find ourselves opposed to the chamber of commerce, where they want to use special benefits for certain businesses but keep the taxes high so they can pay for those benefits. we call it corporate welfare or crony capitalism. they have staked out -- we have staked out a strong opposition to that.

we used to have a program that corporate america loves because it would help finance deals they would make with china and countries all over the world at taxpayer expense. we oppose that, because companies can get their own financing. they do not need the subsidies during we need to look out for the taxpayers, working families of the country. what did you do -- host: what did you do before you went to congress? guest: right before i was in congress i was at a think tank, the hudson institute, based in indianapolis. host: any regrets with the term limits pledge? guest: no, i actually ran and try to go back and am thankful that i lost that primary because i think i can do more helping other people run as head. host: you do not think you would

have that itch again? guest: in some ways i think of it as a spiritual matter. that god had to ring out of me the desire to get elected and now i can help other people. and now it is helping to get the next generation of leaders. host: how long have you been there? guest: six years. host: just about 15 minutes left if you want to chat with david mcintosh. we will head out to the buckeye state. this is carolyn in alliance. good morning. caller: i have a couple quick questions. do you believe the government should support research and science? also do you yourself in the club for growth believe in the science of climate change and

that the government needs to put money in preparing for climate change? those are my questions. guest: one, i think the government funding, appear at approach would say the private sector will take care of all that we need. i think our culture and country could benefit from greater research and technology. i worry sometimes it gets politicized. you saw that with the science around dealing with covid in an election year, and that was unfortunate. my view has always been get to the facts, let the truth come out and make decisions based on that. to answer your questions, i do think there is a role for helping to make sure we have research looking to the future, building for the future. on climate, i think we should have science looking at that, but i don't think it should be as politicized science. as it says, we will only look at

your data if it proves our theory. if it questions the theory, we don't want to look at it. to me, that is bad science. you should always be open for challenges, let the facts fit -- fax speak for themselves -- facts speak for themselves. one of the things on the climate agenda is that it has been a stalking horse of government control of the energy industry. i think i would be terrible because it ends up affecting lower income, poor people, middle income families who a large part of their budget is on energy, gas prices, electricity, and those will be driven skyhigh if you see a lot of these climate change policies go into effect. host: another issue that has been politicized, critical race theory. a headline from the recent cpac attendees weighing in, what should parents do about critical race theory in schools? you spoke about this? guest: i did. i'm troubled by what i see on the critical race theory front. i think we should step back.

i did at cpac and said, what is the value we should embrace in this country? to me, it is what martin luther king said, in his i have a dream speech, we should not judge each other based on the color of our skin but on the quality of our character. that should be our national goal. we should recognize that we have fallen short in the past, and honestly that there is more to do. that part of the recent critical race theory agenda is a good part, where we are more conscious of are we treating our brothers and sisters the way we want to and aspire to, not based on the color of their skin? unfortunately, what the radicals in the critical race theory movement have done is transform that into a fundamental critique of american culture, our government, our capitalist system, and because there is old and past racism, we are

inherently evil -- they are inherently evil and have to be thrown away. when you read it into what they say, get rid of it all and fit into a socialist, communist type regime. we are very imposed to that. what you are starting to see around the country, the radical approach being taught in school. sadly, what they're doing in most programs often is to divide people by race. they are pulling out the minority students and saying to the white students you are guilty because your ancestors were racist and you need to become aware of that and be treated differently than minority students. that violates the principle that we do not treat people differently based on the color of their skin. so in fact, it encourages a racist approach to this. so we are very much opposed to that radical critical race theory approach. i tell everybody we have got to embrace martin luther king. both republicans and democrats

should stand and say that is our vision for america. it has not always been but it has been, in my lifetime, and we need to make sure it continues to be. host: on the line for republicans, this is a joseph out of tallahassee, florida. good morning. caller: good morning. how are you today? host: doing well. go ahead. caller: basically, i really enjoyed c-span because you get to see the news and interviews live in person. i have been listening to everything and what everybody is saying. it's like everybody wants what they want and they want it now. i'm just as human as anybody else but i know that will not work. it reminds me of the story when i was a child and i read it to my children and grandchildren at bedtime, the story about goldilocks and the three bears. goldilocks stumbled into this little cottage, the bears were gone, and she went ahead and

looked the chair was either too hard or too soft but the baby chair was just right for her. the porridge was either too hot or too cold -- host: i think we all are never -- i think. -- i think we all remember the story. caller: the thing about it is, everybody is living in that goldilocks mentality, i want what i want and i don't want anything to be too hard and i don't want anything to be too soft. i just want what i want. even today, when the college football players are demanding a salary, they are running around catching a football, there is something wrong when college students are saying i can't pay my debt. i'm just wondering where we are really going besides downhill. host: where we going? guest: that's a great question, joseph. where are we going? unfortunately, what we see is a lot of times the goldilocks says, "ok i didn't get what i want so i want government to come in and make everybody, the porridge, the temperature i wanted or all of them to be small chairs." that's one of the reasons we are

big advocate for less government and more of the civil society, private sector. all of us as individuals working, giving, creating things so we each can pursue what we want but we do not have to conform to a government one-size-fits-all, lukewarm porridge and hard chairs. host: less than 10 minutes left with david mcintosh. diane is waiting in tucker, new -- tuckerton, new jersey. good morning. caller: good morning. david, you mentioned because of the unemployment that people were having a hard time finding workers. i have been to restaurants since then and there workers are hand over fist. they are tripping over each other. they have plenty of people in these restaurants. what troubles me is the fact that the politicians think people can live off of an entry-level job. they are getting this little bit

of unemployment, which in this country is making that so they could live and buy food at the supermarket rather than going to the -- where you get the free food and get in food lines. you cannot live off an entry-level job. i have a really good example. i watch fox news sometimes, i watch all news stations, and the girl who sits in the middle said when we went to a restaurant, it took a long time for them to serve us. i'm like, oh my god. do you think anybody who could make enough would ever go to work in a restaurant? guest: i know a lot of people who decide to work in a restaurant. i think in many ways it is a noble calling. they are serving people, making their day better.

i really appreciate the men and women who do that for a living. a lot of times, people may, like you said, it's might be entry-level or their first job, like if they are in the entertainment industry, hoping to become a movie star but they need to pay the bills so they work as a waitress or waiter. my daughter just graduated from college, and a lot of her friends are really smart and waiting to find the right job after the covid shut down opens back up, and some of them have decided i can go into the service industry and pay my bills for now and i will pursue my dreams after that. i give them full credit for that. i think it is a great job and it helps people and makes life better for all of us. host: what does she want to do? go ahead and brag on your daughter. guest: thank you. she is studying art history and a lot of my friends say, that is

hard to find a job. she found a job in new york and she called me and said i will find a job and they will pay me. she is a go-getter. host: morris, illinois, michael, an independent. good morning. caller: i have a couple words. one for the commentator and two for the guests. how do you people maintain your tax-exempt status when you have these endless lines of topic and -- lines of propaganda. jen: who is ready for the weekend? we launched the supply chain task force to monitor and engage on emergent supply chain disruptions and bottle the white house task force.