haiti with florida international university's eduardo gamarra. you can be part of the conversation by calling in or by sending a comment by text, tweet, or on facebook. ♪ host: this is the washington journal for july 18. this week, senate democrats will vote on a voting rights bill. this is president biden -- this as president biden called on congress to pass two bills he says would improve voting rights in the united states. over our next hour, we want to hear from you about concerns you may have over that process. also, tell us what you think needs to be done. (202) 748-8000, democrats. (202) 748-8001 for republicans.

(202) 748-8002 independents. you can text us if you want, (202) 748-8003. post on our facebook page. if you want to post on twitter, @cspanwj is how you do that. if you want to follow the show on instagram, you can do so @cspanwj also. two recent polls by media companies taking a look at questions when it comes to voting concerns. npr releasing there's -- theirs, asking what concerns you more. the green signifies making sure everyone who wants to vote can do so, the orange says making sure no one votes who is not eligible. overall, 56% saying making sure that everyone who wants to vote can do so, versus 41% making sure that no one votes who is not eligible. by party i did a vacation, it changes drastically, democrats

in the green at 85% versus making sure that no one can vote who is not eligible. republicans, only 25% saying that, as a concern, making sure everyone who wants to vote can do so. it goes down from there. it also asks about photo id. do you think voters should be required to show government issued photo i dedication never they vote -- identification whenever they vote? 19% say it should not be shown with a small fraction of those unsure. on this topic of administration of voting and concerns about voting rights taken by nbc, the question they ask is different. when it comes to those polls, how much confidence they had in states that could administer a fair election. 74% say they are confident their

state could administer that fair election. 25% say they are not confident. for democrats who live in states won by president biden, 80% show confidence versus 11% nonconfidence. democrats who lived in states won by president trump say 80% showing confidence in their state to administer a fair election. when it comes to republicans who live in states won by president biden, only 39% say they were confident their state could a minister a fair election. republicans who live in states administered by former president trump, 76% saying their state can conduct a fair election. that is the question as far as concerns or at least of the polling as far as concerns. we are asking you about what concerns you might have when it comes to the voting process. you can call and let us know in this first hour. (202) 748-8000, our line for democrats. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. for independents, (202) 748-8002 .

if you want to text us thoughts this morning, you can do so at (202) 748-8003 and post on our twitter feed @cspanwj. it was yesterday that president biden released a statement calling for congress to pass two pieces of legislation when it comes to voting rights in remembrance of the one-year anniversary of the passing of reppo john lewis, -- representative john lewis. so i can sign them into law, he said, referring to the piece of legislation named after john lewis. the article says how it was earlier last week when the president went to philadelphia and talked about issues concerning voting. here are part of the comments from philadelphia. >> hear me clearly. >> there is an unfolding assault taking place in america today that attempts to suppress and subvert the right to vote in

fair and free elections. an assault on democracy, and assault on liberty, and an assault on who we are as americans. make no mistake. bullies and merchants of fear are threatening the very foundation of our country. it gives me no pleasure to say this. i never thought in my entire career i would have to say it, but i swore an oath to you, to god, to preserve, protect, and defend the constitution. that is an oath that forms a sacred trust to defend against all threats foreign and domestic. [applause] >> the assault on free and fair

elections is a threat literally. we are facing the most significant test of our democracy since the civil war. since the civil war. the confederates back then never breached the capital as insurrectionists did on january 6. i am not saying this to alarm you. i am saying this because you should be alarmed. i am also saying this -- there is good news. it does not have to be this way. it does not have to be, for real. we have the means. we just need the will, the will to save and strengthen our democracy. we did it in 2020. the battle for the soul of america. in that battle, people voted. democracy prevailed. our constitution held.

we have to do it again. host: president biden made those comments last week. you can find those full comments made from philadelphia on our website at c-span.org. when it comes to voting concerns, what you might have when it comes to the process of voting, david in ohio, democrats line starts is off. -- starts us off. caller: i have been watching this voting rights develop met with dismay because voting -- development with dismay because voting is a fundamental right. to make her harder for people to vote, especially when rules are tailored to prevent certain people from voting, that is not american. in texas, i think they had one drop off box for ballots in the most populous county. where the african-american and latino voters are, they do not have enough polling places, so

it forces voters to stand in long lines. i am 67. imagine standing in line for five hours. you do not have a restroom facility. republicans even made against the law to pass out water bottles. it is an obscenity, what is happening. it is diabolical. host: go ahead. caller: real quick, i want to know why joe manchin, with 78% of west virginia writers -- voters supporting the voting rights act, why he will not carveout at least an exception to the filibuster. why is it in the senate you have to have a 60 vote majority to pass anything instead of a 51? host: we will leave it there. joe manchin offering his own proposal for voting rights. we will get to those in a moment. let's hear from william. let's hear from dan in jackson heights, new york.

dan, good morning. go ahead. caller: in a lot of places, by law you have to vote. you can be fined for not voting. the same way as you can be fined terribly if you do not pay your taxes. i think if you make it more mandatory -- and i'm a republican, so mandatory for people to vote, they know that is not an issue. they will not be pulled in by all sorts of stupid promises. instead, they will come and vote because they have to parent the rest of the time, they will thing about why they want to vote. that is the big problem in america. americans are trained to believe you have to do things but never why you should do things. host: on that front, why call for a mandatory voting? ? in that case -- mandatory voting in that case? caller: because of it is mandatory the state has the obligation to make it easy for

you and you have the obligation to do it. as a physician, i cannot believe a person has to stay in line with no bathroom facilities, with all these things. it is unbelievable. so savage, so primitive. people really feel insulted by the way they are treated in some of these states, where they are standing in the heat outside instead of inside. once you make it mandatory, everybody has an obligation and then all the thinking that goes in his into what you are going to do and why you're going to do it host: that is dan, giving his thoughts about voting concerns. we are asking you to share what concerns you may have over the voting process. let us know about them. francine off of facebook saying, the fact that our voting process is not secure concerns me. andre adds his concern, that all

citizens are not automatically registered to vote. on voter ids, saying there needs to be voter id in every state. virginia stopped theirs as well and moved to their ballots to another building. absolutely crazy. from facebook, saying voting should be accessible to people and also complicated people decide not to vote. everyone's voice should be heard in an election. you can post on facebook. twitter is available to you as well. text us if you want. put those in a text and send it to us as far as your voting concerns. you can do so at (202) 748-8003. susan in germantown, maryland. caller: thanks for taking my call. i am dismayed by what i am seeing now, people being denied the right to vote. i think the reason why they are doing it is because they are afraid of the changing to a

graphics. -- demographics, to prevent minorities from rising to positions of power. within a decade or two, minorities will be the new georgie -- majority and whites will be the minority. they are terrified of this. many people who support these voter suppression things, they are afraid. host: how did you come to that conclusion? caller: because the changing demographics and you can already see it around you. the census report, the reasons why the whites will slowly -- right now they are afraid they are losing their way of life. host: susan and marilyn giving her concerns there are let's hear from -- in a maryland giving her concerns there.

let's hear from john. caller: i am a two time democratic candidate for the united states congress here in the pennsylvania ninth. i was fully endorsed by all the unions and united mine workers. i would like to point out to people across the nation that we had -- i have to admit this is a democrat -- an extra half a million ballots. we mailed out x number appearing we got back x -- we mailed out x number we got back x plus 500,000. host: aside from your assertions, what is your concern. >> it is not an assertion -- caller: it is not an assertion. they counted me -- ballots they

got back and there were more. host: what is your concern overall when it comes to voting? caller: my concern is if you have ballots -- extra ballots, how can you have faith in the system? i am a democrat, all right? what if the republicans do this stuff and there is an extra 500,000 ballots in pennsylvania the next time around? you cannot have this. host: let's go to barbara in alabama, republican line. caller: good morning. i do not know what the concern is. i had to show id just to get a vaccine for covid. everywhere, you go in a store and want to put something on your charge card, you show an idea. i do not understand with the concern is. i am all for safe voting and everybody be treated the same. i do not understand how they think there's went to be a

difference because republicans and democrats all have the same opportunity. where is the cheating? host: just to go back, your main concern when it comes to voting is voter id issues? caller: i do not understand where there is an issue that everybody is making an issue because we have always had to show an id where i vote, my name is on a list. that is not on that list, i do not vote. they make you show your drivers license and your name is on the list that they have in front of them. if it is not on that list, you are out. you do not vote. host: that is barbara and florence. some of you talking about issues or concerns over voting, voting id being one of them. you can call us, text us, post on facebook as well. a story coming out of nbc's

affiliate talks about voting bills in texas. they have a rig down of some of the bills, saying when it comes to the issue voting by mail it is a vote that would add two provisions to vote by mail. walking local officials from sending unsolicited applications for mail in ballots with new proposed id requirements. voters would have to provide a driver's license number, the last four digits of their social security number on applications for a mail-in ballot. when it comes to poll watchers, it says how and senate bills -- house and senate bills would give partisan poll watchers greater access. under current law, waters are entitled to sit or stand conveniently near workers. -- not recently effective. attempts to widen voting axes

last year once again will target the vote of both bills. both bills would ban drive-thru voting used in harris county and last year's presidential election as well as 24 hour voting in polling places used in specific days in harris county. there is a lot more to this article when it comes to what is going on in texas and what the collection of tennis -- texas democrats appeared on capitol hill, talking to legislators there. one of those people at a press conference talked about why those members left the state. [video clip] >> at the outset of this legislative session, the process was poisoned. it was poisoned by a governor who defunded the legislative branch in violation of our state constitution, which has specific language about separation of powers, and also what has been developed under our u.s.

constitution. when you start the process in such a coercive way, when you say, i am going to be the absolute ruler of the state of texas and defund the legislative branch, you have poisoned the entire process. we as democrats are united. we said we are going to kill any undemocratic efforts in the state legislature. if that meant leaving the state, we were going to do it. you have probably looked long and hard at the legislation that has been offered just in recent times, legislation that will make it harder for texans to exercise freedom to vote and write about. we are not doing this for democrats. we are doing this for republicans, for independents come up for north south texans and east and west texans. we are doing this for catholics and protestants, anybody in the state of texas who needs to exercise the right to vote should do so freely. we are not going to buckle to

the big lie in the state of texas, the big lie that has resulted in antidemocratic legislation throughout the united states. we said no when the big lie came to the capital in texas and darkened our door. we said no during a regular session. we are happy to work on bipartisan proposals that expand the right to vote, that make it easier to vote and harder to cheat in the state of texas, but that is not what we saw at the outset of this process, when none of the amendments offered by my colleagues were considered in committee. we took a very difficult decision. we are not here smiling. we are not spiking the ball. we are not saying we are happy. in fact, we are sad for democracy in the state of texas. we took a solemn oath to protect the constitution of the united states and of the state of texas. that is why we stand united before you hear today -- before

you today and preserving the democracy of texas and the united states. host: washington post reporting the texans say they plan to remain in washington through august 7, when the special legislative session ordered by texas governor greg abbott is scheduled to expire. their exact plan is still in the works as far as what happens after that, the story adding that texas democrats face tough odds. senator joe manchin and kyrsten sinema have opposed changes to the filibuster. senator manchin's posture did not budge. forget the filibuster, the senator told reporters. that was from the washington post. the washington post also highlighting a story that three texas democrats are being contracted for coronavirus.

the members were fully vaccinated. the caucus did not identify who the members were. senator manchin offers his own compromise when it comes to voting. it boils down to a couple of elements, saying it would provide for automatic voter registration, make election day a holiday cannot mandate at least 15 days of early voting. in federal elections, it would ban partisan gerrymandering and supports a list of alternatives to prove a voter's identity, like a utility bill. you may share some of those concerns. you may have your own concerns when it comes to voting overall. this is peggy and texas, republican line. -- in texas, republican line. caller: i am a 70-year-old senior. if we are going to keep our constitutional republic and not

end up ruled by a communist regime, we are going to have to have secure elections. this means a return to paper ballots. i do not know if you are all aware what is going on in arizona audits in mike lindell's upcoming presentation, but it is very important we enforce id and go back to paper ballots. host: you think that will resolve the main issues when it comes to voting? caller: i think it will. we have to have id for everything now. i think for the most important election -- the most important event we must have strict rules. host: ok. caller: there have been double ballot counting's. there have been illegal ballots counted. there is the mass going on in

arizona and georgia and pennsylvania and wisconsin. i think our best bet is to return to paper ballots and have a strict voter id. host: that is peggy and texas, talking about voter id, also mentoring arizona. the associated press taking a look at the events of arizona, saying election officials have identified fewer than 200 cases of potential voter fraud out of more than 3 million ballots cast's in last year's -- cast in last year's election. the ap said their investigation found 182 cases were problems were clear enough that officials refer them to investigators for further review. so far, only four cases have led to charges, including in a separate state investigation. no vote was counted twice. the ap also adding that, while it is possible more cases could emerge, numbers illustrate the

implausibility of the claims that fraud and irregularity in arizona cost him the state electoral vote. a final audited result, president biden won more votes than former president trump out of 3.4 million. if you want to look through that ap investigation and what they found as far as their analysis of events in arizona, you can do so online. from texas cannot republican line. this is richard -- from texas, republican line. this is richard. caller: i was watching like i usually do in the morning. i am 81-year-old texan. what these people are coming on here with and lying because they do not know what is happening -- it is the easiest state to vote in. you have to .5 weeks to vote. you drive down there and come back later at whatever time you can do it. it is so easy to vote.

at my age, they send me paperwork that i can -- if i wanted to vote by mail, i can do it, but you have to send back proof of who you are and they will send you a ballot. they do not mail out millions of ballots like california and other states do. it is so easy to vote. host: do you have concerns over the process? caller: no concerns right now. it is working perfect. people are getting up there and lying about this stuff, that it is so difficult and we are trying to stop voting. we had more people vote last election that have ever voted, but we improve on it all the time. host: let's hear from brian in utah cannot republican line. -- in utah, republican line. caller: this is dangerous.

read it. there is nothing wrong with it. there is no racist crap. lyndon b. johnson was the most racist and he gets the credit -- lyndon b. johnson, big racist. host: when you started, you said read it. i'm trying to figure out what that refers to. caller: it is bullcrap. there is nothing wrong with that. host: nothing wrong with what? caller: jim crow guy? that was democrats at the start of that, the jim crow. you could not rent an apartment to a black person if there was white people living in there. host: back to the issue of voting, you have no concerns with the current process? caller: no, it is fine. nobody is reading it. they think there is a bunch of

jim crow crap in there that is not. host: democrats line. caller: my name is tyrone and i was born and raised in alabama. you had a previous caller there. i am 73 years old. i can remember my mother and grandfather going to vote at the courthouse in alabama and having to pay a poll tax. we had entered the courthouse through the colored entrance and i am concerned about voting in the united states or -- for people of color like me. i'd experienced it. -- i have experienced it. host: you have been refused to vote based on your race? caller: yes, based on my race.

host: how so? caller: because in alabama at that time under governor john patterson and george wallace the thing was segregation now and segregation forever. that was all aspects of life in alabama. i can remember my cousins, aunts , uncles, all of them were refused the right to vote because of the caller of our skin. host: have you been refused that right currently? caller: no, i have not. i do not want to go back to that. i have lived and was born and raised in that era and i do not want to go back to that. i fear with these new voting laws input on the book now, that is what they are trying to pass. republicans are the number one people who is went to benefit from it. host: that is tyrone from

michigan giving historical experience when it comes to voting. you can express your concerns over the voting process. we have gone for about a half hour now. you can give us a call at (202) 748-8000 for democrats. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. caller: for independent -- (202) 748-8002 for independents. if you want to text us, you can do so at (202) 748-8003. you can always post on our social media sites. on twitter, @cspanwj. one of the other pieces of news outside the issue voting took place here in washington, d.c., highlighted in the washington post. saturday night's game between the washington nationals and san diego padres was suspended after multiple gunshots outside nationals park. police say there were three victims. a woman was found and wounded outside the stadium.

two others who showed up at the hospital a short time later were taken into custody. police believe the incident was gunfire from one car to another outside the stadium. they recovered one of the vehicles believed involved. one of the local newscasters was at that game and provided at least sounds of the gunshots. [video clip] >> and one man left. [gunshots] host: you can hear some of that background noise. another person outside the stadium provided video as far as what occurred. you can see it online in another tweet as well. this is what happened after people heard those gunshots outside the stadium while the nationals management was trying to keep people in the park,

people heading outside, some going to the dugout with players themselves. again, all of that taking place in washington, d.c. you can read about it more online let's go back to your concerns over voting. in illinois, democrats line. this is ron. caller: thank you for taking my call. i am concerned about the voting, that they are going to do gerrymandering and try to make it harder for minorities to vote . i think it is a shame. i am a 72-year-old vietnam veteran. we can serve in your wars, we can die in your wars, we can run in your olympics and get gold medals, but cannot vote. i do not quite understand that. host: can i ask what convinces you this process is to make it harder to vote?

caller: i'm just going on what i am hearing on the television. i have not had a problem voting. i worked the polls -- worked the polls for a while and we have not had any problems. i do not want to see anybody have any problems either in other states. host: when you work the polls, is it normally -- is it a normal process usually as voting days concerned? people,, people vote, there are usually no issues? caller: no problem at all. i worked with republicans and we have a good time. we do not talk politics. we do not hinder anybody from voting. we want everybody to vote. we do not have problems at all. host: would you say people on both sides of the aisle have equal concern over voting issues? caller: i think it is both

sides. i think everybody is concerned, but i think republicans want to stop minorities from voting. that is the way this sounds. actually do the research. host: ron there in illinois. he is a poll worker himself, talking about the process of voting and his concerns over it. let's hear from a democrat in houston, texas. caller: yes, thank you. i wanted to distinguish between voting in an election and registering to vote. . in texas, we after register by law one month in front of the election. you must be registered to vote. in order to register to vote, you have to write on a piece of paper and turn it in. you are not allowed to register online.

i know many people go you can. no. they have to print it out and turn it in. it is archaic, the way we are registered to vote in texas. number two, in this last pandemic, i wanted to vote by mail. i was not allowed to because only 65 and older are allowed to vote by mail in texas. or at least in harris. the largest populated county in texas. so we have 4 million eligible people to vote. not everybody is registered because it is hard to register. we have to get everybody that is eligible to vote and registered to vote in that period of time. i wanted to do it by mail but we

are not allowed to. i do not care with the id is. i would just like to be allowed during a pandemic to be able to vote by mail. it is safer. host: since you are from texas, two questions. what do you think about the proposed senate bills that have a letter debate with even texas democrats going to washington -- lot of debate with even texas democrats coming to washington? caller: the senate bill and the hospital in austin. both of them -- i listened. they walked out also in may. at that time, you would not believe the provisions they put into the senate bill after everybody had looked at it. they only had two hours to look over it. a 60 page bill. they had included in their -- there that they could overturn

an election based on not just if it was fraudulent but if somebody thought it was fraudulent. a judge would have the authority to overturn it without having to prove it. this is why they had to walk out the first time. that is not except about. -- acceptable. host: did you agree with flying to washington? caller: absolutely. my representative is in that group, and i am so proud. i am so comforted to know somebody is defending us because it is so difficult. this process is becoming harder and harder. they are going to work on redistricting in our state. now we are not even going to be in session during the time when they redistrict it. there will be maybe a group of five people. none of them will be democratic. host: lisa, i kept you on a

little longer but wanted to get your thoughts on those issues, you being from texas. one of those texans expressing dismay was texas's republican senator, john cornyn, talking about that act. [video clip] >> following unsuccessful attempts to pass an election integrity bill during the regular legislation session earlier this year, governor abbott has now called a special session for the texas legislature to consider that and other matters. that special session kicked off last tuesday -- last thursday, but the chamber is already being held hostage by a minority of house members who are unwilling to do their job. democrats have raised concerns about the current draft of the bill. make no mistake, that is why the legislative process actually exists. that is why it is important they be there and debate the issues

and actually vote on a bill. the purpose is for all sides to be able to debate and potentially amend and vote on legislation. rather than do their jobs, yesterday house democrats abandoned our state and the millions of texans that they represent and decamped for washington, d.c. when faced with the prospect of defeat, and for better or worse the legislative process is about arithmetic you are not always going to win every debate you are involved in, but that does not mean you leave the state and refuse to do your job. but that is exactly what they did. they got on two chartered jets cannot mask lists -- two

chartered jets, maskless, and hopped on the jets. host: a story highlights the experience of one voter, saying he waited six hours to vote, catching the attention of a cnn news crew when he became the last person to do so. he has now debated leaving after midnight on march 4 but says, i said to myself, don't do that. it was set up for me to walk away, but i said, i'm not what to do that. more than a year later, he was arrested on charges that he voted in last year's democratic primary while on parole. under texas law, it is illegal for a felony to knowingly vote while still serving a sentence, including parole. doing so is a second-degree felony punishable with a minimum

of two years and a maximum of 20 years in prison. in at least 20 states, rogers' alleged but would not be a crime. dave in orlando, texas this morning, saying, if you do not have a legal idea, you cannot vote. with parties have voting irregularities -- both parties have voting irregularities. from facebook, saying republicans and mike ross worked together to keep third parties off the ballot -- democrats worked together to keep third parties on the ballot. when it comes to concern, how easy it is to cheat is what she said. we are asking you about your concerns over the voting process here in clearwater, florida, this is robert, republican line. caller: what i would do is check all mail-in ballots that people mailed in and see who voted. i am sure a lot of people who were dead voted in mail-in

ballots. 65 and older should be the only ones to vote mail-in ballots. why can't younger people vote in person and show their id? there is no racism in voting. just vote. people have to stop ring of the war -- bringing up the war. my aunts and uncles, a couple of them died for this country. host: when it comes to mail-in voting that you talked about, considering how widespread it was used last time, do you think it is going to be a thing in future elections as well? caller: mail-in voting, i think they should check. you might find trump might have won with all the mail and votes, not that i like the guy at all. you might find some thing different in there. if you just have 60 five and older mail-in voting, i think it would go better.

if you cannot vote in person and show your id, there is something wrong. everybody can vote and they know that. host: you mentioned that. we will go on to michael in connecticut, independent line. caller: where i vote, i walk in, show my id, they crossed my name off, i go and do it. every year, i get a postcard in the mail that says, this is for voter registration. if anything has changed, fill it out and return it. if nothing has changed, do not do anything. the biggest problem is they think there is a problem with voting. the last guy, trump came out with the guy loses because it is rigged. six months beforehand. all these people are looking for a problem. why is it so hard? i have never waited more than three minutes in line to vote. we have about 160,000 people who

live here. it is not the biggest city in the world, but it does not take time to vote. host: as far as saying that all voting is accurate? caller: say you want to go and cheat and vote somewhere. you walk in. in your town, people know you. that is like going into a club. they are going to find out pretty quick how are you going to cheat? where the cheating coming from? it sounds like republicans are saying there is cheating but they are probably the ones cheating. trump -- how much did he lose by? i think it was rigged and he got 10 million more votes. that is where the fraud was host: why do you think that -- that is where the fraud was. host: why do you think that? caller: how could people have voted for him after four years of him being president? host: we will go to carolyn, minnesota, independent line. caller: i'm concerned with what

i hear being enacted in states by the movie people from the process -- with removing people from the process. in georgia, they removed the secretary of state from being part of the process. i think anything that any process that is enacted to try to nullify or try to change people's votes is dangerous. also, i want to say i do not think enough concern by the democrats are being expressed about voting. i think what senator manchin put forth is valid. i like his proposal. my ancestors, my relatives fought for the right to vote and marched and people have died for this right. for people to say race is not a

factor, i do not know if it is the sole factor but i think it is causing a lot of these provisions, these laws being proposed in states. host: why do you think that? caller: because, like in texas, they have one dropbox for harris county, one of the most populous counties. why would you do that? why would you put a provision in there that would make it harder for people to even submit their vote? i agree. i do believe voter id needs to be standard. i think everyone should show id, but why would you stop a drive in voting that brought out a number of people and put them in the process? why would you put guardrails to

make sure? ? it is secure -- sure it is secure? host: since you brought up senator manchin's compromise, do you think that is a better approach than the for the people act? caller: idea. i think the approach is fair. i would add what they took out of the john lewis. the states need to go back to preclearance. that is the only thing i would hope everyone would put in. i do think hr one in the senate, i think they went too far in a number of things. i think what senator manchin put forth is reasonable. host: carolyn in minnesota talking about senator manchin. we have shown you this a bit over the last few weeks, but to show you again, some of those elements of what senate democrats would like to see past, automatic food -- voter registration.

it would call for a constitutional amendment to overturn the citizens united decision and protect against purchase of voter rolls. it would prohibit coordination from super pac's and candidates. it goes on from there. that is what is up for consideration this week. the hill reports the senate majority leader says that on tuesday he will meet with texas democrats to talk about issues concerning that but also earlier on, parsley by the 19th of this week, debate or at least a test vote of hr one could take place in the senate. look out for that on c-span. it would need 60 votes to pass, 10 republicans coming over to make that happen. on the senate side on the larger issues of voting and then for the next 15 minutes or so give us your input on voting concerns you may have.

republican line, florida. caller: my concerns are the only mail-in voting should be for military and u.s. citizens who have to work overseas. and i just am tired of hearing all this. i want one day of voting, the first tuesday in november. polls from 6:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. period. no more, no less. host: why shut off mail-in voting overall? caller: i think there is too much fraud involved. as far as i'm concerned, i do not want to hear their are few instances of fraud. one instance of fraud is too much for me. that is just the way i feel about it. host: in st. petersburg, al

giving us his thoughts. we will hear from ruth in ohio. caller: yes. my concern is in georgia. they put into law that, if they do not like how you vote, they can -- hello? host: you are on. caller: they can change it. republicans can take over a district and put in whatever they want to have in the voting process. host: where did you hear that? caller: if you look at the whole law -- people are not talking about this, but i saw it on several news programs, where they can change it. if a democrat is in charge of that district, if they do not like what is going on,

republicans just take it over. i think it is georgia, but it could be one of the other states too where they are changing all the laws. host: from carol in west virginia, independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. i have a lot of concerns over the election. first, there are different states. each state has different laws on the election. i would like for only u.s. citizens to vote in any election because some states allow illegals to vote in locals. does that automatically register them to vote so that would be easy to vote in an election? i would also like to have voter

id. i would also like for the people to have more personal responsibility about getting their own information updated. i think a lot of problem is, if i move out of one district into another district, it is up to me to update my voter information. if i get married or remarried, it is up to me. that way, the books can be updated themselves. and also the states need to clean up their voter rolls. if somebody dies, the social security office, the veterans office, the county clerk, they know when you die, so why can't

they take you off the voter role? host: i got you on the line. you being from west virginia, what you think about senator manchin's role in these back and forth about the for the people act and his own compromise? caller: i agree with some of it. i do not agree with all of it. mr. manchin is one of the few -- there are very few moderate democrats left. he is more -- he is not way to the left, but he is more in the middle. there are very few left. that is the reason that, even though trump won by a large percentage of west virginia, joe manchin is still getting

reelected. host: let's hear from thomas in lincoln park, michigan. republican line. caller: thanks for the truth. i think federal elections would be a total nightmare. i was watching a program earlier, a rerun. i think it was wednesday, telling how states would be funneling people, illegal aliens into the voting process and american citizens' vote would be diminished tenfold. i cannot see the federal government doing anything correct. just look at what we have going on now. it has been not even a year of the highest inflation, highest gas prices. host: thomas in michigan giving his thoughts. the president last week also giving thoughts when it came to election efforts on the state level. his concern to get passage of these various pieces of legislation through congress.

here is more the president from last week. [video clip] >> we have to be clear eyed about the obstruction we face. legislation is one tool but not the only tool. it is not the only measure of our obligation to defend democracy. attorney general merrick garland announced the united states to part of justice is using its authority to challenge the onslaught of state laws undermining voting rights in old and new ways. focus will be on dismantling discriminatory laws like the recent challenge to georgia's vicious anti-voting law. the debarment of justice will do so with a voting rights division , doubling its size and enforcement power. civil rights groups and other

organizations announced plans to stay vigilant and challenge these odious laws and the courts. in texas, republican state legislature was to allow partisan poll watchers to intimidate voters and imperil an impartial poll worker. they want voters to be able to be in a position where they wonder who is watching them and intimidating them, to wait longer to vote, to drive a long way to get to vote. they want to make it so hard and inconvenient that they hope people do not vote at all. that is what this is about. this year alone, 17 states have enacted, not just proposed, 28 new laws to make it harder for americans to vote. not to mention nearly 400 additional bills republican

members in state legislatures are trying to pass. the 21st century jim crow assault israel. it is unrelenting. we are going to challenge it. host: more that presentation on the issue of voting is available on our website. michael is next, new york, republican line. caller: thank you. i want to say the president is right and what you just said and it is unbelievable, the way republicans are trying to restrict voting rights. i would think we would try to expand voting rights and have as many people vote as we can. we had the lowest voter turnout in the free world, of any democracy. it is ridiculous. the last election, 52% of the total voting populace voted.

clearly president biden won. president trump has said, as far as voting by mail is concerned, that voting by mail becomes a reality in the united states, republicans will never win again. i do not believe that. i believe the more people who are allowed to vote, the more chances there are that republicans will win. we had a local election for school board during covid where they sent out ballots to every household who was eligible to vote. they got 91% response. the budget got voted down. in a second budget vote, there was no mail-in ballot in. people had to show up and vote. the voting turnout was 53% and the budget passed. what does that tell you? host: that is michael in new york. we will hear from vincent in new jersey. caller: thank you for taking my call. i believe voting should be one

day. we all go out, vote that day. that evening, we know who the winner is. soon with the way the world is today we will be voting through doordash or grubhub. it is our responsibility to take that time and go vote. about how hard it is -- i listen to everybody having complaints about how hard it is to vote. just imagine 250 years what people had to do to go to vote or go to the 1800s and see how hard it was to vote or the early 1900s, how hard it was to vote, but they did it. here we live in a society where we can just go. i vote every time. it takes me five minutes to sign in, show my id, and i am out. it is a simple process. i do not know how people say it is so difficult. with this effort we are spending

here, you would think we would spend it trying to fix motor vehicles. we spent more time in motor vehicles that we do to vote. host: we got your point. cindy, democrats line. you will be the last call. caller: all i have to say is we have come so far with voting. here we are in 2021. had former president trump won amount we would not be talking about this. this is crazy. we are at the point where we are trying to suppress voting. my parents voted for years. it makes me sick, how trump and republicans have tried to say that trump won. we would not be talking about this, had he won. host: as far as concerns about the process, you have no concerns? caller: i have plenty of concerns. everybody should be able to vote.

we talk about mail-in voting. the host: you say people are beig restricted, how so? caller: why can't we do mail-in voting? why not souls to the polls on sunday? host: giving us the last call for this hour, thank you for doing that. two guests join us. as you heard, britney spears fight over her conservatorship headlines. we will talk about the issue of guardianship, rebekah diller will be along for that conversation. later on, unrest in cuba and haiti with florida international university's (202) 748-8001 -- eduardo gamarra.

we will take your questions as well. all of those conversations are coming up on washington journal. >> book tv it features leading authors discussing their latest nonfiction books. tonight, stacey abrams discusses her recent suspense novel. it is set in the halls of the u.s. supreme court. the founder and president robert woodson argues american history is being replaced with ape over rising version. he is being interviewed by randall kennedy. watch book tv every weekend. find a full schedule on your program guide.

>> tonight on a q&a, the chief engineer of the historic when it was called back into service to aid firefighters following the attacks on the 20 hours. in her book, she tells the story of the community of mariners who came to the rescue of thousands. >> the maritime evacuation that delivered nearly half a million people to safety is an incredible example of the goodness of people. when you are given the opportunity to help, you have the tools, the skill set, the availability that people made the choice. for the sake of fellow humans. that is very instructive and something we need to remember. >> tonight on q&a.

you can also listen to it q&a is a podcast wherever you get your podcasts. >> washington journal continues. host: rebekah diller is a clinical professor talking about conservatorships and guardianships. thanks for your time this morning. we have heard this term a lot in the news lately, can you explain exactly what conservatorship is? guest: it's the process that takes place in state court. it's a process by which someone can be declared incapable of making their own legally binding decisions. the right to make those decisions is placed in the hands of a conservator or guardian.

it's the process through which someone can lose fundamental rights to make decisions about their life, how to spend their money, what health care to consent to or not consent to. decisions about where to live. what we find is there is a high standard for imposing the conservatorship in theory. you are supposed to show the person is facing significant harm due to an inability to make decisions and that there is no less restrictive alternative to a conservatorship. it's imposed too readily when less restrictive alternatives might suffice. once it is imposed, it can take

on a life of its own. it can last for an indefinite duration. host: when it comes down to the courts, is there a threshold about when a person has qualified or needs a conservatorship? is there a standard threshold? guest: the standard is it's got to be shown by what we call clear and convincing evidence that the person is going to face harm due to some kind of inability to make decisions and appreciate the consequences of that decision-making impairment. as i mentioned, there is no less restrictive alternative. that is the legal standard with a little bit of variation. host: when a person enters into looking over someone in a

conservatorship, how easy or difficult is it to reverse that? guest: extremely difficult to reverse it. that's were a bunch of reasons. a number of conservatorships, the overwhelming majority are imposed for what we would call an indefinite duration. they are not for a year or indefinitely. that is a problem. you don't necessarily have courts going back and giving them a review. the big challenge people face in trying to end conservatorships, they are not informed it's an option. it's hard to get legal counsel to assist with doing that.

when you are under a conservatorship, in order to end it, you have to prove the very thing you're no longer able to do. you have to prove you can manage on your own. when you're in the conservatorship, you are not permitted to do that. people have a hard time getting out of them. you can see in the britney spears case, they don't have access to their own information. when you are in the conservatorship, the conservator is the one who has your medical records and your financial records. it's an uphill climb to get out once you are in it. host: we are talking about conservatorships and guardianships. you can call (202) 748-8000 in the eastern and central time zones. (202) 748-8001 in the mountain and pacific time zones. if you want to text those

questions, (202) 748-8003. you can post on her facebook page or twitter feed. it seems like britney spears highlights the current issues you are talking about when it comes to console over -- concerns over how these are granted. guest: it's a really interesting moment because of the scrutiny the britney spears case is receiving. to my mind, what we should be concerned about is how many people are out there with similar situations who don't get the public attention that britney spears gets. we don't have access or interest from the media, from others looking into their cases. there are a number of things that hurt case highlights. one is the fact that it seems obvious to anybody looking at it

that this has gone on way too long. when she testified, she wasn't told she could try to end it. the other thing here that happened to her is her funds have been used to pay for all manner of fees for things she never wanted. she's been paying millions for the conservator fees, for legal teams, the justification for a conservatorship is to preserve someone's money. here, she has had to pay out all of this money that she never asked to have involved in her life. there are a bunch of concerns that her case brings to the fore. we should be interested in what is extraordinary about her case. what should trouble us is the

way in which there are things going on her case that are typical for many others that don't get attention. host: her father is the conservator. does it usually fall to a family member? guest: it often is a family member who brings the petition for conservatorship. it's not always brought by a family member. when the case is there, the court can a port -- appoint a family member. there are also professional conservators, lawyers or some type of agency. the court should take into account who the person would want in that position. you saw that in her case, she has been adamant that she did not want her father. she's been stuck with him in this role for quite some time.

there is supposed to be some consideration who the person would want in that role. it doesn't always happen. host: there is a viewer off twitter who asks this question. who monitors the conservators? how often are they monitored? guest: that's an excellent question. this is one of the most troubling aspects of the conservatorship right now. most states have a rule where conservators submit a report. that report should be reviewed. in a lot of states, courts don't get to the task of reviewing the report on paper. that's just looking at the paper , what the conservator has submitted.

there are some places that go a little bit further to try to monitor. to look into how the person is doing. that is exceptionally rare. most courts don't have the funds to do that. they don't have the funds to look at the papers that have been submitted. that does happen in a few places. it appears to have happened in the new spears case because a court investigator went to talk to her five or six years ago. it's a job that falls upon the state court. many of them would tell you they don't have the resources to do it properly. host: i was going to say, if that's the case, the amount of due diligence for a

conservatorship has to come into question. guest: you are talking about at the moment when the conservatorship is established? i will say there is more attention at the moment at which the conservatorship -- the court is considering whether to establish a conservatorship. there is more attention than there is after-the-fact. after-the-fact is the moment when you are setting up the conservatorship. after-the-fact, that's when all sorts of trouble can happen. we don't even know in this country exactly how many people and who they are are under a conservatorship. there is a terrible lack of data and information.

this goes to the issue of how are these things monitored? it's hard to monitor if you don't even know how many people in your state are subject to a conservatorship at any particular time. host: it's (202) 748-8000 in the eastern and central time zones. (202) 748-8001 four mountain and western time zone. our guest is rebekah diller. when it comes to issues of reform, how active of the states been? guest: there has been some promising reform in the last couple of years. mostly in the area, some states of past reform recognizing what i view as the most promising development, something called supported decision-making, which is an alternative to

guardianship. it's an alternative to guardianship in which a person is able to keep their legal rights to make decisions, but get support in making those decisions. a number of states in the last several years have passed laws recognizing that as an alternative. it's not widely enough used in practice. we need to push for more states to recognize it and provide support for programs to implement it. host: the issue a britney spears on capitol hill, republicans and democrats making comments about looking at this. i do want to show you matt gaetz. he spoke about the situation,

frame it in the discussion of britney spears. here he is recently talking about. >> they tried to act like they spoke for brittany, now, the world knows what whitney spears wants. it is the liberty that should be offered to every single american. britney has been abused by the media, she's been abused by her grifter father. she's been abused by the american justice system. we need to create a federal change in the law that will free britney and the millions of americans who are impacted by a corrupt guardianship system that empowers people to take advantage of the week. that should unite all americans. host: the last point, when it comes to the federal possibility of making changes about this

topic, how much power does the federal government have? guest: it's an issue of state law. the federal government can play a role in trying to make things better. the federal government can't rewrite state law. they can do a lot of other things. they can do things like long-standing proposal to establish a guardianship program. this would help courts get a handle on basic data and monitoring practices. as well as promoting alternatives to guardianship. there's a role the federal government comply in terms of various agencies that interact with the guardianship system. you saw some senators send a letter recently, asking hhs and the department of justice to

help gather information on the extent of conservatorships to those agencies. there is a lot of room for federal action it, to try and make things better. it is also fundamentally a state law and the state court issue. there are many issues where the federal government has stepped in to try to make improvements. this should be one of them. host: this is joe from tulsa, oklahoma. good morning. caller: thank you for the subject. it caught my eye this morning. my mother went through an issue. i am happy you are on to this. she was assigned acorda ported -- a court appointed guardian. he was a criminal.

he was stealing cash from my mother and putting it on a ledger. that's just one example. this went on for a number of years. there was nothing we could do. no policeman, no lawyers. nothing could be done. we were watching the news one night and we saw my mother's guardian put in a police car. the only thing that stopped this guy was he was arrested on drug charges and put in prison. we fought for years to get rid of him. we could not get the money back. it cost $100,000 or more, from my mother who was being protected supposedly from wasting cash. i'm just so happy you are on to this. host: to the point, how hard is it for an outside party to

challenge a conservatorship? guest: pretty hard. i think that experience is unfortunately not uncommon. it is hard. several dynamics take hold. often it takes a while for that kind of abusive and illegal activity to come to light. this goes back to what we were talking about with monitoring. if we had a more robust monitoring it, you would've hope something would have come to light earlier. there have been a lot of scandals like this in different states.

periodically, you will see an expose her you see a situation like what the caller described. they've been exploiting the people under guardianships. again, i can't tell you exactly how often it happens because we have this big problem with a lack of information and data. every serious investigation that has been done into the pervasiveness of guardianship misconduct has completed it's a significant problem. the case is not the only one. host: columbia, mississippi, your neck. -- next. caller: explain the difference between guardianship or

conservatorship and power of attorney. guest: that's a great question. with guardianship or conservatorship, the person legally loses the right to make decisions for themselves. with a power of attorney, you may appoint an agent under your power of attorney who can act on your behalf. you haven't given away your right to act on your own behalf. you haven't lost that right. when you are in a conservatorship or guardianship, you have lost the right to do things on your own. it has to be done through the conservator. there is a big difference. executing the power of attorney, appointing an agent you trust,

it's really important for avoiding the possibility of guardianship. host: a follow-up from a viewer on twitter who identifies himself as john g. there are different kinds of guardianships. can a professional really make a determination of incapacity and a 30 minute interview? guest: those are great points. for many years, the idea was when you were under guardianship, you lost your rights to make decisions about any aspect of your life. there were reforms around the late 80's and most states that said we are not going to give up.

we should tailor the guardianship orders. we should make them limited. we are going to issue a guardianship order that only gives the guardian power in the most narrowly tailored set of areas that are necessary to prevent harm to this person. in most states, it's the law or right now. any guardianship order should be limited. not for in nature. this has been hard to change the practice around. even the law on the book says most orders should be limited. in practice, it's common that you have these very broad guardianship orders in which the person loses more rights than

were necessary to prevent harm. there is a related idea that the audience member brought up. there used to be this idea that capacity was binary. you either have it or you don't. that is evolving. there has been broader recognition that you might need support in one area of your life to make decisions, not in another area. you might be able to make decisions with support as opposed to looking at whether or not the person can make decisions across the board. these are evolving ideas. the law has to catch up to them. the practice has to catch up. host: when it comes to those with disabilities, how are those met? are there different standards to

what we were talking about previously with britney spears? guest: this is definitely a disability rights issue. the fact that people with disabilities are having their rights taken away too frequently is why we are concerned about guardianship and conservatorship. the standard i set out earlier, what's important for us to think about is how we can change the culture of paternalism that has seeped into guardianship, it's the same culture we think about that our society applies to people with disabilities, we know better. we will tell you what to do as opposed to saying you can make

your own decisions. if you need some support, we will help you find that support. we are not going to take away your fundamental rights because you have a disability. host: you talked about an approach to this with limitations. can you go through those? what works best? guest: i think the first thing you have to think about is one of the less restrictive alternatives? have we tried every other option, including supported decision-making. the person gets assistance from someone they trust to make decisions. have we tried all of those things? if we haven't tried all of those things, we need to try them before we are rushing into conservatorship or guardianship.

host: rebekah diller is talking about the issue of conservatorship senate guardianships. where do you think the topic goes from here? do you see any fund metal changes happening? is this going to go away as an issue? guest: i hope it doesn't go away is an issue. this is an underappreciated civil rights issue that affects 1.3 million people in the country. we don't often hear about it. we should. i think all of the attention it's getting right now is a good and important development. i hope it leads to further reforms and changes, not just in

the law on the books but in the practice. i hope it leads to further support as an option. i can't predict what will happen. i think there is a lot of interest now because when people realize what's going on, they find it quite troubling and they want to do something about it. host: we have a comment from a viewer, she relates the experience saying it's not easy to get a conservatorship. we are in the process for my mother-in-law. it's hard when the courts are closed during the pandemic. our courts have a backlog on these things? guest: certainly, the pandemic has been challenging to the court system. there is a backlog across the board in many cases.

i am not surprised to hear the viewer is saying there is a backlog. in terms of them saying it's not easy to get, it really depends in many cases. in many cases it is often too easy. if they are experiencing this delay, i'm not surprised. i do know in general there are delays in the courts due to the pandemic. host: rebekah diller is the clinical professor of law, talking about conservatorships. thank you for your time today. guest: thank you. host: we will go to open forum for our next half hour.

if you have an interest in politics or something that is of interest to you, you can let us know better. democrats, (202) 748-8000. republicans (202) 748-8001. independent voters, (202) 748-8002. we will take those calls when washington journal continues. >> book tv features leading authors discussing their latest nonfiction books. tonight, stacey abrams discusses her recent suspense novel. it is set within the halls of the u.s. supreme court. woodson center founder argues that american history is being replaced with a polarizing version.

he is interviewed by a harvard law professor. find a full schedule on your program guide or visit book tv.org. >> washington journal continues. host: this is a chance for you to comment on the world of politics, especially those things that interest you in particular. you can call us on our open forum. (202) 748-8000 four democrats. (202) 748-8001 four republicans. (202) 748-8002 four independent voters. a look at passing the $3.5 trillion budget, what it would do for medicare and how it would change that. the package backed by the president is likely to add new benefits and lower drug prices for the 60 million people in the health program.

the wall street journal with that story taking a look at debate over the plan. last week, support for the bipartisan infrastructure bill came forward. that could become an up soon as well with this effort to pass a three point $5 trillion budget. look at those things when it comes to voting rights. this week, democrats in the senate could have a test vote on the voting rights act bill. look for that as well. you can follow along on our website. highland park, illinois on this open forum. go ahead. caller: good morning.

i would like to address democrats and republicans and ask a question. do you think we can progress in this country without talking to her, without compromise? everything we've done in this country so far, it's been compromised. abortion, some abortions are allowed. that is because of rape and incessant and medical reasons. some states have no restrictions on guns, others have restrictions. this is due to talking to which other -- each other. imagine how far this country could go if we gave a little on each side. host: what do you think keeps people from doing that? caller: i believe the parties

have become almost religious in nature. anything that is set against the party is going against the notion of god. the republican party seems to be a religion. people are holding their arms up and praising the lord. they are wearing certain uniforms. we are becoming like two armies fighting over religious problems. that is not the way to progress. host: we will hear from tricia in michigan. good morning. go ahead. caller: i am concerned about the voting. i think we should all use ids. delaware which biden used to represent has stricter voting laws than georgia or arizona.

host: why is voter id a concern? caller: i think everybody should vote one time and you should be represented at one time. it doesn't matter if you're republican or democrat. everybody deserves one vote. you should be able to show who you are. host: that is tricia in michigan. caller: except for mail in, why

this argument about mail-in voting? i have been in this country since 1965. i was a citizen in 1976. i have voted in every election. i never had any problems. host: that is his perspective. let's hear from terry in south carolina. caller: thank you for taking my call. i also am interested in the voting laws. what i am concerned about is we have a gem and who called in earlier from illinois who was speaking about being a pole

member and a vietnam veteran. he was concerned with the new laws being passed. you ask him where he had heard about these. he said it's what i'm hearing on the news. you followed it up with president biden talking about these laws and pushing these things. i am an independent. i vote for both parties. i am shocked because i was watching earlier ted cruz and blumenthal from connecticut discussing the voting bill of rights. when they started saying these jim crow laws, i just see voter id laws. i see opening up more dates for people to vote. when he questioned blumenthal,

there are no early voting dates. there is nothing happening. host: when it comes to your concerns, how would you characterize those? caller: i believe we should have in person voting for the majority of the people. i do believe in absentee voting. i think there's a huge difference between a male in voting system and in absentee voting system. it's been used for years with people who are out of the country for work or military or for elderly who can't get into vote. that's fine. with the pandemic, this was an unusual time we were living through. i am afraid they are trying to open up the law so male and is everywhere. i know there are states have

mail in voting and it works for them. that should be a state to state voting issue. host: that is south carolina. let's go to mark in philadelphia. caller: good morning. thanks for getting my call in. i am a little off-topic. my issue is why isn't merrick garland prosecuting trump, mo brooks, don jr., and giuliani for the january 6 insurrection. i don't know if they are guilty or not. we find out mo brooks is talking about running in alabama. you've got to be kidding me. what is this? what are they waiting for? it's been six months now.

if merrick garland doesn't want to make the decision, turn it over to a grand jury and see what they do. maybe they indict, maybe they don't. let's hold trump accountable for the insurrection january 6. don't ignore it. host: that is marked in philadelphia. the new york times is taking a look at the early senate map going into the midterms. swing states like georgia and arizona restock their warchest with multimillion dollar sums. that's according to new financial filings. that gives them an early head start.

more of that in the story in the new york times. let's hear from jim. jim is in north carolina. caller: good morning. we are right at the border, we are five minutes away from south carolina. how about maybe having a national voting day. we have other holidays where people are off. why don't we take president's day? make it for voting so people are off that day. they can go ahead and vote and

make it a holiday. australia finds people if they don't go vote. we could do that. there are so many simple solutions. why has it been that mcconnell has obstructed anything the democrats want to do? if you're republican or democrat , look at these people and what they are doing, not what they are saying. go to church on sunday and pull the plug on grandma by cutting back on health care, there are so many things wrong. they want to be in power. host: new jersey on the independent line. caller: good morning. being in the middle, being a democrat my whole life, voting for the other side, i can feel

both sides. who do you trust? i have trust issues. to hate one side so much that you don't trust anything they say, the next side wins and you trust the vaccines, the underlying fact is there is a bureaucracy that never changes. i believe that we are not allowed to talk about the elections. i believe there is only one way to vote. that is in person. if you can't get an id, you can't get any stimulus. there are a lot of things we should trust and keep it simple. host: thank you for all who

participated. next up, we will talk about unrest in cuba and haiti. eduardo gamarra will join us next for that discussion as washington journal continues. >> monday night on the communicators, >> ransomware has become a huge threat, not only cyber criminal threat but because of the implications for critical infrastructure like pipeline country -- companies, these are significant targets. they have recently become something that cyber criminals are targeting. defending against it has become increasingly complex.

>> he discusses recent ransomware attacks and other cyber threats. monday night on the communicators at 8:00 eastern on c-span 2. >> peter has published hundreds of nonfiction books in his career as founder of the public affairs company. he has written a memoir about his own career. the national book review rights he has not written a memoir so much as a report from the front, many fronts. we talked with him about his time in vietnam and the soviet union among other things. >> on this episode of book notes plus.

>> weekends on c-span 2 are an intellectual feast. find events and people that explore our past. on sunday, book tv brings you the latest in nonfiction books and authors. it is television for serious readers. learn it discover, explore on c-span 2. >> washington journal continues. host: eduardo gamarra teaches at florida international university, here to talk about the current situations in cuba and haiti. thanks for your time this morning. can we start with cuba? what's the best way to understand what's going on

there, particularly in light of the protests last week. guest: it's a very difficult question to answer. cuba's revolution has been a highly subsidized resolution. -- revolution. it was subsidized by the soviet union. they went through a difficult economic time in the 90's. venezuela came around and subsidized cuba. venezuela's oil industry has collapsed. the same time, cuba's tourism industry has largely collapsed primarily because of the pandemic.

information is so scarce. we do know that the tourism industry collapsed. cuba lives off cubans residing in the united states. remittances have slowed down dramatically. by virtue of the u.s. sanctions against cuba. there is a combination of factors that have led to cuba's economic situation. there is one more thing that i think is fundamental. that has to do with an opening that occurred under the obama administration. that had an impact on this new

generation of cubans, the younger cubans. the penetration of social media has bypassed government sanctioned against its own population. what this has done is fostered this new generation that questions the revolution, not only appears to believe in some of the goals of the old revolution, it was 63 years ago. it no longer fears its oppression. host: this morning, the president yesterday, the president of cuba, went before cameras. one of the things he highlighted was the trade embargo and accuse international media of malicious

intent. he was quoted as saying what the world sees from cuba is a lie. are you surprised by that characterization? guest: i'm not. people who've been studying cuba for decades will remember from the beginning when the u.s. applied trade sanctions on it cuba, it has become the main talking point the regime has. anything that went wrong with cuba was largely blamed on the embargo, despite heavy soviet and venezuelan subsidies. it is a trade embargo for the most part, it has been largely a very porous embargo. there is spanish investment.

there has been u.s. investment in cuba. it's been a very porous embargo. i would say that for some measure, the only country that has applied these measures is the united states. the extraterritorial measures after 1997 hasn't been put in place. when you look at some of the things like the u.s. trying to sanction for an hours from investing in cuba, it's impossible. china has large investments in cuba. with the cuban government doesn't want to identify are the trends i talked about before. in the end, it's about how the

cuban regime has this managed the economy. it thrives off the embargo in a sense of political rhetoric to maintain itself in power and to grow in international coalition that still supports cuba. over the past week, countries like argentina and venezuela and bolivia and others essentially repeating the rhetoric that comes from cuba. host: if you want to ask questions, we will talk about that in a bit. (202) 748-8000 for the eastern and central time zones. (202) 748-8001 for the mountain and pacific time zones. if you're cuban or haitian, (202) 748-8002 is how you do that.

you can text us at (202) 748-8003. the president last week addressed issues, particularly what was going on in cuba. he gave his perspective. i want to play what he had to say and get your perspective. >> the ability to sent remittances back to cuba, it's highly likely the regime would confiscate those remittances or big chunks of it. with regard to the covid problem in cuba, i would be prepared to give vaccine if i was assured that an international organization would administer those vaccines in a way that average citizens would have access. one of the things he did not ask but we are considering is they've cut off access to the

internet. we are considering if we have the ability to reinstate that access. host: start with that last first , the internet access and what it does for the people. guest: as i mentioned before, over the last decade, cuba has benefited from the opening up of the internet. this new cultural movement, much of this uprising has really come from the artists, this new generation of cubans that has captured the essence.

they have some music that now plays everywhere in the world. this is really and internet social media phenomenon. the reality is this is something they were able to do before the internet, communicate with their relatives abroad. miami television stations, they interview cuban guests directly from the islands. the internet has provided this information. at the same time, it has allowed the world to go into cuba. that's why the regime has cut off the internet. as an attempt of going back to how things used to be in cuba, that is going to be very

difficult to put the cat back in the bag. host: this is gary in new york. good morning. go ahead. caller: good morning. i have to say that i'm an american citizen and army veteran. i am ashamed of my own government with the policies they use in cuba to make the people's lives so miserable that they will hopefully overthrow the government. it's not a new policy. let me give you one quick example going back to the iraqi people. lesley stahl and cbs interviewed madeleine albright. she said was it worth the lives of 2 million iraqi children who did not have proper medicine to

constrain it saddam hussein? madeleine albright's answer was yes. this same policy exists with cuba, nicaragua, venezuela today, denying medicine and food . the american policy is if any country or any ship delivers medicine or food in violation of sanctions, those shipping companies can never use a u.s. port. it's a stranglehold that i don't agree with. host: go ahead. guest: i think gary is voicing an idea that is very common, the idea that most of cuba's problems stem from the u.s.

embargo. i'm not in favor of the embargo. i never have been. the better way to address cuba, the internet is a great example. the region begins to crumble. -- regime begins to crumble. i think things are going to change dramatically. many people have said this over the years. that being said, the reality is cuba has been a dictatorship. it represses its people and continues to thrive politically from the embargo. the embargo is favored by the cuban regime as a political strategy to maintain the

revolution. the same school of thought argues it favors the most extreme chapters of the exile community who thrive from the rhetoric of the embargo. what i think is correct, and in some measure with the president is saying, how do you deal with a regime that does not want to open up? let's take for example the vaccine issue, right? they are not in favor of receiving any humanitarian aid because if they where to recognize they needed aid, that would also recognize the revolution is in trouble. they also claim to have their own vaccine but most of the reports out of cuba tell you the vaccine -- first of all, we do not know whether it works, but

at the same time they do not have the syringe is apply the vaccine. you know, it is a very interesting predicament that both the u.s. and cuba find themselves in at the expense of the cuban people. host: from california, this is manny. caller: hello. i am a retired law professor here in california and i was born in havana and i live in havana and i vote in havana. i find a lot of these issues are being given by experts who know nothing about cuba and i wanted to ask the professor if he has ever been to cuba. guest: yes, as a matter of fact i have. caller: when was the last time you were there? guest: i don't think that is a question that is as important.

i have been to cuba several times. caller: i live there and i vote there. most people do not realize cuba is a democratic country. i vote for the capitalist candidates because i think cuba is to socialist. host: ok. i think manny got cut off but who he votes for, talk about that perspective. guest: well, it is interesting he would say democracy in cuba. it has been governed by just one party and been governed by two brothers. their nominee has been the head

of state since castro stepped down. democracy, i guess it depends on how he is defining it. frankly, democracy to me is about separation of powers and above all about an independent judiciary. it is about -- and we may disagree on this -- but multiple political parties. more than anything else, right, it has to do in some measure with the fundamental respect for human rights. none of those are present in cuba at the moment and haven't been for the last 52 years. i did not find cuba to be democratic. not in the 1990's and certainly not now. host: what does the president

face now versus how his predecessors would have dealt with it? guest: that is a very important question because in some measure the president has been carrying out economic reform. economic reforms in some measure that have -- you might argue he faced the trump administration imposing sanctions. at the same time the real deal is that he has agreed -- even going back to the things cuba was supposed to be when the obama administration opened up

with cuba when we established ambassadors. of the whole issue of how some of our officials were severely wounded. we still do not know what caused the hearing loss of u.s. officials at the embassy. there are many things that cuba appears to do in favor of opening and then there are many others that push it back, you know, back to more stalinist view of the world. host: eduardo gamarra is our guest. brian in michigan, you are on with our guest. caller: hi. can you hear me? host: yes. go ahead. caller: spend a lot of time in cuba and haiti. the previous caller is correct. here's the deal, we should not be trading with people who are not like-minded with us. we can help out humanitarian

ly. the whole deal is corruption, we all know that. we have mainly men at the top of the countries and definitely in the united states of america. this extends out to china. we should not be trading with china. we should not be. they do not match with our ideals. guess what? they are corrupt, we are corrupt. when we bring in think tanks and people who think they are so smart, or not -- host: specifically what do you want to find out about cuba or ask him? caller: i just stated it but i will state it again. we shouldn't be dealing with it. people should have to come here legally. we can help on the margins, but we are no smarter than anyone

else. i have been in 26 different countries including cuba. host: ok, caller. we will let our guest respond. guest: again, that is a school of thought that is a very important one and i agree with part of it. countries have to assume responsibility. corruption is a very serious situation around the world including the united states and we have to deal with corruption. there are studies that calculate the impact of corruption on gdp and frankly, when you look at haiti for example, corruption is one of the most serious ills. from that with the role the u.s. autoplay, it is a world power --

the u.s. ought to play, it is a world power. this is the role it will continue to play. one thing i would like the u.s. to do and another is what it is going to give. host: you heard president biden talk about what he is -- giving thought to what to do now. do you think he could have gone further? guest: as i have said, he is trapped by the political circumstances in the united states. we are already -- florida is a very important place and it is essentially a red state. domestic politics often has gotten in the way of cuba politics. for example, the president has said -- [indiscernible]

-- he is correct that the regime is favored. for every $100 a cube and spends or a cuban in miami sends to his relatives, 40% goes to the state. there is a big debate about whether we are in fact willing to subsidize the government. i think the president is kind of stuck. lifting the embargo is something -- i believe the embargo has been less effective than people believe. but today for the biden administration lifting parts of the embargo would be, frankly, political suicide. host: one of the issues that came up last week was from the homeland security secretary

talking about migration and giving a warning to the cuban people. we will get your response. [video clip] >> the coast guard along with our state, local, and federal partners are monitoring any activity that may indicate increases in maritime migration in the florida straits, including vessel departures from florida to cuba. the time is never right to attempt migration by sea. . to those who risk their lives doing so, the risk is not worth it. allow me to be clear, if you take to the sea, you will not come to the united states. host: professor, were you surprised by that directness? guest: i guess i was surprised

like many in miami were, and it has to do primarily with the insensitivity of the secretary considering he is also a cuban-american, but at the same time when you analyze that statement it is firmly grounded in our history with cuba. i had the privilege of working in the 1980's with the red cross processing cuban refugees. i understand, you know, the way in which the u.s. is perceived. cuba in 1980 used immigration as a tool to punish president carter and did so quite effectively. it caused president carter a serious headache, especially in

florida. at the same time -- [indiscernible] -- especially the democrats understand how serious a new flotilla of cubans coming across the straits would be politically speaking. the 1990's had another round of migration. [indiscernible] i would say that most people really understand that another wave of immigrants like this would cause very serious trouble politically speaking for the administration. and at the same time the secretary is correct. this is not the time for people

to throwing themselves into the ocean. this is hurricane season. tragedy could be averted. i do not think we are going to see another government repeat what president carter did or president clinton did. host: let's hear from rick in homestead, florida. caller: good morning. second-generation cuban-american so this is an emotional topic. you know, i think my generation, the younger generation, has seen our grandparents, parents make themselves successful in this country, die here and not be able to return to their homeland. we are tired of the rhetoric. we are tired of the embargo. i think this is the time.

this is the time we have never seen before. cuban people standing up in the country. we invade countries like iraq, afghanistan that we have no family members from that have no ties for us. we call on president biden to stand up, make a decisive move, get in there, and take over freeing the cuban people. or take the shackles off the cuban-americans and let us take care of business. but we are tired of the rhetoric. for far too long we have invaded other parts of the world and left a country 90 miles away enslaved to a communist regime. either take care of business, take the shackles off, but let's go. host: that was rick in homestead, florida. professor, go ahead. guest: that has in fact been the cry especially in the more

conservative sectors of miami, particularly in the republican party. we heard the mayor of the city of miami even call for the military intervention. but again, i think the president and others, senators and representatives, have forcefully stated that is not going to happen. we are just leaving afghanistan and there is not much appetite for another commitment of u.s. troops. and the perception it would be an easy task that we could do quickly of course is also unrealistic. i don't see, i don't think, that we are going to see u.s. troops in cuba. certainly i think that is the policy of this administration. at the same time i think the call is correct. the embargo, first of all as i

noted at the beginning, has not effectively worked. embargo's generally do not work. embargo sanctions take a long, long time to be effective and we have had this policy on cuba the last 62 years and have not achieved the objective of that policy. in some measure i think that, you know, the debate over the embargo is likely to continue as well and we are likely to have only piecemeal opening. hopefully it will be in terms of humanitarian assistance but for that we are going to have to -- unfortunately, at the same time -- count on the cuban government to accept it. host: how would you characterize the state in haiti since the

assassination of its president? guest: well, i had the privilege of working in haiti for many years and haiti, you know, has a very serious issue. like other countries in latin america which, you know, got rid of authoritarian regimes in the 1980's haiti has tried to construct a democracy the last 35 years. but it has failed to do so. it has failed to create the institution. in a sense it has been fairly common to hear people talk about cuba as a failed state. to have a failed state you have to have a state to begin with. haiti is in a state of complete anarchy. there are no institutions to speak of that are functioning.

there are certain pockets that might, you know, you might call them successful. for example, the construction of the new police force in 2010. but for the most part there is no institution analogy in haiti -- institutionality in haiti, especially after the assassination of the president. this is where we get into a huge debate. how do you get haiti to come out of this state given the leadership it has or does not have an given the lack of institutions? once again we are debating what to do with haiti. it is a problem that has really become something that comes up every decade or so where, once again, the international community believes that it has

to go in and try to solve the problems of haiti. host: given the current political vacuum who feels that vacuum do you think? guest: that is a very good question because every president since 1980 has failed to hold midterm elections. every president has had to deal with a president with no parliament in a parliamentary system. haiti has not had a functioning parliament the last two years. it has no quorum. there is no senate. at the same time the supreme court has been beheaded.

the former president named five prime ministers. he named one prime minister in april, right, who was still the functioning prime minister until the president was murdered. the prime minister he nominated had not been ratified either by the president -- sworn in, part of me -- or by parliament. so we have two prime ministers , because they are the only elected body, that they have the right to elect the president. you have three individuals saying they have the right. until recently the united states was supporting the prime minister nominated in april.

now the international community appears to be moving to favor the prime minister who was not sworn in. here you have enormous confusion. how do you fill the leadership vacuum with no legitimate authority? host: we go to jeff in virginia. thank you for waiting. caller: let me partially identify myself. i worked for the department of the army at the pentagon. i have been there 20 years or so. i have been at in-house conferences and met the professor. i would just like to know his thinking if the u.s. did a partial with allies and partners in the region, military intervention as far as keeping the calm. set a time limit for six months. i know it is not popular to do something like this but just

until we can get to the elections. not that they are the ultimate answer. i will stay on the line. guest: that is a very difficult question to answer. you just noted it is very political the demand for intervention in cuba. i have said that is not going to happen. at the same time it appears, you know, the only solution may be once again devolving into some kind of international action in cuba. pardon me, in haiti. here is where the haitians -- every time the international community has intervened the results have been poor. the last time the u.n.

multinational force came in we ended up with thousands of haitians who died from cholera. there is this domestic perception in haiti that yes, we have these series of problems that are insurmountable, but we are really worried because of the negative repercussions international intervention has always had. therefore, we are cautious about calling for it. even though the prime minister called for u.s. assistance. my personal view is i don't think haiti is viable, at least in the short to midterm. i think we, the united states and international community, have a great responsibility. i will not go as far as some

colleagues of mine who have advocated for a protectorate. let's make haiti a protectorate so we can rebuild it, rebuild institutions, and then be able to ensure there is, you know, a sustainable nation. but i do think what the gentleman is suggesting may be inevitable in the long run because what you already have is an enormous amount of pressure on the dominican republic. the dominican republic already militarized its border and if this continues, we will have people throwing themselves into the ocean and attempting to come to the united states. so that i think -- where is our responsibility? i think we have a responsibility to haiti and nothing kind of responsibility we have always done which is go in, try to fix

things, and then suffer from defeat. the haitians are impossible to work with, it is impossible to do anything. we pull out because things are difficult. i think haiti is a long-term proposition for the international community. host: this is from new york. norm, go ahead please. caller: good morning. one of the previous callers asked you when you had mostly recently been in cuba and you said it is not relevant. it is relevant because the situation has changed. i have visited many years during obama and post-obama and the living conditions have changed considerably for everyday cubans. i have many friends there now and i think that is what he asked that question. i had two things i wanted to hit

on. the internet has been restored by the cuban government. i am able to communicate again on the internet and the remittances, 40% is given to the government. i sent money to help friends in cuba and they never did that. he got what he was supposed to get. in fact, we were able to use western union which has been cut by our previous president. the cuban government, up until the early 2020 rather, was charging an additional 10% to convert u.s. dollars but it did not apply to those sent by wireless. that 10% tax was eliminated in the early months of 2020. i just wanted to make those points. some of the information is --

host: before you go, how would you characterize the living conditions of the people now? caller: i have not been there since the pandemic but it was tough economically. they are getting by but food is scarce, terrible crowds of lines waiting to buy what is available, if it is available, if they can afford it. there have been inflated prices since the unification of the currencies. they eliminated the convertible peso at the beginning of the year. the conditions economically are very bad. my communication with them is not in person anymore. host: ok. that was norm's perspective. caller: i think he is right. the cuban government did restore the internet. to the extent it has been restored i am not familiar. i tried communicating as well

and have not been as successful. but i do understand the cuban government has lifted some restrictions on the internet. but it also demonstrates the ability they have to cut off communication when everything goes wrong. now that they have restored that they are cracking down. the second thing, conditions in cuba over the last 20 years, right, improved. improved largely and in first part because of the opening of the economy. in other words what i am trying to say is that embargo allowed investment in cuba during the early part of this century. i also noted the arrival of the

internet. i believe very firmly that the obama administration would have likely led in a better direction in terms of improving the lives of the cuban people. however, that is not where we are today and in large measure it has less to do i would say with what we have done and more to do with the cuban government. their economic mismanagement is the reason why cuba finds itself in the situation. the embargo contributes to that, but, you know, what the caller said earlier, we need to assume responsibility for our own actions. this is a path that enables a very small group of men, right,

to determine the future of cuba based on an ideology and a way of looking at the world that, frankly, is a very conservative approach to governing. not to mention the fact it is absolutely built on the oppression of the cuban citizens. host: our guest joins us this morning from los angeles. edgewater gemara, thank you for your time and the perspective -- eduardo gamarra, thank you for your time and perspective. guest: thank you. host: we will do one more round of open forum until 10:00. you could talk about issues concerning to you. you can reach us at (202)-748-8000 for democrats, (202)-748-8001 for republicans, and independents (202)-748-8002. we will take those calls when

"washington journal" continues. ♪ ♪ announcer: tonight on q&a, jessica dulong was chief engineer of the fireboat john jay harvey when it was called into service to aid firefighters following the attacks on the twin towers. in her book she tells the story of the community of mariners who came to the rescue of thousands. >> the maritime evacuation that delivered nearly half a million people to safety is an incredible example of the goodness of people. that when you are given the opportunity to help, you have the tools, you have the skill set, you have the availability, that people over and over again made the choice to put themselves in harm's way for the sake of fellow humans. and that is very instructive and

something we really need to remember. announcer: jessica dulong tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern on q&a. you can listen to it as a podcast wherever you get your podcasts. ♪ ♪ announcer: book tv features leading authors discussing the latest nonfiction. tonight, voting rights activist and nominee for georgia governor stacey abrams discusses her suspense novel, set within the halls of the supreme court. on afterwards, robert woodson argues american history is being replaced with a polarizing version in his book "red, white, and black." he is interviewed by harvard law professor.

watch book tv every weekend. find a full schedule on the program guide or visit booktv.org. announcer: "washington journal" continues. host: this is open forum. if you want to talk issues of politics important to you, call and let us know. (202)-748-8000 for democrats, (202)-748-8001 for republicans, independents (202)-748-8002. you can text us at (202)-748-8003. "the hill" at thehill.com reports the national guard training is in danger over a stalemate in congress on capitol security funding. the deployment to the capitol left it with a $21 million bill that, absent new funding, has to pay out of budget. officials are warning the guard will have to makes weekend drills and planned maintenance

in august and september. the story adding processes already in motion could lead to those being canceled as lawmakers struggle to find legislation that would reimburse the guard. it also quotes the guard spokesperson that says, the sooner congress acts the better. the wheels are already turning. president biden made comments about facebook and information online when it comes to covid. the verge website reports facebook continued its pushback saturday against the president's comment social media platforms were killing people with misinformation. in a blog post from the vice president of integrity, guy rose, it states quote, "the facts tell a difference troy than the one promoted by the administration. at a time when cases are rising in america the biden administration has chosen to blame a handful of social media companies. it is clear we need the whole of

society approach to end the pandemic. that, not allegations, should inform the effort." you can find that at "the hill." you probably saw this locally, espn was picking that up between the san diego padres and the washington nationals. suspended because of a shooting outside the park that caused echoes of gunfire. for the exchange between people in two cars left three people injured according to the police chief. one of the people shot was a woman attending the game while she was outside the stadium. her injuries were considered non-life-threatening. a local reporter attended the game and picked up sound as far as the gunfire was concerned. [video clip] >> five hits. [[rapid gunfire]

host: that is the video and then on twitter plenty of video after the sound was heard of what was going on outside the stadium, particularly as people were fleeing. the shooting taking place outside the stadium even as management was trying to keep people inside. even reports some ended up heading to the dugout in order to seek protection. that is some of the instances happening yesterday. you can mention those or anything else of interest to you. when it comes to politics in hometown illinois, republican line, we start off with bob. go ahead. caller: good morning. love c-span. thank you for the open forum. i think the mainstream media censoring along with big tech, the public -- here are one of

the few channels people have been speaking -- there is so much that has been blocked. we cannot discuss on twitter, facebook. they censor us. the hunter biden story before the election, that would have swayed the whole vote. we would not have to be going after auditing ballots by hand in four or five separate states. the border is so grossly under defended. we have got to tighten that up. the secretary mayorkas, he is making people from afghanistan, the interpreters, vet them carefully but then illegal employment across the border, drugs, child rapists. thank you, pedro. host: john from virginia. independent line. caller: i watch your show every

day. most of the time i recorded because i work. i watch all the different news, cnn, fox news mostly, msnbc. i try to watch all the sources and it is interesting to get all the perspectives. but what bothers me, it is almost like if somebody said they saw something on fox news, it cannot be true. your hosts was discussing crime -- it was not you -- and one gentleman called and and said part of the problem is letting the felons out of jail as part of the problem. the host acted surprised that anybody would say that and he said, where did you hear that? like that was news to him. of course, it is on fox news for several days and have the major cities are letting felons out of jail and that is causing a rise

in crime. i watch cnn and it is not reported at all. i think it would be more fair and balanced if they acted like anything they saw on fox was propaganda. host: occasionally on a lot of fronts we will ask that as far as people. get things not necessarily tied to a network. they tell us are sometimes they don't but thank you for the call. virginia beach, virginia, democrat line. caller: i just wanted to say i have seen a lot on various media outlets the past week about attempting to return to work and how many employees are tired of poverty wages. we are seeing the biggest push for workers' rights in quite some time. i would love to see the senate get the pro act passed.

but we have three democratic holdouts. i would just like to see the senate rally and get that done so that workers' rights are more of a thing. higher wages and more unions so we can have middle-class. host: i was going to say, is it strictly a wage thing or are there other things? caller: it is a wage thing. i would like to see these rates work. basically allow the employer to terminate employees for anything and i don't see how people responsible for raising a family -- it is terrible. you can show up and technically be fired for wearing green shoes one day. that is not something you can depend on and the workers need more security.

paid family leave and writes for, you know, pregnant and breast-feeding mothers. host: ok. that was robert in virginia beach. bill from florida on the independent line. caller: good morning. i am sort of following up on the professor. he used the word "conservative" to describe the government in cuba. in preface, in this last weekend number of outlets were saying, should we bomb cuba? i would make the one point that the people of cuba -- if they were armed, not in any organized fashion, this tyranny the last 60 years what end overnight.

every time i think about it and every time i talk to the people in miami, to think that i government could rule an entire generation of people -- this does not need help from the united states. these people in cuba are completely capable of salting this in a few days. that is my only comment. host: who was calling for bombing cuba? caller: no, the professor was not. there were op-ed pieces of people urging the united states should intervene. but i am only saying you have an island nation of completely de-

armed populace. they follow a very small group of people and they have had a generation of people who have basically had a miserable, by and large miserable, existence with a low standard of living. host: that was built in florida --bill in florida. other people mentioning the economy. on the wall street journal website they say the u.s. economy 2021 growth search peak in the spring. economists expect a strong expansion into next year. widespread business reopen take an infusion of pandemic aid propelled rapid gains in consumer spending. but that burst of economic growth is starting to ebb.

we moved into a moderate phase of expansion, that was ellen of morgan stanley. that does not mean something more sinister is not going on and that we are poised to drop off sharply. job gains, pent up savings, and continued fiscal support could foresee an expansion gradually cooling down. that was at the wall street journal website. we go to dave in las vegas, independent line. caller: good morning. i would like to know why when trump supporters tried to overthrow the united states government that he is not being held accountable. the attorney general go after him. people were killed. there is something wrong with our system. they shouldn't have a commission to find out what happened, they

should be putting him in jail. when charlie manson sent his followers out to kill all those people in the 1970's they put him in jail. why isn't trump being put in jail? people were killed. i don't get it. the attorney general should do his job and bring him up on charges. host: but why do you think the attorney general was not doing it? caller: he is just going after the protesters but he ain't bringing trump up on charges. host: why do you think that is? caller: what? host: why do you think that is? that he isn't bringing him up on charges. caller: i don't know. he is above the law, that's what i think. he is a communist dictator. he is mentally ill. host: ok. we will go to greg and virginia, republican line. caller: hey, thank you for taking my call. to the last caller the reason the attorney general is not bringing up charges is because

he would never win. trump did not incite everybody. it amazes me the double standard. what about the billions of dollars of damage committed by black lives matter and antifa where hundreds of officers were injured and many were killed? but the lies and brainwashing is amazing. there is one other thing i wanted to get to. i think everyone should watch the press conference with jen psaki to stop what they call misinformation. they are using covid as an excuse to do that but if they do that, once covid goes away, that will never go away people. you better do everything you can to stop that from happening. that is very scary. host: that was greg in virginia. if you are interested in watching any press conference, this or previous ones, i invite you to go to our website at c-span.org. the daily press briefing will be

available for you to watch, including all of last week's. the website is c-span.org. we go to michael in alabama, democrat line. caller: yes, sir. i just had a comment concerning the fellow who thinks they should bomb cuba. apparently, and he made the comment that if all the people had personal firearms, everything would change overnight. i have been in the military. he has never seen what i helicopter gunship can do to somebody. never seen what i 20 millimeter cannon can inflict on the human body -- what a 20 millimeter cannon can inflict on the human body. the fact that they think this little army is going to defeat the marine corps is ridiculous. these people have no idea the

power of a military unit. host: ok. valley forge, pennsylvania, chris. caller: i would like to say a few words about the republicans and how they call us the libtards. i would like to give one example of how republicans shoot themselves in the foot. first 60, 70 years the republican party has been against the government providing birth control for women and adamantly opposed to abortions for anybody. everybody knows it has been said repeatedly how white people are generally more wealthy than black people. i think sometimes like 10 times the rate. what has happened because of republican policy is that white women can get birth control because they can afford it. they have fewer babies. black people, generally speaking, are more poor so they can't.

thanks to republican policies white women are having fewer babies and black women are having more. they cannot afford birth control or abortions. since 1950 when the republicans put these policies in force the black population at the time was 15 million, 16 million. today there are 50 million black people and they are the ones that hate black people. they elected trump, the guy who was a huge racist. host: when you say they, why do you make that widespread generalization? caller: it is a bit much i confess, but a huge majority elected trump right? they still do in the republican party. it is a generalization and i concede, but i think there is a lot less respect for black people among republicans. host: ok. new jersey, democrat line, this is kara.

caller: how are you? host: good. caller: i find it interesting because a couple of years ago trump tried to establish within the federal end a commission headed by chris cobalt out of kansas that dissolved because they could not find enough voter fraud to justify their existence. cobalt even knew it was illegal. to parallel and bring it forth, the republicans that are in charge of these statehouses are basically trying to conduct pre-election elections where they elect the voters as opposed to voters electing them. host: how exactly does that work? caller: well, just like the

methods, means and methods. for example, for voting locations -- and it has been reported in certain states where they were voting locations -- shut down in majority minority places. but yet, expanded in majority caucasian, residential places. that has been reported over and over again recently, ok? that is a way where you are intentionally -- it is an intentional, yet subtle, way of making voting harder just by replacing or closing down voting locations. host: ok. that was cara in new jersey.

referenced the trump commission in 2018. this was the associated press rendering of the story about the commission that was launched. uncovered no evidence to support widespread voter fraud because of analysis of the documents. it was in a letter to the vice president where kris kobach said documents showed there was preordained outcome, including a section on evidence of voter fraud that was glaringly empty. there was no real evidence anywhere. sue in indiana, independent line. caller: thank you. i wanted to thank you for having the professor on this morning. i am third-party in a case like that.

i am the person the guardianship was sought out for. we have seen lives saved and improved from the guidance of caring guardianship. so i would like to say that. we have seen how difficult it can be for a caring family member to step in when a life is in danger. but now i have witnessed the abuse of a person, so i do believe that in every case an attorney should be appointed for the person. i realize with britney spears that was maybe not enough in her case. but in most cases an attorney is not appointed and sometimes a guardian is appointed.

i have witnessed that is not enough. host: ok. i do not know if you missed the segment that was on earlier today, we did have a discussion taking a look at guardianship and conservatorship. you can go to our website at c-span.org and find that interview. if you are interested in that and any other topic. las vegas, nevada, republican line, this is from john. caller: how is it going? can everybody hear me? host: you are on. caller: i have two quick things. the thing being done to the american people is called strategy of stress. military people will know what i'm talking about. host: who exactly is doing that? caller: the u.s. government is doing that to the american people. host: house so? caller: how so? look at what is going on. has anybody seen a picture of

george floyd in the casket? host: we will go to wayne in minnesota. democrat line, hi. caller: yes, i would like to say nobody had ever heard of voter fraud until trump ran for president the first time. host: what makes you say that? caller: well, nobody ever mentioned voter fraud and no everybody except the vote -- everybody accepted the vote back then. if he lost the election the first time, it is because of voter fraud. now it has got to be a big issue and i don't know why people think it is a big issue. host: what do you -- what makes you think it was not just a big issue? caller: he said he lost the election because of voter fraud. host: are you saying voter fraud

it does not exist? caller: well, it has always been minor but nobody has ever worried about it. host: ok. carol in missouri, republican line. carol in missouri, hello? caller: hello. host: you are on. go ahead. caller: i just wonder why the old people don't get money. host: ok. exactly how? caller: why don't we get more money, honey? host: heather is up next in georgia, democrat line. caller: thank you for having me. i want to talk about the voting fiasco.

i am a democrat. this is why people are leaving the party. we are not being denied the right to vote. let's keep it real. this is for the illegals who probably do not have state id. we need state id to vote. we have our grandmas, aunties, we have ids. do not try to pull the wool over our eyes this fake fight for black people. democrats are always pulling for it and i'm a lifelong democrat. host: why are you convinced voting rights are not geared to keep minorities from voting? caller: don't make the face of that black people. we can vote just as we have always voted. this is for the illegals who do not have all their paperwork or id together. quit these fake fights for black

people and that is why people are leaving the democratic -- black people are leaving the democratic party in droves. these fake fights for blacks. host: leonard is in waterford, maine, independent line. caller: i have been listening the last half hour and would like to point out how almost try ballistic our politics -- tribalistic our politics is. we just tend to accuse an entire people in line with the party. for example, january 6th, that was certainly not an insurrection.

there is and has been for quite some time election fraud not voter fraud. kris kobach from kansas, he was very active in trying to eliminate -- take off the voting rolls with his interstate cross check list. legitimate voters are not going to have the same first and last names. may be the middle name was different but it did not matter. he was able to take off over one million voters. host: ok. we will go to tony. last call from chicago, illinois, democrat line. caller: how you doing? host: fine thank you. caller: i'm a democrat in chicago and i want to do a criticism of democratic policy quickly.

i am tired of hearing them say push minimum wage to $15 an hour. that is a false positive. $15 an hour does not pay for anything. doesn't pay for anything. $15 an hour should have been at minimum wage years ago. until they say something with real substance, $15 an hour for kids, at the very least $18 to $20, they are giving us a false choice. that is one. number two is, i'll forget about that one. host: we are out of time, but thanks for the call. thank you for all of the calls. that is it for the program today. another edition comes your way tomorrow at 7:00. we will see you then. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its

caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> >> c-span is your unfiltered view of government, funded by these television stations and more, including charter communication. >> broadband is a force for empowerment. that is why charter invested millions building infrastructure, upgrading technology, empowering opportunity in communities big and small. charter is connecting us. >> charter communications supports c-span is a public service, along with these other television providers, giving you a front row seat to democracy.

>> tonight on q&a, jessica delong was chief engineer of the historic fireboat john jay harvey on september 11, when it was called back into service to aid firefighters following the attacks on the twin towers. in her book "saved at the seawall," she tells the story of the mariners that came to the rescue of thousands. >> the actions that delivered half a million people to safely is an incredible example of the goodness of people, that when you are given the opportunity to help, you have the tools, skill set, the availability that people over and over again made the choice to put themselves in harm's way for the sake of fellow humans, and that is very instructive and something we really need to continue to remember. >> jessica