>> c-span is your unfiltered view of government. we are funded by these television companies and more including charter communications. >> broadband is a force for empowerment, that's why charter has invested billions building infrastructure, upgrading technology, empowering opportunities into immunity's big and small. charter is connecting us. >> charter communicate -- charted mutations supports c-span as a public service along with these television providers. >> coming up bone "washington journal, student" -- coming up on "washington journal," we talk about student loan debt with adam minsky. then we turn to immigration policy, first with america's voice director frank sharry

and then discuss immigration with mark krikorian. "washington journal" is next. ♪ host: it is "washington journal" for august 12, one of the spending is for offering potential students the ability to attend two years of community college. supporters of the efforts they could assist older income and older americans to improve their lives. critics say college can already be affordable with scholarships and grants. what do you think about what is being advertised as free community college in the democrat's $3.5 trillion

proposal? if you support the effort, (202)-748-8000. if you oppose it, (202)-748-8001 . a few attend community college and you want to give your perspective, you can call (202)-748-8002. you can post on our social media sites, and you can also text us at (202)-748-8003. follow us on instagram at --@cspanwj. in providing this portion of the spending plan by the democrats for free community college, the majority leader, chuck schumer, says it is about what it would provide overall, saying it is for the legislation, the budget blueprint, about restoring the middle-class to the 21st century getting more american is the opportunity to get there. he adds by making education, health care and housing more affordable, we can give tens of millions of families a leg up. when it talks about the proposal from the biden administration,

and it comes to free community college, it was during a recent event that acting assistant education secretary amy lloyd explaining how the federal government would work to provide community college. [video clip] >> on access front, the american families plan would put an associates degree in reach for all americans, regardless of income, by providing them with two free years of community college. 100 years ago, the high school movement expanded to secondary education, and that made the groundwork for economic innovation. today, the needs of the economy have advanced. americans need and deserve opportunities to build their skills to contribute to expanding the economy. i am sure i do not have to show this group that increased educational achievement increases earnings because degree holders working full-time in about $262,000 more than high school graduates over their

working careers. what does this mean for our higher education system at large? the proposal envisions a new partnership between states and the federal government where each level of government bears some spots ability for financing these investments. the federal government steps up to keep costs low for students, providing at least 75% of the cost and at least 90% for trying. they also asked states to do their part, not just in terms of sustained financing but to align their higher education systems with k-12 and pursue other critical reforms. we have done the math and it stays -- and if all states, and tribes participate, students would pay nothing in tuition and fees. we know that initiatives that clearly communicate students can attend college tuition free have

had particularly large impacts on enrollment. [end video clip] host: that is the plan by the biden administration reflected in the $3.5 trillion budget blueprint. if you would like to let us know your thoughts, if you say yes and support the idea, (202)-748-8000. if you say no to it, (202)-748-8001. if you attend community college, you can call the (202)-748-8002. you can text as your thoughts, (202)-748-8003. our social media sites are facebook.com/c-span and you can post on twitter at -- @cspanwj, and you can also follow us on our instagram page @cspanwj, as well. rebecca allen from facebook saying when it comes to this idea of community college for free, given how many jobs require it now, yes. they require business communication classes that may help people learn how to write a proper resume.

anybody would be motivated to learn. another viewer, i agree, we should expand immunity colleges, but local tax dollars via the public school system is already paying for them. local industries also support community colleges to train future and current employees. community colleges are already a viable resource and an alternative to the overpriced elitist universities that bury so many in debt. and then also if our facebook page, if you want free tuition, join the military and serve. if not, pay out of your own pocket like everyone else from the past 100 years. 25 states, including arkansas, indiana, minnesota, montana, rhode island and tennessee already have statewide free community college programs. even more were expected to follow before the coronavirus put a strain on budgets. admit state-based programs are

already in place, students receive a scholarship for the amount of tuition that is not covered by federal or state aid, and the program pays for whatever tuition and fees are left after financial aid and grants are applied. that is what is already going on at a statewide level. the biden administration laid out their plans for what they would provide should this legislation passed and it become law. you can let us know your thoughts on this topic. from maryland, buffalo, new york, you are first up. caller: yeah, i was definitely agreeing what you are talking about. i was just really saying that this is our future, and our future is aligned in education. without education, how do we grow? i fully agree with this. host: if cnbc's reporting is

accurate and a lot of states provide this already, why should the federal government step in and do this? caller: because somebody has got to be the bigger guy and step up. there are a lot of things that are lacking and falling apart here. i see it in the streets. i am here visiting family in new york, i lived in los angeles, i have seen it. that -- i also have other ideas about getting education going, but city by city, state by state, we are not figuring this out. this is what i see. host: let's hear from steve in wake forest, north carolina, who also agrees with this idea. good morning. caller: good morning. i definitely agree with it. my kids just started community college herself, and i could sure damn use the help with that. she is trying to go to miami next year. i do have a question, pedro.

host: if you do not mind, let me go to the topic at hand, your daughter, as far as the cost she is going to pay, what is it like compared to sending her to a four year school? caller: it is outrageously expensive for everything these days. you have four kids in college, don't you? host: if you get scholarships and state assistance, as well, or are you or she paying it out of pocket? caller: no, we are paying out-of-pocket. we are fortunate like that for my family's side. are you all ever going to mention the two white police officers that were going down the other day? host: if you want to comment on the report for free community college, whether you support it or oppose it, you can text as your thoughts, and one of the

people commenting was education secretary who asked about the feasibility of free community college during a june hearing about the education and labor community -- committee. here he is from that meeting. [video clip] >> i support each student being able to choose the best post secondary path for them to reach their academic and career goals. i also believe states themselves should be able to run their education system in a way that makes the most sense for them. the president biden would have us believing that mandating committee college the free would be the answer to the complex problem to affordability for all students. we have great community colleges in iowa and my district, but nationwide community colleges still face a number of challenges, like long wait lists, low graduation rates, and low transfer rates to four year institutions. mr. secretary, do you believe immunity colleges are equipped

to handle the expected influx of students attending on the promise of a free college education? will they be able to effectively meet all student needs? if not, how can you justify the president's request to spend over $100 billion to community college free for all? >> thank you, congresswoman. to me, the challenge of meeting the demands for community colleges one that i will accept. if we have a situation where our community colleges have more people that want to sign up and they can pay, that tells me that there was a thirst for this and will only have a benefit for our economy, our community. community college graduate with a 21% increase in earning potential. that is good for families, community. will it require focus on challenges?

definitely. however, it is about time that we realize as a country that we need to provide more opportunities for college access. we need to provide opportunities for students to get skills for higher-paying jobs that are waiting for them. i do believe this is the right step for our country. i recognize it will come with challenges, but those are challenges i accept. [end video clip] host: that hearing available at c-span.org if you would like to hear the education sec.'s thoughts on community college and the biden administration providing the two years for free. can find it online. with money sent out during the pandemic, several cities and states using it to that end. this is from the hartford current, the connecticut university systems will send checks of $100 to $350 to community college students this week to help them continue their education.

a statement said that it helps to -- it aims to help families make ends meet. they add that part of it comes from funds provided by the federal government during the pandemic. in pennsylvania, the same kind of initiative from another community college. officials revealing august 9 that tuition for the fall semester will be free to early county residents. 300 students applying so far. this is, "actually, that is a huge thanks to our county counsel who use their american rescue act funding. they have given a significant amount of dollars for anyone who has been a resident for a year or longer and can receive that free tuition." in tennessee, as well, community college paying up to $2 billion to clear student debt and forgive the remaining deck for about 1600 eligible students.

this also adds that the american rescue plan act funding can go toward the cost of attendance or emergency cost such as tuition, food, housing and others. we are getting your thoughts on it. if you disagree -- someone disagrees with the idea, this is joe. caller: good morning. i think the public school systems had 13 years to educate the kids and they need to figure out how to do that properly. they spend an obscene amount of money on public school systems. i cannot find a high school graduate who can write a business letter to higher. i think there plenty of opportunity. adding another layer of bureaucracy and expense is not necessary and wasteful. host: but specifically why not apply this to community college? caller: well, because the high schools need to properly prepare the students for college. everything that i have

personally experienced, you get someone with two years of community college and they are function united 12 grade level -- functioning at a 12 grade level. the schools could do so much more before we add another layer. host: when you say inexperienced, what do you mean? caller: we are trying to higher administrative positions and it is virtually impossible to find some of can even write a letter. that we are willing to send out. host: let's hear from jean, delroy, ohio, who attended community college. good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. i am just calling to say i do not think community college should be free. i think no one values what they get for free, and if you really want to go to college, you can find a way and you will make your way once you get there.

i say, no, do not pay for it i say, no, do not pay for it. host: why do you say that? caller: i was in pasadena, texas, and there was community college called san jacinto college. i was a laid-off steelworker living on $180 a week unemployment. i've met with them and told them i wanted to go to school to be an x-ray tech. they told me to move down here and we will find a way. we will help you get employment on the weekends, just get started. and that is what i did, and i became an x-ray tech. i left being a steelworker, and i found a way. i literally worked seven days a week for a year. between school and working in hospitals on the weekends while i learned to be an x-ray tech in school, and i took any job in the hospital i could that, which they helped me find one.

i was an orderly pushing structures around, and as i say, for seven days a week, i was in the hospital. host: is that what you still do today? caller: i am now retired. i am 67. i am now retired. i am 67. host: ok. caller: but i know for a fact it can be done. host: that is the story from jean in ohio, attended community college, and talked about the way she became an x-ray tech . if you attended community college, like to give us your story, you can do so. we set aside a line, (202)-748-8002. joe does not support this idea, tell us why, joe. caller: love c-span. been calling for over 30 years. we cannot afford it. we have got 33 trillion in debt. i would encourage everybody to

watch this afternoon steve and mary, both trying to stop these biden plans. we cannot afford any of it. it is ridiculous. host: specifically what do you find wrong with the community college approach/ -- approach? caller: it is another thing we cannot afford. we have to stop all this giveaway stuff. our nation is going to be bankrupt. steve moore, who i think is the most brave economists in the world said, joe, we are going bankrupt. we have got to cut back on all of this. we have got to start saying no, otherwise, we are going to be bankrupt i would encourage everybody this afternoon to watch the larry kudlow and steve moore -- host: you mentioned that twice. we will leave it there. when it comes to the cost of community college, collegeboard.org gives us guidelines on what to expect to

pay for going to college for a private four year university, $37,650 a year for 2020-2021. for a public four year out-of-state, 27,000 plus dollars per year. for a public four year in-state college, a little over $10,000, $10,560. compare that with the community college and the average cost for 2020-2021, $3700, about $4000 is what you would expect to pay in comparison to the other costs. when it comes to community college students and what they received with financial aid when it comes to that, 59% saying that they look at other aid. that is amongst federal grants with 84%. state aid adding about 22% from the state, federal loans about 15%. 7% coming from additional aid.

from michael in pennsylvania, who supports this idea, good morning. caller: good morning, pedro. how are you doing today? host: i'm fine, thanks. go ahead. caller: i support it because listening to previous callers, they realize there is a huge education gap. a lot of people do not have the opportunity to go to school. so to start in a community college and then transfer to a four year school, they would be saving a significant amount of money. and that woman in the 1960's, that is great you did that, but guess what? inflation of the pandemic have shown that there is a huge disparity between communities. we have to look at educating our country to the best if we want to bring it to the top. listening to these people say you do not need community college, well, some of the kids in high school probably cannot graduate into a job that will be able to sustain them.

so what are you going to do with all these people? you are talking about possibly pushing them on welfare. when people work for walmart, do not make enough money. and this company gets all these tax breaks. host: 25 states already provide assistance on the state wide level, why not leave it there? why should the federal government enter into it? caller: what about the other states, pedro? i was just going to say it forget about a whole generation of children and say, look, you are on your own, do what you can? nobody complained about textbooks for the rich, which is phenomenal. how you do not complain about millionaires and billionaires not paying any taxes, not one of your people who previously called. host: we are drifting away from the topic. seymour in scottsdale, arizona, who supports this idea. good morning. caller: two comments. one, i was a high school chemistry teacher at glendale,

arizona, and the glendale community college let the honor students go ahead and get ahead by going in high school and on the weekends and getting a free year or two of community college . they cannot afford it, but they worked so hard. i think if you give people who are really aiming toward that, it would be great. second, is in the 1960's, i went to city college of new york. it started as a free academy in the 1800s. people like bernard bruce went there. it was free. it was the only way people in new york from the poor areas would get to school. they worked hard and they would get ahead. they have good programs to help people. not a perfect program. no program is ever perfect, but they help people who really want to get an education for free, it is a great idea. host: that is seymour in

arizona, giving us his thoughts when it comes to the demographics of those who attend the community college. the association of community college tells us 29% of those are first-generation to attend college. 20% of those with students with disabilities. single parents take up 15%. and then non-us citizens at 9%. if you go to the forbes website, forbes contributor press and cooper, giving us thoughts -- preston cooper, giving us his thoughts on the program or what is promoted by the administration, saying that community college solves a problem that largely doesn't exist because community colleges already quite affordable. it will not fix the problems on the higher education system, but taxpayers should wonder what exactly they're getting in mr. biden's proposed investment in community college and demand better. you can read that online, if you wish. from stephen anglin falls, new

york, on our guest line, hello. caller: hello, pedro. i have one concern that has not been discussed. i think it would be reasonable to request or require a student to have at least a c average to get free community college for two years. can you imagine those students who have partied, and i do not mean to be discouraging, but partied in high school or have slid through with a d-and you put them to community college and expect them to succeed? they have to have some sort of a base. i feel a c average should be a requirement for free community college for two years. host: lynn attended community college and joins us from conroe, texas. caller: hi.

i attended community college back in the 1980's and got my degree and went on to have a beautiful life, you know? i was able to put myself and my children, back then it was 250 and now it is over $1000. our low wage income has not improved since then, and if the tax breaks could be given to the top 1% as no later than four years ago, why not give the people who are on minimum wage and they have to have a decent wage and a decent life? host: we heard from another member of community college and she said she made her own way. what do you think about those stories, and why do you think the federal government should provide? caller: like i said, back then,

the community college i went to, i paid $350 for a course and now it is over $1000. and i paid it myself. my husband at the time made enough money to be able to do that, but people on minimum wage now, there is no way they can make that kind of money to be able to pay it out of their pocket. it kills anyone being able to pay it and make it on their own. host: ok, that is lynn in texas giving us her story. many of you have when you call in on the community college line. bob texting us from illinois, saying our politicians are out of their minds. free/?the first lesson in life my parents taught ? -- free? the first lesson might parents,

and is there is no free lunch. we are going to pay dearly for it if it passes. from maryland, go to the military and earn your g.i. bill. or would you prefer others to pay your way? from washington, say we have running start programs. for high school students with the same grades can attend community college classes free of charge, get dual credit and graduate high school with an associates degree and a high school diploma. some of the stories coming in from text. from paul, paul joining us from chesapeake, virginia, attended community college. good morning. caller: yeah. when i was living in west virginia, i went to west virginia northern community college, got my associates degree, and i was working during the day, going to school at night. just because you are going to

college does not mean you have to take your 16 hours every semester. you can do it a little bit at a time, but another thing i would like to address is the high schools going into college. in oregon, they just said that students do not need to meet math and reading requirements in order to graduate. i have a grandson who cannot read cursive because they did not teach them cursive in public school. i have a daughter who attended community college, and she is doing just fine. host: if i may ask, did you pay for it out-of-pocket when you attended? caller: yes, i did. again, this was in the 1980's,

so, yeah, it was a little cheaper than. host: the only reason i ask is because if you were brought up the fact that it is provided for free, will people get as much satisfaction quality of it versus paying for it for yourself? caller: here's the problem, you start paying it, you get free tuition, and everybody likes free tuition. it has got to be paid for somehow. i want my children to have their college tuition paid, that would be great. the problem is once they get out of college, now i am still paying for everybody else's kid to go to college. but what i would like to see about my daughter, who attended community college, she also continued on to get her bachelors and masters. get this, online. my wife got an online

masters from the university of missouri online. never attended campus. so, yeah, there is online, it does not need to be free. there is plenty of online colleges, community colleges, and they are a fraction of the cost of a four-year college. host: that is paul and chesapeake, virginia. the cnbc story highlights critics say through a combination of grants and scholarships already pay little, and it does not cover books, room on board, and fees, costs they struggle with, and diverting funds to free tuition, the expense of other operations on campus, including hiring faculty and administrators. in addition, community college is already significantly less-expensive. we showed you the cost versus four-year institutions. one of the main drivers of this

idea, senator bernie sanders, on the senate floor this week talking about those needs he sees for those two free years of community college. here is part of what he said. [video clip] >> we will begin to address the crisis in higher education by making community colleges in america tuition free. this will give millions of young people and working people the opportunity to get the education they made to acquire the skills so they can go out and get the good paying jobs that are out there. it will also give people the chance to transfer the two years of credits to a four-year community school. i hope in your succumb we will go further, but two years of free community college is no small thing. [end video clip] host: that is senator sanders from this week.

for the next half hour, we will take your thoughts on this proposal by the biden administration to provide free community college tuition for two years. if this is something your support, call us at (202)-748-8000. if you oppose it, (202)-748-8001 . and for those who attended community college, any of you calling with your stories, (202)-748-8002. in other news, particularly when it comes to the infrastructure bill, "wall street journal" talks about mitch mcconnell's perspective on what happened with the pass of the bill in an interview saying "the structure is popular with republicans and democrats. we had a nearly divided senate and house. i do not think the message from that was to do absolute nothing. if you are going to find an area of potential agreement, i cannot think of one better than infrastructure, which is desperately needed." he also said, "there is nothing like the backup of a president

-- presidential signatory, so i think the president deserves a lot of credit for opening the democrats up to each of bipartisan agreement on this bill." one of the aspects being debated in the $3.5 trillion budget framework was how to treat electric yokels. this firm -- electric vehicles. this from "the washington post" this morning. incentives are facing trouble. it says that the senator who represents the democrats in michigan pushed tax credits up to $12,500 per vehicle. chuck schumer called for rebates when drivers by electric vehicles. he said it should be backed by hundreds of billions of dollars in federal funds. it also highlights the amendment submitted by senator deb fischer, republican of nebraska, to borrow electric vehicle tax credits for people making more than $100,000 a year or vehicles

that cost more than $40,000. ed pastor three democrats joining republicans. senator sinema and martelly voted with joe manchin of west virginia and supporting that amendment. if you want to see the back-and-forth debate going on within the democratic party itself when it comes to this idea for electric vehicles, you can highlight those stories. one of the people making news yesterday was the incoming governor of new york, kathy hochul, after the events concerning governor cuomo. she took to the cameras after he announced he would resign, talked about what she sees as her future as governor. here's part of that from yesterday. [video clip] >> i spoke with governor cuomo yesterday, and he placed his full support for a full transition -- smooth transition. i thank him for service to our state. regarding his decision to step down, i believe it is appropriate and in the best interest of the state of new york.

while it is not expected, it is a day for which i am prepared. i have already spoken with the senate majority leader, the speaker, labor, business, state leaders, other state elected officials, as well as tri-state governors. i look forward to working with each and every one of them and all of you to build on the progress we have already started. over the next two weeks, i will continue meeting current and potential cabinet officials. i will build out my senior staff. and i will do what i have always done, i will travel the state to meet new yorkers, to listen to them, to assure them that i have got their backs, and i will take their concerns and bring them back to our state capital and work with our partners at every level of government to come to

solutions. people will soon learn that my style is to listen first and then take decisive action. so, in 13 days, i will officially become the 57 governor of the state of new york. shortly thereafter, alec forwarded delivering an address on new yorkers -- i forward to delivering an address to all new yorkers on my vision of a great new york. [end video clip] host: that is lieutenant governor kathy hochul, soon to become the governor of new york. you can find more of that on c-span. fill in ohio says he does not support free community college, it is doing away with our work ethic, free childcare, free tuition, who pays for the students to drop out? another viewer says why are they trying to prevent people of enhancing their chances to get

jogs and #spiteful. another common, colleges have good professors who do not take tenure for granted. when students matriculate to a four-year institution, everyone will profit. you can make comments on social media. from mark in bay city, michigan, attended community college. good morning. caller: good morning, pedro. i attended community college. i paid for my community college. i continued on and got my four year degree, and i paid for that, as well. i am undecided as of yet as to whether or not we should pay fully for community college, but i would like to add this thought to it, did you realize that many of the students in the community colleges are operating on a level below college level? they are taking what are known as developmental classes. these classes are teaching math

at a sixth or seventh grade level, english at a sixth or seventh grade level, and this is already creating a problem with the students that are at community college are not doing community college work for the beginning of their careers. host: how do you know that for certain? caller: i teach at a community college. host: got you. as far as your uncertainty, is that what you base it on or are there other aspects? caller: my uncertainty is merely based on two factors. the two factors are that we need to focus on getting them up to speed as high school students, and they also need to have a value in anything they should get from a community college by paying at least some of it. those who are in intense need

are getting financial aid, and your statistics bear that out as 60% of the people are already getting some sort of aid. host: that is mark in michigan. from jeff in ohio who supports the idea, you are next up. hi. caller: how are you doing today? host: fine. thank you. go ahead. caller: i agree but with a twist. for years, i thought this country should take cues from other countries. after high school, everybody does four years in the military. after that four years, we pay for the college for four years. if you do eight years, we paper eight. with that, it would turn out a whole lot better. less drug use, better work

quality. it would just improve everything so much, and if you do time in the military, why not pay for the college? host: why do you think every young person would be eligible for the military to take advantage of that? caller: i am sure most of them could be put through something in the military. not all of them will be able to drive a tank or things like that, but other things they can learn, and they can learn skills. everybody can benefit from that. host: that is just in ohio, talking with a twist when it comes to the military aspect. this is matt and new orleans, go ahead -- matt in new orleans who is opposed to the idea, go ahead. caller: good morning.

this week, the oregon governor said that the kids will not have to prove their proficiency in reading, writing and math. so how are you going to expect if the democratic party is pushing this agenda, that the kids will be able to pass a community college? thank you. host: linda joins us from north carolina and supports this idea. go ahead. caller: ok, i am definitely in favor of it. a lot of kids drop out of school before they even got to high school because they figure even if they finish high school, they are going to get the same job they would if they drop out, so there is no reason to stay in. they know they don't have the money to get a college education. you cannot get any job at all basically unless you have two years of college. so they are disqualified because they know they are not going any college, so they may as well drop out early from high school

and get a job. i agree they should have a grade level of figuring out who should get to the programmer not. obviously, you are not going to graduate high school if they do not have a certain grade level. that is about it. host: linda in north carolina. many of you mentioned what took place in oregon. yahoo! news highlights the decision by the governor, saying the bill would suspend proficiency requirements for students three years or temporarily suspend academic standards, the covid-19 pandemic. backers argued existing proficiency levels presented unfair challenges for students who do not test well. venue standards would aid the black, latino x, pacific islander, tribal and students of color. it is essential subjects on a freshman, sophomore skill to graduate, which was terminated at the start of the pandemic as

part of the brown lives stay-at-home order. they argued in favor of sp 44's exposed expansion, saying that the efficiency standards were flawed. you can find more of that yahoo! news. this is from pennsylvania, rick, who says no to this idea, go ahead. caller: yes, good morning, pedro. i say no to community college. my biggest complaint is during the 2020 campaign somebody asked elizabeth warren her idea was to give free college to everybody, and somebody come up to her and asked her, well, we just got done paying for our daughter to go to college, how do we go about getting a rebate for that? i mean, where do we stop? why does the government stop that paying for all of these freebies? ann, can i get a rebate for

paying for my daughter's college? that is what i would like to know. host: that is rick in pennsylvania. when it comes to the economy, "the wall street journal" front page story looks at the topic of inflation, saying consumer prices rose 5.4% in july from a year earlier, the same pace as in june, the highest 12 month rate since 2008, according to the labor department, releasing those figures wednesday. price pressures weakened on a daily basis and the consumer price index climbed 0.5% from july in june, with a slower paced 0.9 increase in june from may, although well above the average of 0.2 rate from 20,000 to 2019. in "the new york times" this morning, a decline of 10%, saying the budget deficit declined by 10% a year earlier

to 2.5 trillion. the modest decline from last year's record high came out spending on unemployment benefits and health care that have started to slow, and as company sent individuals pay more taxes because employers are returning to work and for july, the federal government to record, a shortfall of 302 billion, the highest on record for the month, but revenue in july 2020 skewed higher because of the usual april tax deadline was delayed last year. let's hear from a viewer in new jersey. this is from montclair, new jersey. i think it is anita? go ahead. caller: yes, hey, pedro, how are you doing this morning? listen, i went to community college myself. i got a four-year degree and then a masters degree. we need to help people help themselves. if you live in other countries, they are giving free education, and then they are importing the

people over here to educate our people. our people need to be qualified for the jobs that are here. this is why you have all this crime in the street because they feel there is no hope for themselves. help them help themselves. plus, pedro, we already pay taxes for people going to school, even if you do not have a child in school, you pay taxes. so, give them help. this is what would help us. host: a viewer from new jersey, let's hear from massachusetts, diane says no to the idea. hello. caller: hi, pedro. i believe that we should not be giving money for them to go free. they are already doing the government supplemental and fafsa. i think you would water it down. the two-year degree would [indiscernible] it is a good stopping point. host: that is diane in massachusetts. one of the people supporting this idea teacher did not bipartisan senate discussion was

maine's republican senator susan collins, making the case of who would benefit from free community college. here's part of that presentation. [video clip] >> and that is my state, his estate, we have seen a lot of factories -- his state, we have seen a lot of factories close and people who thought they were going to have lifelong jobs were displaced. our shoe factories, paper mills that are gone. we need to help re-scale people. that is why i have always supported the assistance educational programs that allowed individuals with federal assistance to go back and learn a new skill, and community colleges have been absolutely critical in that area, but so have our university systems. that is really important. i think often times when we talk about college, the focus is on

someone coming out of high school. well, it may be someone who has been in the workforce for a number of years, has been displaced, and now needs new skills for the jobs of the future. [end video clip] host: that is also available on their website, c-span.org, if you would like to see more of that. this is from a viewer off of twitter who says the viewer agrees in principle but perhaps more emphasis should be paid on keeping kids in school for those who cannot get to community college. dropout rates are high in some places, and everyone should graduate. from rose in connecticut, i attended community college in the 1970's. got my nursing degree using the g.i. bill. today, i have my doctorate degree in nursing. i think a person should pay at least half of the tuition. it shows how much they really value their education. this is from greg in cleveland, ohio, saying the people targeted to help with free community college will not take advantage of it. this will only increase the gap

between the haves and have-nots. texting is available at (202)-748-8003. denise in florida, who does not support this idea, hello. caller: yes. i believe what this country needs is more vocational training. not everybody can even have the desire to go to community college. they do not offer things to learn how to be an electrician, a plumber. you talk to people and their trades that have these businesses, and they cannot find any help. so, in the future, near future, who is going to do these jobs? there is a lot, a lot of young men out there who could be learning these types of things, but the vocational training is lacking. that is very necessary. host: you don't think that avenue is being touted or emphasized enough? is that the case? caller: exactly. exactly. colleges not everything.

i went to a vocational school back in the 1970's. i went into drafting, which not many women were in at that time, but that is when they pushed for women in engineering. i came out after two years. it was free at that time. i came out and made as much money as my friend that went to a four-year college. and i could go anywhere in the country i wanted to work. host: how much of that was actual training? did you get to do on-the-job training? how did that work? caller: yes, we went for one year, and then this summer we spent on the job with the company, and then we went the second year. a lot of businesses help support the vocational schools because they needed the help. they need the people. and at that time, i think it was part of the high school system, but at that time, there was also a lot of vietnam vets going on

the package where they had the two years free schooling. again, refrigeration, electricians, diesel mechanics, all those types of trades. there really needed. host: do you still use those drafting skills today? caller: to some degree. i eventually came into my own business. i am an artist and they make pottery. i like the arts. that is why i took drafting because in those years, it was all still by hand. now everything is on computer. host: that is denise about her vocational skill experience. many of you telling stories when it comes to the background you have, particularly if you attended community college. even if you want to give your perspective on our yes and no lines, one of the stories coming out when it comes to the former president donald trump about the granting of limited tax records to democrats in the house, u.s. district judge from washington previously rolled that the

former president's accountant must turn over a broader array of records, but the supreme court ruled that there were separation of powers concerns when members of congress on personal information from a president. democrats argued they needed access to his financial records from 2011 to 2018 to fix "glaring weaknesses that were exposed by the former president," but that judge rejected the argument from democrats, saying congress did not need the details of trump's finances young what was already disclosed, leading to the reveal or disclosure of records from 2017 to 2018. let's hear from melissa in lake charles, louisiana. caller: hi, pedro. good morning. . i really do not support this i support -- i really do not support this. i support higher education but people have to have skin in the

game. they have to have some kind of personal value they are applying to this. we cannot afford it, for one thing, and we pay for children's full education firm k-12 -- from k-12. if they cannot get it during that time, some kind of automation, or learning what they enjoy, that we should not be picking up the full bill for them as adults also. it also lowers the value on every college diploma, every college degree that has been achieved. we have to remember, we really cannot afford this. plus, 20 five states already fund their own community colleges -- plus, 25 states already fund their own community colleges. there is a better way to do this then free, free, free. this is too expensive for america. maybe what we need to do is make the children take more economics classes in high school so they understand why we cannot afford this. host: ok. from ken in astoria, oregon,

attended unity college, hello. caller: good morning. -- attended community college, hello. caller: good morning. i have a different aspect from what most of these callers are saying. i want to tell you my story as briefly as i can. i spent six years in the army, and when i got out of the army, i went into commercial fishing being this is a fishing town, at that time. i went out on albacore tuna boats after my first season, then i came back. it is seasonal work, so i had time. i took a couple of semesters at a community college on commercial fishing. they had a commercial fishing school, which they still have to

this day. so, i fast tracked thyself right up to being a boat captain -- myself right up to being a boat captain going to a two-year college because i only did eight semesters, and our community college in the early 1970's had a work program for students. i signed up for it. so i spent like about four hours a day i believe it was as a custodian at the college, and that helped pay for my books and all of that stuff. besides, i was getting a check from the veterans administration to the g.i. bill. host: so from your experience as he described it, what do you think about this proposal for providing that community college

tuition for two years? caller: i really do not have a problem with it, personally. community college gave me the big break. i made really a good life being a boat captain up at dutch harbor and all over the west coast, all the way up to hawaii and san pedro, mexico. i finished all of the pacific ocean with big boats and made big money. host: ok, that is ken in oregon, telling us his experience. let's hear from clarksburg, maryland, who supports this idea. caller: hey. nice to hear from you guys. i love listening to c-span, first of all. but, yeah, i didn't take community college, it was

critical when i was transferring from one degree to another, right, you know? so i was looking at a full-time degree. i had to take a couple of semesters off due to a family, you know, family essentially. but, i guess my biggest point here is that i would like to address texts and callers saying that they are really pushing the military, like why don't people just go four years in the military? one previous caller said, why don't we take up some country, other country's thing where you do four years in the military mandatory after high school, and they help pay for schooling and stuff like that. my biggest point is i have never been a person who wants to be told to put a gun in my hand

and kill somebody else. i have tremendous respect for our forces and people who served, and i would like the freedom to choose in doing that. that is why i think this is a good step forward. host: that is jerrick talking and giving his perspective when it comes to efforts in afghanistan, the washington post highlighting that the united states is part of a multilateral effort to push diplomacy and dealing with the situation in afghanistan, saying that since the u.s.-taliban talks began two years ago, representatives from regional neighbors, european powers, the european union, the organization of islamic corporation, and the united nations have conversed for meetings on the militants. the hope is that sheer numbers and unified stance during the taliban meetings and a joint statement to be issued after the last statement today will

disabuse the militants that there is any crack and national resolve to cut any taliban from diplomatic contact and assistance. more that in "the washington post" this morning. from chicago, illinois, we will hear from william, who attended unity college. good morning. caller: good morning, pedro, how are you doing today? host: fine, go ahead. caller: i am a product of welcome x committee college in chicago. it prepared me -- product of malcolm x community college in chicago. it prepared me to now be on the verge of receiving my phd at the university, and i must say that community college is a necessity for upward mobility. in terms of the military, i do concur with the previous caller from maryland, but i would like to say that the military is not made for everyone. everyone is not made for the military. i have experience serving the

military four years, three years reserve, and i have seen how the military -- let me rephrase that, how people do not do well in the military. i think that should be a choice for people to make instead of saying that it be mandatory for them to go to the military to receive an education. host: for all the degrees you got, did you pay for those yourself or how did that work? caller: i used my g.i. bill. there is a grant which will pay for your education. i use that to pay for my masters degree. and being a phd student, at an ri institution, they will pay for your education. at the same time, you will have to teach undergraduate courses. host: the only reason i ask that

is we had a couple of viewers call and say if someone got education for free, it would not be valued as much as someone like yourself who paid for. what you think of that argument? caller: each individual is different. are you going to have individuals who will waste their education? yes. i think the vast majority of the population will embrace this opportunity and be a productive citizen in our society. host: that is william in chicago, illinois, finishing out this hour of people talking about the prospect of free community college from the biden administration. thank you to all who participated. we will continue on the topic of education, particularly looking at student loans.

joining us next, adam minsky to talk about student loan debt. a conversation coming up next. later on, the first of two voices joining us to talk about the budget reconciliation package and proposals when it comes to immigration. we will first year from frank sharry. he will join us later in the program. that is coming up on "washington journal." ♪ >> today, the centers for medicare and medicaid -- discusses the biden administration's priorities. live coverage begins at 1:00 on c-span, online at c-span.org or listen on the free c-span radio app. ♪ >> british writer charles dickens is credited for some of

the best known fictional characters. over 2000 scattered throughout his 14.5 published novels. american authors, journalists and politicians refer to situations -- a professor in london has published three books on charles dickens. the most recent one titled "a very short introduction." we asked her to talk about charles dickens' life and accomplishments, including his two trips to the united states. >> author on this episode of book notes plus. listen on c-span.org or wherever you get your podcasts. >> c-spanshop.org is c-span's online store. browse to see what is new.

your purchase will support our nonprofit operations. you still have time to order the congressional directory with contact information. go to c-spanshop.org. >> "washington journal" continues. host: joining us now, adam minsky, a student loan attorney and senior contributor for forbes, here to talk about student loan debt. thank you for coming on the program. guest: thank you for having me. host: exactly what do you do as a student loan attorney? guest: i have a practice-based in boston, massachusetts. i help folks navigate what is a complex student loan system. i help people dealing with disputes or problems with their student loans or misinformation and i defend folks who are dealing with issues of hardship, default collections. host: i imagine that during this

pandemic, you have had to deal with those issues and related issues. what are some of the biggest problems you are seeing with student debt management? guest: for federal student loan borrowers, the good news is there are a lot of programs to help people manage their loans. there are so many complex eligibility criteria -- servicers do not always do a great job of facilitating these programs. a lot of people get tripped up. sometimes they get sent in the wrong direction and sometimes their errors are mistakes that need to be corrected. host: when it comes to the federal reserve, about $1.8 trillion in student loan debt out there. the average debt is $32,000. the average monthly payment is $393. we saw the biden abundance

ration extend the theft -- we saw the biden administration extend. guest: payments on most federal student loans have been suspended since march of 2020. all interest has been frozen. other federal loans have been suspended. that was originally supposed to end on september 30, but the biden administration was under pressure to extend that because of the pandemic and two major loan servicers said they would be exiting the student loan service space by december, which is expected to cause significant disruption. the administration decided having folks resumed payment while this was going on would not be a feasible way to go. host: what is the new deadline? guest: january 31, 2022.

the administration has characterized this extension as the final one. we have to assume that student loan borrowers will be resuming payments in february. host: what you think about the extension of the deadline in the first place? is it a good idea? guest: i do. surveys have shown the vast majority of borrowers who have federal student loans are at the very least nervous about repayment. many are not in a position yet to resume repayment. i also think there is a lot of discussion that student loan servicers are not prepared to handle the volume of borrowers who will be resuming payments simultaneously and all the processing that goes along with that, particularly given some of the shakeups that have happened. host: what does this mean when it comes to government revenue

as part of that? what is to be expected? guest: some folks are making payments. i believe nine in 10 borrowers covered by the moratorium are choosing not to make payments. it is costing around $5 billion a month in government revenue. host: our guest to talk about student loans, management and related issues. if you want to ask questions, you are welcome to do so. if you have student loan debt, call us at (202) 748-8000. if you have paid off that student loan debt, (202) 748-8001. if you have no student loan debt, (202) 748-8002. i am interested in your perspectives on the last two categories -- those who have paid it off and those who do not have it. guest: it is not an experience i see -- i am dealing with folks

with student loan debt. the folks i encounter who have either paid off their loans or did not have to take them out in the first place are grateful. given the mess we see it comes to our student loan system. host: there has been a debate on capitol hill about the cancellation of student loan debt. from what you are hearing from washington, what you think about the arguments about the ability to do that and should it be done? guest: this has been a hot topic for quite some time. there are compelling arguments in favor of some sort of student loan cancellation, both economic, as well as more of an issue of racial justice. there are good legal arguments that support the notion that the president can cancel student debt. there is a provision in the higher education act that provides the secretary of education has broad discretion

to modify canceling of student loan debt. it has never been done before and there are certainly counterarguments. the u.s. department of education under secretary devos reached the opposite conclusion, there is no legal authority to do that . certainly, there are folks who paid down their loans who view it as unfair. host: this argument coming from nancy pelosi when asked about the possibility of the administration canceling student loan debt. this was last month at a press conference. [video clip] >> people think the president of the united states has the power for debt forgiveness. he does not. he can postpone, he can delay, but he does not have that power. that has to be an act of congress. i don't even like to call it

forgiveness because that implies a transgression. freeing people from obligations. the question of who gets for given -- to use the term that is out there -- is a debate. we use whatever money there is in support of more people with even less debt, or fewer people with more debt, that is a policy discussion. the difference between the president -- the president cannot do it, that is not even a discussion. not everyone realizes that. the president can only postpone, delay, but not forgive. host: that is the speaker's perspective. how would you respond? guest: there are plenty of folks in congress who disagree with that, plenty of legal scholars

who disagree, as well. we just discussed a couple moments ago how the president has delayed student loan repayment through january 31 of next year, but that involves effectively canceling billions of dollars in interest that would be accruing every month. elizabeth warren has made arguments there is legal authority to cancel student loan debt. some attorneys disagree with speaker pelosi, as well. i believe the speaker subsequently clarified her comments. she was essentially arguing for student loan cancellation to happen, it would have to originate with congress. just the mechanism to do it. host: ultimately, if congress or the president went down this route, they would have to decide who qualifies. what are the best qualifiers, in your mind? guest: there are a bunch of different ways to look at this.

supporters of debt cancellation believe that everyone should have their debt canceled. there is a logistics argument that that would be the easiest thing to implement. one problem we see is for the student loan programs, whenever strings are attached it makes it difficult to implement and we see a lot of problems as a result. that being said, the president has floated certain criteria, the type of school you went to -- undergraduate or graduate, public or private -- your level of income has been a major criteria. if it is below a certain amount, you should be entitled to a greater amount of debt forgiveness. there is a number of different ways to think about that. host: the brookings institution making this argument, the taxpayers widespread student loan forgiveness would rank among the largest transfer programs in american history. forgiving all those federal

loans would cost $1.6 trillion. forgiving up to $50,000 per borrower would cost about $1 trillion. under each of these proposals, all 43 million borrowers would stand to benefit by different degrees. the federal government absorbing , or at least the taxpayer absorbing these costs, what argument would you make for the taxpayer? guest: one thing that gets lost in this argument of taxpayer versus student loan borrower is student loan borrowers are also taxpayers. there are around 45 million student loan borrowers in the u.s. and they are all taxpayers. there are benefits that folks argue that student loan cancellation can provide that offset the cost. greater economic flexibility, greater ability for folks who have put off major life decisions like marriage or buying a house.

without their student loan debts burdening them, they might have more ability to greatly participate in the economy, which can lift everyone up. host: adam minsky is our guest, he is an attorney dealing with student loans and a senior contributor with forms. sean in california says he has student debt, you are up first. caller: good morning. i had a question, but you actually answered a lot of my question. my comment is, i do have student loan debt. i worked while i was going to school. when i finished my masters degree, i had to get a job doing in-home health care making $10.50 per hour. i worked my way up and i still

am not working in a master's degree position. i am just hanging in there. there need to be some checks and balances with the companies and employers because sometimes you have to people out there that are playing favoritism. and they would not hire a person with a master's degree that would threaten them to lose their job. i just heard with nancy pelosi, who said the president could not do anything about student loans. this is something they ran on, helping us with student loans. now, nancy is sitting it is up to congress. lastly, sorry, i am also have saved for many years. i was married for 31 years, i

went through a divorce, i want to purchase my own home. i cannot purchase a home when the federal government is putting student loan costs on asset-debt ratio. i live in california, i live in a rural area and i wanted to let you know what some of us are going through. i worked through the pandemic, i had to pay the federal government taxes through the pandemic. host: thank you for the perspective. guest: it is a common theme that i hear. in the last 10 to 20 years, there has been a greater emphasis on folks getting advanced degrees to advance in the workforce but wages to not necessarily match expectation.

the cost of living goes up, you have to go into debt to get that advanced degree to get the promotion, but folks are not really earning the level of income that would be sufficient to pay down their debt, and as a result they feel stuck. it is a sentiment i hear a lot. host: tampa, florida, this is allen. he paid off student debt. caller: how are you? i paid my debt back. i had about a $40,000 debt after college and paid it entirely back over a period of 20 years part with interest, many more thousand than $40,000. my concern is a matter of equity. if one takes on such a debt, i took it on with the knowledge i would have to pay it back with

interest, and i did so. having completed those payments, a matter of a few years ago, and entering the housing market, struggling to find a house, and realizing i do not have the money to afford the house but i would like to have right now. but i paid my loan. where is the equity in all or nothing? either you are currently incurring a debt and it is cancel, or you recently incurred a debt and it is cancel, but for those of us who paid for 20 years, it is not canceled. i think there should be a graduated program. if you demonstrate you paid the last 10 years, maybe you would not get the full amount, maybe we would get a portion. it should not be all or nothing. you pay back $60,000, $70,000 over 20 years in the next person who gets alone gets it all paid

back or $10,000 of it knocked off, that is not fair. host: that is allen in florida. guest: that is a debate. how do we address this and how do we make it fair? certainly, some folks are saying we should have some sort of criteria attached to loan forgiveness so only the folks who are "most deserving" are the ones who benefit. people who were defrauded by their schools or people who choose to work in a low income public service career, that type of thing. i heard an idea floated as a way to make student loan cancellation fair, or for people who did pay back their loans, maybe there should be a tax credit for folks who pay down their loans the last 10 years as a way to balance things out. a lot of ideas are out there

about how to make this fair. one thing i want to point out is we do not necessarily refuse to implement new programs that benefit people because other people before the program was implement it did the right thing. for instance, folks who were able to save for retirement, that did not stop us from putting into effect the social security program designed to provide retirement income to people come up that was implemented a long time ago. these are legitimate concerns we have to take seriously. we have to look for ways to make it more fair rather than just not going forward in the first place. host: how are repayment programs usually designed for a student to pay back a loan? guest: that is another great question. for federal student loans, there are a lot of options. a lot of options that exist

today did not exist 10, 20, 30 years ago. there are traditional options, you pay it back like a mortgage or carlo. there are income driven repayment plans that allow folks to have a payment tied to their income and circumstances. sometimes, being in one of those plans is a requirement to get on track for a profession based forgiveness program. while they can provide an affordable payment, there is no requirement payments are high enough to cover interest. there are millions of borrowers paying literally as much as they can and they are fulfilling their obligations under the terms of the contract they signed, but their loan balances are increasing, not decreasing. that is a major problem we are seeing and it can effectively trap people in debt, were even though you are paying a huge portion of your income each month, your balance is going up,

not down. people might not realize that is a big facet of the current student loan system. host: you wrote on august 9 about the biden administration starting in overhaul of the forgiveness program. could you explain what is being considered? guest: the administration is starting with what they are referring to as a regulatory rewrite of the bunch of student loan programs, including income driven repayment, discharges based on disability and school misconduct. as i mentioned, these programs have become -- very complex, difficult to navigate, rapid problems with the programs. the regulatory rewrite process takes a while. it takes many rounds of hearings, public input and negotiations with stakeholders.

the idea, i think -- and i hope -- is we can make these programs more equitable, more fair, easier to navigate. host: if you were asked, how are students educated in receiving student loans and why are so many allowed to receive six-figure amounts when they will likely not be able to pay it back? guest: that is an excellent question. there is not enough counseling with student loans and personal finance in general. federal law requires counseling at the beginning, but you are 18, you are starting college, student loans are not necessarily at the forefront of what you are thinking about. then there is exit counseling at the end and that does provide a general overview of how the system works. it is not super specific. at that point, you have already incurred a debt. in conjunction with any sort of student debt forgiveness

initiative, we have to look at the front end of things. first of all, make college more affordable so folks do not need to go in as much debt, or any debt in the first place. for those who have to take on some level of debt, make sure information is clear at the outset and make sure the system they are entering into sets them up for success. host: this is nick in west chester, pennsylvania. caller: hi. i have, to briefly give my own background, i have about $17,000 in debt from my undergrad. i went to west chester university in pennsylvania, i am currently there is a grad student. i got a scholarship that covered my tuition for three of my four years, and i was an assistant, that covered my housing for a couple years but this is a public, state owned institution.

the problem is not about more counseling, it is about making school, all public colleges, free. we need to do that. we need to cancel student debt. we do not want to forgive it. i do not believe i should be forgiven from wanting to have an education. i know, pedro, you mentioned earlier that someone said the argument, someone who has it for free will not valuate as much. i am someone who had a free student lunch program in high school. i think i valued having free student lunch because i needed it we need to have this level playing field in terms of colleges. president biden has the authority to cancel student debt. i find it ridiculous that he is punting the football to pelosi and she punts it down. i was privileged to have

scholarships that have limited my debt, but it is still absurd that going to a state owned institution, i have $17,000 in debt. that is a failure of our state and federal government not fully funding colleges and universities. host: that is nick in pennsylvania. guest: one problem we have seen over the last couple of decades is a gradual pulling back in funding of our public institutions, community colleges and public state schools, as well. one of the issues i think is a perfectly reasonable concern is if we were to cancel debt, whether it is for everyone run a more targeted basis, if we do not change the factors that are causing people to incur this debt to begin with, we will be right back where we are today a few years from now. i definitely do agree that in conjunction with some effort to

address the $1.8 trillion in outstanding student loan debt that currently exists, we definitely need to do something to make sure that folks are not racking up this much debt to begin with, as well. i think there is a legitimate argument that one of the easiest ways to do that, one of the most direct ways to do that is to better fund our public institutions so there is a debt-free option for people to get their degree. host: what is the default level on student debt? guest: i do not have that information on the top of my head. the most recent statistics i saw is that 1 in 4 federal student loan borrowers prior to the moratorium were in some sort of nonpayment status, that includes forbearances, delinquencies, defaults and an income driven plan that results in a $0 payment because their income is so low.

even before the moratorium went into effect, a quarter of all student federal loan borrowers were not making payments. host: adam minsky joining us. this is april in new york. has no student debt. hello. caller: hello. good morning. host: you are on. go ahead. caller: i just wanted to make a comment. i personally feel that if you cannot afford to go to college, you should make a decision not to go. you can't always do things you want to do if you cannot afford them. i would like to have a maserati. i would like to have a love furious car. if i cannot afford that, i am going to get a toyota. -- i would like to have a luxury car. if i cannot afford that, i am going to get a toyota. maybe you can go to a smaller school. i went to school. i had debt.

i worked my way through, i paid off the debt -- took me a while. this was in the 1970's. everything is different now. i think nick made a comment before, he wants a college education. you cannot always get what you want. that is the way life is. if you want to be a lawyer or a doctor, you might have the capability of doing that. but if you cannot pay off the debt when you get out, what kind of lawyer or doctor are you going to be when you are representing people, helping people and all you are thinking about is, how much money can i make to pay off the debt? is that the type of professional people we want? host: that is april in new york. guest: to go back to the conversation we were having a few moments ago, certainly, for

folks who do want to go to school, there really should be affordable options. the problem is it is not just a matter of whether you want or do not want a college degree for the fun of it. study after study shows getting a college degree means you will have a much better chance of earning enough to be able to have a middle-class lifestyle and have a family, and to save for retirement. without that college degree, your chance of having those things is much lower than if you have a degree. adding in the debt element of it complicates the equation. when i want to school, the mentality of everyone around me, my teachers, counselors, family and my friends' families -- go to the best school you can get into.

it will be worth it. it will be a good investment. over the last couple of decades, that mentality has shifted. go to the most financially responsible route you can in terms of getting that degree. get your degree, but that does not necessarily mean going to the most expensive school. it means balancing school prestige with cost. if we reinvest in our public institutions, we can create a path for folks to get a degree while not incurring the debt we are seeing folks incur. host: a viewer has sent us what i think is attached as far as a statement about $42,000 being dispersed, $18,000 being paid, and remaining balance of $44,000. we need a refinancing program. low interest rates. guest: that type of phenomenon,

where you borrowed x amount, you paid back a chunk of that and you owe more than you started with is rampant and is becoming a major problem over the course of the last 10 to 15 years or so. it leaves folks absolutely despond it. -- despondent. i mentioned folks can be on a plan where their loan balance grows even as they make payments. interest accrues in a variety of circumstances, even while you are in school, you start out owing more than you started with. interest rates, we have been all over the place, they are generally not super low for a lot of people, even with student loans, particularly for student

-- graduate students. we need some sort of refinancing program. the only way to get a lower interest rate for federal student loans is to refinance at loan through a private lender, which comes with a bunch of different risks because you are leaving the system. i do agree, we need some sort of federal student loan refinancing program that either caps interest or provides an interest rate that is much lower and fixed at a lower amount or both. host: diana in pennsylvania with no student debt. hello. caller: yes, thank you for taking my call. i would like to ask, i have a grandson that is 24 years old and he is trying to go to college on his own. he is completely independent from his parents. he works, he has a good job.

yet, when it comes to applying for a student loan, his parent'' income is counted toward trying to get a loan or a grant. i understand that is because the federal government allows students to be covered until they are 25 on the insurance part can you tell me if there are any programs he can go to to avoid this? guest: i obviously cannot provide legal advice, but he definitely might want to sit down with the financial aid office. there could be ways to proceed. i do not do a lot of work with federal student aid applications at the outset, but i believe there might be a way of declaring yourself an independent student if you can prove he is in fact financially independent of his parents. there might be ways around that.

the first step would be to consult with the financial aid office at the school he attends. host: a viewer asks a question about student loans, what happens if you file for personal bankruptcy? guest: one of the many problems with the student loan system is bankruptcy traits student loan debt differently than any other form of consumer debt. most of the time, if you go into bankruptcy, you list out your debts, comply with the bankruptcy and at that end, all debts are discharged. student loans come up that is not the case. student loans can only be discharged through bankruptcy if you can prove undue hardship, which is a difficult standard to meet. you have to effectively sue your student loan vendors in the proceeding. we call that it adversary

proceeding, which can be a very taxing, expensive and invasive process for folks that is often not successful. it is very difficult. there was a bill unveiled in the senate a few weeks ago that would change the law on this. it would allow federal student loans to be discharged in bankruptcy without proving undue hardship provided the borrower has been in repayment for 10 years or more. this is designed to reduce the chances of fraud. someone graduates from school and then immediately goes to bankruptcy court and would return federal student loans to a similar place they were at before the undue hardship standard was implemented. host: let's hear from bobby in kansas city, missouri. caller: these people are calling in and saying i paid my loans, it is not fair.

i think what they are saying is let's do nothing to help people out. there are people in debt from not having sufficient health care or not having any health care. i think that has ballooned $240 million in collections and rising from the pandemic. i think that is a selfish attitude. when you retire and you have student loans, that money can be taken out of your check. i don't think people realize that. you do not get a lot of money when you retire to begin with. by the way, when i started college, i was a young guy and i remember the lady in the financial aid office at do not worry about it, just get these loans, you can take forever to pay them. she never told me they are not dischargeable through bankruptcy. there is a lack of information when you take these out. maybe now there is, but there was not 20 or 30 years ago when

i want to college. i think student loans should be made as dischargeable as any other personal bankruptcy because it puts an undue burden on everyone. that is my comment. thank you. host: that is bobby in missouri. guest: thanks, bobby. i think we need to see reforms in multiple ways. one thing bobby brought up is worth emphasizing, folks who are on a fixed income in retirement and on social security who have not defaulted, they can get a chunk of their check garnished by the government. we think of student debt as a young person's problem, 23 years old. what we are stirring to realize is student loan debt are impacting folks in their 60's, 70's, 80's and 90's because it has been impossible for many

people to pay their loans over time. others took out loans as parents for their children and then got into trouble after that. this problem with student debt is not just a young person's problem, it affects all age groups, all demographics. i certainly think doing nothing is not a good solution. host: one call from kevin in bethesda, maryland. caller: good morning. i know that maryland had a program, they might still have it, where you take the value of the home you are interested in buying an 15% of that will go toward repaying outstanding student loans. i am wondering what your guest would think of that. guest: i am not specifically familiar with maryland's program but i have heard of that type of program before. there are a lot of new, creative

solutions we are seeing. there are home programs that allow student loans to be wrapped up in that. there are employers offering incentive programs that offer a payback is part of the benefit package. i am hopeful we will see more creative programs like this to help folks pay down debt. at the end of the day, without some government intervention, these programs will nibble around the edges but not solve the problem. host: he is a senior contributor at forbes. he works as a student loan attorney. adam minsky joining us for this conversation. thank you for your time. guest: thank you for having me. host: our next two guests will look at spending plans by senate democrats. our first guest, america's voice executive director frank sharry joining us. another perspective in the

program coming from mark krikorian. those conversations coming up on "washington journal." ♪ >> weekends on c-span2 bring you the best in american history and nonfiction books. saturday on american history tv, at 2:00 p.m. eastern on the presidency, a discussion on the results of c-span's survey of presidential leadership with historians. the survey ranks presidents from best to worst in 10 different categories. at 8:00 p.m. eastern on lectures in history, turn-of-the-century women journalists face societal pressures to balance traditional femininity and having a career in journalism.

a professor talks about the challenges these pioneering women overcame. book tv features leading authors discussing their latest nonfiction books. sunday and in :00 a.m. eastern, hear from freedomfest in south dakota, including an author and attorney on her short stories, opinion pieces and speeches in her book. at 9:45, a national review columnist with his book. he argues liberals used the covid-19 pandemic to change the election system and make it more vulnerable to fraud. at 3:05, an economic historian with her book, which looks at a new kind of economics that focuses on science and a better understanding of human action. at 4:35 p.m., an economist talks

about the future dominance of artificial intelligence in his book. at 10:00 p.m. eastern, conservative podcaster discusses his new book in which he argues the progressive left is pushing an authoritarian agenda in america. he is interviewed by a talk show host. watch american history and book tv every weekend on c-span2, and find a full schedule on your program guide or visit c-span.org. >> "washington journal" continues. host: our first guest this morning on the topic of immigration is frank sharry, the founder and executive director of america's voice. thank you for coming on the program. guest: thank you for having me. host: can you remind people about your organization and who funds you? guest: we are a pro-immigrant

organization, we are fighting for immigration reform in congress. we are funded primarily by foundations and individual donors, we take no government money. i have been doing this for a few years. host: when it comes to the recent proposals in the reconciliation bill when it comes to immigration, one would offer -- make investments in border security measures. what does it mean impracticality as far as the perspective of seeing changes on this front? guest: specifically, what we are expecting the senate and house to detail as they flush out these budget resolutions is a path to citizenship for approximately 8 million undocumented immigrants -- dreamers, kids who came over at the young age who are now in their 20's and 30's, people who have been here for 20 years,

homeowners, business owners, families settled in america, farmworkers who worked in dangerous and difficult conditions to feed us and are considered essential workers and deportable by our federal government. we think that is morally wrong. health care workers, first responders, food packers, meat packers, construction, etc., people who have been deemed essential but are not protected under the laws of the united states. how do we put them on a pathway to citizenship so we can recognize them as the americans they already are. there are details to follow, fights to follow. we are on a pathway as part of a human infrastructure package that the senate kicked off with the resolution that passed this week through a reconciliation

process. it only requires 50 senate votes rather than 60, under the filibuster. we can see a pathway to a breakthrough that is 35 years in the making. as someone who has worked on a bipartisan basis for many, many years, what is attractive to us with this strategy is we can get it done without republicans. in the past, what has happened is the anti-immigrant majority in the republican party has thwarted the pro-immigrant minority in such a way that we have blocked immigration reform for decades. now, we have a path to victory the does not require republican votes or republican obstruction and we are very excited about the prospects of a breakthrough. host: would you say all senate democrats are on board? guest: they are indeed. when it was first announced that immigration reform was part of the senate budget resolution,

reporters ran to interview joe manchin in the hallways. do you know there is immigration reform and it? he said, yes, i am fine with that. if we passed immigration reform in 2013, we would not have the problems we are having now. from joe manchin to aoc, the democratic party is united. host: our guest is with us until 9:20. taking a look at what is being proposed in this reconciliation bill when it comes to immigration. you can ask questions at (202) 748-8001 for republicans, (202) 748-8000 for democrats. independents, (202) 748-8002. republicans taking a critical look at this perspective. senator lindsey graham -- i am

going to play this for you and then get your response. [video clip] >> let's be clear -- a pathway to citizenship as part of our immigration package in the budget reconciliation bill would have a substantial and direct impact on our budget. a pathway to citizenship for dreamers -- host: that was another perspective. apologies print i apologize for that. as far as republicans, can they do anything to slow it down or stop it? guest: in fairness to your viewers, what lindsey graham said -- he used to work with john mccain. he was part of the gang of 8 to try to pass it on a nonpartisan basis. republicans will try to make this painful for democrats but they cannot stop it. they will try to say immigrants are criminals, spread disease,

are invading us, all of the right wing tropes that have been trotted out for centuries. they are speaking to a minority. the majority of americans have discussed this and come to a consensus. every public opinion research poll of any quality finds the same thing -- about 3/4 of the american people support putting people here who are working hard and taking care of their families. put them in a process where they have to pass background checks to become a permanent resident of this country and eventually a citizen if they apply. about 25% of the country is against it. the republicans are speaking to that trumpian base, saying immigrants are a threat. maybe it is good for fundraising, maybe it is good for fending off primary opponents, but it is not good for the country.

these people are working hard, they are contributing, many are essential workers. of the approximately 8 million undocumented workers in america, 5 million are deemed essential workers. they have sacrificed so much and given so much to keep a safe during the pandemic, which is ongoing. as was written in the "wall street journal," if they have been doing this heroic work, we should stamp "citizen" on their papers because they are already american heroes. we are not too worried about republican opposition because they cannot stop it, but we have strong bipartisan support from the american people and that is the wind in our sails. host: we will show you some of what senator graham had to say about the topic. [video clip] >> on the immigration side,

senator sanders said that this bill creates millions of new green cards, of people here illegally. here is the question -- if we told the world that budget reconciliation would increase millions of green cards for people here legally come up with that entice more people to come here illegally? here is what i think -- that is the dumbest idea i can think of. in the middle of an invasion of this country by illegal immigrants, the democratic party , through budget reconciliation, is going to authorize millions of new green cards for people here illegally. senator sanders -- here is what is happening as i speak. the statements are being

translated into spanish and every other language, and human traffickers all over the world let the word get out, hey, the senate is about to increase the number of green cards available for illegal immigrants. why don't you go and get in line? nobody has asked the border patrol, how do you think this would affect the illegal immigration problem? have you spent 15 minutes talking to anyone at the border about what this policy change would do to a broken immigration system? i guarantee you have not. if you talk about common sense at the border, they would say the last thing you need to do right now is incentivize more illegal immigration by allocating green cards to people here already illegally. what is happened in the last six months? 262% increase compared to last year. does any democrat had any idea what is happening? had any of you come to the floor

to explain to the american people what the hell is going on the border? you don't have a clue. you do not care. host: go ahead and give your perspective. guest: he spoke so differently a few years ago. he has really changed. the word "invasion" is disturbing. it was used by donald trump and picked up by the shooter who killed 23 people at a walmart in el paso. it was cited by the tree of assassin who killed 11 jews in pittsburgh. it is difficult to see the kind of language trotted out by someone who used to have common sense on this issue. -- a popular proposal to put immigrants on a pathway to

citizenship, the argument they use is the border. they say, those dreamers who grew up pledging allegiance to america who are doctors, lawyers, construction workers, home health care aides, let's put them on a path to deportation. they don't want to say that. they say the border, the border, the border. i have for that argument every year for 30 years. to me, it is an excuse. yes, we have challenges at the border. yes, it is a situation that goes up and down over the years. i think this administration has a strategy but if they have time and encourage to put it in place will achieve durable solutions. the idea that there are challenges at the border so we cannot take people who have lived in america for 15, 20 years, who have been taxpayers,

hard workers, participated as neighbors, the idea that they are somehow -- if we do something for them, they will translate the transcript in the highlands of guatemala or honduras is ridiculous. people are fleeing central america because of the conditions and central america. they will not be enticed by a budget resolution being debated in the senate at 3:00 in the morning. host: let's hear from ron in pennsylvania. republican line. you are on with frank sharry. go ahead. caller: good morning. i have been listening to this guy talk. i don't know what he is smoking. you should go down to mcallen and see what is going on. you are telling us it is not a problem.

host: are you there? caller: i am here. host: you are breaking up. go ahead. caller: it is crazy. all of these people are not talking about the ones who have been sitting there working and paying taxes, it is the invaders, the ones coming across the borders. they are not vetted. the ones who sneak across the border, how do we know what they have? they are not violent? go out to the hamptons where i am from? see how many ms 13s are out there. host: that is ron in pennsylvania. guest: i think ron speaks for the 25% who see immigrants as health threats and gangbangers

and so forth. we are not talking about the people who are settled here -- that is who we are talking about. people in the united states, deeply rooted, working hard, building families, creating a line for them to get into so they can have background checks, health checks, etc., and get on a path to permanent residency. that is supported by three quarters of the american people. i said what is happening at the border is a problem. what are the causes and solutions to that problem? many people think what is happening at the border is illegal immigration. it is a refugee crisis. it is asylum-seekers that are fleeing three particular countries in south america. it has to be managed in a humane fashion at the border.

three quarters of the people coming across the border, border encounters you hear about in the statistics, the numbers are up to historic levels. three quarters are being returned or deported. that means we have an immigration enforcement apparatus that works. 15% of the people being admitted -- others are being detained, by the way -- 15% of those admitted are following the laws. they come to the border and say i fear persecution and violence in my home country, i want to apply for asylum. under our laws, we have to uphold our laws to give people a fair chance at what is for many a life or death decision. this administration has to reconstitute and reimagine. we have to have fair procedures that are efficient and make sure

the entire system has integrity so that those who qualify are permanently admitted and those who do not are removed. we need a much better system. our system is broken. we need to go about working. i think the centerpiece of it is to say, if we had millions of people in this country who have been working hard and contributing and risking their lives for our safety during the pandemic, does it a nation of immigrants have some obligation to also show some gratitude to people who have contributed so much? gdp growth, income growth, job growth that will result, this is going to be an economic stimulus for the communities where immigrants are. host: let me put in south carolina, this is eddie on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. speaking with frank, where'd you

get the 75% support? he is going by some fake poll. he said they are returning most of these immigrants. immigrants, why is he not saying they are being shipped to different states all over the country? ok? the third thing, i hope they do pass this. democrats will be in the minority the next 40 or spent the last thing i want to say, trump won the popular vote. it has been proven. guest: i will put him down as skeptical on the proposal. it is obvious, pedro, you do this every day -- you can tell which media's is -- ecosystem people operate in and i know in foxlandia, they are being fed information.

you, can -- you can look on our website, polls, they support this -- this is what the average american says -- you have people that have been here for years, working hard, paying taxes, building families, contributing mightily, and during the pandemic many have been essential workers that have put their lives on the line. it is high time this country recognizes we are not going to deport them and we shouldn't. it would be morally wrong and impossible. let's make sure these families have the chance to become the full americans they already are. i am comfortable having a debate about public opinion on these proposals. it is why democrats are leaning in, why republicans are shouting at their base, but they know that trump and instead ran on nativism did not do well the last two cycles. trump nationalized midterm races around caravans, criminals,

immigrants as a threat, and it inspired hader's to take up arms and kill innocents, but it did not inspire voters to vote for them. in the midterms and 2018, democrats won by an historic margin and midterm elections, the most ever. many republican posters say trump made a huge mistake in emphasizing immigration rather than the economy. i will just say that being hard on immigrants as a wedge issue may have worked in the early-2000's, made -- mid to thousands -- nativism as a wedge issue has lost its edge. host: pew research put out this month in august the u.s. border patrol reported 182,000 encounters with migrants. how would you describe what is going on at the southern border as far as those increases? guest: there are increases that

started in the spring of 2020, that gets dropped out of coverage. as the pandemic hit, human mobility was effectively stopped worldwide. as people started to move again, more more people decided it was time to get out. this was under trump. it accelerated under biden. i know the beltway coverage and beltway commentary tends to say it is biden's fault, he is not tough enough, the fact is i have been working on central america's forced migration since 1980 -- this has been going on for 80 years. it is not because of border policy that has an impact, but a relatively smaller impact. it is because of what is happening in central america -- widespread violence, corruption -- the violence against women and kids is unbearable. the climate-change related disasters, recent hurricanes

that have hit those four nations now in central america brutally. so, if you are sitting there's -- living in under us, el salvador, guatemala, you have a 12-year-old girl, 13-year-old son, the gang is trying to recruit him, make her a girlfriend, and you have relatives in maryland who say come here, it is safe, you can have an opportunity to apply for asylum, and if you qualify you will be able to live in america rather than the dangerous conditions where there is no hope and no future, well, you know what? people are coming and applying at our border. what we need to do is make sure there are ways to apply in the region for refugee status, visas, family unification -- minors fleeing gang situations, pursued by gangs, being able to apply. we can have a more orderly system of migration. it is going to take time.

we need to address the root causes. over time, the pressures that have led to these boom and bust cycles of arrivals at the border can be addressed. it is not going to be easy. we are dealing with people fleeing with their lives. you don't take people fleeing from a house on fire and send them back into their house. host: one of the holdovers from the trump administration was title 42 may public health order that allowed border agents to expel migrants arriving at the border. it is maintained by the biden administration. what do you think of that been maintained? guest: i think it is a mistake paid we have been critical of it, as have our friends. i understand administration is feeling pressure and if they see something seen as undoing a control, they will be hit by the right wing ecosystem that is designed to make moderates and the democratic party feel uncomfortable. them -- the main thing that will happen, title 42 has to be

unwound. there is a way to do it, public health officials say. people that test positive are put in isolation. one family went to a whataburger in mcallen, and it was like let's blame immigrants for the spread of covid, when obviously what is happening is the delta variant is spreading in states where they have not emphasized mask-wearing and vaccines. quite frankly, there is a way to unwind it responsibly as part of building back better and immigration system that has integrity -- and immigration system that is fair, efficient. look, it is not going to be easy. this administration came in, and all of the set went up even further. again, i know the beltway press is like -- it must be biden's messaging pad i must -- find it ridiculous -- messaging. i find that really host: nbc

reported families leaving the border testing pod -- 18% testing positive for covid. guest: because they are testing everyone -- they are not ringing and spreading the virus, they are been identified quickly and handled responsibly. the border is a tough issue, but if we think migration starts at the border and assault at the border, we are missing the big -- is solved at the border, we are missing the big picture. we need a regional strategy. of course the united states is a sovereign nation and has a right and a duty to control who comes in, but if we go are -- we are going to uphold our laws, we have to throw -- work illegal immigration -- thwart an immigration and process those applying for refugee status. both are under our law. more than two thirds are being removed or deported. another 12 percent are being detained. something like 15% are being admitted as asylum seekers, sent

to family in this country in order to follow through on their process. yes, the court system is backlogged. yes, we need to have a more efficient system, but can we do fair and efficiency leading to a system with integrity on asylum? of course we can. do we have that now? no. trump and stephen miller decimated the asylum system. they ruined it. host: jacksonville, florida. democrats line. caller: good morning. host: you are on. go ahead. caller: yes. hi, mr. sharry. the oak -- recurring theme i keep hearing every day, supposedly there are busloads and planes full of infected people being spread throughout the nation, and there isn't -- i haven't heard what is the answer to that -- is this

misinformation? i hear it. the previous caller talked about it. buses full of infected people and planes full of people being spread, coming from the border, being spread throughout the nation. can you talk about that, please? guest: sure. happy to. it is this information -- misinformation. people coming to the border, if they are not removed or deported, they are either detained, where they are vaccinated because of the conditions in the detention center -- without vaccination, you will have awful spread. they don't do it quick enough, fully enough, but that is the policy. the people that are admitted to pursue asylum claims -- these are generally unaccompanied minors, kids fleeing horrific gang violence in central america, or families who are fleeing because of mothers and

fathers who don't want their kids to be subjected to those conditions, or themselves are subjected to violence. they are coming here and applying. they get tested. the government does not have the system to set it up. it is private charities. sister norma, a true saint who works on the border, she runs a shelter. the border patrol brings people they picked up who are applying for asylum to her shelter. she makes sure they are tested. if they test positive, they are put in hotel rooms they rent out and isolated. then, once they are passed the protocol, they can move two families were those that have been tested negative are moved to families throughout america. there is no big plane loads, busloads of people who are infected coming. that is misinformation from the right wing to demonize others to rally people upset about their conditions. this is what trumpeted.

this is what xenophobic populists are doing around the world. i find it unfortunate. i wish the press corps would do a better job. they have been hyping the notion it is out of control. have you read that more than two thirds of the people that are encountered at the border are turned around and sent home? i suspect you haven't. it is not broken through. those are the facts and check them out. host: this is a viewer from twitter asking would you support a cap ransom guestworker program -- comprehensive guestworker program with an id card. people can be sent with the labor is needed. guest: i don't like to call it a guest worker program that i like to call it a temporary worker program -- program. i like to call it a temporary worker program, and there have to be protection so you are not bringing in workers to replace american workers and you are not bringing them into exploit them. this administration has done it

-- they have set aside 6000 temporary work visas under a program called h2b, and it will allow people to fly to the united states rather than come to the border and apply for refugee status. they will commune with labor rights and work. a lot of controversy about working conditions and wages. many of my friends in the labor movement have strong views on this, and i generally support those views because you don't want workers to come into this country to undercut americans. you need a level playing field in the labor market, and when immigrants are used to undercut americans were to be exploited, it works for no one, except unscrew bliss employers gaining an unfair advantage over honest employers. yes, to a temporary worker program, but we have to make sure labor protections are meaningful. host: one of the other

performers coming from proposals made from the public and senators -- proposals coming from republican senators, narrowing it to those enrolled in dhaka. what you think of that approach? guest: there are 650,000 people that have daca. a judge in texas just decided d aca in his view is not lawful, and 100,000 people in line to get daca were cut off immediately -- their hopes and dreams -- as they were hoping to go to work, go to college, fulfill career aspirations. the dream act, which includes d aca plus other young people, should cover roughly 3 million people. the idea that self 600,000 people and not 3 million dreamers, and then let's forget

people that have worked here as nurses, homeowners, 415, 20 years, --for 15, 20 years, -- no, from our point of view and where the american people are, they are trying to say we are not against the smallest population, and they are saying let's add every cool measure that trump did in order to pass it. it is a way to get to no, not a way to get to yes. senator john cornyn came to town and said i'm a texas republican and conservative from a border state who wants to help george bush pass immigration reform. quite frankly, he has gotten to know -- in 2005, 2006, 2007, 2010, 2013, when he 14, 2018, so when he says i really want to get to yes, that track record

makes us suspicious. host: troy. pittsburgh, pennsylvania. republican line. caller: good morning. what i was going to say is we are the third populated country in the world -- china first, india second, then us. the majority of people coming in, illegals, are students who overstate student visas -- overstayed student visas. they are not coming across the border. next is why don't they say in mexico, the ones that are coming up, because mexico has a trillion dollar economy now, and they can find work there, where is this a political thing where the media and certain ngo's stay down there and bring them appear to rile people up, and when they do come here and get the lower wages, people say they are

sending the money back down there, it is not staying in our economy, it is going back to wherever they came from. well that thing of they are helping our economy -- they are helping their economy because they're going to send it to their family. host: that is troy in pittsburgh, pennsylvania. guest: david to unpack. approximately 35% -- a bit to unpack their. approximate 35% of people in the country without status did come on illegal -- on legal visas and did over stay. some are total -- students, but mostly it is tourists and business folks, but some students as well. the majority of people that have come without authorization to america -- in the past it used to be from mexico. now it is people coming to seek entry our primary coming from central america. it has really shifted -- this is

an important lesson -- mexico has improved its economy, particularly in the north, less so in the south. there has been a thriving middle-class, hit hard by the pandemic -- don't get me wrong -- but in fact, the incentives to leave mexico have come way down because they addressed the root cause, a lack of economic opportunity in mexico. so, people want to stay home with family, friends, community, if there is employment opportunities, if there is a future. if not, america just to the north seems very inviting. there has been a huge shift. meskill has made enormous -- mexico has made enormous progress. young single men are part of the new encounters because the pandemic has had the economy so hard. the u.s. is helping with vaccines. we are hoping the mexican economy will continue to grow in a robust fashion going forward and those opportunities will be extended to southern mexico, but

it is a success story for the most part. now, in terms of people who come here and are working and contribute in, look for my people send about 10% of their income back to support family. it is a far more effective aid program then foreign aid. it is one of the most incredible ways to build wealth in developing countries -- money sent from relatives in the western world. that is a good thing, but they are spending most of their money and making their money here in america, so they are buying food, renting apartments, buying homes, purchasing clothes, sending kids to school, supporting them, doing that -- so, yes, what we want is a legal system, in orderly system, a fair system. we -- and orderly system, it fair system. we have a right to have a system that is designed for americans for our national interests and our values. that is why three quarters of

the american people say these people have been here working hard, building families, and they don't have papers, so they are scared every time they leave the home because they might get picked up by ice, or they are scared they will be separated after building a life where they live in families where the dock might be -- dad might be undocumented, kids have citizenship -- you will rip those families apart until u.s. citizen kids they cannot have mom and dad because we will enforce a law no ifs, ands, or buts? let's focus our system on people and paperwork. host: carlos, pompano beach, florida. you are on. caller: by the way. i am not an undocumented system -- citizen p ima citizen -- citizen. i am a citizen.

this is the reason you want people to come from the country -- you want votes for yourself, the democrats. that is what you want. what about the kids suffering in the regime of fidel cresta -- castro? why not them? you want the votes for you. it is not because of compassion, anything else. that is what you want. guest: carlos, when did you come to america? caller: i came in 1979. guest: where you part of the freedom flight? caller: i am not against immigration. i am pro immigration because i am an immigrant myself, but the real reason is because of that -- that is why you guys are blocking the cubans. i am not a cuban. guest: where are you from, may i ask? caller: i see injustice and i'm

calling you because of that paradigm not a cuban, by the way -- that. i am not a cuban, by the way. host: that is carlos. mr.sharry, go ahead. guest: it may be of interest to you i spent much of my professional life working on behalf of cubans fleeing from castro. 125,000 cubans escaped after people took over the peruvian embassy in the ledge -- last huge spasm of opposition to the regime. castro the relatives come to take boats and i worked on that for many years and i am proud of that. we are not for some immigrants and against other immigrants. we are for a fair, orderly, functional immigration system that treats people fairly. do i think cubans fleeing the

regime have a strong case for refugee stratus -- status? yes. do i understand many cuban-americans vote republicans -- vote republican? yes. and my still in favor of cuban-americans -- cubans fleeing? yes. host: frank sharry, founder of america's voice. their website is america's voice -- america'svoice.org. host: we offer another perspective on immigration. we are joined by mark krikorian, director of immigration studies. explain to our viewers about your organization, the point of view to, and how you are funded and backed? guest: we are a think tank on the immigration system. our motto is fewer immigrants, but a warmer welcome p we try to

make the case for better enforcement -- welcome. we try to make the case for better enforcement, lower levels of legal immigration, and also a better job of welcoming and incorporating those immigrants we do legally led into the united states, and we do all of the usual thank tank -- think tank things. half the people on c-span i assume are from think tanks -- white papers, panel discussions, public education papers, speaking to you all. that is what we do. host: and how are you financially supported? guest: we are a 501(c)(3), a technical term, in other words a nonprofit, and we get support from organizations -- we do more wholesale funding -- fundraising, larger donors rather than retail donors where you rely on many individual donors. we have individual, small

donors, and we appreciate every contribution, but we are mostly supported by larger foundations. host: the reason we bring you want, in light of the reconciliation package, two topline efforts, one would be lawful permanent status for qualified immigrants, the other would be tightening or more border security measures. to the first, what you think about this proposal from senate democrats and the white house? guest: it is a complete mistake. again, it is not a mistake because legalizing illegal immigrants under any circumstances ever is always bad. i am kind of a squish on that issue under certain circumstances. the problem is, the last big amnesty, the legalization program we did, now 35 years ago back in 1986, was a betrayal, and the failure of that program where illegal immigrants got their status, with the promises

of enforcement so we would not have more illegal immigration -- they were lies. the promises were false. the betrayal forces the debate even today on immigration. if we are going to talk about legalizing illegal immigrants here, we cannot really legitimately have that discussion until we fix the problems that created such a large, illegal immigrant population in the first place. if we do that, then i'm happy to talk about it. there are all kinds of different moving parts on how you do that, but what the democrats in congress are proposing is pretty much a straight out legalization program -- amnesty for almost all illegal immigrants. the numbers are kind of iffy at this point because it is not really written down fully in black-and-white, but it could be as many as 10 million illegal immigrants -- a large majority of the illegal population, and

the initial offer from the white house in the legislation that they had introduced a number of months ago was no wind enforcement of any kind in response -- no enforcement of any kind in response. no balance, no nothing. the idea now is if the amnesty is pared with a little bit of extra money at the border, some more border patrol agents, maybe some more wall construction, that somehow that is a comparable, balanced deal is absurd. the problem with the border is not really we don't have enough border patrol agents, although more resources would help, the problem is one of policy where this administration is de facto welcoming, inviting illegal immigration. until that changes, we really cannot have a debate about legalizing illegal immigrants. host: the scope, according to

"the hill," the bill would not offer dreamers, as they are known as, but also migrant farmers deemed essential to the pandemic, to be held in temporary protective status. is that scope to wide? would you accept a narrower scope as far as those groups are concerned? guest: no, but the one thing there is a legitimate case for is a very narrow, targeted -- it is not even a legalization program. sort of, and upgrade for the people that have daca work permits now. the daca program that president obama decreed unlawfully, it has been declared illegal by a court, these people have been working illegally, have already gotten amnesty -- basically upgrading those people to amnesty premium if you will, from amnesty light, there is an

argument to be made for that. the problem is the pro legalization folks have used that targeted number of people -- maybe 600,000, 700,000 people as an argument for a 10 million person amnesty, and they reject the idea that there should be any balance to such a proposal. without going into a lot of waukesha detail -- waukesha detail, this is c-span, a little is ok -- if you will amnesty those that have daca, you have to, for instance, at the very least pay for, account for those extra green cards beyond the limits that are in law by reducing future green cards, at least by a comparable amount, and you have to make sure that the parents who were adults when they brought these daca people, who now are adults -- they are

in the 30's, some close to 40, but they came before the age of 18. the parents knew what they were doing. they knew what they were doing when they brought these kids here. these parents cannot be allowed to petition for their illegal immigrant parents who knew what they were doing. without going into more detail, the point is a very narrow and targeted part of legalization does have -- you can make a case for that, but only if it is balanced and offset with other measures and isn't, sort of, the starting point, as it were, the camels nose under the tent, for a mass amnesty for virtually the entire illegal population. host: mark krikorian is joining us.

we have invited a line for those undocumented immigrants that want to call in at 202-748-8003. it was on the senate floor that senator cornyn made the case and i want to play some of that in get your response. * let's be -- [video clip] let's be clear -- a pathway to citizenship would have a substantial and direct impact on our budget. a pathway to citizenship for dreamers and immigrants with temporary status would have a budgetary cost of approximately $42.4 billion over 10 years. this is a critical component of our economic recovery. this is -- there is no world in which this budgetary impact is merely accidental $42.4 billion. creating a pathway to citizenship is not just a matter of cost. there are also benefits.

it would boost our nation's gdp by $1.5 trillion over the next 10 years. it would create 400,000 new jobs, and increase every american's annual wage by an estimated $600,000 -- -- 600 dollars. when, win, when. publicans have used this process to open up a refuge and alaska for john, and enact -- and drilling, and enact a tax cut for the wealthiest americans and corporations. in 2005, senate republicans used with conciliation to dramatically increase the number of lawful, permanent residence by an estimated 3.2 million over 10 years. now they are saying it does not belong in reconciliation. in 2005, they put it in. this is the exact same immigration status we are proposing to give dreamers, from

workers. i have tried for many years to pass a path to citizenship. republicans have obstructed bipartisan immigration reform time and time again, including filibustering the dream act at least five times. host: that is senator durbin's take on it. what do you think of that argument? guest: as the president might say, it is malarkey. he made two arguments, one about the economics and one about the senate rules. as far as the economic part, there is no question that if any legal -- an immigrant is legalized, and illegal immigrant gets amnesty, his income, generally does go up and tax payments go up a little bit. there is no question about that. the problem, of course is the use of public services balloons even more, and that does not even count the longer-term effect of social security.

these estimates that you hear from congressman are very, artificial, constructed things that are based on 1019 your costs and benefits rather than -- 10-year costs and benefits. we published this on the medicare costs of legalizing illegal immigrants -- they are enormous. hundreds of millions of dollars. maybe there is a good reason to do it -- there is -- that is not a reason against it, but the idea that legalizing immigrants would be an economic boom is ludicrous. it is the kind of thing you would expect from lobbyists, and you would expect from politicians trying to move an issue forward, but it can't be true because illegal immigrants are disproportionately less skilled and less educated. it is not a moral critique, it is just the way it is.

when they get legal status, they do earn more money. therefore because they earn more money, they pay more in taxes, but once they are legalized, they have access to a wide variety of public benefits, and eventually when they retire, of course, social security, and medicare. that is not a bad thing. in other words, if you're going to have people that are legally in your country, citizens of your country, they are obviously going to be part of all of the social welfare and safety net programs that everybody else has access to, but the idea that importing poor people is somehow an economic boon for america is ridiculous. host: the first call is from mcgill, canton, michigan. we set aside a line for undocumented immigrant. you are on the call with our guest, mark krikorian. caller: my mother is a mexican and she works in the hospitality

industry, cleaning rooms and so forth, and my understanding is that most illegal immigrants currently are from mexico are of mexican heritage -- or of mexican heritage. when it comes to immigration, we need to think of what is best for the country, and if we keep that in mind, i think we need to keep the mexican immigrants here because they are hard workers, honest. i can see my mother working for very low wages -- a very honest woman, and, you know, it's people like lindsey graham had her -- their way, she would have to go back to mexico. let's look at it another way. what about these traders -- the people that attacked the u.s. government on january 6? do they have a right to be americans just because they were born here? how about sending them back to where their ancestors came from? host: that is mcgill calling.

guest: the question is not whether they are good people or bad people. some are good, some are bad -- most are like the rest of us, a little bit of each. the question is what is the effect of our immigration policy on the broader national interest ? the national academies of sciences looked at just the economic, sort of, dollar and cents, side of immigration, not just illegal immigration, but general immigration policy, and their conclusion was there is in fact a small, net benefit, when you add up the cost just in the labor market. the cost and benefits -- there is a relatively small net benefit to the country as a whole. the problem is that benefit, number one is relatively small. number two, it comes from lowering the wages of people

competing with immigrants -- in order, lowering the wages of less skilled people, and then, sort of, transferring that benefit to the rest of society, and that is a moral question. is it right to have a reverse robin hood immigration program, which we have now, and the third mitigating factor -- the third reason that small, net benefit from immigration is not what you think it is is that it is entirely wiped out by the extra social service costs that low skilled immigrants impose on tax payers in general, not because they are not working, not because they are ripping anybody off, but if you have a less skilled, less educated person in modern, postindustrial, knowledge-based economy, the odds are pretty good that he is never going to be able to earn enough money to feed his own children -- not because he doesn't work hard, but because

he is a mismatch. if you will, a 19th-century worker in 21st century economy. because he is never going to pay a lot in taxes and will inevitably use services to feed his children and take care of his family, is a net economic loser. the issue is not our immigrants legal or -- are immigrants legal or illegal, good or bad -- the fact is that is a mismatch for a modern society to be taking large numbers, especially poor people, from overseas. host: peter from new york. republican line. caller: you stole a little bit of my thunder. the elephant in the room here is why are the democrats doing this, and even some republicans, allowing all of this flooding into the united states. i read a very good article in the "wall street journal," in

july talking about millennials getting married later and not having children, and that in 2020, the population of people dying exceeded the number of people being bored cut -- born, so this is a problem, but it is a twofold situation, because the business community wants cheap labor, and they are flooding the zone. why are the democrats doing this? they see them as potential future democratic voters, because when you bring in uneducated, low-skilled people, they have a tendency to be more dependent on government, and that expands the power of the democratic power. and also, the business community wants to flood the zone with low-skilled labor so that working-class people, blue-collar people cannot compete with them, and that would keep their wages suppressed. host: that is peter in new york. guest: the way that is often

expressed -- the shorthand way is that the corporate right wants cheap workers and the left wants cheap votes. there is some truth to both of those things, no question about it, but i think there is more to it -- a deeper, i wouldn't say ideological, but, kind of, a worldview issue here, and that is that much of our elite, political, business, education, media elite, has become post-national, post-american. and what that means is they don't really see it as legitimate for us to keep anyone out from a that wants to move here. they are not open borders, strictly speaking, because they still believe in borders in the sense of delineating who fills the potholes on which side of the line, like a county line or a state border, but, increasingly, our leadership class -- i don't use elites, but

in a technical sense, or business leaders, education, etc., don't really think there is any moral content to a border , that they have any greater responsibility to their fellow american citizens than they do to everyone else in the world. one way to put that is much of the leadership class sees itself as citizens of the world, and how that translates into immigration policy is that if someone from central america, or increasingly from uzbekistan or whoever, comes to our border, we, kind of, have to let them in. we don't have the right. the american people, even through democratic processes, don't have the right to say no. i think that is really what underlies this, and the issues of boats and cheap labor are true and part of that, but they, kind of, rest on top of that foundation that views this issue through that prism.

host: so, we have greg from dallas texting us, asking us to ask you on what the limit is on how many immigrants should be admitted, and how many should be? guest: that is a good question. i, years ago, did a publication where i ask people from all across the spectrum, including frank sharry, who was your previous guest, to give me a compact, maybe 1500 words on what they want -- how many immigrants they want, how should we pick them. frank himself did not respond, as well as most people on his side of the debate, and the reason for that is because the immigration expansionists don't have a limit. their answer, their immigration policy, if you boil it down to one word, "more." that having been said, i don't think picking a magic number is the way to approach this. the way i approach this is inspired by the way the barbara

jordan's immigration commission back in the 1990's -- barbara jordan was a civil rights icon who was the head of an immigration commission and released a report, and one of the basic insights was that instead of picking a number from the top, and, sort of, taking immigration policy fit in -- shoehorn it into that, was to go up from the bottom. in other was, decide what categories of people should be let in, and then letting them all in every year, so what that means is how do you define who gets in. just to give you the 32nd response from my perspective -- 30-second response from my perspective, it does not mean zero immigration, but zero based budgeting for immigration. you started zero, and then what are the categories of people that i think should be let in any way. the first ones would be husbands, wives, and little kids

of american citizens. everyone agrees that as long as that is legitimate -- and there is obviously a lot of fraud there -- but as long as that is legit you should be able to bring in someone you married from overseas or adopted a baby. that is a lot of people, 300,000 people, 400,000, maybe, depending on any given year. lest you will be different. -- last year will be different. the second would be people that are tops in the planet in their field. there are not that many. let's say 25,000. then humanitarian conditions -- people who not only are refugees in some u.n. definition, but who literally cannot stay where they are for one more second and have nowhere else to go under that many circumstances. there is not that many people like that in the world. you and keeps a list of emergency refugee cases -- the you when keeps a list of emergency refugee cases -- the

u.n. keeps a list of emergency refugee cases. it is not that many. it is still a lot of people, more than any other country in the world that sin, but it is a lot less than the one million plus -- let's yet, but it is a lot less than the one million plus we admit today. host: when you say the current process to become a legal immigrant should be streamlined? guest: absolutely. that is one of the things -- our immigration policy, they say it is the second most complicated body of law after the tax law, and anyone that is filled out even a simple tax form knows that that is ludicrously complex. a much more streamlined, simple, legal immigration system is clearly desirable, and that means getting rid of a lot of these barnacles that have built

up -- all of these guest worker programs, all kinds of legal immigration categories that, frankly, have no justification like the visa lottery -- we give away 50,000 green cards a year pretty much at random to people around the world. so, yes, pruning, streamlining, simplifying the legal immigration system is something we need to do. host: let's hear from luisa -- louis in virginia calling from our line for undocumented immigrants. caller: i want to say your guest, mike, he said it in the beginning, he is funded by large corporations. he is not publicly funded. people should understand, should know this person has more towards republicans, first of all. second of all, i am undocumented. i don't like people who

undermined me -- i am not from central america to start with, but people who are coming to this country who are in their countries, professors, skilled workers -- they might not speak english, but they will learn. they are contributing. another point people have to understand, the bad thing about our culture now is anything we here we take it as a fact. the fact is and i know this because i lived through this, the numbers, when you do a condition get a paycheck, they deduct social security and medical aid. there are a lot of undocumented people that are contravening and working. they don't -- contributing and working, they don't get the paperwork, guess what happens to that money? let's stick to the facts. i know it is hard, but everybody

has the internet. but please don't undermine people with low skills. they come here, work very hard, become very high skilled people and they are still second-class citizens, all right? we are part of that, and we are the victims. a good economy, a bad economy, we are the victims. host: that is louis in virginia. guest: first of all, corporations are completely aligned with the modern left on immigration. in fact, your previous guest, frank sharry, was the leader of a previous organization which was, in fact, explicitly, an alliance of big business with groups on the left. my think tank, actually, we end up working with, were providing information mostly to republicans who -- because they

are the ones who want it, but we have a relatively diverse staff, board, and funders, including the former executive director of the congressional black caucus foundation, the first asian-american candidate for the senate in delaware, the head of the miami urban league -- so, this issue doesn't actually split nicely right and left, as a lot of people imagine. the last people that point he made was about the withholding in your paycheck -- last point he made was about the withholding your paycheck. it is true that many illegal americans work on the books. we estimate 60%, maybe 70% even work on the books, so there is withholding from their paycheck. the issue, of course, is they are not likely to pay much in income tax because their wages are so low, so they don't have a lot of tax liability, and, in

fact, they are likely to get tax credits, refunds, earned income tax credits on behalf of their children, but also, i think what he was talking about was social security --medicare -- social security, medicare. that is the part that is not part of your tax return. that is not income tax. that is called payroll tax. it is true that if you are an illegal immigrant, you are paying into social security, and if you don't become legalized, you never get social security later when you retire. that is true. like i mentioned earlier, we have done research on this. if you were to legalize illegal immigrants so that they will eventually be eligible for social security -- they don't pay that much in social security, because for low skilled workers, people that don't make a lot of money, social security is a pretty good deal -- you get back more than you paid in, and the result would be legalizing illegal immigrants working on the books -- there social security and medicare payments would in fact

accrue credits for when they retire, but the costs that taxpayers as a whole would have to bear when they retire are enormous -- far larger than the amount of money they would be paying in. again, that is not an argument against it. that is an arc -- maybe there is an argument for legalizing people like that, but let's not returned it would not -- pretend it would not be enormously costly to taxpayers as a whole. host: we had a viewer on twitter -- what is your view on e-verify for public -- punishing companies that hire illegal workers. guest: it is an important tool. let me clarify -- it is not about punishing companies. it is about the tool to help legitimate employers -- a free, online system so that when you hire someone -- you have to obviously collect their information for social security and irs anyway -- you put that name, social security number,

date of birth, into the e-verify system. i have seen it done. my admin people have done it for many years at my own center, and it tells you -- is that information real, does it match, and as that person authorized to work? the point is not to punish anyone. it is to give employers the tool to ensure the person they hire is who they say they are -- that they are not lying to them. the punishment part comes in those that don't do it -- that they are knowingly employing that illegal immigrant, because right now you can wink and not and show fake documents, and it is relatively easy to get away with hiring illegal immigrants. e-verify exists -- 40 federal government program it is amazingly effective, cost-effective and functional, but it is not mandatory for all hires. about half of new hires were screened through e-verify. when you sign up for it, you

have to check all of your workers. about half of filers are screened. illegal immigrants on the other half were not being screened -- who are not being screened. illegal immigrants see that -- they know they will go to the next fast food place down the road. making e-verify part of the hiring process for all new hires is an essential part, as the caller suggested, an essential part of regaining control over immigration, and one point that i bring up that isnews-y, the infrastructure bill passed this week, there was an amendment by senator langford to make e-verify mandatory for anyone getting funds -- road companies, bridge construction companies that get funds from that infrastructure plan, that they would have to use e-verify, and most senators voted for it, including five democrats, but

the other 45 democrats voted no, so they filibustered, basically, and it failed, so the democratic leadership, basically voted to make sure illegal immigrants could get infrastructure jobs from the infrastructure bill, and is, frankly, kind of outrageous. host: from our democrats line, kentucky. this is maureen. caller: good morning. i have a statement about the immigration laws themselves. people like me in small communities are confused when there is such a disparity between immigration laws at the border and laws once these people are in our country. it is my understanding that you cannot pass through an asylum-granting country to seek asylum in another country. that is my first confusion. the second one is a case out of

weed sport, new york, and this is just a sample case and it happens all over the country -- a man named mark was killed in broad daylight by an extremely drunk illegal who had been prosecuted eight times previously for dui, nonregistered, nonlicensed. he killed a father -- a young father, and he could not be extradited because of the laws in new york state. he could not be prosecuted, he could not be held, so he is walking free. this happens over and over, and people in small communities are just confused about what immigration should look like because of these things that happen and that we hear about. can you comment on -- host: in that case, i am pulling up a story, apparently that same man is now serving time in

prison, but go ahead and finish your thought. caller: that is what i mean -- it took so much time, anxiety for this family, there is no retribution. it is just confusing for single americans in small community is to be overrun. host: we will finish it there. guest: two points, the second one first i will talk about. there is no question that there are significant numbers of illegal immigrants that commit crimes not because they are illegal immigrant -- aliens, not because magically you are a violent criminal because you are an illegal alien. it is just because there are a lot of people. some of them are going to be criminals. the question is what does the government, the state, local, and federal government do when an illegal immigrant who is not supposed to be here in the first place is arrested for some kind of crime -- none immigration crime, for instance, like drunk driving. in this situation, even if you

are an illegal immigrant, this administration has ordered dhs not to take you into custody if you are a criminal unless you have committed and especially serious crime, and president biden, when he was still running for office, specifically said that drunk-driving illegal immigrants, convicted of drunk driving, should not be removed from the united states. so, there is any legal immigrant the government did not know about, he snuck in, got summer, committed -- got somewhere and committed a crime, that is not really on the government -- there is no direct responsibility, but when an illegal immigrant is arrested for something, beating up his girlfriend, driving drunk, selling drugs, and the biden administration knows it is an illegal immigrant because they got the information -- every person is arrested, that information goes to the fbi.

if the biden administration constant the -- consciously says no, we are not going to get that guy -- if you don't prosecute him, we are not going to take him. if you do prosecute him, we are not going to pick him up when the sentence is done, then that illegal immigrant commit another crime, as most criminals do -- they reoffend, that is directly the responsibility of the administration that chose to let that illegal immigrants stay in the united states. host: john, mississippi. independent line. we are running short on time. jump in with your comment or question. caller: i think immigration is a attack on not only black americans, but poor americans put african-americans built the country, and you allow people -- americans. after an americans built this country. it is always on the black men. you allow redlining. we just got our rights some 50

years ago, so you have a government of assassinating black leaders. host: stick to the topic at hand. what you believe -- why do you believe that is the case as far as immigration is concerned? caller: because of people come to this country they have to be fed and clothed -- they don't go to hollywood. they go to the black community's, they come to our schools, opportunities -- they take our opportunities. host: we will leave it there. mr. krikorian, if you wanted to respond to any of that. guest: there is no question that immigration -- immigration in general, not just illegal immigration, arms, first of a, the least skilled, the people lowest on the economic letter -- disproportionately black americans, but obviously not only black americans, and obviously it is there schools that are impacted, and we have seen this repeatedly. we have published something on equal employment opportunity commission cases -- these are not real cases, not just

anecdotes but he said, where black americans -- somebody said, where black americans were fired specifically because they were american and replaced with american workers. there was one, andblack americay immigrants. the immigrants are not bad because of this, but it is a bad policy that needs to be fixed because we need to take care of our own people whatever their race or religion. host: cis.org is the website. thank you for your time this morning. that is our program for today, and another addition comes your way at 7:00 -- edition comes your way at 7:00 tomorrow morning. we will see you then. ♪ [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2021] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] ♪