by these television companies and more including sparklight. >> at sparklight, it is our goal too. right now we're facing our greatest challenge. that's why sparklight is working around the clock to keep you connected. we're doing our part so it is easier to do yours. >> giving you a front row seat to democracy. >> here is what's coming up on today's washington journal. bloomberg news white house reporter will discuss the week at the white house and president biden's agenda. what is next for president biden's legislative agenda as it heads to congress and later, creators sands previews the canadian elections today and u.s.-canada elections.

we'll hear about booster shots and washington journal is next. host: good morning from washington. hundreds of thousands of white flags implanted along the national mall to honor the more than 670,000 people that have died in the united states from the coronavirus. new reported daily deaths from covid-19 increased by 22% in the united states last week. surpassing 2000 for the first time since february. president biden travels to new york for the united nations general assembly where world leaders will gather and discuss

the response to the pandemic. president biden livers a speech at the opening of the general debate. we will begin this morning with your thoughts on how the president is handling the pandemic. if you been recently vaccinated in the last three months, your line is (202) 748-8000. if you are vaccinated, (202) 748-8001. the unvaccinated, dial in at (202) 748-8002. you can also join us with a text, include your name and city and state. (202) 748-8003 or go to facebook, instagram, twitter. we will get to your thoughts in it. how is the president handling the pandemic? how do you rate his response. take a look at a recent poll that was done in forbes

magazine. they found his approval is slipping on many issues. his approval rating sinks to the lowest level amid concern over coronavirus pandemic. they found that when it comes to the pandemic, his rating is at 50%. that is down from august. they note that it's true for the pandemic. 38% said they wanted him to prioritize. six points fell from early august. this shows that americans -- his approval rating is slipping when it comes to the pandemic. we want to hear from you. also, news on the pandemic front. the fda advisory panel backed a

booster shot as many of you know for seniors and those at high risk, but not for the general public. the washington times frames that this morning in their newspaper that biden is beset by leadership woes after eight months in office. they note that the fda has rejected a plan for widespread booster shots though the president announced plans days earlier to have every adult get a booster shot starting today. yesterday, dr. fauci he appeared on many. this is what he had to say when he was asked about the fda decision. >> were you disappointed the panel did that recognize and -- did not recommend vaccines for all? >> not necessarily.

we had a plan to be able to do it all, we had said from the beginning that this would be contingent on the examination of all of the data that the fda accumulated that would be discussed with their advisory committee. that's what happened. as you know, the approval was for people 65 and older. a considerable number of people who are 18-64 who have underlined conditions the put them at a higher risk for severe disease. that's a pretty good chunk of people. the decision was made based on the data they examine. that was always the plan, to make the proposal ready and prepared to do the entire amount

from the beginning with everybody, but to be prepared to do what the advisory committee and the fda authorized. i'm not disappointed. i think the process worked. host: dr. anthony found she on the decision to approve the booster for high risk but not the general population. there is more news on the covid front. pfizer says its vaccine works for kids ages five to 11. they plan to get authorization for this group soon. back to the confusion over booster shots. the confusion over this has riled governors. this is a quote.

dr. fauci was asked about this confusion. >> i want to begin with the booster shot confusion. would we be in this confusion if the president hadn't gotten ahead of the science? >> if you look at what happened, it wasn't getting ahead of the science. the president and the medical group that the white house said we are planning to be able to roll out boosters for everyone 16 and older. that was the planet. that was always contingent upon the fda's normal regulatory process together with their advisors to make a decision as to exactly what the rollout would look like. that's what happened. a very competent group of people who advise the fda deliberated

and came to the conclusion that rather than have somebody who is the regular immunization should be able to get boosted. 65 years of age or older, those with underlying conditions that might make their response severe. those who have institutional or occupational situations have more risk of being exposed and infected. that's a fair chunk of people. we look at it as one phase of the rollout. i understand why there might be confusion. people were not understanding the difference of planning for something and actually what element of that you are actually going to rollout. that's what happened. host: dr. fauci defending the

president calling for booster shots for everyone. the fda advisory panel rejecting that on friday. we are getting your thoughts on how the president is handling the response to the pandemic. on the booster shots, look at eight yahoo! news pole. 73% say you would take a covid-19 vaccine booster. let's go to jerry in nebraska. you are vaccinated. caller: i think i would give him a d. he's got us tied down and restricted. there are thousands of people coming across the border and nobody knows what they've got. they ain't vaccinated. you can bet on that. they are forcing us to get vaccinated and restrictiveness. he needs to shut that border

down before he starts criticizing people in the united states. there are thousands of people and they are shipping them all over the united states. host: you say forcing this. were you forced to get a vaccine? caller: he is forcing other people too. to keep their jobs. to get into school. why is he forcing us to do that and got the border wide open? host: the border issue is making the front page. this is the new york times. border patrol agents are trying to stop haitian migrants from entering a camp. they are coming by the thousands trying to escape haiti. let's go to william in ohio. you are vaccinated. welcome to the conversation.

caller: i think he's doing great. i am 86 years old. i've been fully vaccinated. it's a shame that whenever you've got crooks who line pockets, the lobbyist, politicians, it's a shame. i feel so sorry for my great grandkids. they are not going to stand a chance in hell to survive. all we have is crooks. host: rob is in new york. you are unvaccinated. caller: i think he's doing horrible. he doesn't even know where he is half the time. it's pitiful. it really is. they are trying to force people to get the jab. postal workers don't have to get it.

congress doesn't have to get it. who the hell does get it? why are you letting these illegals run all over the country. these shots don't work anyway. there are so many breakthrough cases. when i saw dr. robert malone say this should never be put in a person's body, why the hell are they doing it? host: you plan to stay unvaccinated? caller: i had covid over a year ago. host: is there any situation where you may be mandated to get it? caller: i just quit my job because the company i work for wanted me to get the shot. i've already had the covid. why would i get a shot for something i have already had? host: do you have another job lined up? caller: i just decided i'm going

to live off savings for a while. host: eugene, we will go to you. caller: i am going to tell you something. there is something advertised on tv. they are lying to us. they don't pay for hearing aids. i paid $600 for mine. they won't reimburse for it. don't fall for that ad. host: what about the pandemic? caller: i don't know about him. me and my wife have our shots three months ago. i'm not going to get the booster. host: why not? caller: they haven't proven that to me yet. host: join us this morning is the white house reporter with limburg news. we are talking about the plan in

response to the pandemic. let's begin with what's on the agenda this week for the administration. guest: thank you for having me. they go to the u.n. tonight and meet with the secretary-general. we think he is going to get an ear full because the countries that don't have vaccines, other countries are desperate for them. they want the u.s. to do more and donate more. biden is heading that off by having a vaccine summit. there is a report from limburg that 500 million pfizer doses

will be donated. it's a little bit more of a close race. we don't have enough vaccine. today, kids 5-11 are looking good in a smaller dose. a lot of moving pieces. joe biden is going to be under criticism for using doses at home. it spurs more donations abroad. he went to the g7 and tried to get one billion doses pledged. these things are hard to come by. that's why officials are thinking it's a shame that they are having trouble. the u.s. has a problem that a

lot of countries would love to have. to have a lot of shots and none of willing arms. host: what will he say tomorrow night when he addresses the united nations? guest: the u.s. is an arsenal of vaccines. that has been true. he wants to pledge that he wants other rich countries to do more. europe, china, india asked for a lot early on. they had a big outbreak. this is not all tourism or wanting to feel good. there are arguments from academic to say biden should be given away shots abroad to help americans. the delta variant is coming hard in america right now. until it is snuffed out

everywhere, it won't be snuffed out anywhere. that is part of the reason for the vaccine. your caller said they had covid. why should i get a vaccine. the bar ponce from health officials is you can get it again. there is a new strain of the virus. it packs more of a punch. that's why they are begging people to do it. that suggests everyone is already gotten a shot is willing to get a third one. we don't know yet when they will be able to get it. that's a lot for a monday morning. host: how is the administration going to respond this week to the fda advisory board rejecting a third shot for anyone who is not high-risk after the

president said everybody needs to get a booster. guest: i think they will take one halfstep. they said they would follow the science. you heard she talk about exemptions for other categories. 65 plus might change. other groups like occupational exposure, that's a pretty big category. even if you don't fit into that, we will see where it goes. his officials are coming under fire, it's up to the fda and the cdc to determine. one step at a time. right now, they're going to start boosters. it is older people and at risk

people getting boosters early. the data on us getting boosters now as opposed to later as a weaker case. host: thank you for joining us this morning. we appreciate your reporting. guest: thank you very much. host: your reaction it to the pandemic. this is robert in michigan who sends this text. stephen in kentucky. what do you think of his job handling the pandemic? caller: thank you for taking my call. i appreciate the time.

i think he is trying his best with what he's given. there are americans who won't listen to what he says or scientists. he is doing what he can. for those who are blaming illegals, making them the scapegoats, i think you have to blame the millions of americans who are unvaccinated and flying through airports. it's the american problem. host: evelyn, you are unvaccinated. caller: i give him a b plus. he is putting the information out there. people can take it if they want to take it. when they first came out, they said you will not get the

disease like polio or measles. now, they are saying it's not like that. you can still get it. i am a 100% disabled veteran. i can't afford to get a cold. i don't know how this will affect me. some people get sick after this. host: you have not had the vaccine yet because of those reasons? caller: when it first came out, i thought it was going to be something like polio. now they say you are going to get it after being vaccinated. that has thrown a lot of people off.

people are very educated. we need to know more about the vaccine. what's in it. we need a little bit more to go on. host: dr. fauci talking about the long-term effectiveness of the vaccine and the need for users. >> you said it loses effectiveness over time. you believe the general public will need booster shots. the fda is not there yet. >> what i believe and this is my opinion as a scientist and a public health person, it is conceivable and may be likely that ultimately when we look back on this the proper regimen for protection, optimal protection and durability, would be more than just the prime and the boost.

it might entail a third boost. that is entirely conceivable. remember, when we did the initial studies, we had to move very quickly. we were dealing with an emergency situation. this has already saved millions of lives locally. that doesn't mean that's the optimal regimen. when all is said and done, and optimal regimen may 3 shots for everyone. right now, based on the data that was examined by the advisory committee, their decision is to go week just did. having some limitations on it. data keeps coming in on a weekly basis.

we will see the evolution of this decision. host: let's go back to. he is saying full immunity comes with the two shots plus a booster. caller: tell me what it's doing. tell me how it's acting in my body. tell me how it's working. tell me the chemicals of what's in it. i can barely breathe. i think the president is doing what he is supposed to do. we are a divided country. let's do one country. what is wrong with people fighting. host: i hope you can watch washington journal. well into the last hour, we will be joined by a director of

vaccine education at children's hospital of philadelphia. he is a member of the food and drug administration vaccine product advisory committee. we will ask him that question. tell me how it works in your body. we hope you keep watching. sam is in washington. good morning. caller: good morning. i would like to say i think he's doing a terrible job. if you would give me a moment, i will explain why. first of all, i have relatives who are in the medical field. nobody talks about therapeutics. things that can help people. they only talk about the vaccine.

i'm 74 years old. i will not take the booster for this reason. i think he's been lying to people. he is doing what they tell him to do. hold on for moment. he makes some of the most idiotic statements. we have to protect the vaccinated from the unvaccinated. i am supposed to be protected already. why do i need to worry about unvaccinated people doing damage to me. i am protected. i agree with one caller who said it's strange that you can allow people to come into this country and ship them all over the

country without being vaccinated. for a regular person goes to a large gathering, that's a spreader. the illegals crossed the border unvaccinated, no masks. that's not a spreader. i've talked to several of my relatives. we do believe in therapeutics along with the vaccine. they will not talk about therapeutics. the therapeutics, people start taking a lot of those, that would hurt the people who push the vaccine. host: mark in florida. your turn. caller: good morning. some basic points. when we have jobs, we have a job

description. the president has a job description. his main description as commander-in-chief. it's not just this president. they are running this country by executive order. that's not how it is supposed to be run. you have a branch of the government called the legislature. a dictator can dictate these things. it's not right. regarding the vaccine, they have no liability. whatever harm vaccine causes, they are not responsible. that's not true of almost everything else. here is a vaccine that could cause harm. the manufacturer is not held

responsible. host: before you go, is there any scenario that you could see you have to get the vaccine? going to a sporting event or concert. what if they require them to go out to eat? caller: there is so much white noise out there. there are a number of different vaccines. i've spent hours with the stuff. it's unclear to meet which ones are safe and which ones aren't. there is a saying now, my body my choice. it's not about a president telling me in florida what to do. it brings up another issue and

that is states rights. the federal government doesn't have host: host: authority to tell people what to do. the wall street journal editorial boyd writing bad advice on covid vaccine boosters. the fda panel downplayed waning antibodies. they say that the government should leave it up to americans to decide whether or not they want to get the booster. they also write this. some on the panel opposed boosters on grounds that the shots have high levels of protection against severe illness for younger americans. many people under 65 are getting severely ill. pfizer said the side effects are no greater then the second. why not let people make their own decisions?

many people younger than 65 will find a way to get a booster. they don't want to get knocked out of commission. they will have to quarantine if they yet sick. this is from the wall street journal. the u.s. government is paying only about $20 for a vaccine dose compared to $2000 for antibody treatment for somebody who gets sick. the economic cost benefit seems to favor boosters. some experts are worried about vaccine equity. this isn't their mandate. the u.s. is donating more than the rest of the world combined. european countries are using less effective chinese vaccines.

the experts are often wrong and should control public policy. listen to dr. francis collins. he was asked about the availability of various vaccines for booster shots. >> if someone got the moderna or johnson & johnson vaccine and they fit into the 65 and older category, do they say give me a third dose? can you mix and match? >> we are right in the middle of those trials. can you mix and match. any of the three, can you start with one and boost with the others? we will know more about that in the next two or three weeks. right now, we don't have the answer. modernity and j&j have submitted their booster data.

the fda may have a comment on that pretty soon. it's not quite in sync. people shouldn't be rushing out now and getting a booster. there are a number of people who seem to do that. the vaccines right now in the u.s. are doing a great job of protecting people against severe disease. we are worried about that beginning to erode. we don't want to get behind the virus. >> the white house did want boosters this week. do you believe they will be available this week? >> part of the reason for this to get talked about a month ago was to be sure we were prepared. we have a system that is

noticing a tropical disturbance in the atlantic long before there is a risk. part of this might very well be a good thing. we need to get all the pharmacies and preparations together so it wouldn't be a mad -- at the end to emblem at this. host: that was face the nation. we are asking you to rate president bidens job on responding to the pandemic. what grade would you give him. one of our viewers says a plus for the response. what part of get vaccinated is bad messaging? colin is in california. you are vaccinated. caller: i would give the

president and f. here is why. the credibility is long gone because of the past few years. because of the crazy media stories from all of the political parties. what really matters is there are millions in america who had covid. what the president needs to do is get everyone antibody tested and took knowledge we have maybe 100 million people who already have the virus. we call people survivors when they've been through assault. we have 100 million covid survivors with better immunity than the vaccine.

i hope it's not politics that causes the president to keep focusing on vaccines. it's a huge mistake. we've got 100 million survivor heroes. they are going to save everyone because they've got the herd immunity. host: sandy, you have been recently vaccinated. what made you decide to get the vaccine. caller: i am 71. i had no other choice. i give biden an ar also. i hear people calling in about what they don't trust about the vaccine. i never hear anybody calling and where they googled the mayo clinic to see what covid it can do to your body, even a healthy person.

the herd immunity is not really taking off. we have people who won't take the vaccine. vaccines have been given out to go to school. i room or sad case when i was seven. one of the little girls we played with, i had gotten my vaccine. she was taken out in a white van with a red cross on it because they didn't have the new like to have now. she was covered up. when she came back, she had not gotten the polio vaccine. she was crippled. that was new at that time. i wish people would read up on what they are looking at. the covid vaccine -- it never

said you could not catch covid. you were supposed to vaccine and wear our mask. now we have delta. people are talking about i don't know what it will do to my body. you know what the covid will do to your body. have a good morning. host: catherine is vaccinated. welcome to the conversation. caller: this is catherine from burlington again. i would give him a d+. there is always room for improvement. i think he's doing the best he can by encouraging people to get vaccinated. i cannot see how people are blaming. i took the j&j six months ago. if it's recommended, i will get

the booster shot. how is that? host: dean is in connecticut. you decided to get vaccinated recently. explain your decision. caller: i was in no rush to get the vaccination. when delta came out, it scared me. i figured i should go out and get it done. i give the president of b plus because he's trying to do his best as a leader. he has so much going against them when he stepped into office. he's just trying to do a lot of cleanup. host: harry and pittsburgh. caller: and a. -- an a.

i want to see them get theirs. as far as these other people, when trump was in office, this was all over the world. now it's in this country getting worse. they are sending them to red states. nobody is blowing the governors instead of him. he can't do anything. to trust him is nuts. this guy had kids killed in afghanistan. the military people are nuts. all they talk about his critical race theory. they've been in this thing for 20 years. host: we will stick to the pandemic this morning. how do you think the president is doing handling the response

to the pandemic? caller: i am vaccinated. i don't think he's doing very well. all summer, we've had the reopening of ballparks and stadiums and college football is back. you see 80,000 people at penn state, 100,000 people. i don't hear anyone saying about these being super-spreader events. the only event all summer was the holly -- harley rally in sturgis. all of those people do wear the red maggot hats. i think biden will continue to tighten the noose by requiring employers of over 100 people. i think the next thing will be

tied to your bank card or your social security number that if you don't get vaccinated you will have limited options as far as banking. as far as the booster is concerned, i think you are going to have a lot of trouble selling that. i'm on the fence about this. host: how come? caller: i've heard other callers say we shouldn't be concerned about the unvaccinated. we are being told that's not true. we are being told you have to get the booster. the fda just came out and didn't require it or is not going to required for people under 65. there is so much messaging that

is different out there. it's very confusing to people who aren't scientists or epidemiologists. host: we are going to talk to a doctor in the last hour today. also a member of the fda advisory board about scientific questions you have raised. we hope you keep watching. let me show you on face the nation what they said about who falls into this high risk category of who should get the booster shot. >> this advisory panel gave a green light for 65 and up and those who are high risk. who does that mean? the official put teachers in that high-risk category. do you agree with that? >> i think they could be seen in

that space. they are in circumstances if they are in classrooms with kids under 12 who can't be vaccinated where they are at a higher risk of exposure. they fit into the same category as health care providers. the way they made the vote was a little ambiguous. >> is it just as risky being in a classroom as a hospital ward? i live with unvaccinated children. does that put me at high risk category? >> that is a great question. i think that is one the cdc will discuss in some seriousness. it is more likely that you could get exposed to someone who is living alone. host: our conversation with all

of you, how is the president doing responding to the pandemic? randy is in oklahoma city. caller: we are in a tough situation. he is doing the best he can. he was given a bad situation. the country is in hades right now. the border thing, that doesn't mean anything. they are young kids anyway. they test 100% of the people. they quarantine them. i think he's doing a great job. people who don't think he is art listening to alternative radio or something. anything he does is wrong. he can't do anything right for them. i live in reality and i believe in science.

host: dave is in florida. caller: i think what we really need is a vaccine against stupid people. the virus is a symptom of a much bigger problem. the last four years, we had a president who declared himself a wartime president with this thing when it started to break out. as it started to burn its way across the country, he was telling his cult of fools and useful idiots that it was a hoax. it would all go away like magic. they might try injecting themselves with household cleaners. now we've got 670,000 people who have died. that's more americans than died in any war that we've ever been involved in. can you imagine a u.s. president

if we had an invading army, this is an invader but it's a micro scale. if they were coming across and killing people, telling the public that it was nothing to worry about, it was a hoax. that's the biggest act of treason we've ever seen come committed. these people are so deluded. it's the same situation with climate change. climate change doesn't exist because there was a climate change to happened 10,000 years ago. so we should just dump tons of petrochemical sewage into the atmosphere because something happened to the climate 10,000 years ago. host: bob in green bay.

unvaccinated. caller: i will give him a d. all of these people are calling us stupid. my wife is 66. i am 60. i spent the last winter in a bar with young kids. both of my sons got it. we are going to give it a year and see. we don't need to be called stupid. we do our research. it's not just trumpeters. i just wanted to get that out there. host: carol in tennessee. she is vaccinated. caller: i am vaccinated a long time. my concern is a b plus. we still have some wiggle room to better our situation. if we could say the right words,

we have demonized the vaccination for the youth and young people. we should encourage. they don't have problems wearing a mask on halloween. if we had made it fun, we wouldn't have to be in a situation where people are denying. our children will be excited. going to school as one of the frozen queens, any other character, you've put a mask on it and put it over the character. we would be in a better place. those children that are under age 12. host: pfizer says the vaccine

works for kids age 5-11. they are looking for authorization very soon. carol is in west virginia. you are unvaccinated. welcome to the conversation. caller: i would give him an f. it's not only on the vaccine. it's the way he has handled different things. as far as the vaccine goes, i'm not vaccinated. my husband is. we are fine with that. i know other people that are vaccinated. that's a choice each one has to make. host: why did you make that choice? caller: there are -- i think before anybody gets the shot, we

have millions of people out there we call frontline workers. they was heroes whenever thing started. nobody wants to talk about herd immunity. the nurses, the doctors, the firefighters, they was all out there while we was on lockdown. why not test people before they are given the shot to see if they have the antibiotics already in their system before they are given the shot. as far as everything else, i think the hesitancy comes. this was politicized before president trump left office. everybody was talking about. it's coming too fast. we heard vice president harris say she wouldn't take no shot. this was all politicized for the

shot ever come out. host: how did you decide to get vaccinated? caller: good morning. time will tell. time will tell if he has arrived at the right place or not. i think almost all americans are very stupid. i think everybody acts foolishly throughout the day. we are all attempting to learn how to act and do what's right in life. our country is in a bad way and people hate each other so bad. i still say it's biological warfare. no one has been able to do that.

if you congratulate them for, they will have to own it. over time, they will be shown that they destroyed so much. i wish everybody that is sick now, i wish you peace. host: mike in virginia, we go to you next. you are vaccinated. caller: i think he's doing a good job. i think he got handed a giant mess and he's doing the best he can with it. i work on things that i never know if there is going to be covid or not. i wanted the shot. i have been vaccinated. the first part of it wasn't bad. the second messed me up some.

i am waiting for the booster. you see these people die in the hospital. when i was younger, i had asthma really bad. i had to get adrenaline twice to get to the hospital. you don't want to die that way. take the shot. just take the shot. that's the choice. live or die. i hope people have a good day. host: we will go to florida next. go ahead. caller: this is superior i was vaccinated. -- this is sue. my husband was able to get vaccinated right away. for me, it took a little longer before i qualified. this kind of disturbed me. they weren't giving it out for

caregivers of people. i think this is something people should do, but they should have a choice. we just returned from neuss smyrna. there are no restrictions. businesses don't have to wear masks. it's a very touristy place. they haven't had an abnormally high rate of covid. it's up to the person. as far as how biden has done, i think he has failed in a lot of ways. host: victoria and wisconsin.

what do you say? caller: i would give an f. i think there has been so much wavering it, misinformation regarding the vaccine. i chose to get vaccinated. i have been vaccinated since february. i think. my husband is one hunter percent sable. my sister who lives with me is 100% disabled. i will not get the booster. i will not get the booster until all of the waffling and misinformation, it's ok for joe biden to not take questions from reporters. it's ok for obama to have a super-spreader event.

the met gala, they were all unmasked. make up your mind. nobody should dictate to grown people what they have to do. that's its dictatorship. host: amanda, you are next. why are you unvaccinated? caller: for two reasons. one because of the dna it's made out of. i have a religious objection to that. there are other vaccines in other countries that are not made out of that. you are going to have the doctor on, why are we not making vaccines that are not made out of that, that are made out of proteins. we could take that objection out-of-the-way.

i had a doctors appointment this past week and spoke to my doctor about my health issues and my concerns. i feel like i'm in between oh rock and a hard place. if i would have problems, i have history where it could really harm me. she had to agree that i had legitimate concerns for my health. i wish everybody -- we all have different situations in our lives. we have to do what's best for us. host: do you wish the president would acknowledge this? caller: i do. i wish they would acknowledge

that vaccinated people can also spread this. they may not get it to the point where they get sick. they still can be carriers. it's not all unvaccinated people. there are people who have health issues where this is a real issue for them to take the vaccine. it's not so easy to just say this is better than dying. sometimes, the results are worse than dying. host: john is in wisconsin. he is also unvaccinated. caller: in 2019, i was told i have a heart at 30%.

i get a pacemaker. i am working a 30 hour a week job. i exercise. i am 72 years old. i just don't see the need for it. that's my opinion. if the people allow the government to tell them what food they eat, what medicine to take, their souls will be in a sad state. host: we are going to take a break. common up, we will turn our attention to congress. this will be a consequential two weeks. we will get a preview with bloomberg reported. justin trudeau faces a tough reelection fight.

voters had to the pole today. we will have that preview with the director of the canada institute. we will be right back. >> coming up this week, the homeland security secretary, the counterterrorism director appear before congress on threats to the homeland. the house homeland security committee on wednesday at 9:00. federal reserve chair jerome powell holds a press conference. watch this week on the c-span networks or listen on the c-span radio app. had to c-span.org for more

information. c-span, your unfiltered view of government. >> washington journal continues. host: joining us is the congressional reporter from bloomberg. tell us about the days and how

they unfold and what is topping the agenda. guest: congress has been on a long recess. this the first time both chambers have been here since the beginning of august. we are looking at a government shutdown. there are big decisions with today. democrats are looking to force republicans to vote on this and make it a bipartisan issue. mitch mcconnell has said he's not going to allow republicans to go along with it. he wants democrats to do it on a separate reconciliation bill. that's a huge fight. looming is the build back better agenda. that is really hung up. a series of events will happen

starting with the 27th of september. pelosi will hold a vote on the infrastructure will. that is going forward. i talked to progressives on friday. she said the majority of her members are going to vote against that bill a must the house and senate have already passed the $3.5 trillion reconciliation bill. there is no sign the senate will do that. this is a real problem for nancy pelosi. there is a risk of both wills getting blocked and congress being in a morass at this point. host: what are the issues hanging it up? caller: the price tag is part of it.

there are two moderate democrats who do not want the $3.5 trillion price tag. they worry about the tax increases that the been proposed. other elements as well. in the house, we did see a big problem with the drug price proposal. they want to negotiate drug prices. they want to penalize drug companies. that is not out of committee. it is not just about the effect on drug prices. it is also could provide $600 billion to provide social spending. another big problem for democrats in the house is the salt inductions, the caps on on

state and local tax deductions that really benefit wealthy homeowners. it is capped at $10,000 under the trump tax reform bill. they would like to raise that, either an unlimited deduction for a short time, or perhaps doubling that. there's a glimmer of hope that perhaps the short term cap increase will go forward, but that has not been worked out either. there's also additional climate change provisions. also fuel subsidies are remaining in the house bill. that is a problem for progressives, a problem for bernie sanders. there's just a lot of problems with this bill at this point. host: we also learned over the weekend that the parliamentarian struck down part of the reconciliation proposal. talk about that. guest: democrats are hoping to use this budget process, which allows them to bypass the filibuster. normally you need 60 votes in the senate to stop debate. that gives the keys to 10

republicans who could bl -- who are needed to shut off debate, except for the budget measure. this would allow congress to reduce the debt, to ease the hard choices of cutting spending. but that is being expended to be used for tax cuts, for other matters including the covid rescue package we saw earlier this year. democrats want to use that for other things like immigration, and the parliamentarian come the rules keeper, any ruling last night, said this is stretching the definition of it matters too far. it is not a budget matter. it is a social policy matter. host: you talked about climate change. what role is senator manchin playing on climate change proposal, when he comes from west virginia, with ties to fossil fuels? he's made money off of the industry. guest: he's absolutely pivotal.

he's the chairman of the energy committee in the senate. he is that 50th magic boat. ultimate -- magic vote. i should have sillier that all democrats -- should have said earlier that all democrats have to stick to gather to make this work. he is skeptical of attempts to funnel funding towards renewables and electric vehicles, as well as to end fossil fuel subsidies. he's also interested in promoting things like clean coal technology, which some scientists are skeptical on. host: a lot of moving parts this week. what gets voted on first, and when, and in which body of congress? guest: mostly matters will take place in the house. the house, under the constitution, has to originate tax matters. so the reconciliation bill have to go forward in the house first.

also traditionally, spending matters starting the house as well. so we are expecting them to vote on this september 30 stopgap measure probably to december 3, maybe december 10, just to keep the government running. we think they are going to do that early to give the senate more runway time. it may be combined with the debt ceiling increase possibly to 2022, or that may be a standalone. that is going to be the early action. in the house will turn to the annual defense policy bill, which will be chock-full of amendments related to foreign policy, afghanistan, saudi arabia, and a big fight over the top line for defense. progressives want to see the defense budget cut. congress with military and military industrial complex companies in their district have asked for a $24 billion increase above what the biden administration was looking for, so that is going to be a big fight as well.

host: the house also considering the women's health protection act. guest: there's obviously a big concern in the country over abortion, pro-life versus pro-choice. we have this law in texas which has gone into effect, essentially limiting or for all intents and purposes banning abortion. this will be an attempt to address that, but this will be something that doesn't really have a future in the u.s. senate, so it is more of a messaging effort to get democrats on record saying they oppose this. host: what about voting rights legislation? what is the proposal that could get a vote in the senate? guest: the democrats had a very expensive bill, hr one, the government reform, ethics, voting rights, campaign finance bill. that was pared down to a slimmer version that could get all 50 democrats in the senate, including joe manchin, on board. the majority leader said they

would bring it to the floor this week. this is more of a messaging exercise at this point. there just isn't the path to get 10 republican votes. joe manchin notice he was leaving town last week. we talked to people like susan collins, who are moderates in congress, and they just don't see this kind of role for the federal government in the elections, and they are objecting to it at this point. i don't see it really passing the senate at this point. host: we are talking about president biden's agenda and congress with erik wasson of bloomberg. we want to know what you think congress and the president should put on their agenda. you can dial-in this morning. for democrats, (202) 748-8000, republicans, (202) 748-8001, independents, (202) 748-8002. text us with your thoughts at (202) 748-8003. just include your first name, city and state.

let's go to frank northport, new york, and independent. you are up first. go ahead. caller: good morning. erik, i want to talk specifically about the debt and only the debt. since clinton left office, when clinton left office, he had a surplus, and since then we have had two republican presidents, and the debt has continued to climb. how do they explain this increase in debt? thanks, erik. guest: i think we are seeing republicans go to boards the fiscal responsibility message, really being driven by mitch mcconnell. i personally believe that he is trying to move the party away from trumpian themes.

he is pro vaccination. he doesn't really believe the election was stolen. but he wants the party to return to the low government -- the small government, low spending message. that is why we are seeing it come to the forefront. i think republicans will say there was emergency deficit spending the covid crisis, and that is what really drove it up during the trump years. there is still a skirmish going on in the deficit effects of the trump tax cuts. democrats say it is $1 trillion. republicans say it is less than that. part of it is counterfactual because we had the covid crisis and it didn't really play out as people thought it would. their main argument right now is that democrats are undertaking an effort to add to the debt through this reconciliation bill, and given that, they are not really willing to vote for the debt ceiling increase. democrats' counter argument is

that you guys need to vote yes. host: let's go to roger in north carolina, independent. caller: good morning. joe biden is a nice guy, but the truth is, and i would love to give my opinion on what joe biden's agenda is, but he doesn't really have one. the truth is he is not running the show. i would like to find out who really is. thanks. 1 -- host: the president is heading to new york today for the you tonight nations -- for the united nations general assembly. he will be addressing the opening of that general debate. what do you expect him to talk about? how does that impact congress in washington? guest: i think the president is really pivoting to focus on the coronavirus. i expect him to talk about a goal of vaccinating 70% of the

world population, really pushing the vaccine message. i think they had a wake-up call with his poll numbers, that really dropped in the wake of the afghanistan pullout and the resurgence of the delta virus. there really pivoting to focus on this. i think there is a sense that it is the virus, stupid instead of it's the economy, stupid, and he has this testing mandate of business is saying you have to test or vaccinate your employees. is going to mandate a vaccine for federal employees as well. this is his focus right now. he's also playing an active role in the legislative assets. i think being a creature of congress, he kind of knows how that works, but he will jump in, and he is with kyrsten sinema and joe manchin one on one, the key little votes in the senate to try to see what they can get on board with. that is my sense of how the

president is involved right now. 1 what we see them -- host: will we see them at the white house this week? guest: we certainly could. if not in person, they are on the phone with him a lot. caller: dennis, and ohio republican, your question. caller: yes, i don't think joe biden has come through with anything he has promised. if he has, let me know. one thing i think you should do is the social security for people, i know a lot of people on social security that's really hurting. host: erik wasson, has he had a win? guest: they point to the rescue package that went through. democrats are especially proud of the child tax credit, giving a tax benefit to a lot of people with young children up to a certain income level. i think that is what they are really pointing to. this infrastructure package is really on the verge of being

passed, to get through the senate in a bipartisan way. when you have highway main and funding that is 1.2 trillion dollars, this is very much a win except for all of the infighting among democrats. i think that is a frustration to moderates who feel like we got up past this and had a victory touchdown dance over that, but the agenda is up in the air, but we could see within a month or so the administration being able to grow about having past it. host: david in new jersey, independent. caller: [indiscernible] i'd like to tell you, this is my 48th time that i'm appearing on c-span. i'm a 97 year young world war ii vet, and i have lived through the great depression up until

the present time. they call my generation the greatest generation. three words describe the jade's generation -- the greatest generation. the first three words of the preamble of the constitution, "we the people." that is what makes us the greatest nation in the world. we the people, we look out for each other. for many years, we didn't agree. the congress compromised and move the country forward. unfortunately today, compromise has disappeared. it is my way or no way. it is not what our great country is about we have to look out for each other and do what is best for each other, and it is my

fervent prayer that the congress can come together and do what is best for we the people and not me the people. host: thank you, david. marilyn in pennsylvania, democratic caller. marilyn, you are on the air. marilyn in beaver falls, pennsylvania, good morning to you. all right, let me go to johnny in carolina, republican. good morning. do you have a question about this week in washington? caller: well, it is not a question. it is basically, i am not going to see a rant, but you said something about the agenda of ayden and congress. i think ayden's agenda, to -- think bidens agenda, to be perfectly honest, is against the american people.

all of his foreign policies, all of his domestic policies, have been a tragedy for this country. nothing he has done since being in office, working through congress and nancy pelosi, has done anything to benefit america. even now, they are trying to step on the constitution, the bill of rights. they are trying to take our freedoms away from us. they are trying to take every freedom we have read the second amendment, the first amendment. they are using facebook as the long arm of the government to stifle free speech. this is not the american way. host: erik wasson, let's talk about foreign policy. what does the schedule look like in congress for oversight of president biden's decision to withdraw from afghanistan? guest: we are really looking at end of the month hearings in the house and senate with secretary of defense lloyd awesome -- lloyd austin and general milley. it will be a major event here on capitol hill. basically, austin refused to

appear before the senate foreign affairs committee last week, and there were threats of subpoena. he later said it was scheduling conflict. but congress wants to hear from him on what went disastrously wrong with the pullout, why was it a black eye for the u.s. there's been a revelation in the new work by -- the new book by bob woodward and robert costa about his calls -- about general milley and his calls to china about u.s. actions there. there have been some calls for his resignation, but certainly he's going to get love -- get a lot of questions on that as well. next week we are expecting very big fireworks as far as oversight on afghanistan and china. host: mike in ohio, democratic caller. caller: yes, thank you for taking my call, greta. good morning, mr. wasson.

i wish that reporters and journalists would quit referring to democrats such as joe manchin or kyrsten sinema as moderate or conservative democrats. they are not. they are corporate democrats. they are bought and paid for. it can be seen as joe manchin sits with the u.s. chamber of commerce or exxon mobil and gets his marching orders from them. they are not conservative or moderate. they are bought and paid for corporate democrats. thank you. host: and mike, what kind of democrat are you? how would you describe yourself? mike, you there? well, wasson, respond to that. guest: i think it is important

to look into the financing, and certainly there are donations that people have. i invite people to look at that for joe manchin today, both his personal involvement in the coal industry, as well as donations. i think we do tend to, as a shorthand, categorize people as moderate or progressives. but it is worth looking into as well. i would say that some people who are considered progressives as well have ties. we saw that with the drug industry fight, people who are not normally considered particularly conservative democrats, but have huge pharma presence in their district, are raising questions about the drug pricing. their argument is not only will it hurt health care, but it will hurt jobs in their district. caller: ken in tennessee, independent -- host: ken in tennessee, independent. caller: yes, my question is why

congress is not looking into the general milley and all of the other ones that has the -- hello? host: yes, looking into general milley about what? caller: why he went behind the backside of congress and stuff about the allegation about what he has done. host: i'm going to have you turn up your television. erik wasson, do you want to repeat what you said before? guest: he's going to be called before congress and asked about that. also interestingly, the january 6 committee looking into the riot by pro-trump supporters, as also looking at actions related, looking at the pentagon and others related to that time. we are expecting them to rope in a fresh look at what millie did

their. did he really go rogue, or as other reports have suggested, was this part of a wider effort in the community worried about erratic behavior from the president? caller: bradley from georgia, tash host: brad -- host: bradley from georgia, democrat color. caller: yes, i have a couple of things i would like to bring up. i am a diehard liberal, and i am getting so fed up joe biden and him trying to negotiate with republicans. you hear these collars -- these callers, they are not going to play ball with us. they are off the rails. in this country, we have to have health care. i see what is coming down the road for our country's future. this virus is going to tear us apart, and it is just a matter of time before we don't have a choice, when we have to lock

down. we have to do another lock down because there's another variant getting out of control. when that happens, these republicans are going to go b's arc -- go biz arc -- go bezerk. host: do they have the past to push forward with the president's plans? guest: the past couple of cycles have been tough for senate democrats for a variety of reasons. they only have 50, and joe manchin says i am sorry it turned out that way, but he's the clincher here. with those two moderate, pardon my expression, democrats, joe manchin and kyrsten sinema, not on board, you will not get the 50 votes. as far as social policy, you

need 60 votes. progressives are saying abolish the filibuster, change the senate permanently, but these numbers are not going to do that. you could do that with 50 votes. it's called the nuclear option. you can change the senate roles, at the do -- senate rules, as they did for supreme court nominees. as for right now, there's not the votes to do that for legislation. host: the house and senate returned this week. there's a lot of key debates and negotiations happening. follow it all. you can go to bloomberg.com to follow erik wasson's reporting. you can also follow him on twitter. we appreciate your time, as always. guest: thanks for having me. host: we take a break. we will come back and talk about canadian prime minister justin trudeau facing a tough reelection fight as voters head to the pole in that country today. we will get a preview with christopher sands of the wilson

institute regulator, the debate over booster shots and whether kids can get vaccinated with a top fda advisor. we will be right back. ♪ >> coming up this week on the c-span networks, homeland security secretary, fbi director christopher wray, and national counterterrorism director appear before congress on threats to the homeland 20 years after 9/11. c-span3 will have live coverage of their testimony on tuesday at 9:30 a.m. eastern and wednesday at 9:30 a.m. eastern.

on wednesday at two: 30 p.m., federal reserve chair jerome powell holds a press conference. watch this week on the c-span networks or listen on the c-span radio app. head over to c-span.org for scheduling information or to stream live or on-demand any time. c-span, your unfiltered view of government. ♪ >> you can be a part of the national conversation by participating in c-span's studio cam video. . petition your opinion matters -- video competition. your opinion matters. create a five or six minute documentary that answers the question, how has the federal government impacted your life? your video must show your views on a policy that affects you.

c-span awards cash prices and a shot at the grand prize of $5,000. entries must be received before january 20, 2022. for rules, tips, and how to get started, visit our website studentcam.org. ♪ >> c-spanshop.org.

browse to see what's new and save up to 30% on our classic logo apparel shirts and hoodies. also, fleece blankets, mugs and glasses. there is something for every c-span fan. shop the fall sale now through september 21. your purchase will support our nonprofit operations. go to c-spanshop.org. >> "washington journal" continues. host: joining us this morning is christopher sands, the canada institute director for the wilson center, here to talk about the elections in canada today. first of all, explain, what is the snap election, and why is it happening? guest: thanks very much, and good morning. a snap election occurs when the prime minister decides to have an election and goes quickly to

a vote. canada switched to fixed election dates back in the early 2000s under the harper government, so you normally you expect an election every four years. two ways you can have an election sooner. one we have just seen, where the prime minister thinks he has a chance to win, so he calls an election. or his government falls and he's forced into an election. this is the former, a bit of a surprise, although the prime minister had been talking about it all summer, so it may be the worst kept secret in ottawa. he is facing the leader of the conservative party, who is fairly new and not well known or had not been well-known to canadians before the campaign. other party leaders were more familiar, but his main opposition is the conservative party because that is the party that stands the best chance of getting as many or more seats

than the liberal party, which is justin trudeau's. host: how close is this election? guest: it is very close. it appears many people are frustrated with trudeau for calling and without having a really good reason for interrupting peoples summer and early fall plans. canadians are in a grumpy mood, like the united states. canadians have been dealing with the covid lockdowns. they have been worried about the economy. they're concerned about what is happening in canada-china relations, u.s.-china relations, and even the pullout in afghanistan. it is not clear that the election is going to resolve any of it, so it seems to be an exercise in shuffling, almost mutable -- almost musical

chairs. turnout should be pretty good. canadians are normally good voters. secondly, canada has mail-in ballots. one of the key things to note is that canada doesn't send ballots unless you request one. that lowers the risk of fraud. you have to turn in your mail-in ballot and send it back in. there's a whole process whereby couriers make sure who asked for the ballot got it and returned it. we think there's about 1.2 million mail-in ballots. it could take anything from two to five days to get them all tallied, depending on how they come in. it could be a week before we know the final result. host: and why should americans care? guest: in some ways, anxieties

have been made worse by canada-u.s. relations. many canadians were hopeful that after a rocky relationship with donald trump, that the biden administration would be an opportunity to get to a traditional approach to relations, a more constructive partnership. but early on, from the cancellation of the keystone pipeline to michigan's holding up the line that connects western canadian oil to eastern canadian provinces, i know we don't have the stimulus passed yet, but that was preempted in some ways by president biden's executive order early in his presidency. there are a number of areas where canadians hope to have a closer partnership with the u.s., but in practice, they struggle to get their interests addressed. there is a roadmap between the two countries of issues, quite a long agenda, that has been very

constructively work on behind-the-scenes, but for many canadians, the u.s. seems to be very distracted now and not as helpful a partner as they'd hoped. host: are they blaming president biden, or do they see it as the fault of their own prime minister? guest: that is one of the most interesting questions. as many americans do, they also take a look at congress and realize congress makes everything more difficult in washington, and the recognize that president biden have to do a lot of work's agenda through congress at the same time, and they know it is a very dangerous world. but if you think about it in this sense, we didn't need to have an election. justin trudeau thought he could go from a minority to a majority government, but it is clear that as a minority government leader, as prime minister since 2019, he

has been hindered or held back in his ability to respond, whether it is to covid or restricting the border for this very long period, or even spending money on covid relief and providing some supplemental benefits for individuals to make it through covid if they are not working. so for the most part, trudeau has been able to cope with all of these dangers, so why are we having an election? maybe so that he could have a majority, but i don't know that that has convinced many americans that this was a necessary move. host: let's open up the lines. democrats, dial-in to (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001. independents, (202) 748-8002. a line for canadians this morning. please dial-in at (202) 748-8003 . you can also text us at that same number. please include your name, city

and state. or send us a tweet, and we can read some of your comments there. you mentioned the border between the united states and canada. it was closed because of the pandemic. how did that affect canadians? guest: it is important to note that it was restricted, but not fully closed. that is an important inference because the two governments agreed to only allow essential traffic to cross the border. they had slightly different versions of essential, different definitions that they used operationally, but what it meant was that truck drivers moving goods back and forth and supply chains were allowed to continue to operate. that is really important because if that was not happening, the economic impact on canada would be quite huge. they rely heavily on trade with the united states for their economy. but what has been restricted is

discretionary travel by individuals, and the u.s. has left air travel open. canadians can fly in. but for border communities like ontario or vancouver and toronto which turned relatively close to the border, so is montreal, this restriction has really broken a link that was part of the quality of life of people in those communities. maybe they have relatives, family members on the others. we had stories of couples that were planning a wedding or families that are planning a funeral, and they can't cross the border to see one another and to be together at those import moments. there are individuals who have medical treatment across the border, coming into the united states maybe for some important gadgets that we have are some of the advanced and expensive medical care we have that is not available in canada, and they are allowed into the united states, but then they have difficulty getting back off of having to quarantine.

even comes down to silly things. last year, the toronto blue jays played in buffalo in an empty stadium, and canadian fans couldn't see them because the blue jays needed to be inside the united states so they could play with other teams. the couldn't do that from toronto. the nhl season, similarly, we saw a north division for the first time, keeping the canadian teams together because they were unable to go back and forth for games. all of this is part of the disruption which, as many americans know which was supposed to be two weeks to stem the spread, but quickly became 18 months, and i think we are well on our way to 24 months now. host: we are talking about the canadian elections. canadians will start voting today. christer sands -- christopher sands, our guest today.

c-span plans to air the results right here c-span.org on c-span, on c-span.org -- right here on c-span, on c-span.org, and on the free c-span radio app. when will we have the results? guest: polls are open for 12 hours in every jurisdiction, but over the years, because of the internet and whatnot, the concern has been they need to close the polls earlier on the west coast so that people don't give up, i guess, if their favorite party isn't doing well as it comes to the east coast. 85% of the seats in the house of commons, which are all of the seats that are up today, 85% of them are in just four provinces, quebec, ontario, british columbia, and alberta. any people in the smaller

provinces feel like a rounding error or an afterthought. but we are dealing with a situation here where we have a minority government. this current government has 155 seats out of the 338. 170 would be a majority, and that would allow them to have a fairly good, free hand to run the country. but with 155, on every major vote, they need to bring over some of the opposition and keep all of their members in line. party discipline is very tight in canada, very different than in our congress. there's not much question about how members of the liberal party will vote, but conservatives may not want to go over and election right away. they may choose to work with the government initially, particularly on big items of national interest. but the smaller parties are also in the mix. a social democratic party, the green party which is quite small. a quebec first party that runs canada's only in quebec.

and a new party pulling around 5% or 6%. their support is a bit scattered across the country, and it is not here they will win any seats, although their percentage of voters may look significant. it is a first pass the post single to strict mandate, much like the u.s. house of representatives, so if it is not a concentrated vote, you may not have anything. host: let's talk to joe, i republican. caller: i'm hoping canada and the united states would join as one nation. i am really hoping so. i think that would save a lot of money on the u.s. side, from pharmaceuticals and things like that, and it would probably save canada on food. they buy a lot of food from the united states.

host: christopher sands, go through the history of u.s. and canada separation. guest: this is one of those separated at birth stories, and a way. if you go back to 1770's, there were a number of colonies north of the border, including nova scotia in 1707, new brunswick and prince edward island, quebec and ontario, and a small vancouver colony that appears a bit later in the 18th century. all of those colonies were independent -- separate from one another. but after the american revolution, the colonies that remained part of british north america state separate with a westminster pollard mentoring model of government -- mr. parliamentary model of

government, unlike the united states. we thought we could persuade them to going us early on, and the war of 1812 was in some ways an attempt, we thought, to liberate canadians from british rule, that they would see the appeal of the united states and want to jump in and join our revolution. it turned out, though, that in that war, canadians decided to stay separate, and after the civil war, many canadians looked south and said america is grappling with some real problems. perhaps we should get together and form a supersized colony that can help this country to develop. so with british encouragement in 1867, canada became a dominion, a sort of super colony of the british empire, and remained that all the way through world war i. it was in the aftermath of world war ii the canada gained nominal independence, but we shouldn't forget queen elizabeth the second is also the queen of

canada, the reigning monarch. there's a governor general that represents her on a day-to-day basis, now mary simon, canada's first indigenous governor general, someone who comes from the any wood people at the arctic. so that system i think is one that canadians are proud of, but the caller is right, there's a lot of ways in which being separate countries creates some added costs and hassles and can be challenging for both governments. one thing i think, if we don't come together as a single country, we can at least rely on is we have always been able to cooperate reasonably well and overcome some of the problems as they come up. maybe not as fast as our citizens would like, but we have partnered on an awful lot of things that i thing we do very well together. host: where have we had to cooperate over the years? guest: we cooperated in building the st. lawrence seaway,

protecting the waters of the great lakes, in the early part of the 20th century when we were building dams along the columbia river. we created a watershed authority and began looking at how we could make sure enough water flowed from the headwaters of the columbia in canada all the way down to where the columbia meets the pacific, but between oregon and washington state. we worked together to allow that to continue. we have worked together also in big events such as the aftermath of 9/11. many of your viewers will maybe have heard about or seen musical "come from away," about how a small town in newfoundland excepted some of the people returning to the united states whose flights didn't have enough you will to go back to europe or their point of origin, and ended up landing in

newfoundland and staying until they could get back to the united states. this happens ad hoc, but based on the fact that canadians are by and large warm, friendly people, and in a crisis, good to have as partners and friends. host: and how did canadians react to president biden's withdrawal from afghanistan 20 years after those attacks? did they hear from their prime minister? guest: this was a bit of surprise to many canadians because their part in the war was significant, but ended in 2016 as the last canadian troops came home. canada lost about 162 people, particularly after he took the lead on a very important nato

mission. this was a tough fight for canadians. afghanistan sort of fell down the list of news items on the canadian news because there was no direct involvement, but there were many canadian citizens working with ngos who stayed after the period of canada's military deployment to participate in helping to rebuild afghanistan and work towards human rights there. i think this was where canadians were quite surprised. they didn't know that the u.s. was pulling out or would pull out so precipitously. i think like many americans, they were sad to see the disorganization, the chaos, the sense that there were individuals who were so desperate to get out of afghanistan, they were taking really harrowing risks like trying to hang onto airplanes that were taking off. i think that was a real shock for canadians. they sent their own troops to try to bring home as many canadian citizens as they could, but like most of the west, they

were not pleased with how that rolled out. i think they felt what they were left a little bit on their own and perhaps without much warning to deal with the crisis that unfolded. host: we will hear from brian in michigan, an independent. caller: can you hear me? host: yes we can. caller: looking out my window right now at the lake, about 50 miles out from canada. the problem i have with the narrative earlier, you said it was kind of to mulch with under trump. i don't believe that -- kind of tumulty was under trump. -- kind of tumultuous under trump. i don't believe that. you are on the precipice of allowing chinese troops to come and train in canada. what is up with that? guest: thanks for the call, and hello to michigan.

i am a detroit kid myself, so i appreciate that we are hearing for michigan on this one. i think probably growing up so close to canada is part of what drew me into the canada-u.s. relation and studying it as i do. on the tumultuous years of president trump, i wasn't trying to cast any aspersions, but there were a couple of things that highlighted those years. remember, donald trump wanted to redraft nafta, an agreement that was working well in canada. criticism came from american politicians simply because it never translated into action from the george h w bush, bill clinton election all the way through the election of 2016. we have at least one candidate, ross perot and then ralph nader, and then later even some

democrats like president obama and hillary clinton, and by 2016, both hillary clinton and donald trump were critics of nafta, calling for its we negotiation or elimination. when donald trump came into office and made clear he intended to actually renegotiate or scrap nafta, it was very unsettling for canadians. in the end, we came up with an agreement, the usmca, and i think it is a good agreement, and i am glad we continue to have market access for canadians, but it was very unsettling. one thing about canadians is they often have lower risk appetite, as they stay in the stock, than average americans do. . that is what i meant. . in the end. , it was a tumultuous

period. it was donald trump who, on his way to his next big meeting in asia, called premise or trudeau weak and two-faced. this led to many canadians to feel that that was just plain rude. it was certainly something justin trudeau didn't take particularly well. so not an easy time. on the question of chinese troops, there had been an arrangement going back sometime to allow china to do some training in canada. the plans were made well before the arrest of the huawei chief financial officer on a u.s. warrant because she was being accused by the united states of having and run iran sanctions.

they took to canadians hostage and charged them with espionage. sentenced to one, we are still waiting for a ruling on another. this is really soured -- but this has really soured china-canada relations. we had some really harsh words. so i think many canadians share that concern, how did canada ever find itself posting military exercises with a country like china. i think the answer is those were contemplated in a better time, and when it became clear they were going to continue, given the current atmosphere, justin trudeau and the canadian government were quite within their rights to suggest this had to be stopped and canceled. but you make plans and you hope that things work out, but in this case, i think events made to going. ahead with those plans simply impossible. -- made going ahead with those

plans simply impossible. host: carl in new york, good morning. caller: i'm interested to know how the canadian electorate view the american discourage with their elections. are they concerned about fraudulent balloting? do they feel secure with their voting machines? do they think there is evil afoot to bankrupt their elections? guest: thank you very much. it is a good question. one way to address it is to describe what canadians are doing today as they vote. what is interesting in their system is they will be going in and making a single choice on a relatively small piece of paper,

or sometimes a machine, although it is usually paper in canada. they are going to tick a box. there will be candidates from the major parties running. there are some candidates that are small and don't run -- some parties that are small and don't run a candidate in each constituency represented in the house of commons. but they are only making one choice, so voting is quick. there's no referendum or race for local school board to distract the voters. they have a 36 day campaign to hear the arguments of the various parties, and then they make a single decision. because it is just one decision, it is much easier to tally the result and much harder to figure results. election administration in canada has been pretty good. i mentioned earlier in the show about mail-in ballots.

we think there are about 1.2 million. in many u.s. jurisdictions, election officials send out ballots to everyone on the electoral roles so they can avoid having to come in if they were nervous about covid. but because not everyone was at the same address, because there were individuals who had changed where they were, they were ballots floating around that people worried might fall into fraudulent hands or might be returned by the wrong people. that i think undermined confidence in the u.s. election system. another challenge that we had, and you will remember well, is that elections in the u.s. are administered locally, by states and counties and cities, and then those votes are reported up. that allows the u.s. to have quite a few different approaches. some use machines. some use different kind of machines. some use paper as a backup. we remember from 2000 the punchcard system in florida, the

hanging chads being scrutinized to give us a result. canada's system is much simpler. there are election administrators in every province in a national election role, and these have doubled up a lot of confidence in the system. today, because we expect it is very close, it is possible people will be wondering whether one side or another have pulled a dirty trick, but it is so rare in canada, i suspect most people will be accepting of the results when they come in. i will give you an example of canadian confidence in their elections. in the famous 1995 quebec referendum on independence from canada, they talked about negotiating a way out of canada. in 1995, the result was 50.4% for staying in canada and 49.6% for leaving canada. that is a very narrow margin.

in an inquiry after the election, it appeared that the federal government may have spent more in that campaign then it should have done, according to campaign-finance rules. so a very narrow results, and some suggestion that the federal government side, which won might have done something illegal. nevertheless, canadians have accepted that result and moved on, although there was an inquiry into the illegal spending. there has not been an outcry, and uproar, or to a demand for another referendum election since 1995 area i think that reflex canadians -- since 1995. i think that reflex canadians' confidence in the election. host: bill in virginia beach. caller: i am going to have to

change my question because the previous one stole my thunder and you extensively answered it. united states appears to be very strongly divided politically amongst not only the congress, but the people. canada does not appear to be divided to such a degree as the united states. you have any comments to make about my statement? guest: i do, and hello to virginia beach. it is a matter of degree. canadians are also quite divided between different political parties, but there are two factors that i think have made canada go through a little bit less of the vitriol and harsh polarization the united states has. one is the parliament tree system itself. because the leader of the opposition and the prime ministers across from each other in the commons chamber and there's a question period, or

prime ministers questions that occurs, most days while parliament is in session, there is a human connection between leaders. i have known and had a chance to meet and chat with several canadian prime meet with leaders of the opposition and while they will disagree very forcefully with one another, i have never heard anyone suggest there opposition is evil, wrong maybe, but not people. it is remarkable how many relationships exist between the same region that have served together. canada is a big country. if you're from alberta or newfoundland, you have an affinity for those who grew up there. but it is also because canadian politics has a little more closeness between leaders. it is hard to demonize somebody

that you know so well and are likely to have a drink with afterwards or occasionally get together with for a meal or with their families. having said that, canada usually gets some version of all of our political problems. so in the 1980's and 1990's, was a negative campaign advertising. we have seen a lot of push, pulling and grappling with misinformation and disinformation which may be coming from domestic sources or international stoking divisions between different parts of the country as we have seen in the united date as well. that has led to an intensity about the election, strong feelings about individuals. this campaign has been quite shocking, because at least four canadians that have been protesters calling out cuss words at the prime minister and

trying to shut him down and even shockingly to throw rocks at him he is doing a public appearance. very unusual for canada to see that. a couple of years ago i took some students to alberta and the premier there is a former federal cabinet minister is now the head of the abortive province and his opposition leader i had met and known and abroad students to meet -- head of the alberta province and his opposition leader i had met her and brought students to meet her. there were a lot of harsh words being said about him and what did she think about it. she said, i think people in politics today get too angry, and it is very hard on individuals and their families to put up with the kind of things that are said and the threats that are made for anyone

in political life. it comes back to the initial observation that the manatee and members of different political parties grant to one another that makes it that much easier to break bread but not be quite as nasty. but the nastiness is creeping into canadian politics and is worrying a lot of canadians and should certainly worry us. host: will you be tweeting about tonight election? guest: i am. there is a feature and i don't know if it works but twitter space and i am going to try to do some commentary with friends this evening if people want to tune in. just find me on twitter. it is sandsatwilson.

or you can find me at the woodrow wilson center. i am looking forward to the election and trying to unpack the preliminary results. we will be watching the c-span coverage if that goes ahead. host: we are guessing around 9:00 p.m. eastern time they will be out. thank you for the preview. guest: thank you. thank you for the viewers who called in. host: we are going to take a break, when we come back, we will talk with paul offit dr. paul offit , fda advisor in the debate about booster shots and vaccinating kids under 12. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] ♪ >> you can be a part of the

national conversation by participating in the studentcam video competition. your opinion matters. if you are a middle or a high school student, create a five to six minute dockery that answers the question, how does the federal government -- six-minute documentary that answers the question, how does the federal government affect you. use c-span video clips that are easy to find. the studentcam competition awards $1000 and a shot at the grand prize of $5,000. entries must be received before january 20 2022. for competition rules or how to get started, visit our website. ♪

>> "washington journal" continues. host: joining us is dr. paul offit come the director of the vaccination center at children's hospital in philadelphia and a member of the food and drug administration vaccine advisory committee. let's begin with the news from last week. the advisory panel you serve on, what you cite when it comes to boosters and why? -- what did you decide when it comes to boosters and why? guest: the question was, were we

willing to allow pfizer to have their vaccine for anyone over --. the israeli data that was being used we didn't feel was applicable to all the studies we have seen in the united states. all of the studies the pfizer vaccine, including for delta and all age groups, showed that protection against serious illness was holding up, in the high 80 or low 90% range. that was a variance with the studies from israel that stated protection wasn't holding up for those over 60 years of age. we weren't sure why there was a difference but we have seen protection against serious disease was excellent here. that is the goal of the vaccine. it was easy to say that we could approve this for those over 65 for the same reason we approved it for people who were immune

compromised. as you get older, your immune system is not as vigorous as when you were younger. then the question became how about recommended that for people at high risk, obesity, type two diabetes, asthma and other high-risk conditions, and we did agree to do that. the thinking there was similar that someone who is at high risk may also not be able to respond quite as well and would benefit from a third dose although the data was softer. the general thought was that it is clear that as time goes on, antibodies directed against the virus, it will decline and associated with it there will be an increase in a demented infection, mildly symptomatic infection. if you have a mildly it symptomatically infection, that is not a big deal. but when that happens, you are contagious and in theory could get a better hold of this

pandemic by giving a third dose. i am not sure what that will impact the pandemic. the problem that we have right now and the reason we have a continued pandemic will not be resolved by vaccinating people who have already received two doses. all of the people who have high-risk conditions that we see in the hospital are unvaccinated. we will see what impact this has on the pandemic that is how we came to that decision. host: if fulks who are unvaccinated a going to remain unvaccinated -- if folks who are unvaccinated are going to remain unvaccinated, why not you those vaccinated it booster dose guest:? guest:-- booster dose? guest: if you're trying to get back to the lives we lead for, the best way is to vaccinate the unvaccinated and everything you can.

the third dose, i hope it has a bigger impact in terms of contagiousness, but you are less contagious when you are previously vaccinated than unvaccinated people. the people at high risk that out to the hospital have not received any vaccines, nor has anybody in the household. that is usually what we see. it is about vaccinating the unvaccinated. that should be the biggest focus. i don't think there is a downside but i think what we have created and it was a communications error, we created the notion that people who only received two doses it are not adequately protected. i have received two doses and i might get a third but i don't think it will make a huge difference. host: who is responsible for that miscommunication could the

president wanted to get booster shots this week. did he get ahead of the science? guest: he got ahead of the scientific process. you define the problem and the problem is that over time there is an erosion in neutralizing antibodies and protection against mildly symptomatic infections. the solution to that problem is a booster dose. you have a problem, you have a solution and you show data to the fda showing you have a solution to the problem and the fda which is a regulatory body, allows the vaccine to be distributed and then it goes to the cdc, the recommending body and they make the recommendation. they got a little ahead of the process but not the science. the science is solid.

do you want the agencies to weigh in here you don't want to marginalize those. by the end of the week, americans should have a clear idea for whom poster -- the booster dose will be recommended. host: do you think the fda will follow what you said? guest: they typically follow. we will see whether it happens. the cdc may accept that or not accept that or they may add that anyone who works in a job where there is a high risk of transmission should also get the

booster. there will be some upside. what is at issue is just how big of an impact that will have, how much of the upside is it. host: the washington post wrote that the u.s. is paying -- the economic cost benefit seems to favor boosters. your response. guest: it depends on what the effect of the booster dose is. to what extent does that impact? i certainly agree a booster dose is trivial in getting an infusion. but what impact is this having? are we having a significant impact on disease in this country because if we aren't than giving a booster dose -- you have to be careful that all

the data that were generated over the pfizer vaccines were over two doses. we had a trial submitted for approval back on december 10 of last year. we had a big platform for two doses. now we are giving a third dose and the data submitted involved 306 people. at any time you give a medical product that has a positive effect and it will have a positive effect, you can i was have a negative effect you want to make sure the risk clearly outweighs the benefits. host: what are the risks? guest: we know the second dose there were different colts side effects that include fever, joint pain, muscle pain, nausea, down area -- diarrhea. for the younger people, there was the issue of myocarditis,

information of the heart muscle. it was higher in the younger age group that was brought up at the advisory meeting last friday. you want to have a really good reason to give a third dose to a young group, because remember it was the second dose that cause the myocarditis. the reason is because it was a booster. if the third one is a greater blister, could we increase this risk the rare but serious adverse event of myocarditis? host: the question journalists -- the "washington journal said some on the panel worried about global vaccine equity and they write but that is not your responsibility as the advisory panel. can you respond to that? guest: peter marx made it clear at the beginning of our discussion that that was not to

be part of our discussion. we were there to discuss the risks and benefits and to whom we wanted to recommend and what circumstances we wanted to recommend it at the global equity was not part of it. we are virologists and immunologists and specialists. it's is not necessarily we should weigh in on. i think it is ultimately something the federal government should consider. host: your response to the breaking news that pfizer said it's covid vaccine works for kids ages five to 11 and plans to seek authorization soon? guest: we are in an age of science by press release. you have the one page document looking at this 2300 child study between five and 11 years, looking primarily at immune responsive. this was an effectiveness study and you weren't looking at the disease in the group.

there is far more data to look at hopefully we will get that to review within the next few weeks so we can make the best decision for america's children. host: what happens next when they seek authorization? guest: the company submits a document to the fda for review. the fda reviews the data and will look at every child that that the vaccine and every piece of information. then they will create their own documents. they are typically 100 pages long. and then the advisory committee if they seek the advice will look at the data and we will make a recommendation and the fda will either accept or not accept and then it goes to the cdc. hope is that we will get the data submitted by the end of

september, no later than the beginning of october and we will be asked to take a look. host: dr. paul offit , what you see with the booster with kids at the hospital you work at? guest: we have had a clear increase in cases we had a lot of covid patients, some of whom were very ill, critically ill. it is frustrating. this has always been frustrating. it was frustrating last year when we admitted kids and now it is even more frustrated. it was mostly because they were unvaccinated and the families were unvaccinated. this is frustrating because this is in many ways preventable. if the children are hospitalized they generally aren't vaccinated

people i would argue most to see the first two doses if we are going to impact this pandemic. host: why did we see the uptick in cases with the delta variant and children? guest: it is clearly more transmissible. what you have in children less than 12 a fully susceptible population and children between 12 and 15 only about 50% or so are vaccinated. you have an under vaccinated population. as we head towards cooler weather, red is easier. -- the spread is easier. people who are older have largely been vaccinated but it is the younger population that hasn't. host: we are asking parents to join us.

(202) 748-8001. 0. all others call (202) 748-8001. what are you expecting with children getting vaccines? guest: what you look at is safety for the younger age group who we all have to do is more vulnerable. you want to make sure the product is safe and they have the right dose. the dose give over 12 is 30 micrograms per dose. for the five to 11 years is 10 micrograms. and the dose given to six month old five-year-old children is three micrograms, so 1/10 of that given to adults. how did they come to the conclusion of these. what were the studies? and what is the data, what is

the neutral rotting -- antibodies? they are mostly going to be not efficacy studies. that is what you look for. host: we will take your questions and comments about vaccinating children and boosters. audrey in alabama, good morning to you. caller: i husband and i are part of the over one million people that that a third vaccine at walgreens and i had a question about my son peered he will be 20 october 3 -- son. he will be 20 on october 3. when he was first vaccinated,

the information about the myocarditis hadn't come out and i was just wondering, because he does have pre-existing and will be at for severe disease. you said one in 50,000. i just had a question as to whether if it was your son, would you recommend a booster? guest: do you mind if i ask you what is his high-risk condition? caller: asthma. guest: to be honest he is 20 and otherwise healthy because of his asthma? caller: yes, sir. guest: i would probably wait until the first million doses are out there in his age group peered he has gotten to doses and it does protect him against serious disease. the third dose will help him be more protected which would not

be a huge risk for him. i would wait a little while until the first few million doses are out there in his age group, just make sure there are no surprises. myocarditis was a surprise. when the studies were done of the pfizer vaccine, we didn't know myocarditis was going to be a problem. the only way we knew was when it was intense of millions of people. i would wait. your son is protected to a great degree against serious disease. it is not like you are jumping without a net. host: do you have a follow-up? caller: that was very helpful. you all have a blessed day host:. host:-- day. host: linda in connecticut. caller: i am a big fan.

i have all of your books. i received two shots of the moderna. the first one may have been given incorrectly and may have been ineffective. i just don't know. my doctor suggested i have an antibody test for an ig spike which came back as greater than or equal to 28. then he wasn't really sure what it meant. my question is, what a booster give me enough protection if the first shot was ineffective and how would i know? is there any antibody test? i'm just wondering that the people in trials were given an antibody test and i am wondering is there something i could take to know if i am protected. i definitely want the booster, but i just want to know i'm protected from covid.

guest: why did you think the first shot was ineffective? caller: well, it was given back in my arm and i'm not sure if there was enough of the vaccine in the vial. i took a look at it and it didn't look right. i had no reaction whatsoever to the first shot. the second shot, i really had a big reaction. i had the covid arm. i read somewhere if you -- somewhere you only get covid arm if you didn't get the first one. the just a position --

juxtaposition of the two, i just wondered. not seeing much vaccine in the needle made me nervous. guest: i think the fact that you had a brisk reaction to the second dose tells you the first dose was given correctly. otherwise, you would've had no reaction as if you were getting the first dose. i think you can consider yourself immune. when looking at antibodies and the spike protein in circulation helps you know you are protected. the cdc says don't do that because you will drive yourself crazy. there are people who may not have high levels but they have high frequencies of memory be cells that make the bodies in which case you are protected. i wouldn't be in any rush to get a booster dose pi would consider yourself protected. host: let's go to linda in

newberry, florida. caller: i am worried about the low temperatures the vaccines have to be kept at. who is monitoring that the temperatures are kept at the right temperature? is it the manufacturers? host: dr. offit? guest: the pfizer vaccine has to be -62 -80 centigrade, which means dry ice. we haven't had that in any vaccine and it has to be stored that way. you have about a five date life in the refrigerator which is shorter than most vaccines. once you violate the rubber stopper, you have five hours to give every vaccine in the vial. there are unusual storage and handling characteristics with this vaccine that make one reasonably worried about making

sure the places are handling it that it is handled correctly. i haven't heard anything about people who are getting vaccines that are no longer effective because of inadequate storage issues. to date, i think we are good. it is understandable you would have that concern. host: we heard from viewers who say they want somebody to explain the science to them on why these vaccines are effective. how does it work in my body? guest: they are remarkably effective. the first mrna vaccines, i was on the committee and we were asked to approve if it was at least 50% effective. dr. fauci early on set he was hopeful it could be 70%. it is like 95% effective in those first few months, the trials we considered. it is a novel technology. we have never used this

technology to make a vaccine before. normally if you induce an immune response against a virus, you would give a life, weakened form , a severely weakened form of the virus. that is how we make weasels, monks, -- measles, mumps. or you give it killed form like the polio and titus and rabies vaccines. or you can take one protein of the virus, which is how we make the hepatitis be or human papilloma virus. what you do here is inoculate the gene that coats with that one protein. instead of giving one protein from hepatitis b or from human papilloma i was vaccine, we give read that the gene that coats it. it is a piece of messenger rna which is the blueprint that

educates the cell for how to make the protein. it is in a lipid nano particle taken up by the cell and the messenger rna enters the cytoplasm or the area outside the nucleus and then ends -- enters the ribosomal system and transfers the gene into a protein. it is a little like a life, weakened virus but your cell makes the protein and the protein is put on the surface of the cell and stimulates the immune system. it has a dramatic capacity for a great immune response and when you see fever and fatigue, headache, nausea, that is all a product of your immune system. that is your immune system and it has side effects.

what you see also is a swelling underneath the arm at the site where the shot was given. we used to see that with the smallpox vaccine. i haven't seen that since. that is another indication of what a power immune engine this is. it remains excellent at protection against serious illness because the memory cells generally would be long-lived. when we talk about giving a booster, the reason we get it is there starts to be a decline in antibodies in the circulation, not memory cells but circulation and that comes an increased risk of a symptom attic infection or mildly symptom attic infection, -- risk of a symptomatic infection or mildly symptomatic

infection. if you look at state like connecticut, vermont, nasa chooses that have high vaccination rates, they have lower incidence of disease. i think it is possible to get on top of this pandemic with the two doses. we will not be allowed to find that out because there is a significant part of the population that refuses to be vaccinated. it is frustrating and i am not sure how to deal with it other than what we are trying to do is to make vaccines mandatory. host: what percentage does need to be vaccinated? guest: 90%. host: are you worried that there could be people just tired of getting vaccines, even the people who get vaccines and then

requiring them to get boosters and the next variant comes along and you booster doesn't protect you from this variant? guest: there was the ancestral strain from wuhan or outside of wuhan and then the first that left china was the first variant. that is the one that swept across asia, europe, the u.s. that was replaced by the alpha variant because it was more contagion -- contagious and then replaced by delta. all are susceptible to the vaccination for serious disease. i remain optimistic that we can get good protection against serious disease even though we are still using the original strain peered we had the ability to make vaccines specifically --

strain it. we have the ability to make vaccines with the other strains. this vaccine is a slow mutate or. coronaviruses are slow mutate or's compared to viruses like influenza. i am -- slow mutaters. they are -- coronaviruses are slow mutaters compared to viruses like influenza. people it is not hard to convince people who have gotten vaccinated to get more the hard part is convincing people who haven't gotten a vaccine to get anything. host: a poll said 73% would take over vaccine boosters as well. let's go to jane in new york.

caller: i would like to ask a question about mixing the vaccines. i am 65 and high risk. they want me to take another vaccine to be like a booster or a booster to enhance what i have with the johnson & johnson vaccine. i am questioning whether we can take a pfizer on top of a johnson & johnson vaccine. guest: those data are being generated. i think the answer will be yes soon. johnson & johnson also has a two dose trial in my believe is they have completed it. we will see. what i would say is hang in there. i think we will have a more formal recommendation on that by as early as the end of this

week. the cdc will meet and discuss the issue of booster dosing and will address those who have received one dose of johnson & johnson host:. . host: if you got the one shot of johnson & johnson, if you get a booster, will it be like a second dose? host: to new york. caller: i have a four-year-old, a six-year-old, and a 10-year-old. the two older kids are in public school. we mask my husband and i are vaccinated. we live in an area that is 60% fully vaccinated. our governor asked us to mask the younger child. i wanted to find out, what do you think her level of risk is

that a four-year-old should be masked in school. my other question is, what is really the data about that very young age group. i have friends with two-year-olds that have to mask and we are all trying to figure it out because there is no information on how many children ages 2, 3, and four actually get the delta variant and end up in the hospital. host: how difficult is it to keep a mask on your four-year-old? caller: it is very hard. she keeps chewing it. it is a lot. they have to put it on indoors. the only to get off to eat. she has starting not only chewing that and has developed, i hope it doesn't turn into a

tick, because one of the older one has it and now she chews on anything. i am a little bit worried because when they come home, i have to constantly figure out ways to distract them and remind them to stop doing on things that are supposed to be in their mouth. host: dr. offit? guest: i think we are heading into a difficult time. you have the delta variant which is more transmissible peer you have a fully susceptible population of children less than 12. they are all now going to be gathering in one place. we note this is a childhood disease children now account for 27% of all cases compared to when the virus first came in when they accounted for 3%. this is becoming more and more

childhood illness. we had 200 50,000 cases last week and -- we had 2500 cases last week. although it is less frequent that you have a child less than five who is hurt by this virus, it does happen. the only weapon they have coming into september, october, is mask's and social distancing. one of the reasons it is so much worse now than a year ago. before we had a vaccine, we had a fully susceptible population and the numbers were better than they are now in terms of hospitalizations. and the reason is our behavior. last year, many public schools were not open and those that were open were very careful. that is not true this year. there were 67,000 people at an

eagles game yesterday and pretty much none the year before peered we are gathering in large numbers and spreading this virus . i worry about school settings. my advice would be do the best you can to keep a mask on your child. i know it is hard. i don't how your school district works, it would certainly benefit from a mask mandate and a vaccination mandate for teachers. you shouldn't have to mandate vaccines. anybody who looks at the data would get a vaccine in a minute. it is upsetting when teachers choose not to vaccinate when they walk into a classroom with fully susceptible children. host: sheila wants to know how money have underlying illnesses

that you are seeing in the hospital? they are all normally healthy kids? guest: i would say one third is healthy. i would say the number one is obesity. when you walk in and they are ventilated, they are usually obese. type 2 diabetes and asthma are a little less and obesity is the biggest one we see. host: why obesity? guest: i don't know. it seems to be more abdominal obesity and it may have something to do with being able to expand long's. ungs. host: do think more data is needed?

guest: we are continually learning. we have a drug now we are using for children severely ill. we are learning as we go. i trained back in the late 1970's and early 1980's and that was when hiv came to this country. we learned as we went and this is now the new thing we are learning about as we learn about the virus. host: another question was not religious exemptions for the mrna messenger as you talked about pay can you address that, people who have concerns -- you talked about. can you address that, people who have concerns? guest: i have never understood this. many states have religious or philosophical. religious doesn't make sense

peered all religions teach us to care about our children and family and neighbors and a society. the notion of putting yourself or your child in harm's way unnecessarily in the name of your religion seems like a profoundly on religious to do. i know in many settings in which vaccines are mandatory they are allowing for religious exemptions but it sounds like a contradiction in terms. where is the wisdom that said it is better to get -- not get a vaccine then to get one. religion is a belief. there is an enormous body of information supporting the vaccines. no medical product is actually safe. -- is absolutely safe.

host: welcome to the conversation. caller: people who have been vaccinated and the antibodies had time to develop peered i heard a story about a 14-year-old boy whose mother took him to get vaccinated a week before school started and then he died two weeks later. he didn't time for his antibodies to start developing to protect them. i also hear people who have been exposed to covid and then they go to walgreens to get a shot and they think that will protect them after they have been exposed. i was looking at some polls the other day. host: can i have you asked your

question? caller: why don't they put the numbers out there that these people that are getting covid and are vaccinated? why don't they let these people know they didn't have time for the antibodies to help fight virus? guest: know vaccine is 100% effective but they are highly effective. -- no vaccine is 100% effective but they are highly effective. if you have vaccinations, what is your chance of being hospitalized? the number is extremely low. the massachusetts outbreak here were thousands of men getting together indoor without masks. 79% had been vaccinated, despite the fact that they were vaccinated, 340 six of them got infected.

so vaccinated got covid. of the 346, four were hospitalized and a hospital rate of 1.2%. that is the number you need to know. you don't need to know the number of people hospitalized vaccinated or unvaccinated. but you want to know who got the covid vaccine who were then hospitalized. if fantasies could come true, you would vaccinate 100% of the people in the country. what you will see over time as we vaccinate more and more people, there will be a larger percentage of people despite being vaccinated are hospitalized. you will see those numbers in terms of percentage previously vaccinated will increase as you vaccinate more and more people. the number you need to know is what my chances of being vaccinated?

it is extremely low. host: connie in north carolina. caller: i got the johnson and johnson. they haven't talked as much about johnson & johnson as the other two. my biggest concerns is my friend had maternal. he got covid. but then he got pneumonia and was hospitalized for 13 days and almost had to go on a ventilator but didn't. should you get the pneumonia vaccine, and how quick do you get that to win you get your vaccination? host: dr. offit?

guest: people over 60 should get the pneumococcal vaccine. they only work to prevent disease. they don't work to treat the disease. it won't work once you have already gotten the disease. if there hospitalized for pneumococcal pneumonia, it would be too late to get it in that setting for for -- for certain age group you are recommended to get the pneumococcal vaccine. host: has the doctor reviewed natural immunity from israel? it appears those who have had the virus and recovered have better protection than the vaccine offers. guest: that study was the notion that if you got naturally infected and compared those who are vaccinated that you are less likely to get a disease moving forward if you are naturally infected and vaccinated.

that is an outlier based on small studies. i am not convinced of that. we need to do those kinds of studies more and more and they aren't done enough. we know if you are naturally infected and then get vaccinated compared to infected and not vaccinated then you are 2.5 times less likely to get infected. there was an advantage to boosting someone who has been naturally infected. people are asking if i have been naturally infected can i assert i am protected against serious illness as someone who is vaccinated. you could reasonably assert that . you could say i have been naturally infected and i have antibodies against the so-called virus which proves that i have been naturally infected. i don't think i need a vaccine. i think you could make that case. that is a reasonable top off for people who are against the

mandate because they have been infected. i think they are right. host: how would you prove that? guest: when you get a vaccine you are getting a spike in the protein. you can look at whether or not you have antibodies to the nuclear protein. if you have antibodies to the nuclear protein that proves you are naturally infected. caller: is it likely to get dependent on the covid vaccine? is there any report of people who have received the booster shot? i got mine and i feel like i am

15 years younger. i have more energy. my pain level is lower than it was. is there something in there that maybe it stood my immunity? i was just wondering if you could help me out with that. guest: that is a new one on me. i'm glad you are feeling better. you are not protected against covid. there was a fellow who worked in our division was trying to explain to their nephew on how they work. she is waiting nervously outside the room here he goes in and get his vaccine and he walks out and throws his hands and screams, i'm immune. there is a lot to be said with feeling better. i am all for it. host: jerry in huntington beach,

california. caller: the question i have is, it seems like there have been fewer deaths from people hospitalized. have they improved their treatment? or is it to something they are not accurate about. guest: you are we are understanding when you have pneumonia, you have two problems, taking oxygen and putting it in and taking carbon dioxide from your blood and putting it back into the air. we are getting better at how best to ventilate people and who to ventilate. our drugs are better and is now clear that dexamethasone for those who require oxygen and also another drug that has

certainly been shown to reduce mortality. i think we are relying less heavily on remdesivir because it wasn't the wonder drug we hoped. and the monoclonal antibodies, we are learning if we can get them early enough, you really can't prevent hospitalization and people who are already infected. i think we are getting there. host: a viewer wants to know, we are going to get our annual flu shot this week, how long after that should be get the covid-19 booster chuck? -- shot? guest: i would wait two weeks. host: dug in wyoming. go ahead -- doug in wyoming.

caller: i am wondering about strain this exercise if it might mitigate the adverse side effects of the vaccine. i worked out with my barbells and run -- ran before i got my vaccination and i felt no side effects: area. -- i felt no side effects in the -- other than the swollen area. i am inclined to put that with the exercise i had before. is that something you would recommend to other people getting vaccinated? guest: it is a testable

hypothesis. you could put them in half and give them the vaccines and see what happens. it is an interesting idea. what happened to me after i got my second dose, i just whined. host: who took care of you? guest: my long-suffering wife. host: next is ron. caller: i found a california company that is now in south africa doing clinical trials and they have been themselves so far very effective with the emphasis on boosting immunity as opposed to antibodies.

is there anything to report for this being authorized or approved for use? guest: i haven't heard that, by boosting the immunity and not the antibodies do you mean boosting native immunity. maybe that is what they mean and i have not seen those data. the good news about these kinds of scientific issues if you can only prove them. you could see whether or not that therapy worked or didn't work on what the side effects were. that is what has always been reassuring about the science is that it stands on evidence and doesn't have to be about belief and what people feel to be true.

host: teresa and savannah, georgia. caller: who do we report vaccine side effects to when we don't have insurance? guest: there is a system called vaccine adverse event recording system. it is a form you fill out online that you can report about the side effects you think was associated with the vaccine. host: pfizer said they feel their vaccine is safe for children five to 12. what do you think the timeline is? when do you think we could begin vaccinating that group of children? guest: the earliest would be the end of september that they would

submit and then it takes many days to review the data and they put out their own report and then the reports come together and they go to the advisory committee and asked us to review it and then we review it and we do have dates set aside in october to review this if that is what they decide to do. once we make a recommendation, the fda typically follows and a day or two and the cdc is able to make a recommendation for a few days. you would hope this will all happen then no later than the middle of october host:. . host: we will be back tomorrow at 7:00 a.m. eastern time. enjoy your day. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] ♪

>> c-span is your unfiltered view of government, funded by these television stations and more, including comcast. >> you think this is just a community center? >> it is way more than that. >> comcast is partnering with 1,000 community centers to create wi-fi for students and low income families so they can get the tools they need to be ready for anything. >> comcast supports c-span as a public service along with these other public providers, giving you a front row seat to democracy. >> tonight, election night in canada results, live at 9:00 p.m. eastern on c-span you can

also watch online at c-span.org or listen on the free c-span radio app. >> coming up, homeland security secretary, fbi director christopher wray, and national counterterrorism director appear before congress on threat to the homeland 20 years after 9/11. live coverage of the testimony before the committee on tuesday at 9:30 a.m. eastern and the house homeland committee on wednesday at 9:00 a.m. eastern and later watch this week on the ben network -- the c-span networks or listen on the free c-span radio app. also visit c-span.org for scheduling or on-demand at any time.