house debates on government funding, debt limit increase and infrastructure legislation. join the discussion with your phone calls, facebook comments, text messages and tweets. "washington journal" is next. >> on this vote, the yeas are 48, the nays are 50. the motion is not agreed to. ♪ host: the call of the vote yesterday in the u.s. senate that blocked debate on a short-term measure to keep the government open and funded and suspend the debt ceiling through december of 2022. it may add not only to the uncertain young capitol hill but may further worry the financial markets and cause americans to question if, how, and when the government can pay its bills.

good morning. on the first hour, in the first hour we will talk about the vote and the debate yesterday, what's ahead for government funding, what's ahead for the infrastructure plan in the house and the fate of the 3.5 trillion dollar budget resolution. all of that in your phone calls, at (202) 748-8000 for democrats. republicans, (202) 748-8001. independents and others, (202) 748-8002. you can always send us a text at (202) 748-8003 and if\ you do that, make sure include your name and where you are texting from. we will look for your posts on instagram and twitter on -- at @cspanwj. this is the front page of the hill.

gop blocks debt bill, senate republicans filibuster a measure to fund the government and raise the debt ceiling, leaving congress at a crossroads on how to raise the borrowing limit of the nation. also from "the new york times" this morning, republicans block government funding, refusing to raise debt limit, blocking a spending bill needed to avert a government shutdown and a federal debt default next month, moving the nation closer to the brink of a fiscal crisis as they refused to allow democrats to lift the limit on borrowing. in the article, she says this about the debt limit

host: right after that vote on the senate floor, chuck schumer rose to talk about what's ahead. [video clip] >> i want to make sure everyone understands exactly what has happened here on the senate lore. the republican party has now become the party of default. the party that says america doesn't pay its debts. our country is staring down the barrel of two totally republican manufactured disasters. a government shutdown and a first ever default on the national debt. the impacts of both will gravely harm every single american in this country. republicans would let the country default for the first

time in history. a few moments ago the senate had an opportunity to begin solving these problems right away. democrats did their part and voted yes. senate republicans meanwhile voted to drive our country straight towards a government shutdown and the first default in our country's history. let me be clear, what the republicans in the senate did tonight is not normal. this isn't your typical washington fracas and shouldn't be treated as such. it has far more severe consequences than a typical political catfight. republicans know the consequences. they know that default would likely create recession and they know that middle-class families will suffer. they have heard the same warnings we have and by many calculations, the republican default will raise the deficit by more than the american rescue plan. and yet, republicans still

obstructed tonight. it's one of the most reckless, your responsible votes i have seen taken place in the senate and it should send a signal to every family, small business, market watcher about who in this chamber is in favor of endangering the economic stability of our country and who isn't. host: a couple of text comments this morning, from "the hill," wall street braces for volatility. from punch bowl, "house republicans plotting to hold back votes on infrastructure until democrats pass a bill on their own, a tactic that will force speaker pelosi to get 218 votes and on their own we will see if rank-and-file will follow suit. over to the house side with this story from "the washington

post," house democrats meet on the biden agenda divide, seeking to quell an internal democratic revolt over the biden economic agenda as growing riffs in the party threatened to scuttle a plan to vote on a $1 trillion package to improve national infrastructure with the speaker delivering her please at a meeting where she and a roster of congressional allies made the case for unity among the increasingly discordant liberal and moderate ranks, addressing the caucus pelosi and other leaders doubling down on their plan to hold the infrastructure vote as plan, backing off on an earlier attempt to vote this week on the $3.5 trillion package, citing the fact that the lawmakers continue to negotiate the contours with centrists led by joe manchin, kyrsten sinema. she warned that the package is likely to be smaller than the

price tag that some democrats initially anticipated, according to multiple lawmakers who attended the meeting. your thoughts about all the things going on on capitol hill, the vote in the senate yesterday, continue debate in the house on infrastructure. they will be in at 10:00 to finish up the debate on the infrastructure bill that had already passed in the senate. the house here on c-span at 10:00, the senate on c-span two. phone lines, democrats, it's (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001. independents and others, (202) 748-8002. this is the short-term spending measure passed in the house last week on a partyline vote that would fund the federal government through december the third of this year and then it

would spend the debt ceiling, the debt limit through -- suspended through december 16 of 2022. in the bill there are 28 point $6 billion for natural disaster relief, including hurricane ida and the wildfires in the west and more with $6.3 billion for the resettlement of afghan refugees. the bill, blocked last night in the senate, facing a thursday deadline to get funding past by the end of the current government fiscal year. let's go first to richard in clarksville, tennessee. richard, go ahead. caller: good morning, this is richard. i watch a little bit of c-span and i'm glad i am able to speak a little. the fact is we pay the senators, the house of representatives, what, 30 days to do what?

they went on vacation? they are acting not out of humanity. they are actually carrying on like dog people, like fighting dogs. or like we are in a third world. these senators are not doing what they should at all. they are not with the program. they need to get together to do what's needed for the people in a humane way and not act like, you know, dogs being connected, biting each other like pit holes. we are a unit. we need to be treated that way and continue living in the 21st century. we must go on with our lives in a polite way. host: richard in tennessee, all right. mitch mcconnell came to the floor last night.

[video clip] >> on the debt limit, democrats have all the time and tools to do what they need to do and i have explained in detail how they need to proceed. because democrats ignored our warning back in july, they must amend their previous budget resolution with debt limit instructions and proceed through a fast-track process. on the more urgent issue of government funding, senator shelby and i have a clean cr that could pass today. our bill tracks with bipartisan talks. it would keep the government open, fund disaster relief for the louisiana and fund defensive assistance to our ally, israel, their dome, dropping the debt limit language that democrats have known is a nonstarter for

more than two months. the senate could advance this bill tonight, if democrats will lead us. we could take a bipartisan step tonight towards guaranteeing that there will be no government shutdown. if the democratic leader lets us, the senate could advance funding legislation with a big bipartisan vote yet tonight. the house democratic majority leader has said they will take up whatever cr the senate sends them. the house is ready. senate republicans are ready. the only holdout is the senate democratic leader and his partisan tactics. host: you heard the republican leader talk about their alternative to the resolution removing the debt limit language. more on that from "politico," from the democratic side,

democrats may drop debt fight to avoid shut down, hinting they are willing to drop the debt ceiling from the government funding package in order to avoid government shutdown, signed that the slim majority is eager to avoid a -- shuttered federal government, citing plans to fund the government together on monday evening, sending democratic leaders scrambling to avoid a shutdown that would kick in friday morning. they have several options, they said in the aftermath, but government shutdown is not one. social media, some comments, you can also send us attack. this is joellen in islip, saying that sometimes you have to take drastic measures to be heard, democratic financial goals for americans are like a bulldozer in high gear, something has to stop them. tony, democrats can pass the increase on their own. they know the economic policies will fail and want to use this as an excuse.

this one says the gop raised the debt ceiling three times to help pay the bills, the trump bills, secret service, for guarding him. what the heck? fair is fair. back to calls. kenneth, florida, independent mine, good morning. caller: good morning, how are you? host: fine, thank you. caller: i don't understand the craziness. there was a guy who called from virginia last week who made it real simple about how these politicians go about just telling people what they want to hear whenever they are in power and when they are not in power. i don't understand why c-span don't show the chart that shows when certain parties are in power, how much do they run up the debt around the president and power. if you show the shot, you will see that when republicans are in

power, they run up the debt 52% compared to the democrats. i don't like either party, but the democrats are so weak when they are in power, they just don't know how to stand up. they need to eliminate the debt ceiling. we are still growing trees, making money, turning trees into paper. so what's the big deal? thank you. host: virginia is next. caller: i appreciate the last caller. i started watching, i started watching c-span, actually listening to c-span, c-span radio, when it first started. i don't remember the exact year. no, i thing i do. one of the first things i listen to. host: 1997 is when we came on the air, radio.

caller: 97? ok, good. i do that with my memory sometimes. things seem longer ago. things have changed a lot on c-span. i don't mean to be overly critical, but am i wrong that you guys are owned by the media companies? host: no, we are not. we are supported by cable companies. we are a nonprofit organization funded entirely by cable companies and by your cable and satellite subscriptions. caller: ok i won't accuse you of being controlled by the cable companies, i'm a nice person that likes to get along. i remember brian lamb, he was on almost every day back then and i guess he was one of the founders. you know, i have noticed that it

seems like c-span controls what they allowed to be on. i don't really understand why you guys do that. you used to be more neutral. but if somebody comes on and they have an unpopular position, let's say on vaccines, you cut them off. is that a policy? host: you listen to the show every day? we give everybody as much of a fair chance to have their say on all sides, seven days a week, three hours a day. you listen to c-span radio regularly, this is what we do. yeah, there are times where we end the conversation. we don't intentionally necessarily cut people off. but this isn't a program about one person having their say throughout the show, coming into call-in and way in your opinion. we take other calls as well. that's the way that the program

has been and continues to be. caller: long as i'm on right now, one less thing, what i will be looking for is for your host's too, i guess there are three or four of you, i can't remember how many, give the people with the unpopular position as much time to talk as the people with the more mainstream popular positions. right now, the mainstream popular position is the government position on vaccines. the government position on vaccines is you can have a different position from the cdc on vaccines than spreading medical misinformation. host: i am going to let you go there. we are not talking about vaccines at this hour. we are talking about what's going on on capitol hill with the vote in the senate, the infrastructure package this week with all the debate in the votes ahead in the senate. but i appreciate your input. wanted to let you know that we

have heard from c-span viewers and listeners like you that they want to be able to watch c-span on an app, so what we are doing, we are excited to announce you will be able to watch c-span on an app, it's called c-span now. a free mobile app featuring streaming of the biggest political events live and on demand including "washington journal," with featured clips, access to c-span radio, and the podcasts in the most recent episodes of "q&a," users finding live, unfiltered coverage of the house, the senate, congressional hearings, and more. once the program ends, the videos will stay available for on-demand viewing and the latest program section. go there now to see featured clips, political highlights

driving the news. it's a great way to catch up on politics and you can find the latest "washington journal" segments and as the caller before mentioned, you can listen to c-span radio anywhere and find compelling podcasts on politics, history, and nonfiction books. you probably know this but to get the app for yourself, you can go to the app store, google play, search for c-span now or go to c-span.org/c-span now for more information and links to download the new app. we hope you get it and put it on your phone today. use it to never miss a minute of "washington journal," and all of our coverage. back to the conversation on congress and more happening this week with margaret in springfield, missouri. good morning, margaret. caller: yes, you cannot help people like the republican. they are sick.

they don't want to face reality. they don't care what happened to the people. they want to keep their power and anybody who don't want to face reality, the people are insanely sick. that's what they are. they are sick. nobody can help them. host: here is clarence on shell lake, wisconsin. good morning. caller: good morning, thank you very much for taking my call. i was morning 1942. i think it was one of the best years to be born in. i have seen a lot of nice stuff in this country, especially in the 1950's. my question is this. for the last 25, 30 years, and set of things changing for the good in congress, they have been fighting among themselves for power.

i think it's time for term limits and i hope that everybody else is able to help them think about term limits and vote on the incumbent coming up in the next elections and let's get back to doing what they should be doing, working for the people, not power-hungry people. working for common people like us. thank you very much. host: vote out the incumbents? caller: there might be a few good apples, but start all over. host: my question for you though, can things get done? caller: what's getting done today, sir? host: you make a good point. caller: those people, somehow nothing gets done. host: joni, republican mine, willow street, pennsylvania. caller: clarence, i agree 100%

with you. term limits would do a lot. i agree with that 100%. less pensions, less time to get corrupt. the longer they are down there, the more corrupt they get. they want the power. i'm a republican and i think it's ridiculous that they can't raise the debt limit. i mean, this is our country. why want to put us in peril? just raise it. trump was in last time. he raised it, the tax thing. i can't believe that you now don't want to be responsible for your share. and the democrats have to do all this. host: the senate yesterday blocking moving forward on the continuing resolution that would include suspending the debt ceiling through december of 2022 and on the house side the post reporting this morning the

featured piece from major legislation with a task that they say three months ago, the representative put house leaders in the white house on notice that liberals will vote against the infrastructure built prized by motor -- moderates unless the deal is sealed on legislation expanding the social safety net. the leaders of the progression of -- of the caucus didn't portray this as a threat that simply a reality of the situation. after weeks of negotiations, all to made in -- ultimatums, and spinning of wheels, the reality arrives this week as they work furiously to save the agenda tied up in two bills to save massive investments in bridges, roads, railways, and improved health care access with expanded fights for climate change and the coming days will prove a test of whether the hard stance taken for months will move the

needle or whether it will sink, heading into one of the most consequential weeks for democrats in a decade, she insists that she and her allies will not back down as they push policies they have long advocated and are about -- and believe are close to becoming a reality -- reality. she spoke to reporters yesterday as democrats met in their caucus. here she is outside the meeting. >> what are you planning to do on thursday when the infrastructure bill comes to a vote? >> i don't believe it will unless there is a reconciliation and i think that will be hard, because you know we've got to get everything agreed on. it's not just frameworks. we really need to get the whole bill agreed on and as you know, we have called for a vote from the senate before, having passed it in the senate before. i'm open to thinking about what

an alternative to a vote is, but i think we have to get the whole thing agreed on. we can't have a situation where the senate doesn't agree or there are emails left off the table. the whole bill has to be a need upon, written, etc.. we got our bill, it should be relatively easy to incorporate whatever agreements we come to together. so, i don't think it's impossible that it could happen by thursday. that's what we are working towards. host: here is what some other viewers are saying. stephen and lexington says clearly both democrats and republicans, senators and representatives need term limits because this group dynamics isn't working. stalemates are getting us nowhere. get new americans in the position that care about moving the government forward. tom, cincinnati. i have voted republican on my

life, 73 years old and if they let the government shutdown, i will never vote them again. this one says congress has got to stop throwing money at everything out there. democrats will turn us into a third world country, sue from ohio. phone lines for democrats, (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001,s independent, (202) 748-8002 -- independents, (202) 748-8002 --(202) 748-8003. caller: democrats will destroy this country. they don't give a fannie about the financial security of this nation. if they want to push it through, they have enough votes to do it by themselves.

however, the republicans do not want to accept responsibility for any part of this agenda. it's going to be solely on the democrats. if, if, if the united states can't see it, they can't see it. but that's how it is. i appreciate my comment. host: robert is up next in falls church, virginia. caller: the last caller is par for the course about what i was going to call about. i'm on the independent mind it's really suffocating to vote independent because technically there are four parties in the u.s., there are really only two and both of them are bloated, incompetent, and inefficient. i was just watching the german

elections this week and last week. this might be a little extreme, but i honestly think the best thing for the united states would be to divide the two main parties, split them into a smaller subgroup of parties. if you had an actual number of candidates and people in these multiple parties, you wouldn't have these deadlocks. you would be able to more or less get every party to work and negotiate with the other parties instead of just having a 50-50 split or a 5949 split where any time one wants to do something, the other one just shuts it down. i don't know. the two party is not working anymore. i don't know, take it as you will, discuss amongst yourselves. i just really wish we had a viable third, fourth, fifth,

sixth candidate group with real numbers to actually back things. host: you pointed out the german elections. uncertainty and that election, merkel's party calling to join the opposition writing that the tussle for the german chancellorship was on its way on monday

host: back to your calls on what's going on on capitol hill. the house in the senate are in today, 10 a.m. eastern. dennis is in toledo, iowa. good morning. caller: it was president clinton who took the bush deficit and put it in the treasury and when they left office, the republicans were in complete control and we went back to a huge deficit. so, stop limning democrats for this huge deficit, you know? they are the ones who want to spend money on defense. where are we going to get the money to pay for all this, you know, defense, with tax cuts and

stuff like that? please explain that to me, republicans. host: republican line, arlington, hello. caller: i think a lot of this could be, i'm a republican but i'm also for what's referred to as responsible government, ok? meaning that if you are in the majority, you do what you want to end if the people don't like it, they throw you out. what's relevant to this is i think they should end the filibuster. the people that wrote the constitution only had a two thirds vote relative to treaties . this is a senate rule that has nothing to do with the constitution as far as what the founders wanted. we got rid of the constitution then, if the democrats had a majority and wanted to push through these things, fine, if the people don't like it, they will vote them out.

as far as this thing goes, republicans have been hypocritical on the debt limit. they know it. mcconnell is right, putting the cr up there, pass it through, then the government stays in people, they don't shut the government down and then it goes past the debt limit. but i think the real basic problem is again this filibuster business and that should be eliminated so that we can have a normal type democracy like they have with some of our buddies like canada, australia, britain, like that. host: pennsylvania, democratic line, connie, go ahead. caller: every four years or so we go through the same thing with the debt limit and it's ridiculous. the republicans, it's the bill they have to pay. it's like your brother who is a

bum and doesn't want to pay and everybody else has to pay for them and he goes no, i'm not paying, i'm not paying. you have to take care of it. let's all get together. it's our country. we need to do this. it's what we paid for with trump. he's the one who brought the debt up to this point. host: here's the opinion piece from "the new york post."

host: here is barry on the independent-minded in florida. go ahead.

caller: to the first caller about term limits, i definitely agree with that. the other caller that said this was all on the democrats, the republicans let them eat the bill. that's one of the big problems. everybody, it's all about power moves and who is going to take the blame. you know? this is what the american public is tired of. you know. sit down at the table, you know. republicans, democrats, independents, work something out, stop trying to take credit for a good idea, try to make the other opposition of party look bad for a bad idea, try to work together. you know? last not least, if any americans

ran their household budget like the united states does, which is, you know, we work, what you make, you spend. ok? i don't have to go into august or september and then get a loan to live for the rest of the year. have a good day. host: comments on social media, elizabeth saying that this is a stunt, republicans have nothing left but stunts, no platforms, they only stand for read, racism, and power grabs. this is why republicans are losing america. don saying god for bid that they justified the rays to the debt ceiling. richard saying that the debt ceiling has become nothing more than an instrument to embarrass the party in power, both parties are guilty of fiscal irresponsibility.

until we can elect adults, we have to endure this biannual theater that risks plunging the nation. crystal sang vote them out of office, they are all useless, all they have done is hinder progress while they suck taxpayers dry, this is ridiculous. a photo this morning in "the new york times," president biden getting his corona booster shot, the third shot of the pfizer vaccine. after the shot, the president was asked by reporters about his economic agenda and its fate on capitol hill. [video clip] >> hopes for a reconciliation bill today mr. president? >> you know me, i'm a born optimist. i think things are going to go well, i think we're going to get it done. tonight, tomorrow, and for the next little bit.

y >> which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] -- >> [indiscernible] plex victory is what's at stake. >> [inaudible] >> it may not be by the end of the week, i hope it's by the end of the week, but as long as we are still alive we've got three things to do, debt ceiling, continuing resolution, and the legislation. host: back to your calls here on this tuesday morning. (202) 748-8000 for democrats, republicans (202) 748-8001, all others (202) 748-8002. walter is in meridian, mississippi, republican line. caller: guest: -- caller: all these problems started back in the 30's when fdr opened up the

coffers of the government. this government was never meant to pay for people's livelihoods. that's where all our problems began. that's where it started. once you open the coffers of government, you will never close them. as the years go by, that's what's happened today. they opened them up more and more and more. that's my assessment of the situation. thank you. host: thank you for that. roy is next, melbourne, florida, go ahead. caller: hello, i'm on the democrats line. but anyway, these parties since the election, the republicans haven't moved on anything. they are not going to do the job, they are not going to do the debt limit. it's about who blinks first, that's what washington is all about. infrastructure is very, very

important. at least they could get that past. they got the government funding bill passed, a lot of people will hurt, but they don't care, they have been blocking everything since they have been in there that joe biden put up. this is what you get, the grim reaper, republicans are the trump party now. they are not going to do anything that goes against, you know, his, his schedule. and what he wants to do. i have seen that the whole time since the republicans have been in there and they will get mud on their face on this when i believe if they end up closing the government down this time because the democrats who aren't, i mean all politicians are sleazy, you know that, but they are at least for the people in a little bit of a way, i have always thought that. republicans look out for big business and themselves. they don't care about people. they only care about businesses and what coffer is giving to

them. that's what they look at. i see more of that on their side more than from the democratic side and this is why we are in this way should now. mitch mcconnell needs to go. the same group of people in there now, we need new people in the senate. a new fresh start so that congress can work together. you get the same old people, you are going to get the same problems. that's what clinton new. he was so good he could work with both parties. host: guest: accusing republicans of being the party of big business, this story is from "the new york times," kyrsten sinema set to raise cash from groups of boys -- opposing the bill. the inscrutable democrat who may hold the key to passing the ambitious social policy is scheduled to have a fundraiser tuesday afternoon

host: queensberry, new york, marie, independent line. caller: i wanted to say that i'm disgusted by society as a hole in the fact that we are going back and worth on whether the republicans were the democrats are the issue, i think what the issue is is where did we lose the tradition in our country of the living and lifting people up when they need to help? it at the same time being able to come forward and build and oh up to whatever it is. you know, sending kids to

college should not be free. by the same token, i think that, you know, it's just, i'm very frustrated with the fact that republicans are picking up the bill and at the same time, a lot of the bill is nancy pelosi and chuck schumer. you kind of are in a situation where it's more of a generational, almost the baby boomers are still causing the problems and until we get to a generation where everybody kind of realizes all the mess we are in, i think that's when, i just, i can't explain. i'm just very, very disappointed in the way that government is working and going into a socialist situation is not going to help us. host: you mentioned baby boomers. what age group would you consider yourself part of? caller: i'm an older generation

x. i have kids that are older millennials. so, they went to school. we did the american dream. my husband was in law enforcement and i was a stay-at-home mom. we wanted our kids to be better. they all became professionals. we were not privileged. my father came here from the caribbean. but the fact of the matter is that we worked and we struggled. what i found is that the baby boomers, since the beginning of my childhood, have always been the ones that had to have everything. now we are still dealing with it. dealing with baby boomer politicians and i don't think it's going to change and i don't think generation x ever stood up and the way the millennials are going, seems to me like they are going in the direction of socialism. so i kind of, i don't know

whether the future -- host: would you say that of your own kids? where are their political leanings, would you say? caller: i believe that my kids were raised, they were more conservative at one point. i think they are not socialist, i would say moderate democrats, to be honest. if anything. they are -- and -- definitely not libertarians. they are more independent thinking. we originally were republicans because of small government. and then the republicans became defeated and i'm not a party of trump, i'm a party of smaller government, therefore i have no party. i'm kind of just watching this. i laughed to myself because i feel like it's been a baby boomer problem more so than a republican democrat. host: that could be a subject

for a whole hour of conversation on this program. thank you for the insight on your program. someone asked earlier about a chart. this may not be the chart the person was referring to, but who is responsible for the debt, the current debt in the united states, the $28 trillion plus. this is five presidencies. this is by president, the percentage of increase in the debt during the presidency. not surprisingly, the number one and there is fdr. 1933 to 19 45, the debt in the united states increased by 1050%. going through the depression and world war ii. would world -- woodrow wilson increased its 724%, world war i. ronald reagan, the debt during his presidency increased 100 86%. george w. bush, the wars in afghanistan and iraq and the

economic rescue package passed early in his presidency, the debt increased during his presidency 101%. president barack obama, during his presidency, the economic rescue package that was passed in 2009, the debt relief during the obama administration, increasing the debt by 74%. that is from the balance.com. you can look at it and read a bit more of it yourself, all of that mentioned, we thought we would show that for a bit of perspective. idaho falls is next. democratic line. >> well, how you doing today? host: fine, thank you. caller: we ought to have term limits. we ought to have those people in congress at a certain age get out. retire. we ought to have, i'm going to

go back to the past. in the 70's i worked in a steel mill, making seven dollars, eight dollars an hour. i had a house, i bought a house, new furniture and everything on just eight dollars per hour for my job. wife didn't work, had three kids. worked there till the steel plant closed down. then i went to utah making five bucks an hour. i barely survived on that. host: what year was it that you were making five dollars per hour? caller: 1980. and then from there, everything was construction work, you know. 1980. lot of places, making seven bucks, eight ducks per hour. still, it wasn't enough.

i would say that if people want to raise taxes, taxes are what pay for everything we have today. people's taxes. if people don't help out paying taxes, nothing gets paid for. or nothing gets done. if you raise taxes, you collect money. if you lower taxes, nothing gets done. they want to cut programs to pay for what? so i don't understand. i would say get the lobbyists out of there. all the thieves collecting money? the people in congress need to do one thing only. go out and serve the poor and see what it's like to be poor. host: this was the status reported this morning in terms of roll call and the straw -- scrambled plan on funding the

debt ceiling. jennifer writing that congress moved closer to a partial shut after senate republicans blocked a spending bill over their opposition to a debt limit suspension. the cloture vote on the motion to proceed was 48-50, falling short host: sean is up next in lockport, new york. good morning. caller: thank you for pointing that out about kristen cinema. feels like the stuff is going on both sides, but it would be rich to have democrats calling into say republicans don't want to do anything. when trump was in office,

democrats blocked every thing also. his -- his administration wanted infrastructure also. he invited democrats to the white house and they did nothing. so you know, if you are going to blame one, blame the other. goose and gander as the old saying goes. republicans do want infrastructure, but they don't want the stuff attached to it that has nothing to do with infrastructure. separate bills. i heard some of the republican senators, congressmen, congresswomen saying they want the infrastructure bill without all the stuff attached to it. so i would like to say to my democratic fellow americans that, you know, think about that. it's not just one party, folks. host: all right, ron, democratic line, illinois, go ahead. caller: thank you for taking my

call. i got a couple of things. democrats, they need to wake up and stop trying to work with these republicans. they need to stop trying. i know he's optimistic about the whole thing, when he was in the senate. but these are trump people in they are not going to work with him. the democrats just need to do what they got to do, get rid of the filibuster. kyrsten sinema, joe manchin, they need to become true democrats, get rid of the filibuster so the democrats can do something for the american people while they are in office. the republicans get in, they can do what they want to do, start there wars like they always do. if i had my way, every minority and poor person, they would take their children out of the military. what are they dying for? they come home, can't get a job,

can't do this or that. all of this socialism they talk about? what's wrong with helping your own people? talking about north korea, china, russia? what's the point if you can't help your own people? host: this is the front page of "usa today," mark milley, the defense secretary lloyd austin, and central command general kenneth mckenzie, set to testify before congress this week on the chaotic withdrawal from afghanistan and lawmakers on both sides have criticized the bind administration handling of the exit last month, ending a 20 year war. beyond that, millie is likely to face questions about allegations in a new book that he assured china the u.s. would not launch a nuclear strike in the aftermath of the 2020 presidential election.

host: just to remind you, or coverage of that during his today on c's and three at 9:30 30 and we will talk about that more, as we said, in the next segment. tom, alabama, independent line. caller: i agree with that last caller. i live in st. louis, missouri. the republicans in the democrats for decades have been running this country. they are all in the same basket. if you have been in the government for several years, you are doing something wrong.

serve your term and get out. it's a glitch. the only thing this gets us into is another war, a civil war right here in america. they are dividing us. everybody's dividing us. this is america. there's no black, no white, but the way this is going? the whole thing is going to blow up. $3.5 trillion? and you don't know what's in it? i mean come on. host: all right, rich, ohio, good morning. caller: great comments there. there's always somewhere you can

save $1 trillion. or at least millions. at least millions. the democrats feel that any dollar out there is theirs. like the chinese, they think that any dollar is theirs. if you have a dollar, you have to defend. republican saying that the government should do their job and if they spend it, it's more money and if they give it away and we have to replace it, we have another question about where is the money. the other thing is, there are good accountings for things like double entry, it's what you did to you spend money. one time we spend money for polio and we got millions of dollars in people not getting sick. other countries that didn't spend their money right, they bankrupted themselves and couldn't get toilet paper.

host: talking a lot about the debt limit this morning, "the new york times," with this --

myrtle beach south carolina, dusty. caller: i would like for you to put up the graphic i saw on msnbc that showed the up-to-date. you had a graphic on their that showed the spending of the democrats and republicans. the one i saw this morning was more up to date and it started out with donald trump and the republicans. it was in yellow for the republicans and lack for the democrats. donald trump yellow went almost to the top of the page and the

black didn't come halfway and it was that way all the way down to the end of the graphic where it showed that republicans were in office and spent money in the yellow is always twice as much as the black. host: the chart we should was a perspective through a number presidencies. matthew in salem, virginia, democrats line, good morning. caller: i just wanted to ask you all to please put up a chart to show who actually has run up the debt over the last 60 years. nixon, 34%, ford early 9% and carter it went to 44% and reagan 184% and then senior bush, 54%,

clinton was 36% and then bush junior was 93%, obama came in at a bad time, 78%. and then the caller that called in earlier from mississippi talked about fdr starting social coffers. there has to be some kind of social program for the blind, disabled and so forth. i would have him go on the internet and look at pictures from the early 20's and 30's of people starving in the streets. host: thank you for the suggestion on the chart. "washington journal"washington journal more ahead here on". pop next, we will talk about leadership on hearings before the house armed services committee with questions expected to be tough on the u.s.

withdraw from with -- from afghanistan and we will get a preview from laura seligman and then democratic congresswoman stacey plaskett will join us for the project just for the potential for a government shutdown and other issues this week and the division over key spending bills in her party. ♪ ♪ >> washington post reporter craig whitlock against chapter 15 in his new book, the afghanistan papers this way -- hamid karzai's fraudulent reelection worsened a deluge of corruption that engulfed afghanistan in 2009 and 2010. dark money cascaded over the country. money launderers had suitcases loaded with a million dollars or more of flights leaving kabul so

crooked businessmen and politicians could stage their ill-gotten gains offshore. we asked him to expand on this and other stories from his book "the afghanistan papers." >> craig whitlock on this week's episode of book notes+ which you can listen to and our new c-span now app. >> "washington journal" continues. host: laura seligman is with us this morning to preview what will be two days of hearings with the top military leadership in the united states, good morning and welcome to the program. guest: good morning and thanks for having me. host: let's start with the main feature in these hearings and that is a look at the u.s. withdraw from afghanistan. we will start with the senate because that's today's hearing.

what are you hearing that senators want to know? guest: the key thing to remember here is that republicans lame president biden what they see as a botched military withdrawal from afghanistan so they will try to make the case that he ignored military advice. you can expect lawmakers to try to pin the pentagon leader down on advice he gave to president biden to make the decision and whether they think those with strong -- the withdrawal was a mistake. the other session is what exactly went wrong. you can expect lawmakers to grill the military leaders on intelligence reporting ahead of the taliban takeover. how did we just had it with us -- how did we underestimate that the civilians would not collapse and there will be a focus on why

biden decided to draw down so rapidly including handing over bagram airfield in july. also they will look at the evacuation itself and how chaotic things got on the ground, the desperate scene of afghans trying to get aboard planes leaving the airfield and the death of 13 american service members in a suicide bombing by isis and finally, what we can expect to do about terrorists past this and of october -- august deadline for them to get out of afghanistan and how we continue to put pressure on isis and al qaeda after the americans have left. host: that is a plate full of questions for one hearing. another big issue expected to be asked about his reports from a

new book that general milley had conversation with china's top leaders at the time of the presidential election. tell us more about that. guest: the hearing was supposed to be focused on afghanistan but since then, there have been explosive charges in a bob woodward book in the most controversial is general milley who was an advisor to the president was concerned about president trump what attack china that he called up his chinese military counterparts and told him he would give the general a heads up if there was any strike plan. one problem is that general milley unbeknownst to trump was offering her potential adversary on a military operation in the second is undermining civilian control of the military which is very important going back to the constitution.

the charge in this case is that he was inappropriately undermining the president and some lawmakers have called this treason and called on him to resign. the other explosive charge is that general milley told commanders to loop him in on any decisions on a nuclear strike. he was concerned that president trump would try to launch nuclear weapons. the problem is that general milley is an advisor to the president so that raised alarms as well. host: lara seligman is with us. she is giving us a preview of the hearing ahead today and tomorrow in the house, the armed services committee of both bodies are hearing from america's top nila terry leaders. we want to hear from you in the lines are open.

we have heard a number of speeches particular in the senate critical of the evacuation of bagram airfield during the draw down in those final days in afghanistan and you write about that with the headline of your piece saying, speed equals safety, inside the controversial decision to leave bagram early. tell us more about that decision and what you found out. guest: it was a few weeks in the making and the reporting shows that once president biden made his decision to withdraw from afghanistan, the military brass did a remarkable 180 which i detail in the story. in the spring, they were urging

the president to put troops in the country. after the decision, they made as fast a withdrawal as possible and that included leaving bagram which is the hub of the american war effort in early july. it was two months sooner than the deadline the president had set which was originally september 11. you have to understand the argument that the military leaders made that they needed to get american troops out as quickly as possible after president trump's original may 1 deadline. every day pass that made it more likely we would come under taliban attack. the priority of the pentagon was to pull them out even as diplomats and afghan allies stayed behind. the controversy around bagram specifically is it could have provided an additional evacuation location to ease the pressure on the airport which

could have prevented the disaster that occurred. cantor organs that some officials are making is that keeping bagram would not have helped the evacuation. it's hard to get to kabul, is 35 miles. keeping it would have required additional, potentially tens of thousands of troops which would have been impossible under the residence troop cap. the remnants of the american military left agra in the middle of the night on july 1 and critics including lawmakers who will question the pentagon today say the handover took away the main u.s. military airbase before the bullet was complete. host: what are you hearing about the dollar value and the amount of a u.s. military equipment

remaining in afghanistan? have pentagon officials or national security officials expressed concern about the potential use of that? guest: i believe the dollar figure of what was spent on the military meant in afghanistan or the past 20 years is somewhere near $80 billion. i think the equipment we left there has got to be in the billions of dollars. military officials have made it clear that they destroyed much of that military equipment and they demilitarized is the term they use which means the planes we left there, that the afghan airport flies, they of course will not be able to be used by the taliban and neither will the military tanks and other large meant stop there is still

ammunition, small arms, civilian vehicles and other items that the americans left that the taliban, it's now in their hands and that's something i think critics including lawmakers are concerned about and will bring up today. host: the washington post defense reporter writes this -- host: in your reporting on the pentagon, in the months ahead of the august 31 deadline, what was

the confidence level in public briefings from people you talked to inside the pentagon on that -- a meeting that deadline safely? guest: it changed from january until august. from january until march, april, the commanders and general milley argued for leaving thousands of troops on the ground in order to keep pressure on the telephone. -- on the taliban. after the president made the decision, the military wanted to draw down as quickly as possible. in april, when president biden made the advance start, they started walking across the country and taking over military bases and sending -- and having the afghan army fleeing and dropping their weapons. at that point, commanders did not think kabul or the

government would collapse until months if not years after the americans left at the end of august. that started to change in late june, july and august when it was already too late. troops had been out of bagram and out of afghanistan and we were less dense down to less than a thousand by july 1 so it was too late to take a reversal in moving american military troops back into the country. it something the pentagon was not willing to do so it wasn't until early or mid august when you saw the taliban advance picking up this, the generals were really worrying about there was a new assessment to the pentagon saying that kabul would be encircled within 30-60 days

in a week later, kabul fell much to the surprise of everyone. host: we will start first in shalimar, florida to hear from jesse on the republican line, good morning and go ahead. caller: i think you already answered one of my questions that it appears the military did not advise the president to pull the troops out before we got the equipment and the personnel out. i have more comments and that is that the airbase, as i understand, the airbase was support for the afghan military and we just closed that, since they close the ports of those guys have no support. we had to know that that was going to essentially kill the afghan resistance.

the others thing does the other thing is the general milley conversation with the chinese. talking to the chinese about military operations in the future is not treason. to me, that is aiding and abetting the enemy, potential enemy and that is treason. host: how has general milley explained that? guest: general millie has declined to explain his comments in the press. he said he will answer questions to congress but he hasn't given an explanation yet so that's one of the things that most people want to hear about in this hearing. i think some have made the argument that it is treason. it's overstepping the bounds of his job which by law, he is an advisor to the president, he doesn't command any troops or have authority.

given the chinese leader, a potential adversary, a heads up before conducting a military strike, that could be, by some measure defined as treason. what general millie is going to say for my previous reporting is that this was done with the knowledge of the secretary of defense and all the civilians in the pentagon and the white house as well. i understand that general milley told and consulted with the secretary of defense at the time and it was a civilian idea to talk to the chinese and it was one of the routine phone calls he has been making to the chinese and there was nothing out of the ordinary. host: here is john and sumter, south carolina, democrats line. caller: good morning, before i get on afghanistan, as far as

the general talking to the chinese, there should have been worried about the hour-long meeting between trump and putin. as far as afghanistan, we are losing sight of why we went there. we went there looking for bin laden. somebody explain to me, he is responsible for the troops because he had no idea how many americans were in a war zone. when he told them 19 times that we are pulling out, nobody moved. he pulled the troops out. what are the americans doing their? it's for money, greed. that's what it is. we were helping them, they

didn't help us. thank you. guest: any thoughts host: any thoughts? guest: i think what uses just what you cited is correct is that president trump tried to pull the troops out of afghanistan was not able to do so. now president biden is the first american president to successfully end the war in afghanistan. that took a lot of discussion and a lot of thought. it was overruling the military brass. it was the military that had been pushing to stay in a anniston for the last 20 years, making the argument -- in afghanistan for the last 20 years, making the argument that they needed additional troops to push back the taliban and make sure isis would not reemerge.

president biden came into office and i think military really knew that this was it. president biden had spent the last 20 years arguing in the senate and as vice president that we should get out of afghanistan. i think the military knew at that point that president biden was going to put his foot down and get out. one of the things i wrote about was once president biden made that decision, the military saluted and left. they said we are going to do it on our terms. host: let's hear from robert in price, utah on the democrats lin. caller: i wanted to talk about this equipment everybody is talking about that was left. the money for that started out in congress, u.s. taxpayer dollars and from there, i don't know whether it went to the afghan government or to the pentagon to purchase this

equipment for the afghan army. no matter how that went, defense contractors wound up with the money for the equipment. they turned around and patted political contributions to the tune of $150 million. this looks like a big money laundering scheme to me. i would suggest that any investigation of any of this would not be complete until we find out who got their campaign coffers patted by the defense contractors and i will take this off the air, thank you. guest: i think you are right that any investigation is going to look at the amounts of money that was spent on equipment and training of the afghans over the last 20 years.

political campaign contributions should be scrutinized but i think the important thing here is that this money, billions of dollars, was spent and it was your text they are dollars that were spent on afghanistan over the last 20 years. one argument that lawmakers have made is what we had to show for it? they say you look at afghanistan now and before we invaded after 9/11 and it's really very much the same. the taliban were in control then in the taliban are in control now. the important thing is how the taliban is going to rule and how they will potentially get revenge on the afghan allies that helped us throughout the war effort and how they will suppress women and girls. they are already not letting women being in the government and not letting them go to school in many places and

violently attacking any protesters that rise up. it's very concerning on both of those fronts and you will see that today in the hearing. host: this is the first of two days of hearing with the defense secretary in the joint chiefs and the centcom come at her. it will begin at 9:30 a.m. eastern this morning with the senate armed services committee hearing and 930 on wednesday as well before the house committee. those committees are the committees of jurisdiction but will there be a separate report on the conduct of the withdrawal in particular, will that be done by a could -- a separate congressional committee or by the special inspector general for afghan reconstruction? guest: i think it's not quite clear yet where the investigations are going to come from. i think several congressional committees have discussed and announced their intent to

scrutinize the withdrawal process. you have the house armed services and the senate armed services committees which we will hear from today. many members have said they have issues with the with drawl and they will conduct an investigation and you have the house foreign affairs committee and the senate foreign affairs committee, particular the republicans on those committees will be investigating the withdrawal. then the special inspector general has been investigating afghanistan and the money we are spending in the actions the military did in afghanistan and they have put out quarterly reports on this and continue to do so throughout the withdrawal. we will see the results of many investigations kickoff this fall. it's not clear when those are going to end but i'm sure congressional lawmakers will try

to figure out exactly what went wrong here. host: our line for active and current military -- we will go to that line now. john in ashland, ohio, good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. from the beginning to this day, this whole thing has been a mess. when this all started back in the day with george junior, george senior came to george junior and said why are you going there and junior said we are going there for the oil. he said you will give the bush family a black eye. he said i don't care, he was in it for the money. the corporate entities have been running our military forever. and then you get joe biden who gets the blame for what is

trumps ms. doing, releases 5000 afghan prisoners, the worst of the worst into the mix. and then they turn around and release the cofounder of the taliban and sending him back to the country. the best yet, to set up a meeting arrangement online 11 at camp david to make arrangements for them to take back the country. then joe biden comes into the mix and what happens to him? he gets the blame for everything. why not, he is the fall guy. what is this country coming to? why is this happening? host: the political ramifications on the war in afghanistan. guest: i think he made an

excellent point. that is something that says the biden administration would argue that they were in a corner with president trump's decision to years ago to do that meeting that he discussed on 9/11 at camp david with the taliban. the decision to bring the taliban into the fold and try to negotiate with them, that really is what this trickles back to. that's the argument that has been made. what we have seen then is there have been some good things. the taliban pretty much stopped at -- stopped attacking american forces since february, 2019 which is when this deal was made. with the knowledge that americans would draw down by may this year. this is something that has kept

the peace negotiates between the taliban and the afghans alive to some extent. the problem that people would say is that there was no way to ensure that the taliban kept up their end of the bargain. i think that's when things broke down. the negotiations between the taliban and the afghan government really never went anywhere. where biden picked up the thread is continuing that line of efforts to try to get this diplomatic negotiation and power-sharing deal resolved even in the face of this, it was never going to happen. i think both presidents can share the blame for this withdrawal but only president biden can claim that he successfully withdrew american forces from anna stan for better or for worse. host: if lloyd oyster -- if

lloyd austin are asking how the evacuations are going, how would he respond? guest: i think they are going pretty well. the last word on that is that military personnel are vaccinated and 2 million active duty service members and a thousand civilians, that's great progress. it's been a very controversial decision and then -- and there have been many numbers of the military objecting to this mandatory requirement. the history on this goes back to trying to require the anthrax vaccine after september 11. the problem is that the vaccine was not fully fda approved and that something we have seen the biden administration struggle with. now it has been fda approved with other vaccines have not.

that's causing some confusion among the military and until that gets resolved, this will still be a controversial issue. host: we will cover the senate armed services committee today at 9:30 a.m. eastern stuff you can find it on our new c-span new app with live streaming of today's hearing. we will hear from eddie on her military lined next from south carolina. caller: thanks for taking my call. i am retired military in your screener asked me if i was a democrat or republican and i told her i was an american. please get by asking people what party affiliation they are from. we are all americans. the other thing is the chain of command. i was in congress, i would ask general milley what office he is run or step he should be

court-martialed and kicked out of the military. as former military, that's what i would do and as far as vaccinations on the military [no audio] host: on his point about chain of command, the general will be asked about that and we talked about how he might respond. what is the criticism there? guest: i think the criticism is what the caller was saying that general milley broke the chain of command and he went around the usual regular channels. many will say he did not do that. they said it was taken out of context and sensationalized. he said that he might say it's a routine call instead of a frantic call to the chinese and going rogue on his own. this was communicated throughout the department. that will be his argument for

saying it's not to undermine the chain of command, he was just following orders and giving his best military advice and checking in on the chinese as he often does. i think that will be his argument. host: we will follow more of lara seligman's reporting. thanks for being with us this morning. host: coming up, we will open our phones for open forum for you to weigh in on some of the issues we talked about this morning including the upcoming hearings on afghanistan, the vote yesterday in the senate blocking the spending bill and what may be ahead, the fate of the infrastructure debate in the u.s. house. all of that i had and these are the lines --

>> this week on the c-span networks, secretary of defense lloyd austin, joint chiefs of staff general mark milley in the head of u.s. central command general kenneth mckenzie junior testify in the with withdrawal from afghanistan into hearings. c-span3 will have life coverage of their testimony before the senate armed services committee today at 9:30 a.m. eastern and the house armed services committee wednesday at 9:30 a.m. eastern. the senate and can committee holds an oversight hearing today at 10 a.m. with treasury secretary janet yellen and federal reserve chairman jerome powell on the federal economic stimulus measures taken in response to the pandemic. we will have live coverage on www.c-span.org. thursday at 10:00 a.m. eastern on c-span3, health and human services secretary and education secretary are before a senate committee to discuss school

re-openings during the coronavirus pandemic. watch this week on the c-span networks or listen on the c-span radio app. also, go over to www.c-span.org for scheduling information or stream video any time. c-span, your unfiltered view of government. ♪ >> get c-span on the go, watch the days biggest political events live or on demand any time, anywhere on our new mobile video app c-span now. listen to c-span radio and discover new podcasts for free, download c-span now today. >> "washington journal" continues. host: it's our open forum until 9:00 a.m. eastern and you can weigh in on the issues we've talked about so far on politics and policy along with the afghan

hearings today and this week on capitol hill. i didn't get a chance to ask about this story published by politico this morning, a story from the associated dress, nor rea files possible ballistic missiles into the sea and north korea tuesday for fired a suspected ballistic missile into the sea and tokyo officials report. it raised questions about the sincerity of his recent offer for talks. with south korea. the joint chiefs of staff said in an identified projectile hired from an unknown location and north korea flew to the country's eastern sea tuesday morning and said south korean and u.s. intelligence authorities were analyzing the details of the launch. a front-page story this morning

in the washington post about the crime rate, the murder rate in the united states. your thoughts on issues in the news and what's happening on capitol hill. tim in rochester, new york, democrats line, go ahead. caller: hello? i just have a comment. i know next year's election is coming up so it's up to pennsylvania, michigan, north carolina just to put some democrats in their. nothing is going to get changed and it's just sad for people not to want to help anybody with the three point $5 trillion infrastructure bill which i

don't understand. it's like they don't want to help people. bill clinton was the last president who had a surplus and bush got in there and every thing changed. republicans need to stop whining about money. host: arkansas next in hear from kyle on how republican line. caller: good morning and thank you for taking michael. i'm a disabled veteran. i also am a recipient of disabled benefits from social security. both of my avenues of revenue were not affected by the shutdown but there are many types of people that depends on government facilities like buses and different translators. i hope people will think long and hard and as far as the previous caller, everybody in this country has a right to speak up about the money because everybody's -- or but he pays their taxes. host: we will hear from many in

florida, go ahead, democrats line. caller: i'm actually an independent. however, i tuned into c-span primarily to record the military hearings coming up. i heard previous callers, former military, i believe he was quite respect and prior to his question, he said please don't cut me off. when he asked a question about vaccination for military, he was immediately cut off. i don't know if that was a timing issue or if you are not allowing any kind of discussion on the pros or cons of mandatory vaccinations for military. i thought it was a disrespectful

cut off and i think it's a discussion that should be had and i don't know why the man was that off. host: i'm not sure that he was but we did cover that topic and we talked about the vaccination rate in the military. president biden got his booster shot yesterday, his third shot of the pfizer vaccine and talked about the governments efforts yesterday as he was getting the shot. [video clip] reporter: what do you say to the world health organization [indiscernible] pres. biden: we are doing more than any other nation in the world combined. we will have over 100 million shots and will continue going and we will do our part and have given a great deal of funding to covax. we have plenty of opportunity to

help everyone in the world play the part of getting everyone vaccinated. reporter: what is the percentage of total vaccinations in the world? pres. biden: i think we get the vast majority going on in some industries and schools, 97 or 98%. i am not the scientist and i think one thing is for certain is that half of the country cannot go unvaccinated stuff that gives us a problem. host: it's open forum on "washington journal." a follow-up to the story of the big increase in murders in the u.s. in 2020.

the headline is murders are spiking and police should be of the solution. last year, the murder rate spike almost 30% and murders are up nearly 10% so far in major cities. this is the largest percentage increase ever recorded in america and a reversal from overall declines in murder -- in murder rates since the 1990's. policymakers no one answers and one approach has good evidence behind, the police. there is solid evidence that more police officers and certain policing strategies reduce crime and violence. in a recent survey, a majority said in recent police budgets wouldn't fruit -- would improve public safety. it would hone in on very specific problems, approaches that would require restructuring how many police departments work today. to tim in griffin indiana, go ahead, democrats line.

my bad, go ahead. caller: i just have a couple of questions. how many millionaires and billionaires made their fortunes on american infrastructure? if anybody can answer that, i believe it would be all of them and i am a disabled police officer flat on my back stop i don't even make 25,000 dollars per year on my pension yet i pay more than the millionaires and billionaires and that doesn't make sense to me either. that's pretty much my comment, thank you. host: next is ed in jacksonville, florida, republican caller. caller: i'm calling on the republican line but i agree with the previous caller that i am an american first. i served in vietnam and deployed to afghanistan and i want to let

people know that we left a lot of people behind in vietnam. i notice a lot of russian equipment that was left behind. it doesn't mean it's right to leave equipment behind especially in operation conditions but most of the equipment i saw was not operational. host: most of the equip menu so was not operational? caller: there was small arms and stuff like that and i can see they were operational. the big stuff, i would say you couldn't drive it around the block. host: thanks for your call. next up is margaret, independent line. caller: hi, i am calling about the increase in the crime rate and i think an increased police

presence would help. however, these police offers must be trained properly and to tell you the truth, i am a little embarrassed when i see these guys out here, the things they do, just crazy stuff and this one guy was angry with road rage and pulled his gun and shot at the car and there were women and children in the car. i don't know what's going on. what is happening? it's -- someone said covid has the pit of my meanness and stupidity so lord help us, thank you. host: the story from cvs and boston, a headline. dozens of massachusetts state police troopers resigning over

covert vaccine mandates, the union says that in boston. bradenton, florida much on on the republican line, welcome st. caller: in new york, they are protesting about the vaccine. they will lose their jobs if they don't get the vaccine and this that and the other. same thing in philadelphia. and they got biden sitting in office and he doesn't know what he's doing stuff host: let's hear from arlene in sandusky, ohio. caller: i'm calling about january 6. i hear on tv a lot of the people are being charged. but they are not being charged with breaking and entering.

i have clearly seen them breaking and entering the capital step that is one of the things i haven't heard them being charged about. another thing is i recall trump talking about wanting everybody voting just wanting everybody's voting information early on in his presidency when he first was appointed president. him saying that the presidency of joe biden is not true and him calling for them to decertify and check everybody's voting records, is that a way of him

getting the folding does the voting records he wanted in a way he couldn't get it before when the governors would not allow him to do so? i'm curious about that, thank you. host: writing about the issue of voting recounts in voting lawsis the wall street journal-.

host: in dunellen, florida, mike on the democrats line, go ahead caller: stop i'm calling about your earlier callers discussing term limits. i want to tell you what happened in florida with term limits. in the 90's, we had a republican representative who is an absolute expert on everything to do with florida's freshwater. she was always looking out for the interests of the radians and

freshwater. she got term limited out. she was only republican i ever voted for stuff after she left, there was no expertise in the florida legislature about rush water issues and from that point forward, the only legislation about florida freshwater was written by lobbyist who don't have term limits. it's a very slippery slope when you vote in term limits. there are some fine representatives and senators out there who aren't even in my party but looked out for the best interests of rush water and florida in general. it's a slippery slope. host: why do you suppose some people call for term limits and other people calling for voting everybody out? why are some people adamant about that? caller: we all know the

reputation of politicians and some of them get reelected just because of their name recognition, no matter what kind of horrible job or good job they are doing stuff it's a knee-jerk response to want to not vote anybody who is in office now. there are decent people in both parties but i'm a little old and i remember everett dirksen. i am prejudiced in favor of a two-party system when it's working step host: manny on the independent line in brookfield, florida. caller: i wanted to mention about the gentleman who just spoke about terms as well as about the infrastructure bill. about the infrastructure bill, i agree completely and it's sad

that you have these individuals who are supported by these big organizations and corporations and they are able to use the infrastructure and people go to public school so they can make millions of dollars but when it comes to being responsible and funding the infrastructure, suddenly [indiscernible] that's something that should be called out. when it comes to term limits, it's all about money. we have to take this money out of politics. that is what is corrupting everything and everybody. that way term limits would have less of an act if you have people with integrity who are working for the government. until that happens, we will continue this concept of democrats and republicans and we don't have to use ever thought processes and critical thinking on these matters that are affecting us so much.

host: here is another issue that will come up in the hearing today step.

in dallas, texas, democrats line, glenda. i'm sorry, i got the wrong line, let's go to glenda and carl, texas. caller: that fought so hard to keep all his information secret from my government and the people in the system, for him to require for everyone to give their information out according to these elections that it is ridiculous for him to have the power or any kind of authority over the american people to ask for such things. most of all, after all of the trouble that we've gone through

in america for the last 2.5 and three years, the pandemic and the disasters and all the suffering, how the bottom-line workers have looked out for us and took care of us and still take care of us, that the republican party refuses to realize the help that they need, that the american people need at this time. it's a shame and they should all be voted out. they are not worthy of airboats. they are not worthy to be in the position they are thin because they have no interest in the american people in a time of need. we work hard in america to build this place and keep things going in america and for them to resist at a time of need, i'm very disappointed and that's host: my comment. host:we have heard from viewers and users of our c-span radio

app that they like to be able to view live, c-span programming and watch c-span and we are excited to introduce c-span now, it is a free mobile app and will feature streaming video of the biggest political events live "washington journal and undemanding," putting plus feature clip, access to radio and podcasts in the most recent episodes of our sunday night interviewq&a. state, users will find coverage of government proceedings, the house and senate and congressional hearings, white house events and more. once a program on scott videos will stay available are at least 24 hours on-demand in the latest programs happen. you can go to south bend now and see featured clip-on political highlights driving the news -- you can go to c-span now and see featured clips on political highlights "washington journal "washington journal and driving the news and see" segments and

you will find history and nonfiction books. to get c-span now for yourself, visit the app store or google and search www.c-span.org c-span now or visit www.c-span.org /c-span now. we hope you will get c-span now for your phone today and use it and never "washington journal miss a minute of "washington journal" of all of our coverage. a couple of calls in open form, to pennsylvania and sandra on the independent line. go ahead. caller: my name is sandra. what is the difference of being raped and the governmental raping going on with this forced vaccination? in both cases, someone is putting something into your body you do not want. i do not believe in it and i

think it's wrong and for the bs border and not paying for anything in my case, my husband and i have been married for 10 years and thousands of dollars and we are doing the immigration thing the correct way and i don't think it's right. go trump. thank you. host: jack on the independent line. caller: americans, we are all in the same boat and we need to realize that corporations made money off the afghan war and now they need to build america and that is where they should spend their money now. build america back. host: this is rollcall reporting this morning about next week's opening of the new supreme court term.

host: rick in shreveport, louisiana, democrats line caller: caller: stop thanks for taking my call. my concern is that if they want

these things recounted in different states and the governors are requesting these demands, what is it that republicans and the governors cannot pay for it on their own with their own money? also, where they constantly keeping trump in the news? it appears that msnbc and cnn are giving this man a free-form to run for president and he no longer exists. biden is the president so why speak -- why not speak more of trump? host: marcy on the independent line in advance. caller:caller:, north carolina please come americans, but expecting the government to take care of everybody. it's up to we the people to take care of everybody. i would like for you once a month to have a program on what we are doing to make a

difference as we support more government takeover, we attack each other and call each other names and we need to get involved in our own communities and get involved in our local government. we need to call our representatives and write letters. it's we the people, we own the government stop we need to send emails and quit complaining about things and take personal responsibility. would you please once a month have a program on for what we are doing to make a difference? host: what are you doing to make a difference? how do you engage with your local politicians or legislators? caller: my political comes last. i am a volunteer for domestic violence.

my work in the office at least twice a month. our church has different things we do for our community and it's not just church members, its people in the community that have needs. i used to give platelets once a month until something happened with my blood that they couldn't take it anymore. just a simple -- in a grocery store, you see somebody that looks like they are frustrated, you give them a smile, you give them a kind word. we need to have discussions with each other. host: thank you for calling and for your service to your community. let's hear one more call from michael in maine. go ahead. caller: ok. go to google, type in what is

john kirby's net worth. advisor to joe biden. just made investments could go to google, type in what is joe biden's net worth. ok. ok. governor sununu wants to force vaccinations. and they go to presidential law. special interests or their money. -- talk about his money. he's in violation of presidential law and needs to be charged with treason. -- medical professionals in massachusetts -- host: joining us to talk about the potential for a government shutdown and the budget reconciliation measure as well.

>> you can be part of the national conversation by participating in c-span's studentcam video competition. create a five to six minute documentary that answers the question, how does the federal government impact your life. your documentary must show supporting and opposing points of view on a federal policy or program. video clips are is he to find and access. c spends a student competition awards $100,000 in total cash prizes and the grand prize is $5,000. for competition rules visit our

website at studentcam.org. ♪ >> washington journal continues. host: congresswoman stacey plaskett is in her fourth term as delegate from the u.s. virgin islands on with us this morning to talk about the debate in the house this week on the infrastructure package and what may be ahead in the house and

the fate of the 3.5 trillion dollar budget reconciliation plan. welcome to washington journal. guest: thanks for having me here. host: we know you're caucus had an important meeting yesterday afternoon with the speaker. can you tell us what came out of that meeting? guest: the top line for me in the meeting was the recommitment of members of the democratic caucus to our shared unity and ideology. we all recognize that this is the process, that we come from different districts, but that we are all committed to doing what we believe is best for the people of america and that is president biden's build back better agenda. which includes the bipartisan infrastructure plan as well as budget reconciliation. and that we are all going to work really hard together to get

all of those things done. host: that is a fairly full plate of legislative work. the 1.2 trillion dollar plan has already been passed in the u.s. senate. is it your sense that that is still part of the timetable? guest: i do believe that is part of the time that the speaker is working towards moving us to about this week on the bipartisan infrastructure plan and that we will continue to work to ensure that members are comfortable and that we can all get in a unified voice to yes on the budget reconciliation bill. these are multigenerational pieces of legislation that we believe in working with the president will take america, catapult us through the 21st

century and put us in a position where not only those american middle-class americans, those that are on the fringe right now and those who are struggling can be in a better place. but we are also going to set our children up for a bright future through this legislation. because that is such a strong legislative agenda, we know that's going to take a lot of work. and i believe that in that caucus, we are all in a place that we all wanted to get to yes. and we have a leader in nancy pelosi with steny hoyer and jim clyburn that are going to take us there. host: just a reminder about the large measures the house is considering this week, the infrastructure package passed by the senate with 19 republican votes. 100 billion dollars for roads and bridges.

66 billion dollars for freight and passenger rail. 65 billion dollars for expanding broadband internet. $46 billion for weather resilient operations. 39 billion for transit and 26.5 billion for airports. expanding social settings, it would establish universal pre-k for three and four-year-olds. that measure also extends the child tax credit and earned income credit and creates federal family and paid medical leave benefit. it would require electric utility sector to generate 80% of its power and it would make community college free for two years. that top line figure, do you expect that to change before weeks end? guest: i think there will be some movement in the number.

you didn't mention the fact that our budget reconciliation is predominately paid for and that is because we are making corporations as well as ceos and through other equalizing taxation to the upper class, to the 1%. ensuring that the budget reconciliation is also paid for. the bipartisan infrastructure plan is the leveling of our hardened physical infrastructure. what we have recognized in this pandemic and as we came of the last economic crises, there are many people who are falling behind in the middle as well as the lower class. in the pandemic has truly showed us that there are those of us who cannot take any shock to the system. and so with universal pre-k, the paid family leave, ensuring

there is childcare we are going to ensure that women, the middle-class have the means to grow. we also have affordable homeownership in their because we recognize just as we did coming out of world war ii that homeownership is the greatest way to build generational wealth. and too often young professionals as well as those who are working but unable to save cannot do what's necessary to have affordable homes. , to be able to own their homes. so we put in tax credits for that as well. we believe that this is the soft infrastructure that's going to make our economy work and it's going to ensure that america continues to be the innovators and the greatest nation on earth. all can see that through the pandemic that has not been the case. the really important thing in that is that the democratic

party is also recognizing that we have to make sure that everybody is paying their fair share. my father a police officer, my mom a government worker. myself and my husband and others are paying their taxes. the middle class, even the upper-middle-class is paying their taxes and their fair share. we are going to ensure that the richest americans as well as corporations are also paying their fair share to ensure that everybody has a hand up. host: delegate stacey plaskett. democrats (202) 748-8000. republicans (202) 748-8001. independents and others (202) 748-8002. senate republicans locked the resolution that would fund the federal government passed this thursday into the new year. the measure that passed in the

house last week. what do you expect will happen with the debt ceiling language in that bill? is it possible that will be removed? guest: for now we recognize that by october we've got to do something with the debt ceiling. the democratic caucus is committed to being responsible legislators and ensuring that we pay our debt. american people need to recognize that this debt is in fact the debt of the republicans racked up through their tax cut plan of 2017 in which the richest in our country were able to receive a tax cut, almost $2 trillion worth. so that has raised the debt level in this country and we are committed to ensuring that the government pays its debt not only for the safety of america but so many other nations that rely on the credit and good worthiness of our american

dollars. so we're going to do what's necessary to ensure that that's happening. i'm counting on the leadership of chuck schumer in the senate as well as our president to do what we can to ensure that that's happening. at the same time we are also working on a continuing resolution to not shut down the government. the fact that mitch mcconnell is not willing to come to the table shows that he is only motivated by power and stopping the wheels of government to ensure that his party is seen as not supporting the democrats. when we have continually said that we want to sit at the table with whoever wants to support the american people. -- to pay the debt that the republicans racked up in the last four years when they were

in power. host: how confident are you that the revenue raising measures, the increases in tax proposed will help pay for this plan? >> we have looked at independent studies. i think it's noteworthy that there's an open letter from more than 100 economists that urges us that this is a good plan. nobel prize economists have said this is a good plan. we believe this is a leveling, and equitable measure on those who are the richest in america. you have seen also from millionaires and billionaires that they also recognize this is fair what we are doing. when he have said they just need to have fair warning as to the

changes in the tax law and we are giving them that through budget reconciliations. it's important to recognize that billionaires have seen their wealth go up 1.8 trillion dollars since just the pandemic and last year 55 of the largest corporations paid zero dollars in federal income taxes on over $40 billion office. the top 1% has evaded taxes each year while the typical american worker pays their fair share. and what we are asking is for all americans to pay what is a fair and equitable distribution of their wealth and that cannot be born on the backs of the middle-class class and hard-working americans. host: a headline from the washington this morning. infrastructure bill still a bridge too far.

the chair of the progressive caucus saying 60 democrats are prepared to vote against the infrastructure plan. how much of a threat do you think that poses to the infrastructure bill? >> i have confidence in our speaker, our majority leader as well as our whip that when that bill comes to the floor it will have the votes. i think discussions are continuing to be had within the democratic caucus. we are an extremely diverse caucus. we do have a shared set of values about supporting the american people. we are willing to sit down with one another and have these discussions. unlike the republicans who have entrenched themselves in one position.

are only interested in retaining power. so the fact that we have had very transparent discussions about what have been our issues here on the house side, i think when you see the bill come to the floor it's because we have come to a place where democrats are comfortable with the legislation. what comes next, how we are going to move forward and we will vote yes on the bipartisan infrastructure plan. host: let's hear from callers. karloff in wayne city illinois, republican line. caller: good morning. guest: good morning. how are you this morning? caller: i'm just wonderful. i want to know what the bill is about taking weapons from our military veterans and banning them from having the right to bear arms it's in this bill.

guest: no ma'am, this is not in the bill. caller: i do believe it's in there. guest: that's not part of the budget reconciliation plan, ma'am. issues that are authorizing would not be part of it. there have been amendments requesting that, that they were not included in the body of the bill. caller: ok. my second question is when you talk about raising taxes for the rich and everything, do you think that's not going to affect people that are on social security or the elderly? because when you tax the rich, they raise prices. and they raise prices, we pay for it. we pay for it.

that means when i go to the gas station i'm on a fixed income and i'm stuck paying higher taxes. so how do you figure you are not taxing the middle class or the poor? guest: i think what i understand you saying is that if we tax the wealthiest and tax corporations they will simply raise prices on items and then the elderly, seniors and others on fixed income will have to pay higher prices. host: our color is off the line. guest: i think that's her question. i think what she needs to understand is as they raise taxes and continue to raise prices, they are raising profits continue tours -- continues to raise the percentage by which they have to pay. if at the end of the day that doesn't make economic or profit margin sense for them, simply

raising prices doesn't change the percentage of taxes that they have to pay. and so we are insuring, we are also looking at drug pricing to ensure that our elders have the same page. we are looking at ensuring that housing is there for affordable housing. we know that prices change and fluctuate and that social security also increases with the cost of living. we will continue to work but we cannot make the investments that are needed to ensure that ourselves and our children have a better life and we can only do that by ensuring that all americans pay their fair share and we believe the fairest way to do that is through increasing taxation on the 1% as well as corporations in this country. host: susan is up next on the

democrat line. camden, arkansas. caller: good morning. i live in a state where governor filed a suit with the other republican governors to stop unemployment. i would like to know where that money goes once they stop it from the public. guest: i believe you're talking about the pandemic funding that was given to the state. that money is sitting there waiting to be used by those governors for unemployment, pandemic unemployment. unfortunately this is something that we have to continue to keep pressure on many of these republican governors to ensure that they will continue to pay.

those individuals in the money that was allocated to to pandemic. i urge you to call your elected officials and ask them to put pressure on your governor. host: let's go to barbara on the independent line. caller: good morning. i've got about three points to make. this is on the $3.5 trillion what you call reconciliation package. in there, you are going to give the irs $80 billion to monitor american finances like paypal. any transactions in your account that you can't put in our

take-out over $600. that is against the fourth amendment in the constitution. and how in your right mind you can vote for something like this. number two, when you lower the age of medicare to 60, that's going to affect senior citizens tremendously. we are going to almost double the expense of medicare and i would like to know how you justify that. on that part. number three. ok this 3.5 trillion they are telling us is over 10 years. there is nobody in their right mind that can figure out a budget & we are going to pay for it for 10 years.

these are my questions i have probably a lot more because i don't have time because 90% of this free trillion dollars is unconstitutional in the first place. host: that slots to begin with in the first place. guest: thankfully i am not an economist that we have a tremendous number of economists that have looked at this including the nonpartisan joint committee on taxation. which takes a neutral view and reviewing taxes and legislation that members of congress look forward that have given us that estimation in their projections. we also have an order from 15 nobel laureates to support the bill back better agenda who says that tax reform makes our taxes more equitable and enables our

system to raise additional funds are required to facilitate the necessary public investment and achieve our collective goal. the agenda invests in long-term economic capacity. your first question with regards to bank records, we have put a floor as to which account can be looked at and i don't think the accounts of everyday americans are ones that the irs can go into. it is for more wealthy americans that that's going to happen. additionally as to increasing medicare, we know there is a large medicare gap in terms of those that need that support and social security as well as long-term care. our elderly. we are going to make the

investment to ensure that people live comfortable lives through their elder years and we believe that the $2 trillion that we are raising solely through ceos, the top 1% and corporations, bringing many of those back onto american shores will ensure that that also grows american jobs while also supporting small businesses. these are the things that are not talked about in this legislation that we are trying to increase exponentially the number of jobs, retooling americans to have additional trade and skills in those industries that are coming up and to support our small businesses so that they can expand and grow as well. host: question from lonnie in texas, even if there wasn't an infrastructure bill, would not the debt ceiling still need to be raised to cover the debt of the tax cuts and jobs act

created? guest: exactly. the debt ceiling has nothing to do with the budget reconciliation package this is simply debt that we have incurred by the america during the last four and a half years predominantly during the trump presidency when the tax cut planned that the republicans passed created an additional over $1 trillion debt. host: let's hear from bob in bloomingdale illinois. caller: first time caller. i have a couple points/questions. i hear the democrats always talking about raising taxes on the millionaires and billionaires.

which i am not one of. why don't you cut the loopholes instead of raising taxes? buffet always talks about how he doesn't pay anything. and the reason you don't cut the loopholes is all these democrats, wealthy democrats are giving you money. second of all, do you truly believe as president biden is saying anyone making under $400,000 is not going to have taxes increased? that is not true. and then finally third, our debt is at almost $29 trillion and neither republican or democrat ever talk about cutting. we are in trouble. interest rates are going up. and all you do is spend spend spend. i'm saying democrat and

republican. maybe i should have called on the independent line. in if you talk about cutting. the last time we had a balanced budget was under clinton. guest: yes, we did have a balanced budget under president clinton. we also had an increase in a surplus under president obama. democrats, we are increasing funding to the irs to ensure taxes are paid by the upper class as well as closing the loopholes. we have provisions to penalize those corporations that are using foreign shores to offset their taxes. it's our belief that there is going to be a middle-class tax

cut and that this will be the largest middle-class tax cut ever. we have already made sure that 40 million american families receive a tax cut through the child tax credit, which is helping cut child poverty in half. statistics have shown us that when we reduce child poverty, we increase that activity in america. every year because of child poverty and loose individuals -- those individuals lead to so many other things. not having skills, poor health. we lose $500 billion in productivity each year. by cutting our child poverty in half, that is going to keep us as well a more productive country and i think the lowering the cost, for things that keep

americans up at night like childcare, price of medicine, home care and the cost of college will in fact increase productivity. host: anthony in miller place. democrat line. caller: the rhetoric always sounds so good. the talking points of the politicians. the reality is the american people have truly lost faith or any confidence in their governance. even with the health care bill from the last obama presidency, they say you can keep your doctor. health-care costs are going to go down. i'm paying $1100 a month for my health insurance, my cobra from having lost my job. i can't even get a job that's going to pay my insurance. now we are getting all these talking points but when the rubber meets the road, we know we are going to be out to lunch with this deal. it's not going to bode well for

the american confidence. guest: i agree the american people have lost confidence in government. we see that every day. and listen, being a member of congress, i'm frustrated as well by the amount of inertia, the continual unwillingness to sit down at the table across the ideological spectrum. republicans not working together with democrats. unsure of what people's motivation is. we have been looking at this and i believe that rather than believe the politicians, you should look at one independent outside groups are saying about this legislation. the fact that 72 economists support this. the fact that there is an open letter from 15 nobel laureates

in economics to say that this legislation is going to do that. or continuously look at those times in which americans has -- it's when we have put the investment into our economy that is necessary. as a parent, i have to make investments in my children for them to be productive. i believe what we are trying to do is make an investment in the american economy, supporting childcare, supporting families so that we can get back to work and continue to grow. the greater good of america. not just individuals like myself and some of those who are the collars, but those who are living on the margins and the poor among us to ensure that we can all be lifted up. i think if you look at independent sources and what

they are saying about this, this is a plan that's going to get us there. host: she has represented the virgin islands for four terms. state -- stacey plaskett, thank you for being with us on washington journal. we'll get republican reaction to the critical debates happening this week on capitol hill. jeff fortenberry from nebraska joins us momentarily. >> download c-span's new mobile app and stay up-to-date with live video coverage of the days biggest political events and key congressional hearings. the white house and supreme court oral arguments. even our live interactive morning program where we hear your voices every day. c-span now has you covered. download the app for free today.

>> washington post reporter craig whitlock begins chapter 15 in his new book the afghanistan papers this way. hamid karzai's fraudulent reelection worsened a delusion of corruption that engulfed afghanistan that worsened between 2009 and 2000 10. dark money cascaded over the country. moneylenders lugged suitcases loaded with a million dollars or more on flights leaving kabul so crooked businessmen and politicians could stash their ill-gotten fortunes offshore. we asked mr. whitlock to expand on this and other stories from his book, the afghanistan papers. >> craig whitlock on this week's episode of book notes plus. you can listen to booklets plus -- book notes plus on our new

c-span app. washington journal continues. host: jeff fortenberry has represented his district and nebraska for nine terms. let's start with the appropriations process broadly. the house passed that continuing resolution, republican senators blocking consideration of that. just your view as an appropriations member on how things went this year and trying to get through the spending measures that the house and senate have to get through each year. guest: i think it's a great question to launch a broader discussion about the dynamics that are immediately before us because the whole debate is around infrastructure and a reconciliation package which would be the largest spending and tax increase in the history of america should it go through skirting around normal procedures.

we have a debt ceiling limit and this continuing resolution. we are going to not let government shutdown while the appropriations process finishes. on top of reconciliation and the possibility of more infrastructure spending, you have the 12 appropriations bills that are likely to come to pass by the end of the year. but until the political will is there and proper negotiations, we have this ongoing short-term series of measures to prevent the government from shutting down. -- then there are 12 slices of the government for next year's spending. so that's a little primer for the discussion. overall the spending is projected. if the current bills hold to be

10% over last year. i am the ranking member of the agriculture subcommittee. we put together a reasonable bill that protects farmers and ranchers and those with food and security. it just spends too much. this is an ongoing source of the debate and tension in washington. host: it was blocked in the senate largely on the grounds of the debt ceiling suspension. it would be suspended through december of 2022. now there's word that might be taken out of that resolution. are you hearing? guest: i think it needs to be taken out of the resolution. i'm not in favor of any kind of government shutdown. will have to do something to continue funding the government so there's not that kind of disruption.

so that's another one of the unknown variables now. it got a continuing resolution, you've got infrastructure spending of over a trillion dollars. this reconciliation tax and spending package. we have the debt ceiling limit which the legislature has to approve, added ability for our system to borrow. without that, we can't borrow and we have to pay our bills. commingling those things creates a lot of tension in the regular appropriations process at the end of the year. host: the first year of the biden administration with the $1.9 trillion covid spending earlier, and now these two measures, the budget reconciliation, how has that complicated your normal work in

appropriations? >> extraordinarily so. there was a great deal of confusion in washington as to what this was going to mean so there was frankly a bipartisan airlift to try to save our health care system, to help individuals and families and protect small businesses and those were the first covid relief packages and i think they were successful and i was happy to help lead some of that. nebraska had the largest utilization of the paycheck protection program to help small businesses and it's part of the reason they're almost around 2% unemployment. this was an important initiative of the government to stabilize the small business sector and help get us through. since then, these have not been bipartisan initiatives. they have not been negotiated between both sides and it's added to higher levels of spending. in addition to the factors that

we just talked about, infrastructure as well as reconciliation and the regular budget, we are going to be over $10 trillion this year. unprecedented. host: jeff fortenberry with us until 10:00 a.m. eastern. (202) 748-8000 democrats. (202) 748-8001 republicans. (202) 748-8002 independents. the omaha world had a headline about the infrastructure bill say nebraska could get 2.5 billion dollars from that infrastructure bill. what's your view? would you vote for it? >> most americans support the idea of basic public policy, public goods being infrastructure. the traditional definition of infrastructure has been roads and bridges in airports and trains, transit if you will. the current bill is about half of that. and it's more stuff added on top

of that. i'd like to vote for a good infrastructure bill but i'd like to be included in that process as to how to negotiate. the senate is acting like this is a fate accomplish. we've had no input on the negotiation. simply being forced to take a percent ill because they have deemed it necessary for the country. -- qualification or overview or study as to whether or not an infrastructure proposal is going to be affected particularly because it doubles the spending we have traditionally done is a very significant problem. it's a dilemma for many of us who want to vote for good infrastructure bill but are not going to refuse if we are shut out of the process or if it has access spending and simply deeming something infrastructure doesn't mean it doesn't get scrutiny. there are a lot of things that don't fit those traditional categories that most americans

support. host: negotiations are continuing among democrats. any thoughts about that? guest: once again on my side of the aisle, the house has been completely shut out and we are being forced to vote for something called infrastructure. this is a huge problem and quandary for many of us. i come out of local government and 80%, 90% of what we did was public works projects and people are generally supportive of that. if it's excess in spending and infrastructure is a creative definition to include an ideological wish list, we are not going to do that. host: first to jennifer in oak park illinois. democrat line.

caller: good morning. so i want to put you on the spot, i just want to ask one question and see if you answer it. i was hoping you could explain to me what and topic pregnancy is and how we are able to fix it. i also wanted to say obviously this is about abortion. nebraska is number seven out of 56 in rape. i was wondering since you have five daughters how on earth could you support any of the rules they are trying to put on my body. and i know it's your personal opinion through religion, but your religion isn't by religion and so once you start asking neighbors to tattle on each other for money, what's next?

are you going to start that with premarital sex or -- i just want to know what the line is. are we not going to be able to have sex at all? host: i will let you go there and hear from congressman fortenberry. guest: i would like you to take it a little -- a new bill -- take a look at a new bill called care for her. it creates a commitment to care for the journey of life. before birth, at birth and after birth. so when there is an unexpected pregnancy and there is a vulnerable moment of uncertainty for certain people either woman or a family. this bill commits that we will be there with the resources necessary before birth, at birth and after birth. and my mind that's called commitment, compassion, love. and this was a way in which i am

trying to as a pro-life representative who stands for this fundamental value of life offer alternative that gets us away from argue for this or against that and actually compels us to think about again and unexpected pregnancy not as her problem but as our opportunity as a society. host: the house passing that bill that would override a number of state abortion laws. one in particular is texas that comes to mind. how did you vote on that legislation? guest: i voted against it because it would make america's most pro-abortion nation on earth. allowing abortion up to birth. the vast majority of americans are against all of that. it's an ideological power play that would codify roe v. wade. the supreme court has been all over the map in this regard. this was an attempt to codify

abortion and make americans pay for it which the vast majority of americans oppose. i have offered the care for her act and i invite jennifer and anybody listening to go read it. host: tony is on the republican line. go ahead. caller: i'm a republican, conservative. and i think this bill and the infrastructure which has 17% for actual infrastructure, this is nothing but a path to venezuela and the ruin of our country. i'm not going to put it all on biden and the democrats. you look at mitch mcconnell -- they are there for 30 years plus. and all they do is lie to the public and they all destroyed this country with the debt. if i tried to do that at my -- my house, can i put $56,000 on

my credit card? it's called responsibility. i was poor. i was dirt poor without a christmas and what i did was go get a job. since i was living in a bad place, i will and got three jobs. this is what people do. it's not give away free stuff. when that happens the country's gone and there's no possible way you guys can oversee our government because it's too big, it's a ponzi scheme. i only hear one person talk about cutting in half. if it's welfare and social programs, that's fine. then put up a gofundme page and have people contribute and then distribute that equally to the people. guest: thank you for your concerns. washington has a math problem. you can overspend for a little

while but then there are severe consequences. the consequences from overspending in washington are just hidden from everyone. we send all our manufacturing to china or a lot of it. we buy the stuff, it's a very dysfunctional marriage and all of this has to stop or at least be curtailed. we need good opportunity. people when they have jobs and take jobs pay taxes. they're facing an added level of debt on top of this. the other consequence is inflation. it is a tax that most profoundly hurts the poor and seniors who are on fixed income and now you are seeing prices are going up. those who can't adjust their prices who are working are very

hurt by the inflationary pressures that are added to by government spending. host: what did you hear from the haitians you spoke to and how has that issue affected the state of nebraska? >> every town in america now is a border town. thousands of people were released from the border because the border has been overrun and we cannot handle it anymore. one of the border patrol agents told me, we've lost control. when i went into del rio, i was getting a briefing from border patrol and i said, who is that over there? they said, we don't know. let's go walk and talk to them. it was little family.

they came from haiti but they were from south and central america. most of the haitians coming across the border are probably being smuggled across by criminal elements and they have money because they've been working in central and south america. they're people in need, but they are not coming directly from haiti for the most part. what you are seeing with thousands of people on that bridge, it was about 10% six weeks ago of what you saw then. america, we are a generous nation. we have opened our arms to people who want to come here and assimilate and become great american americans and that's the hallmark of our character. but compassion cannot flow out of chaos. it's also not fair to people who are trying to come here illegally, it creates a national

security crisis. they had stopped people from 76 different countries including people in the middle east. it pushes the need for advanced social services into towns and communities all across america. we didn't have time to see where they are coming from. this is very dangerous and disorderly. they undermines the ability of the country to do good things with a generous immigration policy. we need judges on the border immediately who can judy eight cases for asylum right on the spot rather than waiting years. you need more border patrol, enhanced innovations and enhanced barriers. there's a barrier being taken down simply because of politics and that's not right. host: marion on the democrat line.

caller: i wanted to start with the three jobs. a few days ago you had a caller who said gay trump, i have three jobs. and i'm thinking why is that three jobs to be able to make ends meet? the wealthiest 1% of americans controlled 41 point 52 trillion in the first quarter and the bottom 50% of americans only control two point six 2 trillion collectively. i'm asking you, i think the whole thing with this 3.5 trillion infrastructure bill is that the republicans are absolutely defending the rich not to pay any taxes in order to pay their fair share.

the rich control 70% of all the money in this country and yet they pay 40% of the taxes. i think it's time that republicans and democrats just be americans and say rich people, you have to pay some taxes. i do not buy this philosophy that if we tax the rich people, our products will get higher. guest: thank you for your passion on the issue. there obviously a cares and wants to get this right. the wealthiest 14 congressional districts in the country are represented by democrats. in this reconciliation bill that is about to go through each is about four point $3 trillion, not 3.5. that is a provision that would

allow high-tech states to pass a law the tax burdens to places like nebraska by allowing taxes -- to have a tax deduction. that is a direct subsidy to the wealthiest americans and i think it's wrong. i don't think that's the right thing to do. they are the point about working three jobs, fair point. i think wages need to rise in this country. a lot of people simply work and have to get food stamps to subsidize their life. is that really what we want to do that we pay such low wages? we have to be careful with that because small businesses can get saddled with the things that are unworkable for them and big is this is like it because it will push them out and create a noncompetitive environment. but we need people to receive a fair wage so they don't have to support -- depend on a government program for their sustenance.

host: here's mary lou in maple shade, new jersey. caller: good morning. thank you for c-span. i want to bring up two issues. first issue is taxes. we all know that rich people do not become rich by being stupid. they know how to protect their money. case in point, joe biden himself who it's been reported does at least 500 thousand dollars in back taxes. yet he gets on tv and tells us to pay our fair share. mr. thornberry, can you expand on this idea that is being suggested that the irs hire more employees to audit the american people's bank account for an amount as low as $600.

number two, the issue with all of these illegal aliens and refugees coming into our country. who is going to be expected to pay for their medical care, their health care. they are going to end up on social programs that people in their own country -- our own country need. what is going on right now is so detrimental to the american populace including all of these illnesses they are bringing in that we haven't seen in decades. host: thank you for your question. i'm happy that you raised that issue. that's not american. you should be free to be able to have the liberality to spend as you see fit without the government peeking into that. the idea is there's a tax cap.

they will be able to collect more tax revenue at the expense of your personal liberty. they will be able to see if you spent six -- more than $600. people are getting really upset because this is a nasty form of government intrusion into your life. it's a balance. i live in a community that has many first-generation immigrants. the last wave that came to us or from iraq. the of them were our translators in the military and earned their citizenship and it was one of the first bills i'd worked on in congress because i thought it was only fair to allow people who had risked their lives to immigrate to america. it's a wonderful community that has proudly assimilated, waived the american flag, worked hard at also protected their ancient

culture and tradition. you're right, immigration particularly when it is chaotic is forced into the interior of the country and forced into social agencies. but there is a cost for doing this so the proper balance is again, the character of who we are spent to open our arms to people fleeing particularly persecution who also want to become responsible americans. host: jake sherman from punch bowl news says there is now talk of the house taking up a clean standalone debt bill this is something the democrats have been pushing. lots of hurdles. how do you think you would vote

on something like that? >> i haven't heard of something like that. things are changing by the hour. we need to pay our bills as a country. that's probably entangled with the political consideration and probably not the best thing to do. having attached to other pieces of legislation to try to force the hand is not the right way to go about this. host: thank you so much for being here. that will do it for the program this morning. they will finish consideration of the infrastructure bill.

we will see what happens. maybe possibly even some that limit consideration. let's go to the house floor. we will see you tomorrow at 7:00 a.m. eastern here on washington journal. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the chair lays before the house a communication from the speaker. the clerk: the speaker's rooms, washington, d.c. september 28, 2021. i hereby appoint the honorable greg stanton to act as speaker pro tempore on this day. signed, nancy pelosi, speaker of the house of representatives. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the order of the house of january 4, 2021, the chair will now recognize members from lists submitted by the majority and minority leaders for morning hour debate. the chair will alternate recognition between the parties with time equally allocated between the parties and each member other than the majority and minority leaders and