and we'll talk to gary palmer of alabama and vermont democratic representative peter welch. as always, join the conversation by phone or share your thoughts by text message, facebook comment or tweet. ♪ host: the house yesterday voted to hold former trump white house adviser steve bannon in contempt of congress and today will conclude legislative work for the week without taking up president biden's social spending build back better plan, once pegged at $3.5 trillion now being negotiated closer to $2 trillion. the president told the cnn town hall last night he'd like to see the measure passed but was open to the senate later changing the filibuster rules to take up a voting rights bill and other bills as well. it is friday, october 22, 2021.

good morning and welcome to washington journal. we'll ask you as we begin, your top news stories of the week could be the developments on capitol hill as we mentioned, new vaccine for kids and booster shots or other issues you're following. call us on the republican line if you'd like to. those of you lean republican, 202-748-8001 or democrats, 202748-8000 andantents and others 202-748-8002 or send us a text at 202-748-8003. put your comments on your facebook page and send them to us on twitter or instagram on c-spanwj. it's a shorter program with you this morning. the house is coming in for legislative work at 9:00 a.m. eastern and here's the story of the debate we showed you on c-span yesterday in the house.

households stephen bannon of contempt and voted 229-202 to hold stephen bannon in contempt of congress by refusing to comply with the subpoena from the committee investigating the attack. the vote was along party lines but nine republicans voted in favor of the resolution and pointed out greg pence, whose brother former vice president mike pence faced death threats january 6 and was with him that day on the capital breached did not vote in yesterday's roll call in the u.s. house. the other story about the build back better plan, the reconciliation wilkes this is the headline from politico and some of the latest on that, democratic divisions linger in the last lap of spending talks. they write congressional democrats are down to key disputes in their effort to draft president biden's roughly $2 trillion social spending

package by the end of the week but the remaining hurdles are proving the trickiest to clear and many democrats are becoming skeptical speaker nancy pelosi and senate majority leader chuck schumer can nail down a deal by their self-imposed deadline. we've been talking for weeks about the cost of that plan, the proposed cost of the plan at $3.5 trillion. it's worth looking at another figure "the new york times" is reporting in their upshot column that is headlined, the democrats have a lot of cutting to do. looking at the spending package, the build back better plan, family proposals, $1.9 trillion, .6 trillion for climate and health proposals 1.0 they now say has to squeeze in what they're talking about the -- potentially adds 2 trillion measure. "the new york times" writes as democrats in congregate how to pair back their big social spending bill to a total budget increase of less than $2 trillion over a decade they have

further to go than it may appear. "the times" writes the congressional budget office is unclear when it provides official estimates for the entire proposal win by the house last month. we turned to what budget experts say are the best availability estimates of the costs of everything in the bill compiled by a economist at cornerstone macro. the starting point is far higher than the $3.5 trillion number they used to describe the package initially. all the new spending writes, "the new york times," and new tax cut credits add closer to $4.7 trillion over a decade, a result of a ambitious agenda and optimistic thinking about the price tag. you can read more of that at nytimes.com. yesterday in the u.s. house we started with the vote in the house to subpoena and cite steve bannon in contempt of congress for refusing to comply with their subpoena. here's representative liz

chaney, republican from wyoming. [video clip] liz cheney: the people told us on video before the media and now federal courts exactly what motivated them. they believed what donald trump told them, that the election was stolen and that they needed to take action. today, ms., we're here to address one witness, mr. steve bannon. i urge all americans to watch what mr. bannon said on his podcast on january 5 and 6. it is shocking and indefensible. he said all hell is going to break loose. he said, quote, we are coming in right over the target. this is the point of attack we have always wanted. ms., there are people in this chamber right now who were evacuated with me and with the rest of us on that day during that attack.

people who now seem to have forgotten the danger of the moment, the assault on the constitution, the assault on our congress. people who you will hear argue that there is simply no legislative purpose for this committee, for this investigation, or for this subpoena. in fact, there is no doubt mr. bannon knows far more than what he said on the video. there is no doubt that all hell did break loose. just ask the scores of brave police officers who were injured that day protecting all of us. the american people deserve to hear his testimony. him. host: we open washington journal with your top news stories of the week, republicans 202-7 had 8-8001 and democrats 8000 and independents and others 8002. tweet on the reconciliation

progress and hear from jake sherman of punch bowl news who says that the white house is privately pushing democratic leadership for infrastructure and vote next week and seems unlikely but the push it happening now and we expect a biden-pelosi discussion today. and on the death of colin powell, a tweet, a memorial service will be held at the washington national cathedral friday november 5 at noon eastern and seating by invitation only. that of geoff bennett of nbc. one more story as we react to your top stories of the week we're seeing overnight. you're probably seeing reporting of as well. sheriff's office alec baldwin discharged a prop gun that killed a crew member and wounded a director on a set in new mexico. the prop firearm killing the director of photographer on the film he was working on and wounding its director. this is from the santa fe knew

mexican. let's get to your calls and comment. first to our democrats line and hear from rob in new york city, your top story of the week, go ahead, rob. caller: good morning. thank you for c-span, you do a great job. you know, i think that you're talking about the big story which is this business with mr. bannon. host: what are your thoughts on it? caller: you're talking about whether or not we're going to be a country of laws or if a subpoena, which i always thought was, you know, a legal instrument that everyone had to abide by. if you're going to say now that subpoenas don't matter and this man can just turn his nose up and try to get out of it. that's horrendous. so if we can't -- it's an instrument to follow through

with law. so to investigate. if this man can turn -- if we're not a country of laws, we're in a lot of trouble, you know. i would like to just quickly add that i think the way in which going back a few years, the way our former president incompetently handled it originally when the coronavirus first hit, i think it was intentional incompetence because it was primarily affecting the african-american community and i think it was a way of scaring people that if there's a virus out there you wouldn't want to go outside, that you wouldn't want to go vote and i think it was in his mind, i think it was a way to keep souls from the polls, to keep the african-american community from feeling comfortable because that community was more troubled with the virus and more people dying originally and getting really

sick, and i think it was really -- he's not that intelligent of a guy. i think it was a simple kind of switch in his head which said if he did not follow it through and handled it incompetently, more people would stay away from the vote. almost a voter suppression type of tactic in his simple moronic mind. host: let's go to parkville, maryland, next, and this is ed, independent line. caller: hi, i'm ed here in baltimore. i guess i have a little bit of confusion over the 15% tax for large corporations. if i'm a large corporation and you increase my expenses by 15%, i'm going to turn around and pass that on to the consumer. so isn't that -- wouldn't increasing those taxes really be a tax on the people?

host: let's hear from ron from baron springs, michigan. it's your top stories of the week. first half-hour of the program. go ahead, ron. caller: good morning. my top story is the passing of colin powell. colin powell got his start, as far as i'm concerned, in vietnam when he was asked to be the first officer to investigate the meli massacre and went and said there's nothing wrong here, continue to genocide. a year later a soldier who was there took pictures and had the pictures published in "life" magazine. a that point colin powell in my opinion was known as a cover-up guy, can you go to him. all through his career the next place he surfaces in the nixon white house at the time of the watergate. if we read mr. waldron's latest book, watergate exposed, heroin trafficking was going on in the white house. host: to kathy in louisiana, sto

ahead. caller: good morning. the interest i'm seeing this week in holding steve bannon in contempt of congress, it really amazes me that they're going to do that when eric holder in fast and furious refused to give us what we needed to hear from him or answer any questions to congress, and steve bannon wasn't even there. host: what do you think ultimately happens? they've made this vote and are holding him in contempt. what do you think the justice department will do? caller: the justice department already has submitted their report on what happened on january 6 and they said there was not one charge of

insurrection that was -- and people are sitting in jail since january not facing any charges. yet. i don't know what the justice department is up to. if you'd seen marek garland yesterday trying to answer question, you'd been disappointed in the justice department going after school board parents that were complaining to the school board about what their children were being taught. host: you can see some of that coverage, our coverage of that hearing yesterday, the judiciary on c-span now mobile app. this is the headline from "the washington post" about the president's town hall last night. he predicts a deal on his agenda, on thursday night sought to use the 30-minute national televised town hall to breathe life in his agenda, making a push for lawmakers to unite

behind trillions in spending. he spoke in detail him several proposes and revealed with candor specifics, shedding new light on the status of his spending plans. quote, i do thinking i'll get a deal. doing to would be a bigger deal than passing the affordable care act. it's all about com openly and comb is a dirty word but bipartisanship and compromise has to still be possible. he was asked by the host of the town hall, anderson cooper, whether the senate should revise or end its filibuster rules. here's that back and forth. president biden: here's the deal. if in fact i get myself into at this moment the debate on the filibuster i lose at least three votes right now to get what i have to get done on the economic side of the equation.

so what i have said, you're shaking your head no but let me tell you something, jack, it's the truth, number one. number two, i have proposed in the meantime is it used to be the filibuster the way it worked and we had 10 times as many -- more than that, times the filibuster has been used since 1978. it used to be you had to stand on the floor and exhaust everything you had and when you gave up the floor someone else sought the floor and had to talk until they finished. you're only able to do it a second time. after that you vote, somebody moves for the vote. i propose we bring that back now immediately. the idea that for example my republican friends say that we're going to default on the

national debt because they're going to filibuster that and we need 10 republicans to support it is the most bizarre thing i ever heard. i think you'll see an awful lot of democrats being ready to say not me, i'm not doing that again. we're going to end the filibuster. it's still difficult in the filibuster beyond that, that's another issue. anderson: are you saying once you get this current agenda passed on spending and social programs that you would be open to fundamentally altering the filibuster or doing away with it? president biden: well, that remains to be seen exactly what that means in terms of fundamentally altering it or whether or not we end the filibuster straight up. there are certain things that are sacred rights. one is the sacred obligation we'll never renege on a debt. we're the only nation in the world that never reneged on a

single debt. anderson: when it comes to voting rights just so i'm clear, you would entertain the motion of -- notion of doing away with the filibuster on one issue, is that correct? president biden: and maybe more. host: that's the news as we get underway. the top news story of the week, comments on twitter and text. bob of illinois says without a border we have no country and our laws are being ignored. i'm no racist but think we'll regret it sooner than later. president biden implement how things are paid for. the house refuses to bring a bill to the vote. nothing changes on the hill. in denver, lola says my top news story of the week is the social platform truth social. i can't wait to join. thank you, 45. nuclear capable hyper sonic missile launched by china.

obama killed this program for the u.s.a. during his administration says a viewer in maryland. derrick up next in seattle on the independent line. good morning. caller: this is real important what i have to say. you need to let me finish. first of all, i would like for you to ask my republican to call in, if the representative votes against these packages what is represented or the child tax credits, all these social problems that president biden is trying to get rid of. ask the republicans, do they want these programs? you have representatives such as margaret taylor greene has adds 600,000 loan from one of these programs and numerous of them, they vote no but take the dough. as for what the democrats should do is put this in the bill. they can take everything that's

going to sinema state and joe manchin's state which is the second poorest and he gets special treatment, opiod addiction in the state. ask these people what they're doing. if they vote no they should not get any of the aid. they did not take obamacare. if the governors do not opt in and take this money, the republican states and if the representatives in those districts vote against it, they should not get this aid. they should have to choose assistance. that's what should be pitted against each other, these representatives. but the democrats put the policies in place but the republicans still get them. make them choose. host: to zach in davenport, iowa, democrats line. caller: good morning. the top story to me was joe biden on cnn town hall last

night. it's when he said when it comes to taiwan, we will go to war. last i heard the president is totally in control of foreign policy. host: did that surprise you had a he -- that he said that? caller: i think he was maneuvering that way when he said we have a chip shortage and trying to tamp down our expectations on the economy. i think that we've been going that direction with the automobile sales and so the fact that we have to protect taiwan is definitive. the chinese have been building iowans in the middle of the south china sea and we only have aircraft carriers and those are vulnerable. islands can't be sunk but aircraft carriers can. host: thanks for pointing out that story, jack. there's a follow-up from china.

china vows no concessions on taiwan after biden comments p. china on friday, today, said there's, quote, no room for compromise or concessions over the issue of taiwan following a comment by joe biden that the u.s. is defending the island if attacked. the foreign ministry spokesperson reasserted the long-standing claim that the island is its territory and a daily briefing after biden made his comment the day before in a forum hosted by cnn. linda next in virginia on the republican line. what's your top story of the week, linda? caller: yes, i think it was marek garland's appearance in front of the committee yesterday and what really boggles my mind is he's in the pocket of biden to such an extent that he avoided questions, that he came down very poorly on facts that

at one of our departments, a whole group of people tried to get in and take over the interior department and another congressman held up a picture of what happened on january 6 and they were very, very similar and he refused to comment on the two pictures. i think it's very sad to have a attorney general and a president who are treasonnists and who in fact are lawbreakers. we have laws in this country but you wouldn't know it with the open border. i'm beginning to being our country is ungovernable especially after the last call when the person who called seemed to be erratic and did not make very much sense and it's

very, what can i say, discouraging to see the direction of our country. that's all i have to say. host: some are reporting on the testimony of marek garland yesterday from fox news, garland doesn't say if he sought ethics guidance regarding ties to son-in-law's critical race theory promoting company and also refused to say whether he'd consider an ethics review. here's part of the back and forth with the attorney general and mike johnson, republican from louisiana, who sits on the committee. [video clip] >> did you follow the regulation and have the appropriate ethics agency look into this and did you seek guidance as the federal regulation requires? >> this memorandum is aimed at violence and threats of violence. >> i understand that but -- excuse me, did you seek ethics counsel before you issued a letter that directly relates to the financial interest of your family, yes or no?

>> this memorandum does not relate to the financial interests of anyone. it's a -- >> i take that as a no. >> the memorandum is against violence and threats of violence. >> mr. attorney general, will you commit to having the appropriate ethics designee review the case and make the results public? >> this memorandum is aimed at violence and threats of violence. >> i understand your talking point, you're not asking my question, mr. attorney general. with all due respect will you submit to a ethics review of this, yes or no. >> there's no company in america or hopefully no law-abiding citizen in america that believes that threats of violence should not be prevented. there are no conflicts of interest that anyone could have. >> according to you. but sir, with due respect, that's the purpose of the federal regulation, we need objective third parties to review our activities. you don't get to make that decision yourself. it doesn't matter. you're the chief law enforcement of this country. this raises questions in the minds of millions of americans and your impartiality is being

called into question, why would you not submit to a simple ethics review? >> i amex questionsitily aware of the ethics requirements. >> you're not following them. >> i have followed them and lived with them the last 25 years. >> did you seek an ethics review of this or not? >> i'm going to say again there are no conflicts of interest involved when the justice department asks -- >> according to you. i got that. i'm not trying to be disrespectful but you're not respecting our rules were our constitutional norms and the federal law that directly applies to your activities. this is a great concern. host: top news stories of the week. to monique on the democrats line. caller: good morning, this is c-span and to the last caller, linda, please, the gentleman spoke with passion. he didn't pull something from fox news and reiterate it. i called because the caller before the republican caller, she said it was not an insurrection on january 6.

my lips fell to the floor and why i called in today. i am so emotionally drained. i was raised in washington, d.c. and i love my city. i love my country. but something has got to stop p. it's almost like some republicans are not comprehending the importance of our civil liberties. you know, going up into the capitol was one of the most -- it still leaves me speechless when they can call in and say it didn't happen. that's like donald -- and then what moves me is they find small stuff, especially when they try to say the democratic party is corrupt. all parties probably have a little corruption in it but they have one of the most corrupt

presidents in the united states of america. his whole team were criminals p. and then when you don't follow the rules and regulations just like bannon getting the subpoena to come in and he didn't show up, that's what you call gangster. trump and his friends are gangsters. i grew up in the streets of washington, d.c. i associated myself a long time ago, you know, dealing with people, pimps and hustlers and stuff like that. and the republican party portrays that. host: we'll hear from david in gulf breeze, florida, independent line. caller: i was going to talk about the bannon thing. it's my understanding of before you issue a subpoena you're supposed to get a deposition. and also the authority for a subpoena from the congress, isn't that given to them by the supreme court?

and i don't think they can really give a subpoena for political purposes. and i really have a bit of an issue -- host: the constitution gives ths the ability to. caller: according to rule 17 that i read, it says the supreme court gives congress the authority. i'm just trying to find out the facts. i'm not an attorney or anything. you may be right. but what i've read and all i've got is what i read, not what i hear. that the authority to the congress is given to them by the supreme court. host: an earlier caller -- caller: to find out information but not use it for political purposes. host: an earlier caller mentioned the # difficulty withholder. what happens now? they passed the citation and goes to the justice department.

what do you think will happen? caller: that's a determination the justice department needs to make. but as far as i see, there's a lot of politics involved in this. and i have a little biased -- or against adam schiff because of some of the things he's done and said and i listen to him and he throws a lot of stuff in there that doesn't apply to make you emotional about it. host: thanks for weighing in. caller: good morning. i was thinking about the filibuster. i know the democrats used it 327 times when trump was in office. now they want to get rid of it or stop it for one thing. we know when they stop it for one thing, it becomes permanent

just like they wanted with voting and drop boxes. i am wondering, now they want to get rid of the filibuster but they used it. the longest filibuster in history was when the democrats tried to stop the civil rights act. host: a political store this morning, "young kim to launch bus tour as the same day as obama -- glenn you can watching a bus tour the same day that there is a democratic rally with former president obama. the young kim campaign -- in an effort to show off its grassroots support." that election is about 10 days away in the commonwealth of virginia. we will hear from john in oregon. good morning. go ahead.

caller: i was watching the town hall last night on cnn. the whole thing seemed so scripted. i wish cnn could hold a real town hall with real americans asking real questions about the border and the 1.6 million illegal aliens who have come across the border and our -- and are shipped all over buses and put on planes with no vaccine mandate while we are firing front-line workers because they will not take the vaccine. they're not anti-vax, they want freedom of choice. host: we'll talk about this more later in the program. john in lubbock, texas says his

top story is mentioned and kyrsten sinema -- is joe manchin and houston cinema holding up the senate. coming up, we will hear from lawmakers about the reconciliation package by president biden. first up is gary palmer from alabama and the chairman of the republican policy committee in the house. later, congressman peter welch, a top member of the energy and commerce and oversight reform committees. ♪ ♪ >> keith rick berg has been a journalist almost his entire adult life. originally from michigan, he worked for the washington post for 30 years. his assignments included four years and southeast asia from 1986 to 1990.

africa for three years and then five years in hong kong. a time as the new york bureau chief 2007 to 2010. richburg was also based in paris. later, as china correspondent. he had his time in afghanistan and iraq. keith rick berg is currently the director of the university of hong kong journalism and media studies center. we ask him to talk about his work. >> keith richburg this week on book notes plus. you can listen for free on our c-span app. >> book tv every sunday features leading authors discussing their latest nonfiction books. watch our coverage of the 33rd annual festival of books from nashville. the event features christian to

make, author of "jesus and john wayne." former tennessee governor bill hazlett discussing his book, "faithful premise." chair of the house and intelligence committee adam schiff talks about his book "midnight in washington." it recalls president trump's first impeachment trial. watch book tv every sunday on c-span2 and find a full schedule on your program guide or watch for free on c-span.org. >> a new mobile video app from c-span, c-span now. download today. >> washington journal continues. host: congressman gary palmer is

the representative for the sixth district in alabama and chairs the republican policy committee in the house. welcome to "washington journal." >> -- guest: thank you for having me host: -- thank you for having me. host: let's talk about as a witness the negotiations going on with the build back better plan. what is your view on the current negotiations and where you think this will lead? guest: i hope it leads to us having the opportunity in a bipartisan passion to sit down and talk about what our national priorities are across the board, perfect -- particularly with infrastructure but also getting our economy going again and dealing with the supply chain crisis and dealing with china.

i think what we're doing right now is not productive, it is not in the interest of the country. we need to sit down and evaluate where we are heading as a nation , particularly in the areas i talking about. as we have this conversation, our dent is 25% larger -- our debt is 25% larger than our economy. if these bills were passed, i think we would quickly be somewhere around 150% debt to gdp. host: on the infrastructure bill itself, the $1 trillion infrastructure bill, yet spoken to yellow hammer news and you said the bill would largely be dictated by the green new deal. in the final package in the senate, what is in there you

could support and what you not like? guest: we need a national conversation about our roads and bridges, our water systems, and our airports. what they are try to do with this, and thereby tests -- and the white house has their own commission on this, they are pushing things most americans cannot afford, like electric vehicles. i am not against electric vehicles but we have issues right now with roads and bridges that need to be addressed immediately and that is not what this bill does. host: our guest is congressman gary palmer, a republican from alabama. we welcome your calls and comments. 202-748-8002 for republicans

--202-748-8001 for republicans. 202-748-8000 for democrats. 202-748-8002 for independents. let me ask you about the vote on steve bannon. what do you think about that debate? guest: i think it is all political. if the man committed a crime, we have a criminal justice system that needs to be referred to. the democrats wanted to bring him before this committee. there were other people who were involved in what happened to january 6 that they are not holding them in contempt. it is so transparently political it is ridiculous. it undermines the confidence in congress and in the justice system.

we are seeing a committee operating more like a -- and that has major negative ramifications for the future of the country and our ability to govern. host: do you think it undermines the house's ability to demand witnesses testify? not just steve bannon, but going back to a previous administration. if people ignore or refuse to comply with a congressional subpoena? guest: congress has oversight of the government. we do not have the ability to prosecute anyone. we don't have prosecutorial power. what they are doing is trying to launch a criminal investigation improperly. if there are crimes that have been committed, they need to be investigated by the proper legal

authorities and not by a chamber put together by nancy pelosi which is nothing more than a distraction because they are getting killed in the polls because of their terrible leadership. that is my perspective on it. this is just a political ploy. host: you serve on another select committee, the select committee on the climate crisis. what can you tell us about the work of that committee and where it is? guest: i don't know if we have done anything substantive. there was supposed to be a bipartisan report that came out last congress, it had zero input from republicans. every republican on the committee acknowledges the climate is changing and is changing in ways that will have profound impacts on the country and the world.

we are not doing anything to prepare for that. we need to be looking ahead for how we mitigate and adapt -- mitigate against and adapt to the changes that are going to, regardless of what we do. one of the more interesting aspects of the committee is when they bring in -- they brought in three scientists. one of them was one of the lead editors of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. i asked a simple question, it was if we completely eliminated all co2 emissions, wooded stop climate change? after an embarrassingly long pause looking at each other, one leaned forward and said it would not. i followed up with if the world

went to zero, would it stop climate change? one said it would only mitigate the impact. that should be instructive to everybody. there are things happening through natural variation that will have an impact on our climate. we are so focused on co2 emissions, i am concerned we will not be prepared for the change that is coming. host: it is a lead story this morning about the national security threats, climate seen as a threat to security, report showing a deepening concern within the security establishment that ships unleashed by climate change can reshape u.s. strategic interest and offer new opportunities to rivals such as china and increased nuclear instability in

pakistan. that is somewhat what you are getting at in response to the previous question. guest: we are so focused on co2 emissions and china is not. we are going to diminish our economic ability while china continues to expand there's and it will give them an advantage over us. there are other things that could happen. solar activity, a mass emission. if we had one like in 1859, it would have a devastating impact on the economy. there would be thousands if not hundreds of thousands of lives lost or put in jeopardy. london has done an analysis on what that could mean if we had solar activity of that level. we know magnetic north is changing locations, it is moving towards siberia at a fairly

rapid pace. that is going to impact weather patterns. there are other things going on that we don't even talk about. there are a handful of us that bring these things up. what i try to point out to people is that the history of climate change is in the geological record. we know the climate is going to change. host: given your concern earlier about the debt facing the u.s., do we have the capacity to handle the things we need to handle in terms of addressing climate change in the future impacts of that? guest: i think we do. it is going to be difficult. this is one of these times when i think the country is going to have to rise to the occasion. i think we can deal with the debt while also addressing some of these challenges that face us momentarily with regards to china and russia and the threat

of terrorism, but also what we need to be doing to prepare for climate change. host: we have funds on the line for gary palmer, let's go to alabama. this is karen, republican line. caller: thank you for having me today. i agree with -- 100% with everything you are saying. to me, a lot of the climate change -- for example, the windmills democrats are trying to build across the country -- a lot of these people up there are bend -- up there i invested in these companies and their making money from that. i don't know if you want to talk about that but i wish you would. i agree with everything you say. have a great morning and roll tide.

guest: in regard to renewables, i think renewables can be part of our energy solution. we had a hearing on this yesterday and i pointed out that the lifespan for a wind turbine is typically 20 years. after 10 years, it begins to decline dramatically. natural gas, the life cycle a natural gas facility is about 60 years and for nuclear it is 80. it might be longer. if you look at what is happening in the u.k. and europe in regards to power generated through wind turbines, they had a situation a month ago where the turbines in the north sea

stopped operating. natural gas prices hit a record and they had to turn to coal to keep power on. there is a scandal in europe and britain in regards to the number of people who can no longer afford to keep their homes heated in the wintertime. there are reports about the number of excess deaths from people, particularly elderly people who are having to choose between what they can send -- spent to warm their home and pay for food and medicine. there are some serious issues that need to be addressed before we move forward with this agree new deal plan the democrats have. host: let's hear from joseph on the independent line in north carolina. -- caller: good morning. i would like to say that i am sure this whole thing with

january 6 will eventually blow over and the man currently being held in contempt will get over his problem. there are unintended consequences. if people don't like the man and they are try to put him in jail, they are giving him more media exposure. a lot of people feel like that media is good because more people listen to what they have to say. the same is for our government. i believe trump was right about china. getting out of the trade agreement, we should come up with something to replace it. if we get rid of obama care, we eventually will have to have something because prices are out of control.

what whenever we drill for oil and relieve the wells because they're not conducive anymore -- there are consequences for everything we do when we do legislate and when we don't do anything. i would like to hear what you say about that. guest: i think you make some excellent points. this is one of the things i talk about when you're trying to put together legislation or pushing a policy. you have to think about the unintended consequences. again, i think you are right about media. there are some people who as long as they have attention they are happy with it. i do think on the energy side, one of the unintended consequences -- and i just talked about great britain and europe -- they're predicting the

household energy bill this winter could go up as much as 40%. that will have a devastating impact on low income people and on elderly people on fixed incomes. we have already seen a major increase in gas prices. the thing about energy is that it is the single most inflationary part of our economy. there is an energy cost in everything you eat, where -- wear, all the sources you use have an energy cost. we have to take that into account because of how it affects people. i am not so much interested in the partisan politics as i am how this impacts the people of this country and the things being proposed right now i think are really going to hurt a lot of people nationwide. host: we will hear from lorraine

and neck from lancaster, pennsylvania on the democrat line. caller: good morning. as a representative from alabama and a native of alabama, i am curious where you develop your expertise on pennsylvania election law. guest: my expertise in pennsylvania election law is limited to the constitution. article one section four says any changes to election law should be done through state legislatures. that is not the case not only in pennsylvania, north carolina, arizona. this happened where they circumvented the authority of the legislature. i understand we were in the pandemic and even some people called it covid emergency. that did not prevent the government and states to call

the legislature to do its job to make sure we had honest and fair elections. it is really that simple. host: did you have a response to that? caller: i wanted to note that the pennsylvania supreme court disagrees with the representative. following on everything that happened as a result of his and others actions to sign on to the texas versus pennsylvania suit, their attempt to disenfranchise me and people in pennsylvania, the fact that that lead in no small part to january 6, does he regret what he did? host: we will get a response. guest: that is a stupid analysis of it. it had nothing to do with what happened january 6. the pennsylvania supreme court is limited to their

jurisdiction. their disagreement is not with me, it is with the constitution. i suggest you read article one, section four. it is very clear. what we are trying to do is protect every person's right to vote and make sure their vote counts and it is not undermined by the actions of anyone. it is up to the state legislature to make the changes to their laws. host: let's go to the independent line to wade in south carolina. caller: thank you for taking my call. i had a couple of questions. the first is the fiasco with steve bannon and all of that, i don't think it is helping. the main thing is increasing gas

prices, and loaf of bread is four dollars. the other question i wanted to ask -- i have been trying to get c-span to do a segment on the $3.5 trillion bill compared to the $780 million they want to set aside for illegal people in the country. can you explain to me this morning and to the public exactly what they want to do with that money particularly? thank you very much. guest: that is a very good question. honestly, i don't know what the democrats' agenda is without money. i do think, as i said earlier about the vote of steve bannon, that is a distraction from the issues that are foremost for the american people. they see it at the gas pump and see it when they buy groceries.

they will see it on their household utility bills. we need to be focused on national priorities and doing all we can to make sure people are able to get a job, to keep a job, to be able to keep their homes heated and cooled and take care of their families. that is not what we are doing. we are playing these political games that are nothing more than a distraction. i think you are spot on with that. we are going to dig deeper into the bill. it is really $4.3 trillion. pennsylvania university has a budget model and their projections based on $3.5 trillion is that by the year 2050, this will shrink the economy by 4.8% but expanded

debt by 16.4% -- but expand our debt by 16.4%. host: let's hear from ronnie in arkansas on the republican line. caller: thank you for taking my call. i was going to make a comment about the insurrection on january 6, if it had been reversed and trump had won antidemocratic -- and the democratic rioters would have been there, it would have been looked at as a peaceful protest. they did not do anything about when the buildings were burning. they call that peaceful protests. i don't have a question except that i believe the whole point was to try to keep trump from being able to run again. host: we will go to elizabeth in

san diego on our democrat line. caller: good morning. at this point, it seems to me that the republican party are agents of chaos and division. what are they for? they were against obamacare. trump said he would eliminate it on the first day with executive order and he did not do that. every day they talk about building back infrastructure, they did not do anything. republicans who were against social security, they were again against obamacare. democrats are trying to build this country. joe biden sees that educating lives will improve americans. if you listen to fox news, they

put down education. we will lose the battle of the future if we do not battle our kids. host: you are the chair of the republican policy committee in the u.s. house. what would your agenda look like in the next congress? should republicans take hold of the u.s. house? guest: i would invite your viewers to our website, republicanpolicy.house.gov and look at our policy guides. there is information there. with health care, i authored the amendment to approve health care for those with existing conditions. the main reason i did that is because we are sending out over $40 billion of improper payments

on medicaid. that money is not getting to the people who need it. we are pushing for a major -- accounts which will attract younger people. health care reform is not just to bring on the cost, it is to improve outcomes. if we bring down the cost but don't improve outcomes, we have not done much to help people on the health care site. we are very strong in terms of rebuilding our economy and doing it the right way so people can have good paying jobs. on the education side, very strong advances in math and science. also allowing people to go into vocational careers. i suggested to our major

universities in alabama that we work with vocational schools so if was to become an from one of our universities. there are number of very innovative ideas republicans are pushing out for those interested in hearing about them and studying them. host: question from chris in burlingham, alabama. he says can, -- says congressman, i'm a constituent. do you support the bipartisan infra structure bill and can you talk about the recent flooding in the district, especially considering two young people lost their lives during the most recent storm? guest: i do not support the infrastructure bill and i have made that clear. i do support infrastructure. i am a cosponsor of a bill introduced by a democrat from maryland to finish the -- develop a highway system which

miles of that is the northern line of the district, so i'm a strong support of infrastructure if done the right way and is in the best interest of the country. and in regard to the flooding, that was a tragic loss to see young people's lives. we have had many floods in alabama over our history and that was very unfortunate event. host: congressman gary palmer, thank you for joining us in "washington journal." guest: my pleasure. host: morehead on the program. we will go back to you on your top new story of the week, developments on capitol hill, the latest on the vaccine, and more. the lines are, for republicans, (202) 748-8001, democrats (202) 748-8000 and independents (202) 748-8002.

♪ ♪ >> sunday night on q&a, retired california superior court judge le doris cordell takes a critical look at our legal system and offers suggestions on how to improve it. her latest book looks at minimum sentencing, racial bias in jury selection, and police reform. >> particularly in urban settings, not exclusively, police officers not interested in the fact you did not have your traffic signal on. they're not interested in that. what they want to have is a reason to stop you to then engage in conversation and maybe then search your car. the u.s. supreme court has said

to police officers that is fine. you can make these kinds of stops, and it does not matter that that is not really what you are interested in. and i think what has to change is the very nature of policing has to change and we need to take that role out of policing. police should be used to investigate crimes and prevent crimes. i think traffic stops are major -- are a major problem because they disproportionately focus on people of color. >> that is sunday night at 8:00 eastern on c-span's q&a. you can listen to all of our q&a on the c-span now app. >> "washington journal" continues. host: on this friday morning, asking you your top news story of the week. the lines for republicans, (202) 748-8001, democrats, (202) 748-8000, and independents and others, (202) 748-8002.

this is the new york times, the headline, "cdc recommend covid booster shots for millions of americans in a sweeping win for the biden administration, the cdc on thursday endorsed booster shots of the moderna and johnson & johnson covid-19 vaccines for tens of millions of americans. the decision follows a decision last month of the boosters of the fire -- pfizer biontech vaccine and allows a seek out of a booster shot as early as today. john is in south dakota. good morning. independent line. caller: good morning. why do you always use left-wing biased media sources when playing out stories with your pen, when you could use the washington times or fox news as a source. host: we used fox news earlier this morning and i have not used washington times yet this

morning but we usually do every day of the week. thanks, john. lewisville, texas, paulette on the independent line. go ahead. caller: good morning. -- democrat line. go ahead. caller: good morning. it is amazing how the republicans try to axle ethical when the democrats are in office but when trump was there, they did nothing for the american people. they had the white house, the house, the senate, and they cast nothing. now you have republicans trying to stop what the democrats are trying to do for the country. all i see is a bunch of unethical men from the republican side. thank you. host: here is spokane, washington, up next lore is on the republican line. go ahead. caller: good morning and my response to the lady before is that president trump did everything that put this country on the right track.

it has been devastated by this current administration and its disregard for any kind of constitutional responsibility and look at our borders. that is terrifying. we have 60,000 people going to be walking through our border and we know have -- we don't have any idea who they are. and the constant division of our country and people and our whatever. the hate that comes from the democratic party and now they are trying to write up a bill, trillions of dollars worth of bill, and most of the time before it it has never gone to where it is supposed to go, it gets funnels off -- funneled off into somewhere. obama had $1 trillion to fix the infrastructure. did not do a darn thing. president trump tried to. pelosi stood in the way. i want our nation united. i want to be a free american. that is who i am. to see this administration do

something so -- i don't know how they could -- they are just devastating this country in a matter of a few months. that is pretty apparent in the polls. host: thanks for that. we will go to eve in grand rapids, michigan. democrats line. caller: good, c-span. host: good morning. -- good morning, c-span. host: good morning. caller: i would like to say i am so very sick of the republicans talking about what the democrats are doing and not doing. they are what you call the do-nothing republicans even when they are in office for the people. they are all for themselves. they say democrats are for themselves but it is not. as for the people that do not want to hold the people responsible for the insurrection on january 6 and the people that call in and would say that if it was a democrat -- when people

are protesting, burning buildings. excuse me, if there had not been democrats and black people on the capitol, he would've had blazing guns and they would have been shot down. even trump in the square with the general and told the people that were protesting peacefully, shooting people with rubber bullets and things like that. this is just ridiculous. host: your top news story of the week is what we are focusing on this segment. the washington post, the color mentioned this earlier, a texan mentioned this earlier, trump seeks online presence with new social network. former president touts creation of this truth -- of the truth social platform. he declared they would soon launch a media powerhouse that would then triumph -- help them triumph against their war

against big tech. pranksters found what appeared to be an unrelated test version and posted a picture of a defecating pig to the donald j. trump account. the site, called truth social, has been pulled off-line. evidence trump is likely to face a daunting challenge in building an internet business that can stand on its own. and by all major social networks after his supporters stormed the u.s. capitol on january 6, trump has for months agitated to regain the online megaphone that once blasted his voice around the world. in a presentation released wednesday by his new media company, trump media and technology group, the team held a new social network as the first tentpole for trump media news and internet empire that would one day compete with cnn, disney, and facebook. let's hear from the independent line next. tom is in california. go ahead. caller: thanks for having me on.

i don't know why he's even president, mr. biden. and why his son is not in jail, personally, actually. i mean come on. [indiscernible] host: to brunswick, east brunswick new jersey, gary is on the democrats line. good morning. gary in new jersey, you are on the air. go ahead. all right we will hear from industry pennsylvania next. john, we are coming to you. john is on our independent line -- john is on a republican line. sorry about that. go ahead. caller: i would like to tell the voters out there this child tax credit they are talking about, democrats are talking about, echoes of two incomes of $400,000 a year for families -- it goes up to incomes of

$400,000 a year for families. people making $400,000 a year should not need a child tax credit. the second point, you cannot tax a corporation. you tax the corporation, they raised the price of their products, and the poor and middle-class have to pay for it. it is called inflation. thank you very much. host: the story of yesterday's vote in the u.s. house, houseboats to hold steve bannon in contempt of congress. here is house speaker nancy pelosi on the importance of that vote. >> the select committee on january 6 continues its work this week unanimously on a bipartisan basis voting to hold one of the past president's advisers in contempt to fail with -- failed to

-- to investigate the january 6 domestic terrorist attack intended to interfere with a peaceful constitutional transfer of power. then, see what legislation is necessary. according to published reports, bannon had specific knowledge about the events of january 6 before they occurred and had multiple roles relevant to the attack. and is very outspoken about it. host: you can send us a tax, (202) 748-8003. your top news story of the day. this one says pro public i has an article on how $190 billion was spent in relation to covid precautions in schools. does not seem like anyone really knows where it went. talk with a teacher in the city school districts. these kids cannot function after the last two years of the education system was conducted says chris in new york city. here is the article at pro

public -- propublica.org. that is their investigative report and say the education department's limited tracking of the funds sent to schools has left officials in the dark about how effective the eight has been in helping students. on the independent line in portland, oregon, this is glenn. good morning. caller: good morning. host: hi, glenn. first major volume, please. go ahead, glenn. -- mute your volume, please. go ahead, glenn. caller: those republicans that put in particular from president trump, have they bothered to check what lies or truths mr. trump has spread? or are they simply referring to the news media that supports mr. trump? host: i will let you go there.

you seem a little confused because you have to meet your volume or it will confuse you, confuse us, or both. next caller is on the democratic line. caller: good morning. i would like to say my top news story of the week was denying republicans that went with -- against the democrats to support our republic. because we do not have a democracy, we have a republic. we are working toward a democracy but if we do not protect what we have now, we are going to expose from inside. we had 202 republicans who did not vote. this is the first time it has ever happened when the house of representatives went to them for a vote about subpoenas, on the insurrection, whatever you want to call i, but we need to know what happened on january 6.

we did not have an investigation -- if we had an investigation, we would know. publicans refused to be bipartisan and be on the committee. i'm a democrat, but i love ms. cheney. and the other gentlemen on their. -- on there. they're working to support our republic. so we can have a democracy. or we will end up just like other countries that have dictators because we are headed that way. host: here is the roll call story on that. we read the story in more detail earlier, household stephen bannon in contempt has their headline. and just account count on the vote, it was 229 to 212. nine republicans voted in favor of the resolution. peter meyer of michigan, fred upton, nancy mays of south carolina, anthony gonzalez of ohio, brian fitzpatrick, jamie

herrera, and vice chair liz cheney of wyoming and adam kinzinger of illinois. and also rick penn's whose brother, former vice president mike pence, faced death threats on january 6 and was with him at the capital as it was breached did not vote in yesterday's vote. to run in nashville, tennessee, republican line -- ron in nashville, tennessee, republican line. caller: thanks for taking my call. i want to talk about justice. this steve bannon thing is a crock. nancy pelosi has no ethics, she made $100 million off of bezos stock while she had bills on the floor for credit cards. look at hillary clinton, she broke up her phones. they were subpoenaed evidence. i hear democrats talking about they want justice but they do

not want justice for everyone, just republicans. i feel like they are persecuting us. roger stone goes to jail for six years and 78 years old, and they go grab a swat team with cnn in taupe. what is going on in this country echo you want to talk about totalitarian, we have it right now? host: next up is michael on the independent line in maine. >> the levy is already paid, it got sent to george bush senior as president. they are trying to build casinos down there. nancy pelosi got -- when someone entered his office. when you know law and you won't enter law, law signed into court

of law, a press comes out, the affair goes to the people. [indiscernible] the levees have already been paid. we have a construction crew in portland where we want to make piping? host: it's top news story time on "washington journal." this is about ron desantis calling for a special legislative session. florida's governor will not back down when it comes to fighting the biden administration's covid-19 vaccine mandate. governor ron desantis, the republican thursday, called a special legislative session in the state to stop president joe biden's policy from affecting floridian businesses. companies with more than 100 employees would be required to enforce the policy. biden announced in september. that is a policy that has not been introduced quite yet. the governor saying we have an opportunity to take additional action, and i think we have to do it, i think we have got to stand up for people's jobs and their livelihoods. let's hear from abilene, kansas

next. roger is on the democrats line. caller: i believe the whole bannon story is kind of theater. it is something to distract us from down. the southern border is our biggest problem. i cannot believe we as americans are letting it happen. they just keep coming, and i don't know any way to stop it. biden, his whole presidency has just really became a bad situation from the day he took office. gas has gone up -- energy, everything -- energy reflex everything we do. or we not in a state with a good situation with our energy policy and why they messed it up, i will never know. biden, everything he has done

has been a terrible situation. that is all i have to say. host: next is dale on the democrats line. caller: yes. i'm amazed of these republicans or anybody with this steve bannon issue. if somebody hits your car and a hit and run, you would like to find out who. izzys -- it is your car. if someone robs a banker breaks her window, you want to find out who did that. it's amazing they want to hide everything. they want to keep everything under the rug. donald trump said he was going to go to the capitol to be with them but he did not go to the capitol. after he told everybody -- they went down there for hugs and kisses and y'all are great patriots. this man had four years and it is amazing. he has went through so many changes. he resigned because he knew --

another resigned because he knew there was so much mess going on. i'm so thankful for god that we get the politicians behind closed doors because what happened if they didn't? they would have went after republicans or democrats but i'm so surprised with the republican party trying to hide. jim jordan, every time you ask jim jordan a question, it is like he is trying to hide. he stutters and does all of it. host: kevin mccarthy was asked about steve bannon and his defiance of the congressional subpoena from the select committee. >> are you ok with people define congressional pinots? >> what are you talking about -- congressional subpoenas? >> what you talking about? >> the houses holding bannon in contempt for not replying to the subpoena. >> issued an invalid subpoena. it weakens our power not if someone goes against it. it was a right to go to the court to see he -- see if he had

executive privilege or not. i don't know if he does or not but neither does the committee. so they are weakening the power of congress itself by issuing invalid subpoenas. >> he was a private citizen during the -- >> don't ask me that, the courts decide. host: we are talking about your top news story of the week. this is some reporting from this morning from reuters. the headline at united nations, afghan women appeal, don't let tell the men in. a group of afghan women urged the united nations to block the taliban from gaining a seat at the world body, calling for better representation for their country during a visit to the organization's new york headquarters on thursday. "it is very simple, former afghan politician and peace negotiator fazio goofy told reporters outside of the u.s. security council, "the u.n. needs to give that c2 somebody

that respect the rights of everyone in afghanistan." in west virginia, donald, hello there. caller: good morning. we have the most corrupt president that has ever been in office right now, and you see the results. the mainstream media covers for him, they don't ask in real questions, and then they wonder why we don't believe them on anything else. host: did you watch the townhall last night on cnn? caller: i watched about two minutes of it. when i heard the first question, i turned it off. i watched all the channels, the press stories, that wasn't any kind of real thing last night. democrat or republican, whatever you are, he is ruining your country too. thank you. host: next up is ruth, north carolina. at mary on the independent line. caller: hi, how are you?

host: fine, thank you. caller: what i was most interested in is hunter biden's artwork. yesterday, ken buck, republican from colorado asked the attorney general if he was going to investigate hunter biden, and he also showed a couple of impressionist paintings from famous artist monet. one sold for 500000 and the other sold for 700,000. so hunter's looked like chicken scratch and he is over $500,000. my guess is the reason they keeping this secret of the buyers of these paintings is they are probably -- they have probably been sold or sitting in the garbage can in some other

country in the money was funneled to the biden family. thanks for listening. have a good day. host: next up is holland, michigan. lee is on the republican line. good morning. caller: hey. wow. this is a three to one democrat -- you take so many more democrat callers than republicans. it is funny. anybody who pays attention, pay attention. c-span is a democrat -- host: lee, we will stop you there. we pretty much take them in the order that comes. there's a democrat that follows you, the woman that was before you was independent and republican and there is a republican after the next call. we get to it in order. we take them as they come in. caller: you are a democrat. host: we will go to felicia in des moines, iowa on the democrats line. go ahead. caller: hi. i think the most interesting story is how the republicans

have decided to back bannon. bannon of all people. this is not trump, this is bannon, who stole from the trump supporters, all the money they gave him to build the wall. he stole it. he went to jail. the republicans supporting trump who went to the capital for the insurrection, he has not stood up to back any of them but all of the powerful people that went to jail, he stands up to back them but the little people, the people who support him the most, he does not do anything to support them. he only protects millionaires and billionaires and people like him. these people supporting him, they need to stand up and realize that he is not out to help them. he is out for them only, to help

him. caller: bert is in columbus, georgia. good morning, bert. caller: how are you doing? i wonder why everyone is so mad this morning. everyone seems so mad at each other. i can understand it. if you watch the hearing yesterday on the attorney general, it was pretty pathetic. the attorney general, he reminded me of robert mueller when they would ask him questions. he was -- couldn't remember or didn't have any idea of what the subject was. just like when the republicans was asking him about the florida situation was the people that didn't not like to see our tv and he wrote the letter about having the fbi investigate the parents for being terrorists. i'm sing to myself, what would happen if donald trump was to

ask the doj to investigate people who were voting for him or didn't like some of the situations they didn't like in the, you know, school board meetings and stuff. you have local police that is supposed to control them. you don't have to call in the fbi and you don't have to call parents terrorists. this ag did not seem to know anything. he just seems to be absent. just like biden, he is the same way. nobody in the administration has any sense of what they're doing. you can look at biden last night at the townhall meeting. he couldn't have a coherent statement. he was asked about one thing and he would talk about something else and the moderator had to

bring him back on the subject. host: a number of people, he and among a number of people mentioned the hearing yesterday, the house judiciary committee with the attorney general which c-span covered. we covered it live and you can also find that in our latest programs area on the mobile lab, the c-span now mobile app. you may also be able to find select clips from that event as well. download that now, c-span now, it is the mobile streaming app. virginia on the independent line , dugger, go ahead. caller: yes. thank you for taking my call this morning. the main point i wanted to make is about defending the border. i believe defending the border is defending america and american citizens. the most important thing for people's jobs. when you let too many people into this country and too many people competing for the same job, that'll put pressure on lowering wages and affect people's standard of living and

quality of life. you ever think when you have too many people in this country, you affect the quality of education. you have to educate everybody and resources have to go to educating and that takes more resources. so you will affect the quality of education of the united states. also, people -- if you harm the environment, you affect the habitats for everybody. so funding this country with emigrants is a bad idea and i think both parties should agree to protect jobs and protect american citizens and do something about controlling the border and controlling who comes into this country. my last point is any country that is socialist in this world controls the crossing of people into their country. they know that when they let too many people in, the benefits giving out to their citizens is

affected. so the poor people in this country will have us benefits when they lets more and more people into this country. host: we have about a half-hour left in the program on "washington journal." house is coming in at 9:00 eastern and we will be joined by one of the house members next. we are joined by peter welch of vermont and we talk about the divisions over the president's economic agenda and the priorities for mr. welch and other members of the democratic caucus. that is ahead. ♪ ♪ >> american history tv on c-span two comics pouring the events that tells the american story, saturday at eight to clock a.m. eastern on lectures in history, two discussions on the american military and revolutionary war. first, julian suites talking about the capabilities of the consonantal army.

as well as advantages and disadvantages. the american and british forces had. at 90 -- at 9:10 a.m. eastern, how the american and british militaries compared in demographics, organization, and officer selection progress. at 2:00 p.m. eastern on the presidency, a look at the life and times of abraham lincoln with historians david reynold and h w brand. watch american history tv saturday on c-span2. coming up today on c-span, the houses back at 9:00 a.m. eastern to work on legislation that would create more accommodations for nursing mothers in the workplace. at 9:00 a.m. on c-span2, the center for strategic and international studies hosts a discussion on economic competition between the u.s. and china. you can also watch the events online at c-span.org or by downloading our free video app, video now.

-- video app, c-span now. ♪ download c-span's new mobile app and staff to date with live video coverage of the day's biggest political events from live streams of the house and senate floor and key congressional hearings. the white house event and supreme court oral arguments, even the live interactive warning program, washington -- morning program, "washington journal," where we hear your voices every day. c-span has you covered. download the app for free today. "washington journal" continues. host: we are joined by congressman peter welch of vermont. he is a member of the commerce committee and vermont's at-large member. good to have you back on "washington journal." guest:guest: good to be with you. host: let's start with the reconciliation package, the social spending much of the biden administration is really pushing.

as you see the dollar figure in that being reduced, being compromised and adjusted, what are your thoughts -- what are your concerns on what might be out of that package once the final bill comes to the floor? >> we are at the point where we have to make painful decisions and recognize the reality, that we don't have a single vote to spare and we need boats to spare in the house. we've gotta make adjustments. there are two ways to look at this, the number comes down to 25, somewhere in the neighborhood of two or below. or we can look at it as what are the priorities observed? there is three elements to what the biden plan is about. one is finally investing in families. i would use the word investment because we need childcare, and that is true for you whether you voted for trump or biden. we need pre-k, pre-k is a huge help to parents where not only do they have a secure place for

their kids, they have vacation for their kids. we have homecare. those are some of the major elements of the so-called human infrastructure. that will really make a difference for families, regardless of who they voting poor or -- voted for or who your political party is. the biggest challenge parents are having coming out of covid is taking care of their kids. i feel good about that. and the climate initiatives here are long overdue and it is so painful to watch what is happening in our country and in our world with the incredible weather events. this is the biggest investment in bringing down carbon emissions in the history of the country. so i'm really pleased with that. host: do you think those climate initiatives will remain in the package and the funding to support those initiatives will remain secure? guest: we are going to win some

and lose some on that frankly. the one we will lose is the clean energy plan. that was the incentives, the financial incentives we would provide two utility so they could, without burdening the rent payers or bottom-line, transition from fossil fuel to clean energy. that is a major step that contributes significantly to reducing carbon emissions. if we compensate in other areas, and senator manchin is against it, if we compensate in other areas like hardening our grid, modernizing our grade, which enables us to get wine from iowa or texas to vermont, we can get to that 50% carbon reduction by 2030 that president biden is so committed to. there is other ways to achieve the carbon reductions. quite frankly, you are asking me and this clean energy plan will

be part of it. host: on senator manchin, a lot was made this week about the opinion piece by your state senator, bernie sanders, in the west virginia gazette this week. bernie sanders opinion piece, let stand together to protect working families. can you talk to that piece about the families of west virginia and vermont, the similarities of an aging population, the economic challenges faced by both states? what was your thought about the message bernie sanders had there? guest: the heart of the message is exactly right. childcare and the child tax credit, which is the first tax cut for working parents, there we millions of dollars, dollars that we go to arizona, kyrsten sinema, and several million dollars to families in west virginia. the point bernie is making is really beyond disputes, namely

the programs with childcare, with pre-k, with home care are good for working families whether they live in vermont or west virginia. joe manchin has got a different -- rate then bernie sanders. joe manchin got less than -- probably the only person in west virginia to win that seat. what you saw last week is after bernie and joe manchin had been tussling about the topline and other issues, they were resolving things and making progress. it will be painful because joe manchin said he never could have imagined even going to $1.5 trillion and bernie could not see going below $3.5 trillion and even if they have a different view on the amount of what the investment should be. host: do you think the revenue

pieces of this, the taxes in there needed to pay for much of this and many of these measures will still be intact in the final version? >> we will see. it will be up to senator nick cinema. bernie and joe manchin are in agreement. we have corporations, multinational corporations that have been extraordinarily profitable that you not pay taxes. there was a time with nike where if you bought a pair of nike sneakers, you paid more to the sneakers than nike paid in taxes. the americans in west virginia and vermont are [indiscernible] there is a time where jeff bezos and the richest people in the world not only did not pay taxes but he got money back from the government as a child deduction. bottom line, my hope is that we will get the senators, including

senator sinema, to realize not so much a tax increase as it is asking folks who have not been paying their fair share to pay their fair share. part of that will result in lower taxes for those coal miners in west virginia and farmers in vermont. host: vermont congressman peter welch is with us, and we welcome your calls and comments. it is (202) 748-8001 for republicans. democrats is (202) 748-8000. for independents and others, (202) 748-8002. the standalone infra structure build the congressman has passed in the u.s. senate but the house has yet to take that out from there. it is tied it side-by-side with the pre-$.5 trillion measure. do you see that as a mistake in terms of not being able to pass the info sector bill as a standalone measure itself? guest: i would be fine about passing it as standalone but there is a good deal of anxiety among members who are committed

to passing both and see both as essential. they are coming together now and my expectation is we will pass those if not simultaneously very close in time. so we will see but the bottom line here, whichever tactical decision you thought was best, most of us, all of us on the democratic side absolutely want that infrastructure bill passed. $1.1 trillion and it is fantastic for roads, bridges, and broadband. we need broadband. that is $100 million for us to be able to get that broadband out to the last farm on a dirt road in the northeast kingdom. and i think that was a tactical decision and debate. host: let's go to bob in michigan. bob is on the independent line. hello there. caller: yes, sir. i have one question and one statement.

first question, what exactly is your fair share of what someone else has worked for? now my statement, i have a real simple fix to these 2500 page bills in congress. before you are allowed to vote for the bill you have to pass a test of your comprehension of the bill. and it should probably pass with at least 95%. just like we test our children to see if they understand the material they have read. host: ok bob, we will hear from congressman welch. guest: two things. the fair share is with tax rates. if a working family or farmer is paying 15%, 16%, or 20% of their income in taxes including social security and jeff bezos is paying 0% with billions i would say he is not paying his fair share, period. these big bills, i prefer them to be broken down but my experience here in congress is that the members look carefully

at what is in the bill and we have staff that helps us. i would say that is true of my republican colleagues, republican colleagues and democratic colleagues. and you can say hey peter, i don't like the way you vote on this or peter i don't like what you are doing -- i like what you're doing and i will vote for you. host: betty is on the republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. first, a question. why is it that c-span network never reads articles from the new york post? you read other papers but you don't read that one? host: we read that from time to time, betty. do you have a comment or question for the congressman? caller: yes i do. i want him to expand on the garbage in the bill like studies for butterflies, desert fish, muscles, homes for the convicts,

there is a lot of stuff. guest: i don't know what you're talking about. host: we will move onto patrick in laurel, maryland. democrats line. good morning. caller: good morning to you. i am a democrat and i'm against the $3.2 million budget and i will tell you why. i believe it is because the american people really don't know exactly what is in it. in other words, what is the fine line in terms of exactly what is going on with that? what i mean by that is it is too broad strokes. you guys are doing more cliff notes. it is more soundbites. everybody once childcare and things like that, blah blah blah. the only thing we do not know is how are we going to pay for it. he really cannot say it will be paid for because it is too broad

of a stroke. we do not know what our senators and legislators individually feel about the bill. you cannot say we have stats. i don't believe the american people believe you do have stats. host: all right, congressman welch. guest: first of all your question. i can tell you what is in the bill and i can tell you how we would pay for. one, we are investing in families and that is childcare. so you would not be paying more than 7% of your income to childcare. it is pre-k, which is fantastic for giving our kids a leg up and getting education. it is homecare. it is paid family leave. you have a child who is sick and you are working and you love that child, you love that partner and you are torn because the partner needs you and you need the salary. with this paid family leave, which many of our small employers from vermont want to provide but cannot afford, the

federal government is helping. those are some of the elements in there that are so important. and we of course -- i mentioned we are doing things that will be helpful to the climate. those you can put numbers two. the two ways to pay for this, and i believe it should be paid for, is raising taxes on multinational corporations that have not been paying, they have been able to evade in offshore profits and not pay their fair share even though taxpayers like you are helping subsidize the infrastructure they need to be successful. secondly, the very wealthy people, the jeff bezos's of the world getting away with murder, that should end. they should pay their fair share. we can pay for that. the other thing is this bill will end up closer to $2 billion if not below but you have fair questions and i hope that is a clear answer at least for me. host: our next caller is in marietta, georgia calling on the independent line. go ahead.

caller: hi, representative welch. first, i want to ask your question and hear what's your responses and i want to ask you something else. my first question is did you read the entire 2500 page bill yourself? >> no. -- guest: no. it has not been finally written yet. caller: my second statement is, to me that is a dereliction of duty for any of the people that we vote to go into the constitution not to read an entire bill before you sign off on it. that is a dereliction of duty and that is not what we have you therefore. and there should never be any bill that is so large that you cannot read it. that is ridiculous. guest: a couple of things. first off, i'm in agreement with the opposition to these massive

bills. but let me give you a little to start. number one, i do know what it's in -- what is in the bill now but it is in the process of negotiation. i cannot read a before the final draft is written. number two, the reason we have to have a big bill here instead of doing it one after another is because of the filibuster in the senate. then the term, made it clear he wants this to fail and he wants to found the matter what is in it. he said in the past's job is to make sure famously this is about obama that he was to make him a one term president. i think the job all of us have is to make america succeed. we have got to fight for failure -- we have a fight for failure going on by senator mcconnell. he uses the filibuster requiring 60 votes instead of a majority of 50. the only way we have a chance to let the majority rule as by

putting it into a package that is using the term reconciliation. i would much prefer to have us voting on health care separately. childcare, pre-k, because it would allow you as citizens to have clarity about what is it steak -- what is at stake. host: assuming the house and senate take up the reconciliation measure and the end for searcher plan, you still have looming federal spending for the current fiscal year, the current spending measure is a temporary measure to december. and also the debt ceiling, with the treasury secretary earlier telling congressional committee that she will extend the extraordinary measures, the financial measures treasury has to do. tell us about what you are thinking as we get closer to that december date. will congress be able to iron out its disagreements over spending? guest: there are two issues here. one is spending -- and senator

mcconnell made it clear, no, but some republican senators understand it is much better for us to act on a budget because then we as members of congress are the ones able to make the tough decisions about how to allocate money across the country. but mcconnell wants to make this as tough as possible so he is holding back. my hope is that we pass a budget as opposed to a continuing resolution where you stay on autopilot. and you don't make decisions and that is a failure on the part of congress. the debt ceiling is outrageous. the debt ceiling is an artificial thing where the question is do we pay our bills or do we default on them. raising the debt ceiling has nothing to do with authorizing who is spending. all of the tax cuts in the trump your cost several trillions of dollars and those have to be paid for. part of the debt ceiling is to accommodate what trump did with

those tax cuts. and i'm not and never have opposed meeting america's obligation to pay its bill. that would be catastrophic. i do go back to senator mcconnell. he has been clear in the past that america cannot default. he is very clear now in the present that he is not going to do anything to help avoid a default. he will do everything possible to make it difficult for the democrats and u.s. senate to have any republican support them on a default. it is a pretty outrageous position i senator mcconnell, totally for political purposes, and a way that can be damaging to everybody, everybody in this country. i want our social security checks to go out. i want our payments to be paid. senator mcconnell is messing with that and he should not do it. host: we will go to jamie in

oceanside, california, a republican line. go ahead. caller: good morning. hi, i am a hispanic third-generation from san diego and i notice when i apply for a job and i look hispanic, you would assume i speak spanish. when i go looking for the job, they are telling me i cannot get the job because i need to speak spanish. i find it really interesting that what is really going on is that i work for a large corporation and wages are getting suppressed and getting lower and lower. yesterday, i've saw five guys coming in from tijuana that are taking american jobs such as the job i could have or my family. that is what i want to know when someone will do something about the border. it is important to me and my future and the future of all people in this country. even if you are hispanic because you will lose your language and you will speak english eventually. that is it. guest: two things.

i'm puzzled with what you said. five guys came in from tijuana. five guys cannot come in from tijuana because they feel like it. the border is closed. i'm a little puzzled about that, but on the question of the border, again, totally fair question. we have to have a legal immigration system. we have enormous pressure on our borders, we have it now and had it during the trump administration and during the obama administration. and we have to have a legal immigration system but we have to also recognize the pressure on the border is a result of enormous consequential climate change issues, crime and corruption, and in many cases in central america. the devastation in the economy of south america, bringing up patients who had fled from haiti to south america years ago and now have no jobs in south

america. the reality is we cannot just have any open borders so anyone who wants to come can come. we cannot accommodate it and it has the effect you said potentially. on the other hand, the struggle here has to be to get our borders secure and have a legal immigration system, and we do need legal immigration because we have a lot of jobs that are being unfilled. how can we do that in a way where there is not exportation of legal immigrants at the expense of current citizens, like what you are talking about. this issue is tough but it has been totally politicized. we have to get to the root cause. host: let's go to the democrats line, deborah in maryland. go ahead. caller: hi. thanks for having me on. i had a question and a comment. the question is, why can't you just say to those republicans

who don't want to vote for the infrastructure bills, ok, your district will not get money for infrastructure. that way it would save money and we would all be spared the embarrassing spectacle which happens every time there is a bill passed by democrats of these guys showing up at ribbon cuttings on things they did not vote for. my comment, in addition to the question, is why don't you dressed address the debt ceiling in reconciliation by getting rid of it? it is a 1970 law. repeal it. you do not need it. it throws the country into chaos every couple years. just get rid of it. guest: a few things. a number one, i agree with you on both points. the debt ceiling serves no purpose other than to be exploited and abused by whatever the minority party is. in the past, there was a lot of hypocrisy by republicans and democrats using the debt ceiling

. but always in the past, everyone knew we had to do our repair bills. we came together and passed it. that has changed with the weaponization by senator mcconnell of the debt ceiling. i think we should get rid of it because it serves no purpose other than to create economic and for our country. i agree with that. second, i like the idea that if you don't when i have an infrastructure bill and don't want anything in your district, it takes a heads. what has happened here with a lot of my colleagues is on something like the infrastructure bill, which is so important for all citizens, to have safer intersections when driving their kids to school, to have the bridges that when they are going over them they will not collapse like what happened in solo. a lot of my republican colleagues have a motto, vote to know and take the dough.

so there's a good deal of hypocrisy. the reality is with just the members i would be in favor of doing what you're are saying but there are a lot of people in those districts where the representatives are voting no bank. i still want the people to have safety for their kids and have people to live in the lead pipes to have clean water so they are not getting sick. host: the house is coming in momentarily and we will get a quick call from jim in texas. it jim on the independent line. caller: thank you for having me. i wanted to call about the tax breaks for the clean energy. this hits very close to home. i have a company right on my southern fence i'm building a 2150 acre solar farm, a company

calledrw --a company called rwe. they are basically building this for the city of austin. they are getting 100% school tax breaks, which is usually 65% of our property tax, and they threaten to sue our county if they did not get tax breaks. we need to get a handle on this. we have had to get the law enforcement down here about the deaths. host: jim, i will let you go because we are on the u.s. house coming in. congressman, your final thoughts on his comment or anything? guest: two things, when you said property tax, that is local and has nothing to do with washington. i don't like the stickup that comes into local communities when they need that property tax basically for schools but that is what -- that is a local

issue. there are benefits for moving to clean energy, and this will not be a stick up against the local community. host: congressman peter welch from the state of vermont, great to have you with us on "washington journal." the u.s. house coming in momentarily. we will be back tomorrow morning at seven a cocky eastern. a point of criminal -- personal privilege. i would like to say goodbye and good luck to our longtime producer at "washington journal" . for 17 years she has been with the program with the networks, staying true to its mission of being an editorial voice and real guidance to all of us who host this program. best of luck. i will not miss your license plate in the garage being a maryland grad to but we will miss you. the u.s. house is coming in next. this is live coverage on c-span.

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 room, washington, d.c., october 22, 2021. i hereby appoint the honorable lauren underwood to act as speaker pro tempore on this day. signed, nancy pelosi, speaker of the house of representatives. the speaker pro tempore: the prayer will be offered by chaplain kibben. chaplain kibben: will you pray with me. god, you have asked of us above all things to love our neighbor. help us to live into that difficult yet simple