competition. if you are a middle or high school student, create a 5-6 minute documentary that answers the question, how does the federal government impact your life? your document must show supporting and opposing points of view on policy that affects your community. c-span.org. c-span's student competition awards $100,000 in total cash prizes. you have a shot at the grand prize of $500,000. entries must be received before january 20, 2022. for rules, tips, or just to get started, visit our website. is david wasserman. he's the senior editor focusing on the u.s. house for the cook political report. thank you for being with us. i just want to begin with the latest of how the odds are

looking for the parties heading into 2022 from your analysis. there are 68 vulnerable seats for democrats in the house. and 30 vulnerable seats for republicans. and four tossup races. how is it looking, david wasserman? what's the lay of the land? guest: republicans are the clear favorites for house control in 2022. there are going to be fewer competitive races in that by the time redistricting is done. redistricting is the single biggest factor that will predetermine a lot of house race outcomes because the parties who control the line drawing process in most states have an incentive to maximize the number of safe seats for their own side and minimize the number for the other side. but if you look at the results that we saw in new jersey and virginia, it was a big night for republicans, obviously, but what should really scare democrats is two things, first of all the consistency of the pro-republican trends that we saw between 2020 and 2021 in

virginia where glen young kin, the republican won by 2.5 points. that's a 12 1/2 point swing from biden's 10 point victory in virginia in 2020. new jersey it was a biden plus 16 state. looks like democratic governor phil murphy will hang on by three points. we also saw about a 12-point swing in republicans favor in state legislative races on average in both states. if you were to super imposed that on the house of representatives, then republicans would gain 51 seats next year. not even counting redistricting. is it going to be that dire for democrats who only have an eight seat majority at the current time? they can only afford to lose four seats? it may not be. back in september when gavin newsome in california survive the recall he did so by 24 points. that was a five-point swing when biden won california by 29. let's say there is only a

five-point swing, democrats would only lose 19 seats. either way between retirements, redistricting, and biden's low approval rating, republicans have a lot of roots to pick up more than the five seats they need for the majority. host: the headline in "politico," republican wave bills to take back the house. aggressive redistricting is one of the reasons. is redistricting favoring republicans? guest: it is. and i would have told you a few months ago that redistricting was the single biggest threat to democrats' majority. today it's clearly biden's low approval numbers. but republicans still have the upper hand in redrawing these maps. they control 20 states that add up to 187 districts compared to democrats who are final authority in just eight states totaling 75 districts. why do republicans have such a lopsided advantage? two factors. number one, disproportionately it's been blue states that have adopted independent or bipartisan commissions to redraw

lines. so california, for example, biggest state in the country, 52 seats, it has a citizens redistricting commission that is forbidden from taking into account partisanship in the way it draws districts. new jersey, washington state, colorado, virginia these are blue states that have also adopted redistricting commissions. democrats are kind of approaching this cycle with one hand tied behind their back. whereas republicans get to redraw the lines in texas and florida. the second and third biggest states in the country. as well as georgia and north carolina. i expect that republicans could score a small net gain from redistricting alone, probably between 0 and 8 seats. the bigger impact from it will be that a lot of very marginal republican districts will get a lot safer. in texas where republicans currently hold 23 of 36 districts, and nine of those 23 they hold gave joe biden more than 40% -- 47% of the vote in 2020.

republicans have systematically made those seats safer in their new map. guest: you noted president biden's low approval rating. host: yesterday we talked with steve israel, former chairman of the democratic campaign arm. he said he believes democrats could turn this around in, if president biden approval rating improves because the economy continues on a recovery, and also that the covid-19 pandemic is mostly behind us. guest: it's possible that biden's approval rating rebounds before next year, 12 months is a long time. i do think it would need to be above 50% to give democrats any hope of retaining their majority in the house and in the senate. that said, history is not on democrats' side here. the average midterm loss for the party in the white house in the post-world war ii era has been 26 house seats and two senate seats. republicans only need five and one to retake the majority. it is a really uphill climb for

democrats. another factor here is the retirements that we are seeing. so far there are 13 democrats who have announced they are not seeking re-election compared to 10 republicans. which may not sound like a large disparity, except it's the kinds of seats where we are seeing democrats leave. out of those 13 seats, there are eight democratic seats that are potentially vulnerable either as currently drawn or in the redistricting process, which is a factor in why you are seeing members like connor lamb in pennsylvania or tim ryan in ohio decide to run for statewide office instead. or perhaps why john yarmuth in kentucky or ron kind in wisconsin are retiring. and on the republican side of the 10 retireees, there are only two districts that are potentially vulnerable in redistricting in new york. when you add all of that together, kevin mccarthy looks like a formidable favorite to be speaker in 2023.

host: what about the amount of purple districts in this country versus truly red and blue and how that has changed over the years. guest: yeah, in 1997 when the cook political report first started calculating what we call our partisan voter index, which is an index of how all 435 districts vote relative to the nation as a whole, we found that there were 164 districts out of 435 that were kind of within the partisan 40-yard line that were within five points either way. and those were the places where we saw a lot of competitive races. in the past 24 years we have seen that number key klein -- decline 53% to 78 districts out of 435. i expect it could decline again by a third as a result of this round of redistricting. increasingly what we are seeing is redistricting provides the majority party in each state the ability to politically bludgeon the minority.

so it's like illinois and maryland and new york we are likely to see democrats draw maps that purge even more republicans from those states. and in texas and florida and georgia and north carolina, we are likely to see republicans draw maps that puts democrats even further into the minority. yesterday republicans in georgia just passed a map that would basically guarantee them a majority in the state senate. that kind of transcends what we are seeing in georgia where the state has become quite purple. democrats have actually won some statewide races. republicans would still hold i believe a 33-23 seat majority. and very few of their seats, i think hardly any of those seats would be competitive. as voters have increasingly self-sorted into heavily red and heavily blue neighborhoods and as we see a decline in the number of split ticket voters, voters who cross over from their

presidential choice to a down ballot choice, that has only made the ability for party strategists to draw more durable maps even greater. and so, yeah, this is really become an arms race. and republicans are always going to have the slight upper hand in that arms race. host: i want to invite our viewers to join in this conversation. your questions or comments about campaign 2022, the midterms of campaign 2024 as well. democrats, 202-748-8000. republicans, 202-748-8001. and independents, 202-748-8002. text us as well. city and state. read some of the texts, 202-748-8003. i would like you to call in and tell us what is motivating you to vote in this midterm election and how you plan to vote right now. david wasserman is our guest. we are drilling down into the midterm elections.

you mentioned the redistricting efforts, specifically in the state of georgia. are there people like stacey abrams in georgia who are trying to reverse what they are seeing at that level? is it happening in other states? guest: yeah. it's becoming increasingly clear to democrats that republicans' ability to draw the lines is self-perpetuating. in most states it's the state legislature who redraws the maps. and the state legislatures in most states can redraw their own maps to entrench their power. this is a root for minority party in some cases to thwart the will of the majority and in a lot of cases it's simply the majority's way of seizing even more power. there has been a trend in the number of states towards reform. but most reforms have been successful, most ballot initiatives and constitutional amendments have been successful in bluer states.

there are new commissions this time in virginia and michigan and colorado. but not all commissions are created equal. there are 10 states that use them right now. and some are quite successful. california and colorado have had success with very citizen driven processes that in california it's blind to incumbents and party. in colorado there is a stipulation that districts be drawn with competitiveness in mind. and because there is either a contingent of independents or un affiliated members of these commissions, there tends to be some form of compromise. other commissions have failed. in virginia, a state that passed the commission in 2020, there are eight democrats and eight republicans on the redistricting commission. there is no tiebreaking members. there is no unaffiliate the or independent members. it ended in partisan deadlock which means the state supreme court is going to be taking over

redistricting. some reforms have worked better than others. and this is a case where you're going to see a lot of state supreme courts and state courts be more important than ever. since neither congress nor the u.s. supreme court has taken action to put guardrails up against gerrymandering, state courts are increasingly the last backstop against parties' ability to draw the map any way they want and seize power. host: carol in new york, democratic caller. good morning to you. go ahead. caller: good morning. not only is my name carroll, the she is a male. i'm calling from new york state, new york 22. and i'd like you to ask you about redistricting in new york generally. and then more specifically with

about 22 i realize we don't have a district yet, at least one with boundaries, and i guess i'd like you to make some kind of comment about claudia tenney and her ability to gain re-election. guest: which town are you in? caller: nor witch. in the central part of the district. guest: so obviously very close race there in 2022 where you had republican claudia tenney unseat the democrat, anthony brindisi, by about 100 votes. it was really tight. new york is probably the single biggest redistricting weapon for either party in the country. and it's the state that democrats are counting on to offset their losses from republican gerrymanders in other

big states. keep in mind that new york right now has 19 democrats and eight republicans. but two of those democrats are pretty important figures. hakim jeffries who is in the democratic leadership in the house. he's assumed to be democrat speaker in waiting when nancy pelosi calls it quits. and then sean patrick maloney, the chair of the d-ccc democrats' campaign arm. they'll apply heavy pressure on their legislative counterparts in albany to pass an aggressive gerrymander. even though new york has a voter approved commission, that mission is deadlocking along party lines much as we have seen in virginia. and so it's unlikely to agree on a new map. and at that point the legislature would take over and democrats could conceivably pass a gerrymander that packs republicans into three of the 26 districts in the state. by drawing what we call vote cincts. one heavily in western new york. one in the north country which

would be for elise stefanik. and one on long island, democrats could make all other 23 seats biden plus 10 or more. yet democrats suffered a small setback last tuesday when there was a constitutional amendment to reform the reform on the ballot that voters rejected. that amendment would have made it easier for democrats to gerrymander by moving up the commission's deadline to act, which would give the legislature more time to draw its own map. and it would have lowered the thereby hold for the legislature to -- throash hold for the legislature to pass maps by 2/3 to just 50% plus one a bear majority. democrats do have super majorities in albany. this is the first time they held the majority during a redistricting psych until over a century in albany. yet they are going to have -- have to have near party unity in order to pass a gerrymandered

map. that can be challenging given that some incumbents don't like it. don't like giving up favorable turf to help their team. they want to keep as many safe pre60's as possible. if democrats were to try that map that would create a newly safe democratic district in binghamton in the area that the caller is from, they would probably have to give a lot of republican precincts to progressives like alexandria ocasio-cortez or jamal bowman or mondaire jones. are they going to be ok with that? or will they pressure their fellow progressives in albany to vote against such a gerrymander. there are a lot of moving parts here. host: joyce next in portland, oregon. independent caller. good morning. caller: good morning. hello, can you hear me? host: we can. go ahead. caller: yeah. i'm not going to vote ever again because my personal color, i

know they have not passed the voting act right act yet. and i just about tired of america anyway. i was born in this place. and when i went to school, the only thing they taught us about was abraham lincoln, george washington carver and frederick douglass. now they own this -- on this big kick about c.t.r. earn all that. i don't care about the redistricting. it's going to leave black people out anyway. goodbye. host: two points there. not going to vote because she doesn't see any action on voting rights. and you have heard the speaker of the house talk about getting that passed in the senate. then two, the redistricting will leave out black voters. guest: well, a couple points here. this is complicated. there are some new voting rights act considerations for this round of redistricting. first of all this is the first

cycle since the supreme court struck down the formula that required the justice department to preclear states with histories of discrimination. and so a lot of southern states that used to have to get the justice department to sign off on new maps no longer have to seek preclearance or approval from the federal government. what that means is that democrats don't really have a way to block maps in texas or the deep south from taking effect even if they view them as discriminatory. they have to take the long route. which means filing a federal lawsuit, a voting rights act claim that could take years for districts to be overturned. that is a pretty significant difference versus the past. however, there are an increasing number of cases where we are seeing republican drawn maps overturned by courts. in the past five years, we saw in virginia and north carolina federal courts did strike down

republican-drawn maps as racial gerrymanders. the supreme court ruling still left intact that avenue. had it not been for democratic lawsuits that overturned republican maps in those states, plus florida and pennsylvania, then democrats probably wouldn't be holding the house majority by five seats. these legal questions are going to be very, very big in the months ahead. as we approach these deadlines and it's possible a couple of plans could get struck down. the other factor is that in the south in particular we are noticing in southern metro areas, there is a growing openness on the part of voters to vote for candidates of color. and now a lot of african-american members of congress are winning districts that have less than 50% african-american populations. out of the 53 current members of the congressional black caucus, only 19 represent districts where there is an absolute black

majority. what that's led to is a conversation about what is the fair threshold to allow communities of color to elect candidates of choice? and that varies from district to district. in a rural southern district it might take an absolute black majority to elect a black member. but in a more metropolitan district, charlotte, north carolina, a 32-35% black district can comfortably elect a black candidate of choice. this is a very difficult matter for courts to resolve. what is the fair threshold to draw these districts? and you are going to find disagreement on both sides of the aisle. host: i want to ask about what happened in new hampshire. your colleague, jessica taylor, on political report website, sununu's decision not to run for new hampshire senate gives democrats a brief reprieve. guest: this is a welcome development for democrats, the most popular figure in new hampshire politics is not going

to be running against democrat maggie hassan. but it's not in and of itself going to change the overall picture in the senate, which is that republicans still have a lot of opportunities. in this political environment, given what we saw in new jersey and virginia, republicans would be poised to reclaim the majority. they have got a lot of more purple states to compete in rather than virginia and new jersey, which are quite blue. arizona, georgia, nevada. even new hampshire could still be on the table. host: bob in logan, utah, democratic caller. caller: good morning, david. i'd like to say that i listen to morning joe and liz cheney was on. she hit the nail on the head. she said that she's very proud to be a republican. but she's more proud to be

american. i wore a uniform. and i never felt more patriotic. and when the towers come down, listen to this malarkey on both sides, we are split up and divided this country's got to come back together. we had a horrible man in there. and we've got a man now trying to -- but we need younger people in there. you know it, the world knows it. we are looking like clowns. but anyway -- host: i'm going to jump in and have david respond to the unity message. it's something president biden ran on. and he won. does it work in the midterms for him 20 get out there and talk -- to get out there and talk about keeping democrats in power for unity? guest: it's a very difficult message to sell at a time when

voters are foremost concerned about the rising cost of goods and inflation. look, voters are not looking at the infrastructure debate in congress and thinking about what's in, what's out of the bill affecting their everyday lives at the moment. that's part of the problem for democrats. voters are really feeling a pocketbook pinch from supply chain issues we are seeing. they don't perceive democrats to be taking immediate action to improve that. they seed both bills as kind of a laundry list of long-time pet priorities rather than a way to address acute problems. we saw democrats in virginia run n -- on a very anti-trump message trying to tie glen young kin, the republican, to trump for most of the campaign. that was in a state trump lost by 10 points. it still didn't work. republicans are having a lot of success in down ballot races by running candidates who don't look or sound like trump even if they don't disavow trump. the caller mentioned liz cheney

from wyoming. there are 10 republicans who voted for impeachment back in january. i would be surprised if more than three of them are back in congress in 2023. the reason, like liz cheney, and tom rice in south carolina, peter meijer in michigan could be quite vulnerable this their primaries. we have seen adam kinzinger in illinois, anthony gonzalez in ohio retire. we could see fred upton in michigan join that list. just about the only members in that bucket who have a chance of winning re-election are those who come from states with open or top two primaries where they can depend on some democratic votes to carry them through both the primary and the general election. people like dan new house from washington or jamie herrera beutler from washington, or david valadao from california. then there is the question of the 13 republicans who voted for the infrastructure bill. some of them are retiring. so have little to lose. about half of them came from new jersey or new york. we could see some of them redistricted out of their seats

in new york. there are likely to be fewer republican compromisers or trump critics when all is said and done after the midterms. host: and the hill newspaper echoing what you are saying, david. g.o.p. centrist face attacks from the right. some house republicans are furious 13 of their g.o.p. colleagues voted to pass president biden's bipartisan infrastructure legislation. those members were denounced as, quote, traitors, and could face primary challengers next year. ryan in georgia, republican. hi, ryan. caller: hi, greta, hi, david. my question for you is the past two major leakses, being 2015 and 2020, you among other pollsters, particularly yourself, have been not accurate in your analysis. and i can't help but see that you tend to favor the democrats and you tend to give them more favorability in your analysis. why should what you're saying be

taken seriously? when it seems to be that you're just a shell for the democrats and providing this information to support their narrative? guest: i think you're being quite selective in your analysis of what we have written. had you gone back and looked at our house ratings in 2010, you would have found that our forecast in the house actually sold republicans a bit short. that we said that republicans were going to take the house between 50 and 60 seats. they won 63 in 2018. we said democrats were going to win between 30 and 40 seats. they ended -- they -- they ended up on the higher end. there was a polling error in 2020. no doubt. the polling that we saw across the house environment on both parties' part showed that democrats were doing quite well

in down ballot races. it didn't pan out on election day. we actually did a deep dive into what went wrong with polling in 2020. and what we found was that there was a systemic underestimation of republican support that i think has a lot to do with the low response rates to polls right now. thepeople that are willing to answer a survey, a traditional mode survey, are disproportionately those with higher levels of social and institutional trust. i think president trump's position atop the ballot has been a confounding factor for polls. polling was a bit more accurate in virginia this time around. look, and 2022, we are forecasting republicans will have quite a good year. our analysis is based on our best understanding of the

numbers and the facts at the time. hold us accountable to what we say either way. host: democratic caller. caller: good morning. i am calling because i think -- about what happened in virginia. the virginia elections. there were almost 4 million voters who voted in the virginia election. the republican candidate only won by about 6000 votes. the lieutenant governor only won 55,000 votes. the attorney general republican candidate only won by 28,000 votes out of almost 4 million. for the legislature, doing a recount. 1% or less. you compare the virginia governor's race to what biden

did, comparing it to the other two times the democrats won in virginia, the suburban counties. the only suburban counties that went republican that biden won were stafford county and chesterfield county. none of the democrats who had won in the governor's race prior, none of them won those counties. host: david wasserman? guest: what we saw in virginia was an extraordinary rural turnout for glenn youngkin relative to 2017. he was able to get more trump voters from polls that mcauliffe was able to get biden voters. when the party out of the white house is feeling under siege,

they tend to turn out. anger is a stronger motivator than love. mcauliffe, i think he could have moved beyond trump and made his message more about what voters were focused on, but at the same time the big trouble spot for democrats in a lot of down ballot races for the house of delegates was in the i-95 corridor south of richmond. democrats lost four races by five points or less. that included two districts with black pluralities. it was not that black voters did not turn out at a high rate or defected to republicans. it was that rural white turnout was extraordinary. that is a warning sign for democrats in congressional races next year. the fact we saw so many suburban areas that mcauliffe was a notable -- unable to match

biden. those voters were more simply anti-trump then pro-democrat. that is a problem democrats are grappling with. they can't convince voters these republicans are equivalent to trump. they have to have a way to keep those voters in their camp. i think the only way is for biden's approval ratings to approve. host: brian in d.c., independent caller. you are on the air with david wasserman. caller: good morning to you and your guest. hi head two questions. could you tell me about the state of mississippi, which i believe has the largest african-american population? about 40%. white people about 50%. how many -- how does gerrymandering affect that state? how many african-americans hold

political positions, either in the federal, the house and the senate? if you can speak to that issue. second, could you tell me what you feel was the supreme court's reason behind dismantling the voting rights act? i will take my answer off the phone. thank you. guest: to the second point first, i don't think it is fair to say the supreme court dismantled the act is much as they altered it and weakened it. the provision i mentioned, the free clearance provision that was struck down, that was based on a coverage formula the supreme court said was outdated. the formula used to determine whether a certain state or locality had a history of

discrimination, they threw that part out. the john lewis voting advancement act democrats are trying to push through congress that joe manchin has expressed support for, that would reestablish a process that covers every state in the country. it would not require a formula. the supreme court has not ruled that out. the prospects for that the past look fairly dead. as far as mississippi, there are two republican senators. three out of four house members are republican. there is one african-american majority seat, the second district that takes in the delta and jackson. that is represented by bennie thompson. bennie thompson was the lone democrat in the house to vote against hr 1, the package of voting reforms democrats wanted to pass earlier this year that

would have included gerrymandering reform. i spoke with congressman thompson about this for his no vote. he is very suspicious of redistricting commission's over the process. -- commission taking over the process. it would be possible for there to be two black majority districts in the state, but republicans in charge of the legislature and governorship would not draw that map. it would require federal or court intervention to do so. there is a stronger case for additional black majority districts in states like louisiana, mississippi -- i'm sorry, alabama and potentially south carolina. host: mark from fort lauderdale, democratic caller. caller: hello and good morning to both of you. thanks for c-span. i sure hope he is wrong.

i regard these upcoming votes as watershed event. she called a while back and said she was never going to vote again because of the things that were going on in the way they were trying to block her vote. i wanted to call up. hopefully she is listening and tell her do not do that. right now is the time to turnout. mr. wasserman spoke about how the trumpers poured out in virginia. that is how they may have won. they poured out. what generated that was race something or other. they are trying to stop you from voting. don't let them stop you. please come out and vote. my wife just passed her citizenship last week and getting her ceremony in a week or two.

the thing she is most excited about is her ability to vote. to that woman and others like her when they are trying to block you and using every trick that got between gerrymandering and voting laws, this is the time you must vote. hopefully prove the guest wrong. host: david wasserman? guest: we are seeing extraordinary turnout in this era of elections. 159 million americans voted in 2020, more than 20 million higher than we saw in 2016. in virginia, about 3.3 million virginians vote. it shattered the all-time record for gubernatorial elections, which had been 2.6 million in 2017. what we have entered -- we have entered an era of high turnout. it is not clear that helps one party or the other. we had a huge surge in virginia and the republican glenn youngkin was able to win.

this is a question of how high can the parties turnout there voters? how much can they engage their base? democrats are going to need to win back a number of independents to succeed in 2022 or 2024. host: ken in south carolina, the line for republicans. caller: thank you. give me a little time. i have been a longtime viewer and caller. i started off as a democrat. then i went to independent. i'm not quite fully republican but i'm leaning that way. on the gerrymandering, yes. it is a problem at the local level. on the federal level it is not going to make any difference. all democrats go to washington and they think the same. coming from a black man perspective, the democrats left the black people, black

americans for the new immigrant vote. on the national level everything being passed will hurt their party. inflation is up. immigration at the border is a disaster. the proposal to give illegal immigrants money. blacks are hearing that and seeing that. critical race theory says -- the y generation of kids don't have nothing to do with slavery. we have to teach kids about history. it is like race baiting. are the democrats going to do something for black america? the black politicians have changed on us. host: david wasserman? guest: there has been discussion about the role that the education issue played in the virginia outcome. glenn youngkin and republicans were hammering on critical race theory and talking about terry

mcauliffe gaff in a debate where he essentially said parents should not have control over what is taught in schools. mcauliffe later walked to that back. i don't think youngkin's win is an endorsement of republicans' position that critical race theory is encroaching in schools and teaching kids wrong lessons so much as it became a catchall for parents' frustration with what occurred with schools in the last 20 months. especially school closures. that was a big factor in why you saw such large republican turnout not only in rural areas but in rapidly growing suburbs. all of which saw a pretty big

swings towards youngkin. host: we will talk about critical race theory and education coming up here in a few minutes. first, patty in louisville, kentucky. caller: thanks for taking my call. host: you have to turned on your television. caller: i just did. sorry. thanks for taking my call. i wanted to speak about the redistricting. i am 68 years old. i have voted ever since i was 18. i vote and all the local, the state and the presidential every single year since i was 18. i have noticed that where i live now and most of my life my voting has been real easy.

i always voted in-person until last year. it has always been easy to do. last year i voted early. then i went into neighborhoods in my city where voting was harder. i drove people to the polls. i had waited in my car for people to vote up to 10 hours. for me looking at this, i think this is wrong. whether it is the ways they are trying to suppress vote or discourage voting, i'm not sure. but as an american who has voted every year, i don't feel this is right. the redistricting i have never understood why that is the way it is either because i have watched i think it is three times republicans have lost the

popular vote but the system elected them. that is something that, like i said, as an american i don't feel that is fair. i feel that is not letting the people choose their leaders. i feel it is the system choosing their leaders. host: david wasserman? guest: a couple of different things. first of all, yes, the caller is correct. there have been two occasions in the past seven elections where we've had a split between the electoral college and the popular vote. that does not have to do with how district lines are drawn, although it is a structural benefit to republicans in both the electoral college and the house. in addition, the senate, which gives disproportionate power to small states. in the house redistricting is part of the equation. there has been one occasion in

2012 where republicans did -- democrats did win a slight plurality of the house vote and yet republicans won the house majority. similar situation in 2016. you have this built-in advantage from redistricting for republicans that is likely to expand. it's also important to note that part of republicans' advantage is based on the distribution of where voters live geographically. the fact that democrats tend to be clustered in urban areas like louisville and republicans tend to be more spread out across rural areas and small towns. in kentucky, there is the possibility a republican general assembly will overrule or override the democratic governor to pass a map that converts john

yarmuth's open seat into a more competitive or more republican district. he is the last democrat holding federal office in kentucky. he is announcing he is retiring in 2022. host: david wasserman, u.s. house senior editor for the cook political report. you can follow his analysis if you go to cookpolitical.com, and on twitter. >> see sans -- c-span's washington journal, everyday we take your calls live on the air and discuss policy issues that impact you. thursday morning, james discusses his book in the company of heroes about medal of honor recipients who served in iraq and afghanistan. also examining issues facing the veterans affairs of ministration. watch washington journal live at

7:00 p.m. -- 7:00 a.m. eastern. join the discussion with facebook comments, texts and tweets. ♪ >> you can be part of the national conversation by participating in c's bands student cam video competition. up your voice matters, so if you are a middle hazel student, we are asking you to create a documentary that answers the question helps the federal government in afterlife. the documentary must show supporting and opposing points of view on a program that affects you or your community using c-span video clips which are easy to find and access at c-span.org. the come petition awards $100,000 in total prizes and you have a shot at the grand prize of $5,000. entries must be received before january 20, 2022. rules, tips or how to get started, visit our website at

studentcam.org. ♪ >> book tv every sunday on c-span two features authors discussing the latest books. coverage of the brooklyn book festival, with a conversation with heather mcghee, and the author of last best hope, and the author of between the lines, her collection of interviews with people she met on the new york city subway, and later, with -- sarno hurston, whose book was posthumously published.

then dr. paul off at come ahead of the children's hospital of philadelphia's infectious diseases division and director of the vaccine education center talks about his book but your life, from blood transfusions to mass vaccination, they long and risky history of medical innovation. he is interviewed by dr. emily at johns hopkins university, and epidemiologists. watch book tv every sunday at c-span2 and find a full schedule online or watch at book tv.org. >> c-span takes you live to nasa's kennedy space center where spacex will launch four more astronauts to the international space station to stay for about six months. crew three is the name of the mission. we will bring live coverage here on c-span. >> we are in the business of launching pe i