rachel cohrs joins us. and we will discuss the role parents play in politics with the christian science monitor's christa case bryant. we take your calls, texts and messages. host: good morning and welcome to washington journal. inflation is on everyone's mind now as we head into the holiday season, with prices jumping on everyday items at a rate that concerns many americans. right now, everything seems to be going up at the same time as there are supply chain issues because of the pandemic. the white house says better days are coming out of that the infrastructure bill has passed, but is it too late?

how has inflation affected -- impacted your finances? we will open up regional lines. in the eastern or central time zone, you can call (202) 748-8000. if you are in the mountain or pacific time zones, your number is (202) 748-8001. you can always text us at (202) 748-8003. we are always reading on social media on facebook, at facebook.com/c-span, on twitter, @cspanwj, and you can always follow us on instagram, @cspanwj . inflation is surging. let's start our conversation by seeing what is going on with the inflation rate. we will have a story from usa today that tells you about what the numbers are now. their story says this.

"inflation over the past 12 months surged to a high as rising prices undercut president joe biden and hurt consumers despite evidence the u.s. economy is rebounding from the pandemic. the consumer price index increased by 2.09% in october, the u.s. bureau of labor statistics reported, leaving inflation 6.2% higher than a year earlier, the largest 12 month increase since 1990. the past year, as the u.s. has battled the pandemic, the cost of energy, food, transportation and other must-haves spiked, the causes including supply chain breakdowns, labor shortages and a sudden burst of spending." what does this mean for consumer

confidence? yahoo! news has a story from bloomberg that talks about where consumer sentiment is. i will bring you a couple paragraphs from that. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2021] "u.s. consumer sentiment unexpectedly collapsed in november. the university of michigan's index increased to 66.8 from 71.7 in october. the figure trailed all projections. waning confidence reflects an escalating inflation rate and a

growing belief among consumers that no effective policies have been developed to reduce inflation. they expect prices will rise 2.9% over the next five to 10 years, unchanged from the previous months." so the consumer confidence in our economy seems to be dropping because of inflation. so what does president joe biden plan to do? on wednesday in baltimore, president biden discussed the economy and concerns about inflation and explained how he thinks the infrastructure bill will help americans. here is president biden. [video clip] >> i will talk about one of the most pressing economic concerns of the american people, getting prices down, number one.

number two, making sure our stores are fully stocked. three, getting people back to work while tackling these above challenges i mentioned. economic reports show unemployment is continuing to fall but consumer prices remain too high. the american people are in the midst of this crisis and you can tell them that the recovery is showing strong results but not to them. it is worse even though wages are going up. we have to tackle challenges head-on. we are seeing the highest growth rate in decades, a vast decrease in unemployment ever since 1950. we have got problems too. many people remain unsettled about the economy. they see higher prices.

they go to the store or go online and cannot always find what they want and when they want it. we are tracking these issues and trying to figure out how to tackle them. my administration, with the help of the people on my left, has a plan to finish the job to get us back to normal from the pandemic and have a stronger economy. let me explain. it starts with good news. infrastructure week has arrived. how many times have you heard over the last five years that infrastructure week is coming? anyway, last week, we took a monumental step forward as a nation and did something long overdue and long talked about in washington but never done. the house passed my bipartisan

infrastructure bill along with another plan i am advancing. it will reduce the cost of goods to consumers, businesses and help get people back to work, helping us build an economy from the bottom up and the middle out. host: republicans however do not believe that president biden will do anything about inflation and that the infrastructure bill will help. house minority leader kevin mccarthy put out a statement about what he thinks is it going to happen with inflation and i will bring it to you. "the joe biden plan for increasing the american standard of living is a failure. the cost of living is increasing at a faster rate today than in 30 years. with the holidays around the corner, the biden administration has only exacerbated the anxiety families face as we approach the most expensive thanksgiving on

record that will involve soaring prices and a scarcity of goods. americans see it with their own eyes. all of these problems add direct pressure on american families pocketbooks." again, that's a statement from kevin mccarthy. how has inflation impacted your finances? are you not able to buy the things you used to buy? are you having to dig into your savings? let's see what our viewers have to say. let's start with rob, calling from new york city. good morning. caller: thank you. good morning. your performance as a moderator is excellent. you are among the best. and i like the way you posed this question in a very fair

way. the global pandemic screwed up the global shipping lines, people not working, already world -- working, all around the world, and it is not biden's fault for inflation. the moderator yesterday, greta, posed the same question you posed today, except she couched the question in such a way, basically blaming biden in the question she asked, the way she worded it. she talked about inflation. i don't remember how she said it but she brought biden into it as if it was his fall and the way she fielded the -- it was a loaded question. greta's question was a loaded question, not a fair question,

biased against our president, biden, and the way she fielded questions from the viewers, you could hear that anytime someone had something to say that was -- that ignited the flame against biden, she was all years, gave them time, and, anyway. host: rob, for yourself, how has inflation impacted you? do you see a difference in anything you are doing because of the inflation rates? caller: yes. i mean, i tightened my belt. i go without things i did not need in the first place. i do not eat out in restaurants like i used to. so what? i can get food and prepare it myself for a lot less, as everybody knows, and you can find ways to tighten your belt

and still live a high-quality life in this country. i am in a reasonably good condition myself and i realize that not everybody is in that position, but -- host: let me ask this just real quick, rob. how many of those changes had to do with the pandemic versus the rising cost of goods? caller: welcome again, you posed -- well, again, you posed the question in a fair way. i tightened my belt from the pandemic and i tightened my belt also from the rising prices. i went for gas today, found a gas station that was $.30, $.40 cheaper than the rest. you can shop for gas to save yourself a few dollars to tighten the belt that way. i almost paid the same price last night as i did six months

ago, a year ago, by shopping. host: let's go to joe, calling from ash, north carolina. good morning. caller: good morning. take this the right way -- john q public. i have been in business for myself. they have a bunch of naivete about them. you go ahead, like the fast food places, you are paying $14 an hour to say, would you like a large order of fries with that please? if you are going to raise wages you have to raise the pricing. when covid came, everybody was in panic mode. we put money in. a two-bedroom apartment here used to run $800. i am by the beach too. now it is running over $2000. everybody has to make up. you cannot go ahead and put more money in and keep on putting it

in. it has no face value because it says it is backed by the people of the united states, not gold. i was a union representative in ohio. i will tell you how brainless people are. they negotiated on vacation. when you first started, you get two weeks of regular vacation, three weeks of bonus. the catch is you did not have to take your three weeks of bonus. you could still work and get it. then you went to 13 total weeks. you got four weeks of normal vacation pay but then took your -- the rest of your vacation and stuck it in your hip pocket. john q public is naive. your shipping problems, they are not there. you are screwing around. as far as my peace goes, i am

good as my money -- my piece goes, mi is good on money? no, but everything is paid off. my medicare went up. host: speaking of medicare, the u.s. government has announced a huge increase in medicare premiums coming next year. i want to bring you that information from the hill newspaper this morning. a lot of our viewers will be interested in this i think. our story. "seniors on medicare will have to pay more than $20 more per month extra in premiums next year, a large increase that officials attributed to the possible coverage of a pricey and controversial new alzheimer's drug. the biden administration announced that the monthly premium for metacarpal -- for

medicare part b will increase by $21.6. officials said this is one of the largest increases in recent years. about half of that increase is due to the contingency planning to make sure the program has enough money to pay for an expensive new alzheimer's drug if medicare covers it. officials at the centers for medicare and medicaid services said that." with everything else increasing, we now see an increase in the monthly premium for medicare part b. these are all expenses that americans will have to pay over the next few months going into the new year. how has this inflation impacted your finances? groceries, energy, gas prices. are you putting off vacations, large purposes, christmas

dinner? let us know. let's talk to richard, calling from nashville, tennessee. good morning. caller: good morning, jesse. a pleasure to see and speak to you this morning. i work at a grocery store and i will tell you, jesse, there's a lot of bad and good going on in this situation. i receive anything in my grocery store and we are one of the largest. i will not mention the name. they are one of the top three. you are not full-time and less you are an executive. and i am one of the chosen few. i save up for a rainy day. i have done that. in the last 10 years, after raising my children, all i had thought about was putting money back. you cannot really trust your

401(k) because it is up and down. i know a lot of people who have a 401(k) and have retired or wanted to retire and couldn't, then it came back. i see prices change all the time. groceries will come down one weekend go up two weeks later and never go to their original price. when you walk the store, you see people stealing, people walking out the door more, more homelessness around retail shopping centers. when they say it is not president biden's fault, it is a lot of people's fault on the left and the right. the bottom line boils down to this. it is a power struggle right now and the american people are having to suffer through it. at the end of the day, when you look at the pandemic, it had nothing to do with all this. it is all about politics. it is, because i have seen it,

before the pandemic hit, do this. all i can tell people is is save up. it is about food, shelter and clothing. you don't need a new car if you have an old car. you don't need a new house if you have an old house. it can be done. put your priorities straight. have a great day. host: let's talk to -- actually, yesterday, white house press secretary jen psaki was asked about president biden's ability to actually control inflation. i want to bring to you her answer in yesterday's white house press briefing. here's jen psaki. [video clip] >> it seems like the white house is making a lot of promises on inflation but there are concerns that the white house or the president doesn't have a lot of power over inflation, things like gasoline in particular. it is a common tactic, the spr,

a short-term thing, so how do you deliver on things like gasoline, food prices, these kind of bread and butter issues? how do you deliver on that? >> some of the biggest costs for households and americans and the way they feel inflation is not typically looking at a graph. are things like housing and child care and health care affecting them? correct. but those are big costs on people's households. that is why addressed and raised those issues. a vast majority of every outside economist predicts that inflation will come down next year. that is what outside experts are predicting. so what we are talking about is how to cut costs in the short term. i have outlined a number of

ways. i would note we don't have partnership for most republicans on that. we hear a lot of screaming on inflation. we don't hear a lot of solutions, or willingness or discussion of a solution. that is what we are discussing. i noted the way we can address inflationary issues is by continuing to push this agenda, pass the agenda because it will help for economic growth, productivity and it is fully paid for. that is why outside economists do not think it will have a negative inflationary impact. host: let's see what some of our social media followers are saying about how inflation is impacting their finances. here's a post from facebook that says the price of gas has doubled. the price of meat has tripled. my utilities are 50% higher and

my dollar is worth 30% of what it was two years ago. we are frogs in a boiling pot. here is a post from twitter. the question is would you rather make 20 cents on the dollar or two dollars? there is a reason corporate profits are up while working americans are getting poorer. another 1 -- it's the same. thanks, brandon. here's another tweezers says buy what we want. there's a facebook that says not in a good way. and it has hurt my son. higher fuel prices and costs.

a post -- the price is high of everything. companies have record profits. regulate. make them pay taxes. how has inflation impacted your finances? let's go to philip, calling from ohio. go ahead. host: -- caller: the inflation thing will hit me and my coworkers because we got our notice that it is going out of business. it is a union job, 170, and down the road in dayton, ohio, 630 union jobs will go away. that is how the economy -- that is how the communists are handling the economy now. host: what do you do? caller: window stripping for

cars and trucks. there's many different aspects of it. we were working six days a week. you could volunteer seven a lot of times. we are running two lines nowadays and it is going out fast. host: we have seen the supply chain issue hitting the auto industry because of the lack of computer chips. what is your plan? caller: i will go back to retirement. i am 73. i work because i want to. but all those guys that have 20, 25 years in, they are scrambling to find work. i like working. i just show up. i am lucky. i will just go home, sip coffee and watch it snow this winter. host: let's go to diane, calling from new enterprise, pennsylvania. good morning. caller: good morning.

i think the biggest problem is that we went from secure borders, reliable, affordable energy independence, and effective military action to open borders, war on fossil fuels, and the disastrous surrender in afghanistan, and that has undermined our confidence in our leadership, and then, when you pump and inject trillions of dollars of monopoly money into -- and call that the solution, i think people, their confidence in the leadership has cratered. host: how has inflation impacted you personally, or has it? caller: i think it impacts everybody because it is hitting me at the gas station and the grocery store. host: tell me about how it is impacting you. are you driving less, buying

less food, doing more price shopping? how has it impacted you personally? caller: mostly through the groceries and gas prices, although i will say it has been across -- at least 30% more to heat my house also this year, so that's another hit their. -- hit there. host: what type of house heating energy dus? -- energy do you use? caller: i use heating oil. host: you are telling me they will be increased for this winter already? caller: yeah. i mean, when you shut down the keystone pipeline and allow russia had to have their pipeline, that means our energy

independence is gone. i mean, we are begging opec now. host: let's go to jeremy, calling from madison, wisconsin. good morning. caller: good morning. it is a pleasure, an absolute pleasure. what a pleasure to hear you. i don't understand why middle america thinks that a supply chain is important when all we are doing is constantly demanding. listen to the previous caller. it is demand after demand. i don't understand why the focus is on the supply side when on the demand side -- i mean, it doesn't make sense. i don't understand why it doesn't dawn on middle america and the rest of us. what is the man saying? it is simple, correct? how am i wrong? host: how is the inflation

affecting you personally, or is it affecting you personally? caller: of course. all of these things are affecting me. all of these causal relationships are affecting me one way or another, but i just found a bridgestone -- i am pretty sure they are original bridgestone tires. i found them for less than $20. i mean, what a deal. i could not imagined when i found. i mean, that's a pretty good deal i think. are you with me, sir? host: let's talk to david, calling from asheboro, north carolina. hello. caller: i just want to say that the promises -- the price of everything has gone up tremendously. the costs more.

that raises the price of everything. another thing is i think the democrat party and the president , i think we have a president who does not love the people of this country. i think you loves somewhere else. i just don't see him as our president, to allow all this stuff to go on, and it is sad that our country has gone this way. i cannot even talk on this. i am so confused on this devilish mess. everything has gone skyrocket. everything. host: david hung up, so let's go to palm beach, to rachel, good morning. caller: my husband and i are

recently retired. we own our home. we have set aside money for inflation, and average amount of inflation, but certainly not for these circumstances. we went down from owning two cars to one car. gas prices are off the charts. also, our hoa has gone up significantly, so people that are on fixed incomes or are retired, i really have considered -- i really am concerned about the future of people 65 and over. i will say that i have heard that medicare is going to increase up to 5.9% in payment, that we are also going to be paying $21 a month more in part b. i am concerned it will price older people out of the market altogether. host: you just said you have

already made one change by going down from two cars to one. what other changes is inflation making you do, making you and your husband make in your lives? caller: we buy less at the grocery store, we don't eat out, which is something we look forward to in our older years. we -- we are halting our traveling, which we were looking forward to in our older years. another thing i would like to mention is, you know, when you're 65 and older, you are not real apt -- smart people aren't -- to get involved in the stock market, because if you lose that money, it is gone, and you don't have 20 or 30 years to make that up, so of course, the rates are 0.001%, you cannot make any money there, so we are stuck at

that level line where we are not going to make any money on our money sitting in the bank, but we're certainly going to lose money. host: a question i asked of you earlier -- how much of the changes you made in going out and not taking vacations are due to the pandemic versus due to the rising cost of inflation rate now? caller: i think maybe the pandemic had something to do with it but it is also being used as an excuse. we have a lot of things going up in price. at the same time, we are letting millions of people come in. illegally into our country. we don't know who they are. of course, we are going to have to pay for them because we will have to pay for our education and health care and housing and etc.

i don't know if that figures into it or not. all i know is this is definitely affecting our lives. host: let's talk to ray, calling from clinton, pennsylvania. ray, good morning. caller: good morning, jesse. this that shed is not impacting me. -- this is not impacting me. we are retired. i want to correct something here. it is not the pandemic causing the inflationary spiral. the inflation is defined as too much money chasing too few goods. that is what is happening. i called a dealership yesterday because they sent me an offer on the car, to trade mind and. -- mine in. i called them up and they said,

we don't have anything on the lot and won't until december. everything is sold. the computer-generated this. what is happening is, the chips, the guy you spoke to in -- host: let's go to tim, calling from rochester, new york. tim, good morning. caller: good morning. about this inflation situation, for me, it is bad because i have to travel for work, but my company gives us a perdiem, so they look out for us, for gas money, but from what i see, i see people at grocery stores, people shopping and, i don't know, i guess it is just different worlds out here and i don't know what is going on. i see everything going on right. i know people are complaining about gas but that is about it. i don't hear too much about

food. host: are you making any changes in your life because of rising gas prices or the rising cost of food or energy? caller: energy, i am trying to stretch what i do with that in the wintertime. i don't use a lot of gas or whatever. i use a lot of heaters in my home. i have been doing that for years. so already know about the energy situation. i feel like, congress, they need to bring these companies in. i understand it was a pandemic, but it is slowing down. i feel like stuff should not be this time. it is all about money and people going crazy over that. and i think people coming over your have nothing to do with it. a lot of people at the border don't work -- border do work

that a lot of people who live here don't do. have a blessed day. host:, at wednesday baltimore -- in baltimore on wednesday, joe biden talked about supply chain issues and what his administration plans to do. here is president joe biden. [video clip] >> my plan will help address the supply chain. you will hear a lot about the supply chain's in the news, but frankly, not a lot of people have a clear understanding, whether they have a phd or did not go to school, about how a supply chain works. what is the impact on the economy? it is not easy to talk about that, let alone how to fix it. they are incredibly complex. as long as goods and materials are getting where they need to go on time, there is usually no need to worry about supply chains, but when global disruptions hit, like a

pandemic, they can hit supply chains hard. covid-19 has stretched global supply chains like never before, and suddenly, when you go to order a pair of sneakers, you are met with higher prices and long delays, or they say they don't have any. the reason for that last year had a lot to do with a lot of companies, how they make their products. in simple terms, it is the journey a product takes to get to your doorstep, raw materials plus labor, assembly, shipping, everything it takes to create the finished product, and these are complex. even products as simple as a pencil can use would from brazil -- use wood from brazil, graphite from india, before he gets to a factory in the united states to be assembled.

that is how it happens. host: how inflation is impacting your finances. a post from facebook that says, workers are getting paid more than me. i get food at a pantry and live

in a shelter. rent is $1200 for a one bedroom. a tweet that says more demand than supply is causing this. imagine if trump would have tried to contain covid. we are still in a pandemic. a post from facebook that says, 50, $60 a week on groceries. now it is $75. another that says i am good except for food. i make too much for assistance. i just cut back. another that says, it hasn't. i went shopping and everything was packed with people spending all kinds of money. gas prices are higher than usual but that depends on international oil production output and supply and demand.

i see people spending money hand over fist everywhere though. one last post. i have not even really noticed. i think most of the complaining is from people whose favorite candidate lost the election last year. we want to know from you how has inflation impacted your finances? let's start with debbie, calling from buford, georgia. caller: hello. it is not just gas and food, which is incredible, but it is also, like, my phone bill, my cable bill, my car insurance, my homeowners insurance, and, if an appliance breaks down or my car breaks down, and social security, they say they will increase it, and they also

increased the medicare. and i won't even go to the doctor because i just try to take care of myself when i am sick. but every single thing, every single thing, is up. not just -- host: so what changes are you making because of this? caller: well, i am eating canned fruit that i've had in my pantry for years. a lot of has a lot of pasta, spaghetti -- a lot of pasta, spaghetti, not that much meat anymore. i do a lot of the grimy work myself, but with covid, i kind of forgot, you know, with the weedeater. it is unbelievable. and my housing costs. i bought the house at 120,000

dollars a while ago and now they are saying it is worth more and based my property talks is on that, and i am just on social security. host: good morning. caller:, good morning, jesse. i don't know what is going on with the cat food but it is crazy out there. every time i try to go look for cat food. host: turn your tv downing go ahead -- tv down and go ahead. caller: i was talking about the price of cat food. everybody knows cats know they are fussy. i am jumping through hoops to find what they like. host: jackson is calling from

lewis, delaware. good morning. caller: good morning. i like listening to your show because i see the country and a problem and the people are complaining but these are the people who voted. if you vote for someone, you get what they offer, which is what we are getting now. the people that didn't like trump, ok. people who like biden, ok, we have got him. the guy who lives in a cave in new york, he doesn't feel a problem but a little bit of gas increase. i don't know what he is doing. he probably doesn't eat anything from a grocery store, but everything is going up, and you are telling me today i'm going to get an increase on my medicare, so the government is definitely helping our situation, and we elected them. we should be happy.

host: jack, what changes are you going to have to make because of inflation? caller: i have already made them. i'm down to one car. i sold my house. the house was bigger than i needed. however, i bought it at a good price, sold it at a higher price over a year ago, before we had the change in our administration, fortunately for me. host: all right. well, the moody's analytics and their chief economist are saying that the current inflation surge will not last that long. i will bring you a statement from moody's chief economist and what he has to say. the chief economist of moody's analytics says the inflation surge should be short-lived, predicting costs will start

dropping in early 2022 and, by this time next year, certainly by 2023, the u.s. should return closer to normal inflation. "i think this is entirely the result of the delta wave of the pandemic, and i think inflation will be moderate. we are seeing the worst of it now, he says." he is saying he thinks we are in the worst of the inflation surge now and he sees inflation beginning to drop in early 2022 and certainly by 2023 we should be back to normal inflation. the question becomes what part of the country is seeing the worst of the inflation rates? the wall street journal has the story and a map i want to bring to you that shows where inflation is spiking. you can see clearly from the map that the wall street journal has that inflation is spiking in the

midwest and areas in the south. i will bring you a couple of paragraphs from their story. u.s. inflation rose at the fastest pace in three decades in october, with prices increasing more in some parts of the country than others. consumer prices were up 7.3% last month. iowa, kansas, minnesota, missouri, nebraska, north dakota, having the highest decreases. -- increases. midatlantic states had prices rise less. midwestern states are relatively high housing prices in october, rising at a higher clip than others. again, the wall street journal studying inflation, saying the inflation rates are going up

more and the midwest -- more in the midwest and several southern states than in other places around the country. the red shows the higher inflation rates. you see the midwest and several southern states seeing higher inflation rates than other places. what are these rates doing to your finances? let us know. let's start with susie, calling from greensboro, georgia. good morning. caller: good morning and thank you for taking my call. you were talking about the inflation rates in the different states across the country. please know i am on a fixed income. it doesn't matter what that inflation rate is. it is a tax on meat. i am elderly, i am retired, on a fixed income. you want to know what -- how this is affecting me?

already, i have gone to the grocery store and had to make a choice between milk or eggs or bread. you got that? i have to make a choice of what food i am not going to be able to bring into my home to consume because of this inflation. that man in new york doesn't see it. god bless him and his family. i have to live it. and i want it fixed. do i think this administration could do it? no, because they do not want to. their intention is to destroy us. host: was go to joel, calling from -- let's go to joel, calling from mountain home, arkansas. good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call.

inflation is eating us alive. i just want to say. these widows and widowers, when they lose their spouse, they lose their social security. when i say that, they lose half their social security. how do you expect these people to live when churches have to do more for these widows and widowers? they cannot live on $800 a month with 6.2% inflation. an apple is a dollar. you don't see vendors out on the streets trying to sell an apple anymore. this administration is going to get these immigration people $450,000 per person and their families. how can they do that? the widows, the family of the gold star mothers, don't receive that much when their

kids are killed in battle. host: you said something interesting i want to follow up on. you said the churches need to do more, not the government needs to do more. you said the churches needs to do more. do you think the fault lies in americans ability to give money to charities, to have the charities be able to help these people, or do you think it is the government's fall and needs to do more? caller: it is the government's fault. this inflation did not occur until after the new administration took office. host: but do you think the private industries, like churches, like private companies, charities, need to do more as well? caller: people that are still working and demanding $15 an hour and will not take a job at nine dollars an hour, and the government is giving out too much free money to everyone.

they are never going to get back to work and, remember, if they are not working but receiving money, they are not paying social security or medicare taxes and things like that, so we have to take control of the government again. we have to vote these people out in the next election coming up. the church needs to do more but the people cannot come to church nowadays because of the virus and everything. this government -- it is a global, one-way economy now, and if you cannot see the big picture, you are missing it. host: let's go to rose, calling from apex, north carolina. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i will be swift. do not interrupt me. look at the world economic forum. this is their agenda and the source of all your economic suffering and 2019-2022.

we have employers breaking the law, asking illegal questions on job applications to favor the transgendered and woke and asking illegally for vaccination records to advance a global agenda. gas for my nissan under trump cost less than hunter biden. the great reset is a gross reset. host: let's go to kurt, and pennsylvania. good morning. caller: i want to interject something. one of the underlying causes of inflation -- are you familiar with lean manufacturing? host: no. caller: the concept of lean manufacturing. host: no. caller: it was pretty popular among a lot of companies for decades, and i think the pandemic actually caught them with their pants down using this

philosophy, because what lean manufacturing, the concept is no inventory, just basically on-demand inventory, and i think what you're going to find is that caused this ripple effect that helped contribute largely to inflation. host: let's go to linda, who is calling from walker, west virginia. linda, good morning. caller: yes. thank you for taking my call. i would like to explain to you about medicare, not medicaid. medicare. and the reason i am calling is we got a letter in the mail saying what we are supposed to be getting, well, the funny part is, by the time you take the insurance out of this, we will probably be lucky if we get five dollars a month extra. see how you can figure that --

and we are supposed to be able to pay our bills on this. this don't cover a gallon of milk and a loaf of bread. and i thank you for your time. host: let's talk to darrell, who is calling from st. paul, virginia. good morning. caller: good morning, sir. it is a great morning here. a little snow on the ground i guess for the fall. i retired from the coal business. it is doing great now in my neck of the woods. i don't understand that, but basically, gas has gone up more than anything for me as far as being a retired person. host: so, darrell, you are calling from virginia and you see snow on the ground already? caller: yeah, we are up here in the mountains, so we got a skiff of snow this morning. host: has inflation impacted anything you are doing? caller: mainly running around.

i am calling down on that. i was retired last year and most of us retired people, i guess we going vacation. we cut that back mainly because of gas prices. is going to be a couple dollars on the gallon, and that definitely eats into -- you know, with the inflation, so that is my big problem now. caller: let's talk to william, calling from scottsdale, arizona. good morning. host: -- thank you for taking my call. i am retired and it is tough on us. one other issue that i think might be important to you, this thing at the border was created by biden,, and the issue i have with it is all i am hearing lately is problems with trump.

what is going on with the biden administration? he totally is ignoring what is going on. and it is costing our country a fortune. and all i hear about is the bad stuff that trump supposedly did with the administration. host: let's talk to mike from connecticut. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. the term "supply chain problem," i have a problem with that. the reason i say that is we don't really have a supply chain problem. we have an everything-is-made-overseas problem. that is the problem. in one city in connecticut at one time, a huge manufacturer, most of their products are made overseas now. the factories that were abundant in that city are closed, they

are warehouses now. they have been divided up into small businesses. we don't have a supply chain problem. we have an everything-is-made-overseas problem. host: let's talk to patsy, calling from tampa, florida. patsy, good morning. caller: good morning. i just want to say, you know, all i can say is jesus is here and he will take the ones that believe in him up to heaven with him, and -- host: turn your tv down, patsy, and keep going. caller: all i have got to say is, you know, jesus is here and he is ready to call us all that believe in him and get rid of your stress and anxiety and depression because where we are going is a greater place than on earth. host: let's talk to dion,

calling from new jersey. good morning. caller: yeah, the inflation has been going up since 2019, i think. [indiscernible] host: can you speak up some? we are having a hard time hearing you. caller: the pandemic -- [indiscernible] supply chain during the trump administration -- [indiscernible] paper products, everything else, and you know, fully mishandled the -- [indiscernible] host: let's go to marry -- to mario. caller: good morning.

people understand that we are going through a pandemic for 2020 and before that. we were not producing anything. we were very much non-producing for food and a lot of stuff. we had shortages of gloves and sanitizer and paper towels and lots of toilet paper and all that, so it was going to catch up to us sooner or later. we are trying to get out of the pandemic and i believe the reason now, the shortages -- i mean, we are getting better and the manufacturing comes back up, but we are not making enough, and with all the delays for all those containers out there, there's a lot of goods, so that's preventing us from catching up.

host: let's go to caffe, calling from fremont, california. good morning. caller: good morning. i just wanted to make the comment that i think stores are being created and the way they are doing things is to keep customers happy. at one store, i went to get sweatpants and they didn't have any, but they had some other things, some other pants i was able to buy, and i asked the lady if they were getting the sweatpants in, and she said, oh, come back in two weeks. we are putting more out than. -- more out then. host: we would like to thank all of our callers and social media followers for calling in for our first segment. next, congress and the white house are making an effort to control the cost of prescription

drugs. next, a discussion about those efforts with stat news's rachel cohrs. next, the christian science monitor's christa case bryant will discuss her article about how both democrats and republicans on capitol hill are looking to become the party of parents. stick with us. we will be right back. ♪ >> next week on the c-span networks, both chambers of congress -- congress are in session. the house will take up the build back better social spending plan after nancy pelosi delayed a vote before the veterans day recess. it came at the request of moderate democrats who wanted the congressional budget office to analyze the bill. tuesday at 10:00 a.m. east and, homeland security secretary alejandra mayorkas testifies before the senate judiciary committee.

it was postponed last month after he tested positive for covid-19. also live on c-span.org and the mobile video app, a leading cyber security experts on the white house, homeland security, and the fbi will testify for the house oversight and reform committee for strategies to crackdown on ransomware attack's, disrupt tap -- disrupt hackers and build resilience. on wednesday live on c-span3, the confirmation hearing for jessica rosenworcel is confirmed that she will be the first woman to serve in this capacity and she will take -- the committee will take up other nominations including commissioner of the federal trade commission. at 10:30 e -- a.m. eastern, a virtual meeting of the house subcommittee to discuss the u.s. role in global vaccine equity. watch next week on the c-span networks or watch our full

coverage on c-span now, our new mobile video app. head over to c-span.org for scheduling information to stream video live and on-demand any time. c-span, your unfiltered view of governments. >> "washington journal" continues. host: we are back with rachel cohrs, the washington correspondent for s.t.a.t. news talking about the intersection of politics and stat -- and policy to discuss efforts by congress and the biden administration to address rising prescription drug costs. rachel, good morning. let us jump straight into it. lawmakers will begin debate on the president's build back better plan next week including in that bill is an agreement to lower prescription drug prices. before we get into it i want to bring to you what chuck schumer said touting the deal. [video clip] >> for the first time ever,

medicare will be empowered to directly negotiate prices in part b and d. this will directly reduce out-of-pocket drug spending for millions of patients every time they visit a pharmacy or a doctor. it will cap out-of-pocket spending at $2000 per year, ending the dilemma i just spoke about when a life-changing diagnosis could mean thousands upon thousands of dollars on -- in new expenses that an individual cannot afford. this agreement will lower insulin prices so americans with diabetes do not pay more than $35 a month. let me repeat that because it is amazing how the cost of insulin used to be so reasonable and has skyrocketed with very little reason to -- or justifiable explanation. this agreement will lower

insulin prices so americans with diabetes do not pay more than $35 per month. it will reform the pharmaceutical industry to stop price gouging and make sure that our country's drug pricing system benefits patients, not corporations. it is not everything all of us wanted, but it is a major step in the right direction as we work to help the american people afford their better prescription drugs. we will keep working to make it even better, but this is a really good start, and a major announcement. [end video clip] host: is chuck schumer right, is this a big deal? guest: if it passes into law it will be a big deal. democrats have been working on the issue of allowing medicare to negotiate drug prices for 15 years, it is something that they have never gotten across the finish line. if this agreement were -- were signed into law it might not be

everything that leadership help for, but it would be -- hoped-for, but it would be a major step in bringing prescription drugs into the realm of other products and services that medicare pays for. host: for some of our viewers who might not understand the argument could you explain to us why they are not negotiating these prices now? why is now this becoming part of the system? guest: back in the early to thousands when -- early 2000's when congress decided to create a prescription benefit, medicare did not have one. the choice that they made, it was the sausage making process that happened in washington, the pharmaceutical companies were able to insert a ban on medicare negotiating profit -- prices. if they can set their own prices it is more profitable and we can

see how that policy has worked out over the years. and, there were lawmakers that disagreed with the choice at the time, and they continue to fight to repeal that part of the law that was signed into effect in the early to thousands. -- early 2000. it was part of the industry's power in washington, and i think that they are rethinking given the prescription drug prices that americans are dealing with every day. just kind of weather that is the right policy going forward. host: you said that democrats have been working to push this through. is this a democrat only planned, or is this being supported by democrats and republicans since prescription drugs like we said earlier affect everyone? guest: they do. this plan we have only seen democratic support for it, and it is difficult to tell whether because it is part of the larger

build back better agenda that republicans just oppose wholesale, they think it is too much spending. it is difficult to figure out where any given republican lawmaker might fall on this policy. the democrats passed a messaging bill in 2019 and they did get to two republican votes which was more aggressive at the time, but the climate is different. at this point, this plan only has democratic support. host: let us look at specific parts of this plan being pushed forward by democrats. i want you to tell us a little bit about what each part of this plan really means further viewers. so, the prescription drug plan, we already talked a little bit about netiquette -- medicare to negotiate price for a high cause prescription drugs. i know it says high cause prescription drugs, does this include all prescription drugs?

or only a few? guest: it does not include all prescription drugs. it is an interesting process, and it starts with kind of making a list at medicare of the highest cost prescription drugs, the 50 most expensive in the pharmacy drug benefit and the 50 most expensive drugs given at a doctor's office. those 100 are the only ones eligible for negotiation, plus insulin products. the secretary does not negotiate for all of those drugs. the secretary will start off negotiating the prices of 10 drugs, which will go into effect in 2025 and then work up to 15 and then eventually work up to 20 drugs per year they are negotiating from these lists. host: he brought it up there, but i want to focus on it, who does the negotiations. you said the secretary. who is doing the negotiations? guest: the centers for medicare

and medicaid services will be running this program, they might contract out, we do not know what it will look like at this point, so medicare would be -- the federal government would be running these negotiations in the process is well outlined in the bill of how that back-and-forth would work. host: another part of the plan says that there will be a tax penalty for drug companies to increase prices faster than inflation. tell us about how that will work. guest: that part of the plan is just a disincentive for drugmakers to kind of take these really large price increases that we see sometimes. so, if a drugmaker decides we are going to raise our drug prices 10% and inflation is only 3% then they have to pay the difference back to the federal government. and this policy is unique and interesting because it also

applies to drugs that are sold in commercial market, employer plans and it goes beyond medicare. if drugmakers are charging those patients more, they will still have to pay a penalty. the idea is that, in theory, it could make drug prices more predictable. host: one more major part of the bill would redesign medicare drug benefits to limit out-of-pocket costs for seniors to $2000 a year. how important would that be? guest: i think that would be extremely important for seniors who do have high drug costs. right now there is not a cap of how much they could pay, they are paying a percentage. for someone who is really sick, who has cancer, those costs can add up. i think patients who are paying really high drug costs right now would see relief when that provision would go into effect in 2024, and i think it offers

peace of mind for people. if they get really sick, then they have some idea that they can budget for. how much their drugs would cost without the concern that there is a ceiling price and there -- and they could keep paying. host: this seems to be a popular idea, at least, to a lot of people in america. one of our social media followers has a question. "if this is so popular, why cant that be proposed on its own instead of a multi trillion dollar bill? why is this part of this multi trillion dollar bill instead of a stand-alone bill if it is so popular? guest: i think that kind of goes back to our question about how republicans feel about the bill. there was a bipartisan effort last congress to kind of get into some of these policies, but they would not have included

allowing medicare to negotiate drug prices, it is not popular to republicans. by including it in the larger package, democrats can use budgetary maneuvers that they are using that can allow them to pass legislation without republican votes. i think from the democrat's perspective it is very popular but also very difficult with some of the entrenched industry interest to get that past, and they -- passed and they want to go as aggressive as they can. they see this as a benefit for them. host: viewers can take part in this conversation. we are going to open up regional lines. that means if you are in the eastern or central time zones, we want to hear from you at 202-748-8000. if you are in the mountain or pacific time zones, your number is 202-748-8001. keep in mind that you can always text us at 202-748-8003.

and, we are always reading on social media on twitter at c-spanwj and facebook at facebook.com/c-span. now, why is this such a priority for the white house and congressional leaders right now? and even knowing that is a priority, why did it almost get left out of that multi trillion dollar package in the first place? guest: it is a priority for the white house and congress because , as we talked about, it is something that americans really care about, looking toward the midterm elections this year. it is enormously popular. a lot of democrats campaigned on lowering prescription drug prices to get into office. if this policy was left out, there are a lot of front-line democrats who are really concerned that it would be an unfulfilled promise that they

would have to deal with next year. and, i think the policy is so complicated, like the way we pay for drugs in this country is very complex and the pharmaceutical industry has a very powerful lobbying presence in washington. and a lot of people have different ideas about how to do this. in principle they agree, but the details really matter. there were some disagreements that progressive and moderate democrats had to work out, and as of two weeks ago it was unclear whether they could bridge the gap on those differences, and, at one point the white house even had said we do not have the votes, we cannot proceed on this policy, but house speaker nancy pelosi and senate majority leader chuck schumer came together and sat at the negotiating table with moderate democrats and were able to push through that and pass

it. host: let us talk about the impasse between the democrats as a party on this bill. what were the problems between the moderate and liberal democrats on this prescription drug bill? guest: i think the biggest disagreement that we saw centered around the medicare negotiation part of this bill. moderate democrats really wanted to make sure that drugmakers had protection to set their own prices for a certain amount of time after a drug came to market. from their view that protects drugmakers' ability to profit from their innovations. if they create something that helps a lot a people, they can make money off of it for a certain amount of time before a negotiation could even start. i think that is something that they really wanted whereas progressive democrats had

imagined a more expansive negotiation policy that applied to more drugs, applied more quickly, and so i think the negotiation part, at least the -- which drugs would be eligible, definitely looks more like a moderate idea, and there was is also -- there was also this idea of should be tied prices to the u.s. to what drugmakers charge in foreign countries, which is often much less, but ultimately that policy did not have the support of the full party, so that policy had been left out as well. host: i will tell you that we have some viewers who are very skeptical of the big pharmaceutical company and one of our social media follows has a question about that. they want to know "what did big pharma get? the negotiation suggest that each party gives and gets up something. is big pharma and favor of this, i assume the answer is going to

be no. if they are not in favor of it, what did they give up and what are they getting to get this pushed through the democrats. guest: the pharmaceutical industry does not support this policy, that is true for big drugmakers and generic drugmakers across the board, they are really upset about this policy publicly. there is no doubt that they strongly oppose it. that does not mean that they are perspective did not get concessions. so, the plan that speaker pelosi had pushed two years ago was very aggressive, it would've taken hundreds of billions of dollars out of the industry. it would have gone into effect as soon as a drug came onto the market and had pricing data available. and drugmakers gained a lot of protection in this bill for small molecule drugs, they would have nine years after a drug was approved before a negotiation

could go into effect. for more complicated biologic drugs, that would be 13 years. they have a lot of time to set their own prices, and the negotiation prices -- process has some guardrails and boundaries. and those boundaries are set using that prices that drugmakers charge in the united states which gives them a little bit more control than in some of the other proposals and frameworks discussed. this looks better for them and some of the policies that were discussed, but i think there is a genuine concern from the industry that this is breaking the firewall, and if this infrastructure gets set up for negotiating drugs that congress and the future could expand it and change the terms of it. i think there is just general anxiety about that. host: we have talked about where republicans are on this bill. i want to play a sound from

republican congressman mike burgess on the house floor talking about this issue. i will come back to you after and talk about where republicans are. here's congressman mike burgess. [video clip] >> contemplates inexpensive drug pricing provision. it claims to protect research and development but the secretary still has the ability to set the price at any new drug at any level the secretary wishes, even zero. there is no judicial review of decisions, additionally disagreeing with the prices set by the secretary will result in a 95% excise tax and under this bill, the government will be the deciding factor determining which drugs and which cures can come to market and be available to the american people. [end video clip] host: is that the perspective from the republican side of this argument?

guest: if they don't, they expect the threat of the idea to encourage participation in the process. i think certainly some lawmakers are concerned about that appearing to candidates, and i think that it also makes an interesting point about access to medicines. and i think that has been a concern for a long time and something i want to highlight from the plan so far, that leaves the drugs on the market to be negotiated. medicare plans will have to cover the drugs on their own formulary. i think there is a larger

conversation going on about if drugmakers profits are hit too much, will americans get new drugs more slowly. what choices will be made as they are investing in new drugs. so i think there is some concern about that space, but overall, i think a lot of analysts on wall street say that pharma can adjust their business practices to make sure that this is not a devastating hit to their bottom line. host: let us let some of our viewers take part in this conversation. we will start with gilbert from birmingham, alabama. good morning. caller: good morning morning to c-span. today, this topic is hitting home. i have a drug that cost me $2600 in the united states. i can buy the same brand -- the same drug in canada for $115. the guest did a disservice to

the republican party and i am an independent. just 10 days ago the republican representative diana harshbarger of tennessee brought to congress a bill to regulate the program and if it managers who negotiate the prices between the drug people who make the drugs, and the pharmacy. i would like for you to elaborate on the negotiations from ms. harshbarger to put in regulations to the program benefit managers who negotiate the prices of the drug and they are the middleman that is jacking up all of the prices. it was unfair of you to say that the republicans are not on board. all that stuff that chuck schumer is talking about is nothing on the program benefit managers. guest: sure. i think the pharmacy benefit manager aspect of this is an important part of this very complex process.

it is something that, although the deal appears to be pretty set, this is something that some lawmakers are still interested in changing. and, making sure that patients are protected from the negotiations that go on between the middlemen and drugmakers. and protecting patients in the middle of that. it is certainly still a topic of conversation among lawmakers as they are moving forward. and i think democrats did agree to put a provision in the bill that requires more transparency from these pharmacy benefit managers, at least to big employer clients, to offer some insight into what patients are actually paying, but the insurers are paying and what is being charged. i think there is a transparency effort at least in this bill, but there is no meaningful regulation on this -- these

middlemen which has been a concern for some lawmakers. host: mike from wisconsin. mike, good morning. caller: good morning. here is my question. i was watching in the first part of the program whether the medicare prices are going up $20 a month. and a large portion of that is due to the fact that -- my question to you is, ok, why shouldn't medicare be allowed to negotiate drugs all of the time? a $2000 cap is phenomenal for anybody and all of us on medicare, and why are so many republicans against it? i do not understand. guest: you have raised some good questions. i think the first point about the new alzheimer's drug that you are talking about, that is a

really good example of a drug that is really expensive, has a big potential market, and medicare will not be able to negotiate for that drug price for it looks like maybe 13 years at this point. so, i think that is a great example of a controversy on how well it works, and under this plan the democrats are advancing, that has been an ongoing area of concern, that if more drugs come out like this that medicare would not have a whole lot of power to do much about it. a final decision has not been made on that drug, but we will have to wait and see what the actual program impact will be. like you mentioned, the premium increase announced yesterday is a big deal and a lot of people will feel that policy. i think in terms of the republican opposition to the plan, they are opposed to more

government involvement in a setting -- in setting drug prices or what the government will pay for them. i think republicans in general favor the free market, and letting that play out instead of having more direct government intervention, which is what this policy would essentially do. host: we are hearing a lot right now about supply chain issues, and -- and a lot of areas around the country including computer chips, and food. are they are supply chain issues in prescription drugs? guest: there are major vulnerabilities that were revealed by the pandemic, because a lot of pharmaceutical manufacturing or raw materials, it comes from around the world. i think there are certainly efforts to improve or incentivize domestic manufacturing of certain prescription drugs, especially really basic drugs that are

generally pretty cheap, and we need to keep things running well , so there is policy that has been proposed on this issue. this prescription drug pricing plan specifically does not address it to my knowledge. but, i think that is something on lawmaker's minds for sure. host: norman from richmond, virginia. good morning. caller: thank you for accepting my call. i spent eight years after college training to be a physician and when medicare was first proposed i was angry that my skills and knowledge were going to become a national commodity. now that i am older and see what drugs cost, i believe that the government needs to have a conscience, even if the drug companies do not. the classic example is insulin,

which has been around for one for 100 years and was very cheap at one time. some drug company was able to patent it and now it takes a lot of money to take it. people are entitled to have reasonable costs for drugs. thank you. guest: i think it offers a great opportunity to talk about the insulin protection in this bill, which would be a big change for some people. so patients who have medicare as there is mature or -- as there ensure or an insurance plan, they are not supposed to play -- pay $35 out-of-pocket for insulin even though prices are so much higher. for people uninsured this will not necessarily apply to them, so that is another spot that lawmakers would like to address down the line.

these insulin price protections are a big deal. a lot of people would deal with them. and the government is also allowed to negotiate for the price of insulin outside of the top 50 list that we talked about earlier. thank you so much for bringing that up. host: lind up from ogden, utah. good morning. caller: good morning, my question is does this bill have anything to do with the doctors getting kickbacks from big pharma to guard the drugs? guest: i think has been -- that has been more and effort on the regulatory side of the biden administration and the trump administration addressing those policies. this bill does not affect that specifically. host: you and your company has put out both drug pricing plan winners and losers.

let me talk -- talk to me a little bit about why you have certain people on one list and certain people on the other. first, let us look at this pricing plan winners. use a speaker nancy pelosi is a winner in this plan, why? guest: this has been something that is a top priority for nancy pelosi, and who knows how long she will be in congress. that is seen as a legacy issue and something that she has been a driving force on for 15 years, but also, more specifically, the past three years or so. she had a key role in the negotiations and in making sure that it was as expansive as it could be. at one point she told the white house who had decided that they were willing to accept more moderate members had imagined for the negotiation process and she said that is not good enough. we will keep talking and try to

get something better. and the result was a happy medium between what her plan had been and what moderates had wanted. so, it is a deal, and deals, even in the democratic party, can be difficult to reach sometimes. host: you also said moderate democrats are winners, why? guest: the moderate democrats that we are talking about specifically are senator kyrsten sinema, congressman scott peters, kurt schrader, there are other lawmakers as well who were really concerned about the policies that house speaker nancy was advancing. she is a very powerful woman, and this policy had been kind of the link it accepted policy from -- blanket accepted policy. these moderates by sticking together because congress was

narrowly divided, they were able to extract major changes to try and fit it to their vision of how they should work and address some of the concerns. so, i think it is a win for both of them that they were able to get something done and both were able to shape how the final deal looked. host: we know why seniors with a high drug costs would be a winner i am surprised to see employers as winners, why would employers be winners under this plan? guest: we actually talked a little bit earlier about the penalty for drugmakers that raise drug prices faster than inflation. that policy in plot -- applies to employers. one thing employers were worried about was if drugmakers get less money from medicare, are they going to raise prices on us to try and make up the money somehow? i think these protections, they

lobbied hard for these two apply to the employer market as well and the fact that that made it in the final deal is a big win for them. host: let us look at the losers that you all have identified under this pricing plan. first on the list are drugmakers. are drugmakers really going to be losers under this plan? guest: they are really mad about it. this is something they did not want to happen especially the medicare negotiation portion. i think it breaks down a firewall for the future, that they are really concerned about. it is clear to say that it is not entirely clear cut, no one loses or wins everything. it will change the landscape for how drugmakers plan and make their business plans for these drugs, and i think that is something that they had wanted to keep how they have been doing things in the past. the fact that if a medicare

negotiation policy passes and inside -- and is signed into law there is a long road forward. that would be a loss for the drug industry which has not seen a lot of losses in recent years. host: progressive done if i -- democrats are identified on this list and is this because i did not get everything that they wanted? guest: they had pushed nancy pelosi to make her plan as strong and expansive and aggressive as they could and they drove a hard bargain with her in terms of passing the house. and at this point, speaker pelosi obviously had their interest in minds, but the moderate democrats were the ones at the negotiating table getting the deal done. and the progressive pocket was not involved and they just trusted leadership to get the best deals that they could but in such a narrowly divided congress progressives did not spend their political capital on fighting back in these negotiations. host: finally, pharmacy benefit

managers, how are they losers? guest: as we talked about they did not get regulation that i think some people thought that they should. they had not been talked about much at all. and at the and of the process we saw transparency measures introduced that they will not be happy about. and there is a potential for further tweaks around the net price negotiated price and what people are paying. i think that they had got no way untouched until the last minute of the negotiations and these transparency measures, they are not as far as some people would go. it is definitely a step forward that -- about addressing a policy that is really opaque. host: let us get back to our viewers and start with paul,

calling from florida. good morning. host: good morning. -- caller: good morning. ms. cohrs. i wanted to ask you, you said something about the fixed negotiation of prices for drugs being phased in over nine years and then four more years, would you please more slowly explain what exactly those time limits are? guest: that is a really good question. so, there are two sorts of drugs that the fda approved. the first one we call small molecule drugs, it means that the drugs are simple to make. and, there are more complex drugs called biologics, like the alzheimer's drugs. a lot of these are given at doctors offices, sometimes. there are two kinds of drugs and

the fda does have a difference in how long drugmakers has protections for either one of those, just because it is harder to make biologics in general. so, in terms of medicare negotiation, it would, from the moment that small molecule, one of the simpler drugs is approved, drugmakers would have nine years that they could cause -- charge what they wanted before medicare would be able to negotiate those drug prices, and for these more complex drugs, it would be 13 years of protection. right now, as the bill stands. there is, as we are talking about, the alzheimer's drugs earlier, there is a period of time where you will not feel the effects of the policy until the discounts go into effect. later on. host: let us talk to nelson from

pembroke pines, florida. nelson, good morning. caller: good morning, thank you for taking my call. you have already addressed some of my questions. i am on medicare advantage, and i am also a veteran, and also use the v.a.. the v.a. has been negotiating for years, but one of the things i have noticed and i am not complaining about their service, it is pretty good. it is that not all medications are available through the v.a., which also means that once medicare begins to negotiate for these prices that there will be medications not available for medicare as well. i am also a little concerned about the fact that the money has to come from somewhere for these companies because, whether we like it or not, they have to make a profit in order to

continue to conduct research, and if you do not pay for one end of the population, than the other end of the population will have to pay. i was wondering if perhaps you could address that a little bit more, and thank you kindly for taking my call. guest: thank you so much for your service. i think the first aspect that you brought up about the v.a. is a good point to touch on. the v.a. negotiates drugs and they have a little bit more leverage because they have what is called a formula where they choose to cover some drugs and not cover others. medicare does not work that way. so, i think that is an important distinction to make, that the v.a. has its own negotiation process, and this process designed under medicare will be different. so, any negotiated drug will have to be covered in some way by these medicare pharmacy plans. i think that was a good question

and it does work a little bit differently and medicare. and, i think that on your second point, i think that certainly, drugmakers might see bottom-line impacts from this policy, and i think they have been saying that it will hurt our research budgets. the thing is there is a lot of other kind of line items in budgets whether it is advertising, stock buybacks. there are other areas that drugmakers could choose to cut back if they really see bottom-line impacts from this policy that are not investing in research or element or really truly innovative treatments. i think it is their argument to make what we do not have a lot of clarity on how that will work out, and i think it is also important to remember that the profit margin for selling and manufacturing prescription drugs

is very high compared to a lot of other industries. host: one of the conversations we hear a lot when we talk about prescription drugs is the different between brand-name and generic. one of our followers says i have allergies and cannot tolerate the generic version of the drug i take. how will this affect being able to obtain rands name drugs? guest: so, i think that is a good question. with the negotiation policy we are talking about in medicare, that policy only applies to what is called single force drugs which means it does not have generics. that brand-name drug that you might be taking one early be eligible for the negotiation process, but at least that drug would apply under these inflation penalties that

drugmakers have, so if they raise the price on the drug significantly they would have to pay a penalty to the government. in theory, that brand drug might have price increases in a predictable way if these policies go into effect. host: let us go back to our phone lines and talk to lupe from california. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. what i cannot understand and i am very curious because i heard something said and i remember someone he talked about bernie sanders going to canada and quite a few people went with him to pick up prescriptions, i belong to kaiser, and i opened up my prescriptions and i notice the tag was placed around the container, so i ripped it off and it said for kaiser only from canada.

and, they have a five start the hospital because they do not pass that down. i play -- i pay zero dollars for my prescriptions and they are not generic. they are the good stuff. i do not understand, why would bernie have to take someone over there when kaiser can order it from canada and we have it here? host: go ahead. guest: i am not entirely sure. i cannot speak to your specific ensure and how they get drugs. drug importation from canada is a policy still on the table with the biden administration. they have expressed interest but have not taken concrete steps that would meet -- that would need to be done to make it a reality. that is a good question. we do not have a specific answer but certainly importing drugs from canada is something that the biden administration has expressed interest in as well. host: paul from pennsylvania.

good morning. caller: yes, the guest seems very knowledgeable and i have couple observations that i would like her to comment on. first, the amount of prescription drugs that americans use compared to other countries, and when the pandemic first hit there were a lot of new stories about supply chain issues because of how many prescription drugs come from china. thank you, and i would like you to comment on that. guest: of course. i do not know that i have a great sense for you of how drug usage varies in the united states, i know that there are drugs available in the u.s. standard and are available in some foreign countries, and i know drugmakers like to tout that the american system is working in that respect. i think we had a chat about the

supply chain earlier, but there is a big concern with mastic manufacturing and raw materials in foreign countries for -- some of these prescription drug products. it is very much an issue on congress' mind. they are interested in pursuing policy on that issue. that is not in this deal specifically, but this is an ongoing conversation. host: let us see if we can get a quick question from carmine from new york. we are going to run out of time real quick, so can you give us a quick question? caller: i will try. good morning. i recently read an article in the new york times how a life-saving drug can take years, hundreds of millions of dollars in r&d before it is developed, protected, and brought to the market. according to the article, i understand that they have to put the course on the price of the

drug, there is no problem with that. according to the article, it is only added to the price of the drug in america, and they mention europe in particular where europe refuses to pay the added course or does not pay the added cost how is that fair? guest: a lot of lawmakers will say that is not fair and that is part of the motivation behind the reforms that governments in european countries and elsewhere in the world use their leverage to bargain for drug prices and we do not have that same infrastructure, so i think that is certainly a concern for lawmakers pushing the policy forward. host: we would like to thank rachel cohrs the washington correspondent for stat news and talking us through the prescription drug pricing bill working its way through congress, thank you for being here.

still ahead this morning christa case bryant with the christian science monitor joins us on the spotlight on magazine segment to talk about an article on how republicans and democrats on capitol hill are looking to become the party of parents. first, we will go to our open forum, where you can call in and talk about the most important political topic on your mind. you see the numbers, start dialing, we will take a quick break and we will be right back. ♪ >> exploring the people and events that tell the american story on american history tv. on "the presidency" historians revisit george washington's farewell address and threats confronting the nation, and the 100th anniversary of the tomb of the unknown soldier. samuel holliday shares the story

behind the tomb including the overseas journey that took this anonymous soldier from the fighting feels of world war i france to the most revealed burial that revered burial ground. watch online at c-span.org /history. >> c-span offers a variety of podcasts for every listener. every week, booknotes+ has interviews about writers. while another looks at how the issues of the day developed over years and talking with features extensive conversations with historians about their lives and work. many of our television programs are also available as podcasts.

you can find them on the c-span now mobile app or wherever you got your podcasts. >> "washington journal" continues. host: once again, we are going to have our open forum segment for the next minutes. we want you to call into talk about what your most important political topic is. we are opening up regular lines meeting at -- meaning democrats at 202-748-8000. republicans, 202-748-8001. independents, 202-748-8002. you can always text 202-748-8003 , and we are always reading on social media on twitter at c-spanwj and facebook at facebook.com/c-span. let us look at our open forum segment by looking at one of the major political stories going on in the united states right now, and that was yesterday's

charging of former white house adviser stephen bannon. let me bring you the story from "the washington post." "stephen k bannon was charged with two counts of contempt of congress after refusing to comply with a subpoena from the house committee investigating the january 6 attack on the u.s. capitol. he was indicted by a grand jury in washington, a rare move by the justice department to escalate the consequences of a dispute involving congress. court records indicate only three such cases have been filed in d.c. since 1990. the charges against bannon each carry a maximum sentence of one year in jail and may serve as a warning to others seeking to avoid or defy the january 6 committee." once again, former white house advisor steve bannon was charged on friday with two contempt of congress counts. what are your most important

political issues? let us start with ava from columbia, mississippi on the republican line. good morning. caller: yes, i heard that about steve bannon. how come it is only republicans get held up when do stuff, like hillary clinton with emails and all of that, whatever she did? how come they ever go up? we need an attorney general for the people and not for himself. the fbi has been used to do the dirty work for different parties, i think we need a justice department that is fair. thank you. host: charlie calling from roslyn heights, new york on the independent line. good morning. guest: hat -- caller: hello everybody, i am on the independent line but i consider myself a progressive because that benefits the

freedoms of the american people today. i do not support you distinguishing between progressives and identity politics and cancel culture and all the other baloney. the mainstream media to puts that -- seems to put that into the progressive camp and we need to distinguish between real progressives, the progressives of the past and all the benefits that they won and these other new things that are going on, these identity politics and everything else. i think it is doing a lot of damage to the progressive cause so we need to distinguish between progressives and identity politics and cancel culture. host: christian from woodbridge, connecticut on the democratic line. good morning. caller: good morning. it is a pleasure to speak with you, and the topic i wanted to talk about this morning is inflation.

if i could just ramble off on a couple of points that i want to say about inflation. the great milton friedman said that inflation is always, and i mean always a monetary phenomenon. we had a whole segment on inflation before on this program and on greta's program, and nobody is talking about the 500 pound gorilla in the room, and that is the adderall reserve. the federal reserve is responsible for inflation. it is the -- it is solely responsible for our money supply. in the last 18 months, the dollar in circulation on this planet have increased by 35%. the sole reason for that is the federal reserve. the federal reserve is a private bank. congress oversees it, but it is a private bank, the most

powerful central bank in the world, the new york fed. the new york fed is controlled by j.p. morgan, goldman sachs, and other international banks, those are the shareholders. the federal reserve looks out for the rich. host: let us go to mike from green village, new jersey. good morning. caller: yes. thank you for this, good morning. i think the foremost problem in the united states is the mental health of the president. historically, biden has suffered strokes and other related issues to his health. and he is exhibiting some of the classic strips -- signs of stroke related dementia. host: how do you know those signs? caller: i used to be a researcher in this area. and we used to examine patients

to determine the classification within this disease states to test drugs on. host: i will tell you that most researchers say you cannot diagnose someone from television. caller: that is correct, but there are symptoms that are emblematic of essentially this disease. and several of them are exhibited by the president, which i guess if you are having questions and i am having questions, the white house has to come clean with some time of objective analysis of his mental health status. host: roger from tampa, florida on the republican line. good morning. caller: the most important development in america is being blacked out by the cable news network. i have been up since 7:00 a.m. and there been no mention on cable news of the court order for the district court eliminating the biden

administration's vaccine mandate, and that has not been mentioned at all in two hours, and i am just pointing out that most american people do not know this stupendous development in the policies of biden and the democrats and it should have been reported by the news and it has not been. host: "the washington post" has a story talking about the labor force in the united states and what is going on with people looking for jobs, and leaving their current jobs. i will read a few paragraphs from that story. "a record 4.4 million americans quit their jobs in september as workers took advantage of the surge and drop -- job openings across the country. a sign of how labor market imbalances continue to complicate the economic recovery 20 months into the pandemic. the number of people quitting in september topped 3% of the workforce according to the

monthly bureau of labor statistics survey released friday. that number is up from the previous record, set in august, when 4.3 million people quit their jobs, about 2.9% of the workforce. in february 2020, before the big wave a pandemic related layoffs began, 2.3% of workers with their jobs. the new statistics reflect how severely influx the labor market remains after the pandemic upended the course of business and life across the country last year. businesses have hired millions of american workers since april 2020 continuing to add employees even during a surge in infections in the late summer. workers have remained remarkably mobile, quitting jobs for a variety of reasons and often with little notice. many businesses are so strapped to find and retain workers they are dipping into budgets to offer higher pay and bonuses, creating the most world --

worker friendly labor market in recent history. that is from the washington post with a record number of americans quitting their jobs in september. let us go back to the phone lines and talk to robert, calling from pittsburgh, pennsylvania on the democrat line. good morning. caller: good morning. hello. i am an 85-year-old retired military person. as i see things right now in this country, we have passed a bill to get people money, for people, and passed another bill for clean water for the people. now they are trying to pass another bill for the people, that the republicans are trying their best not to help the people. and we keep voting for republicans and they are talking about having the 2022 election and put republicans in power,

and they are not even trying to help you. i do not understand it. we came close to having a thing on january the sixth that if they would have won, we would've had a civil war in this country and millions of people would have died fighting. so, what is the point of republicans, i do not understand it. host: let us talk to our caller from lucasville, ohio on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. i am against the payment to the illegals for the children. i do not think we should be giving millions of dollars to the illegals when we have homeless people on the streets. i think if they want to sue somebody for those children being separated from the parents, they can sioux tribe, -- sue trump, he has a one who did it.

caller: be held responsible for every made. i'm all for him reuniting the families. i think they should go ahead and do that. but not pay them millions of dollars for coming here illegally. they have been dropping kids over fences and kids coming in by themselves. how are they going to pay for all of them? host: let's go to debbie who is calling from sycamore illinois on the democrat line. good morning. caller: hello. good morning. thank you for taking my call. i am wanting to have a discussion about the way congress does her business. if there is some way that there could be a process or procedure put in place that once the committee initiates an investigation or some kind of issue and has hearings, that the committee should be appealed to -- should be able to complete that process and come to a

conclusion and write a report. there should be no option from either party to dismiss committees once they are started. they should continue forward. they should complete their work. write a report or offer whatever subsequent action should be taken in the report, and it should not be at the whim of the political parties that are in charge at that point in time or have the majority. if it's important enough to start a committee and it is a bipartisan committee, which is usually the process that they have members of the committee from each party on their. the next party they get elected says oh we are just going to drop this process. thank you for taking my call. host: one of our colors brought

up this story earlier in the segment. want to make sure all of our viewers -- one of our callers brought up this story earlier in the segment. a federal appeals court in new orleans has halted the biden administration's cobit requirement and testing requirements -- covid requirement and testing requirements. a three-judge panel of the u.s. court of appeals for the fifth circuit helmed by one judge who was appointed by president ronald reagan and to others who were appointed by president donald trump. in response to lawsuits filed by republican aligned businesses and legal groups calling the requirement of mandates grossly expedient -- exceeding osha's authority.

they said they believe the ruling imposed a financial burden on businesses and potentially violated the commerce clause of the constitution. the mandate imposes a financial burden upon them by deputies eyes in their dissipation and osha's regulatory schemes, exposes financial risk if they fail to comply and threaten to decimate their workforces by forcing unwilling employees to take their shots, take their tests or hit the road. this comes from the washington post. federal appeals cold -- appeals court halt delivering policy a major blow. let's talk to michael who is calling from boston. republican line. good morning. caller: thank you and good morning. a lot of really important

political issues going on that we could go into. but the issue i want to bring up, which actually is plessy versus ferguson 18 93 which granted a pardon. it is troubling because they put up markers around the country and what they are actually doing is retelling history telling it in a lens that actually hurts black americans. why? because homer plessy that he was -- was convinced that he was white. he was called out by a white passenger, went to the supreme court. he lost. homer plessy passed into the white populace, but the black people suffered. today, the system wants to pardon homer plessy and not

repair the people that homer plessy hurt. that appalled me. the black media is happy that homer, who technically would have been called a quadrant got pardoned. host: let's go to kathy who is calling from wisconsin on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. i am calling because i read a mobile -- i read a video. he had a roundtable on november 1 and it deals with data, doctors, victims. nobody is recording these adverse effects. if you exit go to their data,

supposedly it has been cap since 2007, and 49% of the adverse effects in that data comes from covid. but you can't search any further. you can't see side effects. and this people are having side effects. host: let's go to jim who is calling from missouri on the democrat line. caller: howdy. let's see, a couple of points. start out with inflation. look at the world wide map units ago. inflation is all over the place. we are running in par with europe, consumer nations around the world that imports from china. that cannot be put on widen and

the democrats. that is a supply chain thing. number two, a couple of court cases going on. shootings, the black jogger that was killed. protesters in michigan or wherever that was. there -- the antagonists are claiming self-defense when they were the ones armed and pursuing people. it goes back to george zimmerman in florida. pursued a man and turn it around to where the victim became the aggressor and that's the way it was charged. number three, 8 million jobs and filled. -- 8 billion jobs unfilled.

where are we going to get the people? how about the southern border? host: calling from burlington, north carolina on the republican line. freddie, good money. caller: a story that's not been reported is president trump was found not guilty of sexual assault. the clintons made up the fake dossier. host: let's talk to donna who was calling from illinois on the democrat line. donald good morning. caller: hello. thank you for taking my call. i like to tell you that one of the reasons people aren't going back to work is this forced overtime where they are forcing people to work 12 hours a day and some people cannot do it, like me because i had a stroke in 2018.

my physical ability cannot allow me to work 12 hours. i can work eight hours. i've done that. but 12 hours, after that eight hours my blood pressure just continues to drop after eight hours of work. and i do not want to have another stroke. mine was not good. only 10% of the people walk away from the stroke i had. enough managed to make a recovery that's make the recovery that i've had. 90% of the people that have the stroke i had are either dead or totally debilitated. host: i want to bring to you a story that one of my callers mentioned a couple of seconds ago. we can get the actual information about what has

happened with the lawsuit that former president trump was facing read and this comes from reuters. a former contestant on the apprentice who accuse president of sexual assault without receiving a desk an apology or compensation. the abrupt decision to discontinue the case spares trump from being questioned under oath about accusations he subjected her to him kissing and groping into thousand seven after she had sought career advice. saying he harmed her reputation by calling such allegations by women lies and calling her claim a. trump has also denied her assault claim calling them politically motivated. she had appeared on trumps reality television show.

has secured the right to speak freely about her experience. ms. servo's --zervos stands by her allegations and her claims. let's go to the line and talk to susan who was calling from ohio on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. actually, i wanted to make a comment about the prescription drug prices. i wasn't able to get through earlier. i worked at hospital. i'm a case manager. and my job is to call and price patients medications before they are disc -- discharged home -- an ideal in the cardiac unit. blood pumps and the premier treatment for those and what i

call the pharmacies for the patient on their behalf, if they have medicare the price per month would be anywhere from $450 to $600 a month. if the patient has medicaid or managed medicaid, the most that they can pay for any drug or prescription is three dollars. most cases, they have no charge at all. in other words, they get there medic and this medicines for free. the patients that are on medicare, good citizens, hard-working people, good work ethic, they worked their entire lives. they paid into the system and then they get to the age of retirement and they have this

medicare. they are not able to get the top treatment for their blood clots. they have to get resort -- they have to resort, they can't afford that. that's half of a mortgage payment. so they have to go the route of coumadin which requires several blood draws, lab work two to three times a week trying to get their blood range in the right level. i would like to say that i hope that they do something about this. good hard-working citizens that have paid into the system that her life, it's like they are being punished and they are not able to get the top treatment that they deserve. host: let's talk to matt who is calling from new york on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for accepting my phone call. i had, there was a lead topic at

the beginning of the segment about the vaccines. i got a little distracted listening to some of the callers. the principal reason i called this morning is about the vaccines. in some of the recent reactions. what got me interested this week is the talk show on this morning and the major media network devoted some of their time to the bipartisan which should have been one of the biggest celebrations they gave the previous demonstration which they have no incentive to really help out. some of the back-and-forth, whatever. but they basically commended the previous ministration for this vaccine and how they passed the baton onto the current administration. but you would not know any of that with all of this confusion that distractions and chaos. this is a big thing we did.

i'm sorry i'm a little nervous because i'm not -- sorry i'm a little nervous. this vaccine has helped her bed asleep. and i really think that some of these major media companies that have so much -- have helped tremendously. i really think the some of these major media companies that have -- media companies should start pumping accurate information and get people on board. host: we would like to thank all of our callers, social media followers who dissipated in our open forum segment. coming up next, in our spotlight on magazine segment, christa case bryant will discuss her article about how republicans and democrats on capitol hill are looking to become the party. stick around. we will be right back. ♪ ♪

>> sunday on q&a, a discussion of the 14th amendment. the original meaning of the 14th amendment, which they insist is widely misinterpreted by liberal judges. >> many of them are overblown. in fact, the seeds of liberty were planted at the founding by the declaration of independence. and eventually harvested, but the rest of our constitutional history is about the story of the development of those seeds into a full-blown, as my colleague says, liberation movement. >> to make the world all over again and that's exactly what the abolitionists and the republicans that followed in their footsteps did. >> professors randy barnett sunday night at 8:00 on c-span's

q&a. you can listen to our podcast on our app. ♪ ♪ >> washington journal continues. host: we are back with our spotlight on magazine segment. this morning we have with us christa case bryant who is the senior congressional correspondent for the christian

science and we are -- and she is here to discuss how the political parties are vying to be the party of parents. good morning. guest: thanks so much for having me on. host: what made you decide to write this article? was it the recent role in the recent election that parents seemed to play? guest: even before the election, i've been noticing how in my conversations with lawmakers in the halls of congress, democrats are talking about their vision for helping families and the ideological underpinnings and i was hearing how republicans were talking about it in a different way and there were two different visions for how to best help families. the morning after the election, particularly after the results in virginia which hit close to home in washington dc, i just

heard that theme over and over. this is what we can do for parents, the parents, the parents. i was able to take that that i have been working on about families and top it off with the both parties response to the election, particularly in virginia. and i think my colleague who has been doing some reporting in virginia talked with a woman not too far from washington dc who put it really well. she said referring to terry mcauliffe who have been trying to get another term, she said he poked mama bear. that's a mistake. i think that helps explain why a lot of parents who were concerned about conditions that terry mcauliffe took on education were mobilized -- were what mobilized people to come out in such big numbers. host: what you saw that "parents" were think about

during the election this year, what were certain issues that democrats and republicans were pushing and how did those issues affect the parents and turn out and election? guest: i was mainly hearing it from the other side. how they were changing things from within congress. just recently, some of the reporting that my colleagues have done, it was really clear that this -- that missed -- miseducation is something they were picking up on. chair of a local republican committee in virginia said his -- and glenn -- glenn juncker and --youngkin won and i think

that was happening around the state. his take on why that happened is he said you have a disaster going on in washington right now. and congress going after parents in education. part of what he was talking about was curriculum issues, former governor mcauliffe had commented in a debate that parents should not be telling teachers what to do or what to teach. that was over a debate over a book by toni morrison called be loved. the department of justice effort to be proactive in dealing with threats and intimidation's the school boards from parents who were frustrated about covid restrictions and curriculum issues. during this pandemic when all of the kids are on zoom, parents can see for the first time with her kids are learning in a more thorough way.

that all gave them more insight and more motivation to get out there and follow up the department of justice. the fbi is going to be sent out to our school board meetings and they are going to try to force us into silence or submission. and i think, there's no evidence that that was the directive. it was more that see how we can support school boards. part of the democratic efforts to shut down viewpoints about what should be taught in schools and how much authority parents should have and the parents response ability for a child's education, upbringing. host: let's define who these parents are that lawmakers are talking about because parents is

such a general term. we talked about suburban parents? urban parents? parents of children who have to be vaccinated? parents of college age or older? who are these parents we are talking about? guest: i think what was interesting in virginia was often times the suburban parents that have caught the appearance -- the attention of posters and sometimes the suburban parents whether you call them soccer moms. there are different terms for them over the years. this time it wasn't just the parents and suburban areas. it was parents and rural areas of virginia like from the area and they were seeing really big swings. not famous for being nuanced. when a republican lawmaker or

democratic lawmaker says parent, it means whatever they want it to mean. they don't dive into that nitty-gritty question. so i think that's important. the more time we have to analyze the results of the election, the better we will be able to understand exactly what was motivating people. but i think the really important point to remember is parents have been on the front lines of so many different issues during this pandemic in a way that has been challenging. at that as have teachers --as, have teachers. it brings to the service a lot -- surface a fundamental debate about how we take care of each other in society, especially how we take care of the younger duration. host: let's look at a statement from a republican congressman from indiana about how he thinks republicans need to preventp

--ivot to become -- need to pivot. the concerns of parents need to be a tier one policy issue for republicans. youngkin's success reveals that republicans can and must become the party of parents. there is real energy from parents that we need to understand." he's using the word parent almost as a buzzword. guest: totally. the morning after the election, i was sitting in a press conference with kevin mccarthy and some of his colleagues and i was just so, he just made that they just made such a big impression on me how many times they use the word. the cost of gasoline, the cost of heating your home is the

winter months approach and what that would do to middle class families. the morning after the election, this is clearly what they decided they want to talk about and how they want to leverage this surprisingly to help their own election looking ahead to 2022. host: democrats are not going this. they are pointing to provisions in president biden's build back better plan that they say will help parents, families and children. in fact, here's nancy pelosi those provisions during a news conference she had last week. >> we are very excited about what happened in the legislation. how children are affected. you know. child tax credit, universal ek

for three and four-year-old -- universal pre-k for three and four-year-olds. this is an area, nothing very new except the fact that we would like to put on the table family and medical leave. so needed and so popular in our country and makes such a difference in the lives of american families. are important to men, but men -- important to women, but men, too . host: by pointing to this legislation and other incentives and provisions they say will help those same parents republicans are shooting for. guest: i think they also definitely recognize this is a moment for them to emphasize what they are going to do for parents. i'm relatively new to congress,

but one of the phrases i've heard speaker pelosi use the most is it's for the children. since the election, it has become it's for the children for the parents. emphasizing that as well. it is obviously -- she is obviously a very astute politician and picking up on that as is her party. geared toward parents and families. she mentioned a number of them and i think the biden administration's vision and democratic allies in congress is that this will be filling in a big gap for parents particularly at a time when the pandemic has exacerbated some economic inequalities and made that divide even clearer. their hope and the way they are selling this is that this is going to fill an important gap that currently exists in our system and they compare america to other countries around the

world and show that different metrics, we are not doing as well and taking care of lower income and in some cases middle income classes. child poverty rates in america are higher on average in other -- then in other developed countries. on the other hand, child poverty in 2019 was at its lowest level since 19 city nine in america. -- 1969 in america. democrats like to hold a thumb to other countries and say but we need to do so much better and here are the provisions to help us do that. these are really complicated provisions. and the economic analysis to what extent they will help and whatever they have in a larger economy and how that can affect other families is just really hard to analyze, there's been this huge push to get this will

back better bill passed. it just takes a lot, i don't know that you can't figure it out. for example, around the childcare provision there's an effort to make sure the families up to a certain income threshold won't be paying more than 7% of their entire income in childcare costs. they want to make sure that thou care workers are earning a living wage. all of this is still being finalized. there have been various analyses , if the biden immigration was to see childcare workers being paid as much as elementary school workers, that would mean 130 8% increase in their current salaries and those costs are going to be passed onto the people who are paying for childcare. if you are in that lower income bracket where you qualify for this subsidy, assuming that it passes, you won't be affected by

those rising costs because the government will make sure that you don't pay more than 7%. if you make one dollar more than that bracket and you don't qualify for it, all of a sudden you could see your childcare costs go up by almost double according to some analysis. it is so hard to do these analyses because there are summary dynamics in the larger economy, but i think it's too simplistic to say we are going to help everybody by doing and not look at the aspect of putting a huge amount of government resources into the economy. so when people push back and say will let's make sure we are really helping the people we need help, is this going to be cost efficient and targeted? i think those are questions worth asking. host: let me remind our viewers that they can take part in this conversation. we are going to open up a special line which means if you

are a parent and you want to talk about how your politicians can convince you and get your vote, what you need right now? parents, we want to hear from you at 202-748-8000. if you are not a parent and you still have some need to say about how politicians are pushing their policies toward parents and children right now, we want to hear from you as well. everyone else, the nonparent, we want to hear from you at 202-748-8001. once again, parents, 202-748-8000. nonparent and everybody else, 202-748-8001. keep in mind, you can always text us at 202-748-8003. and we are always reading our social media on twitter http://twitter.com/cspanwj and facebook facebook.com/cspan. now i want to read a couple of paragraphs from your story.

and have you go into a little more in depth on the differences you see between what democrats and republicans are pushing right now. in your story you say at the heart of the debate is a fundamental difference in the parties view about the role of government. in recent decades, democrats have worked to create room -- a more robust site -- social safety net pointing out that america lags behind other developed nations in that regard. they argued that at a time of a vast income inequality, which has been exacerbated by a pandemic that has disproportionately hurt the working class, more government support is needed to ensure that every child has an equal chance of that chance to succeed. you go on to say that republicans thinks of government programs as an efficient,

susceptible to exportation and eroding the role of faith-based institutions and supporting those in need. they blame government benefits were greedy -- creating a dependency that undermines the dignity of individuals and this incentivizes work and marriage. they also argue that things like education and childcare are best addressed at the local level, rather than by a federal government that may be thousands of miles removed. how did that comparison eternity legislative proposals and election slogans? guest: well, you know when i talked to democrats and republicans in the halls of congress, i try to get past the slogans and see where they are coming from and see what their larger worldviews are because i think part of the problem why we are not understanding each other

, stop trying to understand where each other are coming from. what i found is the more you get into lawmakers background, their life experiences and the more you could understand where they are coming from and how they arrived at both their ideological viewpoints but it also gets distilled into an overly simplistic slogan. a really great example on the democratic side, elizabeth warren. she doesn't talk about it often, but she was a real believer in the free market. she was even registered as a republican. in her own words, exposed people who are taking advantage of others by irresponsibly running up debt. what she found and traveling around the country and listening to their stories, they found -- they sound a lot like my family. growing up, her dad had a heart attack and could not work. her mom had to end up going to

get a minimum wage job to save the family's home. eventually, hearing those stories led her to embrace the idea that government needs to valance the playing field. it has become waged against working -- the balance the playing field. it has become waged against working class families. we have 70 children in fact -- we have 70 children in public -- in properly -- we have so many children and property --in poverty. trying to highlight, on the other side of the spectrum, you have someone and never can american republican -- an african-american republican who became a firm believer that financial empowerment is a great way to help people get out of

poverty and created the opportunities program and that ended up being folded into president trump's tax cut bill and that is targeting lower income areas around the country. not using government money, but government incentives to bring private money into these areas. it is help projects like converting an old field in indiana to creating affordable housing projects in mississippi. it is perfect? no, but that's an example how those talking points about what government can do have been shaped by the experiences of lawmakers themselves. and of course the constituents they represent. host: let's let some of our viewers take part of this conversation. we will start with anita who is --bonita who is calling from dallas. caller: good morning. hello. host: could you turn your television down?

caller: this is what i wanted to say. my thing is for any republican or any independent that did not google on their cell phone and ask if critters -- if critical race theory is even taught in pre-k to 12. to me, that was a very ignorant move. it's not even taught in schools. host: go ahead and respond. how big of an issue was critical race theory when it came to parents? considering it's not being taught like the caller says? guest: not having talked to parents directly, i'm stuck on capitol hill all the time. i would leave that to other colleagues who have done that reporting to answer that question, but what i would say is i think part of the challenge now is parents and teachers are

dealing with two big challenges. the pandemic and a national reckoning over race. i think either of those in isolation would be difficult, but having them come together creates additional challenges. and i think bonita is right that people should be doing their talent -- doing their research. we are basing our arguments off information that may be only partially correct or not correct at all. on the other hand, to say your argument is factually wrong although -- and everything you feel is wrong, might also be missing the point to a certain extent because sometimes there are other reasons. a huge combination of reasons why people are frustrated about whatever it is whether it's curriculum or covid restrictions or guidelines or whatever it is.

i think it's really great to be, making sure that your information that you are basing your actions on is correct is vital. so thank you for underscoring that. as we are trying to understand where our fellow americans are coming from to be willing to say you know what, you got this fact wrong. tell me more about how you arrived at that feeling or conclusion or whatever because i want to understand the life experiences and the things that have happened to you and your family that have led you to this place. that's really the only way that we can help solve these problems . we really understand what has contributed to these different positions on the -- on either side of the political spectrum. host: let's talk to coleman who is calling from oklahoma. caller: good morning.

you admit that you live in the washington bubble. the biden voters were 95% in the most recent election. so you are insulated from the real problem because your article does indicate that you are favorable to printing money, build back better program, inviting the economy and giving the government more power over our schools which was what was the major item in the last election here in virginia where parents objected to cr two -- crt. so it does raise a lot of issues with your credibility to speak

unbiased on this subject. guest: thanks so much for calling in. first of all, of, has the nicest people of any state i've ever had the pleasure of meeting. i've -- i was there a couple of years ago as i was serving as a correspondent and i just couldn't believe, even when i would pass construction workers on the street. good morning, ma'am. how are you today? wow. this is an amazing world to live and where everyone is so thoughtful of each other. so thank you for being a great state. to your point about being insulated, i think it is definitely an issue. i fully recognize that most media companies are based on the coast. my organization is based in boston. that can be problematic. that can lead to blind spots where we don't fully understand

the entirety of the country and the entirety of the american experience. i'm really glad that before we came to congress that i had several years to travel around the country and particularly, i focused on areas that supported fairly strongly. that was an intentional decision on the part of the monitor because in to the 16, we recognized like an l -- a lot of other news outlets that we did not see this coming. we need to better understand where these voters who supported ron are coming from and to see how they are working to resolve issues on the -- who sort -- who supported donald trump are coming from and to see how they are working to resolve issues. the former truck driver has been elected to take over his counties water system. it is discovered that there were tons of leaks and he was losing half his water and he was able to cut it down.

those locally based solutions is something that republicans champion. i'm not d.c. agreeing with you at all about being insulated, but i also do want to correct the record. i did not say anything in the article about whether critical race theory was being taught. my focus was on how that's on the response after the elections. i try to write about only what i actually know about. i would encourage you to go back and read the article in its entirety. i do strive to really be fair and all of my reporting's. in addition to laying out what biden presented in the build back better act, i also presented why republicans have concern about it which i tried to bring to light in the show today. i think there are a number of reasons why pup -- why republicans are concerned about

those back better act and things people have been saying about inflation for months now. try to give it and say the bill back better program and all of this spending that we want to do what actually help cut down on inflation. i think there's a good debate to be had there. just want to say thank you again for your question. thank you for making your voice heard for oklahoma. i really value those perspectives from outside the beltway and i hope now that i am more settled in my new job here, i will be able to get out into trouble again and be able to bring in more reporting. host: i want to add that what you just said is that just because a company is based in a certain place doesn't mean that's where the reporters are from. it's not like people who live inside the beltway aren't real americans like the rest of us. let's go to donald who is calling from new york. donald, good morning. caller: good morning morning,

sir. i want to say i think your show is incredible. i'm a veteran -- i'm a graduate of syracuse university. i have traveled to the university of minnesota and to kenya and i know you people have a lot more experience than i do, but he wanted to say a few things before you cut me off please. i want to say i know that this author, this lady on the show has access to the government and i respect her for all of her hard work. you've been talking a bit about the trump administration and the biden initiation. and i wanted to say -- biden initiation. and i want to say i think president biden has done an incredible job on encouraging education and trying to calm race relations and reduce this termination. i saw that the republican agenda during donald trump's -- reduced -- we do's discrimination.

-- economic ability to get huge tax breaks and the poor classes were really crunched and hurt by that. lies, discouragement of truth of what was really going on. quality controls were cut. a lot of stress on destroying the environment. i think we are in a very -- in a pretty good direction now. host: go ahead and respond. guest: thank you so much for calling in from new york. i just want to highlight again, this desire to hear from callers to get the facts right because i think that's important. we are seeing more and more misinformation as well as disi

nformation. sometimes within our own country, sometimes outside the country. i think that one of the challenges with ensuring that we are getting the right facts is that we are not getting caught up with groupthink. before reboot -- before reporting, more and more i'm seeing and hearing things in the u.s. the remind me and this is increasingly entrenched views, almost like a tri-ballistic. my people say that so this is the truth. unwillingness to look at inconvenient facts or look at facts at all. so i think that part of the challenge in making sure that we are looking at facts and basing

our policy views on facts is to make sure that we are willing to consider the merit of what somebody is saying and not just who is saying it. as someone who said to me, pernicious people sometimes come up with interesting ideas and important ideas that we should pay attention to. if we are dismissing argument because we don't like the character or the political party of the person who is saying it, we can sometimes miss things. even if we want to prove them wrong, we can miss things that they are saying that would help strengthen our own argument or viewpoint. host: let's talk to stephen who is calling from los angeles. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for talking about this topic. i was just wondering, is there anyone in congress who has the opposite opinion, who think that we are already doing a ton for

american families and they already have benefits that the ordinary single parent -- single person would not have question mark -- would not have? guest: thanks so much for getting up so early to tune in. it just to clarify your question, do you mean too much for families relative to single people or that we are already injecting too much spending into the economy than we should -- and we should hold back? spending levels? or the groups to which it is directed? host: i believe it was for the groups to which was directed. guest: to be honest, i haven't heard anybody bring it up, but i also haven't asked about it specifically. so that's a great question. and maybe i will poll a few lawmakers the next time i'm in the halls of congress and see what they have to say about that so thank you for bringing that perspective up area -- up. host: when i was single, i always watched congress to see

what they were doing for single people. it seems like everything was aimed toward families. now that i have a family, you know what i'm looking at? let's go to jim who is calling from brooklyn read the morning. caller: -- brooklyn. good morning. caller: i actually grew up in alabama and i wanted to talk a little bit about taxes and people mentioned inflation. i'm a lifelong republican. texas have always been big -- taxes have always been a big issue. selling all this stock, jeff bezos and amazon. we are so many companies that we are not paying debts that are not paying any federal taxes and it's a real -- we are -- we have

some of that are not paying federal taxes. all the money that's going to go to help families with childcare that you mentioned and paid leave and home care or taking care of our elderly parents. our family has a disabled brother. taxes for wealthy people making $5 million a year, $10 million a year. who knows how much elon musk is making? that money is going to come from us. if the money comes from them, really think inflation is going to take over. i think all that money is going to be paid for. large corporations, amazon, these companies aren't paying a dime. if it goes to childcare like you

mentioned, because it's only that if you would talk about that i would sure appreciate it. guest: sure. thank you so much for your question. i think it's an important question and a very complicated one and even the best policy experts disagree on that. you may be aware of larry summers disagreeing with biden's people about the dangers of inflation and whether they are properly accounting for that. i think it was in february, he raised alarm bells around this and he was widely dismissed. i think it was politico that has an article that the white house needs to apologize to larry summers because it appears that he has been more right than they were about inflation being bigger and probably longer-lasting than the biden

administration was saying through the spring and summer. it is a very complex issue. i think to your question, first of all, about whether the bill but better act will be paid for. there are two assessments. both argue that it will be more than pay for or slightly increase government revenues over a ten-year. -- over a 10 year timeframe. moderate democrats in the house are insisting on having a scoring from the highly respected office and they are taking a considerable mount of time to review the bill because of just how complicated it is, particularly the tax provisions. the chairman of the democratic

chairman of the house budget committee told me that it's the tax provisions that need the most analysis because they interact with other portions of the bill, other aspects of the economy in a way that is very complex and difficult to estimate. so we are waiting for the score to come out hopefully this coming week for the house will go ahead and vote on it. i think that will be helpful and whether the bill will be paid for. a significant part of the plan is paying for the bill, as jim mentioned, is taxing corporations and very wealthy individuals at a higher rate and stepping up. the plan has been changing, the whole bill has been changing. i'm not sure if the irs part is changing, but they wanted to add an extra 80,000 agents which would more than double the current number of irs agents.

they were tickly wanted to keep up the expertise within -- they were particularly wanting to keep up the expertise within the irs. to design their wealth and holdings and tax in a way that will avoid having to pay big taxes. i'm still interested in hearing more about the efficacy of the new taxes and tax enforcement measures that the democrats are proposing. and how sure we can be that they will actually produce the revenues they say it's going to be. i think that's a good thing to keep an eye out for as we see congress come back next week and continue deliberations and hopefully come to a vote on the bill back better act. host: let's talk to michael who was calling from tennessee. good morning. caller: what's going to bring

inflation down is when biden get through, are you there? not interrupt the bill back plan and let biden get own with what he's trying to build and passing out the stimulus the people less fortune and the rich people. the stimulus passed out to the less fortunate people, that will help the economy boost backup because a lot of spending will be going on. i got a deck that needs remodeling. my home needs remodeling. and it's going to take money. i'm disabled on a fixed income. there's a lot more people out here need money to fix things,

to get by, close -- clothes. host: can you quickly some up? we are going to when out of time. caller: what's that stimulus gets passed out, it's going to be a magnificent magnificent spend out and all of that money is going to go back to the state and it's going to be triple. it's going to flip off more money than ever. it's going to hit back into the system and that's what's going to boost america back on its feet. host: go out -- go ahead and respond before we run out of time. guest: i think that's deafly the hope of the biden demonstration. so i'm -- that's definitely the hope of the biden administration. thank you for calling in from tennessee and sharing how things look like from your perspective seeing the things that you are

needing help with. i think democrats are hoping to be able to help with those families who are in need of greater support, particular during this time of the pandemic. just to touch again on the previous callers question, this desire to have billionaires and corporations pay their fair share has taken on a great deal of momentum because of stories like yours and the people that you are talking about. i think there is a feeling that in the richest country on earth, there should be a higher standard of living. if you have benefited from all of the government that makes america run out -- a great place to run a country, you have there is possibility to ensure that every individual, family and the country has the opportunity to succeed. and it feels to me like there is greater and greater political momentum area whether we see a billionaire tax, i'm not sure

yet. i definitely see the political momentum moving in that it will be really interesting to see where the next couple of weeks hold. host: we would like to thank christa case bryant, a correspondent for the christian science monitor for being with us this morning and talking about her article. thank you so much. guest: thank you so much. a pleasure to be with you this morning. host: we would like to thank all of our guests, callers and viewers for another edition of "washington journal." continue to wash your hands and stay safe. join us tomorrow at 7:00 a.m. for another edition of "washington journal." have a great day, everyone. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2021] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] ♪

>> c-span is your unfiltered view of government. we are funded by these television companies and more, including comcast. >> are you thinking this is just a community center? >> it is way more than that. >> students from low income families can get what they need to be ready for anything. >> comcast supports c-span as a public service, along with these other television providers, giving you a front row seat to democracy. >> c-span's "washington journal ." we are taking your calls lives appeared will discuss policy issues that impact you. coming up on sunday morning, thomas smith discusses implementation of the bipartisan

infrastructure bill, priorities for projects around the u.s. we will talk about covid therapies and covid response funding in the build back better act. watch "washington journal" live at 7:00 a.m. on c-span or c-span now. join the discussion with their phone calls, facebook comments, text messages and tweets. >> next week on the c-span networks, both chambers of congress are in session. the house will take up president biden's build back better plan after nancy pelosi delayed a vote on the bill. the delay came on the request of some moderate democrats who the budget office to analyze the bill. on tuesday at 10:00 a.m. eastern live on c-span3, -- the

hearing was postponed last month after the secretary tested positive for covid-19. also on c-span.org and the c-span now mobile video app, the leading cybersecurity experts from the white house, homeland security and the fbi will testify before the house oversight in reform committee to crackdown on ransomware attack's and build resilience against cyber threats. the confirmation hearing for federal communications commission chair nominee before the senate commerce committee. she would be the first woman to serve in this capacity. the committee will also take up other nominations. at 10:30 a.m. eastern on c-span.org and the c-span now mobile video app, a virtual meeting of the house appropriations subcommittee to discuss the u.s. role in covid-19 global equity