federal communications commission chair nominee. she would be the first woman to serve in this capacity and the committee will take up other nominations including commissioner of the federal trade commission. then a virtual meeting of the house appropriations subcommittee to discuss the u.s. role in global covid vaccine equity. watch this week on the c-span networks or you can watch our full coverage on c-span now, our new mobile video app and head over to www.c-span.org for scheduling information or to stream video live or on-demand anytime. c-span, your unfiltered view of government. >> coming up this morning, lloyd smucker on president biden's "build back better agenda" and upcoming fiscal deadlines.

then, lois frankel talks about covid-19 relief legislation. and jeff mower of s&p global platts on gas price hikes and the u.s. oil supplies. "washington journal" is next. [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] ♪ host: good morning. it is tuesday, 11-16. the senate returns at 10:00 a.m. and it was yesterday at the white house where president biden signed the $1.2 billion bipartisanship bill into law. and both the president as well as members of congress stressed the importance of bipartisanship when it comes to tackling big issues in washington. and that's where we'll begin on "washington journal" this morning we want to know if

you're seeing bipartisanship in washington and does it matter 20 you? if it does matter to you, 202-748-8000 is the number to call. if it doesn't, 202-748-8001. and the lines for those who aren't sure, 202-748-8002. you can also send us a text message this morning. that number, 202-748-8003. if you do, please include your name and where you're from. otherwise, catch up with us on social media, on twitter.com/cspanwj, on facebook.com/cspan. and a very good tuesday morning to you. you can go ahead and start calling in now as we show you some of the president's remarks from yesterday at that signing ceremony. president biden: i want you to know we hear you and we see you. democrats and republicans can come together and deliver results. we can do this.

we can deliver real results for real people. we see in ways that really mattered. each and every day, to each person out there. and we're taking a monumental step forward to build back better as a nation. host: president biden just before signing that bipartisan infrastructure bill into law yesterday. here's the headline from the associated press. biden signs that $1 trillion infrastructure deal with a bipartisan crowd. the signing included governors and mayors of both parties and labor and business leaders and including to nancy pelosi and chuck schumer. the guest list included republicans such as bill cassidy, susan collins, tom reid, don young, and larry hoag -- hogue. hogan.

more from yesterday's signing ceremony. this is republican senator from ohio, rob portman. >> this bipartisanship -- bipartisan support for this bill makes sense for our stichs but -- sandwiches but the approach should be the -- should be the norm, not the exception. the american people know despite our difference, we should be able to figure it out and work together to solve big problems. we can start by recognizing that finding common ground to advance the interests of the american people should be rewarded, not attacked.

[applause] >> in a morning, you're going to sign this bill. you and i will disagree on the tax and spending and the other priority you have. the reconciliation bill. but i think we can both agree that this infrastructure investment shouldn't be a one-time bipartisan accomplishment. this should be the beginning of a renewed effort, to work together on big issues facing our country. host: republican senator rob part-man of ohio yesterday from the white house. we're talking about bipartisanship this morning, asking if it matters for you. rob portman, talking about that other priority of president biden, that the build back better act, social spending bill

that democrats are attempting to move through the budget reconciliation process that allows them to avoid any republican votes in the senate to overcome the filibuster threshold. we are expecting a vote in the house this week on the build back better act. after the signing of that bipartisan infrastructure bill, does bipartisanship matter to you? and are you seeing it in washington? joe, sun city, california, that line for those who say no. good morning. caller: no, it doesn't matter to me. because the media is always going to serve that's offensive team. the last while the democrats serves the defensive team in the last. so that's what the american people are struggled. that's how corrupt we are today. and that's the truth for you. so be warned. if you want to deny it, you just deny it. reality. but they have their own agenda.

and they're anti-judeo christian values and they're the enemy of this country, generally speaking. host: that's joe in california. this is david, detroit, michigan, that line for those who say yes, backups don't matter. caller: good morning, joe and to "washington journal" fans, listeners and to my fellow citizen from california who preceded me and all that minutia. let me just say this. this should matter. bipartisan should matter. but let me say this to all the joes out there who are railing against the build back better act and was going to take -- over the next 10 years. let me just say this and then i'll get off the phone. invariably, when i say big government projects, like i live in michigan. so one of the big hornies --

honorees from north michigan to florida to i-75, and then when i see these big projects jobs, all these men making really good money, drive the yellow tier and the caterpillar trucks and doing all the works, i would say 99% are white men. ok? and they're making good money. and i just so happen to be -- i have an avenue camper and when i go camping, i see these white men pull in with their big 1500 or their ford 150's with their big, you know, fancy fifth wheel trucks these are the same white guys that work on those projects. so i don't understand what is the angst. because they're going to get the jobs. they're going to get the jobs before white women, before black men, before black women. and i don't understand what their problem is. they're going to benefit. if anybody's going to benefit, it's going to be white men.

host: that's david in michigan. this question that we're asking. does bipartisanship matter to you? i'm seeing your comments from facebook. giorgio saying yes it is the only way award. bipartisanship means that congress members are doing their jobs to work with all sectors of the u.s. and not just working with their screeching base. unfortunately, the media has made it an insult for decades. bonnie says yes. at least yesterday was a very good day that gave me hope that the human race will grow and realizes that we need each other. we can all have a healthy, happy life and preserve this beautiful planet. rebecca says it can get done without bipartisanship and lacking in overwhelming majority, neither side can do that much. mike, on facebook saying whenever something is bipartisan, it's usually bad. more money for the war machine and national security state and corporate welfare and giveaways to the rich.

lou saying never bipartisanship when principles are sacrificed and the left has no principles to even trade. it wasn't always like that prior to obama, says lou. go back and look and find all the democrats who talked like to republicans back then now, they're proven shape shifters and hypocrite. and christine on facebook saying it doesn't matter when it involves dealing with obstructionist republicans. the comments across the spectrum from social media, we're especially looking for your phone calls this morning. on phone lines, split up pretty simply, yes, it does matter, no, it doesn't matter, if you're not sure. thomas, delray beach, florida, says bipartisanship does married. -- matter. caller: hi. thank you very much for taking my call. just a very quick note first, though. the guy who says it is only the white men who are going to benefit from these stimulus packages, that's actually the opposite of what's true. in fact, under his restaurant release bill, white men were

specifically ex included from the -- excluded from the bell. and to me, yes, i do think it matters. it is important. i have both voted for and worked for republicans and democrats. my 2020 ballot had both democrat and republican votes so i think it's very important to work together overall, towards the end. because if you're fighting against each other, you're only going to hurt each other. now that said, what also matters to me is honesty. and while i do think trump deserves a lot of criticism, i find it very hit krill. right now -- hypocritical right now when just the democrats not trying to to overturn the election would be russia collusion.

host: in michigan. for those who say no. caller: good morning. it doesn't make a difference to me because it makes no difference. if there's a midterm election, so we can control when. and it's the same old her go round with the same old players all the time. he can't even come through with one single promise that he campaigned on. guy's a pathological liar. host: on your prediction of republicans winning in the midterms in 2022, how many seats do you see them picking up? how big of a wave do you think it's going to be in the house? caller: enough to obstruct any more policy. it's just a game. the lobbyist are -- there's three lobbyist for each

congressmen. please, give me a break. this country is done. it's finished. host: that's todd in michigan this morning. a chart from the "wall street journal" this morning just taking a look at presidential losses in midterm elections you can see that midterms overall have not been very good to the sitting president. pumpkin -- president trump in 2018 moving 40 seats in the midterm election. president obama losing 13 seats in 2014. 63 seats in his first midterm election. george w. bush, 30 seats lost. a gain of eight seats for his party in the 2002 midterm elections, following the 9/11 terror attacks. president clinton saw gains in his second midterm election of just five seats. but president clinic lost 5 -- clinton lost 52 seats.

talking about bipartisanship this morning. conversations with you, our viewers about whether it matter, did it ever matter? are you seeing it in washington? james, in harvey, louisiana. you're not sure. caller: good morning, paul. i like to say i'm not sure if bipartisan matters. the thing that should matter more, weathering this consent of everybody winning or losing, knowing -- in sports analogies and who wins and who loses. the thing is, i think whether you're a communist or socialist or democrat, republican, whatever, that's your right to have that. but we should all be interested in watch's best for our country. and i don't think our elected officials are doing that anymore. i think we, the people, i think

we electing people to be on our team and our team is not america. and so i'm a little worried. i don't really care what your body affiliation is. as long as you are there to represent the goals of our execution -- institution -- institution and the people there that have their needs and hopefully, we have some common needs that we can coalesce around. host: that's james in louisiana. we mentioned bipartisan group of members, congress speaking at that signing ceremony for the so-called bipartisan infrastructure plan.

it was sinema who has become focused in the build back better act for social spending plan for her opposition to some of the provisions that her party have proposed but she spoke yesterday at the signing ceremony for the infrastructure bill. this is what she had to say. >> how many times have we heard that bipartisanship isn't possible anymore? or that important policy can only happen on a party line? our legislation proves the opposite. and the senator who is negotiate this legislation hoe how to get things done. the senators in our group of 10 effectively represented the needs of the regions we represent. senator cassidy in the deep south, senator warner in the mid atlantic. senator manchin in appalachia. and senators romney and tester in the west. and in the northeast and alaska, each with unique needs were ably represented by senators sheheen, collins and measure continuous i

can, the wonder women of our group, always focused on the practical outcome. [applause] senator rob portman whose knowledge is match only by hid steadfast commitment to delivering on this priority for america. delivering this legislation for the american people, this is what it looks like when elective leaders set out differences, shut out the noise and focus on the issues that matter most to american citizens. host: that was senator sinema in the white house. 2/3 of americans say they want their member of congress to compromise to get things done. the question that they ask if

you had to choose, would you rather have your member of congress compromise to get things done or stoic their principles no matter what? the purple on this chart, the number of those who said compromise. 39% want their members to compromise to get things done. 21% said stick to principles. republicans, 44% say they want their members to compromise but 56% a majority there of republicans saying they would prefer their member of congress to stick their principles no matter what. rhonda in tulsa, california, you're nixon. -- next. caller: i am not sure because i'm so disappointed with pour representatives senate and the

white house, not paying attention to what is going on. i'm here in california. our gas prices are almost $5. when you go into several stores now, you see that the shelves are becoming empty due to the crisis of the ships waiting onshore to come in and foods not being delivered. i'm very dissatisfied. i've always voted democrat. i voted for biden and i vote for kamala. and when you look at the headlines you see now that cameras harris is having -- kamala harris is having some infighting and is in a stalemate position as to they don't know ha do with the vice president. she seems often that she backpedals or it seems that she speaks around in circles about the issues that are directed

toward her and what our president is doing. i at this point and i feel that i will not be voting for biden again. i will not. and for the last few days, i've been saying to my family, i regret, i truly regret that i gave him my vote. i hope this changes soon because we are -- the people, we're not doing well and i feel like we're voiceless. and the definition of bipartisan, i love the caller from louisiana. he said it perfectly, that there shouldn't be us against you or we won or we didn't win this. it's about getting what needs to be done for the people. thank you, "washington journal." thank you for taking my call. host: rhonda, to what you referenced those reports about the vice president's unhappiness in her role brought up to the

white house press secretary enough that she responded to it. this is the headline from the washington times today. the white house skips introduction at the signing event. sake -- psaki rejects reports. there's been a lot of negative reports and they don't reflect our views. jen psaki, voted in that sorry in the "washington times." leon is in louisiana. you say bipartisanship still matters. caller: yes, sir. good morning. my name is leon and i served 34 years in the military. and i look at this thing as when we talk about bipartisan. they're just at the macro level

of our politicians. since i've come back home and i've take a look at the microin our homes, and our families, there's no -- there's lack of bipartisan problem solving even in our homes. it's my way or the highway. we have to problem solve. we have to see the other side of the argument and come to solutions. problem solving isn't -- if i don't get my way in totality, then you're wrong. president lincoln said a house

divided against itself cannot stay. the problem is not you the problem, i'm the problem. america has the problem. we need to bring our best minds together and do this within the economical framework as they say in terms of the definition of economics is the allocation of limited resources and world of unlimited warrants. host: that's leon in north carolina. we mentioned the 13 republicans in the house that voted for the bipartisan infrastructure bill that was signed into law yesterday. and we mentioned on this program the blowback that those 13 members have received since casting that vote earlier this month, remember, it did take republican votes to get that bill over the finish line in the house. because enough democrats stepped away from that bill at the end and so it needed some republican

votes to finely pass in the house. one of the republicans who was part of that 13 was fred upton, republican of michigan. this story from last week after the vote. the congressman from michigan received multiple death threats in the days since he voted for that infrastructure deal with the overwhelming majority of the calls coming outside of the congressman's district. the congressman playing one of those calls for the "washington post." you're a inning piece of traitor, i hope you die. the man hopes upton's family and his entire staff die. the upton spokesman there, criteriaing the phone calls and the congressman talked about it as well. they tweeted the phone numbers

who voted in favor of that bill and that is just within of the stories. dave in new york saying it doesn't matter. caller: hi. thank you for c-span. i'm very angry as to what's happened with this bill. started out at $3 trillion. now half trillion and was watered down and water down by joe manchin and sinema and i understand it's very, very close in the senate. but pelosi and schumer and manchin and sinema, those are the people who were there for the signing of this bill. a much, much smaller. brought down to the lowest it could be. manchin is a self-interested corrupt republican who calls himself a democrat. and he's worried about capital there, who was there at the

signing. host: you mind if i ask your party affiliation? caller: i don't have one, really. i vote democratic. that's all i can do you know, here in manhattan. 73 years old. born on the same day as bernie sanders seven years later. and i'm very angry. i'm an a.o.c. democrat. bowers. those are the ones that didn't vote for the bill. pelosi sold them out completely to the lowest common denominator and that's why i don't think that bipartisanship is working. not for me, at least. because this bill would have been the largest bill since the great depression to help americans. so i'm tired of this. and i think we need a new party. and i think the question should be should we have tripower play? -- tri-parent shawnship? that's what i think.

i know we need a united trump against -- front against trump. but bipartisanship has not worked with me. host: ray, elizabeth city, north carolina. good morning. caller: hello. yes. and thank you for taking my call. i totally agree with the veteran caller on earlier about bipartisanship. it's very important. i do agree it matters much because the bottom line is what happens in washington affects everyone in this country. there are issues that does not matter if you're a republican or

a democrat. there are other issues like border security, national defense, lowering prices and there's a lot of talk about -- of trump being a problem. no, trump's not the problem. the problem is it's issues that are oppressing this nation. and a lot of them go way back before trump. and when you look at these issues that arias -- arise above republicans and democrats and you tackle them, that sends a message of unity. host: that's ray in atlanta braves city -- elizabeth city, north carolina. chris saying bipartisanship means there are only two viewpoints to a circumstance quite frankly most of the time, these bills require more than a yes or no option. safe to saying bipartisanship means little to me. the only thing that counts is

constitutional legislation that works for all americans instead of buying votes or pandering to population segments with empty promise. bill, it does matter. the respondents here on this post, about 80% will say yes. but the other side just won't cooperate. and this is not really. they should work best for the people that they represent. and bipartisanship matter when it hurts america and hurts our kids. the republican traitor who is voted for this structure -- infrastructure matter a lot. because of them, our kids are on the hook for another trillion dollars in debt for $100 billion in infrastructure. some of our comments from social media. one of those republican members who voted for the bipartisan infrastructure bill mitch mcconnell and it was mcconnell who did not attend the signing

ceremony yesterday at the white house when it comes to his reasons for doing so, an article in "the hill" newspaper, he's saying i've got other things i've got to do other than going the signing ceremony. this was "the hill" reporting his comments to a local radio station in kentucky. mcconnell said that his support for the bill has sparked criticism and they noted that some of that criticism came from former president trump who lash out at the leader. it was mitch mcconnell on the floor over the build back better act, talking about his concerns about rising inflation and democrat solution toss it.

here's the senate minority leader. >> the democrats flyings crisis has gotten so bad that washington should stop to pretend and starting to admit it's on them to fix it. they denied that inflation was the lasting problem, america are convinced they're just the people to fix it. but the solutions are more of the same absurd policies that help dig this hole in the first place. after months and mostly ignoring the problem, pipe -- president biden responded to the inflation data by insisting that reversing the trend is a pop priority for me -- top priority for me. but surprised the president's preferred solution just so happens to be the same reckless taxing and spending spree his administration has been pushing for months now.

they cooked up his spending spree back when they were just saying inflation wasn't a major problem. and it was still time to spend like crazy. but now miraculously, that same spending binge happens to be their prescription. so give me a break. this is a sweeping socialist wish list in search of a justification. it's another megadose of the same recness -- rec l.b.'sness. when the bill was up in the senate, 13 house members voted for it as well as well as several of mitch mcconnell's

colleagues. we want to know does bipartisanship still matter to you? again, phone lines, 202-748-8000 if you say yes. no, 202-748-8001. and if you're not sure, 202-748-8002. it's just after 7:30 on the east coast. a reminder the house ends at 10:00 eastern this -- in at 10:00 issue this morning. and of note today, on c-span3, a hearing with the homefield advantage -- homeland security secretary. you can watch that hearing on c-span3. c-span.org, and you can watch it on the new c-span now video app. sure to get several questions on that border hearing. and in woodstock, new hampshire,

the president will be there live on the c-span networks and on the c-span now app. caller: when you look at the blue states, california, all the way up into the late 1970's, and the democrats took that state completely over. look at illinois. look at new jersey. all up and down the coast. the blue states, they just are absolutely horrific for the people who live in those states. and they don't care. all they want is power. and it's never going to change for them. but the right of the polls and put their little check mark for

the other dummy crap. host: all right. let's hold off then name call this morning. james in newark, new jersey. good morning. we say it still matters. caller: yes, good morning. how are you doing, c-span? yes. i was born bipartisan. my mother helped f.d.r. with the new deal. my father, gung ho u.s.a. i was born bipartisan in 1953. now, bipartisan? yes. piecemeal, yes. and it's happening. so i'm quite happy. host: that's james in new jersey. this is michelle, also in new jersey. princeton. good morning. caller: good morning. happy tuesday. how are you today? host: i'm doing well. go ahead. caller: i've been bipartisan --

i think bipartisan is really a joke because we have the republicans, we have the democrats. and they're both working together, really, to administer the 1%. and what i'm finding is that they're pitting americans against americans in regards to the divisions that they have, whether it's religion, whether it's race, whether it's jobs, whether it's class. and we as americans have to bind together as one regardless of your race, your class, or what have you. you are an american. and regardless of bipartisan and the laws that they are creating, we as americans got to realize how do those laws affect us and do we want those laws?

and we as americans have to realizes that we have the power. we have the power to make things happen for us. now we got the fuel rising, we got the food rising. and what i was hearing this morning, you know, people making $50,000 or less, now they got the fuel the food, and everything rising and now they're taking away from their bills and things. and basically, our bills is what run america. host: michelle, on fuel costs increases, a conversation on that in our 9:00 eastern hour this morning. we're going to be joined by jeff mower, of s&p global platts. he's the director of their americas oil news publication. he's been covering gas prices and oil markets since the 1990's. we've had him on this program before. usually when these sort of fuel

spikes happen, they talk about the causes and what the federal government can and can't do. so if you want to stick around for that conversation, 9:00 a.m. eastern this morning. julie, northport, florida. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. host: of course. go ahead. caller: i think bipartisanship matters to me significantly just like, you know, cooperating of all getting along. things are beginning to improve. biden still has over three years to go, and hopefully, we will see more of this and more unity. i'm thrilled about this new law. and i hope everyone else is as well. we will begin to see this in reality, more jobs. better roads, better highways, bridges. i think it's a very exciting time for us and i'm sorry that we have so many people that

don't think bipartisanship matters. it's all about -- host: you say you're thrilled about this new law, the infrastructure bill that's now a law. what are your thoughts on the build back better act? democrats taking a very different approach with that piece of legislation. using the budget reconciliation process here to avoid having to get republican votes in the senate to avoid having to get to the filibuster threshold. caller: i'm not a fan of the filibuster. i'm of the belief that we can do this together. i'm praying that we can all across -- compromise. i think that we're better than all of this infighting. i'm concerned about the

spending. but do i believe in helping our poor. i've always been ad cat for the underserved. and, you know, i've been watching closely and i think that this build back better will go through. but i'm hoping on a bipartisan basis. host: julie, do you think it would have been better to split this up? we're talking about a nearly $2 trillion piece of legislation and i know we've been talking about very big bills of late. but you say there's parts of this you like. do you think it would have been easier to get bipartisanship if they passed the environmental, the climate change pieces to this as one bill and the child care piece of this as another bill? would that have been better for bipartisanship? caller: absolutely. and i think that would be better for all of us i've never been a fan of throwing a lot of different programs, a lot of different ideas into one bill.

i think -- you know, if we take one thing at a time, let's see where we stand on climate change. what can we come toon agreement on? let's build on that. it's one thing at a time. that's why i've always been an independent voter. i don't believe in the way the democrats throw everything into one thing and hope it goes. and i don't believe in the republicans denying everything. i'm right down the middle, very conservative, independent. i'm upset with our progressives that they did not vote for the infrastructure bill because they didn't get their way. to me, that's china -- childish. host: on the democrats approach to the build back better act, the social spending bill, a column from yesterday from fox news.com, you might know the author, newt gingrich, former

speaker of the house the headline, the dieing art of compromise in washington here's how we were private. and this is part of what the former republican house speaker said in that piece. he says the point of the build back better act is to tim pose a radical agenda on the country without republican support not to help the american people. he writes many people saw time of deep division and chaos -- that's newt gingrich from foxnews.com, his piece there. crystal, philadelphia. good morning. you're next. caller: oh, good morning,

america. good morning, c-span. bipartisanship, i'm 63 years old. and i remember when even with differences and stuff, you could work together. the work -- to work stuff out. you meet up and they used to talk about going to having a beer and stuff together. but in this day and age? i just -- it is horrible. there's no common courtesy. a trouble -- troublemakers. instead of being lawmakers. they're working hard to make stuff work with helping common people. they gum up the system. they don't follow the rules on

the floor. and they're just plain bullies. i don't know how you work with people like this. it makes no sense. and there is no -- doesn't seem to be any consequences. they threaten each other. and just act like it's high school instead of congress of the united states and they just block any and everything. whether it's good. if it's bad, point out what's bad. work out stuff and get stuff done for america. caller: what i'm calling about is i'm not sure about it but what i want to know is the infrastructure bill. will that money go to finishing

the wall? hello? host: the divided administration on the first day of the biden signed an executive order stopping the construction there on the wall. so in terms of funding for infrastructure on new wall for the border, new miles of wall, my implication is it's definitely not in that bill but i haven't gone through it line-by-line for you, clarence. caller: well i think that it should. do you hear me? host: i do hear you. caller: oh, ok. all right. that's all i wanted to say. i think that wall should be finished. host: all right johnny in port origin, florida, good morning. caller: how are you doing? yes. i don't think bipartisan really matters anymore. you need a third party and the third party got to compete with

most people for a long time, we've got the republicans. we've got the democrats and they're running things. they're like the old white boys club. neither represent the other people that are trying do other things as well. without that, we have no real checks and balances. they're doing what they want to do and they look the same. host: that's johnny in port orange, florida. my producer, nate, sending me up the proclamation from january 20, from the first day in office for joe biden, the proclamation he made on the wall, the termination of emergency with respect to the southern border of the united states and the redirection of funds diverted to border wall construction. that executive order from the president within 24 hours, becoming president. this is mike in norwalk, ohio. good morning. caller: good morning, america. how is it that they can pass a bill and not one of these

individuals has even read it? i mean, come on. and as far as unity, the democrats spent the last four years trying to impeach trump because he wasn't part of the boys club. the only way it's going to get done is if we throw everybody out of that building behind you. i mean, this is getting to be ridiculous. unity is gone. host: that's mike in ohio. a lot of talk about unity in yesterday's signing ceremony at the white house. a lot of talk about bipartisanship for the bipartisan infrastructure bill. here's more from president biden at that signing ceremony yesterday. president biden: somewhere along the way, we stopped investing on ourself. we risk losing -- and china and the rest to the world are catching up. our infrastructure used to be the best in the world. now according to world economic, we are ranked 13 in the word.

well, that's about to change. things are going to turn around in a big way. for example, because of this law, next year will be the first year in 20 years american infrastructure investment will grow faster than china. once again, we will have the best roads, bridges, ports and airports over the next decade. it will lead the world in the 21st century with a modern cars and trucks and transits. we're going do this by building again and moving again. folks, too often washington, the reason we didn't get things done is because we insist on getting everything we want everything. with this law, we focus on getting things done. the only way to move this country forward in my view was to compromise in consensus. that's how this system works. that's american democracy. and i'm going to be signing a law that's questionable --

consequential. we compromise. we reach the consensus. that's necessary. host: president biden yesterday from the white house from that signing ceremony. a few minutes left, about 10 minutes in this first hour of "washington journal." no the question -- does bipartisanship matter to you? you seen it in washington? yes, 202-748-8000, those who say no, 202-748-8001. and those who aren't sure, 202-748-8002. greg is on that not sure line out in pennsylvania. good morning. caller: yes. i'm not sure because in a perfect world, yes, bipartisanship should make a difference. because everybody should want the same thing, but have different ways of getting there and there should be discussion about the different ways to get there. the question is whether that is what we have today.

and i don't think so. i don't think we have two honest parties. now and you can -- people can piss and moan about both parties and they do it every day on "washington journal" and the mainstream media and in my opinion, you and others there, immediate into the -- feed into the division. people have to look at each politician and vote yes or no on that person. you just heard hunter's dad do his standard thing. now, he says these things. the sound bites, c-span, and the mainstream media will broadcast those sound bites for -- forever. now, who knows whether he writes them or not? i personally don't believe he did. i think it would be great for c-span to find out who actually is running the white house. but these people do something

different. listen to pelosi. listen to schumer. listen to a.o.c. and you tell me. is it possible? is it possible to have a reasonable discussion with those people? host: no, greg, to this question that we ask, maybe this would have been a better phrasing for this. do you think for your elected member, do you want to see them compromise or do you want to see them stick to their principles? are you ok -- go ahead. caller: go ahead. go ahead. host: no, it's a call-in show. you go ahead. caller: ok. all right. i want them to listen. and this gets back to a topic that c-span has covered every once in a while. do you elect somebody to do what you want them to do or do you elect somebody who is smart enough to make the right decisions? there is a difference. i want my person that i -- my representative, scott perry, to

listen to the other side. and then respond to the other side. don't do what the democrats do. don't call me a racist because i'm an old white guy who disagrees with a.o.c. don't do that. that doesn't further the discussion. and help us get to where, i hope, everybody wants to get. if that's the way the other side is going to respond, then is it time for to just throw down the gauntlet and say come on, let's have a civil war, whatever. one side wins. one side loses. if that's the way you want to play the game, then let's do that. host: that's greg in pennsylvania. this is mike in dallas, north carolina. good morning. caller: good morning, john. how are you doing? host: doing well, mike. caller: i'm 63 here, a white guy. i've served four years in the military. i joined the all voluntary

military. it was right after vietnam. i'm not putting that to get a $6 cup of coffee at starbucks. i believe in bipartisanship. i want this country to come together, you know? used to kind of be together, you know what i mean? but nowadays, man, it's like, well, you know, i've got to be a racist because i'm an old white guy or i've got to be a trumper because i voted for the guy. wouldn't you like to -- host: you say you used to be that way. when did it used to be that way? when did it used to be kind of together? caller: well, i don't remember everybody being demonized so badly for, you know, just voting. i mean, man, i am demonized every morning on this show just for the way i vote. now that's the truth, right?

did you cut me off, man? host: no, sir. go ahead and finish your comment. caller: ok. but you know, i'm really tired of being demonized. i can't be so many more -- too many more s.o.b.'s before we have to step outed. i want my grandchildren to grow up like the 1970's, the 1980's. you know, i know that it wasn't great for everybody, hey, man, i worked in the damn cotton mill for $2.65 but i tried to survive you know? i didn't get married until i was kind of stable, 25, in myself. host: so mike -- caller: until i could afford a family. host: you talk about your grandchildren. are you optimistic about the america that your grandchildren will inherit? caller: no. i don't think they're going to inherit the america that i had or that you had or any of us had. i don't really think they're going to be able to afford to

buy a house. i don't think they're going to be able to afford the kind of life we had. i mean, really. you know, i had brand-new trucks, in 1978. i had a harley-davidson in 1980. i didn't get married until i was 25. i went out and did everything and i try to do all this crazy stuff and put it behind me, you know? so i could prepare myself to raise a family. host: that's mike in north carolina this morning. just about five minutes left in this first segment of the "washington journal." did want to note a retirement announcement yesterday. one member who's been around for a very long time on capitol hill, senator patrick leahy is retiring the headlining, leaving behind a legacy of humanitarianism and devotion the state of vermont after nearly 50 years, the senator announced yesterday that he will not seek re-election in 2022.

leahy first went to washington in 1975 after defeating republican candidate dick mallory. by about 1,500 votes back the election of 1974 and sent off a challenge from a union party candidate named bernie sanders. fast forward to yesterday, patrick leahy making his retirement announcement. here's bit from it. >> i know i've been there for my state where i was needed most. i know i've taken the best ideas and helped it grow. i brought vermont's voice to the united states ♪ senate. and vermont's values around the world. so, yeah, i'm proud to be vermont's longest serving senator. and while i will continue to serve vermont, we have reached

the conclusion. it is time to put down the gauntlet. it is time to pass the torch. to the next vermonter will carry on this work for our great state. it's time to come home. so i will forever carry with me the enduring bond with my fellow vermonters whose common sense and goodness is what i strive to match and their representative. thank you all for being the inspiration and the motivation for all the good that has come from my work in the senate. rest assured that our state, the nation will remain resilient in the next -- and the next generation will ensure our democracy remains whole and thriving. host: senator patrick leahy, yesterday, making his retirement announcement.

back to your phone calls after few minutes left on this question. does bipartisanship matter to you? john in ashland, ohio. says he's not sure. why? caller: hello? host: why. >> you sure, john? caller: oh. well, here's the thing. bipartisanship, i mean, the thing is, we went from the united states of america to the divided states of america. and the sad thing is some of the comments i hear from this program, i mean, it's the american people giving these comments aren't very educated. and the sad thing is the things they say that this is a democratic orenn thing -- or republican thing. this is an american thing we're american we all should stick together. we need to help each other. we need to do what's right. you know, when this becomes a democratic or a republican thing, that's wrong.

i mean, if we can't get together and sit down and have agreements or disagreements, i mean, we no longer become a united nation we become a divided nation. and that's what this country's become. i mean, it's sad that this is taking place today in 2021 that we haven't really progressed, we're regressing we're going back to the things that destroyed this country instead of improving this country. host: that's john in ohio. one last call from stacey in mcclain, virginia good morning. does bipartisanship matter to you? caller: oh, definitely it does, jon. good morning, jon. good morning, america. like thomas jefferson said, one party or any wing of any party doesn't have the solution or the answer to all of our problems. we have to work together. the fact that we've got democrats and republicans beat

them like they're bloods and crypt, pitting ideas against each other as if they were weapons ideas are just that, ideas. and everybody has opinions. we can't work together. we won't be united. this country will not move forward. and we will suffer in the end because if we're not united together and working as one unit to better this nation, we won't have anything to leave our grandchildren because they'll be ignorant. they'll be uneducated. and they'll be left with a country that is crumbling. host: stacey in virginia our last caller this first segment of the "washington journal." but stick around. plenty more to discuss this morning, including up next, and after the break, where we will be joined by republican congressman lloyd smucker of pennsylvania who sits on both the budget and ways and means committee to talk about a very busy week on capitol hill, and a bit later, we'll be joined by

democratic congressman lois frankel of florida, a top member of the appropriations committee. stick around. we'll be right back. ♪ ♪ ♪ >> on this episode of " booknotes+" every mother is -- his latest book is called the

lost history of the capital, an account of many bizarre, tragic, and violent episodes around the u.s. hit -- the u.s. capitol building from the founding of the federal city up to contemporary times, ed has been a speechwriter for george herbert walker bush and a writer for "the tonight show.' >> is available on c-span now or where you get the broadcast. >> "washington journal" continues. host: we welcome the republican congressman from pennsylvania, lloyd smucker, for the first time on "the washington journal." he serves on the budget committee. let us talk about budget, the congressional budget office is set to score that nearly $2 trillion build back better act and social spending bill. at some point we are expecting

that. what are you expecting the budget experts to say about this legislation? guest: i think it will cost more than the democrats are expecting. this will be a massive increase in federal spending, it will increase the federal debt, and it will contribute more to inflation, we are already seeing going to the gas pump a gas price increase of over 50%. it will be the most expensive thanksgiving turkey dinner ever in american -- and americans are feeling this everywhere they go. so we and i think that it is the wrong policy to continue to massively expand the federal government to increase dependency on federal government and dis-incentivize work, which is what we have been seeing out of this administration. it is amazing to me, we just came through an election in

virginia and new jersey, and i am amazed at the democrat's response, they are completely misreading the american people. i believe it is like the sink is -- the ship is sinking and instead of bailing water, they are asking to bring more water in. and so, this is not what the people in my district want, this is not want the american people want, i believe. i think they want to try and ram this through. host: i do not know if you were listening to the callers in the last segment but one said if there was a very big bill was broken into smaller parts, she thought that there were parts that she could support. but it is such a big bill with so many different things wrapped into it that she was not certain about supporting it. is there anything in this very big bill that you say you do not support that you could support if it was broken into smaller pieces? guest: they just passed the infrastructure bill, and i

believe that infrastructure -- that infrastructure is a core function of government, and when i was in the pennsylvania state senate voted to actually increase the gas tax to provide for more funding for our roads and highways. unfortunately what has happened is that the democrats in the house, speaker pelosi, have lumped all of these massive spending programs together. again, i have previously supported infrastructure spending. i would have liked to have done so had this bill been properly paid for. so, there are core things that people expect from their governments. but, we know how it ends. if you look throughout history, every country that has overspent, and over promised and printed money to pay for those programs, it does not end well.

at the very least we are doing this on the backs of our kids and grandkids, and i ran for congress to ensure that every american has their opportunity to live their own american dream. and i want to make sure that that is available for our kids and grandkids. the promise in america has always been that every generation can do better than their grandparents and parents before them. with the economic policies that we are seeing advanced from this administration, that is the risk. i think the american people are very concerned about what this will do to our country going forward. host: on the bipartisan infrastructure framework signed into law yesterday people voted against that bill as you noted. expected to bring according to the pennsylvania budget and policy center, nearly $18 billion in hard infrastructure spending to the keystone state. democrats have said that any

republicans who voted against the bill, they should not come to the ribbon-cutting ceremonies, they should not celebrate when the projects come to fruition that are funded through this bill. what do you say to that as someone who voted against the legislation? guest: i think it is a core function of government to provide for infrastructure and it is important to a strong economy, it is a foundation of a strong economy. but the problem with is bill for me was that only a small percentage of the bill went to traditional infrastructure. it outsized -- outsized portions of this bill went to green new deal policies. it was not properly paid for, so for instance, the revenue that is coming in from vehicles driving on our roads is declining. if you think about vehicles are more fuel-efficient than before and folks are moving to electric vehicles.

so, that needs to be fixed. i introduced a bill that would ensure and ask for owners of electric vehicles to pay their fair share for driving on the roads just as the owner of every other vehicle, something like that should have been included in this bill and it was not. it was not fully paid for. it will increase the debt. there are some good ports -- parts, but i cannot support this massive bill, and i could not support the whole package host: host: tied together in the house. congressman lloyd smucker is our guest. a first timer on "washington journal" but third time in congress. taking your phone calls with us until 8:30 eastern. democrats, 202-748-8000. republicans, 202-748-8001. independents, 202-748-8002. i want to shift it to vaccine mandates.

i know you are leading one of the efforts to oppose the biden administration's efforts to impose vaccine mandates or testing on businesses with 100 plus employees. he ran a small business for coming to congress, so what would be the impact of that on the company that you ran? guest: covid has been a challenge for us. we have had remarkable success with a vaccine developed in record time. it is very effective. i took the vaccine, my family has taken the vaccine from the time it was first available. i encourage people to speak to their doctors about whether that is the right decision for them. and i think that is where the decision should be made. this is aided -- a decision every individual should make for themselves just as they make other health care decisions with the advice of their doctor and others who they trust. this is not something that

should be mandated from the government, and it is not necessary. early on, during covid, we had discussions with a lot of individuals who came to congress to talk with us about what the country was about to go through and how we would combat that and deal with it and they talked about the idea of herd immunity. early on, found she -- fauci and others were saying it would be reached when 70% of the american population said they would have the vaccine or natural immunity due to contracting covid. i have heard numbers even less than that when we realized that the earliest fatality rates that we had feared not end up being the case. they fatality -- the fatality rates was lower than initially feared. so folks said even less than 70% could be the right level to

achieve herd immunity, and we could go back. we are there, and this is the part that we do not understand. we are well over 70% of the people in my state, but i do not know the number of people across the country right now, we are close to that or above that. so, we do not need to have a vaccine mandate, certainly it is a massive overreach of the federal government. i believe it is unconstitutional. i am glad that many states' attorney general's are taking this to court. i hope that this reaches a conclusion quickly in the supreme court, in fact i sent a letter with the other republican colleagues and members of congress from my state to our attorney general asking him to join in. this is a decision that should be made individually and should not be mandated by the government. host: we will start on the line for independents.

matt, and potomac, merit -- in potomac, maryland. caller: we spent an hour talking about bipartisanship and congressman smucker started with a political shot. what specific actions to have you taken or do you plan to take across the aisle to reduce gas prices in the short term for americans? host: go ahead. guest: thank you, i appreciate the call. and that is not a political shot, it is fact. the fact of the matter is that gas prices are over 50% higher than they were when the biden -- when biden became president, it has a massive impact on the budgets of americans across the country and across my district. that is a fact. you know, i was a small business owner for years, 20 five years building a company from the time i was 17 to regional leader in

construction in south-central pennsylvania. i understand sort of the laws of supply and demand, and i think some of the decisions made early on by this president, decisions that he made in the first week, shutting off pipelines and supply, obviously contribute to higher gas prices. i think the policy is wrong and then that put them in a position for asking opec to increase their production. how does that make any sense whatsoever? you cut off supply here, you eliminate jobs here and then ask foreign countries, many of which are not always our allies, to increase production. it just makes no sense whatsoever. so, it is not a political shocked -- shot, it is a fact. i agree, i know there is discussion about bipartisanship.

every individual that votes for a member of congress should expect that their elected officials should go to congress and work to do what is right for their constituents and the people who elected them. they should not be there for their own benefit but to do what is right for the country to move the country forward in the right direction. you know, 435 members in the house, 100 in the senate, i think it truly is a reflection of the american people. i have a lot of respect for other members of congress. every member of congress worked hard to get elected in their districts to have the honor of representing the people of their district, they bring their own experiences, their own opinions, the values and the needs, and experiences of those they represent in the district. it is a great system, and we

should have respect for all of those different backgrounds and experiences that come together. host: is very democratic member that you are friends with that you have worked with in legislation? guest: absolutely. i think almost all of the legislation that i have been successful in getting past or included -- passed or included has been on a bipartisan basis. i am friends with many members of the democrat as well as the republican party. i was -- people ask me when i first came to office and i am now on my third term, so i have been here for five years. people asked me what surprised you most when i was first election -- elected and the answer was the caliber of the people that were elected with me in my class, and i find that true across congress. that was democrats and republicans. our class, a matter of fact,

there is an orientation and some of that is done on a bipartisan basis, two weeks of orientation and our class literally several times throughout the orientation asked everyone else to leave the room and we just spoke together as incoming members and we committed at that time, this seems like the good old days now, but we committed at that time to treat each other with civility and respect knowing that we would have vigorous debates and arguments and differences of opinion about what direction to take the country. but, treating with each other with respect and civility. we signed a document that said we would operate that way. i think it is very sad to see how divided both the country is, and also how divided congress is today. perhaps, i was in the state senate for two terms before coming here, so i have been 13

years in elected political office and this is by far the most divisive that i have seen. i hope we get back to a point where we can work together in a far better way than we are now. host: we do have a lot of calls for you. juliann, -- julian in louisiana, go ahead. caller: my question is about inflation even when you listen to janet yellen and powell, it gives me the impression that they do not know the difference between supply and demand and inflation. inflation is if you print money. i am under the impression that since we had covid, people are not going to work or producing goods and services to put on the shelves so people can buy those things. at the same time i think powell was easing off that quantitive stuff, so we still have got printing money and supply and

demand issues that are contributing to the inflation. what would you say, is it 50-50 or 25-75? guest: i do not know that i have an exact percentage, but i think you identified some of the causes for what we are seeing with inflation. you simply cannot spend more money than we have and print the money, expand the money supply without having an impact on inflation. we expected and predicted that we would be seeing not just the word they used is transitory inflation, but it would be here for a little while and then tail off. we predicted that this is something that we are going to see for the next few years, unfortunately, as long as we continue with these policies of massive government spending and expanding the supply to pay for that. that is exactly what is happening.

we now have over 6% increase in consumer good prices over a year ago, the highest inflation that we have seen in about 30 years. we have an entire generation or several generations that have not lived in an environment where they have felt like it is a tax on them. they felt like there dollars do not go as far as they did just a little while ago. i believe that is what we are looking at the next few years as long as we continue these policies. host: monorail township, new jersey. -- monroe township, new jersey. caller: i have what i think is a very simple question. i am 95 years old. i remember when decisions were made for the benefit of the health of the country by scientists.

we eliminated so many diseases, and polio was rampant, when my children were young. it is completely wiped out. why are these decisions now made by politics? you cannot ride in a car without a seat belt, you get a ticket. you cannot j walk. why is it now a political decision when it is for the health of the country? the country was much better off when scientists made these decisions. host: thank you for the question. guest: i think you are referring to covid, and our response to covid, i agree with you. it is unfortunate that it has become so politicized. i think in many ways, what we

saw in combating covid in the development of the vaccine in what was absolutely record time was a remarkable achievement of science. and, i know there are different opinions about the vaccine, as i said i think it is safe and it has allowed us to open. one of the problems that we have seen during covid and the policies that both state and federal, and local governments have lamented his people felt like the science was not followed. in my community, when covid first started we were scrambling ensure that there would be enough hospital beds for those who had contracted covid and the local hospitals in my community were predicting hundreds of individuals who would be hospitalized due to covid. so we were talking about opening up new facilities and figuring out where to do that.

and then i began to notice that that never really took place. and the idea of the shutdown initially was so that hospitals would not become overwhelmed. and that did not happen in pennsylvania, it did not come close to happening in my community. and yet the governor in my state shutdown all but nonessential -- essential businesses, i should say, to the detriment of individuals who owned the business, who had poured their lives into those companies, building those companies and individuals who lost their jobs. i do not think the science was followed in how shutdowns were implemented. we did not weigh the impacts of them compared to the risks of covid. i think you are right, i think we need to be focused. in others, not so much. host: mike, independent.

good morning. caller: good morning. i was frequently surprised to learn that the u.s. has spent three times as much as second-place china in military budget, and i think basically what we are doing with that money is policing the world. and our recent experience with afghanistan proves that that is very foolish for a defense but -- budget, may have your comment, please? guest: the war on terror that we saw since 9/11, i think it was important to ensure the safety of people in the homeland and americans abroad, i think it was important for us to do, we are continuing in that challenge now. i think we talked about

infrastructure being a core function of government. the safety and security of the american people is perhaps the most important function of government, and i think we need to do everything we can to ensure that our soldiers, the men and women who are protecting our freedoms have the tools, the most up-to-date tools and equipment available to them and that they are adequately compensated for the sacrifices that they make. and that we keep the american people safe. i think china is a serious threat to the country, and we need to be sure that we are capable of dealing with them both economically, in trade, and ensure that we have the capability to protect ourselves from anyone who does want to do was harm, whether that be china or anyone else. i supported additional funding

for the military to ensure that not only do we have the best equipment and continue to develop the best weapons, but the ability to maintain that equipment and to have something that is serving. we should always ensure that the dollars are spent efficiently, and that they are being spent at the right levels as well. that is a decision that is ongoing, that i think it is absolutely important that we ensure that we have a strong military ready to face any challenges that might come up. host: coming back to the infrastructure bill, we talked about the criticism that 13 of your republican colleagues received and the republican votes it took to get the bill up -- off of the line. from the editorial page of "the wall street journal," some criticism of kevin mccarthy for not holding those 13 members in line and allowing democrats

to get republican votes to move that bill, and the editorial board of "the washington times" asks mccartt -- if mccarthy is up for the top job. i wonder your thoughts? would you consider voting for someone else if republicans did when tested when the house next november? guest: i think republicans will win the house, all indications are that it would be up for a strong win, the american people have a lot of concern with all of the crises of this administration and the policies being advanced by this administration. you saw that in the election that we just came through, and you see it in the polls now. i am confident that we will win the house and that kevin mccartney will be the next speaker and he will be very effective in leading us, and we have an agenda that is very different from what you are

seeing now. we believe in the ideas of individual freedom, individual responsibility, a smaller and limited government and the free markets. i was a business owner myself and had the opportunity to work starting with little or nothing, i was born old order amish and was able to succeed, able to risk, fail, succeed, and that is what has made our country great, it has created more opportunity and wealth, lifted more people out of poverty than at any other time in human history, and that is the agenda we intend to advance as a majority in the house with kevin mccarthy as our leader. host: let me take two calls, one of the republican line and the democratic line and i will let you respond to both. albany, new york, you are up first. bill, go ahead. caller: a couple of things.

first of all, why didn't republicans in january, the first thing that president -- president biden did was to use executive orders to turn everything around that president trump did. the first thing was to cancel the keystone pipeline. and, there was no talk at that time like there is now. now gas prices, as you said before, and we all know it, sky high. back then i remember saying wow, this is going to raise the price of gas and we are not going to be energy dependent -- independent on our own, we are really lying on opec -- we will rely on opec again. i never heard republicans fighting against that the way that you would have nadler and schiff fighting if it were on the other end. host: we will take the question, and then we will hear from rick

in altoona, pennsylvania. caller: i was hearing about the price of gas and him being a true pennsylvanian he knows how much our gas taxes are, but yet he says we have to open up and get more gas and not ask foreign countries for the gas. on the others he said he passed a bill to tax gasoline even higher. so i would like to know how he is playing both ends against the middle. thank you. guest: -- host: congressman, both of those questions on gas prices. guest: the first question on regards to republicans pushing back against the administration. i think we did that, and maybe we can do a better job of getting that message out there. i was worrying just as you were initially, leadership was warning just as you were, and one of the things that worked really well in the previous

administration with trump as president was an energy policy that encouraged the development of natural gas, of oil here in this country. we became energy independent. we had sufficient supply that brought down the price of gas, and that could have continued had we not stopped the pipeline and curtail the production in other ways under this president. it was a terrible policy and we knew it. we pushed back but unfortunately we do not have the majority in congress so we could not hold hearings on that. certainly, there were many members, many republicans in the house and senate who were warning about the impacts that this would have. to the second question, i talked about when i was in the senate back in -- act 89 was passed which provided for additional

investment in our roads and highways in pennsylvania, which was absolutely necessary. we had the highest number of bridges considered -- i forget the term now -- but subpar structurally deficient, we had the highest number of any state. you know pennsylvania's roads had a terrible reputation and we needed an investment and for decades nothing had been done and we came together. and i talked in congress about some of the reasons we were able to get that done and provided additional revenue that was absolutely needed, it is a core function of government. i think the driver of the increased of prices right now is over a 50% increase in taxes -- gas prices is not due to the taxes, but the policies that have cut off supply, so it is

basic economics. as long as we continue these policies will see gas prices rise, so, it is a direct result of what this administration is doing. host: thank you for taking calls on "the washington journal." we hope you come back again. congressman lloyd smucker from the 11th district of pennsylvania, member of the budget and ways and means committee. thank you. up next another member of congress joining us this morning, democratic congresswoman lois frankel will be with us. later we will dig into that issue of rising gas prices and energy prices with jeff mower, a reporter withs&p global platts. ♪ >> this week on the c-span networks, both chambers of commerce are in section -- are

in session and will take up the build back better social spending plan. this delay came at the request at some moderate democrats who wanted the congressional budget office to analyze the bill. today at 10:00 a.m. eastern live , homeland secretary alejandra mayorkas testifies before the senate judiciary committee. it was postponed last month after the secretary tested positive for covid-19. also at 10:00 on c-span.org and c-span now mobile video app, the leading cybersecurity experts from the white house, homeland security, and fbi will testify before the house oversight and reform committee on strategies to track -- to crack down on ransomware attack's and build resilience. wednesday at 10:00 a.m. eastern live on c-span3, the confirmation hearing for federal communications commission chair nominee jessica rosenworcel before the senate commerce

committee. if confirmed she will be the first woman to serve in this capacity and the committee will take up other nominations including commissioner of the federal trade commission. 10:30 a.m. eastern on c-span.org and the mobile video weight -- app, a virtual meeting of the house appropriations subcommittee to discuss the role of the u.s. and global vaccine equity. watch this week on the c-span networks or on c-span now, our noble art -- our new mobile video app or head over to c-span.org for scheduling information or to stream video anytime. c-span, your unfiltered view of government. >> tuesday, homeland security secretary alejandra mayorkas testifies on the administration's border and immigration policies. watch live starting at 10:00 a.m. eastern on c-span3, online on c-span.org or on c-span now,

our new video app. >> "washington journal" continues. host: congresswoman lois frankel is on your screen joining sba zoom -- via zoom. congresswoman, starting with the build back better act, what is the latest you are hearing about when a vote on the house floor will happen this week, and, more importantly, will democrats be unified when the boat happens? guest: grates to be with you today. i do not know exactly when we are going to take it up, but the word is that we will be here until we do that. the democrats in the house are very unified on this. i know a couple of members are waiting for more information from the congressional budget office. but, this is going to be a transformational piece of legislation that is going to affect americans of all ages.

i am excited about it, i know many of us have worked a lifetime in politics to get kids off to a good start with pre-k and education, getting people back to work with giving more accessible childcare and home care. we have very big projects for fighting climate change, housing, there is something in there to make a life better for all americans, and we are going to do it by making our tax system fairer, having corporations and the richest people pay their fair share of taxes. host: you mentioned the members waiting for the cbo score. is this bill paid for? guest: are economists tell us yes, it is paid for. it will be, as i said, there will be taxes on corporations and people who are very wealthy,

no one making less than $400,000 will pay more taxes. most people will have to pay less taxes. people with children, we will be expending the china -- extending the child tax credit. we will be making the everyday day expenses of parents and caregivers much less, more affordable childcare and home care, free pre-kindergarten education for every three-year-old and four-year-old so children will be what -- will be much more successful in school. we are going to help people with housing. in my part of the country, i live in palm beach county, florida. affordable housing as at the top of the list of people's concerns. as i said, there is something in this package for every american to take the stress off of everyday life, and it is paid for by making our taxes fairer. host: phone lines if you want to

join the conversation. 202-748-8000 four democrats. republicans, 202-748-8001. independents, 202-748-8002. this started in the $6 trillion range and we are now in the $1.75 trillion range for this bill, do you think it would end up where it should be? was there anything cut out along the way that you wish is still in the bill? guest: i think we had gotten too much caught up on the top numbers and what is in the bill and what we are trying to do, and assessing our country as we come out of this pandemic, we are even out of it yet. the pandemic really wreaks havoc, especially on the working lives of women, not only as essential workers, but having to do most of the caretaking. it wrecked havoc on our

childcare industry. we need to allow for women to get back to dust work. we need to have our children in safe, nurturing patient -- places. we really need to uplift not only the care industry, but the workers in the care industry who are making probably one of the worst wages for doing very important jobs. i would say this, as we come out of the pandemic, it is a build back better list of projects that will make life better for everyone. host: to the phone calls, this is lewis in south river, new jersey. good morning. caller: how are you doing? host: go ahead. caller: i was wondering, how are we going to get the housing?

caller: what -- host: what do you mean by the housing? caller: they were looking for housing and it was a top priority of getting housing. host: on housing. guest: yes. this has been really under the leadership of representative maxine waters, who has been pushing this issue for years, because we see what the price -- because we see the prices of housing going up across the country. it is every day working people having a hard time being able to pay their rent, food, and save money to send their children to college. and so, in this package there will be billions of dollars set in there for people to pay their rent and buy homes. host: terry in palm coast, florida.

republican. good morning. caller: my question, she just answered it. the purpose of this build back better is to make america more dependent upon the government. you are going to give them free housing money, free rent money. the infrastructure bill, which was just passed. 10% of the bill is actually for infrastructure. highways, roads, everybody can agree on highways and roads. the rest is all pork. my question to your guest is, why cant the democratic party be honest, be honest with the american people on what is hidden in your bills? host: congresswoman. guest: well, i think we have

been very transparent. obviously, bills are a lot of pages, and anybody is open to looking at them. here is the thing, and thank you so much for your question and i hear frustration in your voice. and, you deserve to know, everyone deserves to know, and i said there is something in there to make life in america better for everyone. yes we are modernizing roads and bridges and adding a huge amounts of money funding and investments into transit so that we can get people around on busing -- buses and trains, modernizing airports and ports, and looking to the future. i do not know about you, but i have two little grandchildren who i hope will grow up in a clean and safe environment. i know i am worried about climate change, and this build back better proposal is going to start us off in a tremendous way

to reduce the carbon in our air so our children and our grandchildren can have an environment without floods and fires and hurricanes year-round. and so, as i said, lots are in there. in terms of the housing. you are from florida? i do not know if you are having the same issue, but where i live the median cost of buying a house is in the mid 300 thousands. that is really tough for an ordinary worker to pay that kind of money. so people need help, we do not want them to be on the street. this build back better is going to create millions of good paying jobs so that people will be able to take care of themselves. host: staying in florida a few miles down the coast to miami. this is michael on the line for democrats.

good morning. caller: yes, i am actually in your area in broward county. you know, kids -- yesterday our emergency session, what the emergency was who knows, and they banned vaccination mandates but made it very easy for any vaccine to not be hit again and discussed banning osha. the problem is who to tell who is correct. people are confused to to listen to. they do not trust authority. you can clear this up so simply just by answering a very straightforward all you need is a dictionary to answer kind of thing, no pre-hd -- no phd to promote latin -- natural immunity as public policy, is social darwinism, by definition and is synonymous with eugenics and is it what happened to bolsonaro down there, to do that

to children just to use them as small parks blankets and to say that you are doing it to increase herd immunity, to keep it so simple, if it is not simple people get confused. host: i will let the congresswoman jump in. guest: i am a little confused by what is your point, but let me just, i am aware of what the slate legislature was doing and i think it is an example of putting politics over health and safety of our people, especially children and the ones not able to get vaccinated. it is pretty clear, scientists all over the world have told us that the best way to stop the spread of covid is with vaccines. and so, to have a policy in

florida and are governor desantis is promoting it, that actually diverts people away from vaccines is very dangerous. host: staying in florida, steve, and independent. you are next. caller: good morning, please do not cut me off and i have a follow-up question. the democrats say that they are not teaching critical race theory in grade school yet, in our library there is a book called "not my idea" a book about whiteness by anastasia zhi that vilifies white people by the color of their skin. i have never known, i cannot help the color of my skin. i want to know why the democratic party is teaching critical race theory recommended from ages eight and up, you can look this book up. it is vilifying white people.

host: we will take your question. on critical race theory. guest: first of all, i am not familiar with that book, and certainly the books that are taught that are used in the school that is an issue for the school board working with parents and teachers. in terms of democrats -- what democrats stand for is a fairness and equality and democracy and this overused phrase of critical race theory is just that. do you know what that is? i will ask the question back to you, what is critical race theory? what is it? host: we lost the caller? guest: i think people are hearing this phrase and they do not even know what it means. and in terms of our values as

democrats and most americans, most americans believe in equality and they believe in fairness and democracy. host: about 15 minutes left with congresswoman lois frankel. a democrat from florida. you can join the common -- the conversation on phone lines. democrats: 202-748-8000 202-748-8001. --, 202-748-8000. at the tail end of the last conversation there was a lot of discussion about gas prices in america right now. i wonder, your thoughts on that matter, what can and should be done by the administration to address the issue? guest: i think that the gas prices are obviously worrisome for everybody because it is very hard. where i live in south florida, most people use cars to get around.

it is important that we keep the gas prices low. i think everyone has to understand and face up to the fact that we are coming through -- and i hope that we are getting through this soon -- a horrific pandemic that stopped commerce for months. for months you had factories closing down, you had oil production slowing down, and now , as we come out of this and people are getting back to work and there is a higher demand and less supply of everything, including gasoline. and so, people, i know people have to be patient, and the president is working to get it moving. the los angeles court is now doing its work 24 hours a day, and i think if we can start to get goods moving, and the oil

flowing, we will get some relief, but probably not for a while, could be another year even to get gas prices where we want to get them. but you are going to have to understand that we are coming through this horrific pandemic that has slowed everything down. and, that the president is looking long term. the best way to beat this oil crisis in the future is to pass the bill back better bill and start to fight climate change and reduce our reliance on fossil fuels. that is what the future is, and that is what our president is planning for. host: so much focus on the build back better act this week. we are coming up on a got -- a government funding deadline and another potential government shutdown. as senior member on the

appropriations committee, where are we on a government funding bill? are we likely to go through an 11th hour exercise in whether the government will be shut down? guest: our goal is to pass the appropriations bill sometime in december. i spoke yesterday with our chair of the appropriations committee, that is what she has been working towards. and fingers crossed that is what will happen. host: 8:00 taking on -- the clock ticking on that. about 10 minutes left. more of your phone calls. tina in pel city, alabama. republican. good morning. caller: thank you for being here. there was a congressman on the floor and i cannot remember his name and i am embarrassed. but he said let us take 60 euros

off -- 6 zeros on what we are talking about and revenue service took in $38,000 last year. this bill is 6.8 trillion so we are going to spend 60 j trillion -- $68,000 on the credit card we have 27 trillion, which is $270,000, is that a good way to live? guest: you sound like you are a math whiz, i did not follow the 6.8 trillion. listen, not to be repetitive, we are coming out of a pretty bad time in our country's history. so many people are out of work, people could not buy food or pay their rent, and the american rescue package in the care packages that we were able to get allowed people to barely survive, to buy their food and

pay their rent and we are trying to build back our childcare system. so, it is going to take resources and we want our children, who i believe, regardless of what party you are in, we all love our children and want the best for them and we want a future for them. so if you talk to a teenager, they are worried about climate change and, rightfully so. as i said before i am worried about it for my two grandsons. i do not want them to have a lifetime of living in florida, hurricanes all the time or across the country, the fires, the flooding, it is quite evident that the claimant is wrecking havoc on our country and we have to do something about it. that is what build back better does, it creates millions of

very good paying jobs, and especially allows women to get back to work as we tried to build back our childcare system. host: to follow up that question, familiar with the u.s. debt clock website and a running tally of the u.s. national debt at 48,000,000,000,009 hundred 67,470,000,000 $500,000 and counting. how much debt is too much? guest: i do not want to take a number, but i will tell you on these bills that we are passing and the economists that told us that we are going to actually reduce the debt over the years because we will be putting people back to work in good paying jobs, and they will be paying taxes. that is the best way to reduce your deficit, is to have an economy working, people that are working and taking care of themselves and paying taxes.

that is the best way to get the deficit down. host: democrats, dallas, texas. this is bob. good morning. caller: congresswoman frankel, i just wanted to make a comment regarding critical race theory. it is my learned opinion in that critical race theory is little more than a fear tactic that is used by the right. thank you very much. host: did you want to follow up? guest: i agree. thank you. that was nicely said. host: florida. peter, independent. good morning. caller: good morning, thank you for having the congresswoman from florida. i think the democrats are facing annihilation in the midterms. they have sold out their base so hard. we have the house, the senate,

and the presidency. you have joe biden, no minimum wage of $15 an hour, light democrats from the north and the senate killed that. no public option, you cannot even fix prescription drug problems with the whole country. we cannot get a vote on medicare for all and the democrats control the house, and you have the progressive caucus writing a bill but will not even fight for it to get a vote. you have sold everybody out in your base. how are you going to win? host: congresswoman. guest: thank you for calling in, and i would like to thank you for giving me the opportunity to address the issues. that is talk about health care because we can all agree that if you really want to have a good life, be productive, you should have access to affordable,

quality health care. our build back better bill is going to do that. it is actually, in my opinion, it is a form of universal health care. because we are going to expand the affordable care act so that every american who wants to buy into it can. right now there is a gap between the working poor who do not qualify, and we are going to expand that to allow them to qualify and to make sure that they have the subsidies necessary to pay the premiums, and if they reach a certain income that they will have their co-pays paid for. we are going to take a tremendous step forward in this rebuild to make sure that everybody has access to affordable insurance for their health care. and on the prescription drug,

there has been a little bit of a battle, but we have a compromise , and we are going to start with negotiating some of the 10 most popularly used drugs and we will allow medicare to do that negotiation. we will make sure that nobody pays more than $35 a month for diabetes, because that is one drug that is very commonly used and in some cases people are asked to pay $600 or more a month. we are making a lot of progress on the health care. in terms of the minimum wage, i agree with you. we should raise the federal minimum wage. i want to tell you what we are doing in this build back better bill, because if there is any industry that is underpaid, it is the care industry. hundreds of thousands of people, especially women of color who

take care of our children and our elderly, and the disabled who are not even paid a minimum wage and that will put the resources to lift their wages. we have a lot of good things coming up. i think for me, my biggest worry about democrats and midterm elections is the fact that we see all over this country a republican legislature trying to rigged election rules, they are gerrymandering legislative districts. that i will tell you, sir, that the frustration in your voice, i promise you this that when we get this bill back better bill passed, a lot of the issues you raised will be dealt with. thank you for your call. host: time for one or two more phone calls. in campbellsville, kentucky. democrat. good morning.

caller: good morning, i am calling in regards of the bill signed yesterday, and then the build better bill passed also, and if they won't do this by the first of december or whatever, or by the middle of december, how would this make the ceiling deficit that has been pushed to the first of december and they insisted that if they could not get that money, they could take it out of social security, and when will that happen? host: i think the question was on the debt ceiling. guest: ok. -- guest: ok, i think maybe so. we have to pay our bills. these are current bills, not future bills.

we have to make sure that we have the ability to do that and that requires what we call raising the debt ceiling. giving us the ability to pay our debts. listen, we have never failed to do that and i am confident that we will get that done. host: last call from tampa. brian, republican. thanks for waiting. caller: thanks for taking my call. i have a few questions and you can feel free to answer yes or no to some of these. do you believe the politicians have gotten blatantly corrupt? there's a 2012 stop congress stock act. did you violate it? and would you want to prosecute the politicians that did? should we have term limits to get rid of corruption and should we outlaw lobbying? host: congresswoman? a few questions at the end.

guest: look, everybody deserves their elected officials to be ethically sound and transparent. lobbying is not a dirty word. there are so many issues that lawmakers face. you need people who can bring you information. it's just i think that what needs fixing is the campaign-finance system and making sure that we don't have what's called dark money, where any money given into the campaign system is transparent. i think that would go a long way. we passed a bill in the house to do that and it's still sitting in the senate. i think that would go a long way in terms of making sure that the public sees and knows who is influencing policy. host: did you want to touch on

term limits? are you in favor? guest: i think term limits are up to the voters. host: congresswoman frankel represents the voters of florida , a member of the appropriations and veterans affairs committee. thank you so much for your time this morning, congresswoman. up next, a conversation on rising gas prices. we will be joined by a reporter from s&p global. later, more of your phone calls. we will be right back. ♪ ♪

♪ it's >> book tv every sunday on c-span2 features leading authors discussing their latest nonfiction books. noon eastern, live coverage of the miami book fair, including craig locke with his book, afghanistan papers. and wildland, looking at three places, clarksburg, greenwich, and chicago, to understand our current landscape. chris hedges talks about the american prison system, detailing his time teaching literature to students car serrated in a new jersey prison. and julie brown talks about her

work as an investigative journalist for the miami herald that led to the arrest of jeffrey epstein. at 11:00 p.m., farah stockman talks about her book american-made, what happens to people when work disappears, examining u.s. companies moving overseas. affecting the working class in america. watch book tv, every sunday on c-span two. find a full schedule on your program guide. or watch online any time at the book tv.org. host: the conversation on gasoline prices now with jeff mower, who has been reporting on gasoline markets since the 1990's. let's begin with a question that you always get when people are paying more at the pump. why. guest: it's a good question,

john. thanks for having me on today. the basic answer is, demand for refined products is outstripping supply for refined products. backing up a bit though, to 2020, just explaining what happened, briefly, when the coronavirus first hit. especially earlier in the year. a really big and sudden drop in demand, 20 million barrels per day, possibly more, in global demand. over a very short amount of time , it was a very sudden, much more deeper drop than people had expected. that was between just say january and april of that year. as you can imagine, fewer people are driving, they aren't flying as much. and then, you know, as a result of that oil companies, refiners start slashing runs, there's no reason for them to keep

producing jet -- gasoline and diesel, jet fuel, fewer people are using it. producers start cutting spending and production. again, where are you going to put the crude? they start filling up inventories as refiners are not going to process the crude. so now we are at a point where we have recovered to some extent. but, the refinery runs haven't really kept pace with the increase in demand. so for instance, plats analytics sees demand rising i think for the first 10 months of the year, january to october of this year, it's all global demand rise 8 million barrels per day, but over the same time, refinery runs increase maybe 2 million barrels per day to maybe 78 billion barrels per day. you have this gap and the

tightness is still in the refined product. like in the united states, for instance, the inventories of gasoline and diesel are below the five-year average levels. now the five-year average can be skewed because last year inventories were still high, right? still a fairly good indicator to show that inventories are still fairly tight, relative to, relative to the demand right now and that's what's causing the price to increase. host: and a snapshot of the end result here, this is from the aaa gas map, the average price of gasoline today, $3.41 a gallon. you can see viewers on this map, the darkest red states are where the average price is somewhere between $3.61 and four dollars $.68. -- $4.68.

and so on down the line of where prices are the highest in the country. with those rising prices, questions in the white house briefing room about what the biden administration is going to do about it. here's a clip with jen psaki from yesterday. [video clip] >> republicans criticizing the administrations big picture. can't claim the keystone pipeline, neutral leases on federal land, saying that the administration writ large has increased gas prices. what's your response? 3 one, -- >> one, we haven't canceled existing. i know that you know that. not new leases. to be clear, i know it has been a criticism, that's why i said that, not an accurate one. rising prices over the long-term makes it a stronger case for

doubling down the investment and focus on clean energy options so that we are not lying on the fluctuations of opec and their willingness to put more supply and meet the demand of the market. that's our view. but we also feel there are a number of actors here, including price gouging, where we have concerns and we have asked the fcc to look into the need for opec to release more that is a larger issue here and that is why we have been focused on those options. host: that was jen psaki, from friday. having this discussion there, bringing up opec and price gouging. the roles they are playing in your mind. guest: well, opec definitely plans to increase production to now 400,000 barrels per day until the end of next year. now in october they increase production by 480,000 barrels

per day. but they are being cautious. and i think other producers are being cautious, to, and that's something i want to stress here. opec is saying look, we can only boost production as much as refiners need. right? if there isn't enough refinery capacity coming online, than there's really no need for us to boost production because where the the crude going to go? it either gets refined or put into storage in the way the market is structured right now, putting crude into storage doesn't really make you any money. there's no financial incentive to put crude and storage right now. so, i get the point of view, when you think of the independent oil producers as well, like outside of opec, right, they are doing the same thing. even more so.

they are saying look, we can increase production a little bit that we want to stay within certain targets. we have promised our shareholders that we are going to tighten down on production growth because we don't want to flood the market with too much oil at a time where there are still a lot of questions about the coronavirus, right? waves of record daily levels in germany, recently, and an increase in kreis -- cases in china, so there's still a lot of concern there, like how do we recover without putting too much oil on the market. and repeating, you know, at least a little bit of what we saw in 2020. so i think that's a real concern. but the interesting thing is i think we will see refinery runs

increase. gasoline prices on the futures market have risen, you know, over the last several months or years. but in recent days, over the last couple of weeks, i noticed they came down a bit and maybe there is something to that. i think part of it is concern around coronavirus cases but i think also you see some refining capacity returning, you know, in the u.s. refinery runs were kept fairly low in recent months, you know, for one reason, because of hurricane activity that shut down some gulf coast refineries. those are now coming back. i think they were kind of stagnant, 14 million to 15 marion barrels a day, now expected to rise, up to 16 million barrels a day this month . and globally the iea came out today and said they see global

refinery runs climbing something like 3.5 million barrels per day over the next couple of months. so, what that will do is increase the supply of gasoline and diesel onto the market. again, there is so much, it really depends on what demand does over the next couple of months, right? more people driving and flying because of the holidays? it's hard to tell. business travel is still way down and i don't think that's expected to recover to pre-covid levels for two or three years. more people traveling for the holidays, a lot of it depends on that. how much are people going to be out shopping and eating, so on and so forth. host: if you want to talk gas

and oil prices, jeff mower is a great guy to do it with. eastern and central time zones, 202, --(202) 748-8001 (202) . guest: we assess around the world. so, the division i work for is the oil division. i marriage the americas news division. but we report on, you know, gasoline, crude, metals, natural gas, you name it. just agriculture around the world. we also assess prices around the world, which is something where, you know, our expertise really comes in handy here because we

have a really good insight into specific markets around the world. it's not just reporting on a futures benchmark. in the case of oil, right, it's not just the ice brent futures or the nymex light sweet crude futures. it's reporting on all the different grades of crude traded around the world every day, all the different grades of gasoline and the different locations, the different grades. the real fascinating thing about that is that you really see the complexity of it. you really get an idea of the, for instance, yesterday i was reading a story about how expensive light sweet crude is in northwest europe, right? and how many more imports, how that's pulling more imports of u.s. crude into that region. you wouldn't necessarily see

that just by looking at futures markets, but you see it by looking at these individual markets around the world. another great example would be, say, refining margins around the world. how profitable certain refineries are when they run certain types of crude through their plants. host: and for the viewers that want to take it out -- check it out, sp global.com. got a lot of calls lined up for you. john, montgomery, independent. what's your question for jeff mower? caller: the root -- the common republican lie about oil prices is that we were energy independent for the past five viewers. my question to you mr. mower is, during any point in the last five years has the united states ever produced more oil than they

consumed? that's number one. number two is, do we have the capacity in america to produce enough oil to overcome the effect of opec on the global price of oil? thank you. guest: yeah, those are very good questions. the united states did become a net crude exporter, i think it was last year. again, i don't remember all of it. but the united states exports a lot of crude. i think crude exports last week were something like 4 million barrels a day but lately it's been like 3 million barrels per day and then the united states also exports a lot of refined products. gasoline and diesel. mexico is a big buyer of refined products. other countries in south america are big buyers of refined products from the u.s. so whether or not we could produce so much, well let me think about that.

i think you could, because it is a global market, no. i don't know what that would take. because it's a global market, you are shipping crude to locations that need it and like i said, exporting light sweet crude or heavy crude to europe and asia, you are competing with, you can compete with opec, in other words, in these regions, and that helps to have that supply, that helps to bring down the price or it can help. i'm not sure if that answers your question. but i think the main point i want to make is that you know, it's this global market and when any country is able to export and access that, it helps to compete with other refiners around the world and can help bring prices down. host: indianapolis, indiana, stephen. caller: i had two questions.

the first is independent. how is it that trump was able to persuade americans that we were oil independent? we are not oil dependent. that's my first question. my second question has to do with capitalism. the first lesson we learned in elementary school is that when the demand is great, the ice is greater. right now there is a demand for oil so the price is greater. why is it that the democrats are afraid to come out and say it? we are not socialist, but capitalism is at work at this time, which is creating these problems. host: mr. mower? caller: so the first question again -- guest: so the first

question again i think has to do with trade flows. the united states was more independent, you know, as the u.s. increased crude production. right? but it was a certain type of crude that was being produced mostly that wasn't really geared up with refiners in the gulf coast or midwest weren't really geared up to run that. they were geared up for heavier, more sour crude. it made sense to export the light crude. imports have gone to the midwest. even in the gulf it's minimal. a lot of that has come from an increase in canadian imports

competing with saudi and mexican crude. that has really helped to drive some of those waterborne imports out. like yeah, there's more north american independence. 3 million to 4 million barrels per day imported into the u.s.. host: what's the difference between sweet and sour crude? guest: it's a sulfur rating. hey lighter, sweeter crude, it's easier to produce for the lower sulfur products that are in demand. for entry -- for instance like ultra low sulfur diesel. in europe, when you think about it, they are very dependent on diesel. light, sweet crude's are very much in the high demand there.

host: northport, new york. you are next. guest: -- caller: november, 2020, there was a fresh crash in the oil. at the time i think saudi arabia and russia for a while had been pushing down the price of oil to undermine the fracking industry. now they really function at a higher price of oil, loading up on massive amounts of crazy where interest rates, artificial wood below to maintain that. at this point at $80 per barrel, it seems like a good spot for fracking to be productive. i'm curious as to what's going on with the fracking industry? guest: that's a good question. you are right, the breakeven price that you would need in something like the permian basin is $43 right now and we are well

above that. you have got to wonder, why are we not producing more out of these? again, i think it comes down to cautiousness. for a long time a lot of these producers were just producing, producing, producing, not necessarily profiting off it. over time they start making more promises to rain that in. eog oil producers were on an earnings call in february and said we might be able to return to pre-covid production by 2022. they said they might, they didn't say they were going to do it. it sent their share price down like six dollars in one day, sending a signal like weight,

our other producers going to do this? are they considering it? are other producers going to do that? i think they walked it back later and now they are explicit saying like maybe 5%, 5% production growth next year. so, they are just being very cautious about that. although they are adding production and we are seeing again, this morning they came out and said they saw one million barrels per day being added by the end of this year. largely from u.s. producers with analytics seeing like another million on screen by next year and again, it's a very gradual increase. a lot of that increase so far has come from not necessarily new drilling, although we have seen an increase in rig

activity. but the completion of wells that have already been drilled. the drills that are completed. these have diminished over the last year or so as they have been completed. that is where the sort of production has been added to the market, at least of the u.s., is coming out of those drilled and uncompleted wells. host: aaa has prices at $3.41 a gallon. members of congress calling for capping the strategic petroleum reserve, what is that? is that a quick fix to the problem? guest: that's an interesting one, because it's like what are the biden options here?

more production on the market didn't work, some politicians have said maybe we should just end crude exports or halt them temporarily, though i think that would be pretty disruptive, you know? i think their argument was like if you halt crude exports, he would keep more crude in the united states and lower prices, but it's like when you think about, how much crude has been promised to deliver to other trading partners around the world, how much time would you need an advance notice to do something like that. would you really want to disrupt the flow for some sort of, in the hopes of pushing down prices in the u.s., right? this seems like a more realistic approach. the idea being we have 600 13

million barrels in strategic reserves. because we no longer import as much crude as we use to, the argument is maybe we don't need as much of that is we used too, right? it's supposed to be there for an emergency and hurricanes, so on and so forth, in times of war, but the idea being that we produce so much more now, do we really need that much crude? maybe you could do 60 million barrels on the market to bring prices down. the counterargument would be that that would be temporary. you would lose that crude and maybe have to refill it down the road. i don't know. the counterargument to that is the biden administration is saying a lot of this is transitory anyway. they seem pretty confident that, you know, along with, again, we

are seeing inflation for all sorts, oil and gasoline with the inflated prices. but the argument is like well maybe this is transitory, so release of the crude, sure, that would help to pull down prices temporarily, but maybe that is all they want. maybe that would be good enough. but i'm not sure how much crude it would take to bring the prices down. i suppose what the administration could do is offer it out there to see who takes it. host: just about five minutes left with jeff mower. taking your questions and your calls about gas prices around the country. steve, out in california, thanks for waiting. caller: thank you, yes. i read an article that suggests the oil companies could pull up more fuel on the market, but

it's more profitable for them to keep the price at the pump high to improve their stock position and that the stock position was worse in the 2010's when the consumer would say that we demand lower prices and they would put more gas on the market and the prices would go down and then they would lose money and profitability. so, none of the dynamics of the oil industry benefit your average american in anyway way. do they? guest: well, yeah, to your point, they do want to be profitable, it makes sense. but this is an unusual time, to. we are recovering from a big drop last year and were profitable last year. a big drop in demand from last year. and again, they don't really

want to add so much, to your point, they don't want to add so much production that they risk, you know, not being profitable again. they have made this promise to their short -- shareholders that we are going to stick to this. so, i get that. as far as the benefits, i think a lot of the frustration comes from the fact that, you know, gasoline is something that we use every day. it's not a luxury good. i totally get that. when prices rise for, whatever, a new jacket that you wanted or a new deck, something that you could put off, you might say maybe i won't build that addition or i won't redo the kitchen cabinets, i will wait until lumber prices come down. but you need to eat every day, you need to fill up the tank. especially if you are in the part of the country where you need it get a job or find a job.

that frustration, i get that, it's a tough one. host: in this conversation about gas we turn to nitro in rockaway park, new york. nitro, good morning. caller: i was doing a little research this morning and the aaa numbers at three dollars 41 cents per gallon throughout the united states, but global petrol price has the average price at 3.76, $3.76 per gallon. now, there are global prices of oil for each individual country, what each pays, dollar amount per gallon. america is blessed. we don't know how good we have it. when you look at countries like ireland, paying twice as much

for a gallon of gasoline, europe is hardest hit. middle east, they've got cheap gas. africa even has good gas. but we had people who, the oil-producing states tend to be right-leaning. texas, oklahoma, wyoming. there is, i believe, a concerted price-fixing, ok? host: mr. mower, what do you think? guest: well, on the global market you are right, prices fluctuate all around. all over the place, even before you get to the retail level. at the retail level you are talking about higher taxes in different locations, like europe, which can add a lot to the price of gas.

i filled up in the bronx the other day and i paid four dollars per gallon, expensive to fill the tank, i don't drive every day though, so i feel lucky about that. it can get up there. and then you know, some countries where the prices the flip side. there an artificially low price compared to what else is going on in the market. as far as fixing goes, i don't know -- i thought about that before, i'm not sure how you would fix the price on a global scale. it seems that there are so many players, so many global components to it. i don't know how that would happen. it's possible that on a regional basis it's why the administration is looking into it, looking at the gouging, you know. they are probably referring to gouging in different locations, right?

from regions. host: last call, jim wilson, north carolina. thank you for waiting. caller: you know, when bush was in office, gas was five dollars a gallon and you couldn't even get it. i remember him coming on and saying its supply and demand. this is what i wanted to say. the oil on our federal lands over here belongs to the people. why are we letting the governments come over here with the people, these deals like they had in the gulf, they are not following the regulation and then they make their profits? this stuff belongs to us. this, sir, on the federal lands, why don't the people own that? we can go in there, we can drill, caps off the grills and

we can take our own oil. why is this always a prophet thing? host: running out of time here, want to get you to answer. guest: what the government does lease, it's a lot on the land to oil companies who bid for the lots. those companies have a right to drill there for a certain amount of time. the royalties are, they pay it back to the government, right? for instance, louisiana had a big offshore industry. louisiana gets a lot of money from oil companies that are drilling. now some people have proposed we should raise the royalties, right? maybe that would help to kind of get to where you are arguing or get a little closer to your argument there.

i think it's interesting, there's a big sale coming up tomorrow. big lease sale in the gulf. remember when biden first came into office? one of the things he did was halt oil and gas lease sales for review. it went to court and court said you need to hold the lease sale. so they are going to be holding one tomorrow, it's like 15,000 lots and i believe the gulf has 48 billion barrels of technically recoverable oil. it will be an interesting lease sale to watch because it may give you some indication on how oil companies view the future, right? how willing are they going to be to jump in and, you know, bid up lots to explore and produce in the area. you might see more activity because of concerns that the

administration might take a harder stance down the road on leasing. so maybe it's like get in now while we can. the other argument is why do it now if you are questioning oil and gas futures for fossil fuels because of energy transitions. something we haven't talked about much today. but when you think about the pressures in the transition to cleaner energies, you have to wonder how profitable this is going to be down the road if oil and gas demand is going to drop in flavor of -- in favor of cleaner energies. host: we will have to end it there. jeff mower, director of s&p global news, you can find him on twitter, it's easy enough to find, @mowerjeff. guest: thanks for having me. host: 20 minutes until the house

comes in and in that time we turn the phone lines over to you, open forum, any public policy issue you want to talk about, phone lines are on your screen. democrats, republicans, independence, start calling in. we will get to your calls right after the break. it's ♪ ♪

>> wednesday the federal communications chair nominee and others testify at a confirmation hearing before the senate commerce science in transportation committee. watch live at 10 a.m. eastern on c-span3, online at c-span.org, or watchful coverage on c-span now, or video app. >> tuesday the homeland security secretary testifies on the border policies of immigration before the senate judiciary committee. watch live on c-span3, online or on c-span now, the new video app. >> get c-span on the go, watch today's biggest political events live, anytime, anywhere on the new mobile video app.

access highlights, c-span radio, discover new podcasts free. download c-span now today. >> weekends on c-span two are an intellectual feast, on american history tv and sunday, book tv brings you the latest in nonfiction books and authors, television for serious readers. learn, discover, explore, weekends on c-span two. >> saturdays on c-span two, exploring the people and events to tell the american story. brett mayer discusses his book, "to rescue the republic, the

fragile union and crisis of 1876," in which he argues that the ulysses s grant presidency has been underrated running in conjunction with the new york historical society exhibition turn every page, inside the robert caro archive, speakers including bob ward were. exploring the american story, watch american history tv saturday on c-span two with a full schedule on your program guide or watch online, anytime, at c-span.org/history. >> the c-spanshop.org is the c-span online store, browse to the latest collection of products, apparel, books, home to core, and accessories. there is something for every c-span fan and every purchase helps to support our nonprofit operations. shop now or anytime at c-span

shop.org. >> "washington journal" continues. host: the house will be coming in in about 20 minutes and when they do we will take you there live and until then, it's our open forum. any public policy political or state issue you want to talk about, the phone lines are yours. leading the discussion this morning, democrats, (202) 748-8000, republicans, (202) 748-8001, and independents, (202) 748-8002. surely, hot springs. good morning. caller: i watched you every morning. i wanted to look in the dictionary at that thing that people are concerned about. i wish everybody would do that. seems like when people call us white supremacist, everybody gets upset, but if they just

look in the dictionary they would laugh. it means being supreme. supreme authority of power. same as supreme justice judge. so, when they say that, call us white supreme missed, they are saying that we are as smart as a judge. [laughter] host: all right, that was surely. barbara, good morning. caller: i'm calling about the build back better policy. they talk about gas prices and driving and our clean air that we are supposed to have. but what about the planes flying above us every day, the jet fuel going out on the plains? also, all the cabin cruisers and motorboats in the ocean? what about the green new deal on all that? the other thing i wanted to mention about was medicare. the elderly are paying for

medicare part d, 100 and $49.60 a month out of their social security. and they are also paying a deductible, a yearly deductible over $200 per year for your first visit. the other thing i wanted to say is why it, why are the elderly paying out of medicare, the increase in that for the alzheimer's medication from the pharmaceutical companies? what's happening with the money that we were giving to afghanistan? $1 billion a day, where is that money going? thank you very much. host: that's barbara in the constitution state. rapid city, south dakota, the mount rushmore state, dennis, good morning. caller: good morning, thank you

for taking my call. i was an over the road truck driver for years. i was an owner operator and a company driver. i retired in 2010, about 11 years ago. they come out with electronic logs just before that. a lot of the older drivers finally got tired of, you get paid by the mile and up by the hour when you're on the road. that's restrictive. i'm not saying you should drive illegally or anything. i know it's a safety issue. but we have a trucker shortage and i would say that's a part of the problem. a lot of people don't want to be away from home like i was a month at a time. so anyway, i don't know what everybody else thinks about it, but that's one of the reasons we have a trucker shortage. anyway, thanks a lot for taking my call. host: before you go, what was your favorite run to make when you were a trucker?

caller: i ran 48 states in three canadian provinces, so i don't have a favorite. i started out with three and suddenly it was 11 western states in the last company i work for it was 48 states and three canadian provinces. host: is there a prettiest state to drive in? caller: i would say colorado. and then canada. you know? but you got a lot of restrictions when you run to canada. more now that you used to have. used to be just your commercial license. now you have to have a birth certificate and a passport. you know, not only that, but you've got to show that you been vaccinated. so much regulations that people finally say that's enough. anyway, i appreciate you taking my call and i hope i was a help to anybody thinking about driving truck. thank you. host: a few programming notes

for you today, we are expecting the homeland security secretary to be before the senate judiciary committee at 10 a.m. eastern, and at the same time the house is expected to come in and we will be airing that live with plenty of discussions about border security and that, airing on c-span3, c-span.org, you can listen to it and watch it on the c-span now video app and also today we are expecting more remarks from the president on the infrastructure bill from woodstock, new hampshire at 2:25 eastern, we will be airing those on the c-span now video app. back to your phone calls, constants in cape coral, florida, good morning. caller: good morning, dear. i've been very concerned about our company -- country. we know the coke brothers have a

monopoly on the food industry. so if they want to try to make the democrats look bad, they could cause trouble that way. the oil people, the saudi's are not our friends, they don't like us a bit. all of these awful autocrats that trump befriended is hurting our country. i feel we are so divided that only half the country is for the things i'm for, which is freedom for our black citizens and women , complete and utter freedom forever. that's my agenda. educate the children so they don't grow up believing in any propaganda. i am 69, honey. i grew up when we had education. we lived -- i lived through the 60's and we don't want that again. i swear if they touch one hair on my nancy pelosi's had to, i'm going to claw their frickin'

face off. host: all right, donald, you are next. caller: thank you for taking my call. as republicans and independents, we should all show how grateful we are now that merrick garland has shown his true colors in how willing he is to do the biden and his cabinet getting on anything that the justice department does. again, we should take time and thank the ones that were responsible for delaying him and keeping him off of the supreme court, because now that we have seen is -- his true colors, we know what a tragedy that would have been. i thank you for taking my call.

goodbye. host: earlier we mentioned that retirement announcement from patrick lahey, the senator from vermont. the headline from the burlington free press, leaving a legacy of humanitarianism and devotion to the state of vermont after nearly 50 years in congress, announcing his retirement yesterday. retirement announcements coming pretty quickly here. jackie spear, the democratic congressman from california, this was her retirement announcement from just this morning. [video clip] >> 43 years ago this week i was lying on an airstrip in the jungle with five bullet holes in my body and i doubt if i survived i would dedicate my life to public service. i lived and i served. it's been a remarkable journey that has surpassed my wildest dreams. today i'm announcing that i will not be a candidate for

reelection to congress in 2022. it's time for me to come home, time for me to be more of a weekend wife, mother, and friend . it's been an extraordinary privilege and honor to represent the people of san mateo county and san francisco at almost every level of government for nearly four decades. i have been deeply touched by your support during good times and bad. you have given me the latitude to fashion legislation that has truly changed the lives of thousands upon thousands of people. along the way i have met great human beings who are filled with goodness and generosity. many of them have become close personal friends that i treasure . there is still another year of representing your interests in congress and i intend to do my level best to support you in every way.

there is also another chapter or two in my book of life and i intend to contribute to you, the communities i love on the peninsula, and san francisco, and of the country that has given me so much. i have never forgotten that i have been given the opportunity to serve because of you. the office holds the power, not me. as i leave, i want to convey my deepest appreciation to you and urge you to protect our precious democracy. it is fragile and vulnerable. god bless you, god bless our troops, and god bless america. host: democrat jackie spear, her retirement announcement from early this morning. we will head out to california as we continue to take your phone calls and this open forum. this is ray, a democrat.

good morning. caller: this oil thing, in 1972i was two years away from getting my drivers license and we were told that oil on planet earth was almost all used up. here we are 50 years later, there's no oil crisis, there never was. it's all about supply and demand, whoever is in power, when republicans are in power they do what they do to raise the prices of everything. look at oil, just the money that oil companies give the public -- the politicians. it's in their vested interest to make the gas prices go high. i purchased my first electric car over a year ago and it has been one year since september that i purchased a gallon of gas. once you do it, it's great. host: what is you get? caller: a used nissan leaf for $4500. i use it to get around town, to

work, i work here in town, it's a great car. i filled up my old el camino gasoline car in september but that's it. the other car, it's more fun to drive, they are economical, no oil, no water, it's nothing, nothing to do. plug it into an outlet and charge it overnight at your house. host: plenty of funding for charging stations in yesterday's infrastructure bill. caller: yes, and $1500 in rebates on a new nissan leaf. i would heart -- highly recommend one. you don't do nothing. warm up the cars, you push the button, it turns on and you are gone into seconds. takes longer to put the seatbelt on. host: that's ray, happy customer in california. karen, good morning. caller: one thing that i have

been concerned about in the media is how they alter the president's speech or any person in congress holding office. i think it should be a federal offense. it's terrible. also, i would like to see americans get to choose what they want. maybe tax us more if we use public education, medicare for all, social security. the ones that want all private and want to pay the prophet, let them have a tax reduction. i just think that would be a simple solution. host: there is a place out there where you can watch those events in their entirety without editing and comment, that's here on c-span. if you want to watch these events and you are concerned about editing, tune into c-span, go to c-span.org, your list of scheduled events is there each

day and also the c-span video library with over 100,000 hours of video content, it's also a place where you can watch events in their entirety. daniel, tennessee, good morning to the volunteer state. caller: good morning, john, it's an honor to speak with you and the rest of the country. i was listening to the radio and they played an eagles song from where they performed in australia back in 2004. before they played and performed of song dirty laundry, they dedicated it to rupert murdoch. [laughter] this was 18 years ago. so, just, the brainwashing that is occurring from that fox media on the far right, it's just

disturbing. host: what do you watch, daniel? what stations do you trust? caller: i'm sorry, you're breaking up john, or whatever? host: what news stations do you watch? caller: you are breaking up on my end, sir. host: that's all right. a few calls left before the house comes in. cheryl, democratic line, good morning. caller: how are you this morning, john? host: doing well, go ahead. caller: my comment or observation that i've made since i've been following politics is that it's funny how come open we have a democratic president, they get bashed. i mean, seriously bashed in terms of especially when you are trying to do things that's going to benefit us as a whole. and what happens, what i noticed

, is that if we go back to clinton, when he was president, he left office balancing the budget. the republicans took over. when they took over, when they left office, they left a mess, ok? then you get another democratic president in there, they clean up things as best they can, they put out the fires, then we get another republican and they leave a mess. it's just a trend with the republicans. what happens is, they burn down the house and then when the democrats get in there and clean it up, the whole time they are in there, they complaining. so i think it's time for the american people to really take stock and stop allowing fox news , cnn, you know, to dictate, you know, their opinions. turn on c-span if you want to

know the truth and watch it and formulate your own opinion. that is my comment today, have a wonderful day. host: that's cheryl in california. tom, marlon 10, west virginia, independent, good morning. caller: with regards to voting in this country, in the 90's there was the motor voter bill. i have seen this happen in massachusetts. we have noncitizens registering to vote. you should have to prove citizenship to register to vote. when i hear people talk about how we have got to preserve our democracy, i totally agree with that. i don't care how you vote, republican, democrat, or independent. but the bottom line is you should have to prove citizenship

and it is under the penalty of perjury for this motor voter bill you've got people who are citizens registering to vote. host: we will end it there. the house is coming in for today. we will be back tomorrow. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2021] the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the chair lays before the house a communication from the speaker. the clerk: the speaker's rooms, washington, d.c. november 16, 2021. i hereby appoint the honorable tony cardenas to act as speaker pro tempore on this day. signed, nancy pelosi, speaker of the house of representatives. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the order of the house of january 4, 2021, the chair will now recognize members from lists submitted by the majority and minority leaders for morning hour debate. the chair will alternate recognition between the