thank you all very much. i hope you have a great weekend. [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] >> today the deputy administrator and director of the center for medicaid and chip services will give an update on u.s. health policy. live coverage at 2 p.m. eastern on c-span. online at c-span.org. or watch full coverage on c-span now. our new video app. >> c-span is your unfiltered view of government. we are funded by these television companies and more. including spark light. >> the greatest town on earth is the place you call home. at spark light it's our home, too. and right now we are all facing our greatest challenge. that's why spark light is working round-the-clock to keep you connected.

we are doing our part so it's a little easier to do yours. >> spark light supports c-span. as a public service. along were these other television providers. giving you a front row seat to democracy. continues. host: our first guest this morning is bill johnson, republican of ohio. thank you for giving us your time today, sir. guest: thanks are having me on. host: how did you vote on the issues that extended funding to keep the government from shutting down? guest: i voted no. this is no way to govern. continuing to govern with continuing resolutions rather than passing the appropriations bill that had been debated in congress. that is not the way to govern. besides that, voting for this bill would essentially be voting

to support the ongoing reckless spending and intrusion into the american people's lives with these vaccine mandates. no, i did not support it. host: we saw some of the senate side contemplating holding up the process over the mandates. was not aware the adventure as far as -- was that a worthy venture? guest: this is a very serious issue. the administration has crossed the line. the courts have said so. these vaccine mandates are unconstitutional. let me say from the outset that i believe the vaccines work. i am fully vaccinated. i have the booster shot. my wife is vaccinated. my son has begun the eight vaccination -- the vaccination process. i believe they are effective

keeping you out of the hospital, that of the icu and on a ventilator, and out of the grave. minimizing your symptoms. i also believe strongly it is not the prerogative of the federal government, the president or anyone else to try to tell the american people they have to get a vaccine. that should be an individual choice between a person and their doctor. host: only to the extent of private businesses under these mandates? what about the federal workers? guest: i don't think federal workers should have -- should be told to get the mandate either. or the vaccine either. that's an individual right. host: when it comes to this omicron variant, what is your level of concern as far as cases in the u.s.? guest: from what we have heard from the medical community the omicron variant has mild

symptoms. here is what we have to come to terms with. we have got to realize that this virus is here to stay, just like the flu, like the measles, the mumps, rubella, meningitis. this virus is here to stay. we have got to learn to live with it and deal with it without shutting our economy down every time it morphs. be prudent. talk to your doctor. get vaccinated, but i'm not thinking we should take extreme shutdown measures because of the omicron variant. host: you talked about mandates from the federal level. does the same type of thinking if a state wanted to mandate a locality, would you accept that as well or that the localities decide on their own?

guest: i believe most decisions are best made by states and local governments rather than unelected bureaucrats in washington that have no clue how normal american people live day-to-day. again, i don't think it is a government authority or right under our constitution to mandate people get a vaccine they don't want. host: our guest is with us until about 8:30. if you want to ask questions, you can call (202) 748-8001 for republicans. (202) 748-8000 for democrats. independents, (202) 748-8002. you can text us questions or comments that (202) 748-8003 -- at (202) 748-8003. the senate now has the build back better act. it was passed out of the house. could come back based on

what the senate does. tell us what you support it or not. guest: i don't know what it is going to look like when it comes back from the senate. we have heard, and i'm sure you for the same thing, senator sinema and senator manchin said this will not be voted on before the end of the year and the senate -- in the senate. it is likely to look different than it did when he went over from the house. i can tell you the biden administration, with the help of nancy pelosi and chuck schumer have already spent $4 trillion since they came into office. we just cannot continue this reckless spending spree. certainly not one that assaults the fossil fuel industry, oil and gas and coal, the energy sources that have lifted more people, including americans, out

of poverty than any energy source on the planet. and a steeper illegal immigrants, taxpayer funding for abortion, you name it. 80,000 new irs agents despite an americans' bank accounts. i don't think any other republicans will support that either. host: cnn reporting senator sinema will not commit us far supporting the package you talked about. there is a piece in the "washington post." they talked about the child tax credit portion of it. when it comes to the enhanced child tax credit, "it provided a lifeline to millions of families. about $.50 more for a gallon of milk. gasoline over three dollars.

hamburger nearing five dollars a pound. the analysis approaches the question backward. no child the size of the parent works. this is a child tax credit, not a parental workforce credit. policymakers face a choice. do you stand by and let one court of black and hispanic children continue to live in poverty." it makes other arguments. as far as supporting or not for the child tax credit, what you think of the argument? guest: if you think this extended child tax credit is going to get into the hands of children and they are going to have the decision on whether or not they buy groceries without money or not, you have another thing coming. that is not the case. what is amazing to me is that the child tax credit was a republican idea, by the way. remember, when republicans first enacted the child tax credit we did so with work requirements.

that is the problem with this extended child tax credit. we don't have a problem. republicans do not have a problem raising children out of poverty. we want to do that every way we possibly can. what we have a problem with our the parents that are simply taking that child tax credit and refusing to come back to work. we have one of the lowest labor participation rates we have had in a long time. contrast that with a few short months ago when we had the lowest unemployment in 50 years, the highest wages, the lowest taxes in five decades under the previous administration. this child tax credit without work requirements are incentivizing people to not come back to work. we need americans to come back to work. i hear it from employers every single day. it is not about providing for children.

it is about getting parents to be responsible. host: representative bill johnson of ohio, cochair of the house natural gas caucus, here to take your calls. lewis and saulsberry, north carolina, democrats line. go ahead with your question or comment. caller: thank you. top of the morning. it is ironic when you hear a republican talk in a manner that they do. everything is for the people. they have something to say about it. when it comes to giving tax breaks for their 1%, they are all for it. not only do they give tax breaks to the 1% indefinitely, they only give the american people tax breaks for two years. here is my question. what do you think about january 6? when you saw those white republicans in maga hats

chanting "hang mike pence" and put a bullet in nancy pelosi's head? guest: i don't know any of my constituents involved in criminal activity. if you know who they are, i would appreciate it if you tell me because i have not heard that. number two, i came out immediately and still stand by it. i think anyone who violated the law and participated in violence and invaded our nation's capitol should be prosecuted to the fullest dissent of the law. it is simply that -- fullest extent of the law. the rule of law should apply to everyone. does not matter the color of your skin or what your ethnic or nationality is. if you invaded the u.s. capitol and violated the law,

you should be prosecuted. i hope they get prosecuted quickly. host: representative johnson, there's a report today that 250 interviews done by the select committee looking at the affairs of january 6, including subpoenaing 40 people. what is your level of support for this effort? guest: there were already investigations going on. this selectivity is not really a select committee. all the members were chosen by nancy pelosi. very little republican input. i think we all know, and we can go into that if you want to -- we know where representative liz cheney and representative adam kinzinger stand on the issues. they are entitled to their opinion. this is pretty much a one-sided investigation over the top of doj investigations, senate investigations, arrests.

justice is underway with people that violated the law. that should continue until we get them all. no, i'm not in for a one-sided, democrat-led, partisan witchhunt that this appears to be. host: minority member mccarthy put nevers on the panel? guest: again, we made the case and we made it firmly that there were already investigations going on and the doj and the senate, the intel committee as well as the government oversight and regulations committee also had looked into these issues. these are criminal investigations. that is the way they should be handled. they should not be turned into partisan politics, which is what the democrats are trying to do with this select committee. host: john and herndon,

virginia. independent line. caller: good morning, pedro. my question to you -- good morning. my question to you is asked someone who has voted for the cares act, $1 trillion to $2 trillion in cost, along with republicans and democrats, my question is, as someone who has talked about reckless spending earlier in the show, under what circumstances do you think it is ok for congress to pass bills that are chileans of dollars in size? -- trillions of dollars in size? guest: you said under what conditions should congress pass legislation that is trillions of dollars in cost, that i understand that correctly? -- did i understand that correctly? caller: that's correct. guest: the national debt now

sits at nearly $29 trillion roughly. it is the biggest national security threat we have. you ask any of our current and former chairman of the joint chiefs of staff. they will tell you that. there has been, as i mentioned, over $4 trillion already spent by the biden administration. there is $1 trillion. $1 trillion sitting in the federal government that is supposed to be going out to the states for covid relief that has not even made it out of washington yet. why? many of the states do not have a process to be able to handle that volume, that amount of federal dollars. i travel up and down the longest district east of the mississippi, eastern and southeastern ohio. i hear from mayors and county

commissioners and township trustees all the time. don't send us any more money. we cannot handle the money you spent -- that have already sent. by the way, on top of that you have got the infrastructure bill. another $1.2 trillion that will be coming their way. now this social reengineering reconciliation so-called build back better. i call it let me take you higher. what is that going to do? it is going to cause inflation to go higher. it will cause utility prices and electricity costs for average americans, for all americans to go higher. it will cause the cost of virtually everything from gas at the pumps to the grocery store to go higher. it is not going to build a better economy. it is going to build a far more expensive economy, costs that

rural americans i represent simply do not have. we have got the stuff this reckless, out-of-control spending. there is no question about that. host: the president announced he will release oil from the strategic petroleum reserve. what do you think about that decision and what it means for the larger decisions made about energy in the united states? guest: at the height of our energy independence in the previous administration america was producing some 13 million barrels of oil a day. we did not have to rely on opec, russia, venezuela or saudi arabia or anyone else for our energy resources. now under the biden administration that number has plummeted in the event of production we had. they are shutting down pipelines that would transfer that oil from the field to refineries, as well as from the refineries to

the gas pump and he people's homes -- heat people's homes. i'm concerned that you have the administration saying they want to protect what we have at the same time they are trying to throttle the development and production of oil and gas domestically, begging opec and russia to pick up the slack. now they want to take oil out of the strategic stockpile. that strategic stockpile is supposed to be there for an emergency, not for mismanagement. that is what this is. divide into administration has mismanaged -- the biden administration has mismanaged our energy portfolio. we are looking at upwards of 54% increase in utility costs this cold winter. look at what's happened in europe. europe has tried many of these

measures, this rush to green. you cannot fuel america's energy grid with wind in solar -- and solar and biofuel alternative energy sources alone. fossil fuels, oil and gas and coal and nuclear are the triad of the base load for america's energy grid. to deny that is to deny us, the american people, the right to a healthy economy. i think it is wrong. i want to make this final point. this taking oil out of the national strategic stockpile is just another part of the formula to eliminate america's reliance and resilience on fossil fuels. who was going to replace that amount of oil taken out of the strategic stockpile? at the same time we are

dampening domestic production? are we going to go out and buy the oil now from opec or the russians or venezuela? what an irresponsible move to make. host: let's hear from jennifer in katy, texas, republican line. caller: good morning. i have a question about early treatment. there is a 71-year-old man who was in the hospital, in the icu with covid. the daughter had to go to court to get treatment. i was wondering why republicans are not working harder to allow early treatment. will you be able to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the fda, the cdc, and why they are blocking these treatments? guest: as you may know, it is

not congress that appoints special prosecutors. that is something the president through the department of justice has to do. we can certainly call for one. i have had this question a lot. i think treatment for covid needs to be a decision between the patient and their doctor. we have one of the most -- we have the most, best medical scientific communities on the planet. we are the ones that developed the vaccine in record time. when you consider that 90% of the people in hospitals today from covid are unvaccinated, that 95% of those in icus and on ventilators are unvaccinated, and 98% of those that have died

from covid since the vaccines came out were unvaccinated, i think that is pretty compelling proof that the vaccines work, that they are effective in minimizing symptoms and keeping you out of the hospital, off the ventilator, and certainly out of the grave. this issue of not being able to get treatment, some states -- i don't know about your state specifically -- but it's an issue with the state licensing boards. some state health associations have told her licensing boards not to allow doctors to prescribe certain remedies for covid. things like ivermectin and remdesivir. nothing has come out of congress that has placed those restrictions on treatment. so, i do believe people within

those states need to go to their state officials and find out why they are not being able to get the treatments that they need and deserve. that is a state-by-state issue. i don't believe that is a federal issue restricting treatment. host: lizzie on the democrats line. caller: good morning, c-span. good morning, representative bill johnson. one of the questions, why don't you support the mandates? the situation in indiana and a lot of the republican states, most of them, there are more dead people in the republican states because of the disinformation being told to them. i think it goes on fox and their

social media and other things. our government needs to do something about that. and, i think the ag should have an independent investigation on our own former president who inflicted this, you know, problem we had on the 6th, the insurrection. a bunch of the people in our government are part of it. that is why we need an ag to get into this and find out who has done this. host: thank you. guest: let me answer your second question first. the doj has investigated. i think they ought to charge anybody that violated the law

and they need to prosecute anybody and everybody that violated the law. that has been my position all along. i don't think you and i disagree with that. the question is how it is done and whether it is done under the rule of law or whether it is turned into a political witchhunt. that is the problem i have with it. back to your question about the vaccine mandates, look, i made it very clear. i have said it several times on the show this morning. i believe the vaccines are effective. i believe if you can't get the vaccine -- if you can get the vaccine, you should get the vaccine. i believe they minimize symptoms, they keep you out of the hospital and off the ventilator. i believe they keep you out of the grave. i do not believe that it is within the authority of the president of the united states or any other elected official to mandate a requirement that a

person get a shot that they might not want to get. i believe personally there are better ways to entice the american people and incentivize the american people to get these vaccines. i spent 27 years in the air force. i have had dozens of vaccinations over my lifetime. i believe we have the best scientific medical community and the world. i believe we are effective in fighting off diseases and viruses like covid with a vaccines we have. but we cannot determine day-to-day and oscillate back and forth about which parts of the constitution of the united states we want to support and which ones we don't. it is not just my opinion. federal judges that are steeped

in their knowledge of the constitution have also said that the mandates by president biden are unconstitutional. they have placed stays on them. let me go a step further and tell you this. i believe employers have rights under the constitution just like individuals do. employers sign a paycheck on the front side. they can tell you what time to come to work. they can tell you how to wear your hair. they can tell you to wear uniform or not. they tell you how much you will get paid. they will tell you how many vacation days a year and how many sick days you get. employers have rights under the constitution as well. if an employer wants to require their employees get a vaccine in order to work at their company, i think that is a very different question.

i think the employer then takes the risk. if you lose employees, you might want to rethink that. we have a workforce problem. we have people walking off the job simply on principle, making emotional decisions because they are not going to be told by an elected official, whether it is the president of the united states or anybody else, they have to get a vaccine. host: one more question before we let you go. we saw representative johnson and a sharp back-and-forth between marjorie taylor greene and nancy mace over various issues. what did you think of the back-and-forth? is this a bad look for the republican party in the house? guest: you have to look across the spectrum. we have seen the same kind of thing on the democrats side. i personally believe interparty squabbles and much of the

squabbles across the aisle are beneath the integrity of this institution. i did not come here to fight with my colleagues. i came here to debate with my colleagues about the policies that are good for the people i represent and for the country we are so honored and humbled to live in. to protect the liberties we have been blessed with. hi don't believe this is a right way to govern. i think it is a distraction. i would urge everybody, no matter what party you are in, step back, take a deep breath and ask yourself, is this how i want to be remembered having been elected to the house of representatives? the most powerful legislative body on the planet. i think it might give people cause to stop and think. host: representative bill

johnson >> today the deputy administrator and director for medicaid and chip services will give and update on u.s. health policy, live coverage beginning at 2:00 p.m. on c-span, online at c-span.org or watch full coverage on c-span now, our new video app. >> book tv, every sunday on c-span2, features leading authors discussing their latest nonfiction books. at noon eastern, live on "in depth," historian and conservative commentator victor hanson will be our guest. join our two-hour conversation as he talks about his books, war, politics and citizenship in the united states. at 20:00 p.m. afterwards, former congressman doug collins talks about the events leading up to the this first impeachment of

donald trump in his book "the clock and the calendar." he's interviewed by colorado republican congressman ken buck. watch book tv. every sunday on c-span2. and find a full schedule on your program guide. or watch online any time at book tv.org. -- at booktv.org. >> without the advances we've made in efficiency and in renewables, for example, i think we certainly our circumstances would be much more serious than they are today. at the same time, we've really been entirely focused on that kind of approach to climate change for the last 20 years and we have yet to see a single year in which there has been an absolute reduction in global carbon emissions without there being an accompanying recession or pandemic. in other words, a circumstance in which the world slows down

its shopping. >> sunday on "q&a," what would happen to the economy and the environment the world cut consumption by 25%? j.b. mckinnon discusses that in his book "the day the world stops shopping," arguing we are currently using up the world's resources at a rate that's unsustainable. sunday night at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span's "q&a." listen on our new c-span now app. >> up next, remarks by president biden on world aids day. he ad leuned the administration's strategy to end the epidemic in the united states. this is about half and hour >> the president of the united states, accompanied by