u.s. and nato are responding to russian troops on the ukraine -- on the ukraine border. join the discussion with your phone calls, facebook messages, texts and tweets. "washington ♪ host: good morning and welcome to washington journal. with the omicron variant of covid-19 spreading, debates over vaccine mandates are intensifying again. congressional republicans in the white house are at loggerheads over the idea of mandates for private businesses. courts around entry have issued conflicting rulings. forcing workers to decide whether to quit or get fired.

what is your view of vaccine mandates? special lines this morning. if you support vaccine mandates, (202) 748-8000. if you oppose vaccine mandates, (202) 748-8001. you can always text us at (202) 748-8003. we are always reading on social media. on facebook, twitter and instagram. the omicron variant of covid-19 is spreading throughout the united states. with many people wondering whether the government should either abandon or intensify its vaccine mandates. this debate has been going on on capitol hill this week and also in the courts.

we will go to a story from the hill to set up our conversation this morning. the gop's legal pushback against president biden's vaccine mandate is limiting his effort to get more people vaccinated. a string of recent court rulings have halted mandates for workers . republican state officials have backed court challenges and celebrated rulings in their favor. some gop lawmakers are pushing to block for government funding deal unless it do funds the vaccine mandate. especially at a time when the new omicron variant poses a threat.

the gop tried to hold up government funding bill to defund the vaccine mandates from the president. but the bill ended up going through and biden has already signed the stopgap measure to avert the shutdown. president joe biden signed a stopgap bill friday to avert a government shutdown just hours ahead of midnight deadline. party leaders brokered a deal to overcome brinksmanship over

vaccine mandate. it ended a standoff that has threatened to trigger shutdown with a small number of republican senators who held out the possibility of holding up a quick vote on the funding bill. of this comes as we have been dealing with the omicron variant which showed up first overseas and is now here in the united states. the omicron variant has already been found in 16 states. the highly mutated omicron variant had been reported in 16

states. many of the cases appeared to be people who had traveled to south africa recently. an infected person in hawaii who had not traveled outside the state and a man in minnesota who attended an anime convention. right now the omicron variant is in the united states and so far in 16 states. president biden announced steps that he thinks will help contain the omicron variant.

here's what president biden had to say. >> as we face the challenges of this new variant, this is a moment when we can put divisiveness behind us. get the nation to come together. to protect our economic recovery and think of it in terms of the patriotic responsibility. while my existing federal vaccination requirements have been reviewed by the courts, this plane does not expand or add to those mandates.

and it should get bipartisan support in my humble opinion. >> republicans in congress. republican senator mike lee came out to the senate floor to lay out his objections to more vaccine mandates. >> each of us did swear an oath. you can search it, you will not find that authority. the constitution does not grant the president the authority to implement such a mandate without the explicit authorization of the people selected lawmakers in congress.

this mandate is not only immoral , it's also unconstitutional. the harms certainly don't stop with the damage that's being done to our constitutional order. millions of americans are at risk of losing their jobs due to this mandate. while court orders are offering temporary protection, these americans are still anxiously awaiting lasting protection from congress and could receive at a moments notice the final ultimatum to be vaccinated or lose their jobs. in fear of the huge fines the biden administration is threatening against businesses that don't comply, many key companies are -- have reached

out to me. their stories are heart wrenching. these are good people. their neighborhood businesses and americans manufacturers. mothers and fathers trying to get by in increasingly difficult economic times. over half a million workers in utah alone are at risk of unemployment due to this mandate. i'm not against the vaccine. my family is getting the vaccine. i've encouraged people to get the vaccine. i am against the mandate.

i recognize these vaccines are protecting americans from the harms against covid-19 and that the government has no justification to make hundreds -- millions of americans unemployable pariahs. >> we want to know what you think about vaccine mandates. tyrone is calling from new york, new york. he supports the mandates. caller: i do. i support the mandate because we already know that a lot of human beings are not going to do the right thing. we had to fight a war to stop the enslavement of people in this country. if he doesn't do anything to the mandates, people are going to say he didn't do anything to

stop the death of other human beings. he's in a catch 22. it seems to me a lot of these republicans just like to create anarchy. we already know what they are doing. now they are paying people unemployed. these people are here to just muck up. i wish biden would continue with the mandates to save peoples's lives. these people need to be able to be protected.

since the pandemic. host: are you vaccinated? caller: i am vaccinated. i'm going to take my booster. they're starting to go after the people in my job. people don't want to get tested. it's like your child. when you tell a child to take medicine and they start falling on the floor. these people are acting similar to your 3-year-old or 4-year-old and now children are acting better than the adults. caller: i find it highly

hypocritical that biden is going to do these mandates on american citizens with the border is wide open and this total idiot is perfectly letting people in this country and he lies when he is at these hearings saying they are going to try to push out people that are no good. he ain't doing nothing. he's lying through his teeth under oath. you can't mandate american citizens. these aliens are being shipped all over the country in the dark of night. if it's so wonderful to do, why are they sneaking people around. you can't have illegals that could be sickened: over the place and then found she says he doesn't want to get political

about it. the original deal was mandates as far as masks, sterilization and social distancing. closing off the streets and towns is absolutely stupid. host: are you vaccinated? caller: i am not. lots of people for, airports. from day one i said not going to get that thing. host: how do you keep yourself safe? caller: i'm in close quarters obviously. i drive people all over the place. i open the window and there the

car out periodically. and i've been perfectly fine all day long. my doctor said i'm perfectly fine. he doesn't recommended because my bloodwork was perfect. host: rob calls from new york. caller: well at least that last collar is wearing a mask. he would be a thousand times better off if he cut the simple vaccine. i've had both my original vaccine back in march and i recently got the maternal booster. little to no problems. i'm on a text thread with many friends. there's a lot of misinformation. people like the last color, he really should just get the jab just like millions of other

people who are refusing. the republican party has really become like this opposition cult . on fox there was a report that one of the spokes people fox is comparing dr. fauci, a guy that has devoted his life to science and is brilliant and they smear him and one woman from fox was comparing him to dr. mengele from nazi germany. which is absolutely insane and disgusting. the opposition cult republican party. they will just come up with any bs, any punchline, any phrase on an angle of entry school level -- elementary school level. i've never been afraid for this

country. i think their enemies around the world enjoying the way in which the sides are so opposed to one another in this country that we have such bigger fish to fry around this country. vaccines are just ordinary and routine at this point. they are not something that people have to make some spectacular disagreement over. all of this misinformation is useless and it's killing people and started with our former president. host: have you been vaccinated? caller: i had my johnson & johnson.

it's not the mrna and it will save your life. it's really like getting a flu shot. host: tom is calling from ohio. caller: the legal liability of companies that have people that are unvaccinated like your caller that drives the delivery service. is he informing the people that ride in his car that he is unvaccinated? and if he gets sick, is the company he works for legally likable -- legally liable to be sued? they will give you a traffic ticket for running a red light. it's your choice to run the red light, but the rules don't apply

to them which is one major problem we have with cops all over the country. if you go to hospital, i'm an older person. i got the booster. an older person goes into a hospital and has no idea if the nurses working on them have been vaccinated. come on. where is the legal liability for these companies? can they be sued? can the government be sued or someone getting sick in a facility where that state fights this mandate. host: before the president signed the stopgap to keep that

open, nancy pelosi talked about the threats to hold up government funding over vaccine mandates. >> how do they explain to the public that they are shutting down government because they don't want people to get vaccinated. why don't you ask them? this is so silly that we have people who are anti-science, anti-vaccination saying they are going to shut down government over that. our message is we have to respect governance and science and that's what we are doing and we will pass this legislation. we are not going to go for anti-vaccine. host: let's see what our social media followers think of the vaccine mandate.

here's a post from facebook that says necessary if we ever hope to get out of this pandemic because there is way too much that information and people are literally using veterinary medicine. here's a tweet that says i have mixed emotions about the vaccine mandates. this is an airborne illness so i would support mandating masks indefinitely. another says, absolutely support. this is our best chance to turn fatal infections into a manageable solution. another tweet says totally unjust. no disease with the survival rate of 90% needs vaccines.

freedoms lost forever. another says, covid is part of our landscape now. we all have to play the game or we all lose. we want to know what is your view of the vaccine mandate? a poll asks americans whether they thought that january 4 2022 deadline or health care workers to be fully vaccinated. you can see from the poll results that 33% of all voters say that january 4 deadline is just right. 39% of voters say that it should not be required.

so there is not a majority of americans who say that january 4 deadline is too much or too little but 39% say they don't think the deadline should be enforced while 33% say that's just right. we want to know what you think about vaccine mandates. victoria is calling from wisconsin. caller: good morning. i would like to start by saying i am fully vaccinated. i have had a booster a month ago. i am totally 100% opposed to mandating vaccinations for people because my idea is that if you're going to mandate it for americans, why aren't you

mandating that all of these illegals that are crossing over the borders just get to come in and they are dispersed and dispensed all across the united states. you know what they are bringing in? how can you tell american citizens that they have to do something when you're not willing to tell people who are coming into our country illegally, have added. that's not how the united states is, was or should be. host: lori calls from naples, florida. caller: i would like to address the fact that i believe the incentive for wearing masks should have been for people to

protect themselves, not for other people. any behavioral autonomous will tell you that the incentive wasn't wrong. people thought they were protecting themselves only from the very beginning, i believe many more people would be vaccinated and would want to wear masks as opposed to helping other people. it's sad to say that's the way things are. there is no r in omicron. if you could pronounce it the great -- the correct way that would be great. i have cancer. it's not fatal or anything.

i've been vaccinated five times. four my journal and one j&j and i've been tested twice and i carried new antibodies to the vaccine. so it's been hard for me. i would rather live that way then died. i'm negative for the spike protein antibody. we will see what happens. host: robin is calling from mercer island, washington. caller: i can kind of relate to murray from florida. i'm in nino compromised and when

i went to get my first shot i had an anaphylactic reaction. -- or i could get covid again. i got sick early and i was sick for six months with covid. i don't have a right answer here. i just don't feel it people should be penalized for choosing to work with covid the way they think to work with that. i can't get vaccinated because

it will kill me. i have researched all the vaccines and novavax looks like potentially reasonable option. host: you said you have to go to the doctor alert. part of the vaccine mandates were for health-care workers. do you think your doctors or nurses should have the vaccine or should also have the choice about whether they want to be vaccinated? >> i worked in a hospital for years. we had to take our flu shot every year. we had to be up-to-date on all about other shots. as an institution that chose to make that necessary.

i think doctors in a facility know very well what needs to be done. honestly there's been so many breakout infections from people that have been vaccinated. i have to be really careful about who can come over to my home. i'm a hermit. i just think it shouldn't be in federal mandate land to make that requirement. host: would it be ok if the doctors office mandate that everyone who worked in his office would be vaccinated? caller: yes exactly. i think it should be up to the institution or business owner

how they go about deciding if it's important for their employees. face coverings should be absolutely mandatory for everybody. that is originally how we held down the fort. people are still getting infections in vaccinated which tells me we don't have vaccines that are 100% effective. host: greg is calling from chattanooga, tennessee. caller: i can't believe people are still discussing this. there's three reasons i would never take the vaccination. you've got bill gates on ted talks talking about how he could

lower 10% to 15% with the use of vaccines. everyone can watch it on youtube. host: jane is calling from payola, pennsylvania. caller: i'm just calling to say that every time i hear people against mandating the vaccine i just roll my eyes and go berserk because anybody that has raised children and sent them from kindergarten on up, you have to prove they've had all their vaccinations. where would we be in this country if people hadn't had their vaccinations for polio and whooping cough. we are trying to help save everyone. i think it's just become too politicized.

but mainly i wanted to say if you sent your kids to school, did you ever complain that you had to prove they were vaccinated? no. we just did it. host: a three-judge panel on the fifth u.s. circuit court of appeals held up a rule that would have required the covid-19 vaccine mandate and i want to bring to you what judge kurt englehart said about the mandate. the prescriptions combined to make it the rare government pronouncement that is both overinclusive with little attempts to account for the obvious differences between the risks facing a security guard on a lonely night shift and a

meatpacker working shoulder to shoulder in a cramped warehouse, and underinclusive. making no attempt to shield employees with 98 or fewer coworkers from the very same threat. the mandates stated impetus -- it's promulgation grossly exceeds versus statutory authority. when that three-judge panel stated the enforcement of the biden administration's covid-19 vaccine mandate. we want to know what you think about the vaccine mandates. cory is calling from harvey

illinois. good morning. >> i wanted to say amen to that woman. she was spot on with what she said. biden has lost the moral authority. he and kemal harris the first people that when asked about the vaccination said, we won't take it until trump as president. so they were the first people that made this into politics. the larger point is the moral authority. biden has lost the moral authority. you cannot go out there and tell people, now that i'm president you should take the vaccine.

host: have you taken the vaccine? caller: yes. i've been vaccinated and i have my booster. host: do you think people should be mandated to take vaccines? >> no. you should not be mandated. i've had the vaccine and the booster, but it was my choice. i don't believe you should force anyone else because that's what you believe. as far as the school vaccines, biden is out there trying to tell people, take the vaccines. you've got millions of people pouring across the border illegally and they are not mandated to have vaccines.

we saw biden exempted postal service workers. why did you exempt them? host: margaret is calling from texas. good morning. >> there is so much there. the government does have the authority to mandate. under the clause that he can take actions for the well-being of the population of the united states. there is the authority for the mandate and the constitution. that was a downright lie that biden harris didn't say that at all.

and i look back, i'm 94 and my children, all of them over 60. one of them is 61. i think what would have happened to them if i had said they are not going to take the polio vaccine because i don't believe in being told to take a vaccine. they'll have their vaccination shots before they went to school. and people who are anti-science. everything in their house from refrigerators to anything they use each day is based on science. and yet they will not believe

the science that says this vaccine works. they never said it was 100 percent effective. it was in the high 80's or 90's depending on the vaccine. i've had my three shots. still when i go to the grocery store, i wear our mask. i can breathe it in and hold it in my nose. go to the grocery store and breathe it out on someone who is vulnerable. host: jonathan calls from georgia. caller: that last collar, 94. she sounded really sharp.

back in the day if you had polio, you didn't need to get vaccinated. you had natural immunity to it. if you had measles, you had natural immunity to it. there's all kinds of vaccines there that aren't mandated. the survival rate for this virus is way north of 90%. 90% of the people who have sadly died with this virus or over 50 years of age. nearly 30% were 85 and had one or more comorbidities. do they need to take the vaccines? do they need to be mandated, forced to take the vaccines? of course not.

even the cdc said the vaccines do not stop transmission. learn the facts. given that fact, the vaccines only protect those who take the vaccine presumably. no one else. worry about yourself. host: have you been vaccinated? caller: i had covid 21 months ago. i have robust strong natural immunity. i have strong t cell and b cell memory cell community. i wish you would have someone who has over 40 different peer-reviewed paper on this.

a cardiologist from texas a&m, dr. peter mccullough, who is not compromised by other special interests, big pharma, and speaks the truth honestly. host: jane is calling from akron, ohio. caller: i wish the government would get the thing cleared up about the people coming over this border that's not vaccinated supposedly. my understanding is that the ones who are vaccinated are the ones that come in legally. the ones that come in illegally possibly are not vaccinated. in the next thing, all these people called in with all these different reasons why they were not going to get vaccinated

because they can't sue anybody. if you are dead, you can't sue anybody anyway. i've had a couple relatives died. they all wish they had taken the vaccine. so all of you people with this ignorant stuff listening to fox news, you're crazy. thank you. host: richard calls from hagerstown, maryland. caller: the guy who said that the cdc said the transmission rate are the same. the fall back on the fact that it protects you from serious disease or death. the deaths are higher before the

vaccine then before. host: are you saying that deaths are higher before there was a vaccine? caller: since we've had the vaccine, more people have died. so where's the evidence that it protects against death. where is the breakthrough? host: i can tell you if you get the flu vaccine, that's not a guarantee. >> we talk about mandated to go to school. host: have you been vaccinated against covid-19?

caller: no. host: how are you keeping yourself safe? caller: i'm living my life. host: representative dan newhouse talked about legislation he wants to exempt critical workers from vaccine mandates. >> our country is in a time of crisis. president biden's policies have caused nationwide shortage and delays. federal employees are facing termination over what should be a personal medical decision. they don't deserve to be fired. that's why i introduced the exemptions for nickel workers act to ensure these critical workers who kept our industries

functioning can make the health decision that is right for them while continuing their important work. three federal courts halted the mandate in some parts of the country. clearly these mandates are unconstitutional. i urge my colleagues to support my legislation. host: here's a post from facebook that says terrible and unconstitutional. a tweet that says i will get every booster until i'm 94. another tweet that says it's either mandates or restrictions. which would you rather have?

a vaccine that is ineffective should not be forced. one-size-fits-all doesn't respond as health care. biden has to do this because he wants americans to be healthy and some of you won't listen. i would support mandates 100% if we were dealing with an apocalyptic pathogen. let's meet the challenge and not panic. james is calling from georgia. good morning.

caller: how are you this morning? host: go ahead, james. caller: what the problem is i think is a lot of the american people don't want to take a shot because of these illegals come over. they just run wherever they send them to. host: sean is calling from baltimore, maryland. caller: good day to you. i'm totally against it. florida has not mandated the vaccine down there.

you look at the state of california. newsom has mandated california has just as many covid debts as florida. they have the same number of deaths. so what's the point of the mandate? i just don't see the point. he's making everybody get the vaccine and in california they're making you get the vaccine and in florida you are not. i haven't looked at the data recently. but florida is doing way better. the government should not tell a business what to do and vice versa. texas was telling businesses that you can't mandate your employees to get the vaccine. if you own a business, you run

your business how you want to. the vaccine mandate just doesn't make sense. you read a tweet that was like apocalyptic, raccoon city. that's not what we have here. host: cheryl calls from pittsburgh, new york. caller: i don't think it's appropriate for anyone to walk in anywhere and ask if you have been vaccinated. it's inappropriate, it's disgusting actually. this mandate is not conducive to the virus. the virus is highly survivable. it's treatable. we have treatments that are 85%

to 100% effective yet we are going with the vaccine and it's really not a vaccine, we are going with a vaccine that doesn't even have that kind of efficacy. we have not opened there and investigated theirs. it's a government run website. why aren't they investigating? with the swine flu virus, they stopped the shop. children are not drivers of the spread. it's a fact. it's disturbing. i'm not sure why people are even questioning this. we need to live our lives like we always have. if you want to wear a mask because you think it's going to protect someone else, you haven't done your reading. but go ahead.

don't force it on me. host: craig calls from oklahoma. caller: i want to give an honest analysis of why there is resistance. the fact that the polio vaccine is really causing the most resistance to this, people taking this one. because the definition of vaccine truly is lessen the effects. but the problem is after polio happened in america saw that, they believed that it would stop and illness. what's causing that resistance is with polio, you wouldn't get crippled if you took it. so they thought it was a cure. that's what's causing the resistance. if americans feel you are not

being honest with them, they will back off. i hope keep -- people can resolve this and we can be healthy. we just need to be told directly with this vaccine does. people can make their decision based on their own personal choices. host: a former administrator talked about the requirement to vaccinate health care workers and what she thought would happen if they tried to force. forcing the resignation of unvaccinated health care workers could lead to the closing of hospitals and nursing homes, especially in rural errors -- areas. the consequences could lead to

life-and-death issues for patients across the country. we are talking about individuals who have already entered the stress of losing patience to covid-19. about the requirement for health care workers. bob is calling from louisville, kentucky. good morning. caller: good morning. i had friends that took the coronavirus shot. next week later they got the virus. what's the purpose of the shot if it don't stop the virus?

host: joe is calling from bedford, maine. caller: good morning and thanks for taking my call. i just had a few points. a year ago before vaccines, if you got it, you were dying. and nothing is 100%. and it is a vaccine. of course it's a vaccine. nothing is 100%. no vaccine is 100%. and these people saying it's the flu, that's just preposterous. approaching 800,000 people killed. that's not going to happen with the flu. the other question is we have tuberculosis. any job i've ever taken you have

to have a blood parade. -- pricked. a woman brought up hepatitis. you can be charged as a criminal for endangering people's lives. these people that don't want to wear a mask, the result is that you don't get to fly. all these people that are saying florida ain't so bad, that guy better check his stats and check what's going on in florida. people will believe anything. you know who said that? donald trump. host: josie is calling from indiana, pennsylvania.

caller: good morning. i'm amazed listening to many of my fellow americans coming in and spouting all sorts of ridiculous theories that are coming from internet illogical sites. i'm very surprised. vaccinations are to protect everyone. my children are vaccinated against mumps, measles and rubella. i get a flu shot every year because it's necessary. sometimes i get a mild case of the flu depending on how the variant has changed when i get my shot. i think that we have forgotten the we in america and we have become so individualistic that we think the world revolves around us and i think what covid has shown us is it revolves

around all of us. it's a global pin to make -- pandemic that needs to be curtailed. if we don't stop or lessen it, it's continually going to mutate. host: mark calls from columbia, south carolina. caller: good morning. i just want to make a comment about civic responsibility. i think people aren't understanding that as americans we have the civic responsibility and our president is asking us to get vaccinated. i think they've done a great campaign and showing people getting vaccinated. i can't think of anybody that they've had on tv or in their

campaign that's had the vaccine that's gotten the virus or died from it. i think we should take those examples into account. there's so many people calling in talking about this person got a vaccine. there is so much misinformation out there and i think people should take their civic responsibility because we used to have that civic understanding. i think we've lost it in the schools, we've lost it and everything. my family's been vaccinated. i think people should take this virus more seriously and thank you. host: we would like to thank all of our collars and social media followers did of next, a political roundtable discussion

on campaigns 2022 and 2024 with b.j. martino and jim manley. later, ben hodges will be here to discuss the massing of russian troops on the ukraine border and how the u.s. and nato are responding. we will be right back. >> without the advances we have made inefficiency and renewables, i think certainly our circumstances would be much more serious than they are today. at the same time, we have 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, a circumstance in which the world closes down its shelving. >> what would happen to the economy if the world cut consumption by 25%. he discusses this in his book, arguing we are currently using up the world's resources at a rate that is unsustainable. tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span's q&a. >> this week on the c-span network, both chambers of congress in session, the house will take up a bill to prevent abuses of presidential power and protect against foreign intervention in elections.

and also the confirmation of the next sec chair. -- fcc chair. house oversight committee looks at threats posed by terrorist organizations like al qaeda and isis with counterterrorism heads from the fence department. then on c-span-3, the inspector general of the u.s. capitol police testifies in an oversight hearing i the senate rules and administration committee, following january 6 attacks. and then a meeting on u.s. relations with chest -- russia as they get more troops on the border of ukraine. the house financial services looks at cryptocurrencies and other digital assets with testimony from ceos of several digital currency companies. at 2:00 p.m. eastern, the instagram ceo testifies before a

senate commerce subcommittee on efforts to protect kids online. watch this week on the c-span networks or watch our full coverage on c-span now, our new video app also head over to c-span.org for scheduling information. >> "washington journal" continues. host: we are going to have a roundtable discussion of the biden agenda and the 2022 and 2024. joining us this morning our bj martino and republican pollster and jim manley, a democratic strategy and senior counsel at atc a worldwide. good morning.

let's look at the most recent job numbers. i want you to tell me how this affects the biden agenda and the upcoming election. we will go to the wall street journal story that says hiring slow last month amid covert uncertainties and assigned that the tight labor market could be loosening. 210,000 jobs in november, the smallest gain since last summer and a mark slowdown from an increase of 546 thousand in october. what do those job numbers tell us about the biden agenda? guest: it tells us the numbers aren't going to do anything about helping the biden's standing with the american elector. when you look at his job approval rating, it covers in the low 40's. to get a jobs number back that is less than half of the

expected number shown for the month is not going to improve that. it is going to have an impact on his capacity to get things done on the hill, which he hasn't shown much capacity to do that, but it is going to continue to drive this sense of disappointment that is existing among his own democratic base. when we look at numbers overall, the 42 roughly that approve of the job he is doing. in the democratics, that number is 80's manatt bad for president but lacks intensity when you look underneath the hood of that approval from democrats, you see only half of the democratic base strongly approving of the job he is doing. there is a growing sense of disappointment over the lack of this administration's ability to get things done. it starts with the base but

spreads among independent voters and republicans have obviously been there for a long time. host: is he right? guest: with all due respect, no, well, some of it is. i would say it is slightly different. first of all, the top line number of the jobs report was disappointing. it is no doubt about it. the unemployment rate continues to tick down to 4.2%. to the extent you can look ahead to next year at the election, it will revolve around the economy and to a lesser degree covid. a key part of getting the economy in place is continued effort to try to wrestle this

covid disease or infection, to a place where everyone can feel more comfortable getting out. again, we could spend hours talking about the numbers. we have seen in the last couple of months there have been revision of previous numbers that keep on spiking up in a dramatic fashion. i am no expert on how to analyze these numbers, but it seems the numbers that keep on getting reported change and are revised in the next couple months later and they keep on showing the economy is in a decent spot all and all, though there are still problems. every democrat on capitol hill has to recognize that. host: jim, at what point do we start blaming the current administration and stop saying it is covid causing the problem?

are you worried about voters saying it is not code but the leadership? -- it is not covid but the leadership? guest: covid is such a tricky thing and adds such an impact to the economy. i think -- i think that this administration has done a heck of a lot better than the previous administration. throw in the fact that it was a political war about how republicans are trying to talk down this thing and try to do everything they can to try to undermine what the administration is trying to do when it comes to dealing with covid. i think the administration has done a good job. but they are going to own it.

the buck stops with the white house and with the president. my issue is that republicans are doing everything they can to try to undermine what the president wants to do. we saw another vote in the senate to try to eliminate mayonnaise -- eliminate mandates and there will be another vote next week using an expedited procedure. host: b.j., at what point do think the voters will say the covid pandemic caused a lot of these issues? maybe it wasn't just the leaders but it was an extraordinary time and we should give them another chance? guest: there is a sense for the first six months of the presidency that voters had the capacity to say there are problems insisted in the first six months are not by the current administration.

they are willing to give that level of grace and part of the honeymoon of any new presidency. for the biden administration what happened after the first six months was afghanistan. that is not only an issue in and of itself that eroded the faith of the administration but you can clearly see in the decline of joe biden's job approval from late july to august and really through much of september, a steep decline in his job approval rating as a result of that. it didn't just hang onto that issue, then it began to open up questions in voters' minds about this administration. it is an absurdity to think republicans want to somehow prolong or continue this discussion on covid. all of the pulling suggest that voters continue to give joe biden the highest marks on how he has had an old -- has handled

the covid pandemic. it is really the one area at which he continues to get good marks. it is one voters focus on cost-of-living, afghanistan, immigration and the border that voters then begin to get a sense that this administration wasn't as competent as they were sold on and began to assign the blame for things that are happening. it is part of this public policy model that this administration has taken which seems to be one a problem emerges to ignore it, then criticize those who say that it is a problem and then actively take steps to make it worse. it is like living in eight bizarro world rather than embracing and actively doing something to fix it. they do something like

cost-of-living which will be significant going into next year and the administration was whistling past the graveyard on the issue and then finally beginning to talk about that, and what is their plan, is to spend trillions of dollars, which by all accounts will only add fuel to the fire of inflation and increased cost-of-living. they have credibility problems. they are beginning to on their mistakes which happened after afghanistan and is leading to problems with the future agenda. host: president biden talk friday on the latest jobs report. i will bring it to both of you and i want you to react to what he says. [video clip] pres. biden: every year december brings the holiday season and gives us opportunity to reflect on the year gone by and look ahead and begin to imagine the new year took on. this year we can reflect on an extraordinary bit of progress.

our economy is stronger than it was a year ago and today the incredible news that the unemployment rate has fallen to 4.2%. at this point in the year, looking at the sharpest one year decline in unemployment ever. simply put, america is back to work and our jobs recovery is going very strong. today's historic drop in the unemployment rate includes dramatic improvements for workers who have seen higher wages and higher levels of unemployment and they are receiving higher wages. the rate of black and hispanic and unemployment is lowering. wages are up for hard-working americans. workers in transportation and warehouses have seen wages go up approximately 10% this year. workers in hotels and restaurants have seen wages go up to 13% this year.

thanks to the american rescue plan, we have delivered significant tax cuts to families raising children. tax cuts enraging wages -- tax cuts and raising wages means american's have more in their pocket each month that we have been in office than they had last year after, -- after accounting for inflation. the typical american family has more money in the pockets than they did last year. the only economy in the world for household income and the economy as a whole stronger than they were before the pandemic. host: jim, is president biden saying what americans need to hear by talking about the economy and his accomplishments with the economy? guest: i think so.

the bottom line is there is a lot of good out there but he has to acknowledge that not everyone is feeling it. and as b.j. nose with the pulling, things are not as good and the americans' minds on the economy. he acknowledges that there has been -- knows with the polling, things are not as good in americans bus reminds on the economy. you have to try and figure out the bright spots but you have to acknowledge that are still feeling pain. i think the president did a good job to try to thread that needle. host: g.j., what do you -- b.j.,

what do you think about what the president said? guest: being in alignment with how voters are feeling, and although statistics might say the economy is improving, voters don't feel it. they don't feel it in their family's bottom line. i think of the wages that the president was talking about from last year, certainly from the heart of the pandemic it is not surprising wages are higher, but the more important thing is that maybe i'm making 10% more, evident costs me 10% more here so i may have more in my pocket, it is just me the same i had before. it is that rhetoric that when voters listen to it, it doesn't

meet my reality. i don't have that sort of buying power. maybe my wages are higher but it doesn't mean anything. it is using numbers to try to convince voters that what they see in front of their face isn't true. it's not going to work, unless and until voters begin to believe it in their heart and unless the biden administration does more to acknowledge that. the concern is not even about job creation but about cost of living. as we head into the winter months and not only is the energy cost for the gasoline and cars getting higher, but home heating gets higher, that is going to be a rural problem for the administration for this problem of higher inflation is just beginning for the biden administration. they think they are trying to get their arms around it, but there is a lot of indication it will be worse into the winter. host: let me remind our viewers

they can take part in this conversation. we will open up the regular lines, which means republicans can call in on (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, you can call (202) 748-8002. you can always text us at (202) 748-8003. and we are always listening on twitter at @cspanwj. the build back better program is still in the senate and democrats having arguments amongst themselves over it while republicans seem to be stepping back and letting democrats argue amongst themselves eerie what do you see the fate of the build back that are program in the senate right now? guest: i think it has problems, because of what you said.

first of all, republicans think it is a joke when you have a party that is completely controlling the levers of government from the president through congress and making the mistakes they are, the best thing they do is to step back and continue to let them fight amongst themselves and make those mistakes. president biden has not made the argument to voters that build back better is necessary. what voters, the little they do know of it, is the massive amount of spending that it entails and they understand that increased levels of spending only served to light the fire of inflation existing in their lives. they have a lot of problems right now and it is going to be interesting to see what happens in the next few weeks with this.

it voters are just not happy about some of the cost implications. when you get into specific elements, there are things that cause problems for the democratic base. taxes on home heating and natural gas, the salt deductions for the wealthiest like nancy pelosi in the bluest states, increased hiring of irs agents. there are things that are wildly unpopular. on the other, we test individual element and voters seem to like it. that may be true until you put a price tag on it and that ultimately is one that many voters are not willing to pay and democrats are learning that. host: jim, you have years of and around the senate. what is going to happen to the build back better plan in the senate? guest: i don't have -- faintest

idea -- i don't have the faintest idea. there is a decent chance it can get done by the end of the year. having said that, for a variety of reasons, including the issues relating to needing to scrub this bill to get it passed so they can use the so-called fast track procedures, there is now a chance it can be kicked over until next year. if that is the case, as you know from your ears covering the senate, that is a recipe for the build to die -- from your years covering the senate, that is a recipe for the bill to die. my hope is they can still get it done by the end of the year. it may take until after christmas, calling the senate back to wrap things up, but my

hope is it will still get done. i want to be crystal clear. b.j., i will agree or hopefully he will agree with me that we have a real problem that -- i would say the americans support policies but we would both agree they sure don't support the warfare going on between democrats right now. they don't like the performance and an indicator is that this bill is sitting in the senate after spending months to get it out of the house. host: i have to ask you, b.j., do you agree with him? what will the cost be to democrats if they get it through or don't? guest: if they get it through

and massive amounts of dollars start flowing into the economy from government spending, inflation is only going to get worse into next year and voters are going to pin that squarely on the sitting administration and those in power. they don't pass it, it is just another point of disappointment for the democratic base. the democrats sorely need something to get their base energized and motivated for the 2022 election. a look at what happened in this year in places like right here in virginia where i live. they look at a democratic campaign that went after republicans with vote based issues and failed to turn it in

we saw it with what happened in virginia and new jersey. on one hand they pass it and cost of living continues to increase at a faster pace and voters blame them. before any of these programs that would potentially be positive or before it has a chance to get hold they have a benefit from it. and secondarily, it is just another disappointment and failure in this administration to get something done. i don't know if there is a good choice for them, but whatever they do, i agree with jim that they probably want to get it done quickly. host: jim, what happens politically if the democrats do pass build back better or don't pass build back better? how does that affect 2022? guest: lets to the second option. doing nothing is not an option.

it will be a dagger to the heart of the biden administration and for democrats on capitol hill who don't get anything done. having said that, i want to be crystal clear, if we pass this thing, that in and of itself is not going to guarantee victory next year. as i indicated earlier, the election, as far as i can tell at this point in time, is going to revolve around the economy and covid which are somewhat interrelated. it will be a quiver in the arrow of a broad set of selling points we can use to try and get our base out to show folks that basic level of competency and that we are trying to get something done.

i would of the two options, i would take the option of getting something done over not getting anything done and wait to see what impact inflation would have. inflation is trickier than they tried to outline. i also want to be clear that inflation is an issue we need to be very concerned about. again to get this done. failure is not an option. it was my hopes in the weeks to come they can pull it off. host: let's let the viewers take part. let's start with shelby who is calling from albany, georgia on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you very much. thank you to c-span and happy sunday.

i am one of those voters that are thankful today that we have c-span that allows voters to call in. i am one of the voters. i appreciate the fact you have the republican and democratic pollsters. i am independent. let me offer the possibility of these pricings and relentless indignities, that it seems like we have going on in our country this sunday morning, where we have much to be thankful for. i have traveled all over the world. i have an epidemic and a medical physician. i have my family apart of offering those services and i am one of those voters who contribute mightily to the economy. what we have here in america right now and what we have had, because i have seen it over a 40

year patient care, academic care with young people trying to come through the matriculation of their life, we have voters for the past 18 months to two years, december 2019 is when this country went into a pandemic crises. now we have a power that does not want to repeat. what we had on january 6 -- i am a female, educated, suburbia, who have young people with college and have eldercare and childcare, who provides health care and also contribute to a public education system. we have a lot of issues right now. this word voters and american people, those are nebulous words. host: can you get the question

in? caller: could the gentleman b.j. please tell us why it is that we are a country that brought a coalition together, females that brought a coalition? we had particularly white men who are wanting to continue this entrenched power that does not give a country quality of life. we have service industries -- people who have no education have been struggling. you have been riding around in a pickup truck with a sign saying you will offer your services. we have an economy for 40 years by men who want power. host: go ahead and respond to her. guest: i think the important

part we have seen in our politics in the last four years, starting in 2016, was a new cleavage of the elector. when you look at the behaviors prior to 2016 and after, we do see a difference in college education being a clear delineation between the parties, the republicans doing much better among voters who have less than a college degree and democrats doing that are among those with more than a college agree. it was more about being in those places and in that socioeconomic position where you felt like you had access and power and authority. the republicans started to do better among those voters. he felt ignored for the past 20 to 40 years by politics. there is a new populist cleavage

existing among our electorate and republicans have benefited from that. in some ways it changed and that voters who are working class are beginning to gravitate more towards the republican party, because they understand that we are listening to their issues about economic concerns as opposed to the democratic party who are increasingly seen as a party of more, for lack of a better word, elitist, at least that is how the working class sees them, who are paying attention to their issues and our entrenched politicians and only embracing their far left. there is a movement and republicans have taken advantage of that in the last several elections, at the congressional level and most recently in the

2021 elections. host: jim, what do you think? guest: i guess i'm not quite sure what to say on the last question. what i say is i agree with b.j. that republicans are making inroads in certain areas and certain demographics that had turned towards democrats in the recent years. i, for one, are watching very closely the inroads they are making in the hispanic community in florida and texas and elsewhere. obviously, the gubernatorial election in virginia was very interesting, and that the suburban voters, democrats and independents that democrats had moved our way the last time around, seem to again run away

from my party this time around, which is i think a significant reason why, you know, glenn youngkin one. -- won. host: let's go to carl calling from west virginia on the republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. i would like to ask the democrat if he continues to believe in russian collusion with donald trump. also, every time -- well, both times biden has been in the white house, he uses the justice department like the fbi, to go after his political opponents. they use the irs to go after the tea party and, you know what, i

thought in vietnam i was fighting against the communists, and now we have people like joe biden sicking the fbi on parents going to protest at a school board meeting. don't you think this is getting out of hand when the person in power can use the fbi and the cia to go after their political opponents? host: go ahead and respond to that, jim. guest: there is no way to sugar coat what i am about to say. i don't believe in what word of what that gentleman said, with all due respect. he is not sending the fbi after his political opponents. i think the irs issue that he alluded to from the obama administration has been mischaracterized by the right wing republican attack machine.

regarding his first issue about collusion, all i know is every time you look around during the previous administration he found the russians. i have been in politics for many years and i have never seen more examples popping up than what we saw the last time around. has everything that has been printed been correct? no. do i think that the russians actively engage in efforts trying to undermine our election? yes, and i think that's been correctly assessed by the intelligence, the senate intelligence committee, and also by our intelligence committees as well. host: b.j., what do you think about the russian collusion and the irs and fbi being used?

guest: i agree there is clear evidence the russians are trying to impact our elections. we have seen that an evidence to that. as opposed to the collusion, they never had any sort of hard evidence other than made-up dossiers. let's look at the future in this administration right now and to the gentleman caller's other point. it was a significant part of the discussion in this last election in virginia, when the biden administration justice department did begin to issue a statement saying they were going to help investigate parents who were potentially complaining about school boards. this was part of that disconnect in the biden administration. every time voters begin to

express some sort of frustration about an issue, the biden administration's first impulse and instinct is to say, you're wrong we know better. that is the problem in the democratic party, that elitism and ignoring the problems that voters have when they express them. and criticizing them and maybe investigating for those who do speak up. that was a big part of the focus on education ultimately that led to glenn youngkin's victory in virginia and it is a big robin for the biden administration owing into 20 -- a big problem for the biden administration going into the 2022 elections. it is the attitude they have towards those who dissent. host: g.j., we just avoided another -- b.j., we just avoided

another shut down and will keep the government open until february. what is the political calculus on these government shutdowns which we have seen happen more and more over the last decade? what is the advantage and disadvantages of threatening to shut down the government if you don't get your way? guest: threatening to shut down the government if we don't get our way is a difficult way to say it. it is distinct policy differences driving some of these decision-making, but from a timing perspective, this is something most politicians would have rather gotten the pain with over this year rather than kicking the can into next year into an election year when congressional lines are drawn and campaigns are underway. it will be more of a problem for

campaigns next year if government shut down. it is going to be ultimately a problem for the party in power. voters look at who they put into office. they put a democrat into the presidency. they put democrats into power in both the house and senate, and now they have to own what goes on there. another is an ongoing effort to bring republicans into this by many and say they need to own some sort of these problems, but ultimately how are voters going to view this? you have to look at the party in power and give them either blame or credit for the things that go on our field to go on. so a shut down next year while no one would think is pleasant, i think ultimately would be another bad sign for the democratic prospects. host: jim, shutdown politics we

have seen more and more over the last few years. does that hurt the democrats when it comes to 2022 the government has to shut down? guest: first of all, to get the small point out of the way i think what we saw with the cr when they got it done was an indication of the desire for different reasons of republicans and democrats to work out a deal on the debt ceiling to kick it further into the future. i am not talking about a year. it is very easy to imagine that working out a debt limit agreement to get this passed in the next two years. that is number one. number two, i understand the idea that republicans suggest that a government shut down would negatively impact

democrats than republicans. i don't agree with that. she is one of those people who was working in the senate when newt gingrich sent down the senate and required to work for free when the government was shut down, something i will never forgive him for. again, i think that on a tactical level, the last thing that senator mcconnell wants to see is a shut down on his watch. he doesn't want, which is why they reached an agreement after objections from the hard language in the caucus, i think he is betting that he has a good shot of flipping the senate, though i don't agree with that, but he doesn't want to

unnecessarily --the waters. host: let's talk to russell, who is calling from south carolina on the democrat line. good morning. caller: good morning. i would just like to say that republicans in their current form are a threat to public health and a threat to national security representatives -- national security. representatives like omar our culture warriors. they have attacked voting rights, women's rights, and religious rights. i always thought america was any religion that you want you could

practice in america, but apparently you have to be christian to be a republican. the gerrymandered republicans were present 45 million less people than the democrats represent, and that is because the district are gerrymandered so poorly and they continue to attack will board members. i am glad you mentioned that, because even here in south carolina, school teachers, principals and schoolboard members are asking for help because republicans are continuing to make death threats because they are asking their children to wear a mask and asking their children to get a vaccine. they are threatening their lives. i hope that the republicans overextend their hand to the point that there voters realize that they don't have policies. the only thing i criticize biden

-- the biden administration for is --. host: i let you respond to that first, b.j. guest: i agree the border is a problem and has gone on for far too long. we have stopped paying attention to the growing problems occurring on the southern border. voters are paying attention, is clearly this gentleman is. it matches the bizarro world public policy model of the biden administration. one is ignore. we put vice president harris in charge and she doesn't go down to the border to visit, just ignore it, criticize those who say it is a problem and accuse them of racism or some

ridiculous arguments, and ultimately enact policies that could potentially make it worse, incentivizing those who would want to cross the border illegally when there is already a great influx. i agree with the gentleman that the southern border is another issue and a secured pump for the biden administration. host: jim, what do you think? guest: needless to say, i agree that immigration is an issue that will continue to be problematic for the administration. i guess what i would rather focus on and discuss is what i think was the central theme of the gentleman's comments, and that is that we are currently dealing with a republican party that is becoming more and more conservative and is becoming much more aggressive in

advancing social policy issues that are causing a lot of division and or anger within the country. obviously i agree with that. all i have to do is look at my own example in the senate. i first came to the senate in the 1990's when the place still worked. it was possible to get things done and i worked for senator ted kennedy who believed in the art of compromise. now fast-forward, and stuff like that is from a bygone era. all i see are republicans trying to advance divisive social policy issues and trying to advance one problematic issue after another. host: before we end, i want to

ask you both about the election 2022. jim, what does the senate look like for the election of 2022? will democrats keep the senate? guest: i have to tell you i am not sure how much time we have left, but i am surprised we haven't talked about abortion yet. i guess so i am going to do that as part of entering that question. i think that for the senate at least, potentially a real wild was thrown into that bait this week when the supreme court heard that abortion issue. it is -- i think it's going to have less of an impact on the house, but for senators, they are in fact right in the middle of this. they voted -- again i believe

unfairly, quite a handful of supreme court justice -- folks on the supreme court, by using the rules of the senate and has now given the supreme court probably the six votes necessary to overturn roe v. wade. if that is what happens months before the election, i think it's that the possibility of providing some fairly dramatic change. i do agree based on the polling i have seen so far, this issue was going to, you know, further energize republican voters who believe -- you are opposed to the right to choose, but i am betting it is going to further

energize the suburban women or independent voters to come out once they can seat what is it very clear that republicans are prepared to take away the right to choose. if you look at the house, past history suggests it could flip. i am not convinced it is going to happen in the senate. host: b.j., since jim brought it up, let's talk about election 2022 in the senate and abortion and how they will merge or if they will merge. guest: i think we are months away from knowing what the supreme court is actually going to do. speculating on that maybe something that we probably shouldn't do at this point, but it will have an impact, whatever happens in whatever decision comes down. it will have an impact and could

serve to help energize some of the democratic base. i think what is important for all of us, the cautionary note for my republican candidates i talked to is that there's still a lot of time, 11 months to go before this election. although we see a generic balance that favors republicans nationally, which is something you rarely see even when republicans gain seats. you see blame given to the biden administration. things can change. while you see all 19 or so democrats who have chosen to retire from the house. you see the target list with only a handful of republicans they think they might be able to draft in contrast to the republican committees, where they think they may go over -- may be able to go over in the

cycle. we don't know is what conditions are going to change between then and now. the goal for a lot of republican campaigns is to make sure we stay focused on the job of those in power and the incumbent party. host: on friday, house minority leader kevin mccarthy came out and promised changes -- if they put republicans back in power. i wanted to play what kevin mccarthy said on friday. [video clip] finds own treasury said it was time to retire the word -- >> biden's own treasury secretary said it was time to retire the word transitory. i don't know what they are doing in the white house but maybe they are trying to come up with

a new term to dismiss inflation. gas prices skyrocketed and he said he would lower the gas prices and he hasn't done it but made it worse. at the measly two cents they think is lowering it. he depleted 50 million barrels of oil from our emergency supply and has done nothing to reverse this anti-american energy agenda he has contributed to that spiked up costs. in my home state of california, you see the price rise almost every day, when the five dollars a gallon. that hurts the hard-working americans every single day. it is not just the gas price. they take that and fill up the car and go to the grocery store, it costs them more. they turn on the heat it costs them more. everything they do, and now we have come to christmas. we worry about the ability to

give -- to get the gifts you want or can afford him and what is the answer from the white house? we can't even promise it would be on time if you can pay for it. the american party is sick of this one-party rule. next year we will make the commitment to every single american, we will listen to you, we will hear you, work on your policies, and we will improve your quality of life. host: jim, what do you think the chances for republicans taking the house? guest: welcome again, if you look at past history, two years into a four-year presidential cycle, the odds are with republicans. having said that, i am not so convinced that is going to be the case this time around for a variety of different reasons. not only because house republicans are morally,

physically and spiritually bankrupt with no agenda, but as b.j. pointed out, there is still a lot of time between now and the election. i mentioned the abortion issue and the possibility it will serve as an energizing issue, but in the end i think it will revolve around the economy. if we get to the economic numbers to a better place, and get the build back better bills out of the senate to the president for his signature, democrats will have wind in their sails. but leader mccarthy is spending an awful lot of time trying to deal with the work for his caucus that includes marjorie taylor greene, representative boebert, paul gosar and others.

to the extent of the republican, i would take that into debate next year and would love to get more attention and focus on those folks, because that is where the republican party is going, dominated by extremists. i think there is real potential for them to overreach. host: b.j., republican chances in the house and who gets to be house speaker if republicans take the house? guest: i think leader mccarthy has the whole position there and i am not sure it is much of a debate right now, but the larger issue for the republicans is don't start measuring the drapes just yet. we have to go out and earn it. how do we earn it as a party?

it is to stay focused on the issues that we have been focused on to this point. this is first and foremost with voters' concerns about cost of living. it leader mccarthy spoke eloquently about the concerns people are having about not only the cost of everyday goods and groceries, but energy costs and this administration's first of all failure to even acknowledge it at first and then things they are doing like shutting down domestic pipelines and proposing additional taxes on natural gas, are actually going to make these things worse. as long as republicans into new to speak to the problems voters are actually having. when voters have economic concerns, they have a hard time really beginning to look at anything else. it is the hierarchy of needs that when your family's bottom line is at stake, you are not too sure you are worried about

some other issue happening thousands of miles away or doesn't impact your daily life. when voters focus on the pocketbook concerns and republicans speaking to that, i think our chances continue to be very good. but republicans from this standpoint can't let up and have to address the concerns and talk about those concerns. but at the same time, while democrats are making these mistakes and have plenty of their own internal decisions, not to mention what comes out of the squad and what they have to deal with their, their factions within each party and that has existed since the founders talk about those actions. it is nothing new. but when you are in the majority, factions are worse and the voters and votes in the house can impact your ability to get things done and can hold you hostage and that only

perpetuates the notion that you really can't get things done and then begins to move your caucus further to the left, which is already a problem for nancy pelosi and fighting against that impulse on that side. there are visions on both sides. the -- there are divisions on both side. host: let's see if we can squeeze in one more quick color. hermann from texas, can you get us a quick question? caller: i think it is the people with this voting, because they are voting against oppressives. when people go out and cheer for the party and they are telling them they are going to do -- and they don't hear that, on both sides. if you do it for the football

team, it'll have an effect on your life, your team might win, but it won't have an effect on your life. but with this power -- political thing, if the right legislation and what you can and cannot do in this world, it could have a terrible effect on your life but you won't accept it because your party won. you need to get back to your moral values and inks in what we need -- moral values and things that we need and not bite my party needs to win and -- we need and not my party needs to win. and then you get a raise, but your tax cut, the millionaires that the tax cut and you got a

dollar or five dollars week on your paycheck, that did not help you. and then if you get a raise and get your hours cut, at doesn't help you. you have to be real about things. just start being truthful about what is happening daily. host: jim, go ahead and respond. guest: there's a fundamental issue the caller just raised, the idea that there are folks wilting against their best interest -- folks voting against their best interests. the idea that folks can vote for the republican party dominated by hard right social conservatives who believe in tax cuts for the wealthy and trying to undermine key protection on the environment is always puzzling to me. it is not for me to decide, but

it is true and it gets lost sometimes in the debate, but it is true some of these folks are only in congress because they were elected by their constituents. there are constituents in the ultimately owned a lot of the chaos that we are currently seeing in the republican process -- in the political process. host: final words, b.j.? guest: i take one question is when the browns lose it affects me personally. his point is well taken. these policies and things we pass impact everyone's life and have real consequences. you see democrats wanting to pass deductions that give millionaires all these giant tax breaks and meanwhile, families, you're telling them hey, your wages went up 6% but sorry,

prices went up 8%. most voters say well, that's not helping me. i think back to early focus groups i did back in 2016 out in greater minnesota, the rural parts of the state, and asking voters, democrats, about who they might vote for in the presidential election and this is before really we got in the heart of the trump versus clinton election that year, it was early spring still. but voters said all i know is a lot of these folks are the status quo and status quo hasn't worked for me for 20 years. i want some change. what we're really asking for is someone who pays attention to them and listens to their concerns and does some things that might benefit their lives. i think there's a reason we have a lot of republican governors in the country because voters feel that governor has a chance to really impact their life. there's less of that feeling who represents them in congress and

the senate but they certainly feel that way about governors and i think the republican governors have done a great job improving the lives of folks in the states and why we have a lot of the governors who represent and are doing very well. host: we'd like to thank d.j. and ben for talking us through the biden agenda and 2022 election. gentlemen, thank so you much. guest: thank you. host: coming up next, retired general ben hodges, the former u.s. army europe commander will be here to discuss the amassing of russian troops at the ukraine border and how the u.s. and nato are responding. after that we'll have more of your calls and comments. stick with us. we'll be right back. >> the book is called "wasps"

and stands for white anglo-saxon protestant, for michael knox baron's examination of the wasp culture is the splendors of the american aristocracy. they are people from history, dean atchison, t.s. elliott, walter lippmann, and whittaker chambers to name a few. author baron's publisher pegasus write wasps were creatures of glamour, power and privilege but yet unhappy. >> on this episode of "book notes plus" available on the c-span app or wherever you get your podcasts. >> at least six presidents recorded conversations while in office. hear many of those conversations on c-span's new podcast,

presidential recordings. >> season 1 focuses on the presidency of lyndon johnson. you'll hear about the 1964 civil rights act, the 1964 presidential campaign, the gulf of tonkin incident, the march at emmake -- selma and war in vietnam. not everyone knew they were being recorded. >> certainly johnson's secretaries knew because they were tasked with transcribing many of those conversations. in fact, they were the ones who made sure the conversations were taped as johnson would signal to them through an open door between his office and theirs. >> you'll also hear some blunt talk. >> jim? >> yes, sir. >> i want recorded the number of people assigned to kennedy, the day he died and the numbers assigned to me now. and if they're not less i want them quickly assigned less. if i can't go to the bathroom, i won't go, i'll just stay behind

these black gates. >> sign in now or wherever you get your podcast. download c-span's new mobile app and stay up to date with live video coverage of the political events from live streams from the house and senate floor and key congressional hearings from white house events to supreme court oral arguments and even our morning program "washington journal" where we hear your voices every day. c-span now has you covered. download the app for free today. "washington journal" continues. host: we're back and joined by retired lieutenant general ben hodges the u.s. army europe commander and here to discuss the russian troops amassing on the ukraine border and what the u.s. and nato are going to do. general hodges, good morning.

guest: good morning. host: you hold a pershing chair at the european policy and analysis. tell us what that is and what do you all do? #. host: cepa is a think tank that focuses on central and eastern europe and we're experts for several years particularly on the black sea and baltic sea region and expanded our attention to disinformation, digital domain and immersing and disrupting technologies but focused on the transatlantic relationship. host: where do you get your funding? guest: like most nonprofits from a variety of sources. we depend on government grants, on foundations who are interested in the same priorities we are and of course we have corporate sponsors as well for different type projects. host: you were the top u.s. commander in europe as recently

as 2017. what do you make of the recent movement of russian troops on the russian-ukraine border? guest: what we're seeing is a continuation of what started back in april with the first visible surge of russian capability. i don't think a conflict is inevitable but certainly all the pieces are in place if the kremlin wanted to expand the current kinetic operations they're doing now. host: what exactly should we be watching here in the united states when it comes to these tensions ratcheting up. what are you looking at and what should we as the american public be looking at? guest: three things. number one, i would continue to listen to what the kremlin says. the language coming out of there from the president putin and minister lavrov and some of their representatives has been really harsh and the rhetoric has increased and i think that part of this is them testing us, testing the new german

government as well but also preparing their own population. this is something that i pay attention to. secondly, i would watch for how our allies rally around the united states. the united states with all of our economic and military power cannot do this alone if the kremlin believes that they can ride out u.n. sanctions and ride sanctions out from germany and france. getting our allies with us economically and diplomatically is going to be very important. then of course the third thing, if there's going to be an expansion of the kinetic operations that are already happening, we're going to have to see some of the logistical effort required to sustain land operations in wintertime. host: you said you looked at this as a way that the russian government is testing us. are you talking about trying to

figure out what the relationship is going to be with the biden administration? guest: i was very happy when the biden administration -- when president biden in his first phone call with president putin several months ago said the sovereignty of ukraine is a priority for the united states. i think the kremlin is testing how high a priority that is and what we're willing to do to protect and respect ukrainian sovereignty. this is one part of the test i'm talking about. and of course i think president putin wants to distract his own population from the terrible conditions there inside russia, but i really think it's a test for the new german government that will be in place come wednesday. this is going to be a very important part of how this goes forward. host: why is ukraine so important to the united states and nato and what's going on with russia right now? what's the strategic importance of the ukraine? guest: that's the perfect question.

people should ask why do we care about ukraine other than the fact it's a great culture and people that have done so much to try to earn their own freedom and protect their own sovereignty? the fact is ukraine matters to us strategically because of where it sits on the map and part of the black sea region and we have three allies, turkey, romania and bulgaria in the region and we help nato protect those countries and there's significant economic potential as the east-west economic corridor between europe and eurasia that would run through the black sea and the kremlin doesn't want to see that develop because then you have western democratic countries paying more attention to what russia does in the region. thirdly, it's important to us because you've got russia's use of their illegal bases in #

crimea as a launching pad for everything they do supporting the assad regime, for example, in the eastern mediterranean and in the balkans and is only possible because of their attempted unfettered use of the black sea region and why ukraine matters to us. host: that's why it matters to us. why does russia want ukraine? guest: every now and then you'll hear some uninformed people talk about crimea was always russian or ukraine is actually always been a part of russia. that's exactly what president putin tried to convince us with his long essay. as you know, crimea did not block to russia until katherine the great and into the 18th century and did that because crimea has these natural harbors that give it the ability to project power around the black sea. so it's been part of the great

power competition for centuries because the ottoman empire and russian empire, the british empire. it's been a contested space for a long time because that's the warm water port that gives russia access into the mediterranean and then on into the atlantic ocean. host: you hinted towards this earlier but why do you think putin is making these type of movements right now? why now? why not next year or two years from now? why now? guest: again, a great we and -- great question, we heard senator blanken and secretary mili talk about we don't know what the kremlin's intentions are. as for me, i subscribe to the notion that president putin is looking at his legacy. he's a few years older than me and i think he wants to be scene as the person -- seen as the person that brought back as much of the empire as possible, belarus, ukraine, georgia, and

that's the type of effort he's undertaken now over the past few years. this particular time of year, of course, is important because it's getting colder by the day. russia provides most of the gas that europe uses for energy generation, power generation and for heat. so that gives him some significant leverage over europe should this develop into a worse crisis. host: i want to bring to you secretary of state anthony blinken who came out and talked about russia's troop buildup on the border of ukraine ahead of thursday's talks with foreign minister sergey lavrov. here's what secretary of state blinken said. [video clip] >> president biden shared with president pout within they met in geneva months ago the strong preference of the united states for a stable predictable relationship between our countries. it's in the best interest of both of us, of our people and actually the entire world.

but as we made very clear in recent weeks, we have deep concerns about russia's plans for renewed aggression against ukraine and would move us in exactly the opposite direction and it's simply not in anyone's interest. that's not just our concern. it's a concern that is shared by many in europe and i think sergei has heard that expressed over the last 24 hours here in stockholm. we have a strong iron clad commitment to the sovereignty and territorial integrity of ukraine. the best way to avert a crisis is through diplomacy. and that's what i look forward to discussing with sergei, including by both parties full implementation of the mincing agreements with russia pulling back its forces. the united states is willing to facilitate that but in the spirit of being clear and

candid, which is the best thing to do, if russia decides to pursue confrontation there will be serious consequences. host: do you think that meeting between anthony blinken and sergey lavrov did anything? was it effective? guest: i think it's effective for two or three reasons. one, i'm pretty sure that the secretary would have been very clear to minister lavrov what the u.s. is prepared to do. that's very important that there's no misunderstanding. everything i just heard from the secretary is the tone that our european allies would also expect. it's clear, it's diplomatic but unmistakable. so i think this was very important. now, as always, deterrence is really based on does the other side believe that we're serious? and hopefully the secretary was able to convey a degree of seriousness in a way that's

compelling to the russians that they know if they do cross whatever -- i don't want to call it a red line but whatever conditions were laid out, if they cross that, they will in fact pay a price. if they don't believe it or don't believe that it's only the u.s., that they don't think allies will help, then i'm afraid that they will probably continue forward. host: right now president biden has a video call scheduled with vladimir putin on tuesday. i want to bring a little bit from the associated press story to you here and want you to respond to it. presidents joe biden and vladimir putin will speak in a video call tuesday as tensions between the united states and russia escalate over a russian troop buildup on the ukrainian border seen as a sign of potential biden. biden will press concerns about u.s.-russian activities on the border and reaffirm the united

states' support for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of ukraine, white house press secretary jenpsaki after the first word from moscow, putin will come to the call with concerns of its own and tends to express russia's opposition for any move to admit ukraine into the nato military alliance. the presidents will decide themselves how long their talk will last said dmitry peskov. how important is this video talk between biden and putin and will we see any major decisions being made on this call? guest: two or three things here. first of all, it's very important that our president is telling the president of the russian federation directly what is going to be expected and that is also unacceptable for what russia might do. this is very important and it's important not only so that the russians hear it and they can judge our seriousness, but it's also important that our allies

understand that and they see this. our german and french and british allies and others would expect that the united states would go to this level to talk before resorting to some other means. and i keep emphasizing the importance of allies because the united states alone cannot deter the russians. this is going to require a unified front with our nato allies, also, frankly, with the european union which has the real diplomatic power when it's operating together. so i anticipate the president will convey to the kremlin that this is not the united states acting alone but that our allies are with us. and this is going to be a very important part of this. one thing, jesse, that i do want to add, of course the chinese are watching this. the chinese communist party is watching how we deal with this particular crisis. i think if they see that the united states either by itself or with allies cannot stop

something on the scale of russia's expansion of the kinetic conflict in ukraine, then i think they'll feel emboldened to do more as well. this is not an isolated incident. host: let me remind our viewers they can take part in this conversation. we're opening up regional lines and means if you're in the eastern or central time zones call 202-748-8000. if you're in the mountain, low pacific time zones, 202-748-8001. keep in mind can you text to 202-748-8003 and we're always reading on social media at twitter on c-spanwj and facebook.com/c-span. ben, do we think economic sanctions in russia will affect their decisions on whether to go into ukraine or not?

guest: yes, in two ways, if we continue sanctions and expand them, of course it's not just the united states but sanctions by european allies as well. that's an important signal of america's and europe's seriousness about ukrainian sovereignty and russian aggression. there's a symbolic aspect as well as an economic impact. what i'm also hearing and expect is that the level of sanctions, the type of sanctions that would be imposed should russia continuities kinetic operations in ukraine are going to be of a different type that are going to bring significant pain to russia's economy and hopefully significant pain to the oligarch's around president putin keeping him in power. this is where i think targeted sanctions against these type of

people would be most effective and not so damaging to the average russian citizen. host: let's let our viewers join the conversation. we'll start with chris, calling from north walton, massachusetts. chris, good morning. caller: good morning. it's 1991, then secretary of state james baker promised gorbachev that in return for the disillusion of the warsaw pact and the reunification of germany, nato would not take advantage of a situation and move one inch eastward. well, today nato is all the way to the russian border, courting the ukraine and also courted georgia and is a encirclement by nato of nato. you tell me, who is the aggressive party here and who is the agriefed party? it would be a little bit like the old ussr having an alliance

with mexico. so anyway, i'd just like you to know we're not all as dumb as you think we are. thanks and have a nice day. host: go ahead and respond, ben. guest: sir -- thank you. i certainly don't think this gentleman is dumb or anybody else in the audience but clearly the agrieved party here are the millions of people who have been deprived of their freedom or desire to choose their own future who have lost everything to russian aggression or under the old soviet union. i think if nations want to be a part of the west, when they see how much better life is as part of the european union or their security in nato, why should any other nation say that they can't have that? and the characterization, of course, and i hear this occasionally somehow that nato is encircling russia, i would

encourage people to take a look at the map and think about what does that mean, encircling russia? the so-called nato russia founding act i think the gentleman is referring to talks about given the current circumstances, we will not do things we won't base permanent forces in former warsaw pact countries. in fact what russia did with this invasion of georgia and its invasion of ukraine, that completely changed the security environment alluded to in the nato russia founding act. so it was the russians by their own aggression anker debated that agreement and -- aggegated that agreement and they've lived up to that although russia completely disobeyed it.

but if you ask people in ukraine and georgia and other former warsaw republics like estonia, latvia and lithuania what their choice is, it's a pretty easy choice. host: since we're talking about it now, should ukraine be offered nato membership? guest: as secretary austin said the other day during his visit to the black sea region, that should stay on the table. it should be -- it's something the alliance depends on or has always offered the possibility, the open door policy. but i think instead of talking about ukrainian membership in nato or georgian membership in nato which i also would support, we need to focus on the bilateral relationship with ukraine. it needs to be recognized and i don't think people see it as a normal bipartisanship relationship. this is where our focus should be and then the united states,

once we have this more normal relationship, we can work with our oral lies in the region and in europe and build consensus towards all of us having improved security if ukraine is a member of the alliance. there's so many other things we need to do first. of course ukraine has a responsibility building its own societal resilience with people trusting their legal systems, businesses being confident in the transparency of the financial systems. these are the things that need to be addressed before we get too focused on nato membership. host: let's talk to george calling from leavenworth, kansas. george, good morning. caller: good morning, general, how are you doing? long time no see. guest: good morning, sir. caller: merry christmaso to you and your family and happy new year. here's the question i would like to see if you could share with the audience. i think people understand the business about sanctions. i think a lot of people think

that sanctions are just lip tal. here's what i'd like you to share with the audience. what are we obligated to do, the united states states, not nato. what are we obligated to do if the russians decide to make a major move in the ukraine? thanks, ben, it was good to see you again. caller: thanks, george. guest: well, of course ukraine is not a treaty ally and there's not an obligation the way it would be as if poland or lithuania or romania were attacked by russian forces, an armed attack. however, i think our administration has made it clear that ukrainian sovereignty is a priority.

secretary blinken just talked about the commitment of the united states and ukrainian sovereignty and that does not mean armed forces would be used but i would anticipate this means we will in fact impose real serious crippling economic sanctions against the russian federation, and i think also the support on capitol hill from the congress has been so important to also make sure that we are providing our ukrainian friends with materials with intelligence, with capabilities that would assist them in defending themselves. but i think it is really important that we keep thinking strategically. take a look at the map, the black sea region, and think about what kind of a strategy do we have that includes not only military support but also competing in the information space, economic investment and diplomatic efforts to ensure respect for international law,

ensure respect for sovereign borders, and attracting western investment in the region and finally, i think one of the most powerful things that we can do would be to see a strong vibrant democratic and economically prosperous ukraine. that would be did not only for ukraine's ability to protect its sovereignty but when russians, russian citizens look into ukraine and say why is it so much better there than what we have here? what is it about ukraine? and i think that would be a powerful way to compete in this information space. i mean, i think ukrainians saw how much better life became in poland as they became a member of the european union and member of nato. so this is important but of course for our information signaling to be effective, we in

the united states have to live up to our own talking points as well, that we have to demonstrate we have these strong democratic institutions, the pillars of democracy, and people are watching that. this is also important. georgia, what are our obligations? for us to set the example and live up to our own talking points, to show continuous support, to follow through on whatever the president is saying to president putin, but also to have a strategy for the region. host: let's talk to chuck who is calling from jefferson, georgia. good morning, chuck. caller: how are y'all doing this morning? guest: good morning, sir. caller: you said something about thinking you said something abot thinking strategically. why in the world did biden allow the gas line or, you know, to be opened up? that will allow russia to just blackmail europe. plus the fact about four years

ago everyone was complaining about trump making nato mad. isn't nato much better off and country's paying more for their own defense now? guest: chuck, thank you for the question. i am with you when it comes to nord stream 2 which is the pipeline project between russia and germany that is just about at the point of being completed. i was disappointed the president decided not to sanction -- to impose sanctions on the companies responsible for this pipeline. i think it was done for the purpose of protecting the relationship with german allies and we had a new german government coming in. we wanted to protect the relationship because we need a strong relationship with germany and the european union. having said that, the previous german government has not

responded in a way i would have expected to something like that. i do hope this pipeline, that the new german government will not complete the pipeline until we are confident russia is going to live up to its international obligations and respect ukrainian sovereignty. if they don't, you are right. they will have significant leverage. they already have significant leverage over europe and so, thinking strategically, hoping someone in the administration says, germany, netherlands, don't worry. we will find a way to make up over the next few months any gaps that occur if the kremlin begins to turn off the gas during the winter. us being able to counter what the kremlin might be able to do. clearly they are always going to use gas as a weapon. this is what they do.

for any of us to believe for a second when they say, we are not going to do that, we are being very naive. frankly, i have little confidence in anything the kremlin says. they are a member of the osc and yet, they are actively resisting and preventing the osce mission in ukraine from doing its observation job. they are bringing down the drones, stopping observers from going into areas, clearly this is not something just happening at the local level. this is being orchestrated by the kremlin. that does not give me confidence in anything they say. we have got to think strategically in terms of working together with our european allies. to your last point, for sure more and more countries are investing more in their defense and if the former president deserves credit for encouraging

that, he should get it. i would say also to expand that just a little bit many countries were already investing more in their defense because of what they were seeing coming from russia. secondly, never in my life did i imagine an american president would question america's pledge to nato. that was a gift to the kremlin. hopefully the current administration not only through words but action will make clear the united states is committed to our other 29 allies. host: let's talk to david calling from plainsboro, georgia. good morning. . caller: hey, mr. hodges. how you doing? guest: good. caller: i will talk global politics for a minute and then get down to your part of the world. for 50 years the communists have used a gambit to destroy america. i mean, the communists in china

use jobs to prop them up and we turn our backs when the communists stampede into georgia and recap it -- wreak havoc. this is who they are. on this gambit thing, and this is a strategy and what we need is a real strategy, to give them something to worry about they have not had to worry about. now with china all we have got to do is say, well, we are going to make all these islands in this archipelago a state. that will give us greater territorial leverage over china. and there in the ukraine, that is a very hard-core, almost no way to give an answer. they are going to do whether going to do. they have done proven that.

are we ready to take back all the things we have allow them to do with energy and jobs? because those two things they are holding us hostage with and unless we are prepared to take them back right now and say, no, you not going to do that. just like in a pen stroke undermined their economies, their way of life. hey, people. he stole $220 billion, here it is right here. just let them know what putin is doing. they will get fed up and do something. host: go ahead and respond, ben. guest: the gentleman brings up a good point. what is happening in ukraine is not an isolated situation. it is tied to a large russian effort. i think the awful, inhuman use of migrants as a weapon in

belarus, this is all part of a larger effort to destabilize europe and put pressure on ukrainian government to present ukraine as a failed state to the west to prevent western integration. but also i think president lukashenko's days are numbered. the kremlin is getting weary of what he does and he has outlived his usefulness soon. i can imagine a scenario where belarus becomes annexed or at least a new government is installed that is even more friendly to the kremlin. i think these are connected. and i did allude earlier to the fact i think beijing is watching all of this and they are watching, number one, our resolve. our capability, they are watching the challenges

associated with if you don't have energy independence, which the gentleman correctly referred to, but i think is also looking to see how well the united states and our allies are able to stick together. i keep going back to this point because there is no way we can successfully deter russia, contain china by ourselves. our economies are too interconnected. the diplomatic requirements or the diplomatic strength of comes from all of us working together and competing in all the different domains. so this is a global situation and i think the administration and congress are working to make sure we have the strong foundation we need but also encouraging strong alliances. host: let's go to bill calling from new jersey. can you give us a quick question or comment? caller: yes, sir. i am interested in how much the

russians are rushing ukraine because of the giant underground submarine base they built during the cold war? it gives them access to the waterways they don't have in their own country. do you think that has anything to do with it? can you educate me and the people about it? guest: bill, thank you. of course, the russians have their biggest naval base there. it is illegal because they illegally annexed crimea but that is part of the reason they did it, because of the naval facilities that are there, the port gives them access through the straits to the atlantic and otherwise. there is no doubt their interest in crimea is directly related to their need for access to the ocean. they also have a river system

that allowed them to move from the black sea all the way to the caspian sea through rivers and canals they built over the decades. so it is more than just crimea itself that gives them naval capability. but this highlights something i think is important, and this will be one of the more difficult challenges of the situation. when we talk about a black c strategy turkey -- black sea strategy, turkey has been a good nato ally since 19522. they have also been frustrating allies and i don't defend bad choices they have made or the terrible conditions for journalists operating in turkey, but nonetheless if we are thinking strategically, we have to look at turkish allies. we have got to fix our relationship with turkey in part because of its sovereignty over

the so-called turkish straits under the monroe convention of 1936. this allows them to control what goes in and out of the black sea, particularly warships. it would be nice if we could work with our turkish ally and offer that as a way to get the initiative over the kremlin that under this turkey could restrict what russian warships might be able to do coming in and out of the black sea. for example, to go to syria. this is part of our strategic thinking and unfortunately we are not in a place with our turkish allies to be able to do that. but this is what strategic thinking is all about. i would add, if you move the black sea up to the middle of the map, you can see more clearly turkey is so important for us as a bulwark against iran. this entire situation is more

than just whether russian troops take control. host: we want to thank lieutenant general ben hodges to talk about the ukraine, u.s. and nato. guest: thank you to you and your team. you provide a wonderful service for the american people. host: we are going to move to the open forum where you can talk about whatever political topic you are interested in. you see the numbers on screen. start the calls and we will be right back. ♪ announcer: monday morning delaware senator chris coons in texas congressman michael mccaul take part in a conversation on promoting democracy hosted by

the center for strategic and international studies. live coverage begins at 10:00 eastern on c-span, online at c-span.org, or watch full on c-span now, our new video app. on monday a discussion with connecticut senator chris murphy on congressional war powers and potential presidential overreach. live coverage from the cato institute begins at noon eastern on c-span, online at c-span.org, or watchful coverage on c-span now, our new video app. monday vice admiral john hill, director of the u.s. missile defense agency, talks about defense strategy and growing threats. the foundation for defense of democracy is hosting. watch at noon eastern on c-span2, online at c-span.org, or watchful coverage on c-span now, our new video app. announcer: tuesday morning the

inspector general of the u.s. capitol police, michael bolton, testifies on the january 6 attack before the senate rules. watch live at 10:00 eastern on c-span3, online at c-span.org, or watchful coverage on c-span now, our new video app. ♪ announcer: washington journal continues. host: we are back with our open

forum which means you can call in and talk about your most important political topic. we open regular lines. republicans (202)-748-8001, democrats (202)-748-8000, independents (202)-748-8002. keep in mind you can always text (202)-748-8003. we are always reading on social media on twitter @c-spanwj and facebook at facebook.com/c-span. for the first order i want to bring to you the story coming out of michigan following the school shooting. i will bring you that from the new york times. in a tense arraignment saturday morning james and jennifer crumbley listen by videoconference from separate jail cells as they were charged with involuntary manslaughter in the fatal shooting of four oxford high school student who the police they were gunned down by their 15-year-old son, ethan.

as the john's red ethan's charges, one for each of the four students, she asked if she understood. i understand, she said. they entered pleads of not guilty. the crumleys, considered fugitives, were captured in detroit and placed in the same jail facility in oakland, michigan that held their son. their arrests and arraignments only began to answer some of the questions about who the crumleys are, how they got to this moment, and what could have prevented the tragedy of oxford high school. that is from the new york times. what is your most important political topic this morning? let's start with homework calling from shreveport -- homer calling from shreveport, louisiana. caller: good morning.

i was sitting here thinking am i right or wrong? in order to fight unions we sent everything overseas to the third world countries and stuff now we are going to make china and them rich and everything else. justified against ourselves -- just to fight against ourselves. that frustrates me. i am a vietnam veteran and disabled veteran. at the point when i went in i had a different outlook. thank you for letting me expose myself. thank you. host: alicia calling from columbia, maryland on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning, jesse.

i am usually busy with a very important part of my life which is going to church. jesse, good morning to you and to america. my question is how much land does russia and china own in america? and is there any way we can change that so they don't buy any more of our land? that goes for other countries, too. why do we buy land in other countries? and also, it would be very nice if you would include independent on your line.

host: kelly calling from garden grove, california on the republican line. good morning. caller: i did not think i was calling on the republican line. i was wanting to talk about with general hodges what the consequences were with regards to if the russian federation is successful, what will that look like in other regions and in regards to china? what will the consequences be if they were successful? thank you and thank you for giving us this forum to discuss. host: bob calling from raleigh, north carolina on the democrats line. good morning. caller: good morning. there is a piece of misinformation that keeps floating around on mainstream media and c-span constantly and i heard it this morning. it is that russia invaded and

annexed crimea. they didn't. they held a referendum at 85% and the crimean's voted for russia to stay. they voted to stay in the russian federation. thank you. host: let's go to steve calling from robertsville, missouri on the independent line. good morning. caller: appreciate you taking my call this morning, jesse. i wanted to talk to the general and say we have to support ukraine and taiwan because they are the lines to keep us out of world war iii. they are being bullied by russia and china, putin and the chinese leader. we have to support them anyway we can. quick little comment, biggest problem in our country's right

wing media. they call in every morning, they listen to this 24/7 and they are brainwashed. i appreciate c-span and thank you for taking my call. host: harvey calling from dallas, texas on the republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i enjoy watching c-span because there is no commercials, you speak the truth, and you get to the core of the problem. i get daily multiple calls saying this is so and so on a recorded line, can you hear me? it goes into a pitch for medicaid part c or advantage plans. they are telling people about the free things they can get and what they don't do is tell you the downside. for example, if you sign up on the advantage plan, you are not happy with it?

and you leave the plan, you cannot get back on the traditional medicare. the other thing with all the freebies and discounts, there was a law of antigovernment abuse which included discount coupons for medicare. my most recent survey i answered and the question started out, did i have part a, part b, did i have any other assistance plan like medicaid, which i said no. then i was asked of my annual salary was above $10,000 a year. i said, no. they said, sorry, you don't qualify. goodbye. if they are talking about saving money and saving medicare, the government, including our illustrious attorney general, should be going after these companies preying on people, abusing the system and draining the medicare fund.

host: eduardo calling from laredo, texas. caller: good morning, sir. i am calling from laredo, texas. my concern is concerning the russian federation. where is the u.s. spending all that financial budget through the year? host: aaron calling from upper marlboro, maryland. caller: i would like to highlight the absurdity of vaxxers versus non-vaxxers. here is my example. you have two people that meet at a bar, they hit it off, they have social lubricant. they decide to socially associate. she is a couple of blocks away.

host: let's go to jeff calling from maine. caller: good morning. host: it is nebraska. caller: it is nebraska. my important issue is the politicalization of the supreme court. that is the number one problem facing america today. current justices are not standing up for super precedents at the supreme court and i will use the current roe v. wade issue as an example. the supreme court and the justices not standing with justice sotomayor when she gave her dissent the other day about justices not being unified and the people losing faith in the institution of the courts, that is the number one problem facing america today. people losing faith in the

institutions that are the building blocks of america, that make us different from everyone else. host: let's talk to ronald calling from florida on the republican line. good morning. caller: yes, sir. my complaint is the biggest problem i think we have is the open borders. letting people come in here and take advantage of the american people's hard work and's taxes they paid. it has been given away to all these people coming in here illegally. our administration is supporting them with power, tax paid dollars. our costs are going up and we are losing. the next thing i would like to say is as far as getting into combat with russia and china, it would be a big mistake. biden has depleted our oil supply and they are about to cut me off.

thank you. host: let's go to willie calling from sarasota, florida on the democrat line. good morning. caller: good morning. i just want to let people know i am a soldier, a veteran. it disappoints me when i see people walking up and down the streets with firearms. if we go into civil war, we are going to be speaking a different language. i do appreciate c-span because you do have a fair and balanced. host: richard calling from nashville, tennessee on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning, jesse. i think the biggest thing that bothers me is we have always had conflict in this country. we are a very versatile country, different races, different

everything. the thing that bothers me as we fought russia when i was a kid. we went through drop and roll in schools. we end up in a situation now with china. we really need to get our jobs back in this country and put all americans back to work and protect ourselves. that's the bottom line. russia, germany, all that, they are going to pay for it. thank you. host: ed calling from georgia all the democrat line. good morning. caller: hi there. i want to complement the general . he mentioned about the journalists in turkey. i have been waiting to hear that on c-span for months. i want to complain you don't ever get to hear about important things like that because people insist on taking up time about

how much they love c-span. you have to say good morning. jesse, bless your heart, but you don't have to tell us the next caller is calling. it is a phone call. every second counts. and then you are going to cut off them while they are saying something important so can have the next caller ask you how you are doing? maybe they can say what they had to say if you told them to go ahead. host: tim calling from lakeview, arkansas on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. host: tim from albany, new york, sorry. caller: i want to make an observation the news is not talked about and that is the proud boys.

they are getting the same old thing about -- this is what is creating problems. i don't approve of any one of them but, you know, they should think about the larger issue at hand. host: let's go to tim from lakeview, arkansas on the independent line. go ahead. caller: thank you and likewise. the biggest issue i still have is truth in the media. we just forgot or don't want to talk about -- we still have americans in afghanistan. we don't want to talk about how many "new voters" are stepping over the border, unencumbered by the rules people empower want to put on the rest of us. host: we would like to thank all

of our callers who called in for the open forum and we would like to thank our guests, viewers, and social media followers for another great addition of washington journal. stick with us. tomorrow morning we will be back at 7:00 a.m. for another edition. everyone have a great sunday. ♪ ♪ >> c-span is your unfiltered view of government. we are funded by these television companies and more including cox. >> cox is committed to providing families affordable internet. bridging the digital divide when

connected and engaged student at a time. cox, bringing us closer. announcer: cox supports c-span as a public service along with these other television providers, giving you a front row seat to democracy. ♪ >> without the advances we have made in efficiency and renewables, for example, i think circumstances would be much more serious than they are today. at the same time we have been entirely focused on that 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. announcer: tonight on q&a, what

would happen to the economy and the environment if the world cut consumption by 25%? journalist jb mckinnon discusses that in his book, arguing we are currently using the world's resources at a rate that is unsustainable. tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span's q&a. you can listen to q&a and all podcasts on the new c-span now app. ♪ host: good morning and welcome to washington journal. with the omicron variant spreading throughout the united states debates over vaccine mandates are intensifying again. congressional republicans in the white house are at loggerheads over the idea of mandates for private businesses. this all comes as courts around the united states have been issuing coli