>> to watch this and all remaining entries, visit our website at studentcam.org. today on c-span, a look at the military budget and security threat. later in the day, houston credit caucus chair hakeem jeffries -- house democratic caucus chair hakeem jeffries. live at 7:00 eastern. and a reminder, all of our life coverage is available to watch at c-span.org or on our free video app c-span now. >> this morning on washington journal, former chief of the cia's russia analysis george bb on the latest developments in ukraine as they prepare for a possible russian assault on the

eastern region of the country. then former new york times labor reporter steven greenhouse talks about unionization first by amazon and starbucks employees. sure to discuss ♪ >> this is the washington journal for april 19. and new poll shows that americans are largely divided about -- the amount of sex and raced taught in schools. student groups and parent groups on top of that are pushing back on that type of legislation. when it comes to sex and race being taught in schools do you think that it is taught too much, too little or perhaps you think it is the right amount. if you think it is too much (202) 748-8000.

if you say it is too little (202) 748-8001. if you think it is the right amount (202) 748-8002 is the number to call and tell us why. you can also text us (202) 748-8003 at. you can also follow the show on instagram. just over 1000 respondents to this whole talking about topics of race and sex taught in schools. here are some of the findings from the pool. overall americans lean slightly towards expanding not cutting back. roughly four in 10 think the current approach is about right. the poll from the university of chicago, associated press shows stark differences between republicans and democrats who want to see schools make

adjustments when it comes to the specifics of the poll you can find out. the question was taking a look at the topic of racism when it comes through ages k-12. respondents on that section said that topic talked too much in schools. 34% say it was talked to little. 37% saying it is just about the right amount of teaching. when it comes to matters of sexuality when that topic came up on the pole 23% of respondents said it was taught too much. already 1% saying it was taught to little. those saying it was just about the right about of teaching in public schools 40%. we will show you more of the pole. you can call us on the line if you think it is too much or too little or you think it is right. (202) 748-8000(202) 748-8000 too much is, too little is (202) 748-8001 if you sate is just

about right (202) 748-8002. you can text us at (202) 748-8003. a similar poll took a look at florida from its governor ron desantis. this is the pole saying that americans are divided. the question being asked is -- two children in k through third grade. 41% say they oppose it when it comes to democrats -- 46% of pendants. 61% of republicans say they support it. would you support or oppose?

saying it is not age-appropriate. 47 percent of adult citizens say they support that. 38 percent oppose. when it comes to ron desantis who passed legislation it was just before its signing that he made statements about the intent and purposes of the legislation. here's a portion. >> today we will sign the parent's rights in education bill. this bill takes three main steps. first it prohibits custom instruction about sexuality or things like transgender in k through three classrooms. after third grade those curriculums need to be age-appropriate. second the bill assures that at the beginning of every school year parents will be notified about health care services offered at the school with the right to decline any service offered.

finally, this bill ensures that whenever question or health screening is given to young students parents receive it first and give permission for the school to give it to their child. there has been a lot of discussions about this particular piece of legislation. you have seen a lot of sloganeering and fake narratives. you still see it even today after a lot of this has been debunked. many of the people who helped to whip this up have actually never read the bill. they have not taken the time to do that. they would rather just further narratives. i must tell you these leftist politicians, corporate media outlets and some of these activist groups actually have read the bill. there sloganeering because they do not want to admit that they support a lot of the things we are providing protections against. for example, they support sexualizing kids in kindergarten

. they support injecting woke gender ideology into second grade classrooms. they support enabling schools to transition students to a different gender without the knowledge of the parent much less without the parents consent. what they are doing with these slogans and narratives is they are trying to camouflage their true intentions. they know and every single pole that has been done that overwhelmingly americans oppose injecting this type of material into the classroom of young kids. american support the right of parents to be informed and to be able to withhold consent over certain types of medical treatments in school. >> you can find more online if you wish. for the next hour tell us what you think about the amount of topics being the aston schools. if you think it is the right about, too much too little. you can phone us on the lines or you can text us at (202)

748-8003. you can. our facebook or twitter. several of us responding. -- prepare them for jobs of the future maybe we will have times to -- nikko rinses children should learn about the different people that we have in the nation. just because a child grows up in an area that is not diverse it does not mean they will not mean people throughout their life. saying i twitter, the deep state wants to mold their children and lives. -- saint florida should spend more time combating violence in school. twitter is available for you if you want to post there. or on our facebook page. the ap poll makes reference to what you saw in florida and adding that it was in for genia's governor race that

governor glenn youngkin campaigned on banning critical race during -- systematic racism that has become a catchall. his democratic opponent terry mcauliffe -- should not tell parents what to teach. ap news.com if you want to see that pole for yourself and read the findings. for the hour you could tell us what you think about these topics. barbara in hollywood florida starts us off on the two little section. caller: good morning. it is definitely -- both sex and race relations. it is a denial of history as far as relations, race relations in

this country. that is across the board. i just noticed what governor desantis said that no one is reading his bill. that is far from the truth. i do not think governor desantis is reading what it is. i think he uses catchall phrases. i digress. it is still too little. we are growing fast. a lot of people here in the united states, if you're going to say this is a country of diversity then you have to, we need to teach diversity. sexual diversity, one of the reason for a lot of our craziness is because you run around hiding issues. it is not a part of our reality. host: if you say it is too

little what would you see is the right amount? caller: the right about when actually be dealing with the truth as it comes. we have history of tons of people. there are new ways to look at it. we are still looking at a lot of our history from first grade eyes. we need more. host: let us hear from stephen san jose, california. when it comes to these topics do say it is too much? caller: at the ages of kindergarten through grade school, it should not be taught at all. when we are having problems educating our children in reading writing and arithmetic,

what these people are doing is they are grooming and i repeat the word grooming in nefarious ways. there is no need to teach children or two shall we say suggest to children, you are a boy wouldn't you rather be a girl? you are a girl wouldn't you rather it a boy? children except adults as authoritative figures and they will be influenced by that of flora tate of figure. -- influenced by that authoritative figure. host: his high school an

acceptable place to talk about these topics? caller: at the very earliest it belongs in high school. preferably it would be, it should be reserved for college. and an optional level at best. the gay culture would like to teach the issues of sexuality and i am referring to a girl/boy issue. to put it bluntly, they either want to be more accepted and the more that they teach children to swing that way, the more of them

there are. host: that is there in san jose, california. we will put up the lines. you can call in and tell us what it comes to these issues. too much, too little, or just the right amount taught in schools. anna in florida says the topic is taught too much. she is in inglewood. caller: i think it is taught too much. we need to stick to writing reading and arithmetic. we do not need to sexualize children. they get enough of that from tv and their phones. host: why not put it in an educational context? caller: because it is not proper to teach children this in school.

this should be something between , they should not even be talking about it 1-3 anyway. kids do not even care at 1-3. host: you make a point that they could get this education other ways and you are saying not at all, do not put it in school at all. why is that? caller: because they don't need it. they don't even care about their sexuality 1-6. kids are on tv, it is everywhere. i cannot even watch regular tv because it is so bad. host: ok. that is anna in florida. floridians calling wraps in response to governor santos's legislation. you can get a copy of the legislation online. the section that gets

highlighted a lot says that classroom -- were -- in a manner that is not age-appropriate for developmental and -- with state standards. you can read some of the other text when it comes to that topic. carol in alexandria, virginia. saying the topics are taught too much. caller: hello. i worked in the school for many years. i did notice through the years, starting at six grade children are getting to how they feel about gender. sixth grade is when they start coming out. six grade is good to start teaching them. i was kind of shocked when a few kids came out in sixth grade.

i think that other kids who do not know what the kids are, i think -- these kids now, it is more advanced than what it used to be. they are more advanced with what is going on in the world. sixth grade is good for kids to start learning about their sexuality and different things about different sexuality. host: when you say sixth grade that is because adolescence is setting in and it should not be done before that? caller: that is right. that is when kids start coming out, when they are in the six grade. when they start coming out with their sexuality and trying to date and everything, and i tell you, because i drove the bus and saw a lot. these kids nowadays, they's --

the parents need to start talking to their kids around the sixth grade. kids know a lot. host: would you say that parents should be the only source for this type of education about sexuality or race issues? or is school an appropriate place? should parents be the main driver? caller: parents should be the main drive. i think the parents need to set in the class with their kids. these kids do not think about color. when they go to school they do not think about color. very small kids they did not be thinking about color. they do not think about color. host: recent events have caused a reanalysis of this type of education when it comes to new jersey this is from april 15

saying the governor announced, ordered the state of department education -- after guideline sparked an uproar in some parents and republican officials. democratic governor said he wants the department to provide for the current flirtation on what age-appropriate guidelines look like for our students, adding that our administration is ensuring that all our prepared to lead productive lives. governor murphy lashed out at critics saying distorted what is included in the guidelines in new jersey. has become the latest battleground on what is become a national debate about what students should be taught in classrooms. unfortunately our learning standards have been misrepresentative. when it comes to issues of sex and race, the issues too much of it, to little or just the right amount. if you state is too much (202) 748-8000.

if you say it is too little (202) 748-8001. if you think it is the right amount (202) 748-8002. we will hear from dan in stafford, virginia. he says they are taught too little. caller: the screener cautioned me that i have a new wants my response. we are not, we are not teaching our kids enough about staying within the lines you are born with. you are born a certain way and you -- a child cannot consent to have sex then a child cannot consent to have their sex changed. you are how you are and they do not have the reasoning or the experience to make such a lifelong change or to go down a path. it may be a slippery slope. it is sensory overload. as a younger parent i thought oh

, my kids are young. it is sensory overload. they get influence and they think that, they see people who take on this strong identity and they want to be that confident. they do not see the full picture. all they see is this curated social media personality. i think a lot of this is just sensory overload. kids who do -- kids do not know what they want. it is parents job but schools need to reinforce with the parents do. here are the lines and stay with in them. if you want to make a major change you need to do that when you can consent. that is definitely not k through three. host: what about middle school, high school? would you apply those same standards to higher grades? caller: middle schools still too

young. i remember being in high school in the early 1990's. shakespeare had topics of sexuality woven through it but it was elegant, it was woven in there. if you had a good english teacher they could explain what was going on. romeo and juliet. i think that was enough. i got everything i needed to know out of shakespeare. maybe i was just the we are with -- maybe i was just the weird kid in school. middle school is too young. host: that is here from glenn in arkansas. says these topics are taught too much. caller: taught too much. it is not about sex, race. it is -- they are hiding sex and hatred in that. host: ok.

bradley from michigan. we put a line for teaching at the right amount. caller: i am a retired teacher. i encourage other teachers to call in and give a little truth perspective on this topic. i was around elementary schools for 30 years. those topics are never brought up by a teacher, ever. there are not units on that in the curriculum. it is a manufactured thing by ron desantis and that type of element in our society. it is really a bad part of our society. i do not know why the republicans always seem to go to that lowball. they go the lowest. it seems to meet their true topic of interest. i wonder about a group of people that conduct themselves that

way. i am disappointed and again i encourage teachers to call in and let people know what is really going on in the schools. it is good, we turn out good people. we have a good society. host: from your education background, where is a good age to start talking about these things in the school system? caller: by talking? if you are actually given the instruction i would say middle school, high school. if a kid don't shy away from comments and questions that arise in class, there is extraneous things that come in. that is the dynamics of teaching. those are the teaching moments that i really celebrated. i enjoyed that moment of the. it was a really rewarding career. i loved it. host: bradley, he invited teachers to call in. if you are a teacher you can call in and give your perspective. if you're a parent you can call

in and give your perspective. the lines are there and you can text us. you heard about governor desantis's legislation. washington time set on its lead page that legislation is barking off efforts in other states saying that republican lawmakers have filed similar measures in georgia, ohio, louisiana, kansas city and tennessee. more have pledged to follow. it says ohio's bill introduced this month goes with language that tells schools not to quote teach, use or provide any curriculum or instructional materials on sexual orientation or identity for the youngest public school students. those in kindergarten and second and third grades. it is from the washington times. it continues taking a look at some other laws including george's bill introduced last month which would forbid classroom discussions in a primary grade level in a manner

that is not appropriate for the age or develop mental stages. wood band instructional materials that would quote normalize or support the lesbian, gay or bisexual and transgender issues. you can read more about that in the washington times. this is from texas. are these topics taught too much? caller: i believe it is taught way too much especially to our children in elementary school and i believe it should not be taught at least until middle school because elementary school is too young. host: ok. one of the other people responding to governor desantis was jen psaki about that

legislation. here's a portion. >> you've seen the residence passionately about his view that a bill like this, a bill that would discriminate against families, kids come up with these kids in a position of not getting the support they need at a time where that is exactly what they need is discriminatory. it is a form of bullying. it is horrific. the president has spoken to that. in terms of his views and comments from 25 years ago i think the most important question now is why our florida leaders are deciding they need to discriminate against kids who are members of the -- community. is it wanting to make kids have difficult times in school and in their communities? i want to pose that question to them. >> in the 90's when -- >> it is important to talk about

how outspoken the president has been against discrimination and what we are looking at here is a bill that would propagate misinformed hateful policies and impact children. that is the question i hope you can pose to some of the leaders in florida. i look forward to having that conversation with you. host: you can find that on our c-span website at c-span.org. jay in pennsylvania. these topics he says are taught the right amount. caller: i like to first say that i was wondering in the schools, someone called earlier about denial. they teach about african-americans that own slaves. did they talk about that? did they talk about black people in this country bought and sold

other black people and did so since 1654? and continuing to do so through the civil war. do they talk about the crime that goes on throughout new york city, about his citic jews, asians that are beaten every day? host: at the topic in hand. you say it is the taught the right amount. caller: when you talk about young children i think there is a way of doing things slowly. i believe children at this time and at their ages, talking about transsexuals and all this kind of stuff it is not the time for schools to do so. that is my opinion. host: when is the right time as far as school is concerned? when is it appropriate to teach that in school? caller: when my children were growing up i would not much my children being taught about

sexuality up until 12 years old, 10 years old. everything is out of control in this country. you say the wrong train, you get fired from a job. host: you are straying from the topic. let us go to florida. he says the top at a taught too little. caller: i wanted to say that when we make these laws that are over restricting or very general or vaguely worded we end up restricting the passive of these children. if we dictate what we can talk about in a classroom setting we are dictating what they are exposed to. if we truly believe in freedom in this country then how can we control what can and cannot be spoken about? how can we dictate to other people how they want to live their lives? host: why is the classroom setting a good setting? caller: classroom settings are

supposed to be these places that are free from personal opinions or at least where you can bring a personal opinion in and not be judged about it. they are the places where we are supposed to remove these things and talk about them in the abstract. where you are free from judgment , free of verbal assaults, hopefully. i think you know where i am now if you can hear the bell ringing. host: when you say too little what grade level would you say you would be comfortable with these topics being taught? caller: that is difficult and hard to put on an age range or a grade level. i think that when these discussions come up on their own time organically they need to be addressed.

there are these teaching moments that we have where it might not relate to the content in the moment but the student or the child had a thought and we want to embrace that and run with it. those are events that are very rare and what we need more of an education. i am from florida and i do agree with some of the wording. i think that it might be inappropriate from k through 32 say things. they are young and do not understand these things. however, i do not know a single teacher who would think it was a good idea to teach it at that age level in the first place. i do notice we are restricting the liberties and freedoms of fully grown adult citizens. let us say that there is a gay

or transsexual teacher in the classroom. and they have pictures of their family and their partner. they are no longer allowed to discuss these things or share that part of their life which is important to share at those grade levels. we are restricting the rights of actual grown citizens over the rights of students and so on. host: we will hear from brad in sun city, california. he says these topics are taught too much. caller: they are certainly taught too much. i am recited -- a retired social studies teacher. three quarters of the south never owned slaves. historically, that is a fact. to blame all white society for savory 100 years later is rather

baseless. the left controls the media and this is political correctness run amok. that is their agenda as far as that goes. the democrats on the left. host: when it comes to teaching -- you are saying it is too much. is that because it is too early or is it the content that is too much? caller: i know you are a liberal two. host: do you think it is because it is taught too early or overall too much? caller: it is too much but it is centered on political correctness. that comes from the left that controls the media. they want the democrats to win. it is that simple. host: when it comes to

legislation on critical race theory, anti-critical race theory educational efforts. there is a story on abc news that shows where this legislation is pending. the ones that -- the states that are in blue, these are states that have signed into law or at least part of their budget anti-critical race theory educational efforts. the ones that are in red and still pending several states across the midwest and some points in the east and west proposed pending legislation. you can see that at abc news. we have spent about a half-hour. this will continue for the next half hour. when it comes to teaching on race and sexuality issues, this is according to an abc poll. if you think these topics are

taught too much give us a call at (202) 748-8000. if you say they are taught too little (202) 748-8001. if you say it is just about the right amount (202) 748-8002. you can also text us at (202) 748-8003. a couple of other points from the pole. it asked about the parent influence on public school curriculum. if 2% of respondents say parents have too little influence on these matters. it breaks down to political parties. -- when it comes to the teachers influence on public school curriculum 51% of those responding say teachers have too little influence on curriculum matters including these topics of sex and race. at 2% of democrats -- dale in pennsylvania.

he says the topics are taught too little. caller: i feel it is too little because it is said that the teachers and the priest are still listing and raping the children. host: these are widespread accusations so let us stick to the topic at hand. why is it taught too little? caller: because of those reasons. host: we are going to move on. let us go to eric in compton, california. he says it is taught too much. caller: i believe it is taught too much. until we simply teach the kids, until you are standing in front of somebody you are planned on living the rest of your life we should not have the conversation of sex. why it y'all having a conversation about sex when you are not looking at someone you are planning to spend the rest of your life with. that is how simple that

conversation is. host: why should seth's education not be part of school curriculum? caller: everybody understands this. in still you are looking at somebody you are planning to spend the rest of your life with why you talking about x. about race, humanity where we teach how to get along with everybody there is no such thing as race. it is called humanity. back to the concept of sex, again we live in a culture where we have this type of -- there are gang bangers and all the stuff but we say hey, the law has changed to allow two people that's in love to get together and be married like husbands and wives and had the same benefits. these are the same people that call their so, they talk about their violence, they know all about their --

host: how does that relate to these topics being taught in schools? caller: as parents, parents and the teachers. the parents are teaching the stuff at home. we are willing to not deal with people in love but we accept violence. host: let us go to crystal in pennsylvania. she says the topics are taught too little. caller: good morning. i worked in grammar schools, actually kindergarten to sixth. middle schools and now i am in high schools. i have never said a one class where he heard sex education being taught with regard to identity sex. i've heard about the different parts of the body, identifying them. i have never heard anything like

that, however on race they teach the normal race, what happened during slavery. it is reality. it happened. in high school i got a reality check. i see the things that are going on in high school was sexuality that has an adult i am shocked by. not because of the teachers teaching it, the students are teaching me because i did not know this stuff. you are surprised that what students know. oh, you are going to be surprised that what they tell you. as far as race, i see african-americans, spanish, quotation, they are all dating each other. i think that is what the republicans do not want. they do not want to see that mixture going in there. they do not care about what race you are from, they are all

dating each other. what bothers me as an adult is the -- saying that the republicans are having or jesus and cocaine parties. that bothers me as an adult. host: back to the topic of schools. what grades should kids start hearing about these topics? caller: if you are talking about sexuality, may be in high school. that is where i see it is hitting them the hardest. they are doing everything you can imagine. as far as race, there is no problem. republicans are making a big thing about race theory. i have nary -- i have never -- when the war started. i do not hear all of this nonsense that they are talking about. as for sexuality, i think it should be taught, meaning identifying the parts of the body, meaning when puberty starts. host: that is crystal in

pennsylvania. one person talking about race, critical race theory is former vice president mike pence speaking at the university of virginia last week. you can see this event on c-span.org. when it comes to that specific portion hears that portion. >> the blighted administration, woke is him is running amok in our public schools and admit -- and universities. patriotic education has been replaced. -- authorized the teaching of what is known as critical race theory in our public schools. critical race theory actually teaches children as young as grade schools to be ashamed of the color of their skin. let me be clear, critical race theory is nothing more than state sanctioned racism and it should be rejected by every state in every city in this

country. host: again more of that available at c-span.org one bit of news, when it comes to the federal judge striking down the mask the mandate requirement on airplanes, trains and other public transportation the new york times takes a look at some of the reactions from airlines. american airlines says it quote prioritizes safety throughout the pandemic and supports federal measures to dance we are grateful to team members for enforcing the mask mandate. southwest airlines says it encourages employees and customers to protect their personal well-being about whether to wear a mask. delta announced it would stop enforcing mask requirement. their might also asked for patients. this decision coming down recently.

there is more reaction from public prints per tatian on these topics. host: hello daniel. caller: i do believe those topics are taught too much in the classroom. i believe that sexuality should be taught in high school. as far as where the parts on your body is concerned. as far as sexual intercourse and that behavior and to whether you are born this way or you're born that way it should be up to the parent who explained those things to their children at home in case they have -- the parents should have more responsibility when it comes to making those decisions whether they should want to know about their children, two mommies and two poppies in their home. i believe that should be taught in the household. host:. should have opt out options when it comes to these topics specifically? caller: absolutely.

host: let us hear from suzanne in south carolina. says the topic -- says the topics are taught too little. caller: first of all i want to say, i believe the subject it is hard to determine what is too little too much. it is very independent. as a mother of three teenagers, when my kids were going to have health class or sex education class i got a sheet of paper and i had the option to sign out. i also agree with a prior teacher who called about teaching moments. when kids ask questions as educators we need to give them facts without value. my daughter is an 11th grader.

she has been listening to your program for the past half hour. she said, mobile we care about our facts. i have known nothing about lgbtq. she said they think they're going to be fired. educators think my child is going to be part of the lgbtq community. i do not get taught that it is ok or anything. host: do the students in your class generally ok to hear about these topics? do some get uncomfortable and how is that handled? caller: for me they blow it off. some teachers are obviously, most teachers do support lgbtq community and everything. host: how much influence do you

think parents should have on these topics? caller: i feel like parents should be open to it because everybody is different. everybody should love who they love. having the option to be discriminated or not. everybody should be able to love who they love without being judged for it. host: again, we've got about 15 more minutes on this topic. if you want to give your thoughts on this. this is michael in massachusetts. caller: hello. i think my education as an example it was handled properly. the subject of sex came up in biology class starting at six grade. you got some 11 and 12-year-olds.

that is the donor puberty. i think god i was educated when i was which was in the 70's. i got a great education. children have to be taught the truth of history and how history impacts present time. that is why you have to speak about race. they need facts. i also want to express my concern that it sounds like based on some of the calls may be the parents are who need to be educated. you cannot have an uneducated individual will jewel who thinks that children should not hear about sex until high school. 11, 12. that is when puberty hits. some of this is common sense. race has to be discussed here in the united states and different

people have to be discussed. you can look at the screen. it is not about liberal, conservative necessarily. you have to know the facts. in terms of slavery, the children were put in the fields beginning at age five. the kids can handle information. host: that is michael in massachusetts. when it comes to the issues of race a recent story highlighted the work of the author ruby bridge -- this is from -- and it 11 page grievance, the group argues that -- the book ruby bridges revealed both explicit and implicit -- teaching. it implies that people of color

continue to be oprah's. it teaches that injustice of this 1960's exist today. ruby bridges had a chance to testify at a hearing taking a look at the topic of censorship. she talked about her experience. here's a portion that you can find online. >> read about the white house and be able to read about the little six-year-old girl who made a difference to the presidency. that little girl was me, ruby bridges. i am proud of my story. not just in this country but around the world. >> thank you so much. i am holding up the famous norman rockwell painting, the rendition in your book. it is wonderful and iconic.

your book has been objected to because people say it may make white children feel uncomfortable. that struck me as bizarre giving that you have a beautiful tribute to the teacher you loved the most i take it. you have a picture. she was white. you have a picture of einstein back who wrote -- john steinbeck. i guess they were rubbed the wrong way by what must be the most clean-cut photo of a racist protester. i imagine they had to search for and wide for the use of that n-word. what is the reaction to those people who say that book does not long in school libraries or in a curriculum about the

civil-rights. because it may make some white kids uncomfortable. do you think it would make white kids feel uncomfortable? >> i have thousands of kids who write to me constantly who lift up my books and talk about how they have learned so much from my own story. i believe that yes, there are some parents who might find the truth very hard to look at. i understand that. we cannot hide the truth from our kids. host: here is gina in alexandria, virginia. she says it is taught the right amount. caller: good morning. i just wanted to say that the young lady, the student who

spoke so eloquently. she also mentioned that some teachers will blow you off. if you have questions about that subject. that is unfortunate because that teacher should be contacting the parent and saying your child has questions about mature subjects, i can offer you resources if you would like to explore this with your child or maybe we could get together. i thought that child really brought up a good point. also, every time ron desantis talks about it, i think they should put the suicide hotline on their because he does not seem to care about the subject that much. he is using it as a wedge issue. when we are talking about kids you got to put the resources on the screen for parents, for children. he is a leader.

it is not just a wedge issue. it is real important. host: let us hear from johnny in florida. he says the topics are taught too much. caller: hello. i am in agreement that it is taught too much. it should be in high school. even with the racism being taught, critical thinking. people call into the show and highlight they know what they are talking about. if we do not deal with facts, -- they need to find the facts out before they start reporting it on shows like this. like the guy quoting the source and does not give the source. it was not like that. host: governor desantis making some other news as of yesterday. this is reported in the new york times saying florida has rejected math textbooks proposed for use in public school classrooms because they quote

incorporate prohibitive topics including social emotional learning and critical race theory. according to the department of education a review sample from one publish -- from one publisher -- lessons social awareness and relationship skills that framework of skills is a popular one across schools developed by the castle nonprofit. here is governor desantis giving the justification for this. >> we got rid of common core. it is a better way to do a lot of things, particularly math. one of the criticisms is that parents could not help kids with math. some of the books that do not meet standards are not going to be appropriate for us to use. you do have things like social and emotional learning and some of the things that are more

political in there. in our view like something like math first does not meet the standards. math is about getting the right answer. we want kids to learn the things to get the right answer. it is not matter how you feel about the problem or introduce these other things. there is a wrong answer and a wrong answer. we won all of our students to get the right answer. most of the book that that not meet standards for whatever reason happened to be in the early grade. when you get to the later grades most books met the standards. we are going to continue to focus the education on the actual strong academic performance of the students. we do not want things like math to have some of these other concepts introduced. it is not proven to be productive. it takes our eye off the ball. host: on twitter says too many parents are uncomfortable about sex and race. my parents gave me a book in the fifth grade.

i wanted to learn all about them. lizzie from twitter says schools are not parents. let us hear from herndon, virginia. caller: super glide for c-span. the coverage is priceless. on the subject of things being taught to litter a lot of callers are treating this as though it is something salacious or detailed. talking about gender identity is something very mild. i think children deserve to hear that some people are gay and some people are trans. that is normal stuff. they deserve to hear that before the fifth grade. host: why do you think they are ready to hear these things at younger ages? caller: children deserve to know about things and be educated about things before they experience them and before they are current fronted by them.

younger children can be particularly mean when they are confronted by something they are not accustomed to. we need to make sure children are not harassing each other on the basis of one child having two dads. they need to understand that that is appropriate and normal and fine. host: another resident out of herndon, this is james. he says topics are taught too much. caller: i see that i am in direct opposition of the other caller from herndon. i've two points. first, there is no opinion associated with how to reduce a fraction, how to diagram a sentence or if you are in biology class how to identify the organs of the animal you just dissected. there are no opinions about that. that is what should be taught. this is solely the providence of the immediate family unit.

the school system should not try to usurp the apparent responsibility on the subject. host: when you say biology, human biology should not be part of it? caller: let me limit what i'm saying here. i'm talking specifically in the primary, elementary school grade. this should not be part of the curriculum. what should be taught is writing , reading, arithmetic. there is the outcome of the answer you are looking for. that is which they should be taught at an early age. when the subject comes up, the immediate family unit has to be brought in by the school. you cannot undermine a parents role, responsibility and authority getting desk in a kids i. that is a recipe for disaster. host: let us go to john in new

york. he says the right amount being taught. caller: thanks for taking my call. i am a former teacher. i taught history at a middle school level. i always make sure i taught race and dealt with race. not just african-americans but indigenous people, certainly the atrocities committed against them. when it comes to sexuality and teaching kids kindergarten through third grade i agree with the last caller. it needs to be age appropriate. these kids do not really understand. if you leave too much to the schools what you do is break down the solidarity of families. that is not a good thing. this is probably one of the

major drivers of where our society has been fragmented. the nuclear families gradually losing influence of the family. i saw it in the classroom down . so i think that there other people who would agree with me that is something that the parents who are -- it -- it is something that the parents are responsible for. host: john finishing off this hour of calls. we thank all of you that participated. two guests joining us, first up, chief george beebe as he talks about the latest developments in russia's invasion of ukraine. later on, steven greenhouse on recent unionization efforts at amazon and starbucks as well as the future of the u.s. labor me of -- movement.

those conversations coming up. ♪ >> all of this month watch the top 21 winning videos from our c-span student camera competition. every morning, we will air one of our student camera winners whose documentary told us how the federal government impacted their lives and you can watch all new student camera documentaries anytime online at studentcam.org. ♪ at least six presidents recorded conversations while in office. here many of these conversations on the new podcast "presidential recordings." >> season one focuses on lyndon

johnson, you will hear about the 1964 presidential campaign, civil rights act, the march on selma and the war in vietnam. not everyone knew that 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 make sure that the conversations were taped as johnson would signal them through an open door between his office and theirs. >> you will also hear blends talk. >> i want a report of the number of people who were assigned to kennedy the day he died and the number assigned to me now and if mine are not less, i want them last right quick. if i cannot ever go to the bathroom, i will not go. i will stay right behind these black gates. >> presidential recordings, nine them on the c-span now app or wherever you got your podcasts.

♪ >> first ladies in their own words, our eight part series looking at the role of the first lady, time in the white house and issues important to them. >> it was a great advantage to know what it was like to work in schools because education is such an important issue both for a governor, but also for a president and so that was very helpful to me. >> using material from c-span's biography series "first ladies." >> i am very much the kind of person who believes that you should state -- say what you mean and mean what you say and take the consequences. >> and c-span's video libraries. we will feature lady bird johnson, betty ford, rosalynn carter, nancy reagan, laura bush, hillary clinton, michelle obama, and melania trump.

watch saturdays at 2:00 p.m. eastern on c-span two or listen to the series as a podcast on the c-span now mobile app. >> "washington journal" continues. host: our first guest is george beebe, a former special advisor to vice president cheney, a former cia russian analyst chief and the author of the book "the russia trap." welcome to the program. guest: thank you. host: when you see the events of the next several weeks specifically in ukraine, how would you characterize those and would you call it the right approach? guest: well, what we are trying to do is to strike a balance. on the one hand the russian invasion needs to be repelled, it needs to be countered. we cannot tell -- we cannot

stand back if a country is invading a neighbor and attempting to take territory or control of that government and impose its will on it, so the united states has a clear interest in making sure that the russian invasion does not succeed in the russians do not achieve total victory. on the other hand we recognize quite wisely that there is a great danger that the united states and russia could wind up in a direct military conflict, and that is a conflict between the world's two largest nuclear powers, and the prospects for escalation into a nuclear war are not insignificant, and so we are trying to strike a balance between providing ukraine the wherewithal it needs to fight back against the russians, punishing the russians through sanctions so that we are sending a message that this type of

behavior is not acceptable while at the same time avoiding an escalation into a direct conflict. host: what is the potential of the escalation occurring when it comes to nuclear weapons? guest: probably less than 10% just to pick a number, but that is uncomfortably high nonetheless when you consider the potential consequences of a nuclear war. one of the people that i worked for 20 years ago, vice president dick cheney said that the prospect of terrorists groups getting their hands on a nuclear weapon, even if it were only 1% was unacceptably high for the security of the united states. if we are talking about a situation with russia where we bite -- where we might wind up in a nuclear war and that number even if it is at 10% that is a very daunting number for us to be facing.

i think we need to take this seriously. host: we have had guests saying the nuclear option would not be an option because of the fallout issues. do you see that as a plausible reasoning? guest: i am not quite sure i understand? host: nuclear fallout in the country and how it could affect russia overall which would limit vladimir putin's use of nuclear weapons, is that valid? guest: that he would not initiate because it would have implications for russia? i think that to some degree is correct. and that is what you might call the rational actor model of understanding this. that rationality will prevail and that russia would be injured by the sort of thing therefore it will not engage in that behavior. unfortunately in international relations rationality does not always prevail. there are situations where people make mistakes, they do things that do not make rational

sense, largely for emotional or political reasons. the real danger of escalation would come from a situation where the russians felt they were cornered, that they faced a choice between their continued existence, and resorting to nuclear weapons use in some way. this is a great lesson that john f. kennedy noted after the cuban missile crisis in 1962, that the leaders of nuclear superpowers should not put each other or themselves in a position where they face a choice between humiliation and launching nuclear war. so, although rationality would argue that putin would not do this, there are situations where either the united states or russia could feel as if it faced that kind of choice, and that is not the kind of decision that you want to be sending up the chain of command. host: situation such as what? guest: either we use nuclear

weapons or we face extreme danger for our countries for some sort of utter humiliation. host: our guest is with us until 8:45. 202-748-8001 for republicans. 202-748-8000 for democrats. independents, 202-748-8002 and you can text us at 202-748-8003. as far as russia allowing for new offensives in the east, donbass being an area of target, how does that change over what we have seen when it comes to the conflict between ukraine and russia? guest: i think the first phase did not go well. they faced serious military resistance, more than they anticipated. they had taken a pause, and they have tried to learn lessons from phase one, they are regrouping and concentrating their forces

on the line of contact in the east, hoping to box in ukrainian forces and the bulk of the armies along that contact in the east. we will see whether the russians prove more successful in phase two than phase one. i expect this to be a lot more destructive, a lot bloodier. the russians have already stepped up their missile and rocket attacks and it is having quite destructive effects. i think this is going to get more intense with a lot more bombs, artillery, rockets, and a lot more civilian casualties as a result. host: we have seen the ukrainian president ask for a variety of weapons from nato and the united states, no-fly zones and the like. is that enough in your mind?

guest: i think a no-fly zone would be a great mistake on our part. there is no way you can impose a no-fly zone over ukraine without directly engaging the russian military. and you know, the notion that some people have that a no-fly zone is a gentlemen's agreement that there will be parts of ukrainian airspace where no one will fly is not how this works. we will have to engage russian aircraft and strike again run -- strike against russian surface-to-air missile units in ukraine, belarus and russian territory in order to secure the no-fly zones which means war with russia which is a grave step and president biden is wisely ruling that out. are we providing enough military supplies to the ukrainians? well, you are getting into that question of balance, and i think

the biden administration quite wisely is providing ukrainians with enough wherewithal to defend themselves without crossing an invisible line and it is not clear where the line is drawn into so much support that it draws russian retaliation. the russians have already warned publicly and privately that they consider those weapon supplies legitimate military prior -- military targets. they have also struck this kind of supply in the past, back in 2014. there was a large explosion at an ammunition and weapons depot in the czech republic which the czech republic years later attributed to russian intelligence operatives who were actually blowing the supply up. those were supplies that were going to ukraine back in 2014 when this war first erupted. the russian has done -- the russians have done it before and

they've warned that they will do it again and we need to take that seriously. that is the balance we are trying to strike. host: you wrote a recent piece for responsible statecraft. you talked about what the u.s. could do to protect the citizens of ukraine. how would you characterize that? guest: the citizens of ukraine are bearing the brunt of the violence. the longer the war goes on the more that they will suffer, the more humanitarian atrocities you are going to see, that is what happens in war. the more disruption of physical infrastructure, the more you are going to get refugee flows leaving ukraine, the more difficult it will be to rebuild all of this. now when you think about what can be done to prevent all of that, by far the most effective

thing to do would be to try and ring the war to an early end. and, it will not come to an early end if our intention is to defeat russia altogether. if we are thinking that we can drive russian forces out of the donbas and have them returned with their tails between their legs to russia, we have crimea, for example. we are in for years of conflict, and that ukrainians themselves will suffer the most. and if we think that the russians are going to achieve some sort of outright victory over ukraine, again i think that we have already seen so far that that is beyond their military capabilities. so, and outright ukrainian victory or an outright russian victory are very unlikely. so, your alternatives are escalation, which would be extremely dangerous, or some

kind of settlement and the settlement will have to be something that is acceptable to all parties in all of this including very -- the ukrainians. that is the kind of thing that we will be thinking about. how will we use coercive powers on the russians to incentivize an agreement in this war. host: we will talk about that in a bit now i want to play john kirby talking about the status of what is to -- of what is going on with the capabilities of russia. i want to play a little bit of what he had to say. [video clip] >> they have suffered losses, casualties and lost platforms and systems where there are aircraft, tanks, and armored personnel carriers. you've seen destroyed russian platforms on the road but they have quite a bit of capability left. they are concentrating that smaller geographic area, in the

donbas and the south. they are trying, as i answered earlier, to overcome logistics and sustain their interior line of communication problems. they will not have as far to go in the donbas to reinforce, resupply, refuel their forces because they have a long border with that part of ukraine. and they are certainly adding combat capability in that part of ukraine. it is a smaller, again piece of ground than what they have been trying to operate in over the last three to four weeks, three major line of access and they still a lot of combat power to use. it is also, as i said earlier, terrain they have been comfortable with. they have been fighting over the donbas area for eight years.

their commanders and troops, there is a familiarity with cities, towns, and terrain that they did not necessarily have they are trying to, kyiv from the north and then up from crimea into the south. we would expect that they are going to try again through their own familiarity with the terrain and the mistakes they made, they will try to overcome that. host: your response. guest: the thrust of what he is saying is correct. the russians are concentrating their forces right now on the east. that concentration will help, certainly. they have shorter logistical lines. that will also help their military fortunes as well. once the operation in mariupol is over, presumably successfully

for the russians they will be able to bring forces from the south up to the north, that will also help. all of that said, there is a variable in all of this that we do not know. and that is essentially the effectiveness of the soldiers themselves, the fighters on the ground. there will to fight, the decisions that they make in the course of battle. so far, russian forces have not performed particularly well in those areas. the ukrainians to -- appear to have clear superiority in their will to fight in their effectiveness as individual fighters. we will see whether that changes in this next phase, it is a big question. host: the first caller is carl from massachusetts on the independent line. you are on with george beebe, go ahead. caller: good morning and thank you for c-span. i asked this question some

months ago of sebastian orca -- sebastian gorka, he kind of implied i was a conspiracy nuts. i have a two part question. do you believe that putin would've gone into crimea if the united states had not deposed the ruler and installed their own. the second part is the people in eastern ukraine have a plebiscite to have more autonomy from russia, and ukraine? that is my question, sir. guest: i think those are good questions. and what you are getting at is the link between this russian invasion and the broader question of nato's enlargement since the end of the cold war in

the early 1990's up until the present day. and the russians clearly have indicated that they oppose that enlargement, in general. particularly to ukraine. which has all sorts of geographic, economic, cultural, and political significance for russia. they have been warning about this problem not just since the end of the soviet union, but in the latter days of the cold war. mikhail gorbachev as the kremlin leader under the soviet union was concerned about the possibility that the breakup of the soviet union could lead to the separation of ukraine and russia, and he regarded that as fraught with all sorts of political and insecurity -- and security problems and he also warned against this.

and putin has vented his anger over this many times over the last 15 to 20 years. so, would this have happened with crimea, what it have been annexed by the russians had the elected ukrainian president not been removed from power? i think probably not. i would not call that situation one where the united states deposed yana covid -- oppose -- deposed him, i think it was more complex than that. i think we would not be in a situation we were in today had the united states and europe approached the ukraine problem in a different way. we unfortunately have approached this like it is a tug-of-war geopolitically.

between the west and russia over ukraine's fate, arguing that ukraine should be part of the west. and not part of the east. given the realities of the situation. the internal composition of ukraine which is an amalgamation of more european oriented parts of the western regions and more russian oriented eastern parts, there is no way that we could pull ukraine into the western orbit exclusively without provoking quite a violent reaction from russia and inside ukraine itself. the reverse has also been true. there is no way that russia could pull ukraine into its exclusive orbit without provoking a violent reaction in

the western portions of ukraine and strong opposition from europe and the united states as well. to me, the obvious way to have approached this would have been to make ukraine neither a part of the west nor the east, this is a concept that henry kissinger raised almost a decade ago. ukraine is a bridge that brought together post--- both east and west that allowed russophones and non-russian speaking parts of ukraine to coexist peacefully. unfortunately we approach this as a tug-of-war, and what has happened is that ukraine itself has been plunged into war and ukrainian citizens have been quite adversely affected from all of this. i do not think we can put the genie back in the bottle, we have to deal with the situation

as it is. i think that will mean trying to find some sort of compromise settlement, as painful as that will be politically. host: gary, ohio. republican. good morning. caller: good morning, hello. my question is this war's well-publicized all over the world, with social media, how are we going to treat russia after it is all over, are we still going to have sanctions? how are the russian people going to feel about all of this? thank you for taking my call. guest: that is a very good question and a very hard one to answer. part of this will depend on what happens on the battlefield and how that fighting ends, if it does. if we are able to find a mutually acceptable compromise that we all do not like, but we

can all live with, then the question of how we deal with russia will be an important one. i do not think we can try the compromise unless it is accompanied in some way by some easing of the economic sanctions that the united states and europe have opposed -- imposed. the russians will not agree to a compromise on the battlefield with ukraine while still believing that the united states and europe intends to strangle the russian economy into submission, and so isolate the russians that they cannot be normal players in some way in international relations. however, if we attempt to approach this by saying the russians are going to be in the penalty box essentially until they have regime change inside russia, until putin leaves power

in some way or another and we get a more amenable, we hope, russian government in power, i think we will be in for many years of very dangerous confrontation between the west and russia and the world situation in which the russians and the chinese are increasingly allied with one another in ways that will be very detrimental to american interests and very difficult for us to deal with. we have to think pretty hard about how this ends and what kind of after war situation the world will be most advantageous. host: reporting on the effect of the sanctions given that there are estimates that the russian economy has been affected 10 to 15%. what are the long-lasting impact of sanctions and it is enough to

stop or alter what the russians are doing? guest: the second part is easier to answer than the first. the russians i think have already shown that these the paint -- the sanctions are not affecting their decisions on the battlefield in ukraine. the reason why is a fairly simple one. the russians do not believe that this operation in ukraine is an elective. that it is optional. that it is nice today. they regard this as a must do, a matter of russia's survival. you can dispute the validity of that perception on their part, but i do not think there is any question of that is how they are seeing this. as a result they feel like they have no choice but to fight, the alternative is the breakup of

russia, the end of russia as an integral country and the end of russia as any kind of significant player in the world. and that is not a situation that they are reeling they are willing to contemplate. they have a history of economic degradation, but we do not hold out much hope that economic sanctions by themselves can call the russians to say that this is too painful for us. we are going to leave. now, exactly what kind of impact this will have on the russian economy is hard to predict right now. i think that the russians will have to be much more on-topic in the approach the economy. the soviet economy was not very

integrated into the world at all. it was largely insulated from much of the world economy. it was integrated quite considerably into the world, and that will change. it will not reverse altogether but there will be less integration, certainly with europe and the west. there are going to be orienting the economy mary -- the economy much more to the south and china. that reorientation will inevitably be bumpy and it will take a little bit of time. and i think the russians know that. but, nonetheless that is a price that they are willing to bear. the russians are experiencing a great deal of human capital flight. and this is a talented population. quite adept in science, math, and engineering, and resins -- russian citizens who have those sorts of ship -- -- sorts of

skills and have the options to go elsewhere are doing so. the loss of the human talent will inevitably have an impact on the russian economy over time, and not a good one. i think the russians are not facing a particularly bright future economically right now. host: our guest to talk about russia and ukraine. anthony, pennsylvania. republican line. you are next. caller: good morning. i have a question for you first, back in august 2021 you had a guest who wrote a book that he predicted that putin would invade western europe in 2022 before the midterm elections in the united states, and the premise of the book is that he would be able to respond to any military action we provided and he would take out our military satellites easily with drone

robots that they have that are tracking our satellites. i was wondering if you could have him back on and then i have a question for mr. beebe. yesterday i noticed that mr. biden canceled an anti-satellite test. i am wondering what vulnerability, seriously, do we face from satellite perspective and is there anything being done to protect that, and i am not sure that if -- i'm not sure if you can answer those questions, but i wonder if you would have an answer and i will take my answer offline. thank you for your time. guest: i think that is an excellent question. the united states is quite dependent on space, both for military intelligence operations and also for the functioning of our economy. this has been a sector that for much of the last 50 some years

has been essentially invulnerable, beyond the reach of weaponry, and we have been quite secure as a result. that situation in general is changing. our satellite systems are much more vulnerable to attack and they have ever been, and this can be done in a number of different ways. you mentioned killer satellites, space-based weaponry, of various kinds that can damage other satellites. late last year the russians conducted an anti-satellite test of their own. they launched a missile from earth that went up into space and struck a defunct soviet era satellite that test was successful. the united states protested that

anti-satellite test quite loudly resulting in a great deal of space debris that posed risks to other satellites orbiting including the international space station on which there were russian cosmonauts at the time. and we claimed that the russians were essentially being irresponsible and reckless citizens of space by putting these other satellites and cosmonauts in danger. but i think that the russians were actually sending us a message, and i think there are two parts to the message. the first was we know american vulnerabilities, we know that you are so dependent on space. number two, not only do we have the technical capability to damage the satellites, to strike at their achilles' heel, but we have such resolve that we are willing to risk danger to our

own cosmonauts in order to show you how much resolve that we have here. those are signals that have a lot of relevance to the situation we are facing right now. when you talk about escalation, space is one of those areas that would be vulnerable for that escalation. the russians i do not think are going to resort lightly that sort of step. it would be highly risky, highly likely to draw a retaliation from the united states, but if this next phase of the war in ukraine really stumbles and the russians appear to be facing a choice between utter defeat and humiliation or escalation, then going after some of these satellite systems in some way would not necessarily have to be connecticut, they could use cyber operations as well. -- conn -- kinetic, they could

also use cyber operations as well. host: you've mentioned humiliation twice, so what would that mean to vladimir putin? guest: he clearly is speaking very emotionally when he talks about ukraine and what he thinks the west has done to russia since the end of the cold war. he uses wards -- words like betrayal and untrustworthiness. he regrets trusting the west too much. when he talks about what mistakes he has made, he says my biggest mistake was trusting the west. these are emotionally laden terms and he does believe, and he has said this repeatedly that russia's existence is at stake and the west and nato are attempting to encircle and

ultimately a race russia from the map. a lot of people regard this as paranoid. and they do not believe his perceptions are justified. we have to consider that whether justified or not these are things that he is acting on. humiliation would certainly involve some sort of defeat on the battlefield in ukraine. he is rolling the dice, putting russia's prestige, and security and military on the line, and if he has dealt an outright defeat he would regard that as humiliating and dangerous. he is in a position to make sure that if russia loses we all lose as well. you might call that the samson scenario where you pull everything down on everyone including yourself. the russians are capable of doing that and we need to take

it seriously. host: are guest served as a former advisor to dick cheney and a former russian analyst to talk about russians -- russia and ukraine. we showed the title, the russia trap, how this could spiral into a nuclear capacity, what is the shadow war aspect? guest: it is different than the cold war. we had an ideological competition, we had a military arms race, we had a geopolitical competition for allegiance in much of the world, but we also had a set of rules, mutual agreements that were both formal and informal between the united states and soviet union that were meant to manage the competition and make sure that it did not spiral out of control. we did not have a lot of common interest between the united

states and soviet union, but we had one common interest which was not getting into a suicidal nuclear confrontation. and we recognize particularly after the cuban missile crisis that we needed to put in place some things to manage the risk. the shadow war reflects a fundamentally different situation where we do not have those sorts of rules anymore. most of the understanding is that the united states and soviet union had and the united states and russia had an arms controller going away. or are already gone, the inf treaty, the conventional forces in europe -- treaty and a host of others are no longer on the table. and some of the understandings that were informal, such as the understanding between the kgb and cia that we would not target

each other's officers for harm in some capacity, that seems to be gone. there is not that kind of understanding, and putin has reportedly come to the conclusion that the united states has destroyed what he thought were the old rules and that we are now in a no holds barred competition where the stakes are existential for russia. and the shadow war also reflects a technology change. we have this new dimension of the cyber arena where a lot of espionage is being conducted, but it is very difficult for the recipients of those cyber intrusions to know what the ultimate purpose of the intrusions are, but not only can you gather data and information,

they are sabotaging the networks. disrupt or destroy the functioning of the systems that are connected to those networks. and that means that the line that once existed between spying and warfare has become a lot more blurry these days. in the old days when we were listening to telephone conversations or recruiting human spies, it was clear that that was not an act of war. today it is not so clear when we are intruding into other country's computer networks. and that means that the prospects for escalation are greater they had before, because of that lack of clarity. host: let us hear from greg in florida. independent line. caller: good morning. i have a question for you. with regards to why russia has

invaded ukraine. i have done a little bit of research on this. the ukrainians do not like, and for the past eight years, has not liked the russians to run their pipeline down through eastern ukraine, down through crimea and that is why i believe that the crimean's have -- what is the word i want -- have associated more with them. the ukrainians have told russia for many years that no, it is

not going to happen because there are more people in the west that want to go to the eastern side, however you are not going to do this. what is your insight? guest: two pipeline politics is an important one in all of this. i do not think this is the fundamental motivator of this russian invasion, that it is an important variable in all of this. back in the soviet days, the soviet union built pipelines to allow it to provide natural gas to western europe. this is controversial at the time and it occurred under the reagan administration. ultimately, the europeans prevailed, margaret thatcher was one of the key players in all of this. we reached an agreement that western europe was comfortable

with the construction of these pipelines and this became a significant source of hard currency for the soviet government at the time. and that supply of now russian gas to europe has expanded significantly over the past several decades, and the russians have been building new pipelines in the north, as well as in the south that will facilitate even greater volumes of natural gas to western europe. this has also been controversial. one of the concerns has been that as the russians add more pipelines, they will be less dependent on that pipeline that goes through ukrainian territory itself, and therefore better able to engage in essentially energy blackmail of the ukrainians in order to exert political control, coercive

control over ukraine. part of the opposition to the other pipelines was meant to deprive the russians of that coercive leverage through these new supplemental pipelines. this is really, i think, become less of an issue after the invasion. and part of that is because the german government has actually said we are not actually going to license that new pipeline in the north because of our unhappiness over what the russians have done in ukraine. part of this is that the europeans in general, including the germans most specifically, believe that dependence on russian natural gas supplies is a strategic liability for europe. i think what this is doing in european politics is accelerating a search for

alternatives to dependence on russian gas. part of that will be accelerating so-called green energy technologies, but part of this will be turning to other suppliers including the united states, even though this will be more expensive, at least in the short run for the europeans, i think they are convinced that dependence on russian supplies is simply not something that they are willing to tolerate anymore. host: is there a way in your mind that russia and ukraine can come to a consensus to end what is going on? guest: it is possible. and first of all, on settling the war, in a way that both sides find acceptable, that is not going to be easy. the ukrainians have indicated that they are willing to contemplate neutrality for ukraine, not being a part of either nato or some sort of russian alliance. but to do that they have

insisted that they need some very solid security guarantees so that they are not vulnerable to a repeat of this kind of invasion. and exactly what those security guarantees will be is going to be a difficult thing to determine. if it looks like article five of the north atlantic treaty, which is essentially something that requires consultation of nato members, if one of them is attacked, i do not think the united states or many other nato allies are going to be willing to provide that guaranteed to the ukrainians. we have not been willing to provide that so far. we did not go to war to defend ukraine in 2014 and we are not going to war to defend ukraine today. given that i doubt we would be willing to contemplate an article five type guarantee.

however if we offer something less, that might not be acceptable to the ukrainians in all of this. so, threading that needle where we provide enough of a security guarantee to the ukrainians that they are willing to agree to neutrality while not providing so much that either we are uncomfortable or the russians are uncomfortable. they have made very clear that they do not want the u.s. military anywhere near ukraine, that is very difficult thing to do. on territory it is a sticky subject. russians will not withdraw from territory that they already hold militarily. the russians would find that humiliating. so, that is going to be a sticking point on the russian side. the ukrainians naturally have said they are not willing to concede territory. so, there are serious obstacles to the political settlement that are not insurmountable, but in

less that occurs, talking about russian gas supplies through ukrainian territory i think, it is not a realistic prospect. host: our guest was a former cia russian analyst and chief adviser to dick cheney on russia and the author of "the russian trap," george beebe, thank you for your time. coming up we will take a look at the state of the union. joining us is steven greenhouse. we will talk about recent unionization efforts by amazon and starbucks and the future of the labor movement. we will have that conversation when "washington journal" continues. >> c-span brings you an unfiltered view of government. our newsletter recaps the day for you from the halls of congress to daily press briefings to remarks from the president. scan the qr code to sign up for

this email and stay up-to-date on everything happening in washington each day. subscribe using the qr code or visit c-span.org/connect to subscribe any time. ♪ >> first ladies in their own words. our eight part series looking at the role of the first lady, their time in the white house and issues important to them. >> it was a great advantage to know what it was like to work in schools because education is such an important issue both for a governor but also for a presidents, and so that was very helpful. >> using material from the award-winning biography series " first ladies." >> i am very much the kind of person who believes that you should say what you mean and mean what you say, and take the consequences. >> and c-span's online video library.

we will feature betty ford, lady bird johnson, rosalynn carter, nancy reagan, hillary clinton, laura bush, shall obama, and melania trump -- michelle obama and melania trump. every weekend at 2:00 p.m. eastern on c-span2 or listen as a podcast on the c-span now free mobile app or wherever you get your podcasts. c-span has unfiltered coverage of the u.s. response to russia's invasion of ukraine, ringing the latest from the president and white house officials, pentagon, and state department and we also have international perspectives from the united nations and statements from foreign leaders all on the c-span networks, the c-span now free mobile app and c-span.org/ukraine, or web resource page you can watch the latest videos on demand and follow tweets from journalists

on the ground. >> "washington journal'continues. host: our next guest reported on labor issues for "the new york times" and the author of " beaten-down and worked up." steven greenhouse, welcome to " washington journal." we brought you on because of events about the unionization efforts at that one place in staten island, talk about what happened and why is it important when it comes to the labor movement? guest: i started out as "the new york times" labor reporter in 1995 and has been writing down -- writing about labor issues. the victory of the union of staten island is by my mind the biggest and most important beat the odds david versus goliath win for a union in many decades,

going way back before i began. why is it so big? because it is 8300 workers which is quite big, second amazon, if there is any company that people thought could not be unionized it was amazon because it is so ferociously antiunion, it is like it is the only company that puts antiunion posters and bathroom stalls so that while you are sitting on the can you have to read amazon's antiunion propaganda. and amazon is one of the leading corporations in image, substance, and importance. and jeff bezos is one of the nation's top business executives, so for a union to beat amazon at such a huge facility when amazon was dealing with a full-court press, that is

a big deal and it sends signals to workers and executives across the nation. to executives it says you might feel like you are invulnerable, but even if mighty amazon can lose a unionization site, -- fight, you might lose one too. and it sends a big message to workers who thought that amazon is a test -- a tough nut to crack, but if enough can unite against amazon we have enough to unite in our workplace too. taking amazon and the string of victories in starbucks, this is the most exciting moment for labor unions and workers in decades. there is a lot going on and you hear about the first rei store was unionized in manhattan, the first rockclimbing facility in the country, indoor rockclimbing facility in the country was

facility -- was unionized. the traveling tour of waitress is unionizing. dartmouth, and grinnell are unionizing. there is a lot of excitement right now among especially young workers that we can improve our lot and maybe raise our wages and better or working conditions by joining a union -- a union. host: for the amazon model what made it successful? guest: great question. one of the -- i use the word amazing aspects of the victory on staten island, new york city as that it was not done by an established powerful union like the teamsters, it was done by a union founded by a fired amazon worker and his best friend to continue to work in the amazon warehouse on staten island. you were these two little delete -- little david's taking on this goliath with one million

employees across the united states. and they managed to get two dozen workers inside the warehouse to really join their union effort and try to organize and reach out to the 803,000 workers and they are brilliant. we reach out to hundreds of thousands of workers, they spoke to them at the bus stop as they are coming and going to the facility, they held barbecues, they held bonfires to speak to the workers in the winter, and they did a good job with putting amazon -- rebutting amazon's arguments. one of the main arguments that they use in fighting against the union is saying that the union is the third party, they are not us and they do not want the union intervening between the wonderful worker and wonderful management. and they are just here to grab your dues and live high on the hog and they do -- and the

workers who participate and lead the effort to unionize amazon made clear we are not a third party, we are fellow workers like you. we know the problems that amazon workers face because we are workers. no the stresses and how brutal it is at work, and we are not a third party, we represent your interests. we are not trying to grab dues to drive cadillacs, we want to have a functioning union and we need dues to have a functioning union to get better pay for you and better working conditions. and these workers really, they work -- these organizers did a good job relaying and communicating with these workers, and another big thing is i have often written in my books that the playing field when workers and union seek to unionize is tilted in favor of

corporations and against workers and unions. take the amazon effort to unionize and alabama, and bessemer. there amazon was able -- under american law amazon can prohibit union organizers from the teamsters or department store union from setting foot on company property. they cannot go inside, they cannot even put flyers on the windshields of company cars. meanwhile, union organizers are prohibited from company partnered -- property, the company can propagandize against the union 24 hours a day seven days a week with videos in the lunchroom in break rooms, requiring workers to attend antiunion meetings, managers could go up and speak to workers one-on-one and say here is a reason why you should not join the union, the union is greedy,

bad, and corrupt. there is an imbalance to how much the employer can communicate with workers versus how much union organizers can communicate. the big difference at staten island is that the organizers were workers who worked inside the building and had the right to enter to go to work, so it was very easy in this kind of self organized, homegrown effort for workers to talk to other workers, and that i think in many ways was the secret. it was workers talking to coworkers and those workers unlike many outside union organizers could gain access and talk to workers in the lunchroom in break room they had far more access to the workers than when big unions send in staff organizers to try and speak. host: our guest is with us until 9:30 and if you want to ask

about events involving unions, republicans, 202-748-8001. democrats, 202-748-8000. independents, 202-748-8002. perhaps you are union member who wants to give your perspective on what you saw going on. 202-748-8003, you can give us a call at that number and you can also post on our facebook and twitter feeds. for amazon and starbucks alike, getting unionization is one thing, how do they keep it sustainable without a large -- somebody backing them. guest: i should first say what happened at starbucks is quite remarkable. starbucks like amazon is fiercely antiunion, and the message that starbucks and amazon send is do not try to unionize, we are self atrocious antiunion you do not have a chance. but there is this initial effort to unionize a few starbucks in

buffalo and in december the very first workers at a starbucks for the first time voted to unionize , so that was the first of 9000 company owned and operated starbucks to unionize and that excited people. people, that really excited people. workers, the floodgates opened up. now we have seen workers at over 200 starbucks in over 30 states petitioning to hold union elections. so we have one starbucks store in december that unionized, 20 voted in favor of unionization, and 200 have voted for elections. so that as a whole lot of momentum. and a union backing, there is a momentum of workers that are so excited to see fellow starbucks

workers unionizing and saying hey, we can do that too. it is one thing to win a majority of 25, 30 workers of a starbucks, to get 15 to 20 to vote for a union. it is harder to get the 1500 to 3000 amazon workers at a warehouse to vote for a union. you ask a good question, pedro. how do you continue the momentum? the momentum is there in starbucks. amazon, the question is how you bring that momentum, bring that energy, bring that organizing expertise model to other amazon warehouses? christian small, the fired amazon worker who got the ball rolling and started this unionization efforts, he said other amazon facilities across the united states have contacted him and said, we too would like

to unionize. christian smalls, how does he and a small independent union without much money go to san francisco, chicago, seattle or boston, where workers might want to unionize, and how does he sit down to -- with them and explain to them how it works? i think you will need some money, some backing, some workers, perhaps provided by the union, so the model of success in staten island can be replicated in other cities. my guess is, there will be other successful efforts to unionize amazon, especially in some of the union friendly, bluer cities of the united states, like seattle, boston, philadelphia, and baltimore. the starbucks and amazons in my mind that created more excitement among young workers

than anything that has come along in decades. how do you sustain it? host: this is steven greenhouse our guest. our first guest is stephen in connecticut, go ahead with your comment. caller: this is a well solicited announcement from you about unions. everything is about how great a union is and how great unions are. that was a well structured, planned out attack in new york. that was well coached by the democratic party, backed by unions, coaching these kids to go in and assassinate the amazon structure. amazon got really sloppy, it got really large. bezos was not paying attention. i am totally against unions. i live in a town where the property tax is -- $3000

for a home. you go to towns over, there are two union employees for everyone employee. as much as you are praising the union system, it ruined america, the unions. they were great in the 1940's, but they are not good today. i was in bangkok, thailand. their train system was running 100%. their subways, their trains. you go to new york city? a horrible system. you got people attacking people. the trains are consistently broken down. we as americans have to pay for this union system. all the rates and prices go up. you've got highways and four workers for everyone worker. host: ok, we will leave it there and let our guest respond. guest: thank you very much for listening and thank you for your question. it is incorrect to say that the democrats are coaching these

workers. that's just not true. the workers that organized amazon, amazon is doing very, very, very well thank you. its stock price has soared and it still has lots of customers. these workers got some advice from outside organizers. it was not a democratic run group. actually -- you know, this democratic consulting firm, gsg , was consulting with amazon management. so in a way, democrats were helping amazon. both my grandsons -- i am from new york, both of my grandsons work in the garment industry in new york, they are both union members. they told my parents how government jobs used to be terrible jobs, and the unions helped turn those jobs into safe, decent jobs.

the auto industry in the united states. people think of good, safe, high-paying jobs. before gm, they were lousy jobs, unsafe jobs. i wrote about how gm managers required their underlings, their subordinates to mow their lawns for them before the unions existed, because that's how much vast power the managers had over them. it's thanks to the unions organizing in general motors, ford, and u.s. steel that the middle class was created in the united states. unions are a major reason that america's standard of living in the 1950's, 1960's, and 1970's was the highest in the world. gm, ford, many companies were making gazillions of dollars after world war ii, but many workers' wages were not good at

all. people were struggling to get by. these key union contractors in the 1950's and 1960's raise wages, gave people health and pension benefits, that was key to creating the middle-class and steve, you might have felt with your grandparents as well and push them into the middle class, a lot of people forget the basic history about how unions have helped. i have written lots of stories about the problems with unions. i have written about corruption, discrimination against women, blacks, hispanics, but i would argue that unions have come a very long way in reducing corruption. i would argue there is much less corruption in a union move and then there was in the trump administration. the federal government, some union members have done a very good job fighting for fair and just unions.

i think the standard of living in the united states of america would be much worse for the average worker if unions did not exist. host: let's go to ted, he is in oregon, a union member. you are on with our guest this morning. caller: good morning. my name is ted. i am a retired union plumber. i was able to walk away from the trade the day i turned 57. my father, he was a member of the ibew, the international brotherhood of electrical workers. i was the kid riding the new schwinn bike and i was determined to get into the plumbers union, as my father told me -- son, i love you, but you are too much of a baller to be in electrician. you should be a plumber. so i stood in a line with 1000 other guys who were grown men

trying to get into local 51 of the plumbers. they were going to take 25 apprentices. when i look at that in those days, that was a tighter class than any ivy league college. so i thought, how am i going to do this? i went down, i joined the air force as a plumber, and the next six years, i traveled the world as a plumber. eventually, i did get in. i went to school for another five years and became a germy -- a journeyman with all the documents that go with it. so i was a working journeyman with the name, the documents in my name, and they can't, a contractor can't do the work unless you've got guys like me

with all the documents. for the next 25 years, i was able to do that every day. the day i turned 57, i was able to walk away and you know, i feel sorry for anyone that thinks they are going to live on social security. you are not going to do it. even now. host: thanks, we got your point. mr. greathouse? -- mr. greenhous e? guest: you make a point that a lot of americans don't adequately appreciate. the way to get ahead, the way to make a good living is to go to college. but not everyone can go to college. not everyone can afford college. i often say that every high school class has a bottom 50%, and not all of them are equipped to go to college. but there are great jobs like being a plumber, being an

electrical worker, taking a union apprenticeship in plumbing or carpentry to be an electrical worker. unions and their apprenticeships play a very important role in creating good living for people who do not go to college. i was often upset when president obama said oh, parents, the way for your kids to get ahead, the way for your kids to make a solid living is to go to college. the implication was well, if you don't go to college, you are a loser and we are not going to help you. i think joe biden gets it. he realizes the importance of going to college and if you can't afford a four year college, try to go to community college. his pushing very hard to increase the amount of oppression ships -- apprenticeships for those who don't go to college. working for a union, doing manual labor, its work that is

extremely helpful to society. it's work that deserves a lot of respect and you can make a darn good living doing it. and i am jealous, as i am sure many of our viewers are, that you were able to retire at 57. host: from twitter, it's a fiction that unions made the middle-class in the postwar boom. we were not devastated by the war. wages and standards of living would rise regardless. guest: thank you, tony, but i am sorry to say you are half right. you are absolutely right that after world war ii, we were the king of the hill. japan's economy, europe's economy was devastated and that made life easy for american companies and gm, ford, were going gangbusters. but in the years after the war, they were not sharing their wealth and many workers in the late 1940's, there was no

middle-class or american middle class. many companies were keeping the profits for themselves. and speak to historians. read the books. they will explain that general motors strikes in 1946, 1947, 1948, and the fortune magazine wrote that the key general motors union contractors in 1942 -- they called it the treaty of detroit, because it went so far in enriching workers and improving the pay and creating the middle-class. when general motors, which has been the archetypal american company the way amazon and apple are today, when general motors, ford, and u.s. steel where the leading companies of the united states and reached these big, landmark labor contracts with much better wages, these other companies were being unionized too and said whoops, if we

want to keep our workers, we must pay better wages too. and i disagree strongly with you, that unions did not play an important role in creating the middle-class after the war. yes, it was important that the american companies were doing well so they had the profits to raise wages to lift workers to middle-class levels. it was partly the boom after world war ii, the economic boom, and it was also very much unions that made sure companies shared their profits and prosperity with millions of american workers so i middle-class would be created and for the first time, many workers could afford to buy houses and afford to buy cars. host: our next caller on the independent line, hello. caller: good morning. i actually meant to call c-span, but i got the pedro show. i will make it work, i will make

it work. mr. greenhouse, i seen myself -- i am a marxist like you, but most of all i am an american. guest: i am not a marxist. caller: i want to know, how do i start the workers revolt that marx said needed to be done? my last question is, do you know why elon musk is headed to mars, to outer space? it's because, a guillotine needs -- host: ok. we will go to bob, a union member in ohio. guest: i am not a marxist. that is not true. host: let's go to bob, a union member in akron, ohio. caller: hi, how are you doing today? i am a first time caller. i have been listening and i feel like the history is being lost here. words like living wage, 40 hour work week, eight hour workdays,

lunch breaks, overtime pay, the coal miners started all this in west virginia when people died on the picket lines there. they brought in the pinkertons and things like that. there were a lot of people that brought the movement to the forefront. a lot of the things that people enjoy today are from those people working hard and those companies did not profit from those union workers. they were all doing business, they were all doing well, gm, ford -- everything like that. i'm just saying, the united rubble workers, people who make tires -- autoworkers, people who make tires, they are union people, but also created a lot of wealth for companies. host: thanks, bob. guest: you are absolutely right.

too many americans forget that americans used to work 70, 80 hours a week. 12-year-olds, 40-year-olds, 50-year-olds used to work in coal mines and factories. we have seen the bumper sticker -- unions, the folks who brought you the weekend. that is true. a lot of people, for reasons i don't understand, denigrate unions. there are problems with unions, but people forget that it is unions that played such a major role lifting typical american workers. we have gone from workers working seven days a week to having a two day weekend. we have gone from workers working 60, 70 hours a week to a 40 hour week with overtime. we have basically ended child labor. many workplaces, coal mines, auto plants were far, far more dangerous before unions came along. i agree.

unions have played a big role. i think a lot of americans today take for granted what they have now. it's kind of a birthright. but they forget it was decades of struggle by the coal workers union and the steelworkers union and the garment workers union that lifted working standards to what they are today. it is so easy to say unions stink, they are bad, but without unions, our nation would be much worse off. americans would have much worse working conditions and would not be earning nearly as much. host: you have probably seen the statistics going back to 1980, 20 3% of the u.s. population as far as members of the union. that dropped to a little over 10% in 2021. 14 million people currently in a union. currently were renting union 2021 -- were in a union in

2021, the public sector and the private sector. what do you account for the drop in people in the unions? guest: that's a good question. there are many reasons. we have gone from 35% of workers in the unions in the 1980's, then it dropped to one in five, now it dropped to one in 10. in the private sector, just one in 16 workers is in a union. the crazy thing, they are certainly done by professionals at m.i.t. and columbia, one in two workers say they would like to join a union if they could, but there are so few that actually join. why? it might not be a good job explaining why -- so many americans -- it's globalization. so many american companies shut factories and moved production

to china, vietnam, or bangladesh, and manufacturing was for a long time the base, the core of unions. when the factories closed, many union members lost their jobs, and that reduced union power overall. i argue that corporations in the united states fight to keep out unions more than any other wealthy industrial nation. i used to be the european economic correspondent for the new york times. i was in paris for five years, i wrote about corporations and interviewed top executives in germany, france, spain, britain, switzerland -- they didn't love labor unions, but they viewed unions as legitimate institutions. they viewed them as social partners you have to work with, work along with unions to create

rater productivity, greater profits, and greater prosperity. i find that so many corporations in the united states, exemplified by amazon, starbucks, and walmart, are super, duper antiunion. they don't see unions as legitimate, they see it as a way to crush extra pay, to get rid of. that's a major way unions are defined. in the 1950's and 1960's, the american companies saw unions much more as partners. but come 1980, the rise of milton friedman, the chicago school of economics, there was a lot more hostility towards unions and corporations fighting more towards unions. a third reason for the decline in unions is that the nature of our economy.

managers ran the show in the 1950's and 1960's. the corporate headquarters was next to the factory, people knew each other and got along each other, living in the same town as the blue-collar workers and the ceo, they wanted to make sure the workers were treated very well. they were generous in pay, shareholders did not try to get rid of him. but in the 1980's, 1990's, early 2000's, wall street, what many people call financial tablism, they put much, much more pressure on corporate executives to maximize profits and share prices. as a result of that, corporations got much tougher in pulling down wages and fighting unions. you have this combination of globalization, increased efforts to fight unions, and when

factory workers in ohio, michigan, wisconsin, minnesota or iowa were demanding a raise, the company might say hey, we face competition from china, where the workers only get paid 50% of what you get paid. you, the union, shut up. you cannot give you what you are asking for because that would make us uncompetitive. that also undercut the appeal of unions. that's another reason why, great foreign competition putting down repression on -- downward pressure on wages. but we are not seeing unions and manufacturing so much. we are seeing big efforts to unionize in retail, newspapers, journalism. there is a huge amount of workers at nonprofits, graduate

students, professors -- certain sectors of the economy, and now at the starbucks, where unionization spreading like wildfire. some experts are asking whether this current news at amazon and starbucks will finally enable much more workers to unionize and whether that will finally reverse the decline in the percentage of american workers who are in unions. guest: a few moments without -- host: a few moments with our guest, this is frank in west virginia. good morning. caller: go right ahead with your fresh -- good morning. host: go right ahead with your question or comment. caller: [inaudible] union contacts. coal mines at 11 years old. my uncle was there at 12. they got him underground. but i want to tell you something

-- the unions made this country. now it is all lost. we threw it all away because, to tell you the truth, back then you had respect to buy a house, you could buy a vehicle as a working man. technology wasn't there back then. now, for some reason, i've got is best us in my lungs, -- asbestos in my lungs. it's a shame what's happened here. people should have to send their kids at 11, 12 years old to a coal mine, then they would understand better how people had to live. they had company towns. the company owned the town, they have the company store, all that. steve, it was good talking to you.

c-span should be calling schools. it should be mandatory. god bless you, bye. host: thank you. guest: thank you, frank. i appreciate your call, and you mentioned how unions have played such a huge role in ending child labor movements. your father was in the coal mines at the age of 11, and that's a very eloquent picture showing these boys in coal mines at 10, 12 years old, and unions have played such a big role in ending some of the worst exploitation in our economy. following up on your points, so much news coverage nowadays is about jeff bezos, and they deserve a lot of praise and attention, but they have downsides too. others who fight the daily fight to make things better,

civil rights leaders and union leaders, they are offering -- one of my favorite quotes about labor comes from dr. martin luther king junior. the labor movement, out of its struggles, it gave birth to economic employment, new ways levels that meant not mere survival, but a colorful life. the capitalists of industry did not believe this transformation. they resisted it until they were overcome. a lot of workers were not keen to raise their wages for the middle class. it took a lot of pushing to get these corporations to pay adequate wages,, to lift workers into the middle class.

i am sure that was true in the coal industry as well, as frank will attest. host: let's hear from our last caller, mike in indiana, republican line. good morning. caller: yes, i listen to the gentleman talking about the union and everything. i live in indiana, 15 miles from the ellen way border. you would not believe all the union jobs across the border. illinois is a failed state. most union states are in the red. most right to work states are in the black. that's a fact. everybody knows it. new york, california, illinois -- they are failed states. i don't know what happened to the union. it might have been good at one time, but it sure has not helped us lately. host: thank you. mike? guest: i do not know the numbers, but i am sure there are some red states, a state that

was running hugely in the red, over 30 million people of california, there are millions of people who have moved to california that would take issue with you when you say it is a failed state. i live in new york state and i know that i and many of our neighbors and friends would say, what do you mean, new york is a failed state? why are so many businesses moving to create jobs in california, los angeles, san francisco, in silicon valley, it new york city, they have very big cities, and many cities have problems. i could make the case that some people from a certain political party have not provided adequate resources to a city to ensure there is enough money to fund the subways or the police or the

schools, so indiana is a successful state, illinois in many ways is a successful state. it is running a deficit for many reasons. california is a phenomenally successful state. that's why so many people want to go there. new york is a successful state, and it's too easy to say a state has failed and it is too easy to blame things on unions. we have had this horrible recession in 2008, 2009, which is in no way brought on by unions. it's created by the banking industry, the mortgage industry, and not enough federal regulation. we have this issue now because of covid-19, and it's way too simplistic to say we have a problem, blame it on unions. yes it's true, sometimes higher

union wages may help you -- in the city. but teachers and firefighters who risk their lives every day on the job, sanitation workers who do such important work. subway conductors who do their job, working underground, they deserve to make a decent living. that might mean paying them a decent pay and a lot of people think, oh, they don't deserve decent pay. they are government workers, they are supported by a union and people hate elon musk and jeff bezos for being worth $200 billion, 200 $50 billion, but unions are just trying to make sure that firefighters and cops and social workers and teachers make 50, $60,000, $70,000 a year

so they can have and support a family. so many people criticize unions and don't appreciate all that unions have done over history and are still doing. i'm not saying there are no problems with unions, but unions have really cleaned up their act in many ways with regard to corruption, discrimination, trying much more now to help workers, lift them up as well. host: our guest is with the century foundation, he is their senior fellow. you heard about his book, worked up: the past, present, and future of american work. we will finish up with your questions until 10:00. if you want to participate, (202) 748-8000 for republicans. (202) 748-8001 for democrats.

(202) 748-8002 for independents. we will take your calls when washington journal continues. >> c-span has unfiltered coverage of washington's response to the russian invasion in ukraine, bringing you responses from the white house, the pentagon, as well as the united nations and statements from foreign leaders, on the c-span networks. the c-span now mobile app, c-span.com/ukraine, where you can follow tweets and keep up with journalists on the ground. c-span.com/ukraine -- c-span.org/ukraine. >> only at c-span do you get it straight from the source. no matter where you are from or where you stand on the issues, c-span is america's network.

unfiltered, unbiased, word for word. if it happens here or here or here or anywhere that matters, america is watching on c-span. powered by cable. ♪ >> c-spanshop.org is c-span's online store. browse through our latest selection of products, apparel, home decor and asse -- accessories. shop any time at c-span.org /shop. washington journal continues. host: republicans (202) 748-8001.

-- host: (202) 748-8000 for republicans. democrats, (202) 748-8001. independence, (202) 748-8002. the federal mass mandate has been struck down, restrictions were dropped monday after the transportation security administration would not enforce the january 2020 one order that applies to airplanes, airports, taxis, and other mass transit, the cdc had recently extended that mandate and it was set to expire monday, may 3 to give more time to study the omicron subvariant. a court ruling put that decision on hold. to how these companies react, another reaction coming in yesterday from the white house press briefing. after being asked about this decision, here was part of that exchange. [video clip] >> he said about this mask ruling out a federal court in

florida that it was a disappointing decision and recommends that people continue to wear masks. why can we sit here in the white house briefing room with no masks, but people can't sit in an airplane cabin with no masks? >> well, i am not a doctor. peter, are you a doctor? as of today? just making sure. these determinations, remember, the masking guidance is green, yellow and red. we are currently in a green zone in washington, d.c., so they are not recommending it. some people can wear a mask if they want to. some people wear them in meetings or certain times where you will be sitting close to people, or maybe you have an immunocompromised parent or friend. people make that decision. this is based on health considerations and data that the cdc looks at about transmissibility, as we have

seen an increase in cases on airplanes. >> if a flight is leaving from an airport in a green zone, those people don't have to wear masks? >> there has been a difference from the beginning about people on an airplane and in a federal transportation vehicle, that situation, then in locations like washington, d.c., which is a green zone. we asked for a two-week extension to look at the data and make recommendations based on the data and the science around whether it should be continued or not. host: more of that exchange available on c-span.org. carmen starts off our open forum in nevada, independent line. caller: can i talk? host: go ahead. caller: ok, a few points. i am a master fabricator,

welder, a 43 years, and i wanted to call for the unions because there are a few valid points to make. if you have a union member go to eight grocery store -- a grocery store and do your grocery shopping, there is a union loaf of bread and a nonunion loaf of bread, but no difference between quality, but the union loaf of bread is 40% more, and extrapolate that across your entire grocery trip. would a union member be willing to spend 300 more dollars on his grocery trip to buy union made groceries? that's the point. the second point, on the uaw, i am a master craftsman welder, a skilled person, i will never believe that from one end of that factory and assembly line to the other end of the assembly line, the car manufacturing process, there is "one" skilled

labor from this end to that end. it doesn't take any skill to put a front seat in a car. none of my business on that. the only thing that should be my business is the value of me to go when i buy a car. hold on, the next thing -- host: you have major -- made your point. we will go to our next caller. caller: good morning, pedro. i will start with the first thing. i am a retired union electrician. that's through the family and my brother just retired from the union, and if everybody was union, you would not have to worry about the loaf of bread being 40%, let's start there. that's not why i called. there are too many points to start with.

the first amendment, let's go with bothering women with their bodies, too much gun violence, too much fox. worried about -- instead of actually doing news, seeing that the other night on their television. as far as being a union member, if we would cut bezos' pay in half, we would have better pay for his people. host: ok, let's go to gail, tallahassee, florida, republican line. caller: yes, pedro. i will try to talk fast because you cut me off last time. i am sick and tired of hearing

about the raid issue. -- race issue. i was born on a tobacco farm in the 1950's and the 1960's, and the blacks and the whites all worked together, they went and had lunch together. when any member of my family died, they sat on the pew in the church with us with our family. also, i heard -- and when you go into a hospital and need a blood transfusion, do you ask if it is from a black person or a white person? no, because we all have the same type of blood. and i worked for eastern airlines, unions are what brought eastern airlines down. host: that's gail in florida. senator elizabeth warren from massachusetts has an op-ed today. democrats can avoid disaster in november.

to put it bluntly, if we fail to use the momentum remaining to deliver before the elections, democrats are headed for big losses in the midterms. we need to finalize the budget reconciliation deal, forced giant corporations to pay their share to invest in climate change, the priorities can be done with the president's executive authority, but i believe we shoul abolish the filibuster. americans should also see these boats in plainview. we will go to roger in alabama, independent line. caller: thanks for taking my call. i was calling about the trans and gay teaching of children in school. i live right next to florida here, they have the so-called not gay bill, whatever it is. if you are gay or chans

-- transgender and you are a teacher, what gives you the educational background to talk to a six-year-old child about that? if you were heterosexual and saw a little gave way and thought you saw a spark of heterosexual and him -- in him, do you pull him to the side and talk to him about being straight and give him literature on being straight? no you wouldn't. you would get fired in the school would get sued. the first thing that crosses your mind when you see a six-year-old child that belongs to someone else is some kind of sexual thing, you possibly need to be investigated. host: let's go to john in virginia, democrat line. caller: what a disgusting call. the problem is, let me say this, when we go to the surgeon and the doctors tried to do surgery, they want to mask. a lot of people, we don't know whether they had covid or not.

but besides the point, this judge is a despicable judge that will make this decision. knowing that the masks help to protect, because there are a lot of five-year-old kids that are not vaccinated around them. someone with covid can give you that disease quickly. we save so many lives, millions of people died from covid. i just can't figure out where we are heading in this. this country, we are going in the wrong direction. we are listening to ignorant people to tell us how to run this country. go ahead, sir. host: i was going to say, we are moving onto joshua and california, republican line. caller: good morning. we have taxation without representation. we have been extorted. $44 billion in aid to china.

$17 billion in aid to russia. $5 billion of aid to iran. when are the american people going to wake up? we could have got $98,000 of stimulus for what we got -- we got $2000 of stimulus. wake up, america. this president we have been here can't even, doesn't even know if his name is brandon or joe biden. host: that was joshua and california. speaking of president biden, he told former president obama that he is planning to run for reelection in 2024. the admission of president obama -- two president obama is a sign that the president is likely to run for a second term. he told supporters he would be very fortunate to run again. let's hear from john, john in

wisconsin, independent line. caller: good morning. thanks for taking my call. i worked for a union for about six years. that time, the company moved to mexico, much like the union plant that is in iowa. i went to work for a nonunion company and worked there for 27 years. i also retired at 57, as the previous caller said. it's just a matter of living within your means. [inaudible] be frugal with my money. i think unions did a lot to improve the working conditions, but as someone who is down the street from my public works union last week, five people cut down one tree and it took them eight hours to do it. there you go. $120 an hour or more, standing

around and not doing decent work. host: we have about 15 minutes left for our open phones. republicans, (202) 748-8000. democrats, (202) 748-8001. independents (202) 748-8002. texts and all others, (202) 748-8003. some international news, boris johnson is still facing calls for his resignation when members of the house of commons returned from their easter recess, they will be meeting around 11:30 this morning. you can watch live coverage on c-span and follow that if you are interested in following that international politics and how it plays out, especially when it comes to covid. let's go to sy in akron,

ohio. caller: an incumbent republican senator running for reelection voted for national parks to be able to club to death baby bear cubs in their den. meanwhile, -- excuse me -- meanwhile senator grassley authored legislation to redefine baby check mail -- chick mail as commercial mail. these boxes are smashed, they sometimes die of freezing or heat or thirst. in iowa, pigs were herded into a warehouse and heat was piped in until all of them baked to death.

california passed legislation requiring that pigs in factory farms have the ability to turn around in their stalls. the pig killing industry has challenged this minimal protection and the six republicans on the supreme court, rather than let the california law stands, have given these minimal killers -- mammal killers a chance to argue before the court. host: let's go to lisa in shreveport, independent line. caller: thank god i am independent, because i think the republicans and the democrats are all idiots. one thing i want to tell you, pedro? have you ever heard of the word program? caller: -- host: in what context? caller: i want to know everyone who is listening, the queen is fixing to be found dead, she was

found dead two years ago and nobody knows about it because people haven't done their research. host: let's go to roy, republican line. hi. caller: well, the reason i am calling is because of the governor of texas and what is he is trying to do. if a child does not recognize their true identity or sexuality until they start kindergarten. they are not sure it is permanent until they are age five and six. if they are teaching kids five and six about sexuality, that is much too early to do that. there are a lot of people doing this -- a lady at disney, some of the gay-rights activists are trying to reach these kids between kindergarten and third grade. it's a very inappropriate time

to do that, because they can be easily swayed. if they have no idea if they are boys or girls until much later. and the crt, that's an excuse for me for a failed education system. i have to say, there are a lot of black kids who go to school who don't want to learn. some of these kids, they are driven to learn. they do their work. but the parents of blacks, a lot of lax, do not encourage their kids to learn. host: that's a widespread accusation. what do you base that on? caller: in my experience in school, and talking to kids. host: why would you say a certain race of kids means they do not want to learn? that's irrelevant, why would you say that about a certain sector of kids not wanting to learn? caller: i am black -- i'm saying

the kids don't want to learn, i am saying a lot of the parents do not push their kids to learn. a lot of parents send their kids to school, and school is just a babysitter. the kids are there to hang out with their friends. this is what the kids told me. host: that's roy in georgia. when it comes to matters of immigration, the wall street journal this morning talks about arrests at the southern border. they write that border agents made 209,000 plus arrests on the border in march, the busiest month in two decades. 11,000 plus migrants were permitted to enter the country to seek humanitarian protection according to data. the numbers cover a period from the beginning of the fiscal year until the end of march. there was a sharp rise of migrants from cuba and ukraine. when it comes to the pages of the washington post this morning, u.s. immigration officials detained more than

5000 migrants from ukraine at the nation's land, sea, and air borders. this is a time when we account the first counting of ukrainians -- a larger group of detentions on the southwest border in march, the highest monthly total since 2000. our next caller, the democrat line from michigan. go ahead. caller: thank you, just a comment on the unions. i have a list here of things unions have given people in the united states, and this has been done over a 50, 60 year period. they got an increase in wages every three years, which was negotiated, a 40 hour workweek, time and a half over 40 hours of work a week, double pay on sundays, health care for the

entire family, pension plans, health and safety in the workplaces, protecting workers, working conditions, maternity leave for mothers who have babies, vacation with pay and longer vacations, longer than 45 days. vacation time through seniority, apprenticeship for the skilled worker, grievances with working conditions with no threat of being fired, if you have a you are -- a union steward representing you. host: ok, what's the point? caller: i think the point is people realize, they don't have all these things, union workers have, but they have an awful lot of them. we went on strike through the years and the union workers got these things for people who aren't in the union. management people got more than what the unions negotiated.

i think people forget all the things that they do have and the working conditions now, because of the unions. host: gotcha. we will hear from lewis in charlottesville, virginia, independent line. caller: yeah, regarding the situation in ukraine, i think we should definitely be allowing temporary protected status for ukrainian refugees, especially when it is such a small number of folks coming in out of the 220,000. for me, we should be doing the whole bundle of protections thing, not just sending money and equipment, but bringing folks in. overall, we should be giving a lot of love to refugees, no matter where they come from.

within our borders, a lot of that needs to happen both in the bureaucratic system, our government making laws within the whole two-party system, you know. host: that's lewis there. the usa today reporting among the latest victims of the bird flu sweeping across the united states, eagles in several boroughs died, and several are suspected of falling ill from the pathogenic avian influenza. three bald eagles in the state that died recently tested positive for the bird flu virus, other dead bald eagles will also be tested. let's hear from gerald in the state of ohio, on the democrat line. caller: joe mentioned, -- joe

manchin and kristin synema kill this bill for biden. all this inflation, everything, is because of joe manchin and kristin synema. [inaudible] all these people is breathing in the same air on a train, a plane. all these people are on it together. and nobody's wearing masks and nobody says anything and they spread the germs, and now you have a judge -- not a doctor, a judge. the judge should be responsible for every death that people die

from covid on a plane, train, or otherwise. host: annapolis, maryland, this is mark. caller: good morning, pedro. thank you for moderating this morning. i appreciate it. some questions i have in terms of the combined crt and sexuality discussion in schools, it might be helpful to parse this out and have two different programs instead of mixing all of this up, like a petri dish. i do agree from a physiological and biological standpoint, schools related to gender identification, etc., really it needs to be contained in an age-appropriate format and curriculum, seventh and eighth

grade, and the range of puberty your high school. anything earlier than that is really pretty and appropriate, whether you are a parent or not. you should basically see that. the science and the biology dictates that. 18 is the voting age. 21 is the drinking age. host: that is mark there. let me tell you what is going on with the network today, something you might want to watch out for. at 2:00 this afternoon, the national press club features secretary brent kendall on preparing for future security threats. you can watch us on c-span, c-span.org, and our c-span now video app. hakeem jeffries will talk about strengthening democracy here and abroad with the democratic caucus chair, that event is live from -- university, and at 9:00

this evening, looking at home appraisal processes and the potential for bias against minorities. the financial services committee will air tonight at 9:00. you can see it on those various platforms. that's it for our program today. another edition of washington journal comes your way tomorrow. ♪ >> this prime minister boris johnson is facing calls to resign after he and his wife were find for violated covid-19 lockdown restrictions.

his statement is expected at about 11:30 eastern and he can watch it live here on c-span. ♪ >> watch the top 21 wedding videos from our c-span student competition. you can watch all of the winning documentaries anytime online at studentcams.org. a look at the military budget and potential security threats with frank kendall life at the national press crop at 2 p.m. eastern. hakeem jeffries talk about strengthening democracy here and abroad.