c-span now is a free mobile app featuring your unfiltered view of what is happening in washington live and on-demand. keep up with the biggest events with live streams of floor proceedings of u.s. congress, white house events, the court, campaigns, and more all at your fingertips. stay current with the latest episodes of washington journal and find scheduling information for the c-span tv network and c-span radio. plus, a variety of compelling podcasts. it is available the apple and google play. download it today. your front row seat to washington, anytime, anywhere. >> this morning on washington journal, executive director of the duke university center for firearms law jacob charles discusses legal protections for gun makers and dealers for crimes committed with their

products. later rob gramlich for americans for a clean energy grid discusses the current reliability of the u.s. electrical grid and the potential for electricity shortages over the summer. as always, be sure to join the conversation with your calls, texts, and tweets. ♪ host: good morning, it is the washington journal for june 2. the house judiciary committee will mark up a package of gun safety measures to be voted on next week. you can watch the committees work at 10:00 on c-span, c-span.org, and our c-span now app. that session after another mass shooting killed five people in a hospital in tulsa, oklahoma. according to the gun violence archive come yesterday's mass shooting was the 20th since the uvalde elementary school shooting on may 24. what you think could be done to stop or reduce them.

here's how you can let us know. you can call us on the lines. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. (202) 748-8000 for democrats. for independents, (202) 748-8002 . you can text us at (202) 748-8003. post on our facebook and twitter feeds. you can also follow the show on instagram. also, the story taking a look at the shooting yesterday at the medical center saying tulsa police described a catastrophic scene inside a medical office building in south tulsa where five people were killed and multiple were injured during the shooting wednesday night. the shooter, who took his own life, was armed with a rifle and handgun as he entered the st. francis health system's natalie building and shot both guns before 5:00 p.m. the shooting occurred in an orthopedic clinic. the st. francis online directory

says it is located on the second floor with nine physicians listed. the st. francis health system released a statement wednesday night saying it is grieving the loss of four members of our family. they didn't release the names or positions of those killed or injured. that is stemming from the shooting that took place in tulsa yesterday. if you go to the website on gun violence archive, they keep a list of what they describe as mass shootings, which includes four people being injured or killed in the process. they listed 20 events so far since the shooting at robb elementary school in uvalde, texas, including last night's event in tulsa. going back to may 31, waco, texas with four people injured. 10 people injured on may 30 in south carolina, in charlston. if you go to may 30, a mass shooting took place in michigan in benton harbor with six people

injured and one killed. in philadelphia, two people killed and two people injured. on may 29 in oklahoma, in the city of taft, seven people injured in that mass shooting and one killed. it goes on from there, but if you count from the event any volte, texas, 20 in number since that event. so far we want to let you talk about these numbers of shooting since you all day -- uvalde, texas. today at 10:00 a package to be voted on next week. also, what you think could be done to reduce mass shootings. here's how you can let us know. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. (202) 748-8000 for democrats. independents, (202) 748-8002. you can also text us this morning at (202) 748-8003. members of congress are commenting on the events of

tulsa, oklahoma yesterday. saying on thursday my colleagues and i will mark up the protecting our kids act, comments and strategies to help reduce gun violence in america. adding that doing nothing is not an option. representative dean schultz saying that it has reached a point where mass shooting victims have to be rushed out of the hospital, referencing the event in tulsa yesterday. other members of congress giving their comments on their twitter feeds if you want to read through that. our website has a listing of people you can follow on twitter, particularly members of congress, and what they've been saying about it. marian fort washington, maryland, democrats starting us off. caller: good morning. i am real sick in the heart right now, and i don't have any more heart to send out. congress is old and backwards. they should have had something put out by now.

look at canada. immediately. they immediately banned handguns. we could put a ban on all the buying of weapons right now. they need to raise the age to 25. they need to do a mental background check along with a regular background check. they need to let them wait seven days for red flags. we have horrible mental illness programs in this country. host: you think of all of those things were put into effect they would stop the amount of mass shootings we have seen? caller: it would slow them down. we need to change the hearts of human beings in this country. we need to know why people want to shoot people for attention. that is what i think that the last shooter did. the first shooter, really? there is something wrong in this country. something needs to be changed. host: let's hear from richard on the republican line in ohio. go ahead.

caller: last week i listened to the senator from kansas. how do you decide what is an assault weapon? get rid of the word assault, go back to kids 18 and under, and ask them what guns do you need to hunt rabbit, to hunt deer, to hunt bear. host: as far as the mass shooting aspect, what you think should be done to reduce or stop these shootings? caller: ask them what they don't need. if they don't mention arp's and that stuff, then to hunt, then we go back and we get rid of that stuff. only for military. we don't need -- the next generation, talk to them. don't argue about what is an assault weapon. ask the teenagers, under 18. what do you need, what don't you need? host: that is richard in ohio. other members of congress. this is representative dean phillips.

from california, this on her twitter feed saying a grocery store, a church, an elementary school, now a hospital in the span of three weeks. how many people will die before the gun lobby and republicans get out of our way and stop blocking our bills, referencing probably the events and discussions that will take place in the judiciary committee when it comes to the package. from connecticut, democrats line, tony, hello. caller: i think what the problem is, america is protesting in america seems like they don't care. two hours later talking about it isn't the weapons it is the people. ted cruz should be called. i don't forget the time they had a hurricane there and he took his family to the bahamas. host: when you say people don't care, what do you mean? caller: back in the 1960's, in those days when they were having

riots and stuff like that people protested and went out on the street and said they wanted the laws changed. they want the laws changed because the republican party not doing their part. sometimes the democrats ask a little too much. that man just called and said a long gun. a long gun is not an m-16. i learned that in the military. host: on the line for republicans, harrisonburg, virginia, hello. caller: my name is jay. two things that i want to say. i honestly, truly think they ought to put metal detectors in schools. how much does it cost for human life? i think we ought to have protection at every door. some kind of authority or something there. you can't put a price on a human

life. i'm telling you, something has got to go. i think that 10 round clips is plenty myself. host: the gun violence archives highlights more mass shooting since the one in uvalde, texas. chicago, illinois may 29 with four injured and one killed. also on that date in phoenix, arizona, five people killed and one injured in a mass shooting event. may 29 in henderson, nevada, an event that injured seven people. in chicago, illinois as well, an event that injured five people. in chattanooga, tennessee on may 28, this is injured six people. gunviolencearchive. org if you want to see how they referenced mass shootings. 20 since the shooting in uvalde.

you can talk about that and members of congress and their efforts to make changes to gun laws as we will see in the house judiciary committee. in south carolina, democrats line. jennifer, good morning. caller: hey, i called the wrong line. host: let me let them hold you off because -- if you want, give us a call back and choose the right line. angela, roanoke, virginia, democrats line. caller: my thought is maybe we put gating around every property as far as schools, public buildings, hospitals. i can't hear you. host: if you are listening or watching your television, please just speak into the phone, please. caller: my thought is we put gating around all the schools, all the hospitals, all the government buildings, anywhere

that anyone with think of to go shoot and do mass casualties, ok? and also, let's put metal detectors and bullet proof glass on every building, ok? and also a keyed entry for employees that would be able to enter that are safe. host: why focus on that verse is on accessibility to guns? caller: accessibility to guns? there is no way to stop anyone from having access to guns, i will tell you straight up. if anyone wants a gun they will find a way to get one. it doesn't matter who, what, where, when, why, they will find a way to get a gun. my thought is to prevent them from being able to get in and

conduct all these shootings. host: let's go to margie in pennsylvania, republican line. caller: good morning. host: good morning. caller: i have to agree with that lady. these people, mentally deranged young people, are not hitting airports that have all kinds of protection. they are going for the soft targets. it would be wiser to spend all the money, and i hate to say this, it isn't very nice, we have been sending it to ukraine, on protecting schools, hospitals, and so forth. i would certainly -- i just want to interject that i have a new grandson-in-law from australia! don't be naive. the bad guys will always get

guns. the people in australia feel -- you sometimes talk to, you know, government officials, icy talking heads talking to government officials. sure they are happy, but the common man, the common people, population of australia are not happy. they feel -- host: that is margie in pennsylvania. the previous caller mentioned canada. their work is highlighted in the washington post. the headline, canada launches legislative push for national freeze on handgun sales. the author writes that the push follows the government's banning of 15 makes and models of military-style assault weapons in 2020 after a gunman posing as a police officer charged across nova scotia killing 22 people,

including a member of the royal canadian mounted police, the country's deadliest mass shooting. monday they plan to introduce a mandatory buyback program that would offer compensation to owners of band firearms. details on the program are expected this summer and they expect to start buying back ends, including ar-15's, the kind of the gun used in the school attack in texas, by the end of the year. representative mike thompson saying is a gun owner i believe the second amendment is strengthened when responsible gun owners stand up for pragmatic and reasonable measures like background checks to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and the dangerously mentally ill. he says when guns fall into the wrong hands it puts people at risk and threatens our second amendment right. jennifer wexton sending out a tweet from yesterday at 11:00 in the evening, horrifying. lives lost, families torn apart, a community devastated. how many more innocent people must be murdered before the lives outweigh the influence of the gun lobby? saying of last evening, too

many officials want to wait until there is a week without a mass shooting to have a conversation without -- a week without a mass shooting to have a serious conversation so it is not "politicized." a member of the house judiciary committee talking about that package of legislation that legislators will mark up later today. here she is, a portion from yesterday. [video clip] >> so we created what is called an omnibus package, a large pack is made up of eight pieces of legislation. things ranging from safety storage to red flag laws, to raising the age from 18 to 21 for semiautomatic-style weapons. eight bills we will be marking up tomorrow, thursday, on what

would be a long debate on the judiciary committee. this is not just about uvalde. uvalde has been in the news, and it needs to remain in the news so the country reckons with the consequences of what has been happening in america. since uvalde there have been more than a dozen mass shootings in america. this is not stopping, this is not going away until congress acts. i expect we will pass our bill out of the house judiciary committee.i believe next week leadership is bringing the protecting our kids act to the house floor, where i am certain we have the votes to pass it. it will then be up to the senate to act. it is my hope that they act with the same kind of urgency we have acted. host: by the way, some of the elements of the legislation that the representative talked about was to raise the age to buy centerfire rifle to 21 from 18.

it would make it illegal to import, build, transfer large capacity magazines with some exceptions. establish requirements for regulating the storage of firearms on residential facilities. it would build on the atf ban on bump stocks, as they are known, and it would apply federal firearms regulation to so-called ghost guns. again, there's going to be a lot of debate over the elements of the package. 10:00 if you want to see the package play out in the house judiciary committee. we invite you to watch after this c-span.org program on c-span or c-span.org -- watch this after c-span or on c-span.org. line for republicans, go ahead. caller: i have a story about what happened to me yesterday. i was at a sam's club. first, there is zero chance that our racist anti-american media in the country or the party that

employs them will ever touch our firearms, no matter what. you can do this every day. i was at a gas station yesterday. i was talking to a guy. it cost me $100 to fill up the gas tank. we were talking about gun sitting next to each other. he watches this show. we started talking about this show. he said in his opinion and my opinion, you people in the media don't want to take everybody's guns. i understand. i understand you have to do your job. the way we feel is you just want to take trump supporter's guns so that you and your party can enslave us again. have a bad day. caller: what's going on? that guy. according to the conservatives, all you need is mind readers all over the place, right? then you can see who is getting ready to snap, whether you are

21 or 18. host: go ahead. you are on. caller: i am just saying all you need is mind readers according to the republican party. you just need mind readers everywhere. then people can see the nut approaching. these people don't want solutions to this problem. they just want to talk around it. so, hire a bunch of mind readers. they could have had mind readers in the hospital that got shot up, right? yeah, mind readers. host: the republican line from kelly. kelly in south carolina on our republican line. hello. caller: good morning. you know, i am listening to all of this and i'm thinking, you

know what? we have more than 20,000 gun laws on the books nationwide. if any law would have stopped this cretin in uvalde, don't you think one of them would have applied? he broke so many laws. he broke so many laws. no one is asking how an 18-year-old with a part-time job at wendy's who was a pot smoker was able to afford a $2000 rifle with all of the bells and whistles and a bullet-proof vest -- i'm sorry, his grandmother had a $70,000 truck. how is anyone able to afford that? no one is looking at this. what they are looking at is the gun. they are not looking at the kid who pulled the trigger. host: if it is not the gun, what is the solution?

if it is not the gun, what is the solution do you think? caller: what i would suggest is you stop looking at the gun. let's actually start looking at the people who are firing them. let's start looking at the mental health situation in our country. this kid was supposedly trans, he was 18, a pot smoker. host: democrats mine, hello/ caller: good morning, america. i believe the whole interpretation of the second amendment is immoral. you don't need very much morals to know -- like, in texas we've had seven mass shootings. he don't know what to do about it. canada knew what to do about it. host: why do you cast the second

amendment in moral terms? why do you cast the second amendment in moral terms? caller: well, their interpretation of it. there is nothing we can do about people killing people, you know? that is what is immoral. we've got to do something about it, you know? we need to outlaw those guns, those ar-15's. that would go a small way to stopping the killings. host: bill in athens, texas. new efforts in new york city on the topic of guns by mayor eric adams. saying since taking office in january mr. adams, a former police captain elected on the premise he could crackdown on crime, has assigned more police officers to the subway system

while reviving an anti-gun unit after it was implicated in abuses. the mayor will name a staff member with a focus on fighting gun violence at every city agency and has experimented with technology that can find guns without the use of a medical -- of a metal detector. dealing with how guns are not only destroying individuals but the anatomy of our city and communities, he said on tuesday while speaking to a gathering of faith leaders prompted by recent mass shootings. 20 if you look at the gun violence archives. 20 mass shootings since the event in uvalde on may 24. we are asking you to comment on the amount that has taken place since then. some of you have looked at the legislative efforts being done on capitol hill. other aspects as well. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. (202) 748-8000 free democrats. (202) 748-8002 for independence.

text us if you wish at (202) 748-8003. nathaniel, go ahead. caller: can you hear me ok? host: you are on our independent line. caller: first, i do support the constitution in its organic form, having the ability to revise it as we learn from our past experiences. next, i would like to say i support comprehensive background checks, both on the local, state, and national level. i support the requirement of evaluation, registration, training, licensure, and insurance for all gun owners for every gun owned, for every gun inherited, given, gifted, and any ammunition bought, sold, or given to anyone with a firearm. i've had arguments on facebook, twitter, tiktok. i come across the same talking

points and same responses that are generated, parroted back to me. they are given without any research in the way that the second amendment came about. i refer you to article 46 of the federalist with the paragraph beginning "extravagant as this supposition is." the reason i am saying this is, those people who say no laws, all the laws we have on the books, we have 20,000 laws on the books, they haven't done anything to change this, you are never going to take my gun rights -- i will put it into perspective ia rate quote, revised, organic -- host: the things that you cited that you said would work, what data do you base that on? caller: i base that on -- you

can pull up videos of people going to the national competitions and living their daily lives in switzerland and how they manage their gun control, if you can call it gun control. it is just well-regulation. host: that is nathaniel in north dakota. senator durbin commenting on his twitter feed saying a mass shooting in a hospital in tulsa, a police officer shot in chicago, gun violence is an epidemic chattering lives and communities. we must vote on reform, and we will. also in the senate, americans are being murdered, not just today but every day. there are simultaneous active shootings across the country. the failure to act on gun safety's complicity in the deaths of thousands of people. it is past time for congress to act. i am ready. a group of senators talking on the senate side. legislators on the house aside could vote on a package as early

as next week. they will mark up that legislation later today. you can watch on c-span. you can comment on that. 20 mass shootings since uvalde, texas, including the one from tulsa, oklahoma last night. in cloverdale, indiana on the independent line. we will hear from mark. caller: good morning. the main point that i want to make, i believe that most of this is political emphasis from the white house in order to distract from the high inflation and other economic things going on right now. there were 200 mass shootings before the texas shooting. over the weekend, shootings in cities, like 50 or 60 people were killed.

most of the shooting is taking place by gang members and criminals. host: in texas it was one person who shot a number of people, including kids. how do you equate those two things, the certain events of cities versus one event in uvalde, texas. how do you equate those things? caller: maybe one crazy guy, yes , i agree with that. i don't agree with the fact that where our real problem is -- let's get down to brass tacks. the problem is the moral fiber of the country and the lack of fathers in the home. raising the age to 21, what they should do is make it that anyone under 21 has to have their

father sign that they can get the weapon. thirdly, going back to this real problem -- this is all of a sudden so front-page. if you want to look at the real problems there has been nearly 70 million children slaughtered and the president stands for that. host: that is mark in indiana. the photograph out of uvalde, texas featuring christian garcia, the 23-year-old marine in his dress blues as one of the pallbearers. that was during wednesday's funeral mass for his parents, irma and joe garcia. in north carolina, republican line. caller: good morning. i have an opinion on gun control

in the united states. i can't back this up, but i've read it somewhere and i cannot remember where. the reason japan did not invade california, invade the mainland -- this came from one of the top generals in japan. when they bombed pearl harbor they would have come into the west coast and invade. the reason they did not invade, with the general said, behind every blade of grass in the united states there is a gun. that is my opinion. host: how does that relate to the topic of mass shootings that we've seen over the last few weeks? caller: most of the mass shootings come from the fact of if you go downtown at 10:00, 11:00, 12:00 at night and you see these kids who are 16, 17, 18 years old riding around in a $70,000 truck, they don't have a

job, it is their truck, mom and dad bought it and gave it to them. host: again, how does that relate to the events over the last few weeks? caller: kids in low income districts are areas don't seem to be in despair. i went into a waffle house sunday or monday night bringing my grandkids back home and there were at least 15 kids there around the age of 18, 19 years old. everyone one of them driving some $50,000 truck. host: on may 28 three events according to the gun violence archive. one in chattanooga, tennessee that injured six people. in fresno, california, one death resulting from the mass shooting with three people injured. four people injured in malabar, florida on may 28th. this also highlights several. colorado springs, three killed

one injured. in memphis, tennessee, for injured, none killed. in alabama, in anniston on the 27th, six people injured from the mass shooting and none killed. the gun violence archive if you want to check out the research and statistics that they've posted, gunviolencearchive.org is how you can see that. we have done this for about a half-hour. we will continue until the top of the hour. 20 mass shootings since the events in uvalde, texas. tulsa, oklahoma last night at a hospital. we will get your comments for the next half until our first segment. if you want to call us, (202) 748-8001 for republicans. (202) 748-8000 free democrats. independents, (202) 748-8002. representative connolly from virginia saying it feels like you hear about another mass shooting every day because you do. there have been 233 mass shootings in 2020 two, we are

100 52 days into the year. representative mikie sherrill saying this is what happens when members of congress abdicated their responsibility to protect the safety and security of our citizens. and saying while reasonable security procedures are important that gun shooting could be stopped by hardening every facility is designed to truly distract from the true source of gun violence. in alabama, in fort mitchell. caller: how are you doing, sir? host: go ahead. caller: i would like to say all of the smoke screens and politicizing of guns, we are missing the point. the point is how to prevent this from happening again. there are several ways to prevent this, but everybody wants to talk about the political side of guns. i am from the military, i do 25 years. i would like to say that guns

are a rite of passage in the united states, but we have to have sensible gun laws in place to prevent this from happening. just like an alarm system for your house is to prevent people from breaking into your house, common burglars, but a real burglar who breaks into things will get in. to prevent this from happening, raising the gun age. if you look at all of these mass shootings, it is from 17 to 20. especially ones dealing with schools. if you raise the gun law to 21, almost like buying beer, it would help. it won't prevent them all, but it would help. host: what age did you enter the military? caller: i entered the military right before september 11. 2001. host: you were 19?

caller: i have retired. i've been in long enough to understand certain weapons are for war. certain weapons the public shouldn't have. we have this notion with the second amendment that we have the right to bear arms. i am fine and dandy with that. host: david nash burrell, north carolina, republican line. -- dave in asheboro, north carolina. republican line. caller: -- we need to have security around our courthouse and everywhere else. we need to put systems in, put someone on duty. it is sad, it is a real sad thing. let's talk about the drug overdose and the gas prices.

trying to linger on one thing to keep your mind off of the gas prices and food prices. host: we did a segment on gas prices the other day, a whole segment. if you want to go back into the archives, i believe it was tuesday. we did a segment looking at that. you can go to c-span.org and find that segment. other guest segments on gas prices too if you want to check it out yourself. in london, kentucky mitch mcconnell appeared before constituents to talk about a variety of things. one thing he talked about was the school shooting in texas that you've heard about and what he would like to see occur in congress when it comes to guns. [video clip] sen. mcconnell: evil on full display and a gun way that saddened the whole country. we have the second amendment to

the constitution, we take it seriously. there is the right to keep and bear arms in this country. so, what i've done is encouraged bipartisan discussions that are going on. in fact, i just had a call with one of the members to see if we can find a way forward consistent with the second amendment that targets the problem. it seems to me there are two categories that underscore the problem. mental illness and school safety. hopefully, we can find a way to come together and make progress on this horrendous problem consistent with our constitution and our values. host: tony in conway, south

carolina. the best thing to stop mass shootings in schools is to get rid of the nonsensical gun free zones that do nothing but set up kids as sitting ducks. then off of twitter this morning saying that i think you should own as many guns as you can afford, but you have to keep them on your property. you have the right to bear arms, not the right to kill other citizens. you can text us at (202) 748-8003. our twitter feed is @cspanwj. on the line for democrats, go ahead. caller: i am a gun owner myself. i believe these ar-15's are weapons that should be used in the military, the police force, like that. our second amendment we have the right to bear arms. no one is trying to take that away from anybody. we need to get control.

here in texas you have to be 21 to buy cigarettes. you have to be 21 to buy beer or liquor. you have to be a certain age for all types of things in texas except for guns. it does not make sense. i don't know why people think president biden is coming for their guns. they are not coming for my handgun. back in the day a lot of people had rifles. but ar-15's? no. we don't need that on the streets. we don't need it. host: in montana, democrats line. caller: hello? host: you are on. caller: yes. i have an idea. i think what we need to do is pass a law, try it for two years. it is a blackout on media talking about these things. most of these shootings,,

suicides all of this stuff happens because of the news media. you know, they are making money off of it, sensationalism. if we passed a law for two years, maybe that would stop this copycat stuff from happening. have you ever noticed that one shooting gets another shooting? that is all i've got to say. host: you wouldn't see the information put out on social media? caller: they seem to be able to take other things down on social media, so why not do that? have them take it down. host: jimmy is next in baltimore, maryland, democrats line. caller: good morning, pedro. it is ironic. i followed the call that i just called. i was thinking the exact opposite. right now the whole shooting thing is sanitized. nobody sees the bodies of these

people who are shot. in the 1960's, i believe, emmett till's mother made a decision to have an open casket and show the horror of what happened. i think right now we can't have consensus because we are not really seeing the horror of what these guns are doing. you know, they have a shooting, they show the flowers, people making speeches, they show the caskets, but they are closed and no one gets to see these bodies. i think if they showed the pictures, a picture is a thousand words. people then there might be consensus because people would be dealing with reality instead of a sanitized version of these shootings. host: that is jimmy in baltimore, maryland.

those sentiments are also being made in the opinion section of the washington post. this is the former secretary for the department of homeland security. it is time to show the real horror of mass shootings in pictures. he says i lack the moral standing to tell a parent for the greater good photos of their dead child or any photographs in particular, but awaiting the real horror of these repeated tragedies. robb elementary is a crime scene. if the case was to go to trial they would have to present evidence of guilt. why should schoolchildren carry the memory of the execution of their teachers and classmates while those who are elected are spared? we will go next to debbie in rhode island.

debbie in rhode island, hello? she hung up? we will hear from james on the republican line in south carolina. caller: yeah, i'm just wondering why the gun laws are not being put into effect? isn't our president's son, joe biden's son hunter biden, go get a gun illegally? host: independent line, this is chris. next up. caller: morning. host: morning. caller: i think it is pretty obvious the american public does not get a sense of the horror of what is actually happening. i agree partially with the idea that we need to see what is going on to understand the horror, but at the same time i

feel like our political system is so divided that republicans won't talk to democrats, democrats won't talk to republicans. of course, they will talk, but neither one of them is actually stopping to listen to the other side. this is fundamental to debate. it is fundamental to progress. until our elected leaders will actually speak about the issue and say agree, first of all, that we have a problem with the number of dead people per shooting. maybe from there we can start to talk about pushing us along with some progress. host: when you hear about discussions on capitol hill that you may have heard of over the last couple of days, legislators talking about possibly passing legislation, what is your level of confidence that will happen? caller: i am encouraged by what i am hearing, but my level of

confidence is very low due to the fact that they have appeared , time and time again, to say the same talking points from their positions without really committing to making a change, passing legislation, that will really make a difference. host: -- caller: which is, i think you have to limit the amount of killing that can occur for any mass shooting. host: that is chris in maine, i believe, sharing his thoughts this morning. we'll do the same for the next 15 minutes. a couple of editorials and op-ed's. this is from the pittsburgh post-gazette saying today, or yesterday, on tuesday protesters demanded outgoing senator pat toomey help fill consensus for modest commonsense legislation that president biden can sign.

he has taken on work with his democratic colleagues from virginia, joe manchin, on background checks. if emmett awes or a mccormick secede mccormick neither are likely to support gun legislation. he should cash in all of his political chips that will make this country and her children safer. that is from the pittsburgh post-gazette. the opinion section of the washington times, another column with michael mckenna saying that if congress is going to try to solve the problem, it first needs to find what it is trying to solve. if the purpose of the effort is to reduce the number of school shootings, minimizing and complicating access to guns might be useful, but not a productive way to start will stop improving the security of schools might be a more immediately fruitful approach. experience suggests that a different suite of policy options, including taking guns from the hands of criminals in

the streets, is in order. you can see that on the washington times. tennessee, mt. juliet, republican line. caller: thank you. i would want to know who decided that these black guns that are fast shooting are called assault weapons. mine are defensive weapons. i have thousands of rounds of ammo. in the summer of 2020 we saw roving bands of rioters burning police cars in front of the cops.the liberal mayors told them to stand down. how do you expect americans to protect themselves when the police fold up? that is what they are for. one other point, how are we going to decide what crazy is when our liberal politicians want to legitimize parents of

little children deciding they may be want to transgender. that's crazy. host: how much do you have been mt. juliet as having used your guns on that front? caller: very little. i had a neighbor who partied several years ago and met a lot of people. i promise, there are 100,000 rounds of ammo in my neighborhood, homes i can see. just people who have never had a record. it made me feel safe, i tell you that, that there are a lot of people just defending and they don't carry them. i never carry mine. i take it out every now and then to target shoot. they are not for hunting. we have no right to hunt, the government gives you that. host: one of the proposals on capitol hill regulation wise was to step up how guns are stored at home.

what do you think about that front? how do you store your guns? caller: they are actually locked up. i have a five-year-old grandchild. i don't want him to ever even see it until he's old enough. but there is no reason to have it out, for me. i don't know about other people. but i can tell you this. at my business there is probably -- two other businesses are there. there are probably eight people who are armed at home. you just never know. you never know when or who is going to protect us when the police stand down. host: gary in tennessee talking about his experiences. gary is from tennessee, jerry is from windsor, pennsylvania on the line for democrats. caller: hi. i wanted to make the point that

i was a schoolteacher, a special ed teacher. i also served in the navy during the vietnam war as a medic. i am calling because my granddaughter was involved in a school shooting when she was in high school. the principal was shot and the shooter shot himself. my granddaughter was standing there. she is now 33 years old and still experiencing that terrible day. i think what they need to do is get rid of the ak 14's -- the -- the n-14's, i'm sorry.

my grandfather -- we all learned how to use it. when not to touch it from the time we were children. i can't understand. we had a teacher who was taken from the school, raped and killed, when i lived in georgia. georgia has a lot of guns because they have the wild hogs and everything else. i really believe we have to get the insiders on the republican side who agree with having all these ammunitions and guns. this is a war of the inner circle with people who are pushing us. host: gerri in pennsylvania. 10 minutes from now we will hear from jake charles talking about gun manufacturers and legal liabilities they may face in light of shootings.

writing in the washington post about baltimore attempting to pursue a ghost gun company, as it is described. she writes that the laws filed in the circuit court against hanover armory in anne arundel county in maryland represents the city's efforts to use every tool available to address a deepening public health crisis. the mayor they are saying that there is not enough legislation. he said in a news conference on wednesday that we have to crack down on the companies profiting off of destruction and death in our communities. if you want to stay with us, in eight minutes we will learn about the gun liabilities, the legal aspects of the guns with our guests. ted is next on our independent line in pennsylvania. go ahead. caller: good morning. lots of good conversation here. all of the suggestions, doesn't

it really come down to leadership? you hear mitch mcconnell and what he says. his is a very wishy-washy statement. it lacks the emphasis, the strength you would want, and it is a little late. i think for all the folks here, it really comes down to leadership. get out there and be part of the process and put folks in who will handle these issues, because that is the only way it happens. host: you said, you talked about emphasis and strength, or at least the focus of what should be discussed. what specifics would you like to see? caller: certainly, all sorts of good discussion here today in terms of limiting access, limiting the supply. i served in the military. there is no reason anyone needs an assault rifle. as the woman on the call

previously said, you need to have a single shot rifle to shoot birds or go out and hunt deer or what have you, that's fine. but an ar-15 is ridiculous. our elected officials lacked the personal courage to do what needs to be done to protect kids, such as in the uvalde shooting. you could not have a more heartbreaking scenario. host: that is ted in pennsylvania. doug in missouri, democrats line. caller: i am rhonda, are you talking to rhonda? host: are you from missouri? caller: i am from missouri. i want to remind america that we are the united states of america. all of this to -- all of this division talk will not have a good outcome. it is reasons like this that

young people are killing one another uselessly and senselessly, and the older people are putting: the fire to keep it going. please, let someone have some reason. let the democrats and republicans come back together to the whole idea that killing one another has no good outcome. i am a proud democrat, i know proud republicans, but the fact that we are fighting such a war, the civil war has already been fought. let's not do it again. let's elect leaders that are about unity, let's elect leaders that are about gun safety. host: rose in virginia. caller: hi, pedro. i have called before in this one hits my heart because my daughter was murdered in chicago by a minority person who sold drugs and had guns. she was shot in the head in 2008.

it really hits my heart to see all these children get shot like that. so, i have a very bias, maybe, opinion about it, but i really lamely alter liberals -- i really blame the alter liberals and leftists for wanting drugs to be legal. the side effects on drugs make them psychotic, these kids. they are into money with it. the left has made drug cartels very important. when the kids take drugs they kill. several of the kids who shot up people at school took marijuana, and marijuana is very strong today comparatively to what it used to be when my kids would smoke. they were sick on it when it was 5% and now it is 90% or more, the strains. they get psychotic, they want to

kill, they get angry, and that is a side effect of it. the government is intentionally keeping those stories out of this whole episode because they want to push it on our population. they are in the cartel business. they are in the cartel business, and they are the ones responsible for our kids' deaths. host: dave in richmond, ohio, independent line. caller: good morning. a very good topic this morning. just from the recent facts of what happened just supporting a 21-year-old, as long as you can draft someone over 21 years old. i don't understand the gun free zone.

the people who have firearms are going into cause mass destruction. why not let someone else have a firearm to protect themselves? that is all i have to say. have a good day. host: we will hear from sal in massachusetts, democrats line. caller: good morning. i was in the marine corps 1972-19 76 and i was a rifle coach at parris island. i don't trust anyone with a gun. i don't trust myself with a gun. get rid of guns. get rid of this problem. thank you. host: given your background, why do you have that feeling towards guns specifically given your background? caller: because i've seen what guns can do. once you pull that trigger the damage is going to be done. i've seen it over and over again at parris island. we have all kinds of firewalls to try to stop accidents, but they happened anyway. host: one more call from hank in

connecticut. independent line. caller: hi, this is hank from connecticut. i am a retired master chief, 92 years old. something that has never come up, which i don't understand, is how we were able to outlaw machine guns in the 1930's because a bunch of gangsters had them. we can't face removing the ar-15's, which are probably 10 times more violent than the submachine guns were at that time. i trained on the submachine guns while in the navy. believe me, i understood right then how destructive they could be. i can't even imagine what these new ar-15's can do. that is all i have to say. host: hank in connecticut

finishing off this hour of calls. we appreciate all of you who participated. i will continue the talking about the legal protection for gun makers and dealers, particularly when it comes to crimes committed with their products. later on in the program, rob gramlich will talk about the u.s. electric grid and the potential for electricity shortages during the summer. those conversations are coming up on "washington journal." ♪ >> 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. subscribe today using the qr code or visit c-span.org.

♪ >> american history tv, saturdays on c-span two. telling the american story. a look back at jackie robinson's integration of major league baseball in april 1947. sportswriters and historians discuss his career with the brooklyn dodgers and his impact on the sport. at 8:50 p.m., the great american's metal given posthumously to ruth bader ginsburg. exploring the american story. watch american history tv saturday on c-span2 and find a full schedule on your program guide or watch online at any time.

♪ >> be up to date with book tv's podcast about books. with current nonfiction book releases and a bestseller list, along with rands through insider -- along with trends. ♪ >> "washington journal" continues. host: our first guest of the morning is jacob charles, he is with the duke center for firearms law. he serves as the executive director. good morning. guest: good morning. host: tell us more about the center and what it focuses on. guest: duke is three years old and founded in order to help advance the debate over gun rights and regulations. it is a two-fold mission of a

legal academy now that the supreme court is getting back into establishing the second amendment firearms law. the other mission is to be a reliable and balanced resource to lawmakers, media and other scholars, judges and lawyers. host: when it comes to the legal aspects of guns, we talk about the idea of shooting, how much legal liability does a gun manufacturer have these days? guest: a lot of it depends on the state it happens in and there is a federal protection. that was passed in 2005 and it limits the amount of liability gun manufacturers and sellers can have when a third-party uses a gun to cause harm. what it essentially did in the aftermath of the act in 2005 was

cut off lawsuits against gun manufacturers for that kind of harm. a few lawsuits have been successfully able to get around that barrier by relying -- there are allegations that the manufacturer violated the law. that is what we saw in the sandy hook case. those cases more recently have gotten around the federal barrier but his stance as a pretty large barrier to most lawsuits trying to recover for these kind of harms. host: if someone attempts to sue a gun manufacturer, how successfull usually are they? guest: fairly unsuccessful if the claim is arising out of someone using the gun to cause harm. one scenario would be if i buy a gun and it malfunctioned and explodes in my hand. the federal barrier will not be

an impediment to the kind of lawsuit. it does not block lawsuits based on product defects. you can sue the manufacturer. what it does do is if, say, you or a loved one is injured in a mass shooting incident and you allege the manufacturer of those guns is responsible or the seller is responsible, in most cases, there will be a threshold question if federal immunity applies. it has been a really big barrier. most of been dismissed in most cases have not been brought because of the federal barrier the tennis courts cannot entertain these losses -- in general, fairly unsuccessful but only in the case where there is an allegation the manufacturer or seller is responsible.

host: what arguments have been used to to establish there is a threshold to consider the case? guest: in the sandy hook lawsuit, the allegations by the surviving family members of the tragic shooting in 2012 alleged that bushmaster, remington arms who made the bushmaster rifle used in the shooting, had marketed the weapon as a tool for ostensive, illegal conduct. they were alleging that remington was violating a connecticut state law that says you cannot market products for illegal activities. they were alleging a violation of law. because they were alleging a violation of law, what that meant was the federal immunity statute does not apply because the statute has a specific carve out where it says all these claims are preempted, they are

not allowed to be brought except for if you allege there is a violation of a state or federal law applicable to the sale or marketing of a firearm. that is the statutory language a lot of courts have focused on. what is it me to be applicable to the sale of a firearm. the connecticut supreme court set our consumer protection statute that says you cannot market a weapon or any product for illegal activities is the kind of statute that was envisioned as forming the basis for a lawsuit when there are allegations in manufacturer or souther has violated that type of law. host: jacob charles is with us. if you want to ask him questions, call us on the line (202) 748-8001 fpr republicans, (202) 748-8000 for democrats. for independents, (202) 748-8002 .

gun owners can text us at (202) 748-8003. describe the conditions about how we got to this place in the first place to have a law. guest: we saw in the 1980's and 1990's, lawsuits against gun manufacturers picking up. in the late 1990's, municipalities started suing gun manufacturers in mass. we saw new york bringing lawsuits not just against one manufacturer for a specific incident what a bunch of gun manufacturers for not just single shooting incidents, but all of the increased gun crime that the city alleged was traceable to the practices of these manufacturers. this was a different kind of theory than we saw in the sandy hook case. this is a theory that said these manufacturers were intentionally

or inadvertently through their own negligence allowing their products to be oversupplied into certain markets knowing full well the oversupply into those markets would lead to their diversion into the legal marketplace and then into the hands of those intent on doing harm. those allegations, since they were so widespread, against all major gun manufacturers, those led to concerns in the gun industry that those kind of lawsuits, even if they were ultimately not successful, that those kind of lawsuits would being crushing legal liability and legal fees that manufacturers had to defend against. they went to the federal legislature and said we need protection from these kind of lawsuits and that is why in 2005 we got the protection of lawful commerce in arms act. even when the lawsuit might not have been successfully, it was a

defect -- the fact of having to defense of many of these lawsuits. host: was it generally a partisan issue? was it one body over the other? guest: i do not remember the exact vote count, but i know there were certainly, it was a bipartisan vote in favor of the law. it was supported more by republicans but it was not just one party. host: even as of yesterday in baltimore, there was a lawsuit filed against a company known for ghost guns. part of the argument, polymer 80 intentionally undermines firearms laws by providing ghost gun kits and parts, making them nearly impossible to trace. is that another way around to winning a lawsuit against what you described was a difficult way? guest: let me cap yacht this but

i have not followed -- let me caveat this that i have not read the lawsuit. if they are violating state or federal law that will be a way to get out from under plcaa. they will still have to prove the claims in court if they get out from under plcaa. removing plcaa means you can have the lawsuit proceed into court. if they are alleging violations of law, that is one of the ways -- a primary way in which a lawsuit can move forward. when there is an allegation of a violation of an underlying statute. host: jacob charles with the duke center for firearms law showing us for this conversation. let's start with rex in minnesota on our line for democrats. you are on with jacob charles with duke center for firearms law. caller: i appreciate the

opportunity. always good to be on c-span. i have a very basic question for you, which relates to the gun retailers. it seems like right now, we are all looking for someone to blame. you cannot really blame the perpetrator because they are dead, obviously, in the uvalde case, and you cannot sue the manufacturers accountable, so what about the retailers? what about having a public-private partnership between police and the retailer so when somebody suspicious comes and buys a gun and a bunch of ammunition, dozens that raised a red flag the retailer would need in order to notify the police so they could follow up on it? it seems like there needs to be another layer of accountability for the gun retailer. i will hold on for your answer. host: thank you for the

question. guest: thank you for that, rex. the sellers are included in plcaa protection. unless there is an allegation of a law break, they are protected by plcaa ,too. in terms of what war they could be doing, you mention the phrase red flag, there has been proposed legislation. there are laws in 19 states and the district of columbia to enact a red flag law that would allow either law enforcement or sometimes family members to go to court and seek an order when there are red flags. when somebody is an imminent risk of harm to themselves or others based on behavioral indicators that they might do something harmful to themselves or others.

i think maybe there is not as much appetite for gun dealers as others. host: we will hear from charlotte. caller: i have something to say about this whole gun situation. i want to tell you the leading cause of death for children is not having a car seat. yet when cops are not allowed to pull people over because it is racist but we are not ready to have a conversation. the biggest crisis we have right now is sentinel -- here we are. host: that is charlotte in tampa. as far as the analogies people apply to this, i want to get your comments. are automakers liable for people who use cars to kill people? another viewer says -- i am sure

you hear these analogies. guest: there are two points. whether or not a manufacturer is liable, two things in regard to that. one is civil law by which we hold individuals responsible for noncriminal wrongs but civil wrongs. normal principals will say in general, a manufacturer is liable for foreseeable misuse of its products. there has to be a connection and sometimes it is not foreseeable use of the product. in general, we have those laws. it is true that a lot of times before plcaa was enacted, manufacturers were not being held liable because -- it was not their fault. plcaa is different. it comes up before we get to those inquiries and says you cannot bring these cases, even

in situations where a manufacturer might indeed be liable. that is one side of the analogy. other industries have this kind of protections. plcaa is that unique statute in the sense that it does two things that i am not aware of any other statutes doing. it provides industrywide protection from lawsuits. yet it does not pair it with an alternative conversation -- compensation. there is immunity for vaccine makers but there is a way for individuals who have suffered harm from the vaccines to recover some compensation. with plcaa, there is no corresponding compensation system. there are some smaller immunity statutes that congress has enacted but this is one of the largest ones. it is doing some of the most work in protecting the industry

against lawsuits without pairing it with an alternative compensation scheme. host: delaware, democrats line, this is gay. caller: hello. good morning. there is a reason most shooters have been 18 to 20-year-olds. due to the gun laws, marketing, the ar-15 to that age group. i do not think marketing has been mentioned enough. i am glad to hear mr. charles talking about marketing this morning. i want to ask you, is there a case for the supreme court that has to do with the shootings and our guns? host: thank you. guest: great question. on the age restriction, there are laws in some states like california that restrict their weapons a person can buy before they are 21. in california, you cannot purchase a semi automatic rifle

until you are 21. that challenge -- that law has been challenged on second amendment grounds. i do not think that case will be the last word on the subject. other states have been experimenting with these laws, as well. florida enacted a law erasing the age to 21 after the parkland shooting. that is a proposal on the table given what we have seen with a lot of the shooters being 18 and 19-year-olds going to gun stores when they know they have turned legal age to purchase a weapon. in terms of marketing claims you raised, that i think is what the sandy hook lawsuit showed his possible to get out from under the barrier that is plcaa. alleging that manufacturers are marketing their weapons in ways that would violate the law is a way to both satisfy there is a legal claim because most states prohibit product manufacturer

from advertising their products for illegal uses. and also because it is a violation of the statute, a way for them to get out from under plcaa because plcaa does not stop lawsuits based on unlawful marketing. host: there was also a question about the supreme court. they are considering a case about concealed handguns. guest: there is a current secondment case coming to the supreme court we expect to come out in a few weeks. it is about new york's concealed carry law. i would be happy to address questions about that but there are no cases before the supreme court about civil liability for gun manufacturers. remington did ask the supreme court to review the connecticut supreme court decision but allowed alonso to go forward. the supreme court up -- but allowed it to go forward. if the court was frustrated or thought the lower court had got it demonstrably wrong, it might

have taken the case to say so but it did not. host: if you could give us the gist of the case if you do not mind. guest: the challenge currently going on is to new york state's concealed carry permit in scheme. in new york state, in order to get a concealed carry permit, the person has to show proper because. it is interpreted to mean you have to show a special need for self-defense. you cannot just go into a licensed official and say i am afraid or i just want a gun for self-defense. that will not be sufficient. the challengers from upstate new york are saying they want guns outside of the home for that reason. they want to concealed carry permit. the supreme court will determine whether or not states can require this kind of good cause. some states have similar schemes that require good cause showing before a concealed carry license is granted.

the majority of states do not have them and some states are going in the opposite direction. they are limiting requirements for any kind of ferment or license to carry concealed. host: south carolina, independent line, michael. go ahead caller:. i am in one of the states that they seem to be going backward on. i have a couple questions, one very broad and one specific. can you first of all help me parse the distinction, the second amendment claims no infringement on the right to bear arms. i do not think nuclear arms should be included in there. can you help me parse the line of what the division is? i understand micro standing might be able to help substantially, i think a micro stamped bullet can be removed from a victim and traced

directly to an individual weapon , which therefore could help solve crimes if the weapons are registered to people. in my mind, that shows the politicians are protecting the anonymity of guns more than the interest of solving murders. host: thank you very much. guest: i will take the micro stamping one first. california has a micro stamping requirement. the requirement means a serial number is required to be stamped on the bullet so if the shell casing is not connected to the scene, the bullet will still have the serial number. there is a debate about how feasible this is for ammunition manufacturers to actually do at this point. there is a requirement in california and new york.

if you could remind the of the first. host: the second amendment and the aspect of infringement. guest: the second amendment says shall not be infringed. the supreme court decision where it first said this protects an individual right unconnected to the militia. it said the second amendment is not absolute, just like all other rights are not absolute. the first amendment says congress shall not make a law -- people think a lot law toward freedom of speech is unconstitutional. one of the things the supreme court will do in this most recent decision is to tell lower courts how they should be evaluating these claims. should they be evaluating the same way they evaluate first amend my claims, which is to look to what the government interest is. is it in reducing suicides?

reducing mass shootings? reducing gun violence more generally? and see how closely aligned a law is to meeting the interest. that is one way to look at the constitutionality of laws we use in the first amendment context. another way to look at the second amendment a lot of conservative judges have been advocating for is to look to history and tradition to see if gun regulation was used in the past and if it was it is constitutional. if it was not, it is not constitutional. those judges are quick to say that does not mean every modern regulation is not constitutional but we have to find an analogy to the past to uphold modern regulation. the supreme court is likely to say which of the two paths lower court should take. host: republican line, silver spring, maryland. caller: thank you so much. good morning.

when these mass shootings happen and the numbers get a lot of play in the media, the number of people killed or injured, i am thinking about two different sets of numbers. the first are the amount of campaign contributions are politicians get from the gun lobby's that seem to on the surface lead to our ability or inability to pass restrictions on guns. the other numbers i am thinking about are the advertising revenue that newspapers, television, radio, etc. get from gun manufacturers to advertise about guns. i am wondering, should politicians be held liable for their negligence in passing gun laws? news outlets or other areas where guns are advertised,

should they be held liable for putting forward the advertisements to the public? host: that is josh in maryland. guest: thank you for the questions. any kind of legal liability or lawmakers or for media who run advertisements is highly unlikely. plcaa will not be the bar there. other core principles will be the main impediment to those lawsuits being successful. one thing on the donations front, certainly all of these are things folks should consider when they are thinking through issues of gun rights and gun regulations. one thing we know about the gun rights movement that has been successful at the state and national level enacting gun rights legislation is the nra, other gun rights lobbying organizations have been as effective with mobilizing voters as they have been with donating

to particular politicians. it is as much the fact they are able to motivate and mobilize voters who are interested in these issues and are often single issue voters on the issue of gun rights more than the fact they are donating sums to particular politicians. host: has there ever been a conversation on capitol hill about changing plcaa itself? guest: there has been legislation introduced, although i do not think there has ever been a vote on repealing plcaa, but there has been legislation debated or proposed to repeal plcaa. i do not think any of those conversations have gone seriously enough to get those up for a vote. there are active conversations going on about repealing plcaa. host: our guest is the executive director for the duke center for firearms law. how did duke university get into this field of study? guest: duke has two law

professors who are experts on the second amendment. they became experts shortly after the heller decision came down. they are two of the foremost experts on the second amendment in the country. they got together and said there are only about a dozen faculty in moscow's that are seriously studying the second amendment -- they got together and said there are only about a dozen faculty in law schools that are seriously starting the second amendment. there are no other law school centers dedicated to the study of firearms law and the second amendment and we thought it was an important thing to do for the public and the academy to have scholars interested in the ideas in this space and how the doctrine develops. host: what got you interested in this field of study? guest: i got interested in it

because i was a student, one of my mentors when i was at duke and he talked to me about how the field is growing and how it has interesting questions about jurisprudence and legal theory, which i am interested in, what the second amendment is for and how we develop constitutional law. on the other hand, it has practical impact. it affects people's daily lives. 100,000 people are injured with guns every year. there is an important conversation at the theoretical level that i am interested in is a scholar in the practical level. host: bowie, maryland, democrats line. caller: good morning. my question is, do people have rights to shoot a manufacture if a manufacture was producing --

gun manufacturers can make guns safer for the public. they can put a lock on a gun. [indiscernible] my question is, do the public have the right to shoot a manufacture if a manufacture put something out not safe for the public? host: we will get an answer. guest: it is a great question and something plcaa can get in the way of. if i am injured in a car accident, i can sue the

manufacturer of the car if i can show the design of the car made it unreasonably unsafe. if i can show there is a safer alternative design that is cost effective to make and the manufactured and not do that, i can sue the manufacturer and recover. what plcaa says is there is some room for these product liability claims but it says you cannot bring them, even if you can get out from underneath the general bar on lawsuits, unless it was caused -- unless you are alleging -- unless what happened is there was harm caused by the act of an individual that constituted a criminal offense. i will give you an example. there is a lawsuit going on in pennsylvania where a boy went over to his friend's house. his friend had a handgun.

his friend took the magazine out of the gun and his friend thought taking the magazine out of the gun meant there were no bullets in the gun. in fact, there was a bullet in the chamber and the particular model of gun he was holding could be fired when the magazine was removed. the friend pointed the gun at the boy and he shot him and he killed him. the family brought a lawsuit against a manufacture and said that is an unsafe design. what you should be required to do is make a magazine disconnect safety. you should be required to make it so the gun cannot fire if a magazine is removed. or you should be required to have a chamber load indicator. there is an indicator on the gun that says there is a round in the chamber. that is a lawsuit going on right now. it has been successful because what has happened was there was an act, someone pulled the trigger intentionally that constituted a criminal offense.

there was a criminal offense of using a gun in a way that was reckless and unsafe. that stood as a barrier to that kind of lawsuit in the same way that would not be a lawsuit dismissed at the threshold level and any other product. because it is guns and because of plcaa, it is stopping a lawsuit for unsafe design -- allegedly unsafe design -- the family would have to prove the alternative design is reasonable. right now the lawsuits are being stopped by the bar that is the protection of lawful commerce in arms act. host: this is a gun owner from texas. caller: hello. host: you are on. go ahead. caller: there are a lot of laws on the books that are not being enforced. it is not the gun owner that legally goes and buys a gun for self protection, it is the criminal element or the person

behind the gun. guns do not kill people, people kill people. they discovered they can harden a target like a school and put a guard at the door, many times one is open, it would set the alarm off. at one entry point and the other doors are exit only. once they start doing that and taking the videogames of killing, like these war games off the market. that hardens kids to say i can just go do this and get away with it. kids need to be taught early about gun safety. it is up to the parents to start changing their perception of how kids play. host: thank you. guest: thank you for that perspective.

certainly valid concerns about the alternative ways that state, federal and local governments can go about reducing the kind of tragedies we are seeing, like the ones in texas. one thing i think should note is there is evidence -- the texas shooter waited until he t turned 18o buy his gun from a licensed gun dealer. we see in other instances on january 6 at the capitol, d.c. strict -- strictly regulates guns. it was not the kind of armed protest you would see in other places where guns are allowed on capitol grounds. the individuals who went into the capitol did not bring their guns. even people who are going to break the law are respecting some laws. there is some evidence laws

affect behavior. host: assuming gun manufacturers have large legal resources at their disposal, what kind of resources does a group of people be to have two bring a lawsuit against the gun manufacturer? guest: i am not exactly sure on this but i think plcaa allows the recovery of attorneys fees for gun manufacturers for an unsuccessful lawsuit. it is very hard for individuals who want to bring a lawsuit against a gun manufacturer to find an attorney to represent them to do so because plcaa is such a big barrier that in the past, historically, lawyers who will represent plaintiff are injured by products have been hesitant to bring these kind of lawsuits against gun manufacturers because it was seen that plcaa was an absolute barrier. the recent cases that have gotten around plcaa immunity

will be an incentive to more lawyers to bring these kind of cases, seeing that there are ways to bring successful challenges. it has historically been a real barrier. host: john in wisconsin, independent line. caller: thank you for taking my call. i am a gun owner, i have been hunting for 45 years. i have shotguns, rifles come along gun -- long guns. i do not know how i want to phrase this. if i have two firearm sitting on a table, one will not do anything by itself. you have to pick up the firearm, pointed, aim it and pull the trigger. i do not see how gun manufacturers could be liable for anything. if you are overweight and diabetic, can i sue a spoon

company because the spoon picks up the food you put in your mouth? at some point in time, it is personal responsibility. all my firearms are under lock and key. they cannot make an amendment, change the second amendment, get enough votes, -- there are different ways of getting around. host: we got your point. thank you. guest: that was it argument persuasive to the legislators who enacted plcaa. the analogy to suing a spoon company if you are eating ice cream would be that for the most part, these lawsuits are brought by people not engaged in the decision-making that led to their harm. these are the victims of another person's criminal wrongdoing.

that is another layer to remove from the manufacturer. but these lawsuits are not brought by people that harm themselves and they are blaming the gun manufacturer. they are involuntarily brought into this because harm has been imposed upon them and they are alleging in many instances the manufacturer has responsibility not because the manufacturer is responsible for what the third party did unlawfully, but because the manufacture has responsibility for its own actions. either marketing the weapon in a way that is unlawful, as the sandy hook plaintiffs alleged, or making a weapon that would be foreseeably misused and not including safety devices that would have made it less likely for this to happen. host: another gun owner. jim in ohio. caller: i am calling about a question. does plcaa protect gunsmiths --

under state and federal law and regulations in the representation of a regular list of things they could do for you if you do not have an automatic or specific license, is that applicable? do they have vetting standards on that under plcaa? do they have manufacturer liability? or does the government have to come in and take care of it with a sanction? guest: thank you for the question. i will be the first to admit that i do not know the answer to the question. i would have to look at the statute in more detail. i am not sure about the question of gun parts specifically. host: in louisiana, democrats lined. hello. caller: i would like to say my unit was the first unit to go to

vietnam with m-16's in 1965. i know the damage the ak-47 can do and m-16. if you saw the bodies and the damage being done to the children. i guarantee this would end. thank you. guest: i do know there is a national debate going on about whether or not the photos would help change the debate. i have seen a lot of family members of mass shooting victims talk out against that, against the way it would read traumatized them to see the photos. and those our loved ones in those positions. i see the point on the others that many people are saying. maybe more graphic images would change. host: mr. charles, one aspect

being debated on capitol hill and the potential new legislation was on something called bump stocks. since we have seen the atf's effort on that, what would happen in what would more regulations do? guest: bump stocks are devices that can be attached to firearms that functionally make them a machine gun. a semi automatic weapon, weapons used in the shootings, require you to pull the trigger for each bullet shot. you cannot just hold down the trigger, that would be a machine gun. those are illegal to own for individuals. machine guns are heavily regulated. automatic weapons -- semi automatic weapons are not as heavily regulated. bump stocks make an ar-15

functionally equivalent to a machine gun. the trump administration after the las vegas shooting where bump stocks were used enacted legislation that would make them no longer able to be used. it would reclassify them under federal law. that is being challenged right now in the courts. most of the challenges have been to the agency's authority for regulating them. they are calling these components of a machine gun. those challenges are ongoing and the supreme court has a case it has not yet decided to take up about a challenge to these bump stock bans. host: one more call. ted in pennsylvania, republican line. caller: this is for charles.

i used to own a shop. you do not know if the person is really mental or not. they can be a perfect person. but still, after the gun is purchased, you do not know what these people will do. a child is three years old and they say the child shot someone with a semi automatic. pull the slide back and pull the trigger. the amount of pressure needed on the trigger, that is impossible. a child cannot pull that slide back at three years old. you cannot predict when someone will go mental because it is the idea -- the federal government got your taxes, the state and local government got your taxes. it is all about taxes. how could you want to sue a manufacturer?

you can sue anybody in the world. you cannot predict when someone will go nuts. host: thank you. guest: without immunity statutes, somebody sues somebody else and he goes to court and a judge says it is not a legal claim. there has to be a legal claim and when there is not a legal claim, courts are dismissing those cases. i want to clarify one thing about the role in mental illness and interpersonal violence. studies have shown those who are seriously mentally ill are not drivers of violence. people who are mentally ill are much more likely to be victims of violence. one of my colleagues at duke, he works in a medical school and has done research that shows if we eliminated all serious mental illness, we would decrease total

interpersonal violence by 4%. there are people who are mentally ill and will be violent, but weekly unlimited all of mental illness -- but if we eliminate all of mental illness we would only decrease violence by 4%. host: the website for the duke center for firearms law, jacob charles serves as the executive director. thank you for the conversation today. guest: thank you for having me. host: coming up, we will hear from rob gramlich talk about the strength of the u.s. electrical grid, particularly what we might expect during the summer months. it was yesterday when the biden demonstration announced new efforts on ukraine. a store in the washington post saying that by demonstration defended its decision to send rocket systems to ukraine, rejecting criticism the decision comes too late to make a difference while brushing aside the kremlin's complaint that the u.s. is prolonging the war.

we want to ask you in our next phone segment for about a half-hour if you are concerned with what we have seen going on ukraine and this latest announcement about a widening conflict with russia. republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independent, (202) 748-8002. we will take those calls when "washington journal" continues. ♪ >> live sunday on in-depth, a journalist will be our guest to talk about immigration issues and the drug epidemic in the u.s. he is the author of several books, most recently the least of us, true tales of america about the neuroscience of addiction and the deadly impact of synthetic drugs.

join in the conversation with your phone calls, facebook comments, texts and tweets sunday, lied at noon eastern on c-span2. visit c-spanshop.org to get your copy of his books. ♪ >> if you are enjoying book tv, sign up for newsletter using the qr code on the screen. to receive a schedule. book tv every sunday on c-span2 or anytime online at book tv.org. television for serious readers. ♪ >> c-span's online store. browse through our latest collection of c-span apparel and accessories. there is something for every c-span fan. every purchase help support our nonprofit operation.

shop now or anytime. >> after months of closed-door investigations, the house january 6 committee is set to go public. starting june 9, tune in as committee members question key witnesses about what transpired and why on the assault on the u.s. capitol. watch coverage beginning june 9 on c-span, c-span now or anytime online at c-span.org. c-span, your unfiltered view of government. >> "washington journal" continues. host: for the next half hour, we will ask you about concerns with a widening conflict with russia. an announcement yesterday from

the white house concerning more weapons being sent there. it was talked about the new arms package being delivered. you can see the full statement on our website, c-span.org. [video clip] >> the capabilities in this package are tailored to meet critical ukrainian needs for today's fight, including requirements for rocket artillery. this authorization is the 11th drawdown of equipment from dod inventories for ukraine since august 2021. the capabilities include high mobility rock ticket -- rocket systems, a range of up to 70 kilometers. five counter artillery radars, 1000 additional javelins and 50 command launch units. 6000 anti-armor weapons. 15,000 155 millimeter artillery rounds. four helicopters.

15 tactical vehicles and spare parts and equipment. these are critical capabilities to help the ukrainians retell the russian offensive in the east. one need is the rocket system i mentioned that response to ukraine's top priority ask. this will provide ukraine with precision at targeting at range. the ukrainians have given us assurances they will use a system for defensive purposes only. in anticipation of this decision by president biden, the department of defense pre-position the systems in europe to make sure they could be rapidly delivered to the ukrainians and put in place a plan to where we could start training forces immediately to make sure they can learn to operate the system safely and effectively. we will continue to closely consult with ukraine with additional capabilities in support of its defense. host: there is more to that on our website at c-span.org. two recent op-eds take a look at

the idea of a conflict with russia. making the case to stay the course. part of it reads nobody wants direct confrontation with russia but helping ukraine defendants landon freedom is in the security interest. the u.s. and nato must take into account russian nuclear capability but they must not be intimidated. this unjustified war has a clear aggressor, russia, and a clear victim, ukraine. ukraine looking to achieve an outcome kyiv can accept. experts making that case in the pages of the atlantic. whatever happens in russia, america and russia are set for a lengthy period of intense confrontation. u.s. support was entirely justified but as the fighting goes on, america's growing involvement in ukraine's war

effort including economic aid and sophisticated weapons could evolve into a wider direct conflict between the two great powers. this might box the u.s. into making unconditional agreement to goals that are horribly dangerous and contrary to national interest. when it comes to this idea of a conflict with russia and concerns over widening this conflict, we will hear from you. let's hear from you. blake underlined from democrats. caller: you do such an awesome job. i am concerned about a growing conflict with russia. however, the only choice we have is to make sure ukraine keeps sovereignty. you let them take ukraine and then what? china keeps moving through eastern europe? you have to take a stand. i was in the military, i got out last year.

now that we are trying to help free people, it is a problem. host: let's go to andrew in massachusetts, also on our line for democrats. hello. caller: if trump was still in office, trump would have let putin walk all over ukraine. thank god biden is in the white house because we have to stop russia from doing what it is doing. i think trump and putin had a little bromance going and trump wanted to be king. host: do you think as far as the latest actions from the biden white house, will that widen confrontation? caller: putin is at the point where he will have to go all in or back out.

it is a dangerous situation. i think there is a chance of a third world war if putin decides he will push it. host: this is from brad in kentucky, independent line. hi. caller: we are the ones doing the pushing. this all started in 2014 when our cia pushed into ukraine, push their leader out and pushed the people to violence. that is when this began. ukraine -- talking about the cost of all of this. in the past three months, we have sent $54 million in arms to ukraine. you could give every county in the united states $17 million. you could give 53,000 families $1 million.

we are wasting money. we are on the precipice of a nuclear war. russia has more nuclear arms than us. this is madness for two small counties in the country of ukraine. host: north carolina, republican line. caller: i think this whole thing is very simple. it seems to me that russia is overstepping themselves and we need to do something about it. more than we are doing. i have been saying this all along and i guess i am not really serious, but it would be kind of nice if someone would just assassinate putin. it would probably quit if he were gone. host: what exactly do you mean by needing more? caller: i do not care.

i am to the point where i do not care if we have more aggression between us and russia. between ukraine and russia, yeah, i do not want to make it worse. i want to make it better. host: why don't you care about increased aggression between our country and russia? caller: i think russia, as long as putin is in charge, is not -- what is the word i want? -- reliable. you cannot trust them. putin, i think the man has gone insane or is just too old. i do not know what his problem is. host: one of the questions asked of the secretary of state holding a joint press conference with the nato secretary-general was about the weapon systems and

if he had concerns about escalation in russia. [video clip] >> let's start with this. it is russia attacking ukraine, not the other way around. simply put, the best way to avoid escalation is for russia to stop the escalation and end the war it started. it is within its power to do so. specifically with regard to weapons systems being provided, ukraine has given us assurances they will not use the system against certain targets. there is a strong trust between ukraine and the u.s. i will also say throughout this, even before, president biden was very clear with president putin about what the united states would do if russia proceeded with its aggression, continuing to provide security systems

ukraine needs to defend itself against russian aggression. there is no hiding the ball. we have been extremely clear about this from day 1, with president biden speaking directly with president putin. it is russia who chose to launch this aggression. they started the conflict, they can end it at any time and we will avoid any concerns about escalation. host: there is marta that if you want to go to c-span.org and our c-span now app. after this program today, the house judiciary committee will start marking up the package of legislation when it looks that guns. you can watch it right after this show. you heard the secretary of state mention president biden and but he wants to see happen in ukraine.

he headed off edge of the new york times where he wrote in part, we do not seek a war between nato and russia. the united states will not try to bring about his ouster in moscow. we will not be directly engaged in this conflict, either by sending american troops to fight or attacking russian forces. we are not encouraging or in ukraine to strike beyond its borders. we do not want to prolong the war, just inflict pain on russia." let's hear from patricia -- carl in west virginia on the democrats line about concerns over a growing conflict with russia. good morning. caller: good morning. i would like the american people to wake up, because every time joe biden says anything over there it is costing us. gas prices went up.

food goes out. everything goes up. it is not going on the national debt. we are paying for it every time he opens his mouth and says something. wake up, america. host: next up is will from lancaster, california. republican line. caller: pedro, i was on hold listening to the show through my phone for 15 minutes during the last segment. i would like to talk about colluding with russia. how many ak-47s did joe biden send to ukraine. our gun manufacturers in america should be selling these guns to the ukrainians. another thing -- host: to the topic at hand, as

far as conflicts and concerns, how concerned are you? caller: he is sending ak-47s instead of american-made weapons. another thing, how much oil has he bought from russia, iran? how much foreign aid has he sent to iran and russia and china? host: patricia in chicago, democrats line. caller: this is patricia from chicago. i do have the feeling as far as the widening of the russia conflict. i think [indiscernible] sanctions on russia. ukraine should be supported by our military, if it is weapons and not soldiers. simply because the population of russia is a fraction of the population of the u.s.

however, russia is more or less allies with china. china's population is multiple of the u.s. population. also, iran is an ally with russia and china. i feel like if the u.s. gets involved with the war it will ignite world war iii with nuclear weapons. it is best we use our heads, keep up the sanctions and assist ukraine when we can. that is my opinion. host: mike from new york, independent line. caller: hello? great. i just wanted to bring to your attention the fundamental basis of what is going on in ukraine with russia -- russia, as of

yet, holiday war -- call it a war. russia is a superpower. if they are not calling it a war, it has nothing to do with ukraine. it is the u.s. we are setting ourselves up here. i think at some point in time we have to realize this type of modern mind game in russia's wargame is not something -- it does not seem like we have an understanding. there is no more brick-and-mortar. it is a technology type of war here. we are setting ourselves up. ukraine of the gypsies of the world. at the end of the day it is ukraine -- russia's ukraine. we have to back off a little bit. host: mike in new york. in the atlantic there was a piece by columnist, "western support for ukraine has peaked."

"ukraine continues to press western allies for support. it once the kind of support to resist russian advances but also win back territory and dual with russia's powerful and military -- military. the big reason for this reluctance is the economic cost of the war is starting to seriously concern americans and other western policymakers. inflation is up to 8.1% for the year. united states inflation is at a four-decade high." seymour in arizona on the democrats line. caller: yes. it's amazing how we can let people die, just the way the polls died in 1933. i saw pictures recently. the pictures in ukraine are the same. how can we be so inhumane to say

we will let an asymmetric dictator who starved ukrainians way back when, millions of them died then, and we are doing the same thing now? we have to act up. we have to be men, otherwise we will have situations like uvalde where the police stayed around and looked because they hope for a better situation. people dying in the ukraine is not worth it. we have to stand up to russia, even if it means of war. host: roberta in illinois on the republican line. caller: hi. i have a comment in the question. -- and a question. as far as contribute into ukraine, i think that is great. we are getting way too close to that line where we will be pulled into a war ourselves. a lot of pressure was put on the

usa from the beginning of this situation, this war. my question would be, are we [indiscernible] here in order to protect ourselves? we don't want to be if warburg -- short if war breaks out. we are already in a tight spot now with everything done to us in the past year and a half to two years. so, that's my concern. we are getting ourselves cornered. that should not happen. other countries should be helping as well. host: morning consult took a poll about aid to ukraine and

where american stood on it. a couple of takeaways. americans say the u.s. is not doing enough in ukraine. 22% think the u.s. is not doing enough. that decline from 37% who said the same in early march. less than half of americans see it as a u.s. responsibility with 43% of voters believing the united states has an obligation to protect and defend ukraine from russia. that is down from a tracking high of 50% at the beginning of may, and the lowest following the invasion. it also talks about other aspects, including support for russian oil sanctions. 48% of voters saying the u.s. government should impose sanctions on russia, even if it causes prices to rise. it is a low support since the first time it was posed in early march when 49 percent backed the measure. morningconsult.com.

frank, hello. caller: my name is frank. i'm from florida. i served in the military for four years. army and marines for short time. there are multiple sides. the key question is what prompted russia to do this? who prompted who? who prompted this work? i don't really know. i don't know the multiple sides, the reasoning. it is not just two sides, russia versus ukraine. there are probably about 12 sides to this. it is not just iran, china. i'm sure the north koreans, african-americans. zelenskyy is jewish. that will have an effect on the israeli -- host: michael, hello. caller: i was just concerned

with the russia conflict. you need a chokepoint. you need to cut off the buying of russian oil. the whole biden administration has put pressure on the saudi's. agreed to help stop iran's nuclear weapons and that will free up the saudi's from worrying about that. once you start pumping the oil to the europeans and they stop sending money to putin, it will choke them off automatically. you will not have to worry about widening of the conflict. host: an interview with the washington post, the ukrainian ambassador to the united nations. he spoke about aid from the united states and the perception that ukraine might suffer because of this conflict. here is the perspective from the ambassador. [video] >> a disconnect between the beginning of the conflict between what ukraine said it needs to be able to fight off

ukraine, not just for its own sake but for the sake of all western democracies and the european system and with the west has been willing to provide. how do you see this playing into the overall equation there? >> i think that the u.s. administration, unlike many -- perhaps the u.k. was part of this long-term vision was very well-informed about the preparations on the russian side. they were already signaling publicly and most important link behind -- most importantly behind the concerns. at least starting last year. it is not a surprise to the administration. you may recall how many times

the press person at the white house or state department would say imminent until it was causing confusion that the white house had to withdraw the use of the word "imminent." some europeans are not even sure putin will launch an assault. secondly, some were badly informed. they believed ukraine with surrender in two or three days. they were not even planning a long-term plan to assist ukraine. only the resolve and the heroic fight of ukrainians changed their opinion and their political planning. host: more of the interview at

c-span.org. jason in ohio on the democrats line. caller: good morning. thank you, c-span. i get a lot out of your program. i try to watch it everyday. i i look at the -- i look at the ukrainian situation like this. putin is trying to keep a hold of this corrupt money machine, what they say with his country. now they are trying to become a democracy. it is like britain did to us. send in the troops. keep the money flowing. we can't let that happen. i would like to see us do more actually. that is how i feel about it. host: finish your thought. i'm sorry. caller: i don't want to see

american troops on the ground but we have a lot of equipment we can send. thank you. host: two other stories to finish the segment with. when it comes to jobs and the economy, wall street journal reporting the labor department on wednesday said they were seasonally adjusted 11.4 million job openings in april, a decrease of 11.9 million openings in the prior month. the number of times workers quit their job fell slightly to 4.4 million. also the washington post and others reporting john hankey junior will be unconditionally released on june 15 -- john hinckley junior. coming up, the strength of the u.s. electric grid, considering the summer months and other aspects. rob gramlich of grid strategies

llc joining us for that discussion. that when washington journal continues. ♪ >> live on sunday on in-depth, immigration issues and the drug epidemic in the united states. the author of several books, including "dreamland,"" the least of us: tales of america and hope in the time of fentanyl and meth." doing the conversation with your phone calls, text and tweets on "in-depth," on book tv on c-span2.

for other programs, visit c-spanshop.org. >> at least six presidents recorded conversations while in office. hear those conversations on c-span's newest podcast ". presidential recordings" >> season one focuses on lyndon johnson. you hear about the presidential campaign, the gulf of tonkin incident, the march on selma, and the war in vietnam. not everyone knew they were being recorded. >> certainly johnson's secretaries knew. they were tasked with transcribing many conversations. they were the ones who made sure the conversations were taped as johnson would signaled to them through an open door between his office and there's. -- theirs. >> you will hear some blunt talk.

>> i want to report of the number of people who signed -- were assigned to kennedy the day he died. right quick. >> yes, sir. >> i promise i will not go anywhere. >> presidential recordings on the c-span now mobile app or wherever you get your podcasts. >> washington journal continues. host: this is rob gramlich, founder and president of grid strategies llc to talk about u.s. electric grid and its reliability. thank you for joining us. caller: good to be with you. host: a little about your organization and your role you have in the world of electricity? caller: where consulting firm that focuses on the power markets, the transmission system, the issues of low-cost decarbonization becoming reliable and affordable but clean power grid, which we are

dealing with changes. i work with americans for clean energy grid, a coalition of a variety of entities focused on that mission, and advanced transmission technologies. host: if you look at the electric grid as a whole, how reliable is it today? caller: the united states still has the most reliable grid probably in the world. it is still reliable now compared to historical standards. there are a few near-term isolated issues we will talk about that have been in the news lately but it is still a reliable grid and it can be. we can get to 60%-80% renewable energy, there are different ways to operate and plan that type of grid but we can do it and we can keep the system reliable and affordable. host: we are heading into the summer months. usually there is a question about reliability for the xo demand.

would you make the case we are prepared for that? caller: we have issues in a couple of reasons -- regions. there is not an overall supply shortfall but the grids are regional. there are isolated areas in the midwest, texas and california with unique issues. it's all related to climate change and severe weather. severe weather we have now is not really what we planned for five to 10 years ago. we need to start planning further ahead for these situations. host: would texas be an example of that from what they saw from the snowstorms they experienced? caller: texas has a couple of issues. they have some summer issues and winter issues. the winter issues were identified 10 years ago. they unfortunately did not get addressed. that was winterizing their supply. they lost half their natural gas fleet, just disappeared off the face of the earth in the middle of a severe prolonged cold spell. the supply was gone and power outages resulted.

it was a horrible situation. texas has a unique issue. it's independent from the rest of the grid. it is isolated. they could not power from their neighbors. what we saw was the other states north of texas had the same weather but they got power delivered from their neighbors, the mid-atlantic and the dakotas. the power-sharing is our insurance policy. everybody can do it except taxes. texas is looking at that now, connecting to the larger regional grid. there's a summer issue for taxes. -- texas. they are better for connecting new supplies which has helped with the hot afternoons, with the air conditioning load. solar going from 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. they have large batteries connected to the grid. that taken from 4:00 p.m. to it

:00 p.m. with the evening air conditioning load. -- 8:00 p.m. with the evening air conditioning load. other regions have a problem with interconnecting new generations. that's creating issues in the midwest and california. texas, as well as other places have supply chain issues. it is hard to get that across this economy, hard to get these units delivered and the supply chain and everything connected and delivered on time for the summer. there is a big rush going around to get new supplies. host: you talked about the regions. is it more on the production side or more on the transition side? caller: it is kind of all three. supply, demand and transition. if you have ample supply to meet the demand, your fine. the regions facing risks, it is the midwest that shows up in this recent reliability report.

their reliability for the country is the north american illogical reliability corporation. they put out a report. it's all over the news. the midwest region, right down the center of the country shows up as the red part. the most of your supply shortage risk of rolling blackouts. not talking about prolonged, multi-day blackouts. rolling that are annoying but not life-threatening like the texas winter storm situation. in that case there's a tremendous amount of excess power in the mid-atlantic. like an winter storm uri when it rest to the upper midwest to save the day, i expect we could see that again. there is five times more surplus in the mid atlantic then there is shortage in the midwest and there is ample transmission to get from the mid-atlantic to the

midwest. i'm not as worried about that. i am more worried about the summers that are increasingly hot. we have urban heat islands and people who often cannot afford the air-conditioning they would like to have. people die in heat waves. that's a huge public health risk. always is. as the summers get hotter and in urban heat islands, it's not really a grid problem per se. if the public health problem. host: rob gramlich is our guest until the end of the show. if you want to ask questions, (202) 748-8000 for the eastern and central time zones. (202) 748-8001 in the mountain and pacific time zones. you can reach out via text at (202) 748-8003. the energy department tells us when it comes to the power system in the united states, 19,000 generators, 55,000 substations for transmission,

642,000 miles of voltage lines. when it comes to those lines, how old are they? is that a concern as far as the age is concerned? caller: it is. many are over 50 years out, beyond their useful lives. we have a challenge in that we need to add transmission capacity for the nation for two reasons. the reliability power-sharing, so one neighbor can save a neighbor, but as we go through the clean energy evolution we need more transmission to connect all the wind and solar. the wind and solar are producing at different times and different places so the transmission can exit all. at the same time we have all these aging assets we need to replace. it is a double whammy on the transmission bill that consumers pay. it's unfortunate those are happening at the same time, certainly for those of us trying to get transmission built for future needs. it is a challenge when they see

the transmission bills going up. we do need to reinvest and build up the existing grid. the bipartisan infrastructure law had about $15 billion for increasing the resilience of the existing transmission system. there will be some help. the department of energy is working hard to get that money out the door and deployed. every utility with their regulator, the state regulators and federal regulators are trying to make sure they keep up with the maintenance. we might talk about wildfires at some point but that is a separate issue, a challenging one. one issue there was insufficient maintenance on the existing lines. there were some very old pieces of equipment, literally little folks. you see pictures of these rusted out hoax on equipment -- hooks on equipment and california.

we need to make sure utilities focus on their wires and maintenance. i hope state policymakers are talking to utilities about that. usually the lines and power grid fares fine. if you have old assets that can spark wildfires, that's a problem. host: one think in a recent wall street journal story looking at shortages. they made this point. the risk of electricity shortages is rising as traditional power plants are being required more quickly they can be replaced by battery storage. the challenge that wind and solar forms don't produce electricity at all times. they need large batteries to store output for later use, while a large amount of battery storage is under development. the pace may not be fast enough. what do you think of that argument, for that trend? caller: catherine blunt at the wall street journal, very smart. i spoke to her this morning.

we have a nice go along going on. one statement is incorrect. she says why didn't seller need batteries to operate. that's not have the power system operates. it is a complicated system. what happens is, think of it as a big lake. somebody takes a bucket of water out of one side of the lake and 70 puts a bucket of water in the lake. it is not that every wind farm needs a big battery. that's a misunderstanding of how the system works. look at the whole system and make sure we have enough buckets going into massive buckets coming out and keep the whole system level. it's a very complicated system. this is one single machine with miles of lines and assets and power plants connected to it. the utility to a phenomenal job. the operators to a phenomenal job keeping all that in balance on a second to second basis. all this power moves at the speed of light so they have to

keep it perfectly static. there are a few -- her point is about supply and demand imbalances. there are some imbalances and shortages for a couple of reasons. i mentioned the midwest. that's more of a paper shortages in a physical shortage. paper because there is surplus power from the mid-atlantic that can come in, as he keeps doing your after year. if the polar vortex is in the mid-atlantic and power comes in from the midwest, they are helping each other. regions help each other. i'm not so fearful. i don't think this is a trend. her article suggests it's a trend if like it's getting worse and worse. in our partisan world -- host: more coming out thing going in. caller: we have a short-term issue with the summer and a couple of regions. there are a lot of power plants coming on. there's a lot of solar and

storage coming in texas that will help that situation in california. if we did not have regional supply chain issues and connection problems to the grid, we would have plenty of that online already. we have a little timing problem. it's the beginning of june and some are experiencing full on summer. host: let's start with brian in minnesota for our guest, rob gramlich. good morning and go ahead please. caller: thanks so much for having this live television show. you have mr. gramlich there. i'm in minnesota with my girlfriend. she has lived in hutchinson, alabama, oklahoma, dallas, texas for a while. i lived in central iowa 20 years ago. i was a carpet cleaner there.

and air conditioning, wow. i visited my brother in tuscaloosa. he did not have air conditioning. tuscaloosa, alabama. tamara not have air conditioning in hutchins. i would like to ask a question. why don't people show their air-conditioners often open the windows? host: the idea of demand overall. caller: there's a lot we can do with demand management. one think i think most days can get busy on right away for this summer and every summer is to give people a discount. let's say you shift your usage a few hours. you will not even notice the difference. if you prequel your home so you can use her and prequel your home earlier in the day when there is plenty of solar energy

on -- and at the end of the it is still hot, you can use less energy then. even a few hours helps a great deal. we saw that with the solar eclipse a few years back. there was a system where all the customers signed up with google maps, this system on the retail use and have them do that pre-cooling and it saved nine gigawatts. people were worried about reliability during that. opening the windows for cooling and doing a lot more energy efficiency, as well as demand management in terms of shifting would help a great deal. host: from greg in pennsylvania, you're on. caller: i would like to thank rob for his work in the industry. that was a great job in getting the message out and bolstering

the bulk grid. my question is how do you see transmission getting traction in this country? i am thinking of high-voltage dc and bringing that into different isos. pjm. clay needs to happen to have this increase and get some momentum? host: you may have to put that into consumer terms. caller: thanks, greg. i appreciate the question. he was talking about transmission lines, high-voltage d.c. lines, direct current and alternating current. some operators are trying to bring in these lines. there is a need for a lot of transmission. it helps reliability and resilience and for clean energy.

everybody knows it is hard to build new infrastructure these days. especially long, linear infrastructure really have to line of each parcel of land along 700 miles or something to get a in. -- get a new line in. they are looking at more highway access for transmission lines. there are different railway lines that are available. there's also a lot of existing corridors that utilities secured 70 years ago. they can be upgraded significantly. you get a lot more transmission with new technologies over the existing corridor. there's a lot of ways a siphon building a new right away with a new transmission line across public land. we will need some of those too. i am optimistic we can do it.

it's a challenge to figure out who has to pay how much. everything is broadly beneficial to everybody. it was supposed to pay for it? we don't do a like highways, 90% federal funding. taxpayers pay for it. transmission is similar. everybody benefits across these large areas with interstate highway type transmission lines but there is barely any federal funding. there's only a few billion dollars for new lines in the legislation passed. we need more help with that. congress is considering a tax credit for large interregional transmission lines. that would be extremely helpful. there's a federal energy regulatory commission that has its top priority getting the planning, cost recovery for those lines. there's a lot happening in washington on that and in each

of the regions. i'm hopeful we can move forward. host: what's the relation surgeon -- relationship between regional providers? caller: it's a complicated industry. the institutions are as complicated as the engineering and the economics sometimes. what we have been trying to get to in the power sector over the 25 years i've been in the business -- gosh, almost 30 now -- is large regional planning entities and operators. we need both the infrastructure to move the power across large areas and we need seamless transfer of energy. power moves at the speed of light if you let it, but we have friction in the system because we grew up as an industry with hundreds and hundreds of isolated little utility silos. now we are trying to get this much more sort of horizontally integrated system.

the federal energy regulatory commission, congress and various ways have been trying to get to those institutions. the utilities are still the utilities. that brand name utility you know and pay your rates to is usually still there with the distribution system and providing retail service. there's an overlay of these regional institutions we are trying to get to to help with both reliability and energy. host: is there enough thermal buckets of energy to offset large losses of intermittent production? are such thermal produces economically viable? caller: great question. the vision i have of the future power system is we have let's say 80% of our electricity from renewable energy sources across very wide areas. they are delivering across large areas back and forth and they have a lot of storage to move

and do the timeshifting from 2:00 in the afternoon for you have tons of solar tate :00 p.m. when you don't -- to 8:00 p.m. when you don't. you have firm backup supplies. you have supply in the future. we could figure out ways to make that carbon-free with carbon capture or different technologies. for the time being we have a lot of natural gas plants. i think they will stick around, should stick around longer. different states like california is another region we have not talked about. maybe we keep our nuclear plant online and we keep some older gas plants around for a rainy day or hot day where we use them when we need them but what i often talk about is don't focus so much on closing. focus on how much they operate. if they operate very few hours a year, their carbon footprint is minimal.

we should not be worried about closing plants. we should try to increase the production, the megawatt hours, the day-to-day cranking of energy from as many clean, carbon-free sources as possible. it's ok to keep other plants around because you might need them. there will be times when you need them. host: tim in arkansas, hello. caller: good morning, gentlemen. i have two things about the grid. first, they refuse to build a cheap backup transformer. an emp pulse will take out transformers and they take two years to replace. that's a big problem with the grid. the federal government interfering with our energy independence. nuclear is the cleanest, yet they will not promote that. natural gas is up next to it but

joe biden says we will not allow more fracking to happen. how do you keep the power on when the federal government wants to increase the cost of carbon fuels in favor of making money in the solar and wind businesses that they invest in personally? caller: that is not my interpretation of the current administration's policy. they declined to do a gas fracking ban and they have been supporting keeping nuclear plants online longer. i think they supported that in the bipartisan infrastructure law that did get past in the law, then now the department of energy has maybe $5 billion to help with the extensions of nuclear power. i think there is some general agreement. keeping some firm power sources

on the grid is beneficial. nuclear is carbon-free. sure, we still have long-term storage problems over a 10,000-year time frame but this is a climate crisis. keeping this nuclear plants around seems to make sense and that's my interpretation of the biden administration's policy. maybe you know something different but that is where i see that going. natural gas has been the fastest growing resource over the last 20 years. a lot of natural gas plants are on the system and i suspect they will stay. i don't think the administration is doing anything to close them. there certainly are debates at a local level about whether the plant is needed. some plans are really old and are dirtier than others. there is debate like that at the local level. i don't know of any national effort for closure of those plans. host: you see the biden administration pushing for

electric vehicles. what does the grid have to look like to accommodate that? caller: great question. the electra vacation of vehicles and buildings, heating and cooling, is going to be a big increase in electricity load. we do need to plan for generally a bigger grid. more generation, more transmission and distribution. those are the three levels. we need to plan for that. a lot of people are working on the exact estimate, what to expect. it is hard to gauge. there is definitely a resurgence in electricity demand. this summer, the issues this summer are a big, surprising comeback in electricity demand after covid when everything was low. it came back with a vengeance. the longer-term issue is we are probably looking at load growth again like we used two. for 20 years it was very flat. led light bulbs and other

efficiency measures led to flat power demand. now i will probably go back up because of evs and heating pumps. host: say the grid becomes solar and wind dependent, could provide for all of that or will you still need backup systems like you talked about with natural gas or coal? guest: you need different services. they are firm resources you need for different periods of time. you can have a very low carbon footprint while you keep some conventional power plants around for a rainy day. that's a very reliable, affordable and clean power system. host: we keep getting solar panels installed on homes but it's difficult. what is your take on americans getting solar for homes? caller: i have solar on my home. if you have a suitable location with a south facing roof and no

trees, it's fantastic. if you have trees like i do is limited. if you live in an apartment like my kids do, you probably cannot do it. it is not going to be a major residential energy production. it will be a part of the system. we really need to focus on a large-scale grid, get as much as we can but if you think about a typical city and the land area you need to serve customers with the energy they need or look around your neighborhood. you will not get the types of power to do this at scale from that. we should do what we can. if you have a well-suited resource on your roof, great. it helps you and the system. if you can afford it or financing or benefit from the

state or the federal government, tax credit or something, great. we need a lot more than that. host: go ahead. caller: we are in a situation where we are having a large supply of nuclear power plant that is so overdue to be shut down finally being shut down for safety reasons. is there any kind of definitive plan to get rid of all these stored concrete -- allowing the shore of lake michigan, which is quite an environment of disaster when the plants shut down and nobody's maintaining these. we are we going to put all this stuff and why are we not reprocessing? there are plenty of places in the continental u.s. to store the stuff for 10,000 years.

i don't know about plenty but there is enough. when exactly is this going to happen? on top of the fact we don't have any alternative power sources other than buying it from somebody else. and, next one, is there some sort of a standardized, small generating nuclear facility that is safe that is not like these old monstrosities that have to be shut down? host: we will let our guest address that. guest: good question about nuclear. nuclear provides a lot of carbon-free energy. a lot of these nagging, unresolved issues with nuclear are getting less attention now as we deal with the climate crisis and see if we can keep them around longer. locks terms -- long-term storage has not been resolved. it's a known problem 20 years

ago. it has been a priority at different times. if congress and the department of energy keep working on it, but it is still not resolved. i know it is frustrating. we do need to get that resolved. i think the department of energy is definitely working on that and reprocessing is also on the agenda. i don't have a good answer about any prediction on timelines of resolution or probability of getting resolved. it is a nagging issue. you also asked about small modular nuclear reactors. i'm excited about those. modular. you can get different sizes. standardize them and get them preapproved and quicker to deploy. they are carbon-free. you can put them at the site of closing old coal plants, which come ready-made with transmission interconnection.

there's a lot of advantages. they are trying to bring the costs down and get them through the approval process. i don't expect we will see a lot of them in the next 10 years but if we continue progress, 10 years from now we could see a lot of them. host: anne in tennessee. caller: you mentioned the word transitional in regards to power production. we were told last year our inflation was transitional. now we have seen how that is turned up. i remember obama through a lot of money into building solar panels. those companies went bankrupt. now china has taken over that production. i have always heard wind power could not be stored without a high powered battery. we look what happened a decade ago when germany transitioned to windmills. they quit working and now they

are beholden to russia for their power. even with these sanctions, they cannot shake themselves loose from russia. i don't understand why we can't take what we have and work with it instead of being transitional and making changes we are not ready to make yet. host: thank you. caller: thanks. i look at success stories like the southwest power pool, the area in the middle of the country, oklahoma, arkansas and kansas in those states. they have at times over 90% of electricity from renewable energy. it's interesting to think about the states. those are not progressive states that are driven by climate change concerns. they are just looking at economics. they just want the cheapest source of power. they know the next wind farm they build does not have to have a battery.

all they need to do is look at it like a big systemwide lake across their states. as long as they have the overall supply and demand imbalance and the wind operates when the wind is blowing in the solar operates during the daytime and you run other plants when they are not operating, you operate like a power pool. it is perfectly reliable in the most affordable way to do it. we can do that all over the country and keep growing. the other thing about the energy transition from dirtier to clean sources is it is not actually happening that fast. there's a lot of dire warnings and news reports about the summer. we are only increasing renewable energy 1% per year. we are getting around 20% now. we could certainly do more faster. the way solar and storage are helping and can help with summer

peak usage, with air conditioning load, we need to get that on the grid faster, not slower. again there are a lot of conventional plans that will stick around and maybe we can make them clean with carbon capture. there is research and funding support in the bipartisan infrastructure law for that. is not really an either/or. it is a day versed, balanced portfolio. we are seeing a lot more wind and solar. hundreds of successful wind and solar companies. the media on the right made a big deal about one single company. markets have companies that come in and companies that leave. successful ones continue. that is what we are seeing. so many companies thriving in this business, and it is conventional utilities. you need the utility, your namebrand utility in your state.

almost everyone has major decarbonization targets by 2030 or 2035. the utility executives are usually not the most progressive people. certainly not doing what the democratic politicians tell them to do. they are looking at their systems and sang the most reliable, affordable path forward is to invest heavily in clean sources. we need storage, transmission, the plan for the system and plan for the current and future climate, not the old climate. the climate is different. heat waves are different and we need to plan b ready for that. we cannot go back to the old system. it does not exist anymore. host: when it comes to goals to reach and a zero emissions by 2050, the united states is love on the list and not rising. how does that impact that transition on the electrical grid for more clean energy providing electricity?

caller: we have been reducing -- guest: we have been reducing the electric power sector. it's doing better than the rest of the economy. hopefully we will see electric vehicles come and start getting progress in the transportation fleet. after that, heating with heat pumps. we have a pathway towards major decarbonization, 60% to 80% in the next 10 years or so. these things always get harder when you are getting to the last mile. 10 years from now we will know more about what works. we can do this. we are not seeing major national policy being set that would provide a signal for investors and innovators to go meet. carbon price would be the best thing. go about figure out the best way to meet that, a small-scale,

democratic basis. we don't have that coming from congress. a lot of states are leading the way and the technology, wind and solar is the cheapest source of new power. they are far cheaper than new nuclear plants. cheaper than new coal plants. cheaper than new gas plants. the economics is driving the change. that makes me hopeful about the rest of the world. nobody wants america to do all this decarbonization and see the rest of the world build more coal plants and crank carbon into the air. if we make it affordable for everybody, we will see globally emission reductions. host: adam from kentucky. caller: thank you for taking my call. full disclosure. i work in the fossil fuels industry. coal is my main baby. my first question to your

speaker would be, have you done any lobbying work for green energy, wind or solar? secondly, talk a little bit about what has been the u.s. baseload power over the past five years? have a less percent of the baseload, 50% of the baseload power and transition into these intermittent power sources like wind and solar? last point would be i think you made a statement that we don't the rest of the world transitioning to coal only and that kind of stuff. i think that is what we are seeing. i don't know if it is a train we can stop. apocalypse never by michael schulenberg or. great book. guest: first of all, 10 years ago i was a lobbyist. i did some of that work for the

wind association at that time. yeah, i have clients in renewable energy. they are increasingly buyers of consumer groups and large commercial and industrial customers that want reliable, affordable and clean power. on your question about power, coal has dropped from around the mid 40% to 50% to around the 20% to 30%. largely replaced by natural gas. over the last 20 years the country has gone through a major shift from coal to gas, and increasingly renewables. renewables are coming on strongly in that mix and going about 1% per year nationally. it's kind of a gradual shift.

20 years ago there was a major will gas generation boom. these are over multi-decade evolutions taking place. hopefully that answers your question. host: how feasible is the hybrid decentralized power system with access solar power being fed back to regional grids when needed? where does hydrogen fuel cell technology stand? guest: distributed energy and hydrogen, two very interesting topics i think that bright futures. not just cutting off and the grading going off grid. elt that because that's an expensive local power system to run your own power grid in your house. if it is more hybrid where you can feedback power to the grid there's a lot of utilities

working on that. i would love to see more. holy cross energy in colorado is doing a good job at that. there are different ways to shift usage around and maximize the solar when you have solar and integrate everything have people buying and selling power back onto the grid. pretty exciting to see. hydrogen is a great opportunity for this country, particularly industrial sectors. we talked about how we can de-carbonized power and transportation with electric vehicles. the industrial sectors use a lot of fossil fuels. those are a little harder. you cannot build the wind plant or photovoltaic and giving you need. -- get what you need. hydrogen could be that alternative. you can produce that hydrogen with wind and solar, with clean carbon-free electricity.

especially if we can produce the hydrogen at the times of day and year when you have a lot of wind and solar, like excess wind and solar, it is very cheap energy, widely available and carbon-free. i'm excited about the opportunity to try to get more hydrogen production. it's a major focus of natural -- national policy. the current department of energy is doing a lot of work on hydrogen. host: ingrid from california, hello. caller: good morning. thank you for letting me be on the show. full disclosure, i used to work for american electric and power. they took us -- i did an internship with them. they took us to a coal-fired plant in west virginia. it was like looking at hell on earth. for people who have not been to a plant, the area is all gray.

it was adjacent of pit they were putting the sludge into. all this black and gray slime was all over the place. it covered the dirt, the grass. everything was gray and disgusting. coal, he's doing a disgusting job and he should be ashamed of himself. what about piggybacking on the infrastructure bill? in germany, they have solar panels that line the highway. why not tie those panels -- we will be upgrading and for structure anyway. a lot of ancillary devices are solar powered that operate along freeways and highways. why not have them be aligned with solar panels? that is something that can be tied into the grid. usually the connections parallel the freeways.

right now i installed cell phone towers. i'm always tying into the grid. host: we will stop you there and get a response. guest: thanks. i agree. there's a lot of opportunity to put solar in interesting places as we ramp up this renewable energy supply. it is a big country. we have a lot of places to put it. i'm not worried nationally we will run out of places. there are sensitivities around putting infrastructure near certain communities and localized concerns sometimes. highways are a great opportunity. there's a group out of georgia doing that. they have done it on some highways. you might want to look at that example. and more broadly, looking at interesting ways to appropriately cite