view of government. we are funded by these television companies and more including comcast. >> you think this is just a community center? it's way more than that. >> come is partnering with 1000 committee centers to create wi-fi enabled location so students from low income families can have the tools they need to be ready for school. >> comcast supports c-span as a public service, giving you a front row seat to democracy. >> coming up this morning on "washington journal," lawns for liberty joins us for a conversation on the first national summit this week and it's role in promoting conservative candidates this fall. then, representative mark pocan shares his views on president biden's agenda, abortion access and legislation in the house to protect same-sex marriage.

later, the managing editor talks about the summer worker shortage and how it's impacting amenities across the country. as always, you can join the conversation with your calls, texts and tweets. ♪ host: this is washington journal. a bill passed tuesday to not only protect same-sex marriage but interracial runs. this in reaction to the decision on roe v. wade. for the next hour your thoughts on the republican response. democrats can call (202)-748-8000, republicans (202)-748-8001, independents

(202)-748-8002. you can text us your thoughts on the house passing the marriage equality bill at (202)-748-8003. post on facebook and twitter, you can also follow the show on instagram. this vote took place tuesday and, according to the hill, it was a direct response to an opinion from justice clarence thomas. the respect for marriage act passed with 47 republicans joining all democrats. seven republicans did not vote. when it comes to the reaction of this bill it was strictly in response to the opinions that were given during the roe v. wade decision. this was from samuel alito.

he said, we have stated unequivocally that nothing in this opinion should be understand to cast down on precedents that does not include abortion. rights regarding contraception and same-sex relationships are the difference from abortion because it uniquely involves potential life. the rights cannot be recognized but appeals to the broader right to a tawny. that was justice alito's majority opinion. that was a concurring opinion from clarence thomas in which he wrote, for that reason, and future cases, we should reconsider all of this court's due process precedent because any substance of due process is

demonstrably erroneous. we have a duty to correct the error. after overruling these erroneous decisions the question would remain whether other constitutional provisions would generate due process. that led to this bill being passed. 47 republicans joining in the legislation. you can comment on that in the next hour. (202)-748-8000 for democrats, (202)-748-8001 for republicans, independents (202)-748-8002, and feel free to text us at (202)-748-8003. it was during the debate yesterday that the house heard from representative david sicily, one of the nine openly gay members.

here is a portion of his remarks from yesterday. [video clip] >> today's vote is about love. the love couples have for each other and the respect of love regardless of sex or race. they get married for the same reasons others get married, to make a lifelong commitment to the person they love. yet for too long, our government said their marriages were not valid, they did not deserve the protections that come with legal recognition. the supreme court ruled today -- we need to recognize and protect the right to make this commitment. we have the opportunity to send a clear message to worried couples that the federal government will recognize same-sex ended to racial marriages no matter what the future holds. to mr. jordan's suggestion this

is not necessary, tell that to the millions of lgbtq families worried about the supreme court's intention to rip away more freedoms. that taken away the freedoms to reproductive care, they have tried to take away contraception. this is real for families. when you talk about inflation all families are dealing with the cost of fuel and food. we do not need to layer on top the sanctity of your marriage. host: that is some of the debate that took place before the vote yesterday. future uncertain in the senate as it has been reported. you can comment on all of this. (202)-748-8000 for democrats, republicans (202)-748-8001, independents (202)-748-8002. eric in massachusetts you are first up. caller: good morning. thank you for having me. this is all about nothing. there was never any discussion

about banning same-sex marriage or anything of that notion. what i find strange is if you codified same-sex marriage but you put up all of the restrictions about where same-sex people could go. similarly, when the supreme court overturned the new york ban on -- not a ban -- but the right to prove you need a reason to have a concealed weapon outside your home, the responses to come up with all kinds of restrictions and nobody has a problem. what if we come up with restrictions for people who are gay and married? i think that would be a major issue. that is what has happened in new york. host: you said this was about nothing. were the words of clarence thomas causing concern for you as far as opening the door to revisit these cases?

caller: let's say this. there is not a case in front of the supreme court. the supreme court does not make the laws. what happened is if they make a ruling on a case that was in front of the court, new york regarding concealed weapons -- host: but we are back to same-sex marriage as far as it reopens the door to reconsider things, like interracial marriage. you see no concerns and that? caller: i do not think there are any concerns at all. host: that was eric in massachusetts offering his opinion. one of the other people offering their opinion on the house floor yesterday representative jim jordan of ohio. he talked about his opposition to the bill. [video clip] >> the chairman of the full committee is right. this legislation would, in fact, codify the law, but it would

also reverse the law in 35 states where they said marriage should be traditional. in 30 of those 35 states the people of those respective states went to the ballot and voted for that. let's be clear, he's right. but it would undo what the people in the respective states, 35 states either through the legislature war where the people went to the voting booth and voted, it would undo that. host: the new york times highlights the fact it was justice thomas' opinion that overturned roe v. wade and opened the door for democrats to attempt to draw sharp contrast between themselves and republicans ahead of the elections. it also highlights republican leadership was split with

minority leader kevin mccarthy and steve scalise voting against, giving democrats the ability to paint the republican party in broad strokes. but 47 republicans voted in favor. we will hear from diane. caller: thank you for taking my call. this bill referencing the marriage equality act is just something to make the american people look at that rather than what we are going through with gas, food, and baby formula. they are not trying to stop people from marrying. this is just a game they are playing to make people look at it, try to make people hate and divide this country. host: what makes you believe it is a distraction? caller: because they want to

distract people from what we are going through right now, like expenses, cars, gas, food. they want to do this before the midterm elections to sway people to their side. treating republicans like we are trying to cause hate and division. host: wait, are you republican or democrat? caller: democrat. host: are you sure? caller: yes, i called on the democrats' line. host: i just wanted to make sure. caller: they keep bringing that up hoping they can make people think they are going to remove loving. that would never happen. i want them to stop saying it because the people of america, you need to know they are not going to touch loving. host: let's hear from jonathan in canton, ohio, democrats' line. jonathan, hello.

caller: i am here. can you hear me? host: yes, go ahead. caller: hello? host: you are on, go ahead. caller: the previous caller, i want to piggyback off of her. i listened to jim jordan on c-span this morning and he was saying how many states already have it where marriage is what republicans want. just like roe v. wade they brought it back to the states. i believe clarence thomas -- at first i was upset. clarence thomas releasees the agenda of where the supreme court is headed and he put that out there so they could codify gay marriage and stuff. he is not man enough to say it. just listen to jim jordan. it is outrageous.

host: the previous caller said this move was a distraction for everything that was going on with gas and inflation. what do you think about that? he hung up. this is diedrich in virginia, independent line. caller: hello. how are you? host: find thank you. go ahead. caller: the first two callers could not be more disingenuous. the bottom line is this case will come in front of this court. the current opinion by justice thomas was very clear. jim jordan's statement about the 35 states that already have the ban on the books was clear. there is no other need. ted cruz clearly said this was wrongly decided.

that is clear. all we are waiting for is when the senate blocks it. everyone knows it is going to be blocked. they will use the same excuses, distraction, etc., but that leaves the door open. one of those 35 states it will get banned, bye-bye marriage equality. host: if clarence thomas' opinion was concurring and justice alito said it should be extended beyond that regarding roe v. wade. caller: correct. it is pretty simple right now in the supreme court. you had justice roberts as the chief justice but was also the de facto swing vote. but they are not bound by anything. there is really no precedent.

they are not going to bring up loving because they know that would be a death sentence politically. but i believe contraceptives will be on the line. i know c-span records this and somebody else has to talk so i will not hold out much longer, but i would love for you to reply my comments in three or four years. guaranteed, like i was correct with brexit. host: that is diedrich in virginia. a lot of this argument you can see online on the website and the c-span now app. let's go to robert in brooklyn, new york, democrats' line. caller: hi. i want to respond to the statement made by congressman jordan.

if you allow the popular vote to decide constitutional rights, i am sure the white population in all 50 states would take the vote away from minorities. there are some things you cannot leave up to popular vote. host: as far as the vote itself what did you think? that they actually passed this. caller: excuse me? what did you say? host: that was robert in new york. if you look at the gallup poll last month, they did a recent survey on support for gay marriage and charted it over time. if you go back to 1996, do you think marriage between same-sex couples should be recognized as law?

only 27% in 1996 registering that. 2022 and now it is 71% of those registering that comment. david in sacramento, california, independent line. david in sacramento, hello. caller: hello? host: you are going to have to turn down the television before we start. host: go ahead. caller: hello? host: you are on. caller: i don't hear myself on the tv. host: you're not supposed to. just concern yourself with the phone. go ahead. caller: i am surprised how they

made that law pass and why didn't they pass the gun law? how does that work? host: that was david in california. on the senate side there is similar legislation. where it goes in the senate is yet to be determined, but on july 19 it was senators dianne feinstein, tammy baldwin, and susan collins of maine introducing the respect for marriage act. it would provide legal protections. they say in overturning roe v. wade the conservative majority shows is willing to attack other rights. one just as noted the court's decision confirming same-sex

marriage should be revisited. the bill would repeal the discriminatory act and ensure a quality is the law of the land. susan collins also commenting saying, maine voters codified this over a decade ago. during my time in the senate i am proud to support legislation prohibiting discrimination to ensuring workplace equality. this is another step to prevent discrimination and protect the rights of all americans. where it goes on the senate side is yet to be determined. let's hear from danny in denver, colorado, democrats' line. caller: good morning, pedro. host: good morning. caller: [indiscernible]

host: danny, are you on speakerphone? caller: i am not. host: you are coming in muddled. could you get closer to the phone or the window so you can get a clearer signal? caller: how is that? host: that's better. start over again please. caller: what we are seeing is the result of the republican party hijacking the supreme court picks under the obama administration as well. under the trump administration they rushed through their other supreme court picks. they have hijacked the supreme court. the republican party are a bunch of obstructionists. host: how does that relate to the passage of this legislation

yesterday? caller: they are going to continue to hammer away at a lot of the rights of the american public. this is just the beginning of what they want to try to do. host: that is danny in denver, colorado. many of you commenting. we will continue until 8:00. this vote took place yesterday. nearly 50 republicans protecting same-sex marriage. you can talk about the passage of the bill or the larger issues at play. (202)-748-8000 for democrats, (202)-748-8001 for republicans, and independents (202)-748-8002. you can text us at (202)-748-8003. one of those people yesterday on the house floor was louisiana republican mike johnson, member of the judiciary. he was on yesterday but on the floor yesterday talking about his opposition to the bill. [video clip]

>> there is this bill before us today. clearly, it is about fear mongering. this is a partisan bill to make partisan arguments in the election cycle. you know why we say that? because it is very clear, as mr. jordan said, in the dobbs opinion, if you read the opinion , this is not only unnecessary but divisive and misleading. why? anybody can read the opinion for themselves. justice alito wrote the majority opinion and he clarified -- i am a constitutional law attorney. i used to litigate cases about the constitution and how it should be applied. i did that for 20 years. scarcely has there ever been language this clear written into a supreme court opinion, but let me give you the quote in case you did not want to see it. justice alito said, and to

ensure our decision is not misunderstood or mischaracterized, we emphasize that our decision concerns the constitutional right to abortion and no other right. he continues, nothing in this opinion should be understood to cast doubt on precedents that do not concern abortion. everybody here that? i will say that again, nothing in this opinion should be understood to cast doubt on precedents that do not concern abortion. do you know why? because abortion is unique. abortion is about taking the life of another person. the court recognized that is different and distinct and everybody knows that. everybody recognizes that, even justice clarence thomas, who they have worked so hard to demonize. if you look at page 119, in fact, turn to that opinion. he said, the court's abortion

cases are unique and no party has asked us to decide whether our entire 14th amendment must be preserved or revised, thus, i agree that -- he quotes justice alito -- nothing in the court's opinion should be understood to cast doubt on precedents the do not concern abortion. that language is so clear anybody in this country can read and understand what that means. every civic student, every child. but apparently our friends on the others do not like that language and they don't want to see it. they have manufactured this crisis, this crisis! this divisive debate trying to reopen pandora's box that nobody has opened except the democrats. host: more of that debate at c-span now and c-span.org. baltimore, maryland, independent line.

curtis is next. caller: good morning. how are you doing? host: fine, thank you. caller: i'ma be different from any callers i hear. this is wrong and i hope it does not pass the senate. same-sex marriage is just wrong. i have nothing against what people choose to do behind their own doors but marriage is for a man and a woman. this is how creation is made. two men cannot create anything and neither can two women. but if that is something they choose to do with themselves behind their own doors, you know, that's fine with me. but let's not get it twisted with the civil rights in

the abortion and all the other rights human beings have. same-sex marriages wrong. host: the supreme court recognizes same-sex marriage in relation to traditional marriage. why take a different opinion than that? caller: because it is immoral and it is wrong. it is just wrong and people need to come on with your morals and principles and integrity. it is just wrong. if that is something two adults want to do, that is fine. but all of this stuff with putting it on children and influencing children to do it by allowing these people to adopt children -- host: i do not know if the legislation has to do with that. we will go on to marietta, georgia. bradley, go ahead.

caller: yes, i am still in shock from that last caller. they basically have to hide? this is just the beginning. the supreme court justices on the decision of roe v. wade, they are willing to lie and do whatever. they are going to come after gay marriage. 35 states, boom, it's over and then they will come after loving and interracial marriage. i am so fed up with religion. religion has to be separate from government and it is so intertwined it is out of control. host: what convinces you the interracial marriage is next or these other things are next? what convinces you of that? caller: because the supreme court justices said roe v. wade was precedent.

jim jordan and marjorie taylor greene are the future of the party. i promise you, they are coming after it and no matter how hard you tried, they will never let you in the club. host: brian in tampa, florida, republican line. caller: good morning. host: morning. caller: i would like to say that i actually listened to the oral arguments twice on c-span, thank you very much, by the way. politicians in general really want to create a deep division in the country. they want to be the saviors so everybody will vote for them. it is sad there are so many people in this country that do not see that. i am not angry about people on the others, but i will talk to them.

why is that there are so many people who do not get on this program and say, let's talk about things? there are a lot of issues that need to be talked about because of the change in roe v. wade. host: do you think those issues include the one raised by this legislation yesterday regarding protecting same-sex marriage, protecting interracial marriage? caller: no, because just as in the oral arguments they did say -- and i cannot remember the name of the republican you had on a minute ago -- was that abortion is unique because it deals with the taking of a life. those other issues do not. so, that is what i got out of the oral arguments because i listened to them twice. i don't understand why the american public is just not

getting it. they do not want to listen and learn and make a better decision to get together and talk with people rather than jumping one side or the other. host: that was brian in tampa, florida. he reference to the oral arguments that we get recordings from the supreme court. we take them and present them to you. you can find them on the website, including the decision dealing with roe v. wade. you can go to our website, c-span.org, there is a section devoted to the supreme court. check it out for yourself. a viewer on twitter says, wow, how fast the house moves when they think it is going to cost votes. what a mess our country is. if republicans of the supreme court take away same-sex marriage, interracial marriage will be next. one from fort washington says, the last time justice thomas was

interracial he married. greg in cleveland saying, this is what i don't understand. a person marry someone of the same sex. how does that affect your life? you can make your comments for the next hour. (202)-748-8000 for democrats, (202)-748-8001 for republicans, and (202)-748-8002 for independents. just like some of you have texted us this morning, if you want to do that, (202)-748-8003. you can post on facebook and twitter as well. the respect for marriage act was the legislation that passed in the house with 47 republicans joining in with that passage. it would repeal what is known as the defense of marriage act. it was passed in 1996 as defining the union as one man and one woman and ruled

unconstitutional in 2015. jim from pensacola, florida, independent line. caller: i don't -- i agree with the fellow who called on the independent line less time. -- last time a. . i believe our legislators and judges -- and most of them do -- they base their decisions on what they think the spiritual values they believe in or natural law. why should we have laws -- if anything goes, we do not need laws to tell us everything goes. that is not good for the individual for the culture or the family unit, which is falling apart in this country. i agree. i am catholic. i follow the catechism and how they describe the natural law by thomas aquinas.

it makes a lot of sense. but as far as the other fellow said what you do behind your bedroom is up to you. but we should not push it on children or whatever is not normal or goes with spiritual law. i think that is what justice thomas believes in and other judges who are conservative and catholic. they are following basic spiritual laws that have created western civilization. based on judeo-christian values. if you throw this out the door, it is going to fall apart and our enemies are going to take us over. host: that was jim in pensacola. gigi is on the democrats' line in harvey, pennsylvania. caller: good morning. host: morning. caller: i really wanted to talk about mike johnson. he is very disingenuous. he is one of my representatives

and this whole thing about the opinion from the supreme court, what clarence thomas actually said is that the court today declines to disturb due process regarding griswold and others. they were not addressing it with that specific case but that does not mean they are not going to address it in future cases. he goes on to further say they should reconsider all of the court's due process precedents. they are going to come for gay marriage and they are going to come for contraception. it is just a matter of when. the right case that comes along. second, this whole morality thing. morality is subjective. we have freedom of religion here. religion should not be dictating everybody's laws.

if you are catholic or muslim, they don't want people forcing those beliefs on everybody else, so why do they get to force their beliefs on everybody else? it does not seem right. that is pre-much all i have to say. host: that is gigi in louisiana. the president heading to massachusetts later today to talk about issues of climate. this yoshida press reports he will promote efforts to combat climate change although he will not declare an emergency despite increasing pressure from lawmakers and activists. the white house is not ruling out a statement later on. watch out for that all the networks later today.

the issue of mass shootings and assault weapons will be part of the hearing today in the senate judiciary committee. they will talk about civilian access to military style weapons. testifying will be the mayor of highland park, illinois. you can see that at 10:00 on c-span3, c-span now, and on c-span.org. loretta in oakland, illinois, republican line. caller: good morning. how are you today? host: i am fine, thank you. go ahead. caller: the reason i am calling is i would really like to know why these people -- gay marriage is safe. nobody wants to take that on. we have had gay people in our world forever. any novel written in the 1300s will tell you. the problem with our country is that the rich think they can

make rules to lord over us like they are royalty. talking about her reality in louisiana, we have representatives shaking her derriere, which is quite large, in the sand. she called it twerking, no, it was just disgusting. host: how does that relate to the vote yesterday? caller: the vote yesterday is ridilous. why do people care about all this trivial stuff? they waste our money in congress over garbage. we have cities on fire. we have juvenile delinquents out our ears and all they care about is ignorance about gay marriage. i'm sorry, but abortion is murder. unless you are raped or it is

incensed, it is murder. and if you do it repeatedly, it is repeated murder. host: tanya in alexandria, virginia, independent line. tanya, hello? caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. what i want to say is that everyone has the right to live their life the way they want to. this would not even be an issue if roe v. wade was not overturned. people are definitely concerned about the reproductive rights, they are concerned about their marriage rights. let people live their lives and let god be the judge. we cannot judge other people the way they want to live. we have wonderful gay people who are adopting children or having their own children. let them live their lives.

we don't have the right to impose our rights on other people. also, we want women to be able to take care of themselves and make choices that are right for their families. that is all i wanted to say. let's not infringe on other people's lives and let people live their lives to the fullest. host: that is tanya in alexandria. the new york times highlights the fact the block of republicans supported the measure yesterday amounts to less than one quarter of the party. that was a far greater proportion think a rights legislation had drawn in the past. only three republicans voted last year for sweeping legislation that would prohibit discrimination based on sex, sexual orientation and gender identity. it goes on to say republicans have not shown much support for other items on the democratic agenda, like the bills seeking access to abortion. but this vote did not show major shifts in views on other social

issues, that was according to a nonpartisan poster. carrie in mechanicsburg, pennsylvania. caller: i watch you every morning. it is the best way to learn what everybody is thinking. a lot to take in here. republicans were so upset when we asked them to wear a mask during a public pandemic, that we were taking their rights away. but they have no problem taking away people's individual freedoms. you don't want to have an abortion? don't get one. but making rules to force them is not the way to do it. do it by supporting the. they did sort of pass the courts a little bit. they would not let merrick garland have a chance and they

pushed through amy coney barrett at the last minute. host: the vote yesterday, what did you think of that? caller: why if the republicans say they are not going to go after this issue, why did 47 of them vote against it? it tells you the direction they really want to go. host: 47 voted in support of the legislation. caller: how many voted against? host: i do not have the total but i can find it really quick. you keep going and i will see if i can find the total. it was 267 to 157 yesterday. 47 republicans joining all of the democrats. caller: i'm sorry. i wrote my notes wrong. host: that is ok. caller: 157 republicans voted

against putting this into law so it would be secure for everybody. that is a lot. i listened to jim jordan and all of the reasons why they did not want to support this and it is like, it tells me in the future they are planning on attacking this. the bottom line is freedom of religion. freedom and individual choice. you do not want to marry a same-sex person? don't. but don't take away the freedoms. my goodness, did they have a hissy fit when you said, don't wear a mask. i am christian. if you do not think like me, we are going to take your rights away? host: russell in south carolina, republican line. caller: i would like to talk about the constitution and what

the constitution says in the 14th amendment. interracial marriage is protected and shall not be infringed. but also in the constitution it says marriage is between one man and one woman. that is all i would like to say. host: that is russell in south carolina. one of the people commented yesterday on the vote was democratic judiciary chair representative steve cohen of tennessee. talking about the supreme court's role in all of this. [video clip] >> i am supportive of this bill and i think everybody should. it says each state will recognize the other state's marriages and not deny the person the right to marry based on sex, gender or sexual orientation. as far as with the supreme court said, and we should listen to this and that, the senate listened to gorsuch and

kavanaugh when they said roe v. wade was precedent. listen to thomas who told you, we need to look at these cases and reconsider them. that is gay marriage. he did not mention interracial but it is on the same theory. he is also in an interracial marriage and would not be without that decision. and he mentioned lawrence. this is an american bill. there is no reason to be against it. only because you don't want to go on record of being in favor of those rights. i yield back the balance of my time. host: derek in massachusetts, independent line. caller: good morning. i wanted to say two things. one, i think when it comes to law i think the supreme court needs to keep in mind that law is about comfort for americans and living a happy life.

a lot about marriage is companionship. who people choose as a companion to live their lives should be protected by law. second, as far as the votes yesterday, i think it is predictable that republicans would vote against it. i think with the last caller said about them targeting it, i think that is a valid case to make. thank you for your time and have a good morning. host: stephen in illinois, democrats' line. caller: hello. how are you doing? host: well, thanks. caller: as an atheist i get tired of christian people citing their beliefs and making laws that govern people that do not believe what they do. as far as johnson from louisiana, he was disingenuous. a lot of people on the right

seem that anger and outrage are the equivalent of having convictions. i guess that is about it. host: that is stephen in illinois. we will do this for 15 more minutes. if you want to comment on this vote, the house of representatives enshrining same-sex marriage and interracial marriage, the future unclear. you can call and let us know. (202)-748-8000 for democrats, (202)-748-8001 for republicans, and (202)-748-8002 for independents. bob in texas, republican line. caller: thank you. i am calling about the first sentence of u.s. law. it is unfortunate republicans and democrats seem to have never read that.

blackstone was the most quoted person by all of our founders. the first law in u.s. law, first sentence, is that no human laws should be suffered to contradict these. what man is doing today is contradicting these, and those are the laws of nature. we are talking about creation and the bible. that is the entire foundation of our law. when man infringes on those, chaos results. host: you are relating that to the vote yesterday as far as circumventing god's law? caller: yes. gay marriage is an abomination to the lord. that is in the first sentence of

u.s. law referring to the bible and creation. any time man tries to write laws that infringe on those, chaos results. people are free to do with they want but man cannot legalize that which is an abomination to the lord. host: that is bob in texas sharing his thoughts. on the january 6 committee hearing tomorrow looking at the events of january 6. the washington post saying when they requested texts from the secret service regarding events on that day they report the secret service determined there was no text relevant to the investigation, and that any other texts agents exchanged around the attack were purged. this also adds the national archives tuesday some more information on the potential of

unauthorized deletion of text messages. the recordkeeper asked the secret service to report back in 30 days with deletion of any records, including what was purged and the circumstances of how it was lost. npr reporting the chairman of the january 6 committee, bennie thompson, will miss that hearing after he was diagnosed with covid. according to a spokesperson he sent out a tweet tuesday morning, he is vaccinated and roasted and experiencing mild symptoms. he instructed the committee to proceed without him. you can watch that hearing on c-span uninterrupted as part of our coverage, including all of the other hearings that have taken place up until this point. you can see them on our website at c-span.org. independent line, chattanooga, tennessee, this is greg. caller: just like the last caller what they have done is

changed the meaning of words. that is going to be a problem down the line. marriage in all of the dictionaries except the recent ones say it is between a man and a woman. it has nothing to do with religion. i hate people calling in and saying that. i am not christian. i don't got to church. it has nothing to do with church. same with abortion. i do not want my tax dollars funding babies killed. host: tom from maryland, republican line. caller: good morning. host: morning. caller: everybody is up in arms about this bill. we are not talking about the true problems.

the true problem is you are either a nationalist or a globalist. [indiscernible] i have got a question for you. can you define a woman for all of us? host: we will go to shay in annapolis, maryland. caller: can you hear me? host: yes. caller: i find it appalling to all of the democratic voters, we have got to get somebody in office that is going to be a fighter to try to hold these rights. apparently biden does not want to expand the supreme court. he obviously is enabling the behavior when it comes to manchi n and sinema. we need to vote for more progressives so we can get this

codified and get this country back on the right track. he is not it. host: relate that to yesterday's vote. caller: it does relate to the vote because if you are telling me you have all power in congress and you are not doing anything with that power, how do you expect people to vote in the midterms and the general election to vote for you? apparently, he has not shown the best interest for his people. not only his people but african-americans and gay people that are a large potion of his voting base. i don't understand. frankly, we need somebody who is going to play hardball with republicans. i cannot believe all these democratic voters are still tolerating that biden has done a good job, which he has not. host: that is shay in annapolis.

representative mondaire jones talking about the legislation and why this legislation is personal to him. [video clip] >> i remember where i was june 24, 2011, the day the new york state legislature passed marriage equality. i was living with my friends in new york city, but i was still closeted and i was so afraid that somebody might find out the truth. i closed the door to my room and cried tears of joy by my lonesome. finally, my home state of new york had recognized me as a full human being. affirmed all of those scary, yet beautiful, feelings i bottled inside for decades. wondering, hoping one day the world would change. four years later the supreme court's decision sent the same message to millions of lgbtq

plus americans. i remember being struck by the words of justice kennedy who authored the opinion, it would misunderstand these men and women to say they disrespect the idea of marriage. their pulley is that they respected so deeply they find fulfillment for themselves. their hope is not to be condemned in loneliness, excluded from one of civilization's oldest institutions. they ask only for equal dignity in the eyes of the law. nearly 300,000 same-sex couples have been married. imagine telling the next generation of americans, my generation, that we no longer have the right to marry who we love? congress cannot allow that to happen. i am proud to introduce, a lot of my colleagues, the respect for marriage act which would codify the right to marriage equality under law, but we have to do more. we have to expand the supreme

court to protect fundamental rights once and for all. i yield back. host: from florida this is chris on the independent line. caller: if there is one thing i can say, i am a young african-american in the united states of america. it really disturbed me how everybody is listing these symbolic principles. people seem to have a deposition personally that a man can marry a man or a woman can marry a woman. if ivermectin correctly -- if i remember correctly, the constitution does state the infringement of any marriage, gay or otherwise, shall not be taken advantage of the government to stigmatize any reason to relegate that freedom.

i find that to be heart aching. people only pay attention to the polarization. of course, we all want the same equal and striving goal of freedom, life and liberty. we are human. we are always not going to have the same purview. i personally believe we should focus on the symbolic principles that require unity only by function. host: that was chris in florida. we will hear from catherine, springfield, massachusetts, democrats' line. caller: yes, i am against a man marrying a man and a woman marrying a woman. in the bible, the bible stated, if a man lay with a man, it killed him.

i was born in the country. no male animals would let another male on him. host: as far as the legislation from yesterday, would you think of that? caller: you are going against the laws of the creator. years ago, god destroyed sodom and gomorrah for the same stuff, man with man. a man cannot make a baby. you have a mother and father, you are intelligent. you would not be here if you did not have a mother and a father. the constitution has got no right to put itself above the laws of god and his son. america will pay the terrible price. be very careful. host: that is catherine.

let's hear from debbie and fredericksburg, republican line. caller: hello? host: you are on. caller: i just lost my sister and she is gay, or was gay. we used to talk about her being gay and how she felt the laws were and how it affected her personally and how it affected me. she said being gay in the united states is man's law, not god's law. she's catholic. she had the opinion, keep that part of her life private. do not go out in the street kissing and holding hands because children, little children, don't understand that.

employee put, they don't -- simply let, they put, they don't. i think a lot of the people in the street don't understand. they don't understand why they are out there, they do not understand what they are doing. host: did she ever express interest in having a marriage relationship like a man and a woman? she never expressed that kind of interest? caller: well, yes. she said it is fine because in the bible there are seven references to homosexuality. host: which she that have supported the efforts of the house to enshrine the right to same-sex marriage? caller: yes, she was married. host: ok. caller: but she looked past

that. she was more masculine and people looked at her and did not even know she was a woman. but that was the way she was. host: one more call from nikki in new jersey, independent line. caller: i would like to say three points. people are taking the constitution like it is the 10 commandments. the constitution is written by men. they believed in slavery and killed black people. my other point is judeo-christian has caused wars, killings, division and nobody should uphold this. host: how does that relate to the passage of this bill yesterday? caller: the passage of the bill

is trying to tell us that state everybody has their beliefs and their morals. that is ok. you should not use that to pass laws against people's rights. it does not make any sense. you have to separated. pete -- separate it. people keep saying the law of nature. the only law of nature is change. change is constant. there are animals that kill their babies after they are born. it still does not sound right to me. host: that is nikki and new jersey -- in new jersey. several guests joining us throughout the course of the morning. next up we will hear from tina

descovich. later representative mark pocan to talk about yesterday's boat. that and more -- yesterday's vote. that and more coming up on washington journal. ♪ >> american history tv exploring the people and events that tell the american story. we are marking the anniversary of the caa with several programs looking at the organization -- cia, with several programs looking at the organization's founding. former president george h. w. bush, bidding farewell to cia employees in the final days of

his presidency. on the presidency, bob real with his book " quest for the presidency." exploring the american story -- watch american history tv, saturdays on c-span two and find a full schedule on your program guide or watch online at any time on c-span.org/history. ♪ >> if you are enjoying book tv, then sign up for our newsletter using the qr code on the screen. book tv every sunday on c-span2 or anytime online at booktv.org. television for serious readers. >> be up-to-date on the latest in publishing with book tv's

podcast about books with current nonfiction book releases as well as bestseller lists. you can find about books on c-span now our free mobile app or wherever you get your podcasts. ♪ >> washington journal continues. host: our first guest of the morning is tina descovich. she is the cofounder of moms for liberty, joining us from orlando, florida. guest: thank you for having me on. host: can you remind the viewers what your main goal is? guest: our goal is to empower parents do defend their rights at every level of government. host: you go to school boards as a large part of your efforts. guest: tiffany justice is the

cofounder of moms for liberty. we focus in on what is going on, on school boards. we have worked up to the state legislative process because a lot of those impacted local school boards and parental rights. host: what issues on the school board level does your organization get concerned about most? guest: we as an organization are not a top-down organization. we do not take issues and push them out to our chapters. they meet in chapter meetings monthly and decide which issues they are concerned with. there is always a common theme of parental rights being taken away, their rights to direct with the kids are learning, what is in the curriculum. mask mandates are coming back. a lot of are concerned about

that. there is a steady, consistent theme that happens. host: when it comes to what they tell you about curriculum concerns, what are the things they express to you? guest: the over sexualized nation of children. a lot of that is -- the o versexualization of children. host: given example. -- give an example. guest: the national sex added standards say in k-3 they want to teach gender ideology that children by the time they reach seven years old should understand that they can be a boy, a girl, neither, or both. host: as far as your organization you recently held an event in florida with werner desantis joining.

how minute -- with governor desantis joining. how many members do you have now? guest: we launched in january 1, 2021. we are 19 months old and we have grown from 2 chapters in florida to 200 chapters. we just reached 100,000 members. we just had our first national summit in tampa, florida. we had 500 attendees there. governor desantis kicked it off and welcomed all our guests to the state of florida. we had betsy devos speak. we had dr. lb did king speak, and she was amazing. dr. carson and his wife spoke sunday. we had 20 or so strategy

sessions where our members were able to dig deep on the issues that were concerning to them. they trained on how to run campaigns, support campaigns, and things of that nature. host: if you want to ask her questions, you can do so at (202) 748-8000 for democrats. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. (202) 748-8002 for independents. you can text your questions at (202) 748-8003. who funds moms for change? guest: most of our funding comes from t-shirt sales. host: are those donors from conservative organizations? at your conference you had

turning usa. do they contribute to your covers? guest: -- do they contribute to your coffers. guest: only to sponsor that event. host: media matters characterizes you this way -- " they appeared to be using parents as ponds to advance a far right agenda. they have attempted to paint themselves as a grassroots entity." how would you answer that? guest: that sounds like a horrible hit piece against our organization. we gave them access to our. moms walking around

-- what they found is that this is a grassroots organization. they came to be around like-minded moms. media matters and other people trying to make us some conglomerate attached to these organizations, either the republican party high funded donors, it is repulsive to me. it is offensive to me and it is offensive to our 100,000 moms. host: you use the moniker " joyful warriors." guest: absolutely. we are moms. we know our children are watching as we speak at school board meetings and some of these issues make us angry at times. we went to remember our children are watching and we want to do this joyfully. we want to make the changes we

believe in with a smile on their face -- our face. host: what have you been able to change on a school board level? guest: we have had so many successes across the country. in florida this past year we did legislative days where we brought 200 moms from the state of florida to tallahassee and they put forward -- together a legislative agenda. each chapter has one vote. they put together a list of the five bills they supported. they held a rally, mid with their legislators, and all five bills -- met with their legislators and all five bills are in law now. host: i know libraries and

things like that, social emotional learning was a topic of concern. can you explain that? guest: i am a huge fan of mental health. as a school board member it was something i championed to make sure children in our public schools have access to the tools they need to get through challenging times. these last few years schools have been closed and children have been masked. their mental health is struggling more than ever. we are supporters of our children getting the help they need. we are watching what is happening. there are some new farias things going on. people are pushing their ideologies into social emotional learning. it is more than how to overcome depression. there are topics we are finding in social emotional learning lessons that discuss gender

ideology for kindergartners. host: is this something you have experienced directly or your affiliates? guest: i have not experienced it directly. my hand guest is 14 years old. i pulled him out of public school 2 years ago. he is going back into public school, this fall so i will be happy to report back on what we are finding in the public school classrooms here where i live. we have chapters all over the country i could point you to. we put most of it on our social media sites. we are constantly pushing out what parents are finding. host: i should mention you served on a local school board yourself at one time. how does that inform what you do today? guest: tiffany justice, we both served from 2016 to 2020 here in

florida in separate counties. we had the same exact experience. what we saw was a lot of people in school districts who love children and want to do right by children, but there are people who have their ideologies they are trying to push into curriculums and more and more that is happening. because parents have not stepped up to the responsibility that they should be taking for their children, in some cases parents have had to step in. they started giving kids breakfast. schools have had to step in and do dental care and medical care. schools have stepped in because they care, but schools are now making decisions on behalf of parents that should not be made by schools. parents need to take back those responsibilities. host: tina descovich joining us for this conversation.

democrat's line, you are on with our guest. caller: tina said they have had their chapters acting locally to go and try to remove books that are not fit for their community, but with the passing of a bill that moms for liberty heavily pushed for, our district is pausing and freezing purchasing new books until the new training rolls out, which may not come out until january 2023. we are potentially banning thousands of books, broadly banning them. it is all ne-yo books that are coming out will not be available to our students in schools. guest: school districts should not be taking actions like you just suggested. i'm not sure what school

district you are in, but please reach out to us. we would love to speak to your school district. the florida department of education has not put out their guidance yet on how to implement that law. what i have seen run florida is schools are going to the extreme, and that is not what should be happening at all. host: from our republican line in south carolina, marie, hello. caller: your group is a blessing. the public schools, they do not want anything to do with religion in schools. the way i feel about it is if you want to teach your child to be a transgender or different than the gender they were born, if you want to teach them about satan, and about abortion, then do it at home.

unfortunately, there are so many parents like you say that are not involved with their children. they take them there, drop them off, then off they go. they are preyed on. parents need to take more responsibility, pay more attention. the schools should be teaching academics only, not all of this other garbage they are teaching our children. thank you. host: that is marie in south carolina. guest: i think the last part you said is 100% correct. what we know from testing that has happened from 2019 and on is that two thirds of american fourth-graders are not reading on grade level. when people hear that and understand that, we know we have a literacy crisis. what we want at moms for liberty

is for schools to focus in on that problem. we do not have time for these ideologies. host: what position does moms for liberty take on teaching history? guest: we get pegged with a lot of things that are not true about us. we believe in teaching true history, the ugly history, the good history. what we do not want to see is history changed, and we won it to be age-appropriate. chapters -- we want it to be age-appropriate. chapters have spoken up. we have been told that because of that we do not want to teach that topic or we do not want to teach about slavery. i want to be very clear that, that is not true. we want to teach about slavery, all the horrors of it, jim crow

laws, we have no desire to whitewash any of it. we want it to be age-appropriate for our children. host: when you say you do not want history to be changed, what do you mean by that? guest: we have concerns about the 1619 project. to say the country started in 16 19 his new -- is a false statement. there are some school districts pushing that as fact. host: from james in carrollton, texas, you are on the line with our guest. caller: i am really one of those people who very much encourages parents and others to become involved in school districts at the local level. part of my question is you seem

to be pushing a political side to your organization when school board positions are supposed to be nonpolitical positions. when you talked about who you had speaking about your convention seemed -- at your convention seemed to be from the far right. how do you feel about this being a political tool rather than a nonpartisan tool to service the students of your districts? guest: some are nonpartisan, some are partisan. here in florida they are nonpartisan races, and we want to make it clear that parental rights is a nonpartisan issue. we support your right to raise your children however you choose and teach them whatever you want to teach them. wheeling conservative. we admit -- we lean

conservative. we admit that. we have a lot of independents running chapters and we respected their right to raise their children the way they wanted to raise them. governor desantis, we have gotten behind education -- or legislation that supports parental rights and governor desantis has been a champion of that. if he was a democrat, we would be just as happy to support him in the things he is supporting. it is not party based or ideologically based. is issue based. host: do local chapters campaign? guest: they have the tools we have given them the tools. they hold candidate forums. we tell them to invite all candidates.

we give them tools to put screeners so they can learn who these candidates are. each chapter can endorse school board races. they are not allowed to get involved in other races because this is the primary focus for our organization. they do not necessarily work as an organization to campaign for but they will announce the endorsement and many of the members will get behind. host: from stephanie and florida. she is in casselberry, florida. your own with tina descovich of moms for -- you are on with tina descovich of moms for liberty. caller: your platform is built on parental rights, but really you only fight for the rights of parents believe the same things you do. what about parents like me who want their children taught in

diverse environments where equality are corner stones? i want my daughter to have access to books that represent many ethnicities and abilities? why do you represent yourself as representing parental rights when you fight against mine? secondly, your comment on history, your mission statement that you went accurate history taught, in particular desantis said that this project would pass based on feedback from moms for liberty. it prohibits the teaching of anything that makes anyone uncomfortable in regards to diversity. how can anyone learn in that environment? learning history is often very uncomfortable. it is nearly impossible for

anyone to teach historical content and not make people uncomfortable. host: thank you, caller. guest: not making people uncomfortable is not what the language says in the bill. the root of where it comes from is lessons being taught around the country, things like where they find kids up, the privilege walks. if you have 2 parents, step forward. they divide kids and tell them they are oppressors and victims. this happened in duval county. parents came forward and said their kids were segregated to learn these lessons. we feel that turns back the clock on the quality, on true equality. it is not that we are trying to whitewash history. we do not want our children to

be moving backwards in time. we want them to look forward to how america is moving forward. host: it was last week the american federation of teachers had their convention. it's president characterized groups like yours. i want to play a little bit of what she had to say and get your response to it. [video clip] >> with the lies about grooming and calling teachers pedophiles, why are fox news into some gop officials spreading these conspiracies and other hateful ideas with social media that stokes and amplifies? because the extremists, the anti-public schools crowd, the antiunion crowd, they see the

importance of public schooling as a unifying american value, and they see that americans value educators, so the extremists plot to change that. we should believe them when they tell us as betsy devos's pal david that -- pal did that to achieve their goal they need to be ruthless and brutal and that they need to operate from a premise of universal public school distrust. he has tweeted it. as our country becomes more diverse, these fear mongers pray on racial -- prey on racial anxieties. they stir up tribalism.

by promoting despicable -- they are promoting despicable theories while -- this is not conservatism. it is extremism! host: what do you think of that characterization? guest: i am not sure what that has to do with us. we are not fox news. we are not any of the people she'd listed out. we are moms trying to help their children. as for her and her union and her organization, we go against her and the nea. you want to know why? because two thirds of american children can't read.

if you look at the things they were voting on, they put in everything from foreign policy to abortion, all types of issues that have nothing to do with educating our children. we really wish they would get back to focusing on that. i know that is what their members want. we love teachers. moms for liberty loves public education. i gave four years of my life here in my county and i served with all my heart. i was in the schools. i was tutoring. i was mentoring. i am a graduate of public schools here. my youngest son is being put back in public schools because i believe in them. just because we what to expose some of the issues in public schools -- we want them to get better. we want them to do their job. i do not know how more clear we can make that.

we are trying to save public education. host: let's hear from debbie, independent line from new mexico. caller: it is comical to say the least. i am curious as to where you people were for the last 40 years because the education has really gone downhill. the kids are learning. you keep saying " we want them to read," but everything out of your mouth is talking about sex, so where is your push on education? all i am hearing from you -- i am excited -- i looked to see what you wrote about and it is all about grooming, sex and pedophiles. if you are worried about education, why are you just pushing sex education? guest: happy to answer that.

the reason that school districts are not doing better on education is because they are talking about these other issues. i do not want to talk about sex on national television, but before school got out, a male teacher came forward. a male coach stood there in the locker room as a child that identifies as a male came in and undressed with no undergarments on while middle school boys had to stand there. how are children supposed to focus on learning? when they are experienced these types of issues because of policies that have been created locally by the state and even the federal government is getting involved in these issues. i have no interest in talking about it. they need to get it out of our schools now. host: monique on twitter asked about the recent forum you help,

asking you your personal takeaways and if you had any surprises from your members? guest: the 500 moms that came to tampa to learn -- we had no surprises. media was all over that place. we had 50 or 60 members of the media walking the halls, and they found out exactly what we are saying. our moms have real concerns and real stories. host: this is from falls church, virginia, matt, democrats line. guest: i am 80 -- caller: i am a teacher and it is your organization that is driving children from the profession. i looked up your organization and i found out are funded by the national -- what is that

called? the council of national policy, which is run by the coke brothers and other right-wing billionaires. you have people on your board who are part of the desantis campaign. you are a wing of the republican party. your goal is to trash teachers because you believe teachers donate to democrats. i do not think anything you actually espouse helps education. what are you doing to get teachers in the profession? what are you trying to -- what are you doing to get rid of child molesters in private schools like the catholic church and the baptist church? guest: we have never taken a dollar from the coke brother or the organization you mentioned in the beginning, so i am not sure what you looked up that said we are funded by that organization. we are not.

we have three board members in our organization. people who are sitting on our board are part of a campaign, that is an untrue statement. i would like to address that we are driving teachers out. that is an untrue statement. teachers were at our summit. they are concerned about what they are being asked to teach children, and they do not want to teach it.they are leaving in droves because of policies by school districts and now the federal government better pushing them out of the classroom. host: the website for your organization is momsfor liberty.org. tina descovich, thank you for your time today. we will hear from representative mark pocan of wisconsin. he will talk about yesterday's

vote, but we will start with open forum on till 9:00. (202) 748-8000 for democrats. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. (202) 748-8002 for independents. we will take those calls when washington journal continues. ♪ >> at 9:00 p.m. eastern, joseph henry harvard professor on his book " the weirdest people in the world," where he recounts how western democratic societies prospered. at 10:00 p.m. eastern, former nasa deputy administrator lori gardner recounts the first efforts to modernize nasa with

her about " escaping gravity -- book " escaping gravity." watch anytime at book tv downward -- book tv.org. >> at least to six presidents recorded conversations while in europe. here's some of those conversations on season two of c-span's podcast, presidential recordings. >> they are unfiltered. >> the main thing is that it will pass and my heart goes out to those people who were overzealous. if i could have spent a little

more time being a politician last year and less time being president, i would have kicked their bots a little more time being a politician last out -- butts out. >> listen on c-span now or wherever you get your podcasts. >> washington journal continues. host: if you would like to text us you can do so at (202) 748-8003. president biden is in somerset, massachusetts today. he is expected to talk about the climate. it was at the white house yesterday when the white house press secretary talked about the idea of a state of emergency on climate change, and she was asked about that. [video clip] >> will we be getting a climate

emergency announcement this week? >> to answer your first question, one thing i want to step back and layout for all of you, the president was one of the first in congress when he was a senator to ring the alarm bell on climate crisis. this is an issue that has been friend of mine for him. ithas been a part-- fron -- front of mind for him. he has stated that he would take action if congress won't. he will take additional actions in that vein tomorrow. he will continue. you will not just to stop with the actions of tomorrow, but i would not plan -- everything is

on the table, it will just not be this week on that decision. host: the president is heading to massachusetts. stay close to our website and the c-span now app. david starts us offin 00 david starts -- david starts us off in illinois. is this dr. pocan? host: he will not be here yet. caller: can i go on the air? host: you are on the air. caller: with what the republicans have been passing, trying to stop abortions, and

stop the gay marriage the thing is on the table. i consider myself a progressive, but like the lady who was just a there with the teachers, i am glad that i am not raising a child now, having to explain to my child why boys are just as girls and girls are dressed as boys in schools. where are we going? how far are we going to go? i do not know if you know it or not, but in ohio they are putting litter boxes in the bathroom because some of these children believe they are cappeds. this is public -- they are cats. this is public school! host: let's go to georgia, independent line, you are out. -- you are up.

caller: i want to talk about the january 6 hearings. if they do not decide to bring charges against donald trump, it will look like it was all for show. that is my fear for the midterm elections. the gop has gone so far right and democrats have gone so far left we are torn apart as a country. i do not see if the justice department does not bring charges against him, it will drive the gop for the right. -- gop further right. host: do you think one of the purposes of the january 6 hearing was to bring the charges? guest: if it wasn't -- caller: if it wasn't,, then they

shouldn't have brought the hearings. host: you can watch that hearing on our c-span now app. open forums until 9:00. (202) 748-8000 for democratss. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. (202) 748-8002 for independents. for first lady of ukraine is set to address -- the first lady of ukraine is set to address congress this -- addresses the congressional auditorium at the u.s. capitol. watch for that on c-span.

probably is no -- vivian on the democrats' line. caller: we cannot vote here. is this america or is this russia? the republicans act more like russians. i am 71 years old. it and the crime wave, killing innocent children. marsha blackburn has not said a word about anything. the roads need redone. everything biden put out there for the american people,, they are against everything but we found out with him taking

all the money he does i would do the same thing too. host: one of the hearings that will take place today has to do with the topic of mass shootings. 10:00, c-span3, are out and our website. from colorado we will hear from robert, democrats' line. caller: i am a democrat. i have been forever, but i do not understand why the president is letting so many people into this country. it is destroying everything that is going on. even in colorado, they will not give me any subsidies to fix my legs or anything.

everything i tried to get something done, " we have to have this, we have to have that." people are ready to throw up everything and leave the united states. host: why do you connect that to people coming into the country? guest: all of the money they are pouring into these people is taking away from the veterans, the government should be helping instead of pouring it into these people who do not have no education. i live right close to where there are about 75% now and it never used to be that way. some of them are barely making enough to live because they are getting welfare. host: that was robert.

let's listen to jacob in alabama, tuscaloosa. caller: i was calling. this will be a bit of a divisive topic given in the house bill proposal coming in today. i am wanting to discuss something from one of your watchers. there is a lot of stuff congress doesn't talk about when it comes to the second amendment and what is covered under it. for example there is the 16th american jurisprudence section 177 or section 256, which is literally says that if it is in any way against the constitution or its amendments it is not a valid law so things like the firearms owners protection act,

the hughes amendment wouldn't be valid because under things like new york state rights they are not valid due to the fact that there is no analog historically. host: that is jacob in alabama. a series of arrests in front of the supreme court yesterday involving several members of congress. alexandria oh because no cortez sent out a tweet -- representative alexandria oca -- cori bush saying " the supreme court will not stop. even though they arrested us we will not stop agitating for justice." you can see some of those tweets protesting the decision on roe v. wade yesterday in front of the supreme court.

you can find that on the various twitter feeds. west virginia, democrats' line. caller: i think every american male should give dna to a massive database so if any female is abused she has regressed. any man married or unmarried, their wages should be taken from them to take care of that child until that child turns 18. this is in order to help women who now carry the burden for having a baby. host: scott in buoy, maryland -- bowie, maryland. this morning i am looking on my feet -- caller: this number i am looking

online feed and seeing a number of black males were killed and they are posting video of it. police kill other groups but they do not show police killings of other races. they have been able to desensitized society when it comes to black males and they do it on constantly. republicans and democrats use it to their advantage. host: scott therein -- there in bowie, maryland. dan cox has emerged the republican nomination for governor there in maryland. larry hogan is contemplating a 2024 presidential bid.

he endorsed kelly schultz who was commerce secretary in his administration. former president trump endorsed cox who argued that president biden's 2020 election shouldn't have been certified. that is some stemming out from the maryland primary. from cleveland, ohio this is joa n. caller: since this is open forum, the first thing i would like to say is with all those illegals coming into the united states, why don't we have protesters there protesting them? they protest for everything. if a biden is doing this, he ought to leave off. he is too old.

he is not in charge. he is listening to others. we worked here all our lives and no one is helping us accept the illegals. that is unfair. i do not think any of us should be paying taxes anymore because our tax money is all going to the illegals and all the fentanyl coming here, nobody cares and the bad is killing all our kids. where is everybody? don't they understand? i think it is a disgrace. put trump back in power. everybody listened to him. he had the voice of the people. host: that is joan. the washington times reporting there is another vaccination for covid in the mix, saying the cdc recommended the novavax covid-19 vaccination for adults tuesday.

it clears the way for americans to receive shock that deploy a more traditional technology. messenger rna is being used in widespread fashion for the first time in history. it uses a snippet of genetic instructions to help the body fight the virus. the novavax virus uses a small amount of the protein, which boosts the immune system's response. line for democrats, go ahead. caller:

even though there was a kid with no recorded instability, destruction of the class. if you have them removed from the class, it is other studentss

prohibit -- they can be as disruptive as they want, but if they are not a physical threat, than it is ok for no one to learn. that is part of the reason teachers are leaving. other parents call and say " she cannot concentrate." there being treated like overpaid babysitters instead of underpaid edge of -- underpaid

educators. a photograph of russia's president sitting alongside the iranian is bent before talks that place in tehran tuesday. the president met with ayatollah khomeini soon after arriving and with the turkish president later in the meeting --evening. the iranian in turkish leadership, part of its first trip outside of the former soviet union since the start of the ukrainian war. they extolled growing trade ties with iran sending a mission to -- let us hear from tony in

winnsboro, north carolina -- winnsboro, north carrier -- gre ensboro, north carolina. caller: any veteran who calls the security line with audible discharge should forfeit any pay they get from the government. host: san jose, california, republican line, go ahead. caller: there was a caller who said there was no proof about the election being stolen. there is a dvd out there. it is definitely proof. host: you mean 2000 mules. caller: yes.

host: do you believe that dvd? caller: i do. they have actual video showing people. our post office here was robbed trying to get ballots. host: that is marianne. they are waking up early there in san jose, california. a lot of californians call this show and we appreciate that. " federal prosecution said they would not prosecute writers -- staff members of the late show with stephen colbert. they were arrested on the 16th. they had been filming a segment involving triumph the insult comment -- comic dog.

the crew had been invited onto the member on two occasions by congressional staff. although police said that they were supposed to have an sustain commissions on charges of unlawful entry, prosecutors would have to vote -- to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that this was unlawfully because their escort chose to leave them unattended. this is michael in washington city, independent line. michael in washington, states. hello. caller: hello? host: you are on, go ahead. caller: yes. i wanted to talk this morning about the rpe decision the supreme court -- roe decision the supreme court ended. i really am scared about where this country is going to.

the fact that women need medical care often after they -- the doctor and family and them have decided it is not viable to carry a pregnancy to full birth, and i know many women with miscarriages, which in many of these states have already also [indiscernible] and even for the women. for instance, mine, i had to have a dnc to help me get rid of the blood that would have bled out, you know? i'm grateful that time in the

1950's. m sister had a teenage pregnancy. it was hard for her when she grew up that to realize she had given her child away and she took that problem with her until her death in her 60's. host: that is michael sharing a story about the connections to roe v. wade. thank you for sharing that with us. and thank you to the rest of you there called this open forum. we will be joined by democratic congressman mark pocan talking about yesterday same-sex marriage wrote and the agenda. later, noel staab on the summer working shortage and how it is impacting communities across -- impacting communities across the country. that is coming up on "washington journal."

>> we have the circle breach the line, we need backup. >> the january 6 committee returns to prime time as they investigate former president trump's response following the initial breach at the capitol. live coverage begins thursday at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span, c-span now, or online at c-span.org. you can also visit our website, c-span.org/january6 to watch previous hearings and other videos related to that day. c-span, you unfiltered view of government. that sure unfiltered view of government. -- your unfiltered view of government. >> if you are enjoying book tv, use the qr code on your screen to receive the schedule of upcoming programs, author discussions, book festivals and more. book tv, every sunday on c-span two or anytime online at booktv

tv.org. television for serious readers -- book tv.org -- booktv.org. television for serious readers. >> book tv features leading authors discussing the nonfiction books. at 9:00 p.m. eastern, a hyatt book prizewinner on his book "the weirdest people in the world," where he recounts why and how western democratic societies prospered. at 10:00 p.m. eastern, lori garver provides a first-hand account to modernize and si and expand space exploration with her memoir book escaping gravity. she is interviewed by christian davenport. watch book tv every sunday on c-span2 and find a full schedule on your program guide or watch on anytime at book tv -- b

ooktv.org. >> "washington journal" continues. host: i'm joined by mark pocan, the member of the appropriations committee. they give are joining us. guest: glad to be here. host: you are also a member of the progressive caucus. what is it like to be a progressive in the house of caucus? >> we are working hard to try to get things done for the american people and i think the toughest part we have these days -- we have one party working to get things done. we don't get a lot of reports from republicans and that makes it more difficult to actually do the things that i think we need to do, the challenge facing us out of covid with inflation, trying to get things i childcare done for american families. those are things we need assistance on and i guess we do not always get from the other side the aisle. host: as far as an agenda, is there much an opportunity for

your caucus between now and the end of the year when the summer break comes? guest: right now, we are in the middle of the appropriations season. as you mentioned i serve on that committee and will be doing that this weekend the weekend then we are into august break. that september, we will be back and you are almost at the election. we have done a lot of things already. if you think of it as a session from the american rescue plan, they put money into people's pockets, shots into people's arms, passing the infrastructure bill. we have done holster reform, not a lot of notice but it made sure people are guaranteed six day delivery, which is believe it or not one of the top three organic issues people call my office about is the life of the postal service. so we have done a lot, we will do a lot more, we are busy doing things to protect people's freedoms, given the roe decision we have been codifying women's ability to make her own decisions over her body.

we did that over marriage equality and we will do it around contraception. it should not be that we have to codify what is already law, especially in some cases perhaps -- for those are the things we're doing. host: what was it like to see 47 republicans join on? guest: shocking it wasn't every republican. all is said is we are codifying current law ground marriage -- law around marriage which includes interracial and same-sex urges. you had that many people out of can such with their constituents and i would argue reality that they voted against it. i was more shocked the extremism in the republican party carried on into that they could not support current law around marriage. host: as far as the date over yesterday and leading up to a, there has been interpretation looking at what justice alito wrote about how far the decision could go to other areas and what justice thomas roe. what is your level of concern owned are there of those justices wrote -- concern over what either of those justices wrote? guest: we know the conservative

justices trying to -- conservative party is trying to stack the court. we have been saying they tried to overturn roe and i don't think people would believe it. you stack a court with this extremist's and they have overturn the subtle law. what clarence thomas at about marriage and contraception, he said these also should be reviewed. i called the next day and ask is my marriage going to be legal. very much we are concerned. yes, we are paying more for gasoline as there is worldwide inflation coming out of covid or the worst parts of covid, but at the same time, do you want to lose your freedom over making decisions for your body over who you love? that is exactly what is at risk with the supreme court and this congress. host: as far as the decision to make this vote, what led up to it consider its likelihood or

perhaps the lack of likelihood passing in the senate? guest: the problem is anything we pass goes to the senate and it is like going into a black hole. i do not have the web -- webb telescope deep enough to find where they go in the senate . as long as they abide by rules that were wound -- were around, we will have progress. in this case, when you saw the 47 republicans, i hope that would translate to enough senators who set i would not stand against current marriages and law. then again, is an interesting time for the republican party to be normal. host: justice alito, when he wrote about this, he said in the first line or within his opinion nothing in the opinion should be understood to cast down on president that do not concern abortion. he goes on from there. you don't take it at hymns word -- at his word you take it? guest: i also took him out there word with justice kavanaugh and

others that they would not overturn subtle law and i have been like to for people that wanted to be supreme court justices and now our peer it i trust when they say they wanted to go after roe or ted cruz and others say they want to go after marriage equality, even though it is subtle law, with half a million people involved and loving -- in loving same-sex marriages, i will be watching up everything because i do not trust they won't go after those things. host: senator mark pocan. if you want to ask him questions, (202) 748-8000 for democrats, (202) 748-8001 for republicans, and independents, (202) 748-8002. you can text at (202) 748-8003. a couple questions as your position to the -- to your position as an appropriator. there has been efforts by you and other members of congress to pull back on the figure being touted. can you ask point was going on? guest: it's interesting. when i came to congress i thought it was odd and 10 years later i thought it was odd that

we have no accountability when it comes to pentagon spending. every other ability we have audits, regular reviews, but when it comes to the pentagon, there are no laws. they do not follow them. yet we have vehicles that only sink. the most recent class of aircraft carrier has a design flaw and they literally have to flash $400,000 worth of assets down the drain in order to unclog them, flushing money down the drain. we have any f-35 system that's 1.5 chilean dollars that has 800 noted deficiencies. in one year, they fixed two of them. there is little accountability. we have to support the troops but we question when these military contractors are making a norma's profits, there's almost no competition, and in some cases they are buying competition up, and they are the only bitter and we have no recourse. they need a more serious financial review and i do not think they are getting that. a number of us are concerned and want to make sure we are looking

at it with more scrutiny. host: one of those amendment would cut the budget by $100 million and the other $170 billion. can you explain those out? guest: the second was the increase above with the department of defense and what the president asked for. that does not seem to make sense, giving more than requested. the other one, it represents a little over a 12% cuts. there is so much waste in the department without the accountability that we think none of that money would go to any customer of the troops. that was the amendment we put forward. it is time we had proper reviews. the fact of the next 10 largest countries on defense are equal to what we spend alone, we are lopsided in our pentagon spending and we have other needs from health-care to housing to education and every time we put a dollar into some of the programs, we are not investing in pandemics for the future, not investing in things like cyber

attacks aggressively as we should. we are not investing in climate change. all those things, for example, our national security threats. i even think if we broadened the definition of defense to include things like covid, i think most reasonable people would say covid is the biggest national security threat of the last two years in this country. then we could spend money wiser. right now, we are not doing that. host: talk about this year's budget or the nda shaped by events going on between russia and ukraine and nato and the like. guest: that is interesting, people like to use that rhetoric as one of the reasons why we had to keep the budget up, but we voted on that money separately from congress. that a separate funding outside of this funding in the nda, so i supported that funding and i want to support the people of ukraine especially in these times watching what russia is doing but that is not related to the nda and people should be honest about that aspect. host: today, the president of

ukraine will address congress, calling for more support in ukraine. what do you think about the address and additional support for them, what we're doing as far as i country is concerned? guest: i think we're doing the right approach. we do not want to send troops in. i think that is the right approach not to send our own troops in. however, we cannot provide a lot of support along with other nations. clearly russia is doing this unnecessary aggression, trying to take turf back they once had with the soviet union. we are doing the right thing. in general, there has been bipartisan support. we will hear the first lady has to say. host: representative mark pocan, our guest, the first question comes from the independent line, tampa, florida, we hear from beth, you are on with representative mark pocan. caller: good morning. i have a question for you, mr. pocan. how do you feel about what our country looks like right now and how we are living in this country? how do you feel? i am almost 60 years old and i have never in my life felt as

sad and depressed as i see what is going on now. the divide between the left and the right. you say the right is extreme, the right says the left is extreme. how are we going to get along and live as a country? one other question, they want more support? didn't we withdraw from afghanistan because of money that was going and being wasted and now we turn right around and it is going again? and we pay taxes and money is wasted. host: thank you. guest: let me take the second part first. we had troops involved in afghanistan at a level we do not in ukraine and the level of funding is significantly different. i supported getting out of afghanistan. you are right, we never should have gone there in the first place and we spent 20 years wasting money. on the issue of getting along, the issue is when donald trump came here, he was all about divisiveness.

he spread a lot of hate in this country and i can certainly see it in congress. next year will be my 30th year in government, local, state, or federal. when i look at the friends i have on the republican party and state legislature when i was in wisconsin, and i think about people i've worked with even an appropriation committee, republicans, and i look at this new approach and attitude that is all about divisiveness that came out of donald trump and now the moderate republican party, it is said to me. because you have to be able to work together. not everyone is right on everything and by having conversation is how we get to having the best public policy. you find out what you have in common, not what you don't. things we learned in fourth grade. it is easy to figure our differences are and hard to figure out what you have in common and build on those things. donald trump really set up a nuclear bomb in the political world when he came here and, unfortunately, people are still, especially in the republican,

behaving that way. look at liz cheney. not exactly a progressive or moderates by any stretch of the imagination yet completely ostracized by her own party. or adam kinzinger and others. i share your frustration. i wish things worked in the way where you can disagree without being disagreeable. but the moderate republican party is not operating that way. host: from mason in minnesota, republican line, you are next up. caller: hi. so a question. when a justice righted to you -- wrote to you and it was settled law and said he would never overturn it, he never said he would overturning, he said roe was settled law and that is their job, to look at settled law and challenge it and return it, much like they did in cases like for example less eb ferguson when they owe -- plessy v ferguson when they overturned

that with brown be. host: i think whether it was kavanaugh or other justices who said it was settled law, they -- that means that is the law of the nation, they don't generally overturn that. for him to say that and then to vote differently clearly even republican senators are saying they were lied to coming from a democratic member of congress, republican senators have said that. i think that is wrong. be honest about who you are in your confirmation process. our real problem is we have no recourse. someone lies through the process to get confirmed and then does something differently, we do not have an ability to go after those justices easily. i think that should be looked at because it has been an organized effort to stack this court for decades, to get to this point. i guess i should not be shocked they are now doing his type of law, taking away half a century of rights for women in this country, but i'm concerned about it and i think everyone should be. host: so when it comes to the

court, we heard a series of legislators maker puzzles to expand the oort, is that something you would back or are there other reforms you would like to see the court take on? guest: i think that is the one we showed. our supreme court has changed throughout years that we have been a country and i think it is time again, this nation has grown significantly, and that is an action we should be looking at. host: kimberly joins us from arizona on our republican line. hi, camberley. your next -- kimberly. you are next. caller: i don't understand why everyone blames trump for everything. i feel he said what people think and did not have the guts to say. i understand it is now in biden's watch. he has made this country a complete mess. why is he still brought into this? he is not president, biden is and it is a terrible thing what he has done to our country. for you people not to notice

this and the border and i live in arizona, it is horrible. this is a joke. it is never brought up by the democrats, it is completely bidens fault. guest: i agree with you. he spoke to a lot of people. i think there was a lot of racism that came out of donald trump's rhetoric and we see that around the country but that is not a reason to say donald trump has not been divisive. clearly any reasonable person who looks at what is happening much less january 6, the first time we had an attack in almost 200 years on the nation's capital and it came when the former president had a rally and encouraged his supporters to come. that divisiveness -- is divisiveness by my definition and most people. host: this is our guest, representative mark pocan. if you want to call and ask a question, it is (202) 748-8000 for democrats. republicans is (202) 748-8001. independence is best

independents is (202) 748-8002. when it comes to issues like homage chains, the president is expected to announce efforts on a sacred of orders. some call for him for a climate emergency. what is the appropriate response president biden should have toward this? guest: we need a much bigger approach across multiple levels. whether it be the money we put into the pentagon because of regions where oil is produced and we have to be extractive, whether it be because of the real effects climate is doing that is destroying so much of this country, watching the weather events that we have had, we need to address this. some people say we may even be passed that point to do something. this is in our best interest not as just a nation but as a planet to be doing more. again, donald trump took us out of the paris accord which was three countries on the planet that were not in that and luckily we are now back in there

and trying to do something. i support the green new deal. i think we need to take that sort of effort toward climate change to make sure not to let the planet, pedro you and i, but for our children and grandchildren because that is where the risk is the greatest. host: is the president making a mistake by not declaring an emergency? guest: i hope he does and i hope he does more. in the infrastructure bill, we had measures that addressed climate, half a million new electric vehicle charging stations to try to help that part of pollution but there were other measures in the build back better agenda that did not get done. when you have a 50-50 senate, every senator essentially has veto power and there has been people there who i think have been a little too close to the oil and other energy industries that do not want to change that have stopped other good things from happening but i think we need to be much more aggressive. host: from james, james in north carolina, democrats line, representative mark pocan.

hello. caller: good morning, gentlemen. i will tell you, i feel like this country is really going backwards. i feel like we have a serious problem. i think it is more to do with the structure of the government and country than how we think and how the people think. we are at the point where now we set it up where the minority would have a voice and now we almost have minority rule. we have $700 million put the supreme court in there and they have minority opinions they are putting down places of the american people. you have states like california, millions of people, only has two senators. then you have north dakota has 100,000 people and they have two senators. now, we have the merging of these i would call them mixed -- the emerging of these i would call them extremists. when you have a 10-year-old girl and they want her to have a baby because this is their belief, it is scary.

then you have every crack, every norm in our political structure -- the republicans just destroy it. they go through it because there is no law to say you cannot do this or that. they breach every norm. host: for interest of time, what would you like our guest to address specifically? guest: that's might -- caller: that's my question, how are we going to fix this structure because it is out of whack? guest: i think i would answer it in this way, there are a lot of things we should modernize. we are at the point where close to 250 years as a nation and there have been changes throughout history that we have done. i would argue there are number of things, expanding the supreme court, is one of those issues, looking at the electoral college for the reasons you mentioned would make sense. we have had people who won the popular vote but not the electoral college. i don't think anyone envisioned that happening. i would argue the rules of the senate, most rules were invented when people came here in this building wearing white powder

ways ask -- white powdered wings. i thing there is modernization required and your point is well taken. host: you think the president should take a stronger voice on issues like that? i know after roe v. wade, there were many in the party calling for a stronger voice from the president on what he could do. does he need to take a stronger stance particularly leading up to an election year in the midterm? guest: as farm some of the things i have talked -- as far as some of the things i've talked about, he is respecting the separation of powers and trying not to go in our lane and has respect for the legislative process i think the president has tried hard on efforts like build back better and other things to get done. the reality is we have a 50-50 senate and a four seat margin in the house of representatives. the worsen imaginable numbers you could have to try to get thing done -- things done. any one person could kill things in the senate and a handful could do that in the house. it has been difficult for him to

get the agenda done in the way we need to. don't forget there are 15,000 plus lobbyists for special interests in this town in washington dc, those that would want to stop things from happening i think the president has done the best he could in trying to put ideas forward. i would love for him to be more aggressive because i think his values to connect with the american people's values. the one thing i think is the most at is build back better agenda is people pay no more than 7% of their income from childcare. i have been told by my business leaders, republican leaders in wisconsin, the number one holding people back from going to jobs is childcare. i heard this over and over and he had a plan you pay no more than 7% of an income for a couple making 100,000, paying 7000 instead of 15,600 i knew -- in wisconsin for example. that would been -- would have been a great savings. that fell apart when build back better did not move forward. the president has been given

tough things given covid, the inflation, other issues out of covid globally as we are experiencing. i think his values are right. host: i know he is on the others of capitol but when you hear the named joe manchin, what goes through your mind? guest: i think of individual sport teams and team sports. i always wish everyone who had a d on their team realized that team is more than one person. host: from nikki, joining us in wisconsin, republican line. good morning. you are next. caller: good morning. i wanted to say we have to stop thinking about trump. we have to think about what is going on right now in the country. every time you hear a democrat talk, which is like this morning, everything is about trump and the insurrection. i am from wisconsin, i have lived here 20 years. i do not see anybody excited about a burnt down kenosha.

i don't see anybody worried about that. believe me, we are not covered. they have not done anything. the business people lost, the citizens of kenosha lost, our police department has lost, all we care about is trump. so here's the question, for the next two years, are we going to spend every minute and every day , every democrats, telling us what trump did and what happened with trump or are you going to fix the problems we have today? every day we have a new problem, nothing gets fixed, because we are concentrating on blaming everything on trump. with this election coming up, i do not want to hear about the blaming trump. i want to hear about what you are going to do to fix wisconsin and get your head back in wisconsin. host: we got the point, caller, thank you very much. it represented, go ahead. guest: i hear you. here's what i wish.

that the republican party would quit talking about donald trump. he is a guy that still runs that party. i don't know if it is a political party as much as i called these days. he endorses candidates, tells people to dance and they say what dance and he says jump and they say how high. from kevin mccarthy to leader mcconnell, i'm watching people still go back to whatever donald trump wants. if he is the leader in exile, that is why we talk about donald trump because the republican party has no vision and no leadership here in washington, d.c. doing anything other than what donald trump wants. that is the problem. host: represented come o2 what degree are you concerned about losing the house were democrats losing the house after midterms? guest: midterm election after president is elected is not good for the party in charge. i would normally not bode well for democrats. there are heavy headwinds with worldwide inflation, whether it be gas prices, food, it's a trip that people are concerned about -- food, etc., that people

are concerned about. if people look at what the republicans are standing for, you are losing your freedom as an individual, a freedom to make decisions about your own body as a woman, the freedom to love and be able to be married to someone legal in law that could potentially be overturned. there is a huge difference between paying an extra 15 to $20 for a tank of gas because of global issues and losing your ability to actually have your freedom as any american that everyone wants. i think that issue could supersede everything else and people will realize what is at risk. host: the cochair of the lgbtq plus equality caucus and part of that, you also chair the 21st century presidential act. what is that? guest: there's a lot of references to a president's in statutes but they never recognize a woman could be president, a game and could be president, and we had to fix the

statutes to modernize it to talk about spouse rather than wife. the bill passed through the house with support from both sides of the aisle and i'm hoping we can get it through the senate. whether it be a nikki haley, a liz cheney, a tammy baldwin, and amy klobuchar, elizabeth warren, or pete buttigieg, all of those folks could be president sometime and because of that, we need a statute represented. host: our next caller is on the democrats line, go ahead. caller: i just have any issue i keep thinking about because like one of your previous callers said, we have a skewed system right now. the people that produce the most money in this country and the most heavily populated areas are grossly underrepresented. i'm wondering if you or anybody in the house of representatives talked about removing the cap on the number of people in the

house of representatives. it is stuck at something like 400 something or whatever. the house is supposed to be as equally representative as possible and it is far from its now. it is not as grossly bad as the senate, where 20 -- 20 million californians are represented by two senators. it is bad. if that was -- if it was at least on my population. guest: i have not heard that much talk about it. i think the problem mentioned by the previous caller is around the imbalance of say california versus vermont by population. each has two senators but obviously that seems to be skewed especially when it comes to things like electoral college and other issues on the house, i have not heard as much. we each present something like

750 thousand people in each district but i have not heard that as the concern -- 750,000 people in each district but i'm not her that is a concern as much as the senate. host: one more call, rose, north carolina, republican line. caller: thank you for taking my call p i want to refute a couple things that you have said and maybe clarify why the public is so upset. if democrats who turned this phrase creative destruction, they are welcoming sheba to build back better. you are the ones who are breaking the rules from sodomy books to transgendered in the bathroom, not wanting voter id and wanting aliens crossing the border, late-term abortions, even when the day after pill exists for that woman raped. the crisper program, altering the dna and wanting us to eat crickets and bugs instead of our usual meet. -- meat.

host: how to forsake of time, what is the question for the guest? caller: why do you think that would not put us on the defensive? thank you. guest: i honestly got to tell you, on your remote for your television, there are buttons that allow you to go to other channels then fox news. i strongly recommend it. i don't know anyone talking about eating bugs or some of the things you brought up. you really need to explore, even if it is just for curiosity's sake, try other news sources and perhaps you will see a little different worldview. i think the worldview you just presented is not necessarily what i would say most people see, so i can't really address it and i do not know much about the eating bugs part. host: as far as legislative occurs, this week, what other things would you like to see as far as appropriations? give us a status report of that. guest: our fiscal year ends september 30. we rarely get everything done by

then. the house passes most of the bills, the senate starts later. it is important in a year where we have elections coming up in november, potentially, as you said, they would be a risk for a party transfer. it is important we get the business of the federal government done. we need to do that in a bipartisan way and everyone to work toward that. that is my hope that we can get the work done and try to restore some of the faith people should have in congress. host: representative mark pocan serves on the appropriations committee and part of the education committee. thank you for joining us. coming up, a discussion on summer workers and some localities across the united states are having trouble attracting and keeping them. noelle straub from stateline will join us for that discussion. that is coming up on "washington journal" continues. ♪

>> live, sunday, august 7 on in-depth, a talkshow host larry elder will be our guest to talk about political correctness, the left, and racial politics in the united states. he is the author of several books including 10 things you cannot say in america, what's race got to do with it, and a lot like me, a memoir about his turbulent relationship with his father. join in the conversation with your phone calls, facebook comments, text, and tweets. in-depth with larry elder, live sunday, august 7 at noon eastern on book tv, c-span2. ♪ >> american history tv, saturdays on c-span two. exploring the people and events that tell the american story. at 11:00 a.m. eastern, the 70

for the anniversary of this cia with several programs looking at the central intelligence agency's founding after president harry truman signed the national security act of 1947 into law. it will feature lectures in history about the cia and national intelligence agencies during the kennedy administration and former president george h w bush bidding farewell in 1993 to cia employees during the final days of his presidency. also airing this weekend, two :00 p.m. eastern, on the presidency, bob real with his book for the presidency, where he documents stories of every presidential campaign from george washington to donald trump. exploring the american story, watch american history tv, saturdays on c-span two. and find a full schedule on your program guide or watch online anytime at c-span.org/history. >> "washington journal" continues. host: joining us is noelle

straub with the publications stateline, she serves as their deputy managing editor. thank you for joining us. stateline, what is it? guest: we are a daily news service, funded by the trust. stateline.org is our website. we cover politics and connect the dots across states. there's a lot of individual papers covering state capital but we give you the overview, what is trending across states with the incoming policies across state so it gives the national picture. host: one of the national pictures you took a snapshot of was summer workers. what's got the publication interested in this? guest: one of our contract freelance writers said she was in portland, oregon and the summer she was driving across the west and went through montana, idaho, the dakotas. she -- everywhere she when she saw hiring signs, help-wanted, we don't have enough workers, every where she went in

restaurants, we are curtailing our hours and we do not have enough cooks. she really noticed that and when she was in north dakota, there a thing called the medora musical, a big outdoor amphitheater that has a song and dance performance every night and it is looking at the badlands near roosevelt national park and she stopped there and found out one of the ways they're trying to hire more people because they have a huge shortage is to offer free housing. she thought i wonder if employers are taking new and creative approaches to try to get more workers during the seasonal shortage. that's part to the idea. she talked to employees that worked there and how they loved the free rent and it drew them there as opposed to other jobs they might be able to take. host: so it is trickling not a salary thing anymore? guest: exactly. there are 11.5 million job

openings and 5.5 million people to take them according to the u.s. chamber, so employers can raise wages obviously which is a great thing, but as a business owner, you can only do that to a certain extent. they have to get creative and they are offering free housing, more flexible schedules, seasonal jobs. a mix of things employers are doing. host: if you want to call in and asked question about the summer workers shortage and a situation you might want to relay from your own experience or experience of others, give us a call. (202) 748-8000 for the eastern and central time zones, (202) 748-8001 for the mountain and pacific time zones. perhaps you are an employer yourself and you want to call give your perspective, (202) 748-8002. you can always text us at (202) 748-8003. some of the lines from the story goes as such, though the summer workforce shortage has been acute this year, the mismatch goes beyond the national storage

. lifeguards, camp counselors, wildfires, resort housekeepers. there are more available jobs in the united states then workers to fill them, not just in the service and hospitality sector. an estimated 11.5 million job openings exist for the 5.5 billion workers. can you expand on that? guest: we looked at -- our reporter looked at this one specific part but it is one example of a hotspot all over the country. the jersey shore in new jersey they need 4000 seasonal workers and are having a tough time getting them. there are also places offering free housing, free rent, anything they can do. massachusetts is offering $26 an hour for a summer lifeguard, which is great. other places that we talked about, there are teacher shortages all over the country and to attract teachers. they are also offering free housing which is another example

. just like in north dakota, they are offering free housing so teachers are year-round offering free housing for the first five years as well. in the bay area of california and west virginia, those two states are offering -- there are few school districts offering free housing as well to attract teachers. host: who is the target audience for these? i think summer jobs you would think high school. is it going beyond that? how far does ago? guest: there are a lot of high school kids and that is a great job opportunity for them, but with a lot of young people, some people have just graduated high school but were not quite ready to go to college and wanted a few years in between. there's a lot of foreign workers i come over, two different types of visas, the j one, the cultural student exchange visas, then the foreign visas for temporary workers. there's a lot of foreigners who come over to take seasonal jobs as well. caller: there was a profile -- host: there was a profile in the story about one of those young workers and he said when he is

looking for work, he does not even look at it anymore if it does not offer free rent. i get those potential employees are the drivers as far as what they can demand. guest: absolutely. host: are employers willing to meet those demands? guest: competition is fierce. they are trying everything they can. a lot of restaurants have had to curtail hours or close monday and tuesday or certain days of the week. it is in their best interest to try to do anything they can. obviously they have financial needs to meet as well so they can only go so far but as far as they are willing to, that is the other thing about housing, employers are trying to get creative and it is not just wages anymore, it is about flexibility. especially during the pandemic, people got used to working different hours and accommodating their schedule. anything employers can do to give flexibility also helps. host: let's hear from a caller, carl in georgia. you are on with our guest, noelle straub. caller: good morning.

my name is carl and i founded a youth leadership institute and i know it is important to start at a young age to train these young people about the importance of getting a good job in keeping a good job. it is like a trickle-down effect as far as what the politicians are doing and what young people see politicians doing these days. it is discouraging. i would be if i were a young person watching what is going on in our country. i would not want everything to do it as well. what do you think about that issue? guest: there are certain things that different states can do to try to attract workers. he mentioned there is a lot of political turmoil right now but states are trying to focus on the good things. for example, north dakota where we focus the story, the states launch a campaign called find the good life and they have a relocation help desk and they

will take your calls and they will help you talk about neighborhoods where you might want to live, how to find a job. states are trying to attract workers anyway they can and even if there is a lot of -- you might not be sure about the political situation but they try to focus on neighborhood quality, that sort of thing to draw workers. host: this is lucy in new york. good morning. caller: ok, i have a simple comment. the reason there is mass unemployment is because this is a disability nation. there are so many people sitting at home collecting disability who are not disabled. the government makes it so easy to get approved. it is unbelievable. i work in the field. also, the illegals coming across the border, they have this scam where they have disability -- they fake disability, fake an accident, and get on disability. no one is talking about it and it is destroying our country.

guest: i'd mentioned the foreign worker visas, one of the requirements is there be no americans available -- willing and able to take the job. so they would not give a visa to somebody if there were americans to fill the jobs. a lot of these jobs are seasonable cleaning, hotel rooms, waiting tables at restaurants, lifeguarding, that there physically and are not enough americans to take the job. when they bring people on these visas, it is because they have to prove there are no american workers who would be able to take the jobs. host: steve offers this comment off of twitter, saying i visited the black hills area and i was amazed at the tourist trap and port from europe while their indian reservations were 70% unemployment only an hour or two away. as far as the imports from europe and other countries, is that the trend for some of these jobs needing to be filled? guest: yes. some employers bring over

foreign workers, but it is only because they cannot find enough domestic workers to help them. they only do it in case of need. there may be people out reservations but there may be transportation issues or housing issues. you may be two hours away but that is a long drive and they may not be able to stay -- anywhere to stay. it is not necessarily having the job be open but you have to prove there not american workers who would be able to fill it. host: the visa involved, it is strick leaf or summer work or does it extend beyond that and how does it work? guest: those i'm talking about our temporary visas. one or for cultural exchanges for students and professors who want to come over. businesses can also sponsor people to learn about the culture but it is temporary. the other one is for temporary workers, either a one-time job with a time limit or a seasonable job -- seasonal job. host: scott in illinois, go ahead, you are on. caller: good morning.

i would like to make a comments. can you hear me? host: yep, go ahead, you are on. caller: can you hear me? host: you are on, scott, go ahead. caller: i wanted to make a comment. anyways, i want to make a comment. my sister and i, i am in my upper 60's, all medical problems, but when we were young, we shoveled snow, mowed grass, and my sister would be out all day and come back with $.50 in her pocket. we never charged old people to shovel the snow and now that i'm elderly, i cannot find anybody to help me with my yardwork. ok? here in illinois, everybody has got lawnmowing businesses. whatever happened to the kids that mowed yards? what happened to the paperboy's? it is all adult business now. in illinois, they overtax you on

everything and that is why people do not do things anymore. one more thing, all of these kids got cell phones. they do not need the cell phones. you know? there's a reason for them but they do not want to work anymore. host: you have put a lot out there so we will let her our guest respond that. -- let our guest respond that. host: it's funny you mentioned mowing lawns. the man we talk to he spends his day mowing lawns and then spends his nights working at the musical i talked about before. there are plenty of people out there who are trying to make a good living and he is out there mowing lawns, so you can find people, it is just difficult with such a hot labor market, so many people, employers, looking for workers. it is definitely hard to find people to do -- to fill the jobs that need to be filled. host: he mentioned cell phones, i guess technology is also a boon in this as far as

clearinghouses, advertising for jobs or making those where two people advertising for jobs. host: absolutely. -- guest: absolutely. the guy in our lead found a job via tiktok. that would not be my first place look but he found it there. he works on social media all the time, so that is where he found the job. host: this is from a viewer saying -- sharing their story. in the 1961 summer, my dad died and isolation on a farm not omaha, my home, i went to student employment and worked at yellowstone are, broadening, as they took equal amount of people from each estate in the union. parks and everything, is that a large source as far as national parks and things of the like for this implement guest: host: it is. -- employment? guest: it is. the guy we talked about his first job was in a gift shop selling concessions and he loved and thought it was fantastic. my first job out of college i worked at homestead national

monument of america. so the national parks offer great opportunities, especially seasonal jobs, to young people. host: if a person works within a national park, do they get automatically things like free housing, free food, what are these parks offering compare to say private employers? host: probably salaries are not as high as private employers might be able to offer but generally they often come with housing because there is housing in the parks like they capped cabins or whatnot. they are able to offer that as parks to take the job. host: i imagine in this year of 2022 compared to others because of covid, this was probably more of a trend or at least a concern in those years right outside of covid, what is the difference as far as availability and people coming back to jobs compared to what we saw earlier -- in earlier years? guest: the pandemic changed everything. employment fell, the jobs -- there were not people taking them. hotels close, restaurants

closed, these jobs were not available. we are deftly seeing that bounce back. ivy the restaurants are reopening, hotels are reopening. the foreign visas, especially because of the travel restrictions, they were externally curtailed during the pandemic and they were on their way back. they are not 100% back to pre-pandemic levels but i definitely almost there. host: we hear from sean, joining us from california. you are on with our guest. go ahead. caller: good morning. good morning, america. [indiscernible] growing up, i was born in the 1960's and when i was growing up, in the early 1980's, they used to have the cedar program for a lot of us that were in junior high school. we were able to work at the local parks and things during the summertime. my youngest son is 22 now. he started working at a dollar tree at 18 and he had been there

for 3.5 years, worked his way up to an assistant manager. a new manager came in and she got rid of all of the males. i don't understand the reason for that and the store is going down. what i see today is being in -- is the employers. but picking and choosing, i am walking in different stores and you do not see the diversity as much. it is kind of looking like the lighter the better. i wanted to give my point on that that what i see from my perspective, a lot of employers are saying that no one wants to work or whatever. i have a 22-year-old kid and he got laid off and he has not been able to find a job for six months so he is focusing on going to nursing school. thank god that he has a parent that he is able to do that right now. thank you very much for hearing me out and hopefully there will

be something that talks about the employee side. guest: there are a lot of job openings, but that does not mean everybody has the right skills for these jobs. a lot of these jobs i have been talking about, the seasonal jobs working in hotels or restaurants, they are not necessarily having a lot of room for advancement or something you want to build a long career on. if you are looking and our young like your son and are trying to build a career, there is not necessarily the right openings now. even though employers are desperate for these seasonal workers, it is not the right fit for everybody. is it just for the summer you will find these needs or do these extend into the fall or a longer-term thing sometimes employers say you are so great we will find you a job in the fall as well. but there are shortages -- it is not just a summer thing. we wrote a separate story on stateline earlier about the winter when it was not so hot out. about the shortage of snowplow

drivers. when you think seasonal jobs, most people think life, tourism, but they are putting seasonal jobs that come with changing weather. this is an issue for cities and states throughout the year. there are leaves to pickups -- leaves to pick up in fall and snow to handle in winter. the amusement industry hires on seasonal workers from outside the united states. according to the department of labor, amusement and recreational jobs are the second most common jobs granted work permits. there has been progress in march, that laid the -- the labor department made 35,000 hdv visas available for the remainder of this year, and roman reaching three quarters of its enrollment size compared to 2019. what to those numbers tell us as far as seasonal workers are involved? host: it is starting --

guest: it is starting to rebound. earn the pandemic, numbers have plummeted and partly due to covid and jobs like i said, the hotels and restaurants were not open but a lot were due to travel restrictions flying from overseas countries to make sure people were not coming into the country with covid. that is all rebounding and is not up to full levels yet but it is coming back. host: as the far as the future of summer employment, do -- today see this as a continuing trend or part of the long term as far as employment in the united states? guest: it has been part of a long-term trend. finding seasonal workers was difficult even before the pandemic. it has never been easy for employers, it is just the pandemic made it worse. it will get better once the pandemic -- as the pandemic eases, but it will never be super easy to fill all the seasonal jobs. it is hard to find people that are available a portion of the year, so it will definitely be an ongoing issue.

host:host: we have a viewer that relates -- we have a viewer and i don't know if you can relate, saying how can we have a shortage of workers when about 10 million students a year either graduate or quit school and enter the workforce? guest: there is always people leaving the workforce as well. that is one of the things that happened during the pandemic, a lot of people nearing retirement age or had been thinking about retirement, covid often pushed them over the line and made them decide i do not want to be working during the pandemic. a lot of baby boomers are aging out of the workforce and baby boomer was the hughes generation so there are more and more people leaving the workforce and fewer people entering. host: i do not even know if this applies to the current situation with summer workers but i suppose some workers would look at this as well, donna from california saying when it comes to issues and helping workers get employment and provide childcare, i do not know if that factors into summer work or not. host: not for people we talk to

for the most part. a lot of them are fresh out of school or young but that is deafly a consideration. employers do, if they can offer family housing in addition to dorm room put style housing, they will definitely get more employees as well. host: winter workers, do employers, eventually we will transition to the fall and winter, do they see these trends continuing as far as fall winter -- fall workers are concerned, winter workers are concerned. will this be a seasonal thing? guest: yes. states are far behind what they need and highway transportation departments, snowplow drivers, yes, states are definitely -- we are struggling this winter and they will continue to struggle when winter rolls around. host: let's try one more call. call her go ahead. are you there -- caller go ahead. are you there? you are on. go ahead. caller: i'm on? host: yes.

caller: listen, the free housing and stuff like that, nothing is truly free so is being paid with tax dollars from the public sector? thank you. host: as far as the housing is concerned, who pays for it? guest: i think he was referring specifically to teachers. the teachers do not have to pay, it is discounted. they do not charge them as much rent but the teachers still have to pay a certain amount. it is more of having housing available. if you move to a neighborhood, there is little housing and the housing there is super expensive, you just cannot afford to live there. whereas if they have a building and have a bunch of rooms and you can take a room, you are able to physically find a place to live. but you sought to pay the rent. it is less rent than say renting an expensive house would have been. host: the story available at

website for stateline. noelle straub serves as the deputy managing editor for the publication. thank you for your time. host: that's it for our program. the house of representatives just about to come in a lot happening on the house and senate side. stay close to c-span.org and our cspan app. we will take you to the house of representatives, said to come in shortly. the speaker: the house will be in order. pursuant to the order of the house of january 10, 2022, the chair will now recognize members from lists submitted by the majority and minority leaders for morning hour debate. the chair will alternate recognition between the parties with time equally allocated between the parties and each member other than the majority and minority leaders and minority whip limited to five