the c-span now video app or c-span.org. >> c-span issue or unfiltered view of government. funded by these television companies and more. >> broadband is a force for empowerment. that is why charter has invested billions, building infrastructure, upgrading technology, and power in communities big and small. charter is connecting us. >> charter communications supports c-span as a public service, along with these other television providers, giving you a front row seat to democracy. >> coming up this morning on washington journal. president have don bacon joins us for a conversation on defense issues and army recruiting shortages. then, national journals aaron durkin talks about a

prescription drug reform bill from senate democrats. later, representative dina titus discusses the economy and inflation as well as supply chain issues in semiconductor technology. you can join the conversation with your calls, texts and tweets. ♪ host: good morning, everyone, on this thursday, july 28. we will begin the conversation this morning with house democratic efforts to try to ban assault weapons. do you support or oppose the idea. if use of ordinate, dial in at (202) 748-8000. if you oppose, (202) 748-8001. gun owners this morning, your line is (202) 748-8002. you can also answer that question by texting us with your first name, city and state, to (202) 748-8003.

or you can go to facebook.com/c-span or send a tweet, just include the handle, @cspanwj -- handle @cspanwj. we will get your thoughts in a minute but first, this is what the legislation would do. prohibit the sale, manufacture, transfer or import of certain semi automatic rifles. those with attachable magazine military style features, restricting semi automatic rifles with six magazines that can fit 10 rounds. it would not apply to manually operated firearms, antique firearms, and firearms used for hunting and sporting. from the reporting from "the washington post," house democrats have delayed a vote on this ban because it is wrapped up in a debate over funding for police. liberals on the congressional black caucus have thrown up some

roadblocks over the funding or police, they want some other provisions included in that. here's from the roof already. -- here's from the reporting. host: it says that the house democrats are landing to revisit this in mid-august when they return from their congressional break. more from "the washington post co. -- post."

host: so, you get to be part of this debate in washington. what do you want these house members to do. support a ban on assault offense? brandon is up first and you say yes. good morning, go ahead. caller: good morning, thanks for having me on. i absolutely some band. these are weapons of war. i think that when republicans oppose bills like this, they talk out of both sides of their mouth when it comes to gun rights because they call it a mental health crisis, but they don't do anything on the backend. host: francis also says yes in michigan. your turn, go ahead, good morning. caller: it's time we do that. there's enough people killed with them, it's time to it. that's what i have to say.

host: this is also from the paper. host: we cover that hearing here

on c-span so if you missed that you can find out our website. when the chair of the committee asked the executives if they would take personal responsibility for mass shootings used with these types of guns. [video clip] >> it seems to me that if a company really care that their products were being used two killed scores of americans, they would stop selling. of course, the gun industry won't do that because they are making lots a lot of money from these bins. as shown in the chart behind me over the last 10 years, they collected half $1 billion in revenue selling ar-15 style assault weapons, the weapon of choice in many wet -- mass shootings. may 500 million of these weapons. smith and wesson made 600 million. that's the very definition of putting profits over people. today the committee knows that

there are victims and surviving family members from the highland park and uvalde shooting. mr. daniel, you have sent thoughts and prayers to the victims of uvalde but never accepted responsibility for selling the weapons that killed these innocent children. you testified earlier that there has been a decline in personal responsibility. i want to give you the opportunity now to show responsibility. will you accept personal responsibility for the role of your company in this tragedy and apologize to the families of uvalde? >> good woman, these acts are committed by murderers. the murderers are responsible. >> reclaiming my time. mr. cole, will you apologize to the victims today, the victims around the country, their

families, who were harmed by your product? >> congresswoman, with all due respect, while i grieve like all americans at these tragic incidents is, again, to blame the firearm, the particular firearm in use here -- >> thank. >> it's an inanimate object. ask reclaiming my time -- >> reclaiming my time. let me get this straight. with all due respect, you market weapons of war to civilians and children. you make millions by selling them. but when someone pulls the trigger, you refuse to accept responsibility. guest: -- host: that was from capitol hill yesterday, where the gun manufacturers were testifying. the whole hearing went for nearly five hours. wanda, michigan. now you get to tell these lawmakers in washington.

what do you want them to do on assault weapons what do you say? caller: i wanted to leave them alone. the minute they go after these assault weapons but they are going to turn around and go after other guns. guns are not killing people. people are killing people. this is not gun crime. this is humanity crime. this is their choice of weapon. you can kill anybody with any kind of weapon. they do it with cars. we have seen that. if they go after these guns, they will not pop until they get guns out of everybody's hands. host: all right. barbara, the bronx, you say yes to banning assault weapons, good morning. caller: absolutely.

[feedback] host: you lost you, sounds like you are away from the phone? barbara, are you with us? caller: yes, i am. host: now we can hear you. go ahead. start over, please. caller: what is it you want from me? host: you know what? you have got your tv up. you to your television. can you do that? caller: i certainly can. host: ok. all right. now, start over with your comments, barbara. caller: ok. i absolutely want the assault weapons band. i don't think that ordinary citizens should have been allowed to purchase them in the first base. i've been saying that for the past 25 years, the folks that make those assault weapons and sell them should be responsible

for the things that are done with them. i'm 85 years old. i believed it years ago and i believe it now even more. guest: we will listen -- host: we will listen to more from the hearing yesterday. jim jordan, congressman from ohio, brought up the issue of assault style weapons for use in self-defense, to your point in -- on ordinary citizens. [video clip] >> i will tell you what we believe, the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, particularly arms that are in, use. our handguns in common use? >> they are. >> ar-15's, are they in common use? x millions. >> are firearms used in self-defense? >> 1.6 million every year. next more and more common in light of defunding the police

with no cash bail and not prosecuting criminals when they do crimes. letting people who attack a congressman running for governor out on bail in the state of new york. that probably unfortunately leads to the idea that people need guns to protect themselves, their families, their property. >> it's a human right, guaranteed by the constitution. >> ar-15's, are they used in self-defense? >> i described them in my testimony. >> you train women to protect themselves, something you know about firsthand. you are out there working with women across the country, helping to train them so that they are ready if a person wants to attack them, why they need a firearm to protect themselves, is that right? >> absolutely. ask ar-15's are used, that's part of your training? x yes. >> is it common that your product is used protect innocent people from criminal attacks?

>> yes. >> yes, as miss oglethorpe said millions of times, hundreds of thousands and up to millions of times per year they are used for self-defense. including ar-15's. >> becoming more and more popular with people who think about defending the property, using a firearm that you manufacture, is that right? >> that's correct. >> the democrat possibly the second amendment. they want to get rid of it. the american people like the fact that we have the right guns. it's a cumbersome process to amend and change the constitution. they cannot do that. they say they will ban certain types of weapons. call them assault weapons, try to ban them. or they come after gun manufacturers and try to sue them. host: jim jordan, yesterday at

the hearing on capitol hill with gun manufacturers. the house is considering putting legislation on the floor along with the public safety and police funding proposal that would ban assault weapons. this morning, we want you to take your turn, your opportunity to tell these lawmakers how you think should vote. whether or not you support the ban on assault weapons. crystal river, florida, you say no. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you. to touch anybody that's listening to this, we have got a simple situation here. we name things to get emotional charge. any gun will kill. doesn't have to be in assault rifle. any gun will kill in the hands of somebody wrong. there are reasons why we put people in governmental

positions. the compromise. the people of america have different viewpoints. of those three things you showed us today, two of them i can go for. no problem limiting the size of magazines and etc.. but i will never, ever let the government, a government official, because they are terminal at the end of their time in office, i would never let a part timer take away my right delineated in the constitution. and they should never asked to do that. i have the right to bear any gun that is for sale legally in america. if they take that away, they can take anything away. host: ok, so you are for limiting the amount of rounds that can fit into this type of gun?

limiting the amount of people, potentially? caller: any gun, any gun. i have no problem with that whatsoever. to give something to somebody that disagrees with me so that we have a win-win situation, i have zero problem with that. that is what politicians should be doing. finding room to compromise. because we are a diverse people. we have a diverse way of thinking about things. however, certain things can never be touched. my rights within the constitution to pay legal arms. let's take this maloney for example, the politician that spoke so passionately. why doesn't she take care of the streets in new york, first, before worrying about firearms? if i go into a crowded room with

a revolver with six shots, i could kill six people. it doesn't matter whether it is an assault rifle. there's no assault, it's a rifle . it's like any other rifle. but we use these passionate terms to elicit responses. what we have gotten in america is a bunch of lemmings that don't think anymore. host: there is a cnbc article going to what you are driving at here. definition of what is actually an assault weapon is highly contentious. this is an older article but it is still fitting to the debate today, 2018. the gun industry typical definition of assault rifle is a weapon that the military generally uses and has select fire capabilities or the capacity to switch between semi automatic and fully automatic modes. however civilian ar-15's don't

have that capability. only semi automatic set -- settings. you are arguing that if you reduce the capacity for any weapon from 20 to 10 or whatever it is, this legislation would limit it 10 rounds, reducing the amount of people that could be killed. correct? are you there? caller: yes, i hear you loud and clear. host: sorry, they must've had your volume down. go ahead. caller: look, let's you and i be honest with one another. this is all rhetoric on politicians part. they don't want to resolve things. they wanted to fill soundbites. the truth is, if they limit it to 10 rounds and i want to be a

mass murderer, i go in with 50 clips on me and it takes two seconds to reload any gun. any gun that has a magazine can be reloaded in a few seconds. we have got to stop thinking about this in abstract terms. this is the reality of today. technology is what it is. we need to deal with people. not inanimate objects like they do something on their own. not give them terminology like killer weapon from outer space. none of that truly exists. host: all right, let's get some other calls in. i want to share this text from a viewer responding to a caller earlier, say we have never seen someone kill 20 children in a school with a car.

that's kenneth from ohio. back to your calls here and your thoughts in a minute, but some other news this morning that we want to share with you, this is from "wall street journal" this morning, u.s. pressing an offer to free brittney griner and paul wheeling from russian detention. this comes from the secretary of state yesterday, who publicly said that they have put an offer on the table, he called it substantial, to russia, to free brittney griner and paul pre-lim in exchange and the deal has been on the table since june and the secretary of state is set to meet with his russian counterpart in the coming days. this headline this morning, president biden and the chinese president she are going to speak today at 8:30 am over the phone, this is on the white house

schedule. we will look for that here this morning. this was announced to the surprise of many people on capitol hill yesterday, west virginia democrat joe manchin says he has reached a deal with the majority leader chuck schumer on taxes and climate change. many people thought that negotiations had stopped. apparently they continued and it looks like joe manchin is on board with some deals on climate change provisions and other proposals to address inflation. including a 15% tax on corporations to help pay for the legislation. many of you know the federal reserve chair yesterday announced he was raising interest rate by three quarters of a percentage point, a big jump. also asked if he thought we were in a recession and he said no. today in the washington journal this morning, gdp numbers will

be announced and many people will be looking at that as a sign other or not we are headed towards recession. justice department best for getting, cbs news headline, compressing communications of allies of the former president. some of the headlines this morning from the newspapers and news outlets in the nation. back to our conversation with all of you it's about banning assault weapons. welcome, go ahead. caller: i just don't believe the gun is the problem. it's the guy with the trigger, not the gun. i have three guns in my house. far as my knowledge, none of them has ever left and shot anybody without me knowing it.

it's not the gun doing the problem. the problem is that people. that's where the problem is. not the gun. host: all right. gun owners as well this morning, if you own one of these so call assault weapons, please call in on this line as well, (202) 748-8002. this includes the so call assault weapons. richard is a done owner in california. good morning to you. caller: if you look at the assault weapons man 2013 that i believe was sponsored by feinstein, it basically talk about detachable magazines. what made something definable as an assault weapon was one military feature, like a pistol grip, forward group -- grip,

telescoping attachable stock. then there were more extreme things like grenade launchers and rocket launchers. if you have one item on the weapon that would be considered a military each are, like a threaded barrel or a second pistol grip, they want to ban that as well. i think it's way too restrictive . especially for bus fonts about gun owners who know how to store and use these weapons. one of your other callers made week that, you know, all weapons by definition are an assault weapon. the question is, does the owner know how to use it and are they handling it responsibly. i don't think those people should be penalized if they understand how to use the weapon. the problem is, the problem is the people getting the weapons. on the black market.

people buying these things. that's where the problem is. the problem is not with responsible gun owners. if you look at the people, look at the profile of the people of these mass shootings, and a lot of them are very young. probably first time gun owners. a lot of them are alumni to the schools in which they shot the children. it's not so much about the weapon, it's about the with mental illness and going back to these schools in facilities where they once were students. i don't think anyone's really addressing that part. host: richard, do you think that responsible gun owners, as you do find them, need any more than 10 rounds to fit in a semi automatic look rifle? caller: the premise of your question is that if someone needs more than a detachable

magazine, for some reason they are going to use it for a criminal usage. i don't think that's the case at all. it's like saying to someone, well you have a certain kind of car that you like and you have a stick work you bio for ari or some other. these people are aficionados of this kind of ownership. they are not, they understand the device and how it works and some people would rather have a full magazine. some would rather have 10. i understand with the assault weapons van back in 2013, they only wanted to have it to five rounds. so you know. i think one of the problems is the people that write these laws don't know anything about guns, quite frankly. you really need to look at this from the standpoint of the guns that were purchased by these kids recently, the most recent killings, were very young and

were mentally disturbed and that was more of the overriding problem than the actual gun itself. host: john, california. you say yes to banning assault weapons. good morning. caller: hey. good morning. i completely support a ban on all guns. not just assault weapons. all guns are made to kill people. let's get that straight. they were invented to kill people. you know, statistically you are more likely to shoot your roommate and an intruder, by far large. where i live in oakland, you, you know, you have to worry about walking down the street, whether you will get shot by the police or robbed. that's why i support the black

and progressive caucus. holding up the bill in the house. barbara lee -- host: yes, we are listening. she what? caller: the only member of congress that voted no on the iraq war and there's a reason for it. yeah. host: caroline, vincent, ohio, gun owner, good morning to you. caller: good morning. i just want to say quickly that i work in a high school and i understand what the caller before was talking about, mental illness and age and all that. but i still would prefer there be an age limit. that's just my opinion. that's all i have to say. host: oregon, jones, "i do not

support an assault weapon ban, the common citizen would suffer total control under middles and police. marilyn, you say no. caller: good morning. i say no but i do support the government if they would unarmed the police, as well as unarmed the presidential security and congressional security. they should lead by example. if they feel that the american people should be alarmed, the president should disarm his security. congressman should disarm those security and they should disarm the police, they should lead by example. we don't want what happened in shanghai china to the unarmed people in shanghai china on 24 hour lockdown, not allowed to leave their houses because they are unarmed and starving in their apartments because they are not allowed to leave by the government they can't nothing about it because they are

unarmed, or forced out of their homes into concentration camps like what's happening in australia because they down there are unarmed. if the government officials want the american officials to be unarmed, they should lead by example. unarmed presidential security. unarmed congressional security, unarmed the police is lead by example. host: curve the point. steve, louisiana. use a guest. caller: yes, i do. host: tell us why. caller: i actually support a partial ban. first of all, just let me, to let people understand that the defund the police crap the republicans are pushing, that's a boondoggle for them. it's completely out of context. people should do a bit of research. the other thing i wanted to

address is these mass shootings of all of these children being killed, here's the thing about that. these people want to be able to go out and be able to rapidfire these weapons and go out and play with them and show how big their gun is compared to other people's guns. you know, they are really saying well, it's ok, we want to bear arms about all those children that are being killed or being killed by mostly young guys. they are like 18 years old, right. do your research. everybody out there do your research. a human being is not even fully developed until they are 25 years old. they are not capable of making a rational decision and they are able, able, without background checks or anything a lot of laces, to go out and buy these

weapons and go out and kill. it's ridiculous. host: are you saying raise the age to 25? caller: yes. absolutely. no one that young should be able to purchase a weapon like that. if you have ever fired these assault weapons, you put a full clip in their, you could pull the trigger as fast as you could pull the trigger, that's how fast you can shoot that. you might be able to shoot it fast with a regular three round or whatever, right? well, the ar-15 style civilian weapon, you can get a 30 round clip and kill 30 people. fast as you could kill the trigger -- pull the trigger. host: the chairwoman of the committee yesterday questioned one of the gun manufacturers

about the mass shootings in quality, texas. take a listen. -- uvalde, texas. [video clip] the gunmen used -- >> the gunmen used an assault weapon from your company to murder 19 children and two teachers. your company said that the shooting was, and i quote, a horrifying tragedy. that the victims and families are "in our thoughts and in our prayers." you even canceled your appearance at the nra convention after the shooting. you testified today that there has been a decline in personal responsibility, using your words. mr. daniels, do you agree that the murder of these children and teachers was a tragedy and do you feel any personal

responsibility for that tragedy? >> chairwoman maloney. we are, i am deeply disturbed by these horrific acts committed by people people. i cannot even imagine what those innocent children had to go through. and the teachers. i cannot imagine the horror that the families have to live with. for the rest of their lives. these acts were horrible. these at need to be stopped.

host: that was from capitol hill yesterday. gun manufacturers testifying before the house oversight panel. you can find it on our website, spend up. hit the video play had and you will see old stars at the bottom of the video player indicating to use some key moments from this nearly five hours hearing. if you don't have five hours, it will allow you to see some of the key moments in the debate esther day. water berry, connecticut, you say yes to banning assault weapons. welcome to the conversation. >> i live -- caller: i live 15 minutes away from newtown where the kids and teachers were murdered. in the 1930's they banned the thompson machine gun, the tommy gun. why? it was a weapon of war that too many people. how come we can learn from those days and apply it to today? host: what are you getting at?

that weapons that are used for war are on the streets? caller: yeah. why did they ban that weapon years ago, yet today we cannot and an assault weapon? host: ok. a little bit more, then, and hang on the line if you and, i want to show this moment from the hearing yesterday with donaldson, the republican from florida and his exchange with a representative from the giffords law center, discussing what's a military weapon and if you ban assault weapons for civilians, what it means. take a listen. >> are these this --[video clip] question of these the same weapons used by the mind -- united states military? >> they are superior to the guns that we supply to soldiers.

>> it would be a long list but i think what you are getting at is if the guns applied to the military have selective fire solutions, firing fully auto rerun bursts. >> so but the minute women in military have are fully automatic and around verse. is that available-for-sale and retail in the united states of america? >> not generally, no, but there are many firearms structures who advocate that semi auto fire is more effective and more deadly. >> advocating versus what is allowed on the firearm, those are two different things, would you not agree? if your position is that semi automatic firing is somehow better than fully automatic rerun bursts, those are different distinctions, is that true? >> i did make that designation, but there are many literary firearms structures advocating for single shot semi auto. host: back to you in connecticut.

what's your reaction after listening to that exchange shall mark caller: -- exchange? caller: i'm a veteran. i have fired automatic weapons and stuff. the semi automatic weapons we have today, they seem almost to a fully automatic weapon in the way -- in the way they have been used to murder people in this nation. host: ok. skip is a gas on banning assault weapons. david, gun owner in ohio. caller: the top of the morning to you, my dear. i have three guns. two handguns and a shotgun and if i need more than that firepower to defend my house. we are in a war. we live in a very sick society. when we love our guns more than we love our kids. all you have to do is look at the empirical actions that happened in schools. i believe that we should basically take this issue out of the politicians hands.

the gun manufacturers, the donations they give for themselves, it should be put on the ballot so that every american can sit there and vote on it. host: john, also gun owner, hello, john. caller: that at -- that other guy would have asked of those two pistols were semi automatic or revived -- or revolvers. i can agree with an assault weapons ban raising the age to 21. as far as weapons of war, [indiscernible]

is that a weapon of war, the handgun? i'm a hunter. i been a hunter my whole life. i store my firearms securely. i'm a responsible gun owner. i don't think you would want to have a vote on it, to be honest with you. probably 80% of the people in the country home some type of firearm, in my opinion. one last point, the people that live in the con jungles, born and raised in the cities, like just the other day there was a representative that claimed the stock to help handicapped full fire a gun they both thought. they are ignorant. if you have not been properly trained, you shouldn't even be able to discuss the question.

what happened in schools is outrageous and the mainstream media keeps putting it online. saying the name, giving him 15 minutes of fame. when things like this happen, it should be a short clip on the television. that should be the end of the story. but they keep going on and on and on and on. people have mental issues or whatever. like a, -- hey, i got picked on or whatever. i'm going to go shoot up a school and get famous. host: so, do you support raising the age of can purchase a gun to deal with children who, as the one caller said -- caller: only assault style weapons. host: what's that? caller: ar-15 stub guns, i

couldn't agree with raising the age to 21. host: you talked about whether or not people port a fan on weapons if it came to about. so's did a poll and this is what they found on all of these russians are some of the questions you raised. 84% of gun owners regardless of partisanship support universal background checks for gun sales including at gun shows. gun owners in the american public regarded raising the minimum age to purchase an ar-15 semi automatic rifle from 18 to 21 and red flag laws. finally there is a majority support among gun owners to raise the minimum age to purchase any kind of gun from 18 to 21 and two design schools so that there is only one entrance garden i armed police officers. however, outright bans on ar-15 style weapons failed to garner support.

42% among gun owners. richard and oceanside, california. good morning to you. you say yes on assault weapons band? -- ban? caller: good morning. the gun situation i would like to say is so out of control in this country compared to other countries recently shown on your shows where they did statistics from other nations, like australia, and there were very few weapons compared to the i don't know how many hundreds of thousands here. other countries, like canada, different places where guns are not so popular, there really is no need to have a handy got around to shoot somebody with. when i was a kid in high school, we got mad at each other, we slug it out. well if you get that mad at each other in her willing to take the

assault charge, slug it out if you can't slug it out, don't bite. simple as that. no need to shoot somebody. that's really bad. we had a gun accident and my family, killed by a shotgun. it was an accident in the garage. my dad and his buddies went hunting. the kids went out and played. just seven years old. kill right there on the floor. tragedy. this is just not necessary. people here are gun crazy and they shouldn't be. they are. the wall won't do anything about it illegal rep lives will do anything about it. gun owners and ammunition makers are making tons of money. my pops had every kind of gun you could have. especially shotguns. he was a state champion here for his level of competition in track shooting at any level. he went to the grand

championships twice in ohio i think it was to represent for the state. he could shoot 100 straight. he did it every day out in the woods. finally, some guy beat him. unlike a thousand birds. yeah, competition, sporting. if you need to have a firearm to make you feel good, you should get just one. that's my opinion. got to be careful out there, they are real dangerous. i have had guns but work. i don't have any now but what i did they were in a safe. bye-bye. host: springfield, illinois, you are yes on this? caller: i am a yes. i was watching fox news. there's a lot of comments, i don't want to root myself, but when we are talking about banding and regulating something, you can liken it to cigarettes. if people are saying smokers are not the problem, or that smokers

other problem that cigarettes, but we regulate the cigarettes and we have done that because there's a safety health issue. this is a public safety health issue. democrats and republicans agree that there is an issue. a mess shooting in this country, one every other day. we are separated by not the people, there are 70, 70 5% of the american people support some type of regulation. there's one party, the republican party, not supporting just gun owners, they are supporting the gun nuts. the people call in who say it's the second amendment if you can't do anything about it, that's nonsense. if the founders lived it today and they saw the shootings going on they would say no, we need to do something and we know that because the supreme court, which interprets the constitution has

many times regulated these arms. not everyone is mentally fit to hold a gun. not everyone has a right age to hold a gun. if we are saying 18 right now, we can say no, 18 gets us to many killers. it could be a culture issue going on. it could be society breaking out. whatever the issues, until they are addressed, what we need to do is go back to the thing that we had for 10 years, 1994 to 2004, which help regulate or bring down the mass shootings. no one can argue these positions . the only ones we need to push our the republican congress and some democrats that are beholden to their constituents to say any type of regulation we are going to either primary or whatever.

but it has to be done, we are the only society that kills this much. if 19 children, fourth-graders, cannot move a society, who is next? it could be these gun owners and their kids and their grandkids. host: the federal government for the first time in a couple of decades will be studying gun violence. this was the headline in "the washington times close out this morning. $25 million on gun research. this is how the money breaks down. washington set aside roughly 70 sat -- $75 million since 2019 for the centers of disease control and national institute of health to instant -- research gun violence. 2.2 5 million, the university of michigan in ann arbor, turning vacant lots into green spaces like community gardens,

supporting green infrastructure to reduce violence in detroit. the virginia commonwealth university, one of their programs gives gun violence victims counseling and services with a goal to stop victims from retaliating from those against interest -- those who injured them. columbia health sciences, examining the effectiveness of firearm prevention tax next by k-12 schools like metal detectors, armed to resource officers, and shooting drills. it also says $1.95 million to alabama at birmingham evaluate the effectiveness of websites designed to teach children about firearm safety. university of chicago examining the rapid women development initiative. 1.2 $4 million to the university of colorado in denver to determine whether producing tax of firearm at suicide risk can save lives.

the university of michigan in ann arbor, sammy heather storing locked and unloaded will curb suicides. the university of colorado, whether or not gunshot projects host: those are some of the studies happening with federal tax dollars. germs, east hampton, connecticut. you say no to an assault weapons ban. go ahead. caller: yes, absolutely no. this is nothing but a gun grab to outlaw all semi automatics and handguns. a couple of your callers brought up the point like the people protesting, the police came out

and were brutal on the people with water cannons, tear gas. one officer said he had to do this because he was the only one working. the whole reason we have a second amendment is so that the people are armed against heretical government. they will start with 10 round clips. then five. they just don't want the people to have guns in the country and that will be a ban on everything . they are coming after our guns. food shortages. the cops won't be able to protect you. we will be in a lot of trouble. host: mike, waukesha, wisconsin, and also say no. caller: it's a nice feeling to think we could pass a law and make people think go away. try that with alcohol in the early 20th century.

we began the production and sale . eventually people paid no attention and we said never mind, we will tack it. we've agreed to illicit drugs in law after law. people want the drugs. now we are in the situation where people want to legalize drugs and they say never look -- never mind any law passed practically, people will not give up those firearms. the deeper question is we are focused on inanimate object, not human behavior. people are doing things they never did before. firearm said that around for hundreds of years but this behavior of mass shootings has never occurred before so maybe we should put some research into what's causing people, especially these kids, to do these terrible act. is it bad parenting? marijuana? drugs, videogames? we are focusing on and people inanimate

object. host: clayton, good morning. caller: good morning. good morning. yeah, a lot of my thunder was stolen from a past of callers. a lot of these people aren't understanding that my fellow denver, banning hunting rifles, with a magazine capacity over a certain doesn't mean anything. con -- common hunting rifles, the riverton 22 can be made to look like one of the scary assault rifles. but a lot of people also don't understand that the little 22 round magazine with bullets, whatever you call it, it's also the most dangerous weapon or carton in the u.s..

that's how more people die by accidental shooting by that little. assault rifles is just a term used by idiots who don't know what they are talking about. host: house democrats considering legislation to ban assault weapons and they are debating it within their own party as it is wrapped up in legislation for public safety and funding police, progressive caucus and the congressional black caucus have held up that package of proposals over funding for police as the debate continues within the party and the post reports that they will come back to it in mid-august. you can read more if you go to their website. christine, akron, ohio, gun owner. good morning to you. caller: good morning. host: we are listening,

christine. caller: thank you. i was on mute for a while. yes, i would like to state, first of all thank you for the opportunity in the forum to discuss this significant and emotional topic today. i have been listening to all sides and appreciate everyone's comments and as a gun owner i would say i would not support a ban on what has been considered an assault weapon, which is kind of the rhetoric of your hearing a lot lately. first of all, i do consider it a slippery slope argument when we are talking about this. attacking our second amendment rights. it makes me nervous when we start talking about these slippery slope issues. second, as a responsible and educated gun owner, which many people are, i do see this issue

as a kind of, we do a lot of deflecting in this country. again, very emotional. everyone gets upset when we hear about these, these shootings. and again it's very emotional but i was nuts of art this and i agree with a lot of the callers today that there are a lot of other issues in the country right now that we need to address around the issue. mental health, the deterioration of our society and responsibility. being a responsible gun owner should be addressed as well. then i listen to the hearings, what i would really appreciate is if our representatives would educate themselves a bit more before they speak. as a gun owner listening to the hearings, you listen to a lot of rhetoric that you realize is not factual. i wish they would educate themselves before they present their questions.

host: seattle, you say yes? caller: thank you for c-span. welcome back, greta. as a former combat medic under the reagan administration, i was afraid of guns before and it turns out i was a marksman after some training. we just don't need those ar-15's. they destroy the body on impact. you can kill 30 people. i don't know, it a matter of seconds? if i was the commander-in-chief, i would load them up and set fire to them and mold them into a sculpture, probably a peace dove. thank you, greta. host: brian, washington, d.c., good morning. caller: good morning.

i would definitely day on them. and as people have said, you need to look at what's going on and what's deeper and to me that is a racial issue and i wonder why it is we are not talking about white men and white boys who are buying these guns and what is it inside a white psyche that makes them want to kill and murder. " guns more than they want children. this hypocrisy of 12, we are all about the children in the womb but not about the elementary school kids who are alive. this is, i guess it stems from their murder rings of native americans and black people, but we need to concentrate on wide white, white men, white boys are walking around talking about they won't be replaced and why they hold so tightly to their guns. that to me is the issue. these are not illegal black market guns as people have said. they are buying them in stores

are taking them from their parents. there isn't any people actually taking care of their weapons. and our children are suffering. any country that puts ownership of guns above the lives of children is a very sorry excuse for a country and that's probably the worst country on the planet. they can't ever call themselves a city, a light on the hill. they are the worst there is. that's my comment. host: texas, frank, gun owner, go ahead. caller: yes, ma'am. host: where you come down on this question. caller: i would like to say, ma'am, i wouldn't mind raising the age for the ar-15 to 25. and i would also like to say that when the democrats give up all their guns, the republicans

will be glad to give up their guns. also, just wondering why the caller right there before, he brought of race. you know, i don't understand, any a republican even touches on the element of race thing, y'all cut them off. and then we don't ever bring that gangs in chicago they kill thousands and thousands. and yet c-span ever hardly touch on that. also, i was just wondering on the fenton all -- fentanyl that

is crossing the border kills a hundred thousand young people a year and will kill another 100,000 this year but y'all don't ever cover that. host: we did, frank. there was a hearing on capitol hill this week or maybe last week. the fentanyl overdose epidemic. c-span.org, go to our website to find coverage there of that hearing. we will take a break. when we come back don bacon concerns over shortages in the army. later, national to lower prescription drug costs for americans.

at 8 p.m. eastern from freedom best journalist glenn greenwald talks about his latest securing democracy about freedom of the press in brazil and liberal media outlets in the u.s.. at 10:00 p.m. eastern afterwards former press secretary on how the mainstream media has left bias suppression, suppression and bias. his -- he is interviewed by don williams. watch book tv every sunday on c-span two and find the full schedule on your program guide or watch online anytime at tv.org.

>> now available in the c-span shop, the 2022 congressional directory go to order a copy of the national directory. it is your guide to the federal government with contact information for every member of congress, including bios. order your copy today at c-spanshop.org or skin the code with your smart. every c-span shop purchase helps support c-span's nonprofit organization. >> there are a lot of places to get political information. the only at c-span do you get it straight from the source. no matter where you are from, or where you stand on the issues, c-span is america's network. unfiltered, unbiased, word for word. if it happens here, or here, or here, or anywhere that matters, america is watching on c-span. powered by cable.

>> "washington journal" continues. host: don bacon serves on the armed services committee. you are a 30 year veteran of the air force. the house recently passed the national defense authorization bill, give us the highlights and what you think this will do for the military. guest: i think the number one thing we will do modernize our nuclear force which is very old. the icbms, which is the ground part, all three need replacing. we found a way of the triad. we also invest in stealth

fighters, more modernized ships, russia who is being very aggressive on ukraine threatening eastern europe which is part of nato, also we see china we had to be able to come up with capabilities and also nuclear announcements. president biden proposed a cut after inflation and there is no way to fund all of those with a 4% cut. we are restoring the 4% and i think that allows us to grow the military that can deter china and russia and all the things we need to do. made a strong pay raise for all the military, but we also need a pay raise for enlisted forces. host: we will talk about that in a minute but i want to stick with overall addressing threats the nation faces from russia and china.

the united states is giving it lot of weapons to ukraine. do you have any concerns or how will those stop files be filled back up after giving weapons to ukraine? guest: that was part of the bill we passed a couple of months ago. we gave a lot of weapons to ukraine, we had to resupply our own forces. i think it is necessary to do this. russia's invasion of ukraine, unprovoked, unjust, barbaric, indiscriminate bombing of cities, women are being assaulted, they killed this is the crime against humanity. if ukraine loses, people are threatening the baltics. the cost of losing is much

higher than what we are doing now we have to help ukraine so that putin and the russians know they cannot get away with doing this. it is totally unacceptable. it costs more than we realize ukraine is doing the fighting. host: on china, the president is speaking in less than 25 minutes to the president of china. amid tensions over taiwan, can you describe what you are hearing from the military about the situation in taiwan? what is the military's tragedy? guest: what is the spot -- response going to be to ukraine? if it was weak, that was going to inform their decision on how to handle time one. i think we have an obligation to taiwan. they have embraced ideas of

democracy, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, free market system, they want to have a close relationship with us. the main thing we have to do with taiwan's help them defend themselves now. we need to encourage taiwan and support them to acquire anti-shipping -- amphibious capabilities. were there fighters. we also need to provide or work with them on missile technologies. they go to war with china and taiwan, china will try to hit taiwan with ballistic missiles and take out their defenses. we have to help them with that now, with the hope they will never have to use it but it will

deter china from ever invading. speaker pelosi has been wanting to go to taiwan and china has been making threats on that. i was discouraged to hear president biden take china's site on this. china does not have a right to tell americans who can visit taiwan. they are trying to threaten us, we should not fall for that. host: do you think the speaker should go? guest: yes. i think it sends the wrong message when china threatens and we cowered to those threats. i think also by her visit, i visited a couple of years ago, these is that display a commitment to taiwan and tells china that we are serious with our relationship with taiwan. it will be the states that pullback and allow china to threaten us to to retreat from that. host: want to welcome our viewers to join this conversation.

questions, comments are welcome. democrats (202) 748-8000. republicans (202) 748-8001. an independents (202) 748-8002. you can also text us and include your first name, city, state (202) 748-8003. congressman, back to this defense bill, it authorizes $839 billion in national defense billion $37 billion more biden has requested a 4.6% pay raise for troops, the largest in 20 years and bonuses for service members. what do you think this does for recruitment? guest: retain, recruit forces. right now recruitment is down. there are a couple of factors echo into that. one of the main things, we are prayed -- competing with the private sector bill. we have a low workforce

participation in the country. we need to attract people into the military. a concern that i have, for the last decade about 72% of the young folks that are 18, 19, 20 years old 72% that qualify, i have seen recent numbers the numbers are going up now. that should alarm us. i think it is becoming a national priority, how do we encourage physical fitness, better nutrition, better health, for our teenagers and young folks? 75% of our youth does not qualify to get in the military that is a problem. host: army secretary from the associated press she had to say the army is facing the most challenging recruitment environment since the inception of the volunteer force this is not a when your challenge, we

will not solve this overnight. what is it looking like? how many years are we talking about? guest: we are trying to turn that around. the years under reagan where it was the most patriotic to join. there are things going on here that come together, first of all, post-covid and by the way we are kicking out tens of thousands of military who want to stay in because they did not take the covid shot. they also have to realize the covid vaccines have been politicized on both sides. i can back that up. i think our 18 and 19-year-olds are quite confused when they hear people from both directions on this. i think we should mark -- show mercy and grace. they also have post afghanistan peered what happened in afghanistan was a travesty. it was a botched withdrawal. i think it lowered a little bit

of the perception of the military. you have a perception of conservative areas that the military has gone to woke and i think our administration should be concerned about that. some of that has been lost in translation. with this lower employment, the private sector is competing for the other 25% aggressively. the military has to step up and make sure it is providing a very competitive and and inviting pay gap. just point them the right way. host: you mentioned the soldiers wanting to join the armed forces are not meeting the requirements, i want to show the viewers what they are. this is between 18 and 35, have to be mentally and physically

fit, good moral standing, permanence resident or u.s. citizen, a high school graduate or equivalent and a minimum score on the placement exam. this physically fit portion of it, how do you address that? when they are applying to get into the armed services, as basically teenagers? guest: that is one of my biggest concerns. half of the high schools don't have physical education. i think they need to make this a priority in our schools. neighborhood sports, i just think we need to raise the level of discussion for the parents to realize that this is a problem. this is a national issue. it is a local issue. and i think if we have to raise the bar on this, 75% of our youth cannot get into the military why ensure physical fitness? there are a lot of issues there as you pointed out.

one of our high school kids they are being incentivized or encouraged to play sports. i know when i was a kid we had three tv channels and in the afternoons they were all soap operas. today our young folks, they have hundreds of channels and a lot of computer games, we have to encourage and make it a priority to get our young folks involved in physical activity. i worked on a farm. some kids don't have a opportunity where it is a natural part of life to be in shape. three quarters of our youth cannot defend our country. we can't ignore it. this has not been a priority in our country, it needs to be. host: john in massachusetts, democratic caller.

what you think? caller: what's that? host: you are up first. good morning. caller: nice to be here. i want to ask the representative were you ever in the military? why would anybody want to join the military? can't even take care of the guys you screwed up many years ago. guest: you're right, it is too long to get that in there. i would say the first path among other things. i will tell you the nebraska legislature and i did serve their, they have rules that you can only pass the bill pertaining to that bill a single subject bill and our congress they have a bill everybody needs to pass i would say both sides of the aisle, they tried to put something onto it it's like loading more things onto a bus. we do need to pass that and i voted for a version that came

out in the senate and make changes to it. we are getting the third iteration between the house and the senate and i think it would have passed fairly easily but now we have this other bill that was announced yesterday by chuck schumer. increased spending by $450 billion and i think it will -- i would agree with the caller. i hope people in their 20's and 30's because they -- toxic fumes. this is our air's agent orange. host: the congressman served in

the air force for nearly 30 years. decorations include two bronze stars, to regions of merits, service metals, and aerial achievement metals. michigan caller:, you are next. something your recruitment process is about, why doesn't the military get more involved in the sending boards the peace corps and the civilian core like we used to? protection agencies, someone wouldn't that be a good idea for recruitment for the infrastructure plan, part of the infrastructure system and everything.

i would like to have your comment about that. i think it is what we are really missing here. guest: i don't know if it should be private military, the military defense our country, building highways and bridges and working overseas, however i do think the color is right that our service programs can be expanded. my grandfather served in the ccc during the depression. i think service programs in the united states or overseas in the peace corps, i think it gives us a broader perspective certainly not from nebraska some of the truckers and you get to meet people from new york, arizona, alabama, and you get a more national perspective. and i think service

opportunities are a added option for folks 18, 19, 20 years old or in their 20's. i think the color is right, i'm on legislation to expand these service opportunities. we are hoping in the united states to build roads and schools and so forth. i think it strengthens our country, i think it strengthens our opportunity. host:, ha nebraska, republican. caller: hello. first off, i want to tell everybody i want to thank you for all that you have done in terms of the time in the service and everything. they have a smear campaign going

on over here in omaha about a fireman having a tough time claiming that you are backing a bill that is going to increase the pockets of the bigger businesses and let the mom and pop shops suffer on the side. i thought they can't beat you at the ballot box, they are trying everything else and i just wondered if you could make a comment about that, thank you. guest: there is a progressive group basically. taxes on individuals were too low, and an almond -- anonymous person put a million dollars to rent an ad. they were talking about the tax reform where we passed it probably five years ago. we have the highest business taxes.

and our personal taxes were too high. how do you compete in a business community when our businesses are paying a third more in taxes than those in europe and asia? i lowered our business tax rates to what the world averages. we want businesses to come back to the united states. we also incentivize businesses to immediately assess their investment. if they want to build a plant, we are seeing that's all over right now. by doing so, putting thousands of construction jobs and creating other jobs that just has a great effect when you incentivize. so i stand by the tax reform. we have the strictest economy in 40 years leading up to covid. i want to point out that it helped us out of covid. a lot of people attribute these

covid bills. the tax code has done more to get our businesses back on their feet. unfortunately, congress in joe biden .2 raise taxes again. it takes a long time to do it. we are looking at 9.1% inflation, we may be told today, i don't know what the results are going to be that the -- that we are officially in a recession. this is a smear campaign by the opponent. my appointment -- opponent was a bit -- big tex razor. host: the gdp numbers that will come out this morning many people will be looking to see if it is an indication we are or headed towards a recession. caller: good morning, everyone.

i was wondering, congressman, had the congress studied the source of the problem that you renew me to. when you talked about not being able to pass educational test, physical test and so forth. i was wondering if you identified the actual ideology from those particular problems. in addition, i was also wondering if you have any solutions or if you share some of the solutions that i had come up with such as making sure that out of our collective tax dollars that schools are able to spend on education programs because on the state level, many states balance their budget by taking things away from public schools. host: that's exactly what the congressman was talking about but i will let him answer you

again. guest: there are multiple factors for how we got in this crisis. three quarters of our youth can't get in the military. people are talking about this. i've been talking about it for four years now. i know it's an issue. i agree with the caller, we should do everything at the local and state level. find ways to incentivize a physical education in our schools. i surely want to help expand that in our schools. i think we can also do more in our neighborhoods and communities to expand local sports. i will give you an example, in omaha our local police they created a program for kids that are struggling economically and they started a soccer league and baseball leagues to help

programs and targeting hundreds of our junior high kids or elementary kids, highs go kids they are playing soccer and baseball every weekend. we know more -- we need more of those kinds of activities and opportunities. i think i also just recite that's realize it's a cultural issue. tv and computer games, raising awareness level for parents and our educators to try to get people from doing too much tv and games. we also have a nutritional problem. we are eating foods that are not healthy for us. i work in the agricultural committee. we need programs that go to the schools work with the snap program. first of all, as a nation we have to realize the crisis. the first step that -- that's the first step in solving the problem. host: fayetteville, north

carolina. caller: thank you for taking my call. good morning. and thank you, representative, thank you for your service to our country. i live here in a very patriotic part of our country. there are a couple of things to touch on. i just retired from teaching rotc. there is a lack of physical education requirements for young people in their high schools and middle schools. we do have assorted programs here in our area for afterschool and other sports activities for young people like skip couple and soccer and so on.

but my greatest concern and i think you will refer to theasvab the kids have very low scores. you were air force, the requirements are much less demanding. so they can be quite selective. the army, as i observed has real struggles getting the numbers they need. the kids cannot get the scores on the asvab. i was told they went down to get the numbers for recruiting which is kind of alarming. as far as physical fitness i think the military once we get the kids in, i think we can get them into shape. but the asvab scores are another challenge. not just with physical fitness but with, you probably want to

start education requirements and compare internationally with our kids. host: let's take that point. guest: greg, thank you. i was in the air force and i was on the can rational side -- congressional side. having to go to fort bragg multiple times, they raised american warriors. i appreciate our special forces there. spot on. testing is an issue. two years of covid, i think the analysis is there now peered we went backwards. kids that stayed home and were trying to learn virtually through high schools and junior high, the scores went records. we hope to learn from this sending teenagers home to learn

virtually for most of the children, most of the students it did not serve them well. we went backwards the last couple of years. i think educators and our local schools are governed by the school boards. try to get a little bit more control but we have to study how do we raise the bar on basic skills when it's reading, writing, and arithmetic. how do we get more people out of high school that are interested in welding, electrical work, pipe fitting, there is a huge demand for these jobs out there. we are not getting enough people into these jobs. there is a huge task if you are an educator, if you are a student and tangent we have a big challenge out there and we have to rate -- raise the scores

and folks who may not go to college they can make a great living. host: your reaction to the secretary of state yesterday saying there is a substantial proposal on the table to russia to release the prisoners brittney griner, paul wehlan, what do you think? guest: we want to get them home, they are in custody and i think for trivial reasons i believe but the russians want to trade for someone in custody here for significant reasons. we have seen it with iran and north korea, they hold hostage american citizens sometimes for

no reasons or trivial reasons and they hold them hostage to get back someone who was a spy or conducted felonies in our country. i would not travel to russia i'm sanctioned anyway so i can't go. but the fact is, don't go to russia where you are under threat and you have a dictator that is doing what he is doing there. they can hold you for no reason. i encourage americans don't trouble russia. host: thank you for your time. guest: thank you. host: we will take a break. democrats have a bill that will over drug costs for some americans. erin durkin will join us to talk more about that. later today, nevada democrat dina titus on the economy and inflation. we will be right back. ♪

>> american history tv saturdays on c-span two. exploring the people and events that tell the american story. at 10:00 a.m. eastern presidential historian and author goodwin talks about how presidents like abraham lincoln, theodore roosevelt, franken -- franklin roosevelt and lyndon johnson fought pressures of their job and at 2:00 p.m. on the providence he autobiography ical author tells the story of. and join herbert hoover in his world war i relief efforts before moving into the white house in 1929. watch american history tv saturdays on c-span two. find the full schedule on your program guide or watch online

anytime at c-span.org/history. >> c-span has unfiltered coverage on the response to russia's invasion of ukraine. we also have international perspectives from the united nations and statements from foreign leaders. all on the c-span network, the c-span now free mobile app and c-span.org/ukraine. our web resource page where you can watch the latest videos on demand and wallow tweets from journalists on the ground. go to c-span.org/ukraine. >> c-span rings you and unfiltered view of government. our newsletter word for word recaps the day for you.

scan the qr code at the right bottom to sign up for this email and stay up-to-date on everything happening in washington every day. subscribe today using the qr code or visit c-span.org/connect to subscribe anytime. >> "washington journal" continues. host: joining us this morning is erin durkin. we were talking during the break that a lot has happened over the last 12 hours. update our viewers on this deal in the senate, this need for prescription checks. guest: late yesterday senator schumer and senator joe manchin entered a reconciliation deal that includes drug price reform including the ability for medicare to negotiate drug prices. it also includes an extension of obama care subsidy for another

three years otherwise they would expire at the end of the year. it also includes investments for climate change now which was a big reversal for senator joe manchin for why this is looking like a health care only piece of legislation. that is what has been happening in the last few hours. things are so far from guaranteed but that is the deal that is being discussed at this moment. host: is focused on this prescription drug component. tell us exactly what is the language and what is this mean for people and to? who benefits from this? guest: i'm going to highlight three major components that a lot of advocates have been very focused on. one big thing, as a longtime democrat goal, it will allow the health secretary for medicare to negotiate drug prices in medicare parts b and d. part b

is that drug benefit for medicare beneficiaries basically covering drugs. for part b it is a little more unique. it basically covers the cost of drugs that you couldn't give yourself they have to be administered by a physician. so what the secretary will do is list high-priced single force drugs. the first year that these negotiations will be implemented will be 2026. eventually building up to 20 drugs over the course of a few years. i will say that piece of the plant was surprising. there was a draft, i don't want to say identical but very similar.

another piece to this is the bill is passed with out of out-of-pocket costs for medicare beneficiaries. it will cap their drug costs at $2000 and it will implement inflation rebates. if a drug manufacturer raises the prices of their drugs, faster than inflation, they will have to pay the difference back to the program. host: when it comes to the negotiation of drugs with medicare, has there been an analysis of what that will do for the cost of medicare? guest: the analysis that we do have is shown what should be car fried.

it would save the government $280 billion. those are the kind of numbers that we have been primarily working with in terms of specific beneficiaries for the drug price negotiation, a piece of it, i would have to know which one you can negotiate so course is going to be ac as we go. there has been something out -- analysis for out-of-pocket costs. showing that about 850,000 would have benefited that paid more than $2000 for their drugs. these are kind of the impacts that we know so far of this legislation. host: we invite our viewers to

join in. especially those on medicare and get your reaction. capping out-of-pocket expenses, negotiating prices, etc.. eastern central part of the country (202) 748-8000. mountain, specific (202) 748-8001. i want to share this headline with our viewers u.s. manufacturing groups run six-figure ad campaign asking congress about the latest drug pricing guilt -- bill. this is paid for by these manufacturing companies. [video clip] >> want a lower drug cost? price controls are hidden taxes on manufacturers that harm innovation, competitive nests and new cures. that our manufacturer's ability to develop innovative cures to diseases. support access to lifesaving medicines and the manufacturing

workers that deliver it. paid for by the national association of manufacturers. host:erin? guest: this is a familiar argument from the pharmaceutical lobby. this is something they have fought against for many years now. in terms of the impact on innovation, the congressional budget did estimate along with saving $288 billion, it will also cause fewer drugs to be introduced over the next 30 years. this is something that the pharmaceutical lobby as routinely argued against when democrats brought forth a proposal like this. so it is no shock that they are going to be doing all that they

can, la being all that they can. they are very powerful. this is why a deal, you know, there is no guarantee what is going to happen on the floor. i think it's very important for the democratic caucus to get together on this. they need every single vote. you know, i am sure they are on the phones and i'm sure things are being discussed behind closed doors. host: the congressional budget office at the impact of allowing price negotiations could prevent medicines arriving over market over the next two years. at the same time you pointed out, the government is going to save $288 billion. guest: i was just double checking our numbers this morning. they updated it to 15 over the next two years. yes, you know, i think were also -- where republicans off warn

you about the effect. this is a concern that has been raised a lot whenever that has been a proposal on negotiating drug prices or really doing anything to affect drug pricing in the market. host: let's go to dave in south carolina. dave, good morning. question or comment here? caller: good morning. i have a great-niece who is missing a lobe in one long. she has to have steroid shots and has medication she takes too. the price for the medicine is destroying her family. they have nowhere to turn, they work so they don't qualify for assistance. and i want to know what is this legislation going to do for people like that? what are they supposed to do? what their children die because they can afford the medicine they need? good day. host: does this any -- address

anybody outside of medicare? guest: sufferable we know is it's pretty minted to the medicare program. there were prior proposals that would have applied that negotiated price to the private market. but especially last year when this was all part of build back better there were concerns about whether it can go through the process. democrats are trying to use, that would require a simple majority. it would raise a concern. this is limited to medicare. that is not to say they are not going to try to turn back in do things for the credit market. i hope that even the public not be on board with this proposal that is not to say they also have not been discussing this

issue. drug pricing has been a concern for them. we will see where the discussion goes from here but, yes, the line is pretty limited. host: caller: alabama, go ahead. i am a medicare recipient and i am diabetic too. i have seen my costs double almost. actually, one of the insulin pens because it got so ridiculous in price i was ashamed to even accepted. that might sound strange but anyway i'm grateful that somebody is trained to do something about it and joe manchin host: was very good.

what are your out-of-pocket expenses like figure drugs? caller: because i do have the, not right now but it still runs out of my income. it is almost 10% of my income just in co-pays. guest: actually, i wanted to note you mentioned insulin. this is one of the bigger changes between what is being discussed now and what is in build back at her. inflation was called out in that bill. there was a specific out-of-pocket cap for insulin that is now being dropped out. it is moving proposals to try to bring down the cost of insulin. it is now moving in a separate bill from senators holland and shaheen. there has been some reported concerns from other republicans. i do know they want to ensure

this one through proper hearing process. yes, there were pieces that would have been directly impactful. host: kate, in ohio. walking to the conversation. caller: thank you. i have a comments actually. i am on medicare and i am taking a diabetic medication. last month, it cost me $44 for a 30 day supply. this month it cost me $245 for a 30 days by and next month is going to be $243 a month until whenever. so when i asked why, i couldn't ge that is with the insurance

that you have to pay. $245 this month. this is, this drug thing is really a scam. i don't think our washington, our congressmen are doing anything about it. i do think they care about we the people. good example, the family that has decided if they're going to eat or keep their child dressed. this is terrible, absolutely terrible. host: erin durkin. guest: that is very interesting and i can see here your specific situation, i apologize to why your costs increased. i think this is certainly something that democrats are at least trying to address especially within out-of-pocket cost cap. it will be interesting to see it

-- if drug price negotiations will exist in this area but this is certainly something that has been a concern is how much drug traces are impacted -- impacting seniors. host: bernie sanders called it week saying that it covers a limited number of drugs and it doesn't take effect until 2026. your reaction to that? what would you like to see instead? guest: this is also a familiar kind of risk in the caucus. this is something we have seen as democrats over the year. proposals, ideas, sanders has been vocal about allowing medicare to negotiate and he had his own proposal that would have allowed for broader negotiations. as like that is the thing about

bridging and keeping them all on board because they are going to need every single vote to get anything through this process. host: what did the republicans want to address? a situation not in the bill? guest: so republicans have expressed concern, senator mitch mcconnell and senator grassley actually had also released a statement highlighting what he and senator wiseman had proposed no more bipartisan bills and just a reminder to myself about the details here. really would have gone over what they call the middleman. pbm, and so it seems there are some ideas that i could get some

people from proceeds of the aisle to be even with that. there were really big difficulties getting some of his colleagues on board. yes, so, even looking at the separate bills for senator collins and senator shaheen. again, how much republicans will be given on that. it going to be interesting and it democrats are managing to get this through or it did get through congress. it will also, it would be interesting to see if they are willing to come back to the table and discuss more negotiations. host: andy in kentucky, good morning. >> i remember back when

president trump was trying to get the cost down and he was fighting you guys like crazy on the democratic side over there. you're making this so political i bet somebody would have to say something that tells you no one ever felt being in the middle. after that the democrats regained the house in 2018. 10 days after that, they stopped price of pfizer, 10% and all of them have going up since then. i'm sure you all are in pfizer's pockets also. you know, this drug industry. host: is a journalist who works for the "washington journal". what did president trump to when it comes to lowering prescription checks?

guest: i'm glad you raised this i saw post on twitter that said at least one of the things having to do with high prescription types for drug prices abroad. this is an interesting one because not the exact same proposal but similar ideas democratic proposals, it is for someone who is very loud on drug prices. but, you know to the colors of the week getting anything done on this issue has not -- has been very difficult. keeping the democratic caucus together has been difficult on this. also bridging the divide from democrats and democrats for any kind of partisan solution on this which has been very difficult on this.

even though both sides of the aisle have expressed concerns on the issue. host: how does it differ from the senate bill? guest: i assume you are referring to build back better act from last november. actually the drug pricing proposal had actually gotten to a pretty similar place to the interim drug negotiations, inflationary drug -- rebates. it looks very similar but it had those additional revisions around insulin. in other piece that apparently the bill would close is i guess there was a concern about future press secretaries will they be able to come in and maybe refusing to negotiate or negotiate as peer judge. at this bill will close that

loophole. so that kind of the key different things. obviously, he pushes so much. including health, climate, things like that. host: sicilia, lewisville, texas. caller: erin, this bill that you were talking about, you are asking a lot. couldn't understand why the lady was talking about medicines going up. i know for a fact because my brother is in the hospital for a year last year. he has eight medications. one of his medications, we can only afford to buy 14 pills, one weeks worth because it was $700 for 14 pills. he had eight other medications to go with that. so he was sitting three -- spending $3000 a week.

it's ridiculous. you all want all these medications out there the you don't, you negotiate as a corporate world but you don't negotiate as a individual helping to pay for it. host: erin you can take the last point. guest: this is a very acute example of what lawmakers are trying to work against. you know, and terms of obviously inflation it was a big concern for senator joe manchin. again just the climbing costs and direct -- drug prices overall. so it's going to be interesting if they are able to accomplish this bill. how much impact it will have, how great -- far-reaching will the impact be? but certainly, this probably isn't the last word on capitol hill.

host: kevin, pittsburgh, good morning. caller: good morning, how are you? host: caller: good morning. i'm calling about being diagnosed with syrup -- psoriasis. i'm 70 years old. i go to get the medicine, i worked on my life. i felt like someone and when he gets up to me, $2300 a month is what i take. i mean, that seems to be a sin in this country if you want to be healthy be healthy. if you are for or middle-class you have to suffer you know all day long, and the medicine the logic in new medicine that is

what they call it. in america, it's horrible. for should have never occurred. host: are you on medicare? caller: yes, i'm 70. host: and your out-of-pocket expenses are 2300? caller: yes and some are 5000. host: will address kim's situation? guest: one caveat because i don't have the numbers specific to the situation but on the face of it it sounds like your out-of-pocket cap would impact your situation. i don't know much about the specific drugs you have to take the it will be interesting that they would arsenal to come under negotiation in the next couple of years. certainly, the out-of-pocket cap

for two thousand dollars sounds like it would be useful here. host: what are senators, members of congress caring about on the feedback they are getting? if you are in -- on a fixed income it is still a lot of money every month. guest: well, considering this deal was struck last night, you know, i don't know what you are hearing individually. i have heard from advocates who have touted this provision is being very helpful. but i think this is going to be very individual. you know, and this is also not taking into account any other kind of additional assistance someone might be able to get if they are lower income. so you always want to explain the caveat that we might not be able to be taking everything

here. i certainly heard a statement over prescription, the disk christian -- description of the rebate. host: surely in houston, good morning. caller: i understand this is trained to help us but i want to make something very clear. if you go to canada and you check out one of the drugs that you are on, you pay probably have over what you pay here. i would say that our drug prices here are higher. so we are paying for all of the research that is being done for the world. i mean, really. host: i want to take that point, charlotte. guest: that is actually one of the big arguments early on when there were more efforts to tie

our crisis to other countries and canada camo with a lot. there is a discussion over the years of having drug invocation because of the drug costs. he really hit on a point on a hs happened a lot. it's not really being captured in this particular proposal moving right now. it is something that has been part of the discussion certainly. host: erin durkin is a health care reporter for national journal. you can follow her work at national journal.com or on twitter at national journal. thank you for the conversation. coming up next, we are going to go into open forum. you can talk about the economy, the latest numbers from the gdp, usa today's reporting finds the economy shrink .9% marking

second straight contractions in raising recession worries. you can also talk about health care or the possible ban on assault weapons, also military spending all of that on the table. any public policy issues. start dialing in. later we will talk with that in about dina titus about the economy and inflation. we will be right back. >> at least six presidents recorded conversations while in office. here many of those conversations during season two of c-span's podcast, presidential recordings. >> the nixon tape. part private conversations, part deliberations and 100% unfiltered. >> the main thing is it will pass and my heart goes out to those people who with the best

of intentions are overzealous. as i'm sure you know, i'll tell you if i could have spent a little more time being a politician last year and less time being president. >> c-span shop.org business c-span's online store. browse through our collection of c-span products, apparel, books, home decor and accessories. there is something for every c-span fan and every purchase helps support our nonprofit operations. >> there are a lot of places to get political information. but only at c-span do you get it

straight from the source. no matter where you're from or where you stand on the issues, c-span is america's network. unfiltered, unbiased, word for word. if it happens here or here or here or anywhere that matters, america is watching on c-span. powered by cable. >> washington journal continues. host: open forum this morning. any public policy issue that's on your mind. you can start dialing in. let's start with the economy because of the latest news. the economy shrink .9% last quarter. it's second straight drop mid recession fears. i will read from paul wiseman's reporting with the associated press. the economy shrink from april through june for a second straight quarter, contracting at

a .9% annual pace. the decline in the gdp followed a 1.6 annual drop from january through march. the report comes at a critical time. consumers and businesses have been struggling under the weight of punishing inflation and higher borrowing cost. the federal reserve raised its benchmark interest rate. president biden will talk about the economy. you can watch that on c-span.org or our video app. there's also this from the wall street journal on the economy. inventory swing is a culprit

behind u.s. recession talks. many economists expect -- gdp contracted. i also think the drop will be largely due two firms trimming their inventories while overall spending by consumers advances modestly. business stocked up to get around supply chain problems and in anticipation of robust consumer spending. after realizing they had overstocked, many have slowed orders to suppliers and filled sales out of existing inventory, restraining national out but in the process. let's get to open forum here.

anthony in west palm beach florida. democratic caller. good morning. caller: i would like to thank you all, you, john, pedro and the other gentlemen that's very hospitable. giving up your voluntary time. you are so hospitable to us. thank you all. i want to talk about a couple of things that you talked about. the banning of the weapons and also the military. i'm a veteran and i also was a police officer 13 years in washington, d.c., federal police officer. and i'm very concerned. there's no reason for these high-powered rifles to be given to the public. these congressmen and women say they support them, they don't allow these folks to bring them into congress as well as when

the congressman who i really enjoyed, the republican that was talking about military -- young folks in our schools now. they are so focused on everything else but the fact of our country and things of that nature. i worked with some troubled kids at some time and our young folks are just not focused on serving. they are more motivated for marijuana cards and there's more drugs in our schools and teaching our kids about the pride of fighting and joining our military and being part of the security of joining our country. host: 10. republican. -- tim. republican. caller: i was just calling to -- i have been watching for a while , like every day.

i have come to the conclusion that we have to be our own ceo of ourselves and take care of us and ourselves instead of worrying about everybody else. we have way too much discussion on very petty things, which is very sad in our country. there's always going to be contraception out there in the house of representatives on stuff that does not -- should not even pertain to what the government is supposed to do for us. that's just all i would like to say today. host: happening in washington this evening, the annual congressional baseball game for charity and fox news sending out

this tweet this morning, batting practice is underway for the congressional baseball at nationals park. we will have coverage of that at 7:00 p.m. eastern time. democrats versus republicans right here on c-span. you can watch on the free video app or our website. caller: good morning gretchen. host: it's greta. caller: we affectionately call you gretchy. that's just me and my wife's pet name for you. host: [laughter] well ok then. caller: there you go. -- it's more related to the violence. i'm in my 60's.

i live in a historically violent area. i'm down here in hillbilly land. i have seen fistfights only life. as far as violent crime, rape, murder, armed robbery. i have never seen that at any time unless it's been on the silver screen. tv or movies. for 60 something years i can watch murders and violence all day on any channel, any movie, almost any show. cowboy shoot them ups all day long. so who is responsible for the noise in between my ears? who is responsible for the noise in my head? if it wasn't for tv and there was no movies and stuff, my head wouldn't have any of those images and pictures at all. it's so funny that you brought up about the baseball game because i was going to go there.

that was a democrat that used an automatic weapon to shoot up all those congressmen and stuff. we want to talk about responsibility for weapons, when barden was vice president, his boss and attorney general eric holder gave automatic weapons to the drug cartels in mexico who would use them against some of us. in the border agents. and what about the president right now. he left so many weapons of mass destruction, army weapons, weapons of war in afghanistan. they make an automatic rifle look like a bb gun. so how responsible is that? host: jack in ohio. we are in open forum. what's on your mind? caller: i was calling in reference to the drug situation. don't people realize we paid for that stuff twice? we paid for that stuff, we

created it and engineered and then they charged us again. this is getting ridiculous. host: darlie in california. republican. are you there? darrell. that's why. darrell in california. republican. good morning. caller: good morning. it's greta right? i was just calling because last week you mentioned that you used political fact as your fact-checker. -- politifact as your fact-checker. the head of the president of the poynter institute is a man named neil brown who also is the chair of the pulitzer committee which

gave pulitzer prizes to the new york times and washington post russian russia russia stories. which also discounted the hunter biden laptop as russian disinformation. so it just seems like it's a vicious circle. they all live in their own bubble and just be careful. be careful who you use as a fact-checker. host: the latest gdp numbers show the economy shrank yesterday when the federal reserve chairman jerome powell announced a substantial increase in the interest rates to fight inflation. he was asked about a possible recession. here's what he had to say. >> i do not think the u.s. is currently in a recession. there are too many areas of the economy that are performing too well. and i would point to the labor market.

in particular. it's true that growth is slow -- slowing. growth was extraordinarily high last year. we would have expected growth to slow. there more slowing going on while -- on now. payroll rises, that is a remarkably strong level for this state of affairs. the unemployment rate at 3.6%. all of the wage measures that we track are running very strong. so this is a very strong labor market and it's just not consistent. 2.7 million people hired in the first half of the year, it doesn't make sense that the economy would be in recession with this type of thing happening. host: the federal reserve chairman have yesterday. steve scalise of louisiana had this to say about president biden's economic policy. >> unfortunately later this week

economists are expecting that it will be confirmed that the united states is in a recession. we have seen the indicators for months now. families paying more for goods everywhere they go. gasoline of course is more than double from what it was before biden took office. so you would think joe biden would be spending all of his time trying to figure out a plan to fix this crisis. but in fact we are seeing the opposite bid we are seeing denial. president biden spending more time trying to redefine what inflation and a recession is rather than working to lay out a plan to stop us from going into a recession or from getting out of the recession. the real answer is reversing so many of the failed policies biden has put in place since he

got in office that caused this recession. you can't redefine your way out of a recession. you have to reverse failed policies. the first step to fixing any kind of crisis is to first admit the crisis. admit the problem he's created. and he won't do it. joe biden won't look the american people in the eye and admit his program is a fail. he won't admit that he has brought this country into a recession. he wants to keep denying and trying to redefine the term recession. host: republican steve scalise of louisiana. mary. caller: i really wanted to go back to the school situation. i've been thinking for years about this. i feel like they need to have singing and dancing in school. and it sounds crazy, but i feel like if you made it mandatory,

these children wouldn't be out drinking, taking drugs. they wouldn't be out killing people. they would be happy when they went to school. also i feel like if you're going to educate these children first of all, you need to feed them. and everybody should have free lunch. i don't care what kind of money their families make or whatever. i feel like if you feed the brain, you feed the body. you feed the body, you feed the brain. it just makes sense. you never know anybody's problems at home until you either yourself. i've been there. i know how it feels for children who don't want to say i don't have the money or my family can't afford it. and no matter how you think you know all this, you don't. because children are too embarrassed to let their peers know what the situation is at home. but remember, if you make

children happy at school, they want to learn. as they grow up, they won't be killing and fighting and bullying people because they feel good about going to school. host: bernie in raleigh, north carolina. republican. what's on your mind? caller: i'm loving this liz cheney january 6 committee stuff. it's presented perfectly well. it's great. i think we are making progress. host: in what way? caller: i think it's moving along. it's getting closer and closer to the real culprit, x president trump. and i wish they would add one thing that they keep overlooking , which would be perfect evidence of the whole thing tying it together. about four months before the election, trump would go and say stuff like this.

i have to win. if i don't win, i will have to move to i don't know, europe or something. let me tell you this. if i don't win it's rigged. just remember that. if i don't win it's rigged. in other words he started planting the seed many months before and so that should be played as a clip from liz cheney to just prove that he is setting the poison. it's almost like if i went to a pool tournament and i said i just want to make an announcement. if i should happen to lose this pool tournament, i want everyone to know that the tournament is rigged. host: usa today front page, 100 days before the midterm vote, americans are not happy. 76% say the nation is on the wrong track. i new usa today suffolk university poll shows democrats

with a narrow advantage over republicans on the congressional ballot. democrats with a narrow advantage. a bit better than the 40 to 40% split baseboard -- and they scored in june. -- split they scored in june. this piece written by republican karl rove of the bush administration. where did trump's donations go? he writes, what will donald trump do with his campaign cash? the former president controls four political action committees and he says that respectively, as of june 30, one of them has 103 million. another 10.3 million. the third seven .3 million and 700,000. give mr. trump more than 121 million at his disposal. in comparison to national groups like the republican national committee etc. together have 174

.8 million. mr. trump has assembled a warchest equivalent to 70% of that of these national gop groups together. that want to surprise many republicans small donors who are pummeled with requests from the former president. in a 24 hour stretch i received 25 fundraising please from trump to save america from the democrats. he goes on to write this. the requests have apparently produced a flood of contributions but donors think will help defeat democrats. it isn't clear that much of mr. trump is going to help in the midterms. one option off the table is converting that money to a trump residential campaign. if mr. trump decides he must upstage the midterms, he will immediately need to file a new committee for his presidential campaign to pay his political expenses. that will mean asking for donations at the same time gop

candidates for senate, house, governor, state and local are screaming for dollars to win midterms. candidates, donors, grassroots activists are sure to be angry with the former president put his personal interests above the party if he announces before the mid-to them. he goes on to write that by his calculation the former president has not spent all he could on senate, gubernatorial and house races that he has endorsed. he needs to now do independent expenditures if he's going to use up all of this money. ron in spring hill, florida. independent. go ahead. caller: yes i am. it's my first time calling.

there was a senator that was on about four months ago and he was complaining about the border and said if he had the power to take care of the borderline, he could fix it in two weeks. i never got a chance to call back and ask when that person was on what he would do and he never said what he would do. he said he would clear it up in two weeks. i wanted to ask him what he would do. the guest with ukraine -- the gas companies have been doing it

for a long time. host: i will go on to michael in live oak, florida. independent. caller: good morning. i just want to say i don't follow any republicans or democrats and the world is messed up and it's only going to get worse and as for the guy that was worried about all the violent images on tv, you can -- you control what you want. nobody is putting a gun to your head and telling you to watch all these violent movies. what else. the president, he's not in his right mind. nobody is in their right mind in office. no senator, no congressman. all the politicians need to be done with. gotten rid of. all that money we are spending on politicians has to come back to the people. that's it. host: roland in ellicott city

maryland. caller: i need all the republicans calling in, just like the representative from louisiana. he had a whole lot to say about what i did and did to cause this recession. the whole world is experiencing right now inflation. everywhere in the whole world. but for some reason american -- americans think the whole world is america. they are not doing a very good job explaining we have it so good compared to the rest of the world. -- the other day they were asking mitch mcconnell -- just like they were asking what's his name.

the guy from california. they've got no plans. they don't even know what they are going to do. just keep telling us how bad biden is. and can they actually tell me how many jobs -- trump? he did not create new jobs. host: this latest economic news follows the fed raising interest rates yesterday has prompted a change in the white house schedule. the president now speaking at noon eastern time. delivering remarks on inflation reduction act of 2022. this is the deal that was struck yesterday with senator joe manchin and chuck schumer. as we talked about it earlier, it would have billions of dollars, 369 billion for climate change and energy. it would include provisions on

health care negotiating prescription drug prices through medicare. cap out-of-pocket expenses to $2000. the president is going to talk about that and he will likely talk about this other economic news as well. that's 12:00 p.m. eastern time. richard in texas. democratic cobbler. caller: are there any truth to the stimulus checks? " what? -- host: what? caller: are there any truth to the fourth stimulus check? host: i haven't seen any article about that. what are you referencing? what did you hear? caller: i just heard there would be a fourth stimulus check i just wanted to find out if that was true or rumors going around.

host: ok. thomas in minnesota. independent. caller: this is thomas. i would like to say that people don't realize who's really bringing the drugs into this country. it's these companies like fedex. all the delivery companies are bringing drugs into this country. they are delivering them to people's apartments. i've been in an apartment that drugs have been delivered from fedex. that's what i'd like to say. host: the senate passed a $280 billion chip bill. the senate approved this bill aimed at boosting the semiconductor industry crucial to modern technology in a bipartisan embrace of expanding policy to counter the competitive threat posed by china. growing concern in both parties that the u.s. lacks a long-term response to beijing's technical and economic rise.

galvanized when the covid-19 pandemic disrupted ship supplies from asia was followed across major industries, computers, cars. the house expected to take up that legislation as well this week. and also many of you heard there were stories last week about speaker nancy pelosi's husband buying stock in semiconductor companies. reporting that those stocks were sold. amelia in west bridgewater, massachusetts. good morning to you. caller: how are you doing. host: doing well. tell us what's on your mind. caller: i'm just appalled that anybody could be for a man like donald trump who was going to burn down the republic, who did

burn down the republic for his own selfish political gain. and all the spineless republicans i'm sorry to say that say that he is at fault for january 6 but say they would still vote for him. i just don't understand how anybody in this country could support that. it's like one man believes that the election was stolen but all his followers want to say it was stolen. there's nobody else saying it. the justice department, nobody. everyone is saying it was a big lie. i live with somebody that still believes that and i can't change his mind. and watching the hearings. anything. nothing will change his mind. i just don't understand. host: here's a story about paul pelosi. nancy pelosi's husband sells $4 million worth of stock from this

semiconductor company at a major loss ahead of yesterday's vote in the senate. david in west virginia. republican. caller: good morning. thank you for taking michael. i have a couple pollutants on the drug prices. it's my understanding that fda negotiates the medical prices for drugs after the drugs are approved. whereas other countries negotiate the price for their drugs before the approval happens. therefore the u.s. loses the leverage of setting the prices by approving the drugs before the prices are set. the second thing, generally i hear a lot of anti-biden and anti-trumpet messages from your callers and it's surprising to me in a country of 320 million people, those are the best candidates we can come up with.

certainly there's got to be other candidates that would do a much better job of running this country and the only third thing i would have to say is they talk about the division in d.c. which is true. i think part of the solution could be term limits for congress as well as the supreme court and to thank you again for taking my call. host: you might be interested in this. most third parties have failed. here's my hours wound. this is written by the former governor of new jersey and andrew yang. they have formed a third party called forward and they are writing in today's opinion section of the washington post on how they think they have a viable third option. go to edwin m newbern co. in north carolina. -- let's go to edwin in new bern

north carolina. caller: it all boils down to trying a playbook would have been two years ago as far as reducing gas prices. gas prices are putting a stranglehold on everything across the way from truck drivers: their commerce to market. it's totally increasing prices across the board and that's what i think needs to be done and the government needs to stop doling out money to people. that's what fueled the fire on this inflation situation. host: coming up next we will talk with congresswoman dina titus about the economy and the inflation situation. we will be right back. >> live sunday, august 7 on in-depth. columnist and talkshow host larry elder will be our guest to

talk about political correctness, the left and racial politics of the united states. is the author of several books including 10 things you can't 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. joining the conversation with your phone calls, facebook comments, texts and tweets. in-depth with larry elder. live sunday, august 7 at noon eastern on book tv on c-span two. >> you up to date in the latest in publishing with book tv is podcast about books with current nonfiction book releases plus bestseller lists as well as industry news and trends through insider interviews.

c-span has unfiltered coverage of the house january 6 committee hearings investigating the attack on the capital. go to c-span.org/january 6. to watch the latest videos of the hearings, briefings and all of our coverage on the attack and subsequent investigation since january 6, 2021. we will also have reaction from members of congress and the white house as well as journalists and authors talking about the investigation. go to c-span.org/january 6 for a fast and easy way to watch. washington journal continues. host: joining us from capitol hill this morning is congresswoman dina titus. let's begin with the gdp news that just came out shows the economy shrank .9%. are we in a recession?

guest: we said yesterday that we weren't in a recession. the federal reserve chairman powell said he didn't think we were in a recession. the job market is still very strong. that's an indicator that we are not in a recession. and those folks who are working will be putting money back into the economy. we know what a recession is like in nevada. we survived it from about 10 years ago and this is not it. host: what are people telling you in nevada? guest: we were the hardest hit in the country. we had an unemployment rate of about 35% so it's amazing to see the strip totally closed down in the early days of covid. however now we are the fastest recovering. people were locked down for so long they wanted to get out and have a good time and what better place to go than las vegas. our traffic through your airport was record numbers.

people are coming back for holidays. we need to get our conventions back however. we are working towards that and international travelers. we know we have a way to go. people want to be sure that this recovery will last and they want to be sure it affects all votes, not just those at the top. host: we learned that senator joe manchin has agreed to a package of proposals that they are calling and inflation reduction act. it includes 369 billion dollars for climate change, a 15 percent minimum tax on corporations. do you think this is going to reduce inflation? guest: i will vote yes for it. it will return some money. caps on the medical cost will work to our advantage. investment in renewable energy will certainly move us away from fossil fuels. that will help.

and there will be a savings overall. maybe it wasn't big back -- build back better, but it's build back pretty good. host: it will be a while before you see the impact of this. the federal reserve yesterday has a shorter-term impact on the economy and the federal reserve chairman decided to raise those interest rates .75%. was it enough? guest: i think it's enough for now. you don't just want to jump really high. we are not returning. it's a gradual increase in i think it will help. host: do you think the president and/or the federal reserve waited too long to act on inflation? guest: no, i don't. you don't want to swing the pendulum from one extreme to the other. we needed to do something.

the legislature was acting. some of the states were a little slower in getting out the recovery money so that has now taken place pretty effectively. i'm glad we are acting now. you have to remember joe manchin was not being very cooperative until the last minute and there is some doubt about what the lady from arizona was going to do, kyrsten sinema. host: you have a voting situation as well, some lawmakers have tested positive for covid-19. that has thrown voting up in the air. there is also in the house a delay on a vote on banning assault weapons. that is tied up in legislation for funding police and other public safety proposals. where do you come down on the ban on assault weapons and this package? guest: i'm a member of the gun violence prevention caucus. remember the worst shooting in american history was in my

district. about 60 people eventually died from that murder at a concert right on the strip. so i am very much in favor of doing some kind of gun violence regulation. i wanted to see us do bump stocks because that's what the person in my district used was a bump stock to turn a regular weapon into an automatic one. i don't think you need weapons of war on the streets of our community. and you see how many gun deaths have occurred since then. whether you are in a movie theater or a dance hall or concert or church or grocery store, school. you just feel like your children and loved ones and neighbors aren't safe anywhere. so i am a cosponsor of banning assault weapons. i'm also in support of additional funding for police training, community policing. to be sure they have what they

need to get the job done to protect all of us and then go home safely to their own families. i would have voted for that bill had it come to the floor. host: i want to invite our viewers to join in and ask you questions as well. democrats (202) 748-8000. republicans (202) 748-8001. independents (202) 748-8002. caller: greetings from the people's republic of new york. actually i'm in the finger lakes area which has nothing to do with the petulant cesspool that is called new york city. -- pestilent cesspool that is called new york city. -- two consecutive quarters of negative growth is a recession. now all of a sudden he has changed his mind. as far as joe biden goes, and

bear with me. i think lately everything that's been going on with the white house is just a big distraction. the last couple states he went to, the democrat people that were running for office had so-called scheduling conflicts so they couldn't even show up with the president of and then joe takes off for the mideast to try to beg for oil which everybody knew the saudi's were going to say no. so to me that was just another distraction because we had the inflation report. i just coincidence come out at the same time he takes off. host: how do you respond to that? two consecutive quarters of the economy shrinking. that has been a common measure of whether or not we are in a recession.

guest: you can't just take those things out of context. other things were going on during the clinton administration that are different from what's going on now. the forecasts all the u.s. will end the year with about almost 2% growth. the job market is different. the housing market is different. the international situation is different. you are talking apples and oranges when you tried to compare to the clinton administration. you have to take these things into account. host: will you be campaigning or have you been campaigning with president biden in nevada? guest: i supported president biden early and i thought he was the right man for the job at the time and i still believe that. i think we have not talked enough about the things we have accomplished in the president, the vice president, any members of the candidate and a of them have already been to nevada.

some obviously to stand on stage. host: in florida. democratic color. caller: i believe the country would be way better off. they say they are having trouble picking the right people to be president and vice president. john kasich. the man who can't be bought. and leslie clark. the great former general would be our prescription for the best for this country. and i also think the deal that schumer and the other guy put, the guy from west virginia. i think it's a sham what they were doing. they are putting the people off. and i think you look great smoking a cigarette. thank you. guest: i look great smoking a cigarette? i don't smoke. thanks. i think wesley clark is quite an

admirable person, too. he was running for president a number of years ago and came to nevada. i have stayed in touch with you. i agree with you on that. as far as the shame, i have been disappointed in mention, too. he's like if you don't play my way, i'm going to take my ball and go home. we will see if the deal goes through. i never think it's over until the lady sings. we have a couple more days here this week and hopefully will move forward because i do think it's got some good things in it and the president has endorsed it. it's got some good things for health care, energy. we will keep our fingers crossed and see what happens. host: the 360 $9 billion for climate change, would it address droughts and wildfires in the west? guest: there is a separate bill on drought and wildfire that we

think we will vote for it may be this afternoon or tomorrow. it's got a number of pieces in it that i have supported because nevada is the driest hottest state in the country and our water is shrinking from the colorado river. we may see the federal government put in some regulations. we share that order with a number of other western states. but he dreamed we would have as many people as we do living in the valley there. i'm pleased to see those provisions in that bill. they make the systems more efficient so we aren't losing water. it's about doing recycling and projects with california. it's putting money into volunteer firefighters and firefighting equipment so we can better address drought. that's a whole big package. i might just vote for that.

host: does this legislation address who gets the water or what companies get the water and how it's being used? guest: most of water use is determined by local government. for example they set standards for watering lawns and where grass can be planted. set building standards for what kind of low-flow plumbing you can use in construction. so that's not in this bill. that's usually done at the local level. also this legislation will overturn the law of the river which was a contact put in place for the colorado river a long time ago. saying in the west is that whiskey is for drinking, water is for fighting over. host: in texas. independent.

caller: i just think that our representatives need to quit thinking of themselves as leaders. they are not leaders. they are representatives of the people. she said earlier is very telling -- what she said earlier is very telling to what all these people are doing. she said i don't think that having weapons -- it doesn't matter what you think, ma'am. the constitution is doing the thinking for you. we had men that fought and died to do the thinking for you. and your job is to uphold the constitution. that's your job. guest: you know, i appreciate that. when i take that oath of office, it is to uphold the constitution. but i would like for you to show me where in the constitution it says you have a right to carry a weapon of war on the street. the amendments to the constitution are not absolute. they've been interpreted over time and the supreme court has

said you can put limitations on gun ownership. and when i say i, i am reflecting the vote of the people. the majority of the people in the united states want to see some kind of gun regulation and that is certainly true in nevada even though we are a big cowboy state. we had a legislature passed an anti-bump stock bill and they passed where you have to sign and have a background check before you can get a gun. those are reasonable things. i'm not taking away any weapons from people who fought and died. in fact many of them feel the same way as do many responsible members of the nra. so i'm not talking about me. i'm talking about the people they represent. host: let's hear from cliff in oceanside california. republican. caller: yes. i believe the only reason why you are there, miss titus, is because of the californians

migrated their to nevada -- there to nevada and put you in office which is the wrong thing because they lift the state to ruin that state. that's what i heard from my friends there. they said don't come back here. it's just as bad as california. host: congresswoman do you have a response to that? guest: most of the people from california moved to nevada because the tax structure is so low. you don't have to pay an income tax. sales tax is much lower. gas prices are lower than california. housing prices are lower than california. seven if hasn't become california gated. host: sam in maryland. republican. caller: yes. do i speak now? host: go ahead. caller: i think she mentioned something about inflation and a lot of inflation is because of

the cost of shipping products by truck and i think instead of the general public of which i know several people got checks and they really didn't need them. i think the truckers should get the stimulus check or they should get subsidized. in that way they should bring down the cost of transported items. foods, produce, whatever. that's my opinion. host: congresswoman, what do you think? guest: i agree with you. that's what happened in some of the recovery act. restaurants got money so they can keep their employees hard but trucking companies also butted from that as did truckers. they were not left out of the stimulus and recovery assistance. it came from the federal government to the states.

host: an earlier caller said he heard there was a rumor of a fourth stimulus check. can you talk about that? guest: i have not heard that and i don't know of any movement on that right now. host: met in waldorf, maryland. republican. caller: i'm retired navy and defense contractor. in the last six months, job offers did not feel the drop from my level experience from mid-100,000 down to under 100,000. in six months. i think that's indicative of what's happening to wages in this country. inflation is skyrocketing, which is are dropping. thank you. host: are you hearing that as well. wages are dropping? guest: i'm hearing businesses are offering higher wages to get people to come back to work.

during covid people got very accustomed to working from home. they put themselves in harm's way to take care of the rest of us and now businesses are trying to get people to come back even though they stayed at home. some of the things we need to do and this is happening in nevada and other states at the state level is up with child support so women can go back, raising the minimum wage which hasn't occurred in years. so you see some of that going on. i don't know about defense contractors. i thank him for his service in the navy. but most jobs are going up, not down. host: anthony is in staten island. you are talking with congresswoman dina titus of nevada. go ahead. caller: my question is -- the last bill in a recession, you can't spend your way out of

this. i don't understand what you people are doing. host: are you talking about this latest deal between senator manchin and senator schumer? caller: yes. the last bill didn't work. when trump left office with 1.6 inflation, now you are at 10. host: let's take that argument. guest: there are a lot of figures floating around. it's a lot of money, but it's aimed at reducing inflation. helping to fix the supply chain and bring down the cost of medicine. helping to move to renewable energy away from fossil fuels so we won't be dependent on places like saudi arabia. so is the glass half-full or half-empty. i think those previous programs work. when we had covid and businesses

were shutting down and people were laid off and children were home from school and we didn't know how to cure it and it was spreading around the world, it took a government investment to get us through that. if you didn't want that check or that help for your business and you wanted everything to shut down, maybe that would have worked better in the long run. i don't think so. host: grant in salt lake city. independent. caller: i come from utah and i'm concerned about the water level in the colorado river. i'm concerned that what happens when there's not enough water to turn the turbines in hoover dam. and that supplies electricity to god knows how many people. and the level in the colorado river is constantly going down. everybody's siphoning the water

off upstream. so i don't know how you're going to get the water back. guest: i am totally in agreement with you. salt lake city, i think the lake is at its lowest. colorado river hasn't been this low or lake mead hasn't been this low since they first filled it up. you can fly over to las vegas and see the bathtub rings around the lake. we are in a 1200 year drought in the west. some places have too much water here in the east and we don't have enough so everyone is looking at ways to conserve water, to make our water systems more efficient, to recycle projects. there is talk about desalinization plants in california along the pacific to bring more water. we have done everything we can practically to conserve water.

so i agree with you. we've just got to pray for rain i think is what we've got to do. host: terry in minnesota. republican. caller: good morning. two quick questions. i see you are on the homeland security deal. homeland security has stated that our southern border is secure. do you agree our southern border is secure? what if the unemployment rate is so low, how come there's so many jobs available? why are they still haven't filled the over three or 4 million jobs haven't come back since 2020? is it because a lot of the labor participation people are choosing just enough to come back to work? thank you. guest: i think we need immigration reform. i have always said that and i stick by that. there are things that need to be done at the border. certainly we need to advance better technology.

we need to be sure that our border guards have the equipment that they need. we need to be sure that the immigration judges are in place so that we can move these cases through. we have to be sure that people who are coming here aren't terrorists. i think there are mechanisms in place to vent people before they get any kind of refugee status. i don't think we need to build a wall. i have never seen a wall somebody couldn't climb over or crawl under. that's not going to be the solution. but we need to do some things to make the situation better. nobody wants just open borders. you have to have a border for your country to be secure. that's why they call it homeland security. the secretary of homeland security has made some segments that made -- may be controversial -- statements that may be controversial but that doesn't reflect what our committee has been working on. there's other kind of security issues that are plaguing our

country. one of them is cybersecurity. that's not people who are coming through the board to get a better life for their families or get away from hunger or get away from roving gangs that help them hostage and killed their children. cybersecurity comes from all over the world and it's not easy to go after and that's a big focus of the committee right now. keeping your information, your credit card safe. keeping hospitals running, power plants, all of those things that can be attacked through the cyber sphere. host: i apologize, i have to interrupt you because the house is coming in, as you know. but we really appreciate your time this morning. all of you members of congress are very busy. thank you for taking some of it to talk to our viewers. guest: thank you. my pleasure. host: the house is going to be gaveling in any second. we will take you to the