the u.s. troop withdrawal from the atlantic council and gets underway at 11:00 eastern. >> c-span is your unfiltered view of government. we are funded by these television companies and more, including comcast. >> you think this is just a community center? it is way more than that. >> comcast is partnering with community centers so students with low income families can get the tools they need to be ready for everything. >> comcast support c-span as a public service along with these other television >> coming up on "washington journal," as students head back to class, andrew campanella with the national school choice awareness foundation joins us to talk about the school choice movement.

later, the president of citizens for responsibility and ethics in washington, noah bookbinder, explains the presidential records act and will talk about the recent fbi search of former president trump's florida home. we look forward to you joining the conversation with your calls, texts, and tweets. ♪ host: welcome to "washington journal" for august 23. earlier this year, dr. anthony fauci, chief medical advisor to the president, hinted he would retire. he made it official yesterday, announcing he would step down in december. he was on the front lines of fighting aids, ebola, and he has been the lead doctor in the fight against covid. over the next hour, your thoughts on the dr.'s retirement and his contributions to fighting disease, including

covid. republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. you can text us at (202) 748-8003. post on facebook and on twitter. you can also follow the show on instagram. it was yesterday that dr. fauci put out a statement regarding his retirement. it reads, in part, over the past 38 years, i have had the enormous privilege of serving under and advising seven presidents of the united states, beginning with president ronald reagan on newly emerging and reemerging infectious diseases threats, including hiv/aids, pandemic influenza, ebola, and zika, among others, and most recently, the covid-19 pandemic. i am proud to have served as

chief medical advisor to president joe biden since the first day of his administration. while i am moving on to my current positions, i am not retiring. after more than 50 years of government service, i plan to pursue the next phase of my career while i still have so much energy and passion for it. we want to ask your thoughts on the doctor's service to the country over the course of 50 years. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. democrats (202) 748-8000. and independents (202) 748-8002. on msnbc last night, dr. fauci participated in an interview and talked about the lessons he learned while dealing with covid. [video clip] >> in some respects, the situation has eroded, and i think it has in the sense of neglecting of the capabilities of the local public health officials. because if you want to respond to an emerging infection, you do

need leadership from above. you need central support from the government. but at the local level, you also have to have the kind of resources that will allow you to respond. what we learned, and i hope we're still learning, a very important lesson from covid, that you never, ever underestimate an emerging infection in which you do not know where it is going, because we have been fooled before. we did not fully appreciate the magnitude of hiv in the early 1980's when i first got involved in the first kisses were recognized, and so many things -- and the first cases were recognized, and so many things were learned on the run with covid. as the months went by, some things we thought in the beginning turned out to not be the case which forced us to adapt and change some policies and recommendations. that was interpreted by many as

flip-flopping or not really knowing what is going on, but it really was the evolution of the science. so one of the lessons that i hope we learn is that we have got to be prepared, have got to be able to respond, but we have also got to be flexible. some military colleagues have told us it is kind of like when you are at a war, you can plan what you are going to do, but when the bullets go off and the cannons start firing, then it becomes the fog of war, and you have to be flexible enough to respond. host: that is dr. fauci in that msnbc interview from yesterday. alan starts us off from brooklyn, new york, democrat line. go ahead. caller: first of all, it is an honor to be speaking with dr. fauci in any capacity or reason for what he has done for our country. to broaden the scope of the topic, the assault on truth he

seems to have been facing during the entire time he was trying to save american lives by using his expertise to address the recent pandemic. i see an analogy between the denial of truth of the science that he has been making available to the public and the denial of truth about democracy in general. many people disparaging the integrity or truth of elections or election officials. i am just wondering if he has any comment on the idea that there is an analogy between this kind of disparagement of fundamental processes in the country, health and elections, and food libel laws from the late 1980's. host: back to dr. fauci, what do you think will be the contribution he has made? caller: i think that he has, by his example of total integrity

and honesty in attempting to speak based upon evidence and not upon any kind of bias or opinion, he has -- host: oh, that was the first caller from illinois -- from brooklyn. this is carla from wayne city, illinois, republican line. caller: yeah, i think dr. fauci is a coward. he does not want to face the music from congress. i believe that he knew about the coronavirus and do not think he helped the american people any. he cost a lot of grief and anguish. and people were shut in, wearing masks, getting boosted, and none of the stuff worked. so i am glad he is retiring, but

i would rather see him face the music. host: stephanie is next from new york, democrats line. caller: good morning. the previous caller said not so good things about dr. fauci. if it wasn't for dr. fauci -- i am an african-american woman, and if it was not for him and the biden administration, a lot of us black americans would be dead. trump had made it very political. when they found out that it was affecting the african-american community more in the hispanic and asian community more than the white community, he just did not care about it. that is when he made it political. that is when they started talking so bad against found she -- fauci. fauci is a hero and always will be. so those who talk bad about him, that is ok, because everybody

knows what dr. fauci has done for this country. host: that is stephanie in new york. several opinions looking at the doctor's influence over various infectious diseases over his career, covid being the most notable and most visible over the past few years. you can call and comment. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. democrats (202) 748-8000. independents (202) 748-8002. on capitol hill, several members of congress responding to the retirement announcement, republican and democratic alike. this is representative andy biggs of arizona, sing dr. fauci's guidance lead to unemployment, child abuse, drug abuse, suicide rate increases, closures of schools and churches, jacobian and anti-science mandates. another representative from the oversight committee saying we

need to know if dr. fauci can steal anything from government officials to shield relationships with the alliance in regards to research and oversight. senator rand paul also commenting on this. you may remember that he and doc served ouchi that she and dr. fauci sparred several times in the hearings on capitol hill. his tweet saying that dr. fauci's resignation will not prevent and investigation into the origins of the pandemic and he will be asked to testify under oath concerning the lab leak. it was in one of those discussions that dr. fauci and senator paul had exchanges. this is a portion from the senate health committee from earlier this year. dr. fauci responding to rand paul, the senator. here is a little of that. [video clip] >> the anger that has developed

with you, dr. fauci, as you do not want to give us advice, you want to tell us what to do. you think you are the science, and anybody response to you -- how dare you? how dare you could incise science? as if you somehow are science. that kind of arrogance, that hubris, that is why the anger is coming toward you. if you were one doctor among hundreds and the government they gave advice, people might not object your advice if there was not such a degree of anger. but you are not willing to hear anyone else. three epidemiologists, and you are not even one, but three prominent epidemiologists, oxford, stanford, and harvard, you maligned them. you spoke openly with dr. collins, and you went after them and said you would do a public takedown, not in science or nature but in the nation, a

left-wing publication. you wonder why there is so much anger? you are not an objective scientist. you lost that long ago. so many of the things that people want, they want to know why you are forcing their children to be vaccinated when 95% of people at risk have been vaccinated. over 95% of people over 65, huge, voluntary success, but you will not rest until you force every child to get this. so yes, there is a great deal of satisfaction with you and many people want you to go. >> senator paul, your time is expired. i will allow senator faucher to respond. >> thank you very much -- >> dr. fauci. [laughter] >> thank you dr. murray. [laughter] >> no, no. >> first of all, senator, at a hearing such as this where there are almost 900,000 people in

this country that have died from this outbreak, you have chosen to do personal attacks on the they go back to multiple hearings. again, just for the record, for people to check, i have never said take people down in that email. it was an email sent to me -- again -- >> you agreed with dr. collins in the email. >> senator paul, this is my time. >> you personally attacked me, and the things you do are incorrect and proven incorrect. you publicly accused me at a hearing of being responsible for the deaths of 5 million people, when there is not a single, single shred of evidence that anything that was done with the nih had anything to do with covid-19. you talk about things like game to function -- >> dr. fauci, i am going to let you respond, but i think you have responded -- >> i appreciate the time. thank you very much, madam chair.

i just want to say i am actually stunned by the amount of misinformation. the only thing i have ever done, and this will take 20 seconds, if you look at the things i have said, they have been to support the recommendations of the cdc, of their advisory committees, and of the fda. i have told people that it is important to get vaccinated, get boosted, to wear a mask, and to be prudent. that is the only thing i have said. i have not dictated anything that is only a monolith with me. it is always public health practices. anybody goes back over any record of me, they know that. host: you can see that hearing on our website at c-span.org. senator dick durbin, democrat from illinois, saying dr. fauci has devoted his career and life to improving public health. he has said kelly lie -- she has saved countless lives in the u.s. and around the world, a brilliant scientific mind.

thank you, dr. fauci, you will be missed. president biden saying, because of dr. fauci's many contributions to public health, lives in the united states and around the world have been saved. as he leaves his position in the u.s. government, i know the american people and world will benefit from dr. fauci's expertise from whatever he does next. he has touched all americans about real lives from his work. i thank him for his service. america is stronger and healthier because of him. next, annandale, virginia, line for democrats. caller: i am glad you played that, dr. fauci just saying that about his support with the masks and vaccines. dr. fauci is a great man, a hero. he wanted nothing but the best for people. host: that is nick in virginia. let's hear from steve in san jose, california, republican

line. caller: one thing is for sure, dr. fauci's epitaph will not take place until he testifies in front of congress. that will be determined by the amount of times that he takes the fifth and refuses to answer. there are many questions involving dr. fauci. chief among them is, it is a well-known fact that china is our enemy. china is killing americans directly by the shipment of fit no -- fentanyl. why in hell would he give money to a research facility, and we know that this is true, not directly but through the nec,

why would he give money to our enemies for purposes that could be used to harm us? biologically, why? like i said, is epitaph will not be realized and fulfilled until he testifies. he has been extremely, extremely evasive up until now. and i hope ron paul is on the committee that puts the questions to him. host: you mean rand paul. caller: rand paul, right. host: gotcha. let's hear from christine in west virginia, democrats line. hi. caller: hello. i was just going to say that dr. fauci has done a great job

telling us about the coronavirus when it first came. trump did not take this serious. he called it a democratic hoax. he did not take it serious. republicans have to have a fall guy no matter what. they have to have a fall guy to say it is dr. fauci who brought the coronavirus here. that is why they are blaming dr. fauci. that is the what the shame, just like the fbi -- host: how do you think dr. fauci contributed to the whole thing over these years? caller: from the time that he started with reagan? host: particularly for covid. caller: covid, well, he helped trying to tell the trump administration to take it serious, to get us to wear masks, which did help, really did help us. when they did get the vaccination and the booster -- i have taken mine, and i might have gotten it, sure, they said we would get it, but we would not have it as bad, and we

didn't. my family had it, and we did not have to go to the hospital. we was fine. they keep saying it is just like the flu, but it was worse than the flu. that is what trump told us. and he knew what it was. that is what the republicans are doing. they want a fall guy, they are blaming dr. fauci. host: the editors of the "wall street journal" with the headline, dr. fauci and the rule of expert. they write, he and other public health experts use their authority to lobby for broad economic lockdowns that we know now are far more destructive than they needed to be. he also lobbied for mask and vaccine mandates that were far less effective than his assertions to the public. dr. fauci's influence was all the greater because he had an echo chamber and the press corps and among public elite. a flagrant example of dr. fauci's refusal to even consider the noble coronavirus had originated in a lab at the wuhan extent to of verlin g in china

-- wuhan institute of virology in china. more on this editorial from "the wall street journal," which you can find online. denver, colorado, we will hear from sue on the democrats line. caller: i am a retired registered nurse. i thought you were going to announce again that he was retiring, but i heard it a few months ago also. host: he made it official yesterday to retire in december. caller: i missed your phone number but finally got it off the internet. anyway, i met dr. fauci back in 1982 or 1983 in new york. what had happened was the california hiv/aids patient, a young man coming in with infections only immune suppressed people are supposed to get. it was a hematology clinic at new york hospital, and he came to visit us because i began with

globulin being studied for other things, and we were going to make an attempt to try it out on this young men who were having these diseases that they were not supposed to be having at their age. so we tried it and it did not work. but having met him so long ago and followed his career, i have to tell you, that man is so dedicated that anybody saying that he is not justice and thinking right. and i do realize that these epidemics and stuff evolve, and that is kind of what was happening back then in 1982 or 1983. nobody knew exactly what to do for these gentlemen, these young men, coming in with infectious diseases they should not be getting at their age. that is what i have to save it he is a nurse, i have bragged on him my entire life now to every nurse i know, and i know plenty of nurses. host: dr. fauci has appeared in front of cameras many times over

the course of his career, several times on this program, as well. if you are interested in hearing him on the various subjects he has addressed over his lifetime, go to our website, c-span.org, and type in his name. you will see every appearance of his, whether it be on a hearing or on this program. "the new york post" looks at his career. they talk about, as a pathbreaking researcher and public health administrator, he has been the worst enemy of deadly bugs and ill-informed politicians. he worked with ebola, swine fluke, sars, covid. long after dr. fauci leaves government service in december, the know nothings will keep trying to score political points. surviving truth over and over again, harnessing the power of medicine to save lives. the editors finish with, thanks, doc. we will hear from kendra, flint,

michigan, republican line. caller: i am concerned about the issues with dr. fauci. our gall paying attention to what is going on in the networks with this? and i mean xfinity. host: can you clarify? caller: as in, y'all have access to medical files and with that company and nobody seems to care about it. host: why do you think that is? caller: um, because you guys at the networks don't care about it. host: what makes you think we have access to it? caller: since covid, you guys have had access to medical data that you should not have access to. host: ok. let's hear from mo in florida, independent line. caller: good morning. i want to say, generally, when the whole covid thing started, i was so thankful for public servants like dr. fauci.

i thought, what a tough spot to be in. you know, they should just be giving credit. but over the course of time, and i understand it is a very difficult situation, but i think dr. fauci even said it himself and the responding to senator paul, when he kind of referred or blended policy and recommendation. and he kind of seemed to blur the -- not kind of, he really blurred the lines with that. because a lot of his early recommendations, they were not given with any kind of uncertainty. i think it is pretty clear that, and dr. byrd has come out lately and indicated the same, that they were giving firm recommendations without firm knowledge. there was way too much guesswork

going on, and that came back to bite their credibility. and that is just the way this has played out. i think "the wall street journal" editorial you referred to spell that out. secondarily, his involvement with the nih and the china lab and that sort of thing, while maybe that kind of experimentation at one time was considered important, it has become apparent that that type of research is dangerous. and he has not been forthcoming about the involvement of him and the agencies in that -- in those experimentations, that sort of thing. those are my two main points. and that is what i wanted to add. host: mo in florida. the profile in "the washington post" admits that the way dr. fauci has looked at covid, they write veteran science has

acknowledged several missteps in the early weeks of the pandemic. fauci and other government scientists said americans did not need to wear masks, which president trump seized on towards the end of his presidency to criticize fauci. fauci did not recognize early on that agitprop -- that a symptom attic people -- dr. fauci could see he and other scientists were wrong about masks from the beginning. they did not see that it was effective in prevention of infection outside of hospitals. it became clear later that the virus was airborne. you can find it online. this is paul in kentucky, democrats line. you are next up. paul in kentucky, hello. caller: good morning. what i wanted to --yes, can you hear me? host: yes, go ahead. caller: hello? host: go ahead.

caller: i was calling -- i am talking. can you not hear me? host: you are listening to your television. ignore that and go ahead and talk on the phone, please. caller: no. all right, i'm ready. [laughs] what i was calling about is i wanted to commend dr. fauci for the years of service. i wanted to say that being a doctor and a medical administrator is one tough job, but especially for as many years. the other thing i want to say is, dr. rand paul, he is an ophthalmologist. he is talking out of his hatch when he is talking about -- talking out of his hat when he is talking about knowing what a

physician should be doing. i think we get a misconception. we have people like our previous president discussing medical policy when he needs to listen to those in the profession. host: ok, that is paul in kentucky. if you are online, viewers, mute your television so you do not listen to it while you should be talking to the phone and a delay does not happen. a congressman sing dr. fauci saved countless lives and helped our nation navigate the most pressing public health crises. from one scientist to another, thank you, dr. fauci. members of congress posting announcements in light of the resignation announcement yesterday with dr. fauci. in georgia, republican line, this is john. hello. caller: yes, i heard of dr. fauci's resignation yesterday. i was recollecting the old

western song, thank god and greyhound, he is gone. thank you. host: what do you mean by that? john hung up. a couple posting off of our twitter feeds and other feeds, as well. lynn from twitter saying i want to think dr. fauci for his service and i hope he enjoys his retirement with his wife and family instead of worrying every day about being threatened by maga terrorists that i wish you the best. catherine says fauci's resignation will not prevent an investigation into the pandemic, he will be asked to testify under oath about discussions concerning the lab leak. sue in new jersey singh prior to covid-19, i did not know who dr. fauci was. the pandemic thrusted him into the limelight. the experience leads me wondering why there was so controversy -- so much

controversy and confusion surrounding covid-19. dana in st. john's, michigan, republican line. caller: i just want to say, about dr. fauci, he is a criminal. he is a murderer. he knew he was part of it, money-wise or what have you, in that wuhan lab in china. not only that, this man is the highest government official in the government, $400,000 a year. not only that, he should be arrested and charged. i have never had the shot. i do not have the shot. i have had corona three different times, and i'm healthy. it did not harm me. a a couple days like the flu, what have you. so it does harm some people if they're compromised, yes. a lot of things will hurt someone who is compromised. it is unfortunate. however, it is scary, the world

has changed ever since corona 19. the world has changed. we have people are afraid, people against each other. it is all because of this corona. it had a purpose that i believe was for world crowd control, just like a burning forest fire. host: why do you take that belief on? caller: by what i see and by what i hear from other people, how african americans believe they were targeted from corona 19. the asians, too. i am not denouncing that, maybe so. i don't know. i know this though, it does affect the weak and compromised. if african-americans are more compromise than whites or what have you, then that is what it is. my point is -- host: what are you trying to make by the comparison? caller: the comparison is i

don't believe that corona 19 is directly targeting african-americans or asians. i believe that if you look at the overall numbers of african-americans or asians or even whites, whomever, in areas that have poverty, they are not going to be as healthy as somebody else that has more going on than being healthy. host: we will continue on for the next half-hour. republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. text us at (202) 748-8003. in the same interview that dr. fauci appeared on msnbc yesterday, he talked about

theories concerning covid-19, how they impacted the recovery efforts and the efforts of the federal government. here is a portion of that from yesterday. [video clip] >> having been the target of this really specific, really different attack, do you have insight into what we should do to protect public officials like yourself and to try to be more rational about the stuff in the country? >> you know, rachel, i wish i did have a positive, constructive answer for you, but i don't. i think you and i are talking about public health issues right now. but what has spilled over, and really in many respects impeded a proper response to a public health challenge, it is something we see has gone well beyond public health. it is a complete distortion of reality. i mean, a world where untruths have almost become normalized, how we can see something in

front of our very eyes and deny it is happening. that is the environment we are living in. you can look at january 6 on tv, and you have some people who actually do not believe it happened. how could that possibly be? and it is now spilling over in denial about public else principles. so i wish i had an answer but i don't. i mean, i do have, because i have always been someone who is cautiously optimistic and always feeling that we will be able to extract the good out of people, and there are the possibility that we will see, as i say, the better angels in our society prevail. but what is going on out there now with the distortion of reality is very troublesome. and i do not have an answer for it right now, but it is certainly interfering with the proper approach to a public health challenge. host: our latest story, pfizer asking regulators to approve another covid shot.

this is in "the wall street journal" this morning, u.s. food and drug administration expected to clear the shot in the coming weeks, in time for a planned fall booster campaign, targeting the original coronavirus and sub variants of omicron, which have become predominant in the u.s. pfizer and biontech said they could begin supplying the vaccine upon fda clearance for a vaccination campaign that could start as early as september. dr. fauci announcing his retirement in december. we are getting your thoughts on it and his work for federal government and various fights against infectious diseases. a call from ohio, republican line. caller: thanks, pedro, for taking my call. i want to go back to something a lot of democrats do not understand. in 2014, president obama ordered fauci to get out of wuhan and stop playing with that virus.

barack obama was deeply concerned with fauci's fascination with a deadly virus, and he shut this whole project down. but apparently, obama failed to share his concerns with an incoming president trump, because he went back to china as soon as obama had vacated the white house. fauci is a criminal. thank you. that is all i have. host: new york post going back to october of last year, saying it is another fauci flood, national has admitted about research at the wuhan lab, despite dr. fauci singh no such thing happen. in a letter to -- wednesday, top nih official blamed an alliance funding wuhan lab for not being transparent about the work it was doing. the nih deputy director said

that limited experience tested whether spike proteins from natural occurring coronaviruses circulating in china were capable of binding to the human receptor in a mouse model. this is from october of last year. robert in arkansas, democrats line come on dr. fauci and his retirement. caller: yeah, i think dr. fauci has done a good job when you go back to the last six presidency worked for, compared to the last one, everything he done, he was contradicted, saying it was a hoax, and you got people believing in that stuff. jobs shutting down, people dying, and you have people calling here talking about fauci was a criminal, there is something wrong with the world for people to think something

like that. one man that is a criminal, that is the former president. and everyone that worked for him had to do whatever he said. that is what i have to say. host: from washington state, republican line, we will hear from john. hello. caller: hello, good morning. i just have one thing to say about fauci, he is a fake, a fraud. he is retiring so we can get some other fake and fraud in there. that is why he is retiring, to cover up his messy little details. host: you say he is a fake and a fraud paired what do you base that on? caller: he is a psychopath. he actually invented covid. host: what makes you believe that? caller: just all the stuff i hear. ask rand paul. you don't want to listen to rand paul, but you want to listen to this clown. he has killed more people than

hitler's, you know, so what can i say? host: that is john in washington state. another related health story, when it comes to monkeypox, the hill reporting that monkeypox virus now has reached 50 states, according to the cdc. wyoming reported a single case of the virus on monday, final state in the country to do so. wyoming department of health said the case was from a male resident in laramie county, and representatives have followed up with the infection individual to deceive other residents have had direct contact with him. wendy and michigan, clinton township, democrats line. caller: hey, pedro. how you doing? all these people are turning on dr. fauci, when he told us to wear masks, get our vaccinations, get our boosters, i was first in line. as soon as he told us i was able to, i had nothing to say.

as soon as they tell me i can get my third booster, i will be there for it. when they say all these other things, i mean, people, get real. i did not have any problems with the virus. i had the pfizer vaccine. no problems at all. host: why do you fundamentally trust dr. fauci, however? caller: because he is a medical person. i mean, he has done all this. when he told us to get our vaccinations and everything, as soon as i was able to, i did. and i have had no problems. i am healthy and everything. so as soon as they tell us we can get these other boosters and stuff -- it does not cost us anything. i am going to get them. i am not going to fool around. i want to stay healthy. host: several people have talked about this gain of function research connected to dr. fauci

and nih. we have had a couple events in the last couple of months that we can share with you. it was on august 3 of this year that the senate looked at this hearing on virus research funding. that took place, and if you want to see that, you can go to our website. on this program, may 3 of this year, we had a reporter talking about the gain of function research, a researcher -- reporter from the federalist, so if you want to look at that and other things dr. fauci has done over the course of his career, not only with covid but with hiv/aids, ebola, zika, you can go to our website and search that. marilyn is next in -- maryland, temple hills, we hear from bob, independent line. caller: i am glad to see him go. a lot of confusion that comes from him.

and as far as taking the vaccine. to me, this is my only point, he is a profiteer off of this whole health episode or event that we had. you know, he just came out early this week to say take another booster. i never took a booster. i just caught covid memorial day weekend. three days down, felt like the flu. that was it. but the other issue is that as an african-american, i feel like we will always live with this, because it was a targeted, cultural message. it is still out there. when they tell you it ain't over, they specifically target my african-american people, and we will never get past covid.

we will always have to wear masks o some kindr of thing connected to covid-19. host: other than that, the general public at large asked to wear masks? caller: when they tell you it ain't over until it is over on urban radio, that is messaging to african-americans. host: why do you believe that? caller: they are not telling the white people it ain't over until it is over on the rock stations. listen, you go to prince georges county and see how many children are made to take the booster and wear a mask. this thing is over. by the way, how does biden catch active at covid, and he was fully boosted? -- catch back to back covid, and he was fully boosted? host: we will go to cliff, in line for democrats.

cliff in virgin islands, hello, democrats line. caller: good morning. how are you, pedro? host: well, thanks. caller: i think dr. fauci is just a victim of social media. i loved c-span, but you guys are social media, as well. you have people calling in who have no idea what they're talking about. you have people calling in making judgments on a doctor who has 35 years of experience. he has devoted his life to what he does. and people call in and are making judgments, they never went to medical school. they have no idea how to judge a doctor. they just make stuff up. they read stuff on the internet, and their calling him a kwak or incompetent or saying he was involved in wuhan, it is crazy. host: do you make judgments

yourself on dr. fauci? caller: no, i have listened to dr. fauci and have respected him as a physician. i wish he was my physician. host: why do you put your trust in him? caller: his position at nih, you do not get into that position by calling into social media or putting photos on facebook. he went through training and practiced medicine for 35 plus years. he writes papers. he has been judged by his peers. when he writes a paper in a study, it has to go to people who know what it is about. it is peer-reviewed. he is getting reviewed by these morons calling in. host: i will stop you there because people can call in to express wide variety of opinions. our call-in feature has been

something we have been doing there since the beginning. i would parse those words on that. let's hear from catherine in los angeles, republican line. caller: david -- good morning, thank you for taking my call. i understand how people heard about dr. fauci during the covid thing, but he's a man whose single existence benefits humanity and will benefit humanity forever. with the commercials about africa for five dollars a month, it is an innovation dr. fauci pioneered during his leadership to keep those kids life, all throughout the world. sars, hiv, this case was a pioneer for all the advances we have. host: innovations such as what? caller: such as covid-19, pedro. a brand-new nova virus. no one knew anything about it. in one year, we gotta vaccine

and multiple forms of treatment. you have cancer, you have aids, 20 years. one year, he nailed it. it affected everybody, and we got it in a year. nobody celebrates that. nobody sits back and says, hey, fauci has done an amazing job, saved millions of people. this guy is awesome, pedro. humanity will benefit from him because of his work. i understand how critical people are of covid-19. host: do you think he has been flawless the whole time, especially during covid? caller: no, no. i am saying we need to celebrate the man's career, talking about his retirement. there have been setbacks with covid. host: covid is what he will be known for most. caller: this is a new. i did not expect him to nail it 100%. there will be bumps in the road, it is science. you test ideas, some fail, you come up with new ideas. some succeed.

you have to expect a couple bumps in the road. a couple mistakes about covid. thank goodness they were not that big. this could have been way worse. it could be on a way different level. overall, big picture, sure, they made mistakes, but who does not? one year, pretty awesome. host: to los angeles -- that was a call from los angeles we take you back to march of 2021, then president trump and dr. fauci did not agree on everything when it came to the fight against covid. it was a press briefing you can still find online peer dr. fauci is asked about president trump's promotion of hydrochloric wind, calling it a game changer in the fight against covid-19. here is dr. fauci's response. [video clip] >> there have been some problems with hydroxychloroquine, used as therapy for people infected with coronavirus. is there any evidence to suggest

that it might be a prophylaxis against covid-19? >> i think the answer is no, and the evidence you're talking about is anecdotal evidence. as the commissioner of the fda and the president mentioned yesterday, we are trying to strike a balance between making something that has a potential of an effect available to the american people. at the same time, we do it under the auspices of the protocol that would give us information to determine if it is truly safe and truly effective. but the information that you are referring to pacific lee is anecdotal, not done in a controlled -- the information you are referring to specifically is anecdotal, not done in a controlled way. >> without saying too much, i am probably more of a fan of that maybe than anybody. i am a big fan. we will see what happens. we all understand that what the doctor said is 100% correct.

but i have seen things that are oppressive. we will see. we are going to know soon. including safety. but when you get to safety, this has been prescribed for many years for people to combat malaria, which was a big problem, and it is very effective, a strong drug. so we will see. >> also effective against sars. >> as i understand -- is that a correct statement? it was fairly effective on sars. >> you have to be careful when you say fairly effective. it was never compared to anything in clinical trial. it was given to individuals who felt maybe it worked. >> that is the point, whenever you do a clinical trial, you do standard of care versus standard of care, plus the agent you are evaluating. that is the reason we showed with ebola why particular interventions work. [video clip] mike -- host: michael and plant city,

florida. i learned to never trust federal employees with my health. i did not do anything he suggested, and i am still alive. this comment says that dr. fauci never understood the ties with covid -- with china during covid and how these might have been detrimental to the american people. you can text us at (202) 748-8003. this is anna in minneapolis, democrats line. caller: good morning. i just want to mention that i do not think that the infection would even be out if it were not for trump. isn't he the one who had that operation warp speed? he demanded it be out. which i took and i believe he took. when it comes to hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin, you do not know what is in there either. we do not know what is in the vaccines.

we do not even know what is in aspirin. host: so dr. fauci's announced retirement, what do you think about his role he served in government with infectious diseases? caller: i believe everything he says because he is a medical doctor. he has been trained. he studied. i don't know medicine. i have got to believe somebody, and i do believe the person who has been trained in that field. host: from mississippi, republican line. go ahead. caller: yes, i am glad dr. fauci is gone because he would say something one minute, where the mask, not wear the mask. in the infancy of covid, everybody did not understand what was going on, but now it is time for people to begin to start living again. dr. fauci is a medical doctor, but he does not know everything. why can't they take the advice of other people, medical people? he does not know everything. he has people who have gotten

the vaccine, double boost to come and they are still getting covid and diane. i -- and are dieting. i had a brother who got the vaccines and he is still getting covid. so why does he have his say? why can't other people tell you there say, and they are not telling the truth about all these vaccines and the side effects, they get taken down. so you need to tell it all. there is a dark side to covid. these people are giving you the vaccines and believing in them, and then some saying leave the trump alone, he has nothing to do with the vaccines. he did not bring covid here, so people need to get real and start living. they are trying to shut things down. one doctor said people are wearing masks, staying six feet apart, and still dead. host: this is the first day of president biden's term as

president of the united states, dr. fauci appointed chief medical officer. he was asked about his work in the previous administration. here's some of his perspective. [video clip] >> if you hold over the previous administration, what has been your experience with this new team? in your view, what would have been different in terms of the trajectory of the outbreak from the beginning if you are with this team? >> i can tell you my impression of what is going on right now, the team, i do not know if i can extrapolate other things, but one thing that is clear as recently as about 15 minutes ago when i was with the president is that one of the things we're going to do is be completely transparent, open, and honest. if things go wrong, not point fingers but to correct them, and to make everything we do be based on science and evidence. there was literally a

conversation i had 15 minutes ago with the president. and he has said that multiple times. >> looking back over the last 10 or 12 months and to now, can you clarify? >> i always said everything on the face, that is why i got in trouble sometimes. host: a call from the democrats line. caller: thank you for taking my call. i was listening to the previous calls. i want to thank dr. fauci and the cdc, pfizer, moderna, for helping us live throughout this pandemic, for guiding us through this pandemic. i think dr. fauci's only mistake was being -- well, let me see, let me put it this way, i was listening to c-span radio app and it sounded like a live

broadcast where dr. fauci was talking to i believe members of congress. as he was talking, when dr. fauci was trying to say, well, if you look here, and if the x axis represents this and the y represents that and you look at this graph and you look at that graph, once i heard that, i said, oh, no, he is making a big mistake, because he is thinking he is talking to medical candidates, medical students. he is not talking to medical students. he is not talking to people that are smart. and there's nothing wrong with me saying that not everybody can become a physician. you have got to take a medical exam in order to go to medical school. you have to pass part one and part two of medical exams to make sure, nationally, that you are accredited with the other people around the united states. it takes an incredible amount of time, effort, money, dedication to become a physician.

once you reach that particular pinnacle of life, then you do realize that when you are looking at analysis, when you are looking at being able to try to figure out exactly how a drug or exactly how a test should be conducted and interpreted, you really just cannot go off one set of data. host: got your point. thank you. frank in michigan, hello, republican line. caller: good morning. i never trusted dr. fauci. the cdc approved a vaccine that was mra vaccine that they never approved that -- they did it first time in history. i called back in january to the health department, should i wear a mask? they said no, it is not going to help you. i get the vaccine, three of

them. dr. fauci said you're protected, not contagious. that was a lie. i finally caught it after three years. went to the hospital, got the antibodies, talked to many doctors there, and they said the vaccine does not work anymore. every doctor there said if you want to take it every four months, you would still catch it. that is the way it is today with this. dr. fauci light from the beginning, lied to president trump, lied to the nation -- dr. fauci lied from the beginning. i beg for therapeutics, anything, at the hospitals, called around here in michigan, and they say they treat it as if you have got copd. think about that, how many people died because they could not get therapeutics? i finally begged to get my antibiotics and finally got rid of it within 10 hours. host: darrell is from st. paul,

virginia, independent line. caller: good morning. yes, first, i have been triple vaccinated, i guess. i finally did get covid. luckily, it was just like an upper respiratory problem. as far as dr. fauci goes, i think he done the best with what they had. i give kudos to him and give kudos to trump, because he really, i think, tried his best to get us on the right track. i do remember, and i saw dr. fauci, might have been on c-span, talking about these masks, do not get them, you are fumbling with them, that is hell you can get contagious -- that is how you can get contagious. i think the old adage of washer hands and stay away from people is the best therapeutic. anyway, i wish him the best. host: one more call, from tommy

in custer, georgia, democrats line. caller: thank you. you can kiss covid yes you can catch covid, but the vaccine keeps you from getting sick and dying. host: finishing up this hour of calls on dr. fauci's retirement. thank you to everybody who participated two guests joining us this morning. first, we will hear from the national school choice awareness punishing chairman andrew campanella to talk host: noah bookbinder with citizens for responsibility & ethics. those conversations coming up on the washington journal. >> all of us together can change america. and make america great again.

as it was under gerald ford. thank you and god bless you. the president that made maga famous, gerald ford. wait, you don't remember associating gerald ford with maga? you are in for a few more surprises. >> i am asking you as i ask all americans. please join me as we take this new path, you and your forebears built this nation now, help us rebuild it and together we will make america great again. thank you very much. >> you can find the weekly on

c-span now are free mobile app or wherever you get your podcast. if you are enjoying book tv sign up for our newsletter signing the q code on the screen. book tv, every sunday on c-span2 or anytime online at motive.org. television for serious readers. it is time to wrap up this season with the c-span shop and summer sale. save 25% on apparel items. there is something for every c-span fan. c-span's end of summer sale now through tuesday. scan the code on the right to start shopping now.

"washington journal," continues. host: andrew campanella is the ceo and chairman of the national school choice awareness foundation. thank you for joining us. guest: thank you so much for having me. host: a little bit about your organization, how does it work and how are you funded? guest: our mission is to raise public awareness of all types of school choice. that includes traditional public schools, public charter schools, public magnet schools, private schools and online learning. the way we do that is through charitable programs. the first is national school choice week which is held every january. we work with 22,000 countries across the country, 59% of them

are public schools. they enroll 53 million children. what they do during school choice week, they hold open houses to let families know that they exist and what they offer. so that families can access school choice options in their communities. the second charitable program is school navigation resources. we develop and promote the nation's largest resources that want to access their resources. people can go online to school choice week.com and get all of these resources in english and spanish. so many families want practical, unbiased information. we are funded by private foundations, and individuals. host: when it comes to school

choice, when someone says that term they think school choice means public school versus everything else. is that something that you are seeing? guest: school choice is every option that a parent has or wants to have for their daughter or son. that includes district schools that people can access through open enrollment plans. tuition free public charter schools, that includes magnet schools that are theme based focused on map, and the performing arts. it includes online public schools which are available half of states. private school choice programs and it includes homeschooling. the freedom to choose to educate their kids at the home. we are talking about the broadest spectrum of options and

we are not favoring any one type of option over another. host: in 13 states, parents can select any public school, in 18 states, they are forced to participate in open enrollment, how has that changed over the years? guest: we have seen incredible changes in access to different types of schools over the past 30, 35 years. the modern day school choice movement began in 1990 in milwaukee, wisconsin. a small group of black parents worked together with democratic and republican lawmakers to create a program that would allow low-income families to access private schools for their kids who otherwise would not be able to afford those programs. in minnesota, in 19 92, public school teachers rallied with

lawmakers created a public charter school. from there, we have seen an incredible growth in school choice options. more school districts are allowing open enrollment programs. it's the opportunity for a mom or dad to choose another traditional public school that might be outside their zone or district. in 13 states, there is unrestricted open enrollment. a parent can choose any public school within that state which is incredibly exciting. we have seen the growth in charter schools. we have seen more than half of u.s. states create private school choice programs. i talk about those programs, they allow families to tap into tuition assistance to afford private education for their kids. more than half of u.s. states

have online public schools that are tuition free providing students with the technology in order to access these programs. we have seen homeschooling expand with states allowing more opportunities for homeschoolers such as the ability to participate in sports. host: our guest is with us until 8:45, we divided the lines differently parents (202) 748-8000, if you are an educator (202) 748-8001 in online for others (202) 748-8003 you can also text us. i know public schools are a part of this. if you invite all of these avenue for kids to go elsewhere do you dilute the power of a public school elsewhere? guest: no, not at all. if you really expand school

choice and you expanded across the board and make sure that there are a variety of option for families you will see an increase in support for public education. when we talked to parents and asked them what types of schools would you choose for your kids the plurality would choose a school in their district but outside of their zone. when you give them more public-sector options it will lead to a higher base of funding. host: you talked about private schools, 30 states are offering scholarships to private schools. 21 states offering scholarship programs, one state offering a deduction program. why should funds be applied in

this manner particularly if you have the ability to send your kid to private school in the first place? guest: you may have the ability to, do you have the resources in the access to those schools? really, having the ability to do something and be able to do something are completely different. we don't want to create a system where lower income families are denied the opportunity to choose education environments that meet their children's needs that these parents have determined are in the best interest of their kids and will help advance their kids lives simply because those parents don't make enough money to afford private school tuition. these programs, the ones that you referred to, once a real research, these programs allow families to be able to make

those choices if they want to. host: arizona recently put into law an avenue for parents a new resource for parents. guest: they passed the education savings program. they can tap into the savings allocation for that student. they can get 90% of what the state would allocate to that student's education. they have to sign a contract with the state saying that they will unroll their child from the public education system. they can then use the funds which are about $7,000 to choose from a menu of different options.

they can pay for private school tuition. they can pay for qualifying online classes for their students. they can pay for resources to develop a customized education system which homeschooling families do. this program was passed recently and enacted several days ago. if you go on the arizona education website you can see what families can do with those funds. there are some limits. they can't spend that money for anything they want, there are specific things improve by the state. host: the editors of the arizona republic say that it is troubling they did not oppose the same standards on private schools as is required on district charter schools. private schools are not mandated

to make testing data available or report learning gaps. lawmakers will need to see if esa's will receive any semblance of public trust. guest: they all have different rules and regulations students can accept scholarships, need to take state tests. these are decisions that are left up to legislatures. they are left up to lawmakers. we are not involved in any legislating advocacy. ultimately, it is up to a parent whether or not the school is working for her or his children. host: andrew campanella of the citizens for responsibility & ethics.

colorado springs, colorado a parent is on the line. caller: good morning andrew. for families who don't have education options that they feel that they need for their student, how can they advocate for more options, what is your advice for pushing for more educational opportunities for their children? guest: i encourage all families to check out the options that may be available in their state. a lot of families that we talked to don't realize how many options are actually available. see what is out there, our website has a lot of information that helps you navigate the process. the second thing i would say is, if parents want more options they should have their voices heard and they should explain why and they should tell their

personal stories about why they want school choice and why they need more options. how their children's lives would benefit if they had additional options. the powerful testimonies of individual parents and families about why they want school choice are what created this movement in the first place. host: she called from colorado springs, do you think a place like that would have options? guest: colorado recently expanded transportation options and transportation funding for students to attend public charter schools. that is something other states can look to as a model. we need to make sure that people can actually get to the schools. that is something our team is working on researching and analyzing. they have a thriving public school charter sector.

they have a variety of tuition free online schools. they don't have a private school choice program. host: a retired educator from vincent, ohio. caroline in ohio. caller: hello? can you hear me? hello? i just have a comment. i was born and raised in columbus, ohio. i went to columbus public schools and i was part of the school district that had their strike in 1975. i loved public school back then

and i loved education while i did it. i want to admit that i have done a 180. i think people should have a choice. i worked with differently abled students and i could see where they would benefit from other types of school systems. i also have had friends send me information about columbus public schools in the videos that i am seeing of water gushing through the ceilings breaks my heart. all of that has helped me to decide that yes, we need more choices. i still want to support the teachers in columbus, ohio that are on strike. i think the teachers of columbus, ohio, for that. host: mr. campanella.

guest: what you described, your experience and education and your support for school choice is what i hear from around the country. they support public education because they realize that students are not one-size-fits-all. one student who lives in the same street may be better served in a charter school or on line school. that does not mean there is anything wrong with the public school. that does not mean there is anything wrong with the kid. it just means the student is better served in their interests, talents and challenges are better addressed in the school that their parent has chosen for them.

you talked about conditions in schools and i want to point out that school choice is a solution to fixing conditions in a public school that needs to be fixed. we do need to make sure that all schools in this country regardless of type are well maintained, and provide a healthy and safe atmosphere for students. host: you probably heard this argument from twitter, not one tax dollar should be sent to religious schools. we are a secular society. we sent our daughter to a catholic school but we paid for it. how do you respond to that argument? guest: look at the discussion we are having about student loan forgiveness. they have never said anything about whether or not the student who got a loan to attend a private or religious college would not be eligible for it. i have never heard anyone argue

that a pell grant for a student to attend a religious university should not be offered. we cannot distinguish between right and wrong types of schools. those are decisions that parents need to make based on their own children and their own values. if we are going to have one standard for higher education, where families and kids can choose any school that works for them. but a different standard for k-12, that's wrong. host: but isn't that a different argument. that is state dollars. are those two different arguments? guest: no i am talking about loans that are sponsored by the federal government. we spin the of dollars a year on

community colleges in state run colleges and institutions and we also spend money to provide government-sponsored loans as well as grants for students to attend private colleges and universities. host: but you are talking tax dollars that would become a voucher to a private school? guest: when you look at a voucher for private school in a pell grant they are almost identical. caller: you might have already answered this question. i just want to ask, i am for school choice. can you provide some data or statistics on how school choice or charter schools have helped low income kids are kids and bad areas.

i am from the baltimore area. or provide some information on how when these kids go to charter schools or they are provided school choice they get a better education in their lives turn out better? thank you. guest: the reason we do this work is because we want to see students have every opportunity to succeed. what we know based on research is that when parents actively choose schools and learning environments for their kids, students succeed in school at higher rates than when parents don't actively choose their schools. it doesn't matter what type of school they choose, just the act of going through the process and making the decision is what matters. what we see is, if a parent participates in open enrollment or a public charter school or

send their kid to a private school or homeschooling, the fact that they exercise their options leads to higher student graduation rates, higher college exception rates, higher lifetime earnings and all the things we want out of education. host: we saw students staying home during the covid years. how do you think that changed the school choice debate? guest: for the first time ever in history every parent in this country was intently focused on their kids education all at the same time and they had to make decisions all at the same time about their kids education. whether or not they will participate in remote learning. whether or not they could participate in remote learning.

they got to see exactly what their kids were learning in the classroom. they had this heightened level of awareness about what was going on in schools that every family thought about at the same time. education is one of the most discussed topics in our popular culture right now. number two, we saw parents who were forced to make decisions saying that they want more options. they want to never be in a position where they felt stuck again. sending their child to a school where they had policies they didn't agree with. parents have a lot of opinions on education right now because they were all intently focused on it during the pandemic.

there has been a ton of learning loss as a result of the pandemic that needs to be addressed. this learning loss has had black and hispanic students the worst. 4-5 months of learning loss. that is significant. host: earl from detroit, michigan. caller: the previous caller was asking a rhetorical question he already knew the answer to. communities that were underserved. my personal experience when my kids were of school-age with school choice, a lot of the public schools in the area had closed. a lot of catholic schools closed down to because of the catholic

church scandal. the only choice i had was to send my kid to charter schools. i looked at charter schools as a hussle. the quality of the teachers within those schools, they didn't even have to be state certified. a lot of the kids that were in the schools, they were suburban young white kids. they did not know anything about black culture. they could not really associate with the kids. some of those teachers were crying in classrooms because they could not deal with black students.

my son was saying the teacher was crying in front of the classroom. at the end of the day, that program where you go into an underserved community to get your college tuition paid off. a lot of those teachers were going to charter schools to get there college loans paid off. host: got to caller, thank you very much. guest: i am sorry for your experience. i'm sorry you didn't have more choices. every student in every family needs to be treated with dignity and respect and be truly accepted in a classroom. i am sorry you had that experience. i know many other families that have had positive experience with charter schools. but every parents story as their

own. host: the supreme court had a case involving the schools in maine. guest: carson v maine is a ruling in relation to a private school choice program in the state of maine. in maine, there are some areas where there are no public schools serving specific grade levels. what the state has done is provide families living in those areas without schools provide students with scholarships to attend private schools.

how can the state make a restriction on this? the supreme court said if you have a private school choice program and you will give families scholarships you cannot tell families that they cannot choose faith-based schools. you can't force them to choose faith-based schools. you have to give them the widest variety of options available. the immediate impact is limited to states that have similar programs and those states are maine, vermont. families in maine are still in a bit of uncertainty because the state needs to promulgate regulations to let these

families make these choices that the supreme court said they could make. we are doing research on that so that families can figure this out. a lot of them are still confused about how this decision will benefit them. you asked about broader implications. in the future, what this says is that when the state designs its school choice program it cannot exclude religious schools. it is important not to expand the true meaning beyond what they said. host: andrew campanella with national school choice awareness foundation. let's hear from carrie from wisconsin. carrie and wisconsin. caller: an earlier collar, --

hello? an earlier caller already asked my question which was as their data that suggest that going to going to charter school gives you a better education because i know there are dismal results from public schools as far as rankings in the world. it is not so much the school but parental involvement. it seems a shame to me that in all these discussion on education we are not allowed to bring that up anymore. my father, before he retired worked in the milwaukee public

school system all his life. every year he would get in trouble with the administration because he flunked too many children. he was a math teacher, they can't add two plus two. that is just dooming children to failure. when you pass them along and they are not prepared. during the pandemic, our children have gotten further behind in areas like math and science. in other school choices bes ides public schools, children are being passed along when they are not ready to be passed along. host: we got your question carrie, thank you. guest: let me clarify about what i said about the success of school choice programs.

the data does show that regardless of what type of school a parent chooses for their daughter or son, students are likely to do better when parents are empowered to choose their school. but you have to have the school choice programs and you have to empower families to be involved at the beginning of the child's education by choosing their school, i'm making a good decision for their child based on their own child's needs and challenges. for the family to truly be empowered to choose the environment and truly be involved in their kids education. as far as social promotion is concerned, where schools are encouraging teachers to past students who would otherwise be failing. that is a very real problem and it is a real problem across the board. i don't have specific data to share with you but i understand what you are talking about and i know teachers do as well.

no teacher wants to be in a position where they are promoting a student who they know who has not really grasped or understood the subject matter. no teacher wants to hold a student back because they understand it has implications beyond that child's learning. schools need to address it on the school to school basis. host: there is a journalistic outfit called education next the did a survey, they asked a question about supporting or opposing homeschooling. there was strong support from the public. how do you think homeschooling has changed since the inception? guest: homeschooling is the original school choice. it's what people did before there were brick-and-mortar schools. homeschooling has grown ever since. even with the advent of more

school options. how it is changed is that there are more supports for homeschooling families and ever before. if you are parent who wants to homeschool their kids there are a lot of cooperatives out there whether in person or online that will help you go through the process and explain exactly what you need to do to opt your child out of their existing school or file the appropriate paperwork with the state to start the process. there are a lot of free online courses that parents can tap into. if they are confident in teaching their kids history, english or they are concerned about physics they can tap into free courses that can help them teach physics. there are a lot more supports out there than ever before and homeschooling is growing each year by 3%. host: how would you respond to a question about the quality of

that kind of education versus a charter school, private school or whatever? guest: you need to look at the data, the situation and you can see that with homeschooling families they actually have increased college acceptance rates. increased scores on sats and other metrics that are objective. host: michael is joining us from california. caller: good morning pedro, i would love your opinion on betsy devos. when the teachers went on strike, she did nothing to fight for those teachers while we pay professional athletes tens of millions of dollars and teachers get 50 grand a year.

second question is, did you go to public school? thank you sir. guest: thank you for your question. i went to public school from kindergarten to 12th grade. i had a great experience and i value what i learned from my public education every single day. the highest percentage of schools that we work with and participate in that program are traditional public schools. we have relationships with some of the nations largest public school districts. i consider myself a strong supporter of public schools. what you see about people on the news and what you read about in the newspaper is not always reflective of their values. betsy devos has always stood up for school choice. host: what do you think school

face as they deal with issues of covid. they have received money from the federal government to deal with covid, what are they face? guest: it is an ongoing challenge that they are dealing with. when there aren't enough school drivers to take them to school. they feel this when their kids get covid and have to stay home from school for a. of time. we can move on as a country broadly from the dangerous threat that existed beginning of the pandemic but it will still cause disruptions. we will have to figure it out and make sure that students are healthy and safe and also recognize that we can't sweep learning loss under the rug because we don't want a whole

generation of students to graduate from high school without the requisite skills that they need. host: from wisconsin we will hear from the parent. caller: good morning mr. campanella. i really appreciate your diligence with important questions of the day. i was on a school board for 15 years and my children both went to public schools. i went to private school for four years and then i went to public school for the rest of my career. my question is, in my view as a school board member.

funding for public education is not a zero-sum game. when you take funds away, and i am familiar with the funding system in wisconsin for public schools and you give it to other entities whether it be parents or charter schools or distance-learning situations, it can potentially take away from the ability of public schools to educate their students. in wisconsin, public schools must take anyone in the district. they can't not take someone and that is not the case for charter or private schools. my question to you is, how do you think that will affect in the long run, in a country that has had free public education almost from its inception, the socialization of children into the society and thank you. i will listen for my answer. guest: i want to thank you for

your service on the school board. i know it is not easy to serve on a school board from the folks i know who have served on such boards. thank you for your commitment to public education. you said that funding is not a zero-sum game and i agree with you. but you then said that it kind of is a zero-sum game and that if a dollar is available it should go to a public school or it would go somewhere else. what i would say is, let's fully fund all schools to make sure that they can serve the students in those schools based on the schools parents have chosen for their schools. i encourage folks to think about this in the context of their individual communities.

you likely have a variety of different parks. maybe you have a park where you can hike, maybe you of a park where you can for shack. people don't go to city council meetings that the skate park is taking away from the hiking part. you should have a variety of educational options that should be available to all students. one school may be good for one student but it might not be a good fit for the other student. host: you are asked about betsy devos, what do you think about the biden administration stance? guest: i think that school choice is a state issue. when we look at the history of school choice and the success that states have made an expanding options for families, what we see is that successful

and replicable school choice programs always come from state-level actions. whether it is open enrollment programs that allow people to choose public schools. whether it is theme based magnet schools in different homeschooling access laws. all of these programs and policies originated in states and have been expanded in other states. these are the incubators of education policy and i think that is where the decision-making should go. host: we have shauna in maryland. caller: thank you so much for taking my call. i just have one question, just about ensuring that schools are

up to standard of the national level. is there anything being done federally to ensure that? i have gone to many kinds of schools. i grew up in wisconsin. i was educated there. i got my undergraduate degree there. one thing i saw a lot was thick kids were doing really well k -12. they got to college were not ready at all. is there anything being done to ensure that her children are receiving the same standard of education. the same quality of schooling? guest: you asked a really good question and that is what is the federal government doing to make sure that the money spent on education is producing good outcomes for students? the federal government's role in education is limited. it's limited to the amounts of

money and gifts to the states. what is done over the years is that it is tried to put restraints on that money and less they meet certain benchmarks. every state has submitted and approved the plan, a contract that says in exchange for receiving federal dollars, states must meet certain benchmarks to advance certain goals. that is where there is some level of federal involvement. but most standards are set at a state level. instruction and curriculum is set at the state and school level. most of the decision with the

exception of federal dollars are state-level decisions. host: this is andrew campanella with the national school choice awareness foundation. thank you for your time today. guest: thanks for having me, i appreciate it. host: we will do open forum until 9:15. it is (202) 748-8001 for republicans, (202) 748-8000 for democrats and (202) 748-8002 for independents. >> 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. our web resource page to watch

the latest hearings, and subsequent investigation since january 6, 2021. we will have reactions from members of congress as well as journalists, authors talking about the investigation. go to c-span.org/january 6 for a fast and easy way to watch when you cannot see it live. c-span brings you an unfiltered view of government. our newsletter "word for word." scan the qr code at the right bottom to sign up for this email and stay up-to-date on everything happening in washington each day. subscribe today using the qr code or visit c-span.org using the word connect to subscribe any time.

as well as industry news and trends through insider interviews. you can find about books on c-span now are free mobile apps or wherever you get your podcasts. "washington journal," continues. host: this is open forum. if you would like to comment on something you have seen on this program. you can text us as well at (202) 748-8003. new york and florida are holding primaries today. let's talk about florida first. they highlight that governor desantis is a possible 2024 presidential candidate. charlie crist is also a leading

candidate. when you take a look at new york, several reasons to watch. two members of congress challenging each other representative jerrold nadler and carolyn maloney. a court order redrawing of the congressional district line combining the east and west sides of manhattan ensures that one of them will not be returning to congress. mr. nadler is a fixture in the upper west side is running as a liberal lawmaker. ms. maloney who has long represented the eastside district is a chair of the house committee on oversight. she may gender a central part of her pitch.

those are two states playing out with primaries today. look for those results coming in tomorrow. in houston, texas. on the democrats line. go ahead. caller: thank you for taking my call. i would like to follow-up on what i heard about the education program. i agree with the speaker not only must we have full funding for all of our schools and good pay for teachers but we have to think about the home environment for the students. we have students that do not have adequate nutrition. they don't have adequate home security.

we have children on the breakfast, lunch program. they are looking for supper and what they do on the weekend? how can a child go to school if they are hungry. how are they going to learn? how will they learn if they're hungry and they are not adequately nourished? these are things that we must as a society care about and address and succeed in overcoming. we must do it. i will go back to these old public service announcement for many years ago, a mind is a terrible thing to waste. host: this is usa today saying that democrats defending their

majority. marco rubio is going up against val demings. rubio c is considered a safe contest. political forecasters have shown that val demings is picking up some speed with her either tying with rubio or leading. they show the congresswoman ahead. that is something to watch out for. if you want to make primaries part of your discussion. you are welcome to do that. republicans (202) 748-8001, democrats (202) 748-8000, and independents (202) 748-8003. caller: it is open forum, i was

watching yesterday when our brave leader mccarthy was talking about whether or not we were better off now or two years ago when he was talking about gas prices. i think it is worth keeping a perspective, two years ago we had mobile refrigerated morgues trucks. i think in a simple way, we are much better off than we were two years ago. host: when it comes to former president trump he is calling for someone to oversee the process of overlooking the papers. this is kevin mccoy writing for usa today, the government handling of the search warrant raises fundamental constitutional concerns. it goes on to say that appointment of a special master

by the court is needed to preserve the sanctity of executive communications and other privileged material. we will watch for that to play out today. it takes a look at the number of documents taken by president trump and the number that were classified, 300 documents now. the government has recovered more than 300 documents with classified markings for president trump since he left office. that first batch of documents that was returned in january, another set provided by president trump's aids in june. this is from brenda in california on the democrats line. caller: good morning. yes, i wanted to talk about some corruption in the democratic party in the area of san

francisco. there is a woman running for district attorney named jenkins. she is a crook. everybody knows it. she is running against a well-known political family member. i really think there is something really wrong in politics when people can knowingly do all of this stuff. everybody knows it. and these people still continue to run and they still keep getting supported by prominent democrats. things are not well in san francisco right now. host: brian from michigan on the independent line. caller: can you hear me? host: yes, go ahead.

caller: hello, can you hear me. oh, ok. i'm going, can you hear me? host: you have to turn off the television. caller: it's muted. host: go ahead caller. caller: anyway, since 9/11 we have to realize that we lost some of our rights through the fourth amendment. we need to revisit the patriot act. our so-called intelligence agency has basically been weaponized. that's what you have going on here. i don't see how we are not

connecting those dots. since 9/11, we got panicked, we got scared. we allowed our emotions to take over. we gave up some of our rights. now here we are 20 years later and we wonder why we have all of this corruption. we have corruption at the department of justice and fbi. we have to take 5% off the top of those departments and replace them with fine people. it is because of the patriot act. i blame this on former president bush. right now, that is the problem. the patriot act needs to be rescinded. host: the business part of the wall street journal takes a look at the plans to be cut at the ford plant. they are cutting 3000 jobs.

mostly targets employees in u.s., canada and india. the cuts were in unexpected, part of the broader restructuring of the focus on electric vehicles. kitty, from michigan. caller: i am calling about school reform. it is hard for me to listen to it because we had what people wanted. i worked for headstart for 20 years. they look at the whole child. does that child have lead

poisoning? do they have cavities, do they need dental work? and they also involve the families. there is a huge component of headstart of leading the parent to the teacher in the classroom. it is all there and instead of reinventing the wheel i wish they could use those performance standards from headstart and put it in the public schools. i also feel really strongly about not having to choose a school for your child. it is very hard for parents to figure all this out. when my daughter went to school, she had a good school to go to. my poor daughter had to go through so much to get her kids in the right school.

i think all school should be good and you shouldn't have to think about. host: let's hear from bill in florida on the republican line. caller: i think ron desantis is doing a great job with the schools. parents are able to see what their kids are being taught. personally, i don't have any kids but if i did, i would homeschool them. they are being taught all these liberal ideas that are way out of line. for us to straighten out this country, we have to abolish all the special interest groups that are paying these congressmen to vote certain ways and we need term limitations. two terms first senator, to terms for president. this way we don't have career politicians and their all their greed. how does a politician earned

174,000 a year and they are a multimillionaire? it is totally out of control. those are just my thoughts. host: two events to tell you about here. >> they will take a look at the upcoming midterm elections and you can see that at 11:00 on c-span. as well as the website and later on today, on 3:00 this afternoon, the united nation's discussion on the ukrainian powerplant. they came under russian control so -- we can see that on the main channel and watch it on the app and watch it on the website. glenn on our line in arkansas. guest: it took years -- they had

the information to develop the vaccine for this in yes -- less than a year. you shouldn't be going to prison for murder. he was part of creating what we have. he gave information stood up pharmacy and where else did they get it? he is the one that had the information they needed to do it. host: darkly -- dr. fauci addressing. to relate to him and covid. >> having been the target of these specific and different attacks, you have insights on how to protect public officials

like yourself and be more rational about this? >> i wish i did have a positive answer for you, but i don't. you and i are talking about public health issues right now, but what has spilled over and in many respects impeded a proper response to a public health challenge, is something that we have seen goes well beyond public health. it is a distortion of reality. a world where untruths have become normalized. how we can see something in front of our eyes and tonight it is happening. that is the environment we are living in. you can look at january 6 on tv and some people don't believe it happened. how can that be? it is spilling over in denying

all the call principles -- public health principles. i don't have an answer. i have always been someone who has been constantly -- consciously optimistic and that we can extract the good out of people and there are possibilities that we will see the better angels in our soap -- society prevail but what is going on with the distortion of reality is troublesome. it leads into fearing what the proper approach to a public health channel -- challenge. host: a cvs reporting -- cbs reporter saying -- and alliance and led an attack on the capital but will reference communications and interactions between defendants and certain members of the probable is. there is a link on his twitter feed.

the washington post reported that white house officials have replied discussions -- under making under $25,000 a year but awaiting a call from president biden. those are things to watch out for. democrats line. guest: i have a few things i don't understand. president trump is hollering, election flawed -- fraud but no one investigated mark meadows is -- who is registered to vote in three states and voted in two. i agree that we need to get businesses out of politics so that we can get back to the people and not to the business and people need to research. every 100 years, there is a covid virus.

trump through the book away and ignore it but every 100 years, people need to read and research and stop listening to other people so they can know what is going on. host: when you say every one hundred years, where did you get that fact? >> i read that in history and the internet because they did the research. i didn't he just one article, i read three. host: who is the day --they? guest: there is one -- it is a science webpage and then there is another one. every 100 years, there is a virus. host: ok. let's hear from eric in

michigan. guest: give warning to all your listeners -- good morning to all your listeners. people keep talking about education reform and the sad reality is it is constantly something that is ignored. we have a 21% illiteracy rate. i live in be detroit area -- the detroit area. only 8% of third graders were proficient enough to move on to the fourth grade at -- and at my event this past weekend, there are -- the media chose to focus on a current event on the city in detroit so you can keep complaining about the problem with literacy when the media is

not talking about it. 92% of people are not proficient and that is an embarrassment. we can't keep calling ourselves the greatest country in the world when we have a system when it comes to education. i am all for school choice and people should be allowed to take public money if their child is talented. you can put them in a for-profit school. that should be a choice for a parent because i use the isla -- analogy from mlk. you can't ask a boot list man -- bootless man to pull himself by the bootstraps. we have to do something. the crisis is real. host: i got your point.

but hear from mary in wisconsin -- let's hear from mary in wisconsin. guest: all the articles i read about the mar-a-lago search, becky calling it trump's residence. in 1994, trump had the designation of mar-a-lago from a -- business related expense. he can't to live there for more than 36 -- three consecutive weeks at a time. this is not a residence but it is a business and there is no reason why they can't search a business. this doesn't apply to the fourth amendment. host: where did you get the idea that he could only live there three weeks at a time?

guest: go to wikipedia and look at the information about mar-a-lago and read through the different categories within the wikipedia site and part of the agreement was the taxpayers of palm beach is that he cannot live -- because it is a club, he can't live there. host: why is it that you trust wikipedia? guest: i heard this were a number of years. it has been reported repeatedly. someone seeks to keep forgetting it. -- seems to keep forgetting it. it is not a residence but a private club. host: you made that point so let's hear from bill, independent line. guest: i wanted to make a few comments concerning the ongoing problems that the doj and the

fbi have been weaponized by the democratic party. there to use your common sense and see that trump -- they did not want trump to be in office because he was not a washington insider and not say life -- a lifelong politician and see what they did to him all four years in his presidency. and then, it said that he is now being trying to -- before the next election, they are trying to establish him as someone who is politically inept because they don't want him in washington. host: who is the they? when you say they don't want him in washington? guest: the democratic establishment.

host: how does that relate to the current justice department? guest: you can see what they did to hillary clinton and you can see what they did to -- all along during the four years that job is being persecuted -- prop is being persecuted and it was proven to be -- trump is being persecuted and it was proven to be false and they are trying to get him out again. not that i am totally supportive of trump but you can use your common sense to see that this is nothing but a ploy by the democratic party and the establishment in washington. host: brandon, lancaster, california. republican line. guest: good morning. c-span, why don't you do the

thing on the secondary white house that barack obama and joe biden set up. what you can see, through the secondary white house, they controlled the fbi which is coney and mueller. the corruption is widespread. why didn't they investigate that? they can investigate treason forever. the secondary white house that i watched on c-span -- host: what do you mean? guest: hey, the secondary white house, don't you remember? it was set up because of obamacare, remember that? right down the street from the white house after the american people won. host: how does that relate to current day issues? guest: to control us.

you think second -- setting up a secondary white house is a peaceful transition of power? he did eight years. host: let's hear from backs. --max. guest: i am 82 years old and-washington -- i have been watching television like everyone else. i watch the vietnam and iraq war and when i watch it on tv, the cities are destroyed and i wonder what these people get their food and where they get their money? everything is a wreck and for people in america, to indicate that they want a civil war, people want to go to football or basketball games. you would not be able to go get gas.

if this country had a civil war, it would be destroyed so fast. a civil war would never solve any problem in the country. host: that is max in michigan finishing off this half-hour of phone. thank you for participating. we will continue on with discussions about senior information. noah bookbinder joining us for the discussion when washington journal continues. ♪ >> over the past few months, the january 6 committee has conducted hearings revealing the findings from their investigation. watched c-span as we look back at the eight hearings featuring

undisclosed evidence -- evidence, depositions, and witness testimony into the attack of the u.s. capitol. cassidy hutchinson, former senior aide to former white house chief of staff mark meadows appears before the committee. she shares her testimony, including an altercation. watch tonight on c-span or anytime on demand at c-span.org. >> live, sunday, september 4 on in-depth, stephen hayward will be our guest to talk about leadership, ronald reagan's political career and the american conservative movement. he is the author of several books including two volumes of the age of reagan series. about the stop -- scholars who

change the course of conservative politics. joined -- join the conversation with your comments and texts and tweets. on c-span two. >> listening to programs on c-span through c-span radio got easier. tell your smart speaker play c-span radio and listen to washington journal, important congressional hearings and -- at -- and catch washington today for a report on stories of the day. so your smart speaker play c-span radio -- tell your smart speaker play c-span review. >> "washington journal" continues. host: this is noah bookbinder.

thanks for joining us. guest: happy to be here. room is an organization that tries to promote ethics in government to reduce the influence of money in politics and we really focus on trying to preserve emergency in a government that works for the american people. host: how are you funded? guest: we are funded by individual donors and foundations. private donors of a wide variety. host: there is a lot of discussions about the information from mar-a-lago and the release of the information of the affidavit to the public. where do you stand on how much information should come up? guest: i look at this both asked -- my current position as -- an crew and a former prosecutor.

i have experience with educating -- executing search warrant. there have been a lot of information made public about the search. when there is a search, usually everything about it is kept secret -- secret. this is an extraordinary case. there has never been a search of a former president of the united states before. the department of justice petitioned and released the search warrant and the inventory of what they obtained. we are in a place where many things have been made public and the judge is making -- doing a good job of balancing the extraordinary nature of this entity interest in a significant public information about why this happened with the interests

of the department of justice in preserving an ongoing criminal and for -- investigation. if you left everything you have, it makes it hard to do interviews and keep on investigating the case. host: because of your background, what does an affidavit do particularly when it comes with -- two mar-a-lago? guest: it is from a lead agent and it will set out the evidence that the government has obtained so far. it will say we are investigating these offenses and we talked to these people. here is what we obtained. we have reason to believe these offenses may have been committed and is evidence -- this evidence exists in this location but it maintains things like the identity of people who have been

spoken to and what they said and that can do a number of things. it can allow other potential witnesses to know everything up -- that is out there and both their stories --mold their stories. we have seen threats to fbi agents and offices and people at the department of justice. we saw an armed person show up at the rpr office in cincinnati so the idea that you might put out the names of witnesses, you can put people in danger. there is a lot in that affidavit that is resilient as to what the reason was for the search but there is a lot -- that will cause pop -- that would cause problems if it were made public. host: we heard a judge saying if

it wasn't released, it will be highly regarded. is that unusual? guest: what we have seen what fee search -- with the search warrant itself and the inventory released, it is unusual. for the affidavit to be released, it is more unusual. that said, in situations where courts released documents that are in public interest related to ongoing investigations, it is common to heavily redacted them. at my organization, we are trying to get information about investigations and we have been fighting with the justice department about a memorandum that attorney general barr relied on when he said the justice department what it charged donald trump with obstruction -- would not charge

donald trump with objection. -- obstruction. getting redacted information about investigations is not uncommon. in this context though, we are in uncharted territory. host: if you want to ask questions about the presidential records in the search, (202) 748-8001 for republicans, (202) 748-8000 or democrats, (202) 748-8002 or independents. can a president automatically the client -- declassify information? guest: it is not a magic wand. you can't say everything i got is declassified. there is a process where the

president can decide documents can be declassified and officials change the marking to declassified. there is something to that but it is not -- this idea that a president can have a blanket order that everything i touch is declassified, that is not how it works in my experience. it is not clear that a court would give that a lot of deference. host: how complicated the process is it? guest: i am not a national quote -- national security -- classification is not my area of expertise but it is not a complicated process but it has to go through certain steps and that is the one of the things that the national purity committee relies on -- security committee relies on.

if you don't have that, it allows people to say that thing is classified is not classified and it becomes meaningless. in order to protect that information, that has to be some order to it. host: as of this morning, former president trump asking for a special pastor to oversee the process. any clarity on what this person could do? guest: in certain kinds of cases, it is not uncommon for a court to say, there is some material that could be problematic for prosecutors or the other side of the case to seat so we will bring someone from the outside to look at everything and make a judgment on who what you can see -- on what you can see. that happens in some frequency

in cases where the attorney-client privilege is an issue. there is documents that indicates what someone told their lawyer and prosecutes -- and the prosecutor can look at that and you cannot un-see it. it isn't clear if it is acting -- if it is at think that has been done in this context. former president trump is claiming executive privilege and it is not clear that this has been used in that context and there is no basis if the president can uses here. --use this here. the sense that i have gotten is there is not a clear basis on meeting a special master but having a special master goes through bunch of documents -- it

is something that does happen and it is used. i haven't seen a lot to suggest it is necessary. host: you have said that there has been information put out already from what was taken from mar-a-lago. from everything you have seen what is -- what is sure -- what is your concern about everything. guest: my level of concern is high. it is really important that records of a presidency be maintained in a way that is available to the american people. we need to know what happened and why decisions were made. the requirements under the law called the presidential records act that say that the records of the presidency needs a golf to

the national archives and when reporting came out last year -- earlier this year, that presidential records may have been destroyed on the way out and in that january 6 committee, there were doctrines that were ripped up and there was information that these records want to mar-a-lago and we wrote to the national archives and department of justice sank you have to investigate. that is cause for concern. when you get -- there is classified information sitting in a basement of a public -- a private club, that is concerning. the top-secret information and you have secure information, that is very sensitive information. even people with top secret

clearance are not printed -- permitted to see and it could be dangerous if that is publicly -- the idea that it was there in mar-a-lago and it was not controlled the way it was supposed to be an efforts to get information back and donald trump and others continued to keep it there suggests a volatile situation, not to mention the records could be connected to other problematic conduct. even the facts that they are there, is very concerning. host: richard calling from canada on the republican line. guest: -- caller: i know it is on twitter that mr. buchbinder -- 14 fbi whistleblowers went to

-- how we don't see noah bookbinder tweeting about that, if those 14 fbi whistleblowers went about -- came out against the trunk, he would be ascetic. how come he stopped calling on the 14 fbi whistleblowers -- host: thanks for the call. i went to establish -- we are a nonpartisan organization and in my experience and in my organization's experience, donald trump and his presidency exhibited a level of corruption and contempt for a system of democracy that we had not seen in previously -- previous

administrations. we have folks on our board core democrats and republicans and we have gone after. from democrats and republicans and we don't go at things at a partisan angle. there is a lot to be concerned about with donald we had really pushed for more transparency in law enforcement agencies. we have been very concerned about text disappearing from service. we have been pretty hard over the years on the fbi and the department of justice. there have been at times, very valid criticism. i do not think the -- that impacts one way or the other, the fact that there is a lot to be concerned about with donald trump's conduct throughout his

presidency but certainly around the efforts to overturn a fair and free election and the events surrounding january 6. host: from ohio, democrat line. larry, you are next step. caller: i wanted to make a comment. what i want to say is the president controls everyone's security clearance. if he has a problem with democrats, republicans, independents, he should just take the -- it would solve the whole problem. guest: you are right that under the law, ultimately, security clearances under the control of the president. i think there as with law enforcement, national security and security clearance is something that should never be used politically and you never want to do anything that creates the appearance that it is being

used politically. i think presidents have tended to be very careful about not going around and taking security clearance away from large numbers of the. it is something you need to be careful with. ultimately, if it comes out the individual officials or employees are a risk to national security, that kind of action is appropriate. it is something that you want to treat in careful and considered way. host: have other presidents taken documents from the white house to their personal location? guest: certainly not on this kind of scale. i know there have been incidents of individual documents that may have made their way. there was a lot of talk in the aftermath of the search about president biden -- president obama taking millions of documents to chicago. that was different entirely. what happened is under the control of the national

archives, who were in charge in millions of documents, millions were moved to the obama presidential library. that was done in accordance with the law and how the law mandates this kind of thing be done. it was done under the supervision of the national archive, just the way president bush and others before them have done. it is not a partisan thing. this idea of boxes of documents, hundreds of highly classified documents going to a presidential resident, we have never seen anything like this. host: do you think the fbi handled the gaining of this material in the proper way? guest: the fbi went to a judge. they got approval as required by the law. certainly, my experience as a prosecutor, sir -- search warrant's are generally not

taken lightly at the federal level. they go through levels of review because this tilt with a former president, they levels of review went much higher than they normally would. the attorney general himself approved this. this is not something the doj can do on its own. it has to go to a judge who looks at law and the facts. certainly, everything we have seen to this point, it appears everything was done properly. i do not think this kind of search should be taken lightly. any kind of action involving a former president is going to be construed politically as this one has been. whether there was anything political about this or not. it should only be done if there was a real need and that is going to be either a serious terminal investigation or a real national security risk posed by documents out there. we do not get "no" a whole lot

about this one but from everything we have seen, it appears -- from what i have seen, it appears it has been done properly. i recognize there are ace -- a ton of feelings about this. host: john, republican line. caller: i would like to say good morning to the listening audience and c-span is wonderful. i wanted to ask mr. noah bookbinder a couple questions. first, he witnessed the raid by the fbi. a lot of guys and the personnel have these bags or backpacks. can mr. noah bookbinder, if he knows, what was in these bags that they were carrying in? these bags they had on their backs. what was in them and could you please define democracy?

that seems to be under attack when you are repeatedly saying this. i look forward to your answer. host: -- guest: thanks, those are good questions. i would say first that i do not have any personal knowledge of what was in any of those bags. i can only speculate. the kinds of things that agents might have could be equipment for handling documents and materials. there can be gloves, there could be other kinds of things used to pick things up and store things. there could well be papers that are relevant. they may have copies of the search warrant. they might have their own kind of notes or things like that. i do not truly know what they had. but, i am just talking about the kinds of things that agents

would often carry with them. in terms of what is democracy? that is a great question and certainly something we could spend the rest of the hour talking about. at its base, democracy is a form of government where the people ultimately decide who is in charge. a true democracy would actually be the people deciding everything that is done through popular vote. we have a republican form of democracy where the people elect representatives. and, where people vote and the result of that boat determined who is in charge. and we respect that vote and have peaceful transitions of power from one elected president or set of elected members of congress or the position -- whatever the position is or the next. that is really the key.

free and fair and meaningful elections. i think, that certainly when a whole lot of money gets involved from a small number of people, that makes our country less democratic. and, when there is an effort to disregard the result of free and fair elections, that is really weapons our democracy under a very direct threat. host: carter in albany, georgia, independent line. caller: i think if they are going -- i would refine the information trump would put there. and then him and his kids, they probably have the papers everywhere. host: you mention the presidential records act. what happens to a person who violates that? guest: a lot of what the presidential records act has is procedures and requirements that is just support -- supposed to

tell you what the best behavior is and the obligations. but, there are actually criminal provisions to the presidential records act. they are not often used to prosecute people because in general, most presidents and people work within the executive branch and have tried their best to follow that law. but, you can have criminal charges and people are convicted. there are actually felony provisions. they are not usually a massive prison sentences that can come with it but it can result in probation and fines and in extraordinary circumstances with time in prison. there is a very unusual provision in the presidential

records act that actually says that people who violates it are disqualified from future office. it is not at all clear whether that could apply to a president himself but it can apply to certainly some people who violate the law. it is a sign of the fact that when congress made that law, they took it really seriously. this is not just paperwork. this is about accountability for the people in charge of this country, of any party, and for history. host: you said we know a lot about -- everything about what is going on up today. going back to your previous experiences, have you seen anything that would rise the level of charges under the presidential records act? guest: there have been a number of situations actually involving

-- that have led to at least some charges because they have had classified documents involved. but, david petraeus was one example. have been cases of documents making their way out of where they are supposed to be, for various personal purposes. that is one piece of that. where broadly, there certainly have been -- more broadly, there certainly have been in a number of administrations questions about whether people are observing the records they are supposed to. i think we saw it in much more extreme form in the trump administration. certainly the idea of trying to keep conversations secret is something we have seen before and goes all the way back to richard nixon and watergate which is what led to a lot of

transparency laws. i think most administrations have tried to, for the most part , comply with the law but we have seen incidences of really resisting transparency. host: is it the attorney general who would make the charges if it came to that? guest: in most cases, it would be someone below the attorney general. a u.s. attorney in a specific district or an assistant attorney general. if it were to be the president himself or senior aides to the president, it would almost certainly be the attorney general would make that decision. host: noah bookbinder is with the citizens for responsibility and ethics in washington. from the mississippi, democrats line. hello. caller: my thing is, and listen to all the networks and i have heard ingram say it is time to

move the page on donald trump. wherever he goes, there is nothing but trouble and that is my comment. host: a couple of things with that. guest: one is that i think there can be some problems with the idea that we sort of need to turn the page and not look back on what happened previously. i think everybody is eager to move on and tackle the problems of today and not worry about what happened that -- happens a couple years ago. but, if you do not have accountability for things done wrong in the past, you can have real loss of faith in our system from the american people who see people can get away with things and nothing happens to them. and there can be risk of the same people doing the same things again. i think accountability is

important. i do think that because donald trump was involved in an attempt to overturn the results of a free and fair election, there are certainly questions about who did what, but that is uncontroverted in many ways at this point. he should not be in a position to do that again. it is not a question of agreeing or disagreeing with specific policies or electing republicans or democrats. we should not have people in positions of power who seek to overturn the key tenets of our democracy. host: ohio in chesterfield, republican line. this is david. caller: hello. i am from ohio. i am a little bit irked about

what i heard mr. noah bookbinder when he claimed to be nonpartisan. i heard of chuck to see what people's backgrounds are on the internet and it does not appear that he is nonpartisan as he appears to be. that is another story. i checked on influence watch md claims to be nonpartisan but -- watch and he claims to be nonpartisan but it looks like he is pushing democratic, left-wing ideals. my question is there must be somebody that checks the records and who is looking at them and how many i am missing. assuming that somebody checks to see which records are missing and how many of these things are missing. i guess that is my question. guest: first of all, i want to

make clear that our organization is a nonpartisan organization. we do not ever tell people who to vote for or not to vote for in elections. we have people on our staff and on our board who have worked for or been democrats in the past. and we have people who have worked for or been republican. and, you can check into that all you want. we have gone after democrats and republicans but we are very open about the positions that we take. we certainly try our very best to keep track of presidential records and federal records and to act when there are any that appear to not be treated appropriately. obviously, there are millions and millions of such records. and, we are not a government agency.

we do not have the authority to go in and dig through stuff ourselves so we rely a lot on what is reported in the press. and on what is publicly available. using the information, we do really try our very best. i would say that one type of record that we have been very interested in for years and years is white house visitor logs that tell you who goes into the white house and meets with the president and staff. and, we have litigated against the bush administration and the obama administration. we ultimately reached a settlement with that and we have litigated against the trump administration. so, the biden administration, when they came in, they went to essentially be settlement the obama administration had reached. so, we did not have to see them. that is something where we have

taken action with democratic and republican administrations to make sure the american people get access to the important records of what our government is doing. host: hypothetical, but couldn't the presidents make copies of the documents in hand over the originals but still have copies of the documents that became a question in the first place? guest: yes is the short answer. in the case of most records, that is probably ok. the important thing is for the national archives and the american people to have a copy of records and be able to know what happened and hold people accountable and understand for history. when you are talking about classified national security information then that becomes a problem. it means information that could be dangerous if it comes to the wrong hands -- an extra copy

walking around somewhere where the people who are in charge of national security information do not know about it. i think in a lot of cases, it is fine. if you want your own copy of the presidential records, go ahead. but as long as the american people have their copy. and it is potentially dangerous to national security than it has to be controlled by the experts. host: in the process, do they ask if any other copies of the document exist? guest: i believe so. host: independent line. edward, go ahead. caller: i think when it comes to voting on issues that affect women's health care, only women should vote on those things. not men. because women have been systematically discriminated by men from the birth of our

country. host: call her, the estate -- c aller, that is not the topic we are engaging in today. let us hear from john on the republican line. caller: i would like to hear from noah bookbinder if you believe the justice department is nonpartisan. and when it came down to hillary clinton when she was involved during one, james comey came on saying she lied about having classify materials on private servers. and also when president biden became everything iraq, his brother then had a contract with building stuff in iraq. i do not think anything was ever done. then he was made everything ukraine and his son became a board member of -- who was under

investigation and biden had a hand of getting rid of the prosecutor. then they went to china and his son got, i think a billion-dollar contract. host: what is the question call her? guest: do believe the system -- caller: do you believe the system we have in place is bipartisan? guest: it is really important that the justice department and the courts are nonpartisan. i think that they strive to be. the justice department and the fbi, like everything else, is a collection of individuals. not everybody -- there is -- not everybody is always going to be perfect but it is important that the institutions do everything they can to maintain the nonpartisanship. i think the doj and the fbi have

not always been perfect. i think overall they have -- i worked for the doj for a number of years and i found it to be a place where a number of people would strive every day to act in an appropriate and bipartisan way. i think that continues. i think that it is easy for people with an ideological band to see the institutions as behaving in a partisan way. caller think the whole lot -- the caller mentioned hillary clinton there are a lot of democrats who believe the fbi and james comey cost hillary clinton the presidents by announcing an ongoing investigation that is not generally done. i think there are a whole lot of people like to call her who think the fbi was defending hillary clinton.

i think it is easy to see it through those lenses. in my experience, the justice department and the fbi have tried hard to and usually succeeded at being nonpartisan. host: we have a viewer asking you about one of the other crews efforts. corey griffin in new mexico. guest: the 14th amendment of the constitution has a provisions section which is called a disqualification clause. it says that if you have sworn an oath to the constitution and have then participated in insurrection, then you are disqualified from: office going forward. so, a crew is representing a number of residents in new mexico who are throwing griffin. he is a county commissioner in

new mexico. he was president -- he was present at the capital on january 6. he has been convicted of a federal crime in connection with that. and, there was a trial last week when there was -- where there was a lot of evidence put forward. that mr. griffin participated in the insurrection that is before the judge. other than explaining the case, i will stop there because it is up to the judge at that point to go through the evidence and what was presented and to make a decision. we certainly very much look forward to hearing what the judge decides. host: eric in massachusetts, independent line. hello. caller: a couple questions. i was wondering if there are specific laws on the books that

outline with clarity the process a president has to go through to declassified documents. i'm curious whether agencies ever come into conflict over this. the question that is in the mind of a lot of viewers, if you work for the government, obviously you still relate to both republican or democrat. how do you celebrate were part of sin leading from your work? guest: first, on the declassification procedures, there certainly are laws and regulations that set that up in a pretty careful way. i am not an expert on that set of laws so i do not want to go too far down that path. it is unusual for a president to be kind of unilaterally classifying anti-classifying a lot of documents -- classifying

and d classifying a lot of documents. there are experts who could point you to the relevant laws and regulations on what should have been in that context. in terms of the partisanship issue, there are a couple things that i can say. certainly, people who work for our organization like every other american vote and have their very own private views about who should be in charge of our country. i am very careful to not endorse any kind of candidate or say who i am going to vote for or say who people should vote for. but, we certainly do spend a lot of time examining ourselves and examining each other within the staff and making sure that

whatever personal views and biases we might have are not controlling the actions we take as an organization. we are human just like everybody else but we try very hard to make sure that we are driven in what we do by the facts and the law. when we file a plane or lawsuit and people come out and say you are just a bunch of partisans, i often take that as a sign that maybe we are doing something right. what they are not doing is criticizing the way we have used the laws or the facts. they are trying to say that you are wrong because of who you are. and, the year is a people that we go after -- people that we go after what we think there are problems, if we were wrong on the law, it would not hesitate to say that. it is one of the things we try

to make sure we do is to be right on the law and the fact. as often as possible and preferably all the time. if you are right on the law and the fact, than personal views are much less relevant. host: we are going to show folks the element of the presidential records act. it starts with ownership of records and places responsibility for those records with the presidents. is updating? considering in was initiated in 1978 and how would you accomplish that? guest: it does need updating. one of the things about the presidential records act is it is hard to -- when there are systematic violations of it, it is hard to enforce that law. you have criminal provisions when somebody in an intentional

and clear way violates the law, they can bring -- they can be prosecuted, although that is hard to do. what you do not have is a situation where it is easy for folks on the outside come in and say, is laws being violated across the board whether intentional or not. and that needs to be fixed. there ought to be in the presidential records act, enforcement provisions that make it easier that if the government is not doing what it supposed to be that the folks to go to court and say you need to enforce this law. that is one piece of it that certainly could benefit from being modernized. obviously, there are presidential records that exist now that did not exist in 1978 the our text. while we think they are very clearly