later, a discussion on voting laws and campaign when he 22 with former trump administration homeland security official ken cuccinelli, who now serves as national chair of the election transparency initiative. pres. biden: cancer does not discriminate red and blue, does not care if you are a republican or democrat. beating cancer is something we can do together, and that is why i am here today. ♪ host: that was president biden in boston yesterday touting his cancer moonshot initiative. his goal is to cut the u.s. death toll from cancer and half over the next 25 years. he delivered his speech on the 60th anniversary of john f. kennedy's original moonshot speech, which launched a decade-long effort to put a man

on the moon. today we are focusing on the fight against cancer, and we want to know what you think it will take to win that fight. phone lines split differently this morning. cancer survivors call (202) 748-8000. caregivers, (202) 748-8001. medical professionals, (202) 748-8002. all others can call in at (202) 748-8003. that is also the number you can send us a text on this morning. please include your name and where you're from. otherwise, catch up with us on social media, on twitter and on facebook. a very good tuesday morning. you can start calling in now. a busy day on capitol hill, the senate in at 10:00 a.m. eastern this morning, the house back after a month-long recess at 2:00 p.m. eastern. votes gatchel for 6:30 p.m. is doing today. the president at the white house

today to celebrate the passage of the inflation reduction act, taking place at 3:00 p.m. and the bureau of labor statistics set to release that key measure of inflation, the consumer price index, at 8:30 a.m. eastern. we will be covering it all on the c-span networks today. but we begin with "washington journal" foe subdued -- focusing on the cancer moonshot. we are joined by a reporter covering the food and drug administration at politico, lauren gardner. you covered the speech, the president saying he wants to cut the u.s. death toll from cancer and half over the next 25 years. how does he plan to do that? >> the president yesterday went through a list of some things he has already done as both vice president under president obama and now as president and looking to the future in terms of what he wants to do to achieve that goal of having cancer deaths over the next 25 years.

yesterday was kind of a way to link his cancer moonshot, which he has been working on since he was vice president, since his son beau died of brain cancer in 2015, and linking that to president john f. kennedy's speech 50 years ago yesterday about trying to take the u.s. to the moon. drawing parallels, and while it may seem like a far-flung idea right now, if we can dedicate the resources and the brainpower to it, we can achieve it. one of the big things around that is this new agency called arpa-h, advanced research projects agency for health care. it is modeled on a couple innovative agencies already in the federal government, one being focused on defense and defense technologies, another being energy, and that launched

earlier this year with $1 billion in funding. the president introduced this new director for that initiative yesterday and tried to use that to show this is who is going to lead this effort, and one of the big goals of this new agency is to back up research of the next tolerate that research into breakthrough technologies -- back up the research of than accelerate that research into breakthrough technologies for chronic diseases that you hear about typically but do not have easy treatments, alzheimer's, diabetes, and many types of cancer. host: arpa-h in washington lingo is the name of that agency. the lead of that agency, the president introducing her

yesterday, and citing an executive order yesterday. a headline, white house launches an effort to bolster domestic bio manufacturing. you wrote the story. what is that effort? >> he cited the executive order yesterday to try and focus several federal departments around this idea of doing more to boost domestic bio manufacturing across all kinds of sectors. not just health care, while that might be the first thing people think of in terms of trying to make sure manufacturing of things like pharmaceutical supplies and medicines, that more of that happens on u.s. shores, there's also ways to use some of these innovative biotechnologies using, like, medicaid -- mitigate climate impacts and improve food production and use some of these technologies to make supply

chains more resilient. part of that is always to try and bring some of those manufacturing jobs back to the united states. so the executive order hopes to coordinate federal investment with that goal in mind across several different agencies, and senior administration officials teased earlier this week that they expect some announcements later this week. wednesday there will be a summit at the white house on this topic of biotechnology and boosting domestic bio manufacturing, in which it sounds like they are going to make some announcements about goals for directing resources towards this. host: you cover the food and drug administration for politico. what role does the fda have in this cancer moonshot? >> one thing the president talked about yesterday was this law that passed in the waning days of the obama administration called the 21st century cures

act, and one of the big goals of that was accelerating some of the processes that exist at the fda to review some of these innovative drugs, treatments, that manufacturers and drug companies have developed to try and target some of these really intractable diseases. and it was a bipartisan effort. it is pretty popular on capitol hill. and right now, actually, there is a big debate over extending -- well, not extending, but actually re-upping the program that is used to fund these activities at the fda come a which is derived in part by fees imposed on the industry to get fda to review some of these applications in a timely manner. september 30. pretty much like everything on

capitol hill, there is an effort right now to get that over the finish line. so that is a key part of making sure that the fda has the resource in place to do some of these reviews. there is a separate effort, as well, in the house to kind of build on that 21st century cures vision, to basically give the agency more authority to focus on innovations like that. that remains to be seen, whether that will have the legs to make it across the finish line by the end of the calendar year, but those are some of the discussions going on right now on capitol hill really focused on both the food and drug administration and innovations like breakthrough cures. host: politico.com is where you can see her work, food and drug administration reporter. that is her story from politico pro from yesterday. appreciate you getting up with us this morning. appreciate your time.

>> thanks. host: we're talking about the president's speech yesterday, this cancer moonshot act. what will it take to beat cancer and achieve this goal? the president setting the goal of reducing cancer deaths by 50% over the next 25 years. cancer survivors call (202) 748-8000. if you are a caregiver, (202) 748-8001. medical professionals, (202) 748-8002. all others, (202) 748-8003. keep calling in. a little bit more from that speech yesterday in boston. pres. biden: the goal is to cut cancer death rates by at least 50% over the next 25 years, to turn more cancers from death sentences into chronic diseases people can live with. create more supportive experience for patients and families.

to update our fight against the cancer. it is a disease we often diagnosed too late and have too few ways to prevent in the first place. stark and equities based on race, disability, zip code, sexual orientation, gender identity, and other factors we know too little about why treatments work for some patients, but a different patient with the same disease it does not work for. we still lack in developing treatments for some cancers, like childhood cancers. we do not do enough to help patients and families navigate the cancer care system. we do not learn enough from their experience as patients. we do not share enough data and knowledge to bring the urgency we need to finding new answers. but for each of the ways we know cancer today, we know we can

change the trajectory. host: that was president biden yesterday in boston, the cancer moonshot, something he started back when he was vice president in 2016, continuing this effort and talking about it yesterday. we are talking about it this morning on the "washington journal." we are asking you, what will it take to cure cancer? we want to get your thoughts. phone lines are a bit different we will put the numbers up for you as we hear from kyle this morning out of new mexico. good morning. caller: good morning, c-span and america. i grew up in connecticut. i live in new mexico. but where i grew up, we had a nuclear power plant close to us. i think answering cancer is environmental. we seek for short-term answers & answers. i think it is harder than that.

in this segment, i think it is an important one, but i do think that the president is shortsighted in this. we can't -- it is a difficult thing, and a lot of it comes from things like saving the soil throughout the midwest, bad water -- host: more than an arpa-h, advanced research projects agencies, these moonshot scientific efforts, you are saying better regulation, more environmental regulation would do more here? caller: you know, i have worked with farmers before, and they recommend it themselves. yeah, regulation, sure, i am not an expert on much, but you are getting at it. you're getting my point.

on this topic, i appreciate your time on this. it is very important. thank you, c-span, for bringing it up. host: appreciate that, kyle, in new mexico. a couple tweets from members of congress yesterday as the president was giving this speech. democratic congressman emanuel cleaver, cancer does not only impact republicans or democrats, it impacts all americans, and when we fight for a common cause, there is nothing the american people cannot achieve. together, we can end cancer. i republican congresswoman saying president biden's socialist price controls for prescription drugs will keep this from happening. a democratic congresswoman says, twice i was told i had just cancer, twice my family and friends felt the impact of my

diagnosis, twice, because of the support of my doctors and loved ones, i survived cancer impacts. together, she said, we can end cancer. joe, summit, new jersey, good morning. for cancer survivors. -- line for cancer survivors. caller: hi, i want to talk about this a little bit. i had cancer. but i just wondering, why do democrats keep on talking about the past or the future? what about the future now? host: what do you think the future of treating cancer in this country looks like? caller: it is a good thing. but what about now? that is the thing. they don't care about now. they are always talking about the past or the future. and we got more troubles now than anything, so let's talk

about that. he is only trying to change the subject. host: phone lines again, for cancer (202) 748-8000. caregivers (202) 748-8001. , medical professionals, (202) 748-8002. all others, (202) 748-8003. question, what will it take to cure cancer? talking about president biden's moonshot initiative. the president speaking yesterday about his past efforts, but this effort on fighting cancer in america goes back much farther than that. i want to take you deep into the archives, deceiver 23, 1971, president richard nixon before the signing of the national cancer act that december -- december 23, 1971. [video clip] >> because when we consider what cancer does each year in the

united states, we find that more people each year die of cancer in the united states than all the americans who lost their lives in world war ii. this shows us what is at stake. it tells us why i sent a message to the congress the first of this year which provided for a national commitment for the conquest of cancer t attempt to find a cure. now with the cooperation of the congress, the cooperation of many of the people in this room, we have set up a procedure for the purpose of making a total national commitment. i am not going to go into the details for that procedure except to say this, as a result of what has been done, as a result of the action which will come into being as a result of signing this bill, the congress is totally committed to providing the funds necessary, whatever is necessary, for the

conquest of cancer. the president is totally committed. we have a presidential panel headed by ben smith which will report directly to the president so that the president's influence, whenever necessary, can be used to reach this great goal. and in addition to that, all of the agencies of government, the national institute of health and more, are totally committed. host: that was former president richard nixon back in 1971, december 23, 1971, the signing of the national cancer act. yesterday, president biden was talking about his cancer moonshot. asking you this morning on this topic of cancer, what will it take to end cancer in this country? phone lines split a bit differently. we will keep them up on the year for you to read them. arlene in florida on that line for all others. good morning. caller: good morning.

we have had so much success from 50 years ago on cancer research and cancer cures, as i hear the folks talking on the phone that have been cured. but my concern at present is the epidemic of fentanyl killing how many people a day, that we are subjecting ourselves to a horror right now in all our communities, white, black, hispanic, red, yellow, green. i would love to hear president biden's subject about fentanyl and these drugs coming into the country. it is -- right now, we do not have a cure for fentanyl. ok, we have some cures for cancer. at present, we need to have a large -- we just need to have so much more on the drugs coming in right now.

we need to cure fentanyl so this generation coming up will have a life and not die in 15 or five years. and thanks for taking my call. cancer is curable. we have proof from the people calling in. and it is just very good. and have a good day. host: arlene in florida. this is herb in greenville, south carolina. caller: good morning. thanks for taking my call. i am calling to say that i am a cancer survivor. about 25 years ago, i was diagnosed with a carcinoma, and it was stage four cancer on my right kidney. i had my kidney removed, and i have not had -- i have never had a minute of chemo or radiation and have not had any more

cancer. host: that is good to hear, herb. caller: yeah, c-span rocks. host: in terms of medical advancements since you were diagnosed with your cancer, i wanted your thoughts -- obviously, you likely someone who pays a lot of attention to this after going through it yourself. caller: actually, yeah, i had my -- since i had my cancer, i lost a female cousin to breast cancer and lost a first cousin, boy, male, to brain cancer. but i never had a minute of chemo because the doctor who diagnosed me told me that i only had a few weeks to live and said they type of cancer i had was notorious for putting people in the ground. so he told me even if i had the surgery and chemo, i had a 50/50

chance of being alive in a year. so i pondered the agony of having chemo, of being sick from the chemo, and i said, you know, i roll the dice, and i have been living on one kidney for like 27 years. but i am 70 years old and probably ain't long for the world. but that is my story. thank you so much for c-span. host: i hope you are long for the world. thanks for calling from south carolina. this is margaret in leavenworth, kansas. good morning. caller: hi, i have had breast cancer 15 years ago, and i think that the treatment, we need to -- hello? host: go ahead and listen to your phone and not your tv. caller: we need health care for

the whole -- you know, you cannot do piecemeal here and there. we need that we value our citizens. having gone through and you survive, but argues the same? well, i am sure not. my brain shrunk. i mean, just getting along fairly on social security that was from before, you cannot get disability in some areas, it is really terrible. i can't -- in this health care system, to get sick, you are really screwed. but i am still here. but the thing of it is, if we had a national health care system, like just everybody has

health care, like other modern countries, we could attack things in different ways. you get piecemeal. so i am glad i am alive, of course, and try to focus on that. but i am not -- like they try to stick you out to work again and do all this, well, i will tell you what, maybe some people have 12 weeks of chemo, radiation treatments, you know, they can just bounce right back, but a lot of us don't. you get, you know, trying to get housing and everything else, it is really terrible. we could all do cancer a big favor, everything, is just to have a health care system. host: thanks for the call. this is rich, tracy, california. the question, what will it take to cure cancer? caller: yes, ever since nixon,

they have had research, but it is going 100 miles an hour in the wrong direction. cancer is an immune system disease. we need to build our immune system. and cancer is a multifactorial deficiency disease. there are 98 different vitamins and minerals, amino acids, and essential oils that your body needs. otherwise, it will get a sufficiency disease, like vitamin c. and this is the way the research has been done. it is just not accepted. it is, unfortunately, going 1000

miles an hour in the wrong direction. host: you talk about the research, the big part of the president's speech yesterday was talking about this new arpa-h, the advanced research projects agency help, congress appropriating $1 billion for arpa-h, and that being housed within the national institutes of health, reporting directly to the secretary of health and human services. at a house hearing this past spring, one of those budget hearings we covered on c-span, the national institutes of health funding was discussed. it was oklahoma republican tom cole who was chatting with the acting director of the answer cancer institute about the money that goes to researchers. here is a little bit of that conversation from this past month. [video clip] >> what is the funding rate at

nci for applications as compared to nih districtwide, and how promising is the science in cancer going forward? >> thank you, mr. cole. the funding rate at the nci currently is 11% pay line for experienced investigators and 16% for early-stage investigators. last year, thanks to the generosity of congress, we were able to give more awards than we have ever given before. actually gone up by about 25% for experienced investigators over the last four years, about 50% for early-stage investigators. but as you know, there has been a big increase in the number of applications to nci, substantially larger than the rest of the nih. this is very good news in the sense that it is a reflection of the optimism that people have of

being able to make progress in cancer. but a direct consequence is that there is a decrease in the pay line of success rate. >> my time is up, but to me, you just made the point as to why we need to it more resources in the various agencies, your silly particular, but i would say across the board -- yours in particular, but i would say across the, we have promising results here, and recipients now can make immediate contributions to the mission that you have there. host: that was one of the many budget appropriations hearings that we cover each budgeting cycle here on c-span. you can watch it in its entirety at c-span.org. we are talking about president biden's cancer may shot an initiative, the effort to reduce the death rate from cancer by at least 50% over the next 25 years and increase access to cancer screenings, improve the experience of people living with

cancer and their families, to establish a cancer moonshot coordinator position within the white house, as well a cancer cabinet within the white house. that is part of the efforts of president biden has put together for his cancer moonshot. we are asking you, what do you think it will take to cure cancer? a big question, a question we are asking on phone lines a little differently. cancer survivors call (202) 748-8000. if you are a caregiver, (202) 748-8001. medical professionals, (202) 748-8002. all others, (202) 748-8003. to minnesota, this is larry. you are next. caller: morning, howdy. thank --how is it going, guys? host: going welp it what do you think it -- what do you -- going well what do you think it will take to cure cancer? caller: it has already been

done. 1900, there was a doctor, dr. rifp, who use technology developed by nichola tesla. if you have ever seen "star trek," the original movie, a guy on it was real, this guy was curing all kinds of cancer without even cutting into the human body, using electrical manipulation. host: larry, how far do you think we are away today from that technology? caller: 120 years in the wrong direction. you people cannot find your ass with both hands and a roadmap. host: that is larry in minnesota. this is don, kalamazoo, michigan. good morning. go ahead. caller: yes, i know most people

are going to think i am nuts, but we all got to die. there ain't no doubt about that. we stop people from dying of cancer, so now we have fentanyl to kill us. we stop taking fit no -- fentanyl, and we will have covid that kills us. we are all going to die. we just got to figure out that people are going to die. that is all i have to say. host: this is kyle, frederick, maryland, line for cancer survivors. good morning. caller: hi, good morning. host: go ahead. caller: yeah, i actually still have cancer, and i hear a lot of people -- well, people think that cancer is just one disease, but a lot of people don't understand that it is a group of diseases. there is no one silver bullet

that is going to take this out. it is going to take a lot of different, you know, studying and trials before you can even get one of them out, one type of cancer out, let alone all of them. host: kyle, i go the president is setting, cutting cancer deaths in half over the next 25 years, obviously as someone going through this, you are paying attention to the advancements we are making. what do you think about that goal? possible? caller: i would love to say it, but even hearing that some trials take 10, 15 years, even before it is decided whether it is going to work or not, i think it is a very ambitious goal. and if it is going to be done, it is going to take a lot of work and a lot of people all working towards the same goal. host: do you think we are in a

place on an issue like cancer that we can bring a lot of people together for broke -- from both sides of the aisle? this will take funding that requires legislation. are we in a place in the country where we can work towards this goal together? caller: i actually don't, because we are still fighting about whether people should be able to keep the government health care, the affordable care act. we are still fighting about that. so how are you going to say that we are going to be able to -- a lot of people that are on that, they don't qualify for a lot of the type of trials or the drugs, like one of the drugs that im on, it costs $8,000 a month. luckily, my private health care plan covers most of that, but if i were on a government plan, i would be paying well over $1000 out-of-pocket a month.

i think the stuff that is out there now, not even being accessible to everybody, isn't something that really should be looked at before we even are able to move, you know, forward on this. there's people dying out there with cancer because they cannot afford the medication. to me, that is a bigger issue than being able to cure it, because you have people dying right now. you have people, 911 survivors act, that almost did not get pass through, and there were funding issues with that. we cannot even help them, and they have cancer. i mean, it is kind of sad that we are able to -- some people are able to get the health care benefits they need and the cures and treatments they need and others are just kind of forgotten about. host: thanks for sharing your story, and thanks for your call. this is bradley in north richland hills, texas. you are next. caller: yes, sir, good morning.

for the president to come out and say he is going to rid the country of cancer is far-fetched, because the situation is basically denying god. he is trying to play the role of god. i, myself, am not a cancer survivor. my organs are reversed. but my wife had cancer and is a survivor. my mother had cancer and is a survivor. a vicious thing, it is, but the way he framed it, it is more of a diversion from the other issues in and of itself. host: how would you have liked him to frame an ambitious goal on cancer? what would have been a better

way of doing it? caller: i think he could have been more honest about it. i just do not leave anything that comes out of the guy's mouth or any of these politicians. nothing but one big lie. seems like it is all about the money. it is about money going to the national institute of health and all these other organizations. american cancer society did nothing from my wife or mother. i really question a lot of these organizations, where the money is going. there is no accountability. there's billions of dollars being poured into these organizations. it is not like nobody is trying to fix the problem, but for him to come out there and play god, i just think it is rotten. host: kurt on twitter said, if we put $750 billion a year into curing cancer instead of giving it to arms manufacturers, there probably would not be in a

cancer. this from steve payne, saying i believe anything is possible and great job to the president, ending industrial pollution and pollution in general would help a great deal. cancer-causing chemicals are in our water and air, and we need to clean it up for the fight will always be here. we need to become non-toxic. russ and west harrison, new york, your next. caller: this is my roadmap. i think they have been experimenting with these mrna vaccines for decades as a cancer prevention, and now we have large population studies and everyone who got vaxxed will be studied to see if their cancers are reduced or prevented, a bone goggle for big pharma. the moonshot project was derailed when eric to lander had to resign in disgrace. he was going to be biden's scientific batman. thanks very much. host: we are asking you this morning about your thoughts on

president biden's cancer moonshot. what do you think it will take to cure cancer? cancer survivors call (202) 748-8000. if you are a caregiver, (202) 748-8001. medical professionals, (202) 748-8002. all others, (202) 748-8003. it is just after 7:30 on the east coast. a busy day on capitol hill. the senate in at 10:00 a.m. eastern, the house back after a month-long recess at 2:00 p.m. eastern, both expected around 6:30 -- votes expected around 6:30. and president biden with an event to celebrate the passage of the inflation reduction act, the passage of that and that celebration, one of the issues that senator mitch mcconnell spoke about when he took the floor of the senate yesterday. here is some of what he had to say about democrats' efforts to fight inflation. [video clip] sen. mcconnell: the focus is on repeating the mistakes they made

in 2021. in august on a partyline vote, they didn't. and the worst inflation over 40 years, every democrat in congress voted to ram through hundreds of billions of dollars more in liberal spending. the american people are concerned of the runaway costs. and the supply chain crisis could get even worse, much worse, in the next days if democrats let their far left big labor allies engage in railway worker strikes. it will hamper the economy even further. washington democrats' top concerns appeared to be something very different. they prioritize a waging war on affordable american energy in a bill that will have no meaningful impact on global temperatures. they prioritize inflating the irs with $80 billion to audit more american citizens without a worry of accountability. tax collectors allow

confidential information to become a political weapon. even the supposed spending package, "inflation reduction," is utter nonsense. nonpartisan experts have concluded that washington democrats, what they did will not meaningfully reduce inflation at all and will actually make it worse. that is in the near term. this is what democrats decided to put first for the better part of the year, and it is what they are now trying to pedal to the american people into victory. host: senate minority leader mitch mcconnell yesterday on the senate floor. you can expect to hear a lot more about the issue of inflation today. that is because in less than an hour, about 830 a.m. eastern, the bureau of labor statistics set to release its monthly consumer price index, taking a look at the issue of inflation in august and where the country

was, that core inflation measure. 8:30 a.m. eastern is when that comes out, likely to be the focus of conversation in that building behind me for the rest of the day after it does. you can watch all the proceedings on the house and senate floor today as they are both back, on c-span and c-span2. about 20 minutes left in this conversation, talking about president biden's cancer moonshot. the question, what will it take to cure cancer? patrick in michigan, you are next. caller: good morning, happy to be with you this morning. host: happy to have you. caller: thank you. i want to point out that people should understand that cancer and cancer research are a very big business, and i would like to encourage them to look up dr. brezinski and the work he has been doing for the last 45 years to cure cancer and the struggle

he has had with our government in advancing his cause. there are documentaries available. his name is dr. brezinski, and he has a clinic in houston. his name is spelled burzynski. thank you very much. host: for folks not near a computer, what has he looked at? caller: he has developed a medication that is much friendlier and less dangerous -- now i am getting nervous -- the anti-neoplastic's do not harm people as much as the radiation and chemotherapy. and it helps the immune system. some process for the immune system.

i cannot even talk now, got me nervous. host: that is patrick in michigan. this is muriel in new jersey. caller: thanks for taking my call, calling from far rockaway. you look at a bag of cigarettes, it says cigarettes causes cancer. it does not say may cause cancer, it says it causes cancer. and there are other things, alcohol. there are things that are not going to be taken off the market. companies are not going to stop making the because there is so much money involved. we have to start with our schools, from first grade. we have to go to our churches. pastors have to do their job until the people, you can cut down on cancer by not doing these things such as smoking cigarettes, drinking alcohol.

as far as the fentanyl concerns, i hear a lot of people calling about it coming across the border -- well, it can come across the border, but that does not mean you have to use it. people know that fentanyl will kill you, drugs will kill you. these things will kill you. we have to teach these things and tell people, and we have to constantly, constantly keep telling them you're going to die if you use these things, and people are still going to use them. but enough people will be saved that you will not be going in the ground, you will be saved and read the bible, listen to the bible, and you will know what to do. and thanks for taking my call. host: a call from tarzana, california. you are next. caller: hi, cancer affects everybody. people who do not even smoke get cancer, secondhand smoke.

as far as environmental, stress also brings about cancer. i mean, there are so any things that can bring about cancer that, basically, you don't know. do you want to protect yourself and try to be healthy and eat -- do the best you can with no stress, but it is still going to happen to some people because it is hereditary and then some people it is environmental and other issues. basically, cancer -- i just looked it up, cancer kills 600,000 people in 2020, and fentanyl was 40,000 people between april 2020 and april 2021. so a huge difference in the amount of people dying of cancer. as far as people saying about

president biden, he created this and i believe it was a 100% vote when nobody was voting for anything, when he was vice president with president obama. nobody was voting for anything democratic, but they voted for the moonshot because the idea was to do 10 years of cancer research in five years. and it was already paid for. they paid for that year when they voted it in. and then went to rob came president -- then when trump became president, he shifted the money elsewhere and cancel the program basically. it had already gone on for one year, and at the end of those four years, if he had kept it going and it was already paid for, he would have been the one to say, oh, i cured cancer. host: on funding, one of our folks who is watching on c-span rights, when the cancer moonshot gets funding compared to the

military-industrial complex, then we will start taking cancer seriously. what do you think about that? caller: i think everybody should take cancer seriously. funding has been going on for ages, both in the private sector and in the government sector. i do not understand your question. seems like the point is already made. host: that is helen in california. this is thia in vermont, line for cancer survivors. caller: good morning. i am a 20-year breast-cancer survivor, and i believe that cancer is a whole lot of attention and that as much as it is valuable, other things need attention, like our border, that the president should be addressing what is happening with millions of people coming here. the inflation that is going on. and every time i go to the

store, things get higher. my jar of pickles was five dollars last year. six months ago, seven dollars to get my special pickles. i think -- i don't know. it is a worthy cause, certainly. but i think there are other things that are more important. and because the election is coming up, he is kind of throwing out anything he can think of to detract attention. and i wish he would stop spending money, frankly, and keep this inflation coming down, because we are all hurting. host: we're talking about $1 billion for this advanced research project agency health. is this a good place to spend money? caller: i think what we're are doing is fine. i really think enough money is going towards cancer research

and there's a lot of things that people don't do, exercise, good food, to keep your bodies well. if they choose to smoke, they are the ones endangering their lives. so, no, from my experience, and i'm still active in activities, raising money for cancer, and i think we are all very cognizant of it. host: whether the organization you raise money for? caller: i am a dragon boat paddler for 20 years. a friend called when i had cancer and they were starting breast-cancer dragon boat support here in burlington. i joined in have done it for 14 years. i.e. dwell and exercise -- i eat

well and exercise. host: what are the dragon boats? caller: something that started in canada. a doctor found out that lymphoma of the arms that you get, the swelling, can be cured by exercise, not by keeping it stable. that is what people were doing, putting a compression on it. so dragon boating in canada is a big sport. many teams participate in this oriental 40-foot boat, and there are festivals. we practice all year and train and go to these different festivals and compete. i have got many medals from doing this. and we have had it here now 15 years in burlington, and it is so wonderful. i was just there last night, and we all support, those of us who

have had it, and then there are other community teams that just compete for fun. we have raised millions of dollars here over the last 17 years. so to various cancer needs in our hospitals and children's homes, etc. so i want to urge people to participate. be healthy, be your own doctor, and eat well and exercise and do good things to keep your cancer chances low. it keeps your cancer -- i am getting nervous, too, like the man before me. host: thanks for talking about it and about dragon boating. joel in new york, your next. caller: good morning.

love the topic. the number one killer in the u.s. is heart disease, and i just think if you really wanted to do a moonshot, you tackle that, at least fight it, and there might be some carryover effect into the cancer area. just like the previous caller talked about, you make healthy choices. exercise. i mean, if you die of lung cancer for smoking for 20 years, that is a personal choice. you know, i just want to maybe focus on heart disease, i think that would be a better target. host: to texas, joyce on the line for survivors. good morning. caller: good morning. first, i would like to say i am a 100% disabled veteran. i would like to know, have you heard the saying, if you do not like the weather, wait a minute and it will change?

in 25 years, they expect it to be a 0002 percent degree change with all the efforts we are putting towards climate change, so it does not matter how many people's lives we are destroying in the meantime. this is another desperate money fraud and election game. they do not intend to cure anything, never have, never will. does not have to accomplish crap, just talk, another big bs money game. my pharma stock was pathetic until the covid fraud. isn't that a coincidence? get the illegals out of my america. get them all out of my america. host: joyce in texas. elaine in olympia, washington, line for caregivers. caller: my sister works for two cancer research centers, and one thing that they found out in the 1960's, mind you, that they did

not want to let the public know about was that 100% of all the cancer patients have cells in your body that have four nuclei instead of one. and when they studied the people that had those cells in their body who did not have cancer, 100% got cancer. but what they were afraid of, if they told the people about the cells, that people, if they had the cells, then everybody would be going to the doctor in fear of getting cancer constantly, if they knew they had these cells. anyway, i just thought i would share that because i thought that was very interesting. host: where did you hear about this? caller: my sister. my sister works for -- first of

all, american cancer society put her 100% through college, paid for pencils, papers, everything. and then she worked for two cancer research centers, one in san francisco and one in medford, oregon, maybe it was portland. in any event, that is how i found out about it, because she was involved in a lot of research and she is published. there was an article written about her. yeah, anyway. host: this is mohammed in virginia, that line for medical professionals. as a medical professional, what is it going to take to beach cancer? caller: good -- two beat cancer? caller: good morning. i think what people are not talking about is if you are

poor, you're are basically eating processed foods, and that really affects your health. it is not as simple as some people say, that it is your responsibility if you get cancer. there are things like pollution. it is really related to socioeconomic status and things you really cannot control. to buy foods from whole foods is much more expensive than basically eating something from mcdonald's for breakfast. host: a couple things have been brought up today, making healthier eating choices and whether or not to smoke or drink alcohol. that is one set callers have brought up. another issue is environmental issues, regulations, helping to clean up the environment. that is another set of issues.

there is this research, moonshot, spending billions of dollars on new treatments for cancer. of those sort of three things, which do you think would be most effective? caller: it is difficult to tell which will be the most effective because there is one investing more in research that will be useful, and i trained with the national institutes of health and have seen what is being done there. i am not pro spending, but if you look at the past 20 years and see the advancements in the treatment of cancer, like melanoma and breast cancer, people with stage four melanoma for breast cancer can live for

10 years now, not like back in the 1990's for 1970's. like with everything else, the regulation should be oversight to that kind of spending. host: what kind of medical professional are you? caller: i am a diabetes doctor. host: last call in this segment, luis out of north carolina. good morning. caller: good morning. i really agree with the president. i think we need to do more research. been hearing more people on the lines talk about they are survivors, but they got to realize, if it were not for research, they would not be survivors. we are getting more and more different types of cancers, so i really agree with that.

you have to start doing that. like the other doctor said, our climate is our biggest problem. apa has deregulated so many things -- epa has deregulated so many things, water, everything. these factories. thank you for your time. host: that was our last call in this first segment of the "washington journal." plenty more to talk about this morning. next, we will be joined by kathleen hall jamieson, director of the annenberg public policy center at the university of pennsylvania. we have the constitution day civics survey. later, we will be joined by working families party national dr. morris mitchell to talk about the upcoming midterms. stick around. we will be right back. ♪ >> a lot of places to get political information, but only

at c-span do you get it straight from the source. no matter where you are from or where you stand on the issues, c-span is america's network. unfiltered, unbiased, word for word, if it happens here or here or here or anywhere that matters, america is watching on c-span. c-spanshop.org is c-span's online store. there is something for every c-span fan and every purchase helps support our nonprofit organization. shop now or anytime at c-spanshop.org. high school students it is your time to shine.

you are invited to participate in this new competition. we ask this your competitors, what is your top priority and why? make a five to six minute video that shows the importance of your issue from opposing to supporting perspectives. don't be afraid to take risks with your documentary. up to 100,000 in prizes. visit our website at studentcam. org for competition rules, kits, resources and the step-by-step guide. c-span now is a free mobile app featuring your unfiltered view of what is happening in washington live and on-demand.

keep up with white house events, campaigns and more from the world of politics. the latest episodes of washington journals plus a variety of compelling podcasts. c-span now is available at the apple store or google play. c-span now at your front row seat to washington anytime, anywhere. "washington journal," continues. host: constitution day takes place this saturday. we are joined by kathleen hall jamieson from annenberg center's constitution day civics survey to talk about civics education. and last year when you joined us, you reported that civics knowledge seemed to be on the rise in 2021. did that trend continued 12 months later? guest: knowledge of branches is

down somewhat. we are now under 47%. the news is not as good as it was last year but there is always good news. this is a chance to make sure that everyone is a little more aware of the responsibilities we have in your constitution. host: explain what the survey is and how long you have been doing it. guest: it is been going on for 20 years. it can you name three branches of government? can you name the freedoms protected in the first amendment. questions about the prerogatives of the various branches. when there is a constitutional matter who gets to decide what is or not the law? these are the presupposition

all, if you don't understand these things happening in the news what makes sense. their capacities as a citizens will not be top of mind at times where you want them there. you might want to know when there is a conflict between the president and the supreme court or congress and the president who has what kinds of powers. host: to put some numbers to this year's survey in front of our viewers, here is one of the questions asking those who responded to the survey if they could name all three branches of government only 47% said that they could. 18% could name just to end 11% could name just one and 25% could not name any. last year, the number of respondents who could name all three was a 56%, down to 47% why

did that fall in 12 months? guest: we learn these things in grade school or high school and they should just be there. they should be there ready to be recalled by us to answer the question of what are the branches of government. it turns out, some things are more top of mind than others. this is open recall, can you name, your ability to do that from top of mind is lower when the past year has not spent a lot of time talking about the branches of government and their relationship to each other. at some point, maybe this is good news because there was less conflict between the branches and so the top of mind recall between the bridges was not as high. people can make sense of what is in the news. to know what the levers of power are in order to enact change.

host: it seems like the first amendment is always in the news. here are some of the numbers on questions to respondents to the survey about being able to name the freedoms in the first amendment. 63% could name the freedom of speech. 24% could name the freedom of religion. 16% could name the right of people to peaceably assemble and 6% the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances. those numbers are down significantly as well. guest: think of the past couple of years and what was in the news. we had major protests following george floyd. we had controversy about who can assemble how and where. the key word peaceably assemble.

we also had debates about what constitutes the boundaries of speech. those debates were more front and center and that is our best explanation for why we saw drop. the years prior to the past two years, those answers had been lower. we may have simply moved back to a baseline knowledge when things are not front and center in the news unless you are paying attention to these facts. host: one of our viewers joining this conversation. the phone lines to do so the democrats (202) 748-8000, republicans (202) 748-8001, independents (202) 748-8002 and maybe we will even get some teachers to join the discussion to talk about civics education. inviting you to call in as we talk to kathleen hall jamieson from the annenberg center's constitution day civics survey.

remind us about your centers mission. guest: it is part of the university of pennsylvania and its mission is trying to increase public knowledge and in particular student knowledge about basic rights and responsibilities of citizenship. the foundational concepts of the constitution. we helped to organize the civics renewal network. c-span classroom as part of this. provide the best materials that they have assembled for use at school and in homes. it is an obligation of parents and teachers and schools and on constitution day, it is an obligation in schools because the third amendment requires that schools teach the

constitution. take a look at the civics renewal network. it costs nothing and we have a really nice index that will help you find it and we urge you to mix-and-match to try to find things that work best for you. host: you mentioned c-span in the classroom here at c-span for viewers who want to learn more about the annenberg center's . you can find that on our website at c-span.org/classroom. that is where you can go. guest: you don't have to wait for constitution to celebrate the constitution. it is available every day including the days we are

celebrating constitution day. host: plenty of calls for you already this morning. this is paula here in washington dc, democrat. caller: good morning everyone. i am a federal worker. i work in human resources in the executive branch. i do question related to what you were just discussing which is educating individuals, young people in school. i am a middle-aged person and don't remember getting a lot about civics in high school in the 80's. i was just wondering what the curriculum would look like today and if it really is something that is being taught robustly in

schools today? that is my question. guest: for teachers and schools, the amount that has to be taught during the day is large. there are students that need extra help in some areas. asking the teachers to add one more thing is to ask a great deal. we would hope that there would be a way for teachers to see if they could enter great how government works and of course that is not called civics to talk through with students about what is happening in the news and what that means in the constitution. what the constitution rounding for it is. there is less civics being taught now than there was. we know less about the specific kinds of content being taught in schools but we know that we have a lot of good material that is foundational that will help you

teach about structures of government and constructive ways of engaging at your local and state level. if you want to create change using structures that have proven resilient over the years. let me add one more thing about the importance of a civics course. when we look at our statistics, we ask have you had a civics course in high school or college . when someone says yes, it increases the likelihood they are more likely to get those questions right. it increases the likelihood that when you asked the question, if the supreme court issued an unpopular ruling, maybe it would be better to go to the supreme court it would be about idea. to increase appreciation for our

structures of government that will increase the likelihood that people will want to defend them if they are challenged. host: from mlb on twitter who has been watching the long. the lack of knowledge within our american citizens is a damming statement on our education policy. we are in danger of having an uneducated electorate and that will be the beginning of the end of this country as we know it. are you pessimistic? guest: i want to be optimistic about anything. because it makes it harder to get through the rest of the day. the question is, if you don't know who is responsible for doing what and government, if you don't know which party controls congress or one house of congress, if you don't know which party is in the white house it will be more difficult for you to say i don't like this and i want to vote to change

this because you don't know who was in charge. if you are not paying enough attention to elections to understand that the party who moves into power does have some prerogatives that will increase the likelihood that they will get what they want from the system when you have a president of the same party and you have a house and senate of that same party. we want people to understand the foundation so they are not swayed by a lot of ads by individuals and may vote the opposite way that they would vote if they were fully informed. my concern about an uninformed electorate is that our votes translate to a governance that we thought we would get based on our understanding of where they stood on issues and where they sit within the power arrangement which determines if they can get something done. host: you said having civic issues helps increase civic

knowledge generally as people are talking about it, hearing about it. the supreme court has been in the news, especially in the wake of the dobbs decision. when they ask who has final responsibility determining whether an act is constitutional if the president and supreme court disagreed, less than half correctly said the supreme court. why is that? guest: if you don't understand that there are branches you are likely to get that question wrong. this notion that there is foundational knowledge most of us take for granted but some don't have means that we have not anchored their understanding of our government and its structures in a way that lets them understand who has what kind of prerogatives under our

system. the supreme court makes that decision. it can change his position across time. it can say that an earlier decision was wrong but it doesn't do that very often. we have the means to amend the constitution. if you don't understand the three branches you can understand that knowledge. it is important for people who think the dobbs decision was not decided fairly, they need to be able to address that when it comes about at the state level. we would like to see everyone be able to act on their point of view in a way that is responsible. peaceably assemble, exercise their right to speech.

ensures that the action they take is the action they anticipate based on an understanding of the institution. caller: i ran into this issue of ignorance on a project that i worked on a decade ago. i took a survey asking people and ask them how many amendments there were in the constitution and i had to go through 31 people and no one else knew the answer. host: it's 27 right? caller: yes. i started doing seminars and after the 2016 election i thought we are really cooked.

i set up a website and everything and during the pandemic we stopped. i am starting up again this saturday on constitution day we are doing another one. is it ok if i promote that? it is that civicstriage.com. and also the question you had about the supreme court, the abortion thing. congress could pass a law and make it so that abortion is legal in all the states right now. they could do it if they wanted to. the only reason they are not passing that law is so they

could get people fired up to avoid democrat. if you think that decision was wrong you should vote against the incumbents right now. you should vote for whoever is challenging the incumbent. because the congress has the power to change that. host: why is it civics triage? caller: after the 2016 election i thought we can't wait for the education to teach kids. the adults need training. it's almost like an emergency. i set it up before the pandemic coincidentally. it's almost like a disease we have in our nation that people are not educated about civics. host: thank you for the call from new hampshire. guest: i wonder how many people

know what triage actually means. the number of times we put a word in the question and listened as people struggled with that as they tried to figure out what we meant. that may be a concept that is not in the vocabulary of many people. when we are trying to teach things about our system of government, what are the most important things that people need to know? we can amend the constitution. there are means of doing it. one of the things that is ingenious about our system is that it has a way of people to affect change through channels that increase the likelihood that the majority if they act intelligently and understand the

levers of power will ultimately be able to get what they thinks is best for the body politic. understand that we amend, how we amend is more important than knowing how many amendments are. there are a lot of amendments because across time, we have made some important changes. what are they? what rights did they guarantee? what understandings were built into those rights. i like the idea that my grandmother marched for suffrage. my grandmother enshrined the right for women to vote. i grew up knowing that amendment was there and she fought to make that happen. that was one of my earliest understandings. she thought she made a real difference for marching for suffrage. host: from maryland, on the line

for democrats. caller: these conversations are so vitally important and this needs to be funded. i am a former social studies instructor in washington dc. i taught american government which is a mandatory course in order to graduate high school. how can we have a democracy that is for the people, by the people if many of its citizens don't know the three branches of government, don't know their state and local history? and understand that local history and state government how it impacts and influences our national government? i was encouraged by the fact that these high school students, why a lot of them did not like history they loved and thrived in the american government course.

the way they phrased it, it really was civics. the onus is not only on parents and adults but in partnership with state school boards that these classes are still mandatory before you graduate because it impacts the rest of your life. and lastly, this country should be listening to duke ellington's the queen speech when he met her in 1959. host: thank you for the call. guest: thank you to the color for teaching social studies. she makes the important point that there are many places in the curriculum where we can increase civics education.

the other thing i would like to stress, you have to think about everybody having the responsibility to increase the understanding beyond the understanding built in our school system. when journalists write their articles about the controversies of the day, they presuppose that we know the three branches. they presuppose we know the rights and privileges of the constitution. if i could make one request of my journalists, when you write these stories, especially online where you find younger adults. if you would build in those parenthetical statements, you

find ways to build in foundational knowledge with current events. we learned these things through and direct experience. we could all do a better job remembering that. most people who don't know foundational government information it will make sense. host: whether it's mandatory to teach civics, are there places where civics courses are not mandatory? guest: there are places that are trying to increase civics courses. we say mandatory but we have to be careful about the language.

mandated by who and in order to do what? there have been national surveys about how much is happening and where. i would encourage everybody to ask what is being taught in my local schools because that is something we have control over. take a look at the materials are they engaging materials? one of the things i think is interesting about the ways in which we talk about civics, it's really about the federal government. it's important to understand the federal government. the places we are likely to effect changes the local government. their structures are very similar to those on the state and federal level. when you have a problem in your community you can come together

and exercise your collective will in relationship to those structures. they are much more likely to translate what you want to do. largely the ways we exercise our most important activities are going to be at our local levels, our community levels. i applaud those teachers who find a way to visit the local court. find the executive branch and see how it is working. we want to fix this problem, where do we go to fix it? how do we use our voice to articulate our desires and needs? find a part of our local government structure that has the power to act on it. you can waste a lot of time trying to find change of the

wrong places. you can get really frustrated about your inability to create change if you don't know how to use the right levers to affect it. caller: good morning c-span thank you for taking my call. the last caller from maryland covered it. i learned about civics in high school. i learned it well, it was taught well. we need to get back to the basic reading, writing, arithmetic and civics. it is appalling how stupefied our people have become from the degradation of what has been taught in school. if we want to have engaging material, think back to the 70's when we had schoolhouse rock. it sounds funny but that cartoon taught me a lot of things. it taught me how a bill becomes a law.

if we want to fun things from the federal government to increase the knowledge of the citizens, stuff like that is simple and easy and effective. host: before you go you said you learned it well, do you remember the name of your civics teacher in high school? caller: peter conway, seventh. . cleveland ohio. guest: i hope that peter conway hears that. i hope everyone remembers the teachers that taught us well if they are still with us. send a little note to say thank you. that would do a lot to boost the morale of people who are having a difficult time teaching in the current environment. many of our children fell behind during the pandemic. there is an increased burden on

everyone trying to make sure everyone catches up. host: from maryland, this is isaiah on the line for democrats. caller: hello? guest: i had trouble understanding your question. host: one more time isaiah. caller: i heard the constitution

-- guest: our system gives us ways to try to ensure that it will work. part of the reason the system has proved so resilient is that it has built within it the capacity to change, to right wrongs and alters structures when they are not working well and hold people accountable when they fail. when they promise and deliver. when we talk about the conversation we talk about rights without focusing on the kinds of responsibility that is carried by citizenship. when we are called into jury duty, without talking about why you should want to serve on a jury.

serving on a jury takes time but that is part of the way we protect each other in our system. it is a really important protection built-in. we have that protection built into the court system so they can understand and protect us from government overreach. we should cherish those rights so we can defend those rights. if a judge cannot force you to testify against yourself. we want people to understand their rights so they can stand up to cherish those rights. we need to look up more carefully on all the ways the constitution is backing us. a big point of the constitution is to make sure that the government was not oppressive. host: kathleen hall jamieson it

is nice to see that some viewers on twitter are shouting out the names of their civics teachers in high school. do you remember yours? guest: i had a civic teacher's name ms. sanderson. she was the best teacher i had in the entire eight years of elementary school. she was so clear that little children could make change inside of our community. she took us to watch a trial. she had a judge come and speak to us. she invited a local member of congress to come. we were incredibly impressed with that person who showed up and took our questions. she did everything she could to ensure that those young children felt that they were important and that they would grow up to be responsible people who could make the world better. i thought she was the best

teacher that any child could ever had. unfortunately, she is host: no longer with us. host:host: larry, 20 california. caller: i graduated in 1971. i joined the marines and i was in for 20 years. i got into i.t. in 1978. i ended up with over 20 schools after the marine corps. i don't know why we don't try to get a lot of people together and give all these classes and put them on tv. sometimes at night, they have terrible shows. we have to educate the american people and tell everybody that you have to vote. taxation without representation.

the other thing, jury duty, a lot of people don't want to register to vote because of jury duty. i think that should be an option. do you want to serve jury duty or not? i don't know why they don't want to get involved. that is our problem in america. we don't have the education. we don't have the training. let's get some money and put it on tv and make it a 24 hour show where you could have history, social studies, keep it up you are doing great. host: i just have to say, there is a program on c-span american history tv on c-span2 saturday mornings at 8:00 a.m.. we set up cameras in the back of a college universities classroom and film a history lecture. caller: i have seen it and it is

once in a while. we need this constantly rolling 24/7. thank you. host: thank you for the call. guest: we went to one of the cable networks and say we produce a lot of films for ann eberg classrooms. these are 22 minute documentaries about important moments where cases came before the court that helps decide the future of the nation. we propose that they give us a channel where we would run these films so any time you wanted to find them you could watch. the cable company said, if we put that on nobody would watch that. i said couldn't you just give it a try? could we see if they were be willing to watch it? a lot of high quality historical material.

how individuals who stood up for their rights help shape the rights that we need now hold and cherish. sometimes individuals from no means whatsoever. including some important protections from search and seizures. i would love to see a 24 hour channel that had the best of the best in for parents to go to when they would like to have a discussion with their children about japanese internment. i would like to think the caller for his service. one of the things that is so important about our system of government is that there are times where our government would ask us to serve. we forget now that we have a

volunteer army. those who stood up to serve our country swear an oath to the constitution. we have civilian not military control. it is helped protect our nation across time. there are foundational rights that have helped us protect us in important ways. host: let's get a few more calls. this is deborah in bethesda, maryland. caller: i have written to you before in emails about i think c-span ought to contribute to this education like how a bill becomes a law. so many people seem to have no clue that there is something called the filibuster and the

new hampshire gentlemen suggested that the democrats could pass an abortion bill and make it legal don't understand that requires 60 votes in the senate. they did pass a bill in the house. you can't just snap your fingers even though you have nominal control in the congress. there are a lot of things like that, the bird rule. that is why tax legislation is scored within a 10 year window. i would like to see something like that on c-span. not just on the constitution because the filibuster is not in the constitution, the bird rule is not in the constitution. but how things become a law. everything you have to go through. i used to be a tax lawyer in washington and i had to deal with a lot of the stuff. most people have no clue about it. i think c-span would do a real service if they would point out

how the system actually works in practice as opposed to theory. host: that's part of what we try to do on this program seven days a week three hours a day. there is always a lot more to do. we appreciate your comments. guest: along the same lines, we need to fix some of the way in which politicians campaign. when candidates run for president and say if i am elected i will and they tell you they will do something. my usual responses, yes if you have your party in control of the house and senate and they agree on that and they have enough votes to break the filibuster. the way in which we campaign increases cynicism because people say you promised you would do that and you didn't do that. when in fact, the person could not do that under this constitutional system for very good reason. it takes multiple players in our

system to get laws passed and enacted and held to be constitutional is to protect against someone coming in and say ok, i am the president and i do whatever i want. if we could increase the accuracy to remind people that presidents do not have unilateral authority to make changes. they have more authority now than they once did. host: kathleen hall jamieson is a director of the anneberg center. thank you about talking about this year's survey. guest: good to be with you. host: coming up we will be talking with working families party's maurice mitchell and election transparency initiative 's maurice mitchell. but first it is our open forum. we will talk about issues you want to talk about.

we will get to your calls, right after this break. >> c-span campaign 2022 coverage is your front row seat to the midterm elections. watch it as it happens on the campaign trail. meet and greets, debates and other events during this year's senate, house and gubernatorial races. you can take us with you, on the go with c-span now a free mobile app. and visit c-span.org/2022 your website for all of our coverage on demand. you can track results from every campaign. your unfiltered view of politics. c-span now is a free mobile app

featuring your unfiltered view of what is happening in washington live and on-demand. keep up with today's events from white house events, the courts, campaigns and more from the world of politics all at your fingertips. stay current with the latest episodes of washington journal and find scheduling information for c-span's tv network and a variety of podcast. c-span now is available on the apple store and google play. c-span now, your front row seat to washington anytime, anywhere. listening to programs on c-span or c-span radio just got easier. tell your smart speaker play c-span radio and listen to washington journal every day. weekdays at 5:00 p.m. and 9:00 p.m. catch washington today.

listen to c-span any time. tell your smart speaker to play c-span radio. c-span, powered by cable. high school students, it is your time to shine. you're invited to participate in this year's documentary competition. picture yourself as a newly elected member of congress. what is your top priority and why? make a 5-6 minute video that shows the importance of your issue from opposing and supporting perspectives. don't be afraid to take risks, be bold. up to $100,000 in cash prizes. videos must be submitted by january 20, 2023.

"washington journal," continues. host: it is time for our open forum. getting your opinion on any public policy issue. as usual democrats (202) 748-8000, republicans (202) 748-8001 and independents (202) 748-8002. it is just about eight a. the bureau of labor statistics released their consumer price index. here is the nbc news story about those numbers. little change in the month of august despite efforts by the federal reserve to cool off the economy. inflation landed at eight .3% last month compared to one year ago.

prices increased 8.5% back in july. gas prices have fallen for 80 nonconsecutive days and stand at a little over three dollars but food prices have remained stubbornly elevated. prices for food at home rose 1.6 percent from the end of july to the end of august and 13.4 percent year-over-year ending august 20. those are the numbers on inflation. expect a lot more discussion on those numbers throughout the day . a reminder, the senate is in. back from a month-long break.

they are in, votes expected at 6:38 p.m.. president biden is expected to hold a ceremony to celebrate the passing of the inflation reduction act. played need to watch on the c-span network. we hope you watch it all on c-span, c-span2 and watch online at c-span.org. outside of washington, a story from usa today this morning. on the last day of the primary season. primary season wrapping up with races in new hampshire, delaware and rhode island today. the story in usa today the most notable race of the day, a republican showdown in new hampshire that could have a big impact on the u.s. senate. a pro donald trump election

denier are battling for the nomination to battle maggie hassan. highlights a primary day that includes those races in delaware and rhode island. the establishment republican in new hampshire are taking aim at the retired general who leads polls in a crowded field despite a series of far right statements that may not play well with moderate voters. it will get decided today along with a slew of other primaries taking place in the northeast. that is on the agenda today. we want to hear your thoughts in this open forum.

any public policy issue, this is ron from florida, a democrat. you are a first. caller: hi, good morning. thank you for taking my call. i am a democrat and i want to talk about the abortion issue. i think republicans paint democrats as pro-abortion. i don't think anybody is pro-abortion. i think it is an individual choice and i want the government out of that and i think that is closer to a libertarian view which would saddle up with the republican view. i think many democrats think like i do. the other subject i want to talk about is the second amendment and gun control. i don't think any respectable hunter would take an automatic

weapon into the woods to hunt animals. i don't know why anybody needs an automatic weapon for self protection. there are to be some kind of controls on that. thank you. host: that is ron in florida. the story from axios overnight. senator lindsey graham announcing a bill on national abortion restriction. he plans to introduce the protecting capable children from late-term abortion. he previously introduced bills to ban abortions from 20 weeks. this ban seeks to ban abortions for 15 weeks. senator graham talking about that today. this comes less than two months out from the midterm elections

where abortion is expected to be an important issue following the supreme court's decision to overturn roe v. wade. this is randall from maryland. caller: i was going to call to follow up with the discussion about cancer but i would like to comment on the previous discussion with kathleen hall jamieson who i respect a lot. i thought she was a little bit pie-in-the-sky when she talked about the issue about amending the constitution. yes, the constitution has been amended but it has not been amended recently. today's political environment because we have decided to have a two-party system and not have a parliamentary system. it is almost impossible on any issue of any significant

controversy in today's environment to amend the constitution. host: two thirds of a houseboat, two thirds of a senate vote and 75% of the states. caller: that's almost impossible. the e.r.a. is almost there but it still hasn't passed. what is that leave you with? it's not really possible. in theory it is possible but theory and practice are two different things. what you really have is what i would call a secular religion where so much of our lives are governed and dictated by things of the past and what people thought over 200 years ago. it would be great to have a c-span show on that and not just focus on the wonders of the constitution but the constraints

and maybe even have some discussion about why he chose not to have a parliamentary system which gets around a lot of the problems we have. and brings us closer to a real democracy. we could not even change our system with amendments. it really shows you again how limited is. jefferson himself said we should have a constitutional convention every generation. i understand that there is an effort by republicans to have a constitutional convention and there are democrats, i believe former senator feingold posted that. i am not sure why democrats should be opposed to revisiting

the constitution. host: randall, thanks for that. we had one of the groups on pushing for the constitutional convention. i will have one of the producers look that up. we had that group on this program before. we will go to theodore, hopefully my producers looking that up. miami, republican. caller: first, condolences to the royal family. second, i just saw vice president kamala harris. i am just not sure what she is talking about. she rambles on and on. i would like to understand what her position is, where she stands and what she is doing

because i'm not understanding. she looks like she does nothing. thank you. host: on sunday, meet the press aired an interview with the vice president and she said that we had an activist supreme court. you have to turn your volume down there for us to be able to listen to you. sorry about that. it is (202) 748-8000 democrats to call in, (202) 748-8001 for republicans, independents (202) 748-8002. in just about five minutes we will talk about campaign 2022, the midterm elections. we will talking about progressives in the midterm elections and joined in that conversation by maurice mitchell from working families party's maurice mitchell and election transparency initiative.

jim from texas, republican. caller: good morning, how's everything going? i'd a funny question. it has been gnawing at the back of my head for quite a while. why doesn't cnn and msnbc cover the fiasco on the border with these people just letting our country? do you suppose they are trying to help biden? host: what do you think jim? caller: i think biden is trying to get enough people into start another state and call it bidenville. it is just a disgrace. i heard our vice president being described is useless and i guess i have to agree with that assessment. host: that is jim in texas.

this is charles and fort collins, colorado, and independent. caller: i have a friend who is a real republican and stuff and he was telling me that this nation is divided because of biden. this nation is not divided because of politicians, it is divided because of us. until we as people can open our minds up and look in both sides, we will never be able to bring this nation together. it is not the politicians, it is us, we the people. when you hear people use dog whistles. like immigration, it is not biden, it is not trauma. it is not addressed because we the people are divided and we

can't tell these politicians to knock off this partisanship in this extremism. host: that was charles in colorado. thanks to my producers downstairs, it was michael garrett with the convention of the state's project. he came on the program to talk about the grassroots efforts to amend the constitution and hold the convention of the states. you can just type michael ferris at the search bar and watch the interview on that topic. robbie, and florida, and independent. caller: i wanted to speak about money in politics is the root cause of what is causing so much trouble. the money that is involved in the media. whether it is television or online promoting a certain point of view.

there is no more news anymore, it is all opinion and pundits and it gets really tiresome. i would like for things to get back to reporting news, regular news. what we see is people on the tv like tucker karlsson fomenting hate and anger, somebody to feel aggrieved about. the money that rupert murdoch rakes and on fox or cnn, whoever owns them. it becomes ratings and it skews everything. plus, you have heavy donors like to extremely donors and taxes that are providing all the funds for every person running in texas. from four or five different pacs that they donate to. citizens united us have left us

in a place where the people can no longer have a voice. thank you very much. host: this is timothy here in d.c., good morning. caller: i am in washington dc. thank you for having this open forum. the last two colors hit it right on the nail. i live not too far, i live on south capitol street. it is like the politicians are raping the country out of the money. why would you pay a million dollars to win a seat that is only a hundred and $80,000? it's because of all the kickbacks. this country would be the best country ever if every one just

live together. love each other for who they are. let's not get in the way of imposing your religion and ideology on anyone. just everyone love and respect each other. the rest of the world is watching us. the we are making it worse for ourselves. it is sickening. you are stunting your own growth. you can't go anywhere. all of these republicans have millions of dollars in their bank accounts. it is so much kickback. host: that is timothy in d.c.

up next we will be joined by maurice mitchell, of the working families party, the national director talking about his upcoming 2022 midterms. later, ken cuccinelli will join us to talk about his role as the national chair of the election transparency initiative. stick around. we will be right back.

just got easier, tell your smart speaker, select c-span radio app and listen to washington journal daily.

weekdays at 5 p.m. and 9 p.m. eastern. catch washington today for a fast-paced report of the stories of the day. listen to c-span anytime, just tell your smart speaker, play c-span radio. c-span, powered by radio. "washington journal" continues. host: our guest is a mars mitchell of the working families party. -- marius mitchell of the working families party. how long have you been around and when did you get started? guest: it is a political party for the multiracial working-class. we started in 1998 in new york. we have grown to be a national movement that believes that politics should work for the many, not for the privileged youth. we recruit and train activists,

educators, organizers, leaders, everyday americans so that they cannot run and govern. we believe that the people -- can run and govern. we worked pretty hard with our activist around the country. recently come over this past primary season, we have elected eight working family democrats and democratic primaries that will be going to congress if they are successful. our ideas are very popular across all america, urban america, every region. host: working family democrats. are you a traditional third-party? guest: we do have a balance line in -- balance line -- ballot line two allows a party to be able to process with another party. in places like that we have our

own ballot line. in other places, we run our folks in democratic primaries. a party is a group of people who come together, who have a set of issues and use elections as the main intervention. as long as that is happening, as long as you are doing that, you are a party. we chose different ways in order to advance our issues. host: woody efforts -- would you ever show up to eight general election to run as a democratic candidate? guest: i want to be clear, a minor party might send one of the candidates to the general election and sometimes the candidate that is closer to them, we do not believe in spoiler politics. there are opportunities where we would run in the general

election, where we think there is a pop of victory. that has happened in some cases. the main kind of struggle is the site of struggle where we are finding against fascism. we are uniting with everybody, including people that identify as democratics, independence, conservatives. the other side of the struggle, which is taken place in the democratic party, is around how we ensure that americans can afford things like public education or life-saving drugs, or childcare. that is the main thing that is happening you the democratic party. host: what has been your impact on the democratic party

in recent cycles? guest: we have a pretty great track record. we have candidates up and down the country. let's take congress for example, in texas, this is the south, this is the corporate elite fascism. -- they ran progressive candidacies, they were unapologetic about the issues. they one in their primaries and are likely to go to congress. another person, governor lee in pittsburgh. pittsburgh is a working-class town. governor lee is a progressive who built a multiracial

coalition that included union workers, activists and many others. some of those are likely to go to congress. this is a rural district where he challenged a long time incumbent, a long time incumbent, that as a democrat defied as both president and in line with the armor suitable companies. when the democrats were trying to negotiate in order for the federal government to be able to negotiate the prices of life-saving drugs, he got in the way of that. -- she is running in a competitive testing in the general election in oregon. combined all of these candidates , the fact that their issues are protohuman issues, if there's a fight -- protohuman issues.

human issues. guest: we will love for you to join the conversation. host: republicans, (202) 748-8001. independence, (202) 748-8002. a special line for working party members, (202) 748-8003. we are talking about the midterm elections, but i wonder if president biden decides to run for a second term, would you like to see him challenged in the democratic primary. guest: there has not been any challenges that emerged. what i am focused on today, building the united front against what, this is not hyperbole, what to me is fascism. i am actually really hardened

that president biden took a strong stance against the republican party. there really is a stark choice in this country. this is an important historical junction for everyone who is listening. we are deciding whether or not we want to live in a democracy. we are deciding if we are comfortable with the political colt taking government power. people who will identify as conservative, have that binary choice of freedom on the agenda. historically, in a moment where forces are attempting to take over democracy or fascism forces are attempting, we know the only thing that has succeeded is the united front. we are a proud part of the

united front with anybody, republican, independent, democrat, who wants to fight those forces and create a america where we all can prosper and where we have the abilities to have the debates. i want to have the debates around how we get to a place where we can afford childcare, or how we look at america where workers rights are valued. if there are conservative ideas, independence ideas come i want to live in a country where we can have that debate. we can't have that debate when we live in a country where political violence is going on. where the idea of anti-democracy is the idea that we can just nullify an election if we do not like the outcome. we need to fight that front. november is our opportunity to do that. host: i can't think of a more existential and important

conversation than today, than all of us, people of good faith, the majority of people who aren't captured by a political call income comes together in order to succeed that call. host: let's chat with a few callers. john first in austin, texas. independent. caller: good morning. as an independent, as an american, i am wondering how it is that trump is a cult and the democratic party is aa cult. we can talk a lot about the democratic parties in their facist views. why is it that you want to bring the country together, yet you want to take this extreme side?

guest: i want to be very clear, when i say the republican party has been captured by a cult. i remember it when the former president said that he could go and shoot somebody. his following would support him. it would praise him. that is a cult like a dedication to a leader. i think that the republican party has moved dangerously in that direction. it is just not true. you can say a lot of things and have a lot of critiques in the democratic party. in fact i would join you. it simply is not true that there is a personality cult on the

left or democratic party with any other political movement. whenever a democracy moves into a phase when there is a personality cult that is advocating for the nullification up elections and the deprivation of democratic institution, all of us needs to get together to stop that. this debate, i want to have that debate with the caller and people i could agree with. people who we disagree with should be able to afford health care, should be able to be invested in. when they are at the workplace, they should be able to organize if they want to. we should be able to struggle and disagree on the issues and a live in a society where our

values and ideas can't lead to political violence. on january 6, we seem a lot of the far right violent political organization that are aligned with donald trump and his movement. we saw it at the search of his home. violently confronting the fbi and law enforcement. we know that this is cult like behavior. i want to be very clear, i am not picking any issue with people of conservative views around this issue have conservative democracy. we can disagree with the issues. if we do not live in a country where we can struggle with ideas without a leading to a rupture of our society, we are going to be in trouble. host: good morning.

caller: thank you for taking my call. again, if he wants to bring up aligning to cult things, he can mention the obama administration. you have the black lives matter, and t5, citing with democrats -- antifa, siding with democrats. they are making billions of dollars. we have free speech taken away. i will give you an example in massachusetts. i saw a woman come in, using two different ebt cards to buy groceries, then take out $65 to buy lottery tickets. that is what we can't stand.

the government is handing out money. yet, they are going to go order lottery tickets. those are things you should be talking about. have a great day. guest: thanks, caller. i think we can have multiple conversations. i think we can discuss and talk about hate. we should talk about hate. not just abstract hate and people's scum of the institutions and organizations and political movements that are attempting to rep us apart. --rip us apart. this is political corruption. this is autocracy. i'm going to continue to talk about those things.

i'm going to continue to talk about the issues of working families. at the end of the day, i am not going to -- any working individual for the choices they want to make with their money. if you want to buy a lotto ticket, buy groceries, if you want to buy food, i believe that it is your choice. the america we live in come i believe in freedom. the wealthiest country in the history of countries, we should be able to support each other. our government should invest in our communities. we are in safer committees when our government invests. that means investing in childcare, health care, education. i want to live in a country that invests and supports the poor. a lot of us are one or two paychecks away from being in a very challenging situation

economically. in those moments, sometimes it is not a situation of lacking the initiative, or us not being hard-working. sometimes we fall on hard times. i think it is the role of our friends, neighbors, the government to create a safety net for folks who fall on hard times and i think that is a decent way to create a community that i government that supports all of us. i would argue that to the end of time. unfortunately has happened, there is welfare that currently exist and there is a lot of distributions of resources. that distribution is everyday people like us, that money going to corporations and billionaires. the welfare i think is most outrageous is the corporate welfare.

the distribution of resources through tax cuts. there are people who are already wealthy. i think we need to take that on a very serious wave. what is actually happening is at the very wealthy are spending their money to the poor politician that will cut their taxes, sometimes a very handsomely. if they invest a few hundred thousand dollars, in the next cycle at least to a tax cut, that is a big deal. that leads to political corruption. for us, when you invest in working people, everyday folks, they trickle in every single direction. they trickle down economics. we want to be in a debates where we could actually develop a probate economy that works for everybody. host: this is jonathan. four democrats.

on the line for democrats. good morning. caller: good morning. i am a proud member. i appreciate you being our leader. you talked about the party of our dream, what does that look like to you? guest: great question. i think that working people deserve to govern. as the working families party, we believe that working people should lead. when they lead, we unlock all of the capacity of our society, when we invest in our people, those investments are seen in different ways. we deserve a political party that also believes that most of the callers would believe that our politics are not serving us.

the rigid two-party system has not served us feared it has . it has created a environment that has led to division. both people great on many things. most people deserve political movement and political homes of their values and our unapologetic around. if there is a fight against a boss and for workers, people deserve a party will be unapologetic and consistent on these lines against the bosses. if it is a fight against pharmaceutical companies, so we can make sure we can pay for our life-saving medications, a corporate actor but is attempting to engage in political corruption, that is clear and unapologetic. pro human and pro person

agenda. we deserve that and we should build that. if anybody is interested in building that with us, you can text us, 30403 and we will be happy to join us. host: john fetterman, did you support him in the primary? guest: we supported another candidates. we endorse more than 1000 in the primary. it was a great vigorous debate. we are proudly supporting democrats in the general election. we have candidates like federman , mandela barnes, in wisconsin who is a great working families debates. stacey abrams in atlanta.

we think that the federman campaign has done a excellent job. host: michigan. this is janet. line for republican. good morning. caller: good morning. i am a 77-year-old white woman. therefore, in your eyes we have nothing in common. we are both human beings who live in this wonderful country of the united states of america. let me give you advice, you will never succeed in your goal by insulting half the country and calling them facist, racist p or you will never win your argument by saying you want to have a conversation, or less debated.

e it appeared when you start out with the premise of i am wrong, i am your enemy, i am violence because i am a republican and voted for donald trump twice. this political violence that you are talking about that republicans and ultra maga's are doing does not exist, it is a lie. the summer of 2020, when antifa and black lives matter burned cities, hundreds of people were killed. nothing happened to any of them. this incident on january 6 is a touchstone for people like you to paint every republican with a broad brush of violence. it is wrong. it is a lie. c-span.org thank you.

guest: thank you. a lot of people voted for donald trump, twice. if i'm going to gauge in a real conversation, i have to be honest. the truth is, there is a very active, real violent anti-democratic movement that has captured the republican party. it has taken the republican party in a dangerous direction. i do not believe that every person that voted for donald trump agrees with that.

if you disagree with the idea of politics and political violence, join a united front. i can't think of a more important thing to do. in saying that, i ruffle a fume feathers or make -- feathers or make folks uncomfortable, there's no way we could have a conversation that is not based on the truth, that includes a hard truth. hard truth about a party or a movement that you might identify with. we have to start telling the truth. i understand that some callers may be offended by some of those truths. it does not mean that it is not the truth. by the way, caller, i grew up in a diverse community.

i work with people across generations, i know a lot of 77-year-olds would agree with me. host: this is a bill in florida. independence. caller: i am calling because i wanted to know exactly what you see as the differences between conservative on the number of issues. a conservative and a maggot a republican, what are the differences. if you can go into a bit of differences between the working families party and the democratic party, do you consider yourself a facest? guest: the key mark of the

maga republican cult, a allegiance to donald trump. a willingness to align yourself with political violence. also, a willingness to challenge for democratic institutions if it achieves your political end. this is the nature of eight anti-democratic. conservatives believe all types of things about corporate taxes, the size of government, about core values, that has nothing to do about whether or not you pledge allegiance to a individual or if you are willing

to nullify the election if you do not get the outcome you want. the working families party and who we are in distinction between us and the democratic parties, we unite with everybody. we unite with the democratic party in general elections in order to concede the far right. we engage in a rigorous debate year-round on the issue with folks to identify -- with folks who identify as a democrat. the way that we talk about just can seem very binary. for us we believe in the politics of the vast majority of us versus the politics of the very few. by few come i mean people in wall street, corporations who are attempting to corporately capture our government. and are attempting to capture both parties.

in the democratic party, you do have institutions who have evidence of that corporate capture. as a result, when democrats gets an opportunity to govern, they are conflicted because they have to fight where they do not have support in the working base. we are very clear about that. there should be no debate about that. we need a political party that every single day will support workers. that is the main difference we doing the, credit party and the politics of the 2 -- democratic party and the politics of the two-party system. host: if you describe the working party as a social families party? guest: they include people who

identify as democrats. they include people who identify as their main political identity comes in from the work that they do. the working families party is a diverse party. it includes a lot of folks. i cannot be more proud of that. a multi tendency, pro people populist party. host: this is lydia in new york. good morning. republican line. caller: the thing that concerns me about what you are saying, it is labeling groups of people. i know people who are democrats and republicans. i know people who voted for donald trump, that would even consider themselves as maga

. they are not hateful. whenever a group gets labeled and used by a political party to try to make their point, all i could think about is hitler's when he demonized the jews. they used that to gain power. it doesn't matter to me who is far right and far left, when you start labeling, i find that dangerous. it makes me less likely to pay attention to what that group is saying. most people think a variety of things. we all have different reasons that they support a candidate or vote a certain way. i voted democrat for many years. the main reason i changed is because i look at the inter-cities, i see that things have not improved. i think, why are the cities that has been led by democrats for

years and years not gotten better. why is there still poverty. i just would encourage any political group not to demonize another political group. each person that votes a certain way is making that decision based on a number of factors. guest: thank you. to that last point, i could not agree more with the caller. we should not demonize each other. people make decisions, including political decisions for all types of reasons. they think that i want to clarify, you might disagree. the characterization of the right and the left. in late real terms, -- in real terms, there's a very resourced, dedicated, violent right-wing apparatus that has already taken

lives and will take more lives. it is political in its nature. all of us need to challenge and distance ourselves organized against. i do not believe that violent right-wing apparatus includes everybody who voted for one candidate or another. however, i would say, if you do disagree with that, you can disagree with lyrical violence, if you disagree with -- political violence, if you disagree with hate, white supremacy, it is article to this moment to be explicit and say so. -- crackle to this moment to be explicit to say so. -- critical at this mom to be explicit to say so. -- at this moment to be explicit to say so. our political system, i could probably agree with some of those critiques. we need to be better as a

country. we need to build a country that works for many, not for a few. our political system has not delivered. we can if we come together. host: we are going to end it there this morning. maurice mitchell is the director of the working families. thanks for coming back to talk to us. 25 minutes left. we are going to be joined by ken cuccinelli to talk about his role as national chair elections transparency initiatives. stay with us. we will be back after the break. >> middle and high school students, it is your time to shine. you're invited to participate in the documentary competition.

feature yourself as a elected member of congress. we ask this year's competitors, what is your top priority and why. make a video that shows the importance. do not be afraid to take risks with your documentary, be bold. $100,000 in cash prizes. videos must be submitted by january 20, 2023. visit our website for competition rules, resources. >> c-span's campaign 2022 coverage is your front row seat to the midterm elections. watch it as it happens on the campaign trail. other events during this year's races.

do not miss a single moment because you can take us with you on the go. go to c-span.org/campaign 2022. your website for all of our coverage. check results from every primary. c-span campaign 2022, your unfiltered view of politics. "washington journal" continues. host: ken cuccinelli is back with us. he is now serving as the election transparency initiative national chair. what is the election transparency initiative? guest: that is a good place to start. it is a group we started a little less then two years ago to take advantage of the sudden interest on both sides of the aisle and election reform.

having been a state legislator, i can tell you that elections and other state legislators would tell you the same. they are often a left behind subject. all of the country, election laws need updating. pennsylvania is still operating on a 37 election code. -- 1937 election code. in the last two years, we have been encouraging state legislators to open up, transparency open up the election system so citizens can see it. we believe that kind of transparency and openness combined with basic common sense and security gives anybody, winner or loser, confidence in the outcome of the election. that is how we measure success.

systems that are so open and transparent and reliable that citizens on all sides can have confidence in the outcome of their election. we saw evidence of that confidence being shaken in 2020. often by state officials who were not obeying their own laws. you do not pass laws to say obey the last law we passed. there is an element of reliability and confidence. we have not seen this kind of attention to election systems since bush and gore in florida in 2000. florida, cleaning up its elections, firing some people who were not doing a good job. they made improvements. one result was that, in a rough year for elections, 2020, florida the third largest date, swing state, was done counting its election with no complaints

with either site on election night. if you look around the country that night and the following weeks or two, turned out to be a pretty impressive feed. that is our goal with the initiative. we worked on it in states around the country. last year we were making efforts to make sure washington just did not take over elections from the state your we believe that each state running its own election system is a form of security itself. i can tell you that from my days in the department of homeland security. it is much more difficult. if we had 51 systems rather than one. that threat seems to have abated currently. we continue to focus on reforming the states. a bottom line, we are better off today than we were two years ago. that is on a bipartisan basis. in entirely democratic states like new jersey, have passed transparency improvements.

we have seen partisan legislation in pennsylvania, south carolina, kentucky, louisiana. this is one of those issues that did not use to be partisan. it would be great if it can get back to having conversations about what works best in states and committees to run elections. host: if you want to have a conversation with, ken cuccinelli phone lines are open. democrats, (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001. election transparency.org is the website you can go to to find out about the election and transparency initiative. on the about page of that website, the first paragraph, the transparency initiative is mobilizing coalition partners to defeat radical washington democrats through hr one and hr for, while simultaneously

working at the state level to achieve meaningful reforms. it reminded viewers what hr for our. --hr-1 andhr-4. guest: hr1 is a attempts of washington elections. we would have one set of rules. they would be the same everywhere. they would heavily emphasize more of the less secure forms of voting. mail for instances, less secure than in person voting. more prone to fraud and mistakes, also slower counting, which creates its own problems.

we also saw hr1 to connect some dots. it would have mandated that states dump all adults, they did not say citizens, on any other databases. illegal aliens get a public health services from their states that they live in. all of those would have been put on the voter rolls and could have voted without penalty. it would have eliminated voter id laws. every democratic, every party, republicans, democratic, libertarians, all in poll after poll despite the attacks on it support, since a voter id.

frankly even vice president harris, when pressed in a interview in the heat of the hr1 debate, acknowledged that you will need to be able to identify. no matter what the subject, americans do not take kindly to washington trying to take over what their state has been doing since 1789. host: in ohio. independence. good morning. caller: it seems to me that you are an answer looking for a problem. everything i see on this, it is always the republicans this

time, republicans this time trying to say there has been an election. if that happens again, we can say he wins. when it comes to citizens, when we first had this country, you do not have to be a citizen, you just had to be a white lane owner. -- land owner. guest: thankfully we have grown past just white land owner. all men are created equal and endowed by their creator, including life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. we have never been perfect about achieving that goal. it is still our national goal. a part of this debate is getting closer and closer there. the phrase we use all the time,

easy to vote, hard to cheat. it is important for people to remember, former attorney general, i can tell you a bad ballad goes into the ballot box, you cannot take it out. you do not know which ballot is yours or mine. even if you identify a problem after the fact, the only solution, if there is enough bad ballot in the election, to ask a judge to rerun the election. that is an enormous undertaking to try to do twice. it is hard enough once. it is important that we secure our elections on the front end with clean voter rules, people able to identify themselves. we want to make sure everyone's a vote gets counted. that does not seem like too much to ask. the caller was a zeroing in on republicans. you have heard a lot from republicans in the last two

years. our modern elections date back to 2000. all of the presidential elections in 2000, 2004, 2016, it was democrats who were complaining nationally, including people who now say that such complaints are somehow bad, like jamie raskin in congress. they were complaining and objecting to electors. and now all of a sudden, those same complaints on the other are a basis for judgment for those folks. i think that it would be nice to be able to set the partisanship aside. if you get 100 americans in a room, they will agree on 75% on what it takes to run a good election. i think it would be great if we could get back there appeared the way we are going to get back in the transparency that we emphasized the election transparency initiative.

so citizens can see every step of every election in every state , every step except you voting on the ballot. in terms of problems, i mentioned 2020, one of the big problems were state officials not following their own laws. this was rampant. we could point to examples in wisconsin, pennsylvania, michigan, arizona. it was all over the country. covid was the excuse. that is not an excuse to not follow the rules. fairness is not changing the rules in the middle and everybody playing by the same set of rules. in america, we call that due process. that is what some were lacking in 2020. i think we are going to be back to that in the 2022 elections. i think there has been improvements in transparency in

security happening all around the country. there's good reason to think that our election system is better in 2022 than it was in 2020, but there's a lot of work to do. host: less than 10 minutes before the end of our program . after this program is over, we are going to the judiciary committee hearing on data security featuring twitter executive term whistleblower. you can see the room they are. the reporters are starting to gather. that is where we are going to go after this program. until then, questions from ken cuccinelli . john is next. thanks for waiting. caller: thanks for taking my call. i agree. as far as mail in ballots and drawing out -- throwing out,

being and complete --in complete. i agree that hr1 and hr4. different systems are harder to have than one centralized systems. thanks for taking my call. guest: i said how important it is to secure elections on the front and come out wisconsin is a good example. a year and a half after the 2020 election, the wisconsin supreme court found that wisconsin's use of drop boxes was violation of wisconsin law.

there is no basis for them to be used the way that they were in wisconsin, across the state. there was a big difference in various jurisdictions. it is a good example because our courts are not equipped to quickly judge, even criminal cases. every potential fraud vote. this is criminal as supposed to be making a state. takes weeks and months to investigate and trial. you do not have time for that, especially in presidential elections, we have a meeting date for electors six weeks after the election date. it is a good example of the states own court system finding that there officials have been violating the law. it was bipartisan. the republicans and democrats were involved in that and violations of the law.

it takes 18 months to do that. it is important to get these things right on the front end, so that when the election ends, when i lost i did not question the outcome, i may not have liked it, but i did not question the outcome. i had confidence that it was easy enough to walk away knowing we lost in a fair fight. host: mount vernon, new york. line for democrats. good morning. caller: good morning. i am trying to understand why former president donald trump is not arrested. he has committed the highest crime in the nation called treason. it happens when you commit a crime against your government by trying to overturn an election and stealing documents from the white house.

yet, he walks free. the punishment for treason is five years imprisonment. the top level, life imprisonment and a death penalty. guest: sure. i do not think there is evidence of treason. you can disagree with the man, he was a candidate for president. candidates are expected, our system is built to absorb election content. did he go past the point some people thought it should have ended? sure. that is the point of continuing debate as well. as a candidate, he has a right to be sure that the account and everything else was done properly and accordance to the rule. i just gave you a wisconsin example. we know that there were states

not following their own laws by their own judgment after the fact. let's not pretend that donald trump was not angry at nothing. there was a lot for him to be upset about. does that mean that the election should have flipped? we have a system in place to choose those outcomes and the outcome produced was that joe biden was the president, he is today. we now have one of the things that blocked him from that was the focus of the conduct of the elections. the execution of elections getting them done right. to do that, we do need more openness. for folks with your view, i love. you are from mount vernon, new york. for those of you who are on the winning side, the democrat side, joe biden side. i would suggest a lot of openness. instead of saying, you do the

right to look at this stuff. the idea should be, open at all up so people can see themselves that the outcome was the accurate one. one of the things that are much frustrating, when either side tries to shut down the inquiry. the best side to answer, which will you would consider unreasonable beliefs about the election, is to be more open about them. we have localities and states all around the country that are trying to bury this stuff. we have registers, city clerks who are trying very hard not to answer questions. why not? the only reason most people usually conclude that you do not want to entity question is you are -- want to answer a question is you are afraid of the answer. that is not a position we want to be in our election. because who we elect, is leading

our country. that is the starting point by the people. it is that expression of people in our election. we do need to work for years to come in all of the states to improve the quality of our both roles --voter rolls, to make sure people identify themselves and only identify themselves. that is what we have at election transparency.org. it is important to achieve it all over the country. we seen that we could achieve it. when things go badly as they did in florida in 2000, they responded correctly. they were utterly embarrassed at how bad they had to reform. their legislature turned for years to improving their system and letting go people who were not doing the job well. the result was, they had

dramatically improved election functioning. they still acknowledged governor desantis has been pushing other reforms in florida successfully, they still acknowledged they have more to do. the efforts they made following the 2000 election really didn't improve their system. host: we are going to have to end it there. the hearing is getting underway. the senate hearing on that twitter -- twitter was a blower. -- whistleblower. i want to thank you for your time. that is going to do it for our program. we want to take you to live coverage to the hearing. >> their new ceo of this past january. last month, this individual released a whistleblower

disclosure detailing alarming allegations about twitter security practices. without objection, his disclosure will be entered into the record. the name is peter. thank you for joining us. you are here to serve a subpoena, so that the public can hear the details of your disclosure. you've alleged a number of security flaws and weaknesses within, flaws that may pose a direct threat to the safety and privacy of twitter's hundreds of millions of users as well as america's national security. this actually began in 20 11 when the ftc, the federal trade commission, first concluded that twitter was playing fast and loose with user data. they found that twitter had "deceived customers and put