center on -- talks about his investigation that found retired u.s. military personnel taking jobs with foreign governments. ♪ host: public safety, crime, the fear of crime has been a campaign issue in many election years. 2022, it's been a prevalent theme. does that reflect what voters are experiencing?

certain crimes have increased, fbi statistics show out decline in violent crime. some critics argue these ads are thinly veiled racist attacks. good morning and welcome to washington journal for october 24. the first hour of the program, we will ask you is crime a concern in your community? here's how to join the conversation, for republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents (202) 748-8002. send us a text at (202) 748-8003 . we are on facebook and twitter. send us a tweet. is crime a concern in your immunity, what kind of crime. what do you see? is it an issue that is important to you in the campaign.

along those lines, this is from yahoo!. it's a survey they are doing it. in that piece, they write that fbi estimates suggest an overall violent crime may have fallen 1% in 2021. far from being a blue state problem, eight of the 10 states with the highest homicide rate have been read for the past two decades. crime rates in border states are lower. the murder rate is below the 1990's. according to the yahoo! news poll, large majorities of americans believe crime is increasing in the u.s. a similar majority, say they are

very or somewhat worried about a breakdown of law and order in american cities. also in that piece, beneath the surface, the poll reveals that crime is exerting a stronger poland many voters than the number would suggest. when asked how to rate the issue, a clear majority of americans describe crime as very important. only inflation scores are higher. that is from yahoo! news. on the issue of how this is plain out in some of these attack ads, this is from u.s. news. how race entered the midterms in the guise of crime. she writes:

we will show you some of those ads and responses by candidates this morning. (202) 748-8001 is the line for republicans. democrats (202) 748-8000. independents (202) 748-8002. on this program, the university of virginias center for politics talked about how the issue of crime became part of the campaign 2022. >> as to the crime question,

these things are very complicated. a lot of big cities are governed by democrats, a lot just have more problems to deal with than the suburbs do. the suburbs exist for people to get away from the big cities. it's a complicated question. one broad point about the crime issue, we had the murder of george floyd and protests. it seemed like there was a pendulum swing toward thinking about reforming law enforcement. being concerned about overreach by longform. the pendulum has swung back. you've got more of a fork us on law and order and whether -- no one is being a of the police. everyone is championing their own law enforcement. i'm not saying that's good or

bad, it's different than what the conversation was a couple of years ago. >> this morning, is crime concerning your committee? the line for republicans (202) 748-8001. democrats (202) 748-8000. independents (202) 748-8002. new york city, this is john. good morning. caller: good morning. how are you? host: ute the volume on your television. go ahead with your comment. caller: let me get my remote. people have got to understand where it is crime originate from? we have poor people who don't have education, they drop out in the seventh or eighth grade. it happened to my mother and

father, it happened to me. they turn to crime because they have nothing else to do. we need to educate our kids so they grow up with a sense of community and substance in their head. i'm going to on house. i'm going to buy a car. in my neighborhood here in brooklyn, kids go to college. they don't buy guns and do crazy things. it's the kids who don't have jobs, they have no meaning in their life. i think republicans put these gun laws so you can just walk and buy a gun. i think that's because they want crime to be bad in the cities.

in the suburbs, those kids are educated. they've got money. host: your city has pretty tough gun laws. caller: the guns don't come from new york. they won't lay out where these guns are coming from. these kids don't get these guns where there are strict laws. they go down to florida, texas. they've got the laws. if you've got education, if you've got a house, you are trying to go to college, you're not going to do crazy things. in my neighborhood, we have kids that don't have computer classes. we have kids the don't know how to read and write.

then they drop out. that's another generation. host: this is a story about the subway system and the crime rise there. new york city will combat crime after a series of violent deaths on the subway. the governor and the mayor announced a plan to increase the presence of police officers the transit system. it's hopeful that a democrat said the state would hope the city pay for 1200 overtime shifts per day for the officers to patrol the subway and keep new yorkers safe. the governor will take on her republican challenger in a debate that is scheduled. it is scheduled for 7:00 tomorrow night in new york. it's the only debate in that

race. let's go to pennsylvania next. are you there? we lost tony. let's go to barney in florida. his crime concerning your community? caller: crime is a concern, especially in washington dc. host: go ahead. caller: crime is a major concern. black and barack obama are the ones that stormed the capital. that's what they told me. trump is innocent. host: bill is on the independent line. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. in my area, i haven't seen a

dramatic increase in crime. there is a lot more road rage. i think there is a lot of political violence going on in my state, especially from the far right wing. some of these proud boys or whatever they call themselves, i think they are the biggest threat to crime. i think you can show the fbi records that these people are the most dangerous group of people that we've experienced. i am 76 years old. host: you mentioned the issue of road rage. are you seeing an increase in

this? do you tie that into the political references? caller: in some cases, i think the problem is like a lot of people, they put posters on the back. i haven't personally been, but there are people in the state who have had arguments with the other side. to be honest, an explosion starting to kick off. you might say the people want a civil war. host: we will go to social circle georgia. this is pair a. -- perry.

caller: one thing i think we've got to remember is it's a honeycomb world. for every action, there is a reaction. when the legislators pass a law, it stands a chance. that's another opportunity for a lot to be broken. every time someone is angry or being racist or apparent doesn't go to work and chain -- train their children it, the media plays something negative. video, wrappers, everything feels a mind state of the individual. everything is a honeycomb. it is connected. that's why it is so hard to

pinpoint what is causing the crime. everybody is doing what benefits them financially. they are forgetting to invest in the children and to teach them what is correct. there are a lot of problems that have to be addressed. they all influence everything. everything influences one another. i don't know if that makes sense. that's a lot to think about. host: speaking of georgia, the close governor race between brian kemp and his challenger stacey abrams, a recent debate this week. they discuss the issue of crime and crime prevention. here is some of that debate. >> i would let people at home know the largest segment of the

population that is buying handguns and firearms as african-americans and females. the criminals are the only ones who do have the guns. local governments are holding up concealed weapon permits that are keeping citizens from the enable to use their second amendment right to protect themselves and their property. i certainly support that. >> let's be clear. i believe we can protect the second amendment and second graders at the same time. more people are buying guns because they think that's the only way to protect themselves because guns have flooded our streets. these are communities that want to be safe. they don't want to have to carry weapons. the person who was most responsible is a person who holds the weapon. that's why i will quote ronald reagan, trust but verify.

there is no longer a background check for those who have concealed carry permits. that excess less safe. >> there is a federal background check. on every individual that buys a firearm in the united states of america. >> that is not true. >> i understand the point you're making. when you buy a firearm, you get a background check. >> if you purchase a weapon in georgia through private sale, you are not subject to a background check. host: is crime a concern in your community? some comments on twitter.

washington state on the republican line, good morning. caller: how are you? host: fine thanks. caller: i worked with work release programs from guys that were incarcerated to get out if their behavior is good, to work out some of their stuff. they would wear their black-and-white stripes. when i found universally talking

to them over the years is the lack of a father in the house. it was shocking how many didn't have a father, they were raised by a single parent. the ones that did have a father, the majority of them were fathers who had been in trouble with the law also. i thought i would bring that point up. host: edward on the independent line. good morning. caller: hello. host: good morning. caller: i'm calling about the issue of crime. i am concerned about the crime issue. i do think any politicians could do much about it. i hear these interviews and people bring up the crime.

i never hear anybody say what they would do different. everybody's talking about funding the police. hardly anybody -- with the crime issue, it went up 25% during trump's last year. the highest murder rate happened when the late 80's. with the fit no epidemic and other stuff start happening when trump was president. the debate you just showed, they were talking about the highest group of people buying guns was black women, black people are

buying arms because they're worried about these militia types. they want to be protected. that's why black folks are buying guns. they are worried about these militia types. no one ever asks the people about the crime rate in their area. the crime rate is lower in the rural areas. the people in the city are still going to vote democrat. host: ricky, what is your perceptive -- perspective? . caller: good morning. crime is a big issue. during the 80's, during the reagan administration where the

crack at the crack estimate happened. crime is in the middle and lower class communities. in philadelphia, crime tripled. if you look at the major cities, crime went up three times more. that was during covid and the breonna taylor protests. it's just bad. i know that's the number one issue during the election, who wants to bring down crime.

if you're bringing crime down, you have to go into the lower class communities to educate and stop the drug trade. you can get young people in school and show them a better future. host: in the local races in the philadelphia, and the local races for seats, is crime a top issue there? >> it is. caller: that's the number one issue with the local races here. i know in philadelphia the district attorney there on the verge of getting impeached because the crime is out of

control. host: he could be impeached by the state legislature? caller: yes. host: i appreciate your call this morning. we mentioned the race in new york between the incumbent and the republican congressman. a couple of ads from that campaign. this is on the issue of crime. >> the fear of crime is real. it >> you're looking at actual violent crime caught on camera. it's getting worse. on november 8, your life depends on it. it's time our families feel safe again.

>> an officer was on the front line defended the u.s. capitol. he was one over 100 officers injured and died the next day. he refused to endorse the investigation. he didn't stand behind my brother brian. he puts politics before the police. host: a couple of ads there in the new york governor's race. the one and only debate is happening tomorrow new york. back to our calls on the issue of crime. grand rapids, michigan. this is brian. caller: is crime an issue in my community? host: that's the question. caller: can you hear me?

i'm going to be on the ballot. i am running for mayor of grand rapids, edison appeared host: my apologies. i thought it was michigan. caller: it's a community of less than 10,000 residents. it's in central minnesota. it's the county seat. it's less than 50,000 people. it's the area the size of massachusetts to southern maine. we are on the brink of deer hunting season. there are a lot of hunters here. the reason i'm running for mayor is because there is crime here in this little town.

there are drug dealers and thieves and vandals. there are some assaults and driving while intoxicated. it's not new york city. the police department here, they've got unmarked cars. there are the sheriff's and the minnesota state police. the is the department of natural resources. they have their own law enforcement division. it is -- crime is a concern for people in this rural area. host: explain that a little bit.

is there too much of a police presence? caller: in my opinion, yes. i'm running for mayor today to get rid of this. i'm running against an incumbent who's been in office for 14 years. the good old boys, it's like a mutual admiration society. they're always giving each other awards. there is a tremendous senior citizen population here. i'm over 65 years old. i'm trying to calm people down a little bit. host: appreciate your perspective. do you think you have a good chance of winning? caller: probably not. i have run before.

i get thousands of people that vote for me. i'm not part of the good old boys club. host: call us back after the election and let us know how you did. caller: thanks a lot. you are doing a good show. host: this is another small town, not as small as grand rapids, minnesota. this is from a town hall.

let's hear from jeff in pittsburgh on the independent line. go ahead. caller: how are you doing? thanks for your show.

i'm a c-span junkie. a couple of things i wanted to bring up. one of them is -- i'm very concerned about the crime in pittsburgh, the shootings and the murders. now it's like there's nowhere you can go. you have to be in fear some that is going to start shooting people. one of the things we can do is have people, especially in the higher crime areas cooperate with the police. i understand the fear that they have that they will end up being a victim. there are ways here in pittsburgh you can submit something i mail and have forms made up. if you know somebody did a crime

, you can submit that. when there is a crime, the police have no focus initially. if they could be focused initially, even without a witness coming forward, they can focus on a certain person or a certain gang. that would make it so much easier and so much faster for them to be able to solve these violent crimes that are happening. i had a guy that caught a course -- taught a course in community college. he said what are the things we should look for when we hire new police officers? the class went over and over. they went through different things like physical fitness and

bob loblaw. -- blah blah blah. one thing we can train someone in law enforcement is integrity and honesty. when you come to the police academy, we can't teach you that. that is something you have or don't have. there are many opportunities for people in law enforcement to be crooked. you go to a burglary and there's jewelry laying around. you could pocket it if you were a dishonest person. who would ever know? that's one of the things. i'm very concerned about this violence going on.

i'm a concealed carry licensed person. i don't go out of my house without my firearm. you never know. you are in the grocery store, you are in the mall, you were walking down the street. host: how long have you had the permit? caller: i am 70. i've had it since i've been 21. as soon as i was 21 it, i got one. host: have you ever had cause to use it? caller: i've only had one instance where i pulled the gun out. he had a tire iron. he was threatening me to drag me out of my car. he had a tire iron in his hand. when he saw the gun, he jumped

back in his car and took off. i was looking for the police to come to the house if someone got my plate number. you pulled a gun on somebody. it never happened. it was the only time i ever felt threatened where i might have to shoot somebody. host: jim turned in this morning, talking about his permit. he tweets this. grover is in virginia. go ahead. caller: hello.

crime that sin the communities, they never talk about white-collar crime. steve bannon went to the border and stole millions of dollars. they let him walk away. i can go into a burger place and steal a hamburger and i'm going to jail and i'm not going to get out. host: why do you think white-collar crime is a far less campaign issue, corruption, financial malfeasance, particularly in office. why do you think that's not as big of an issue as property

crime, violent crime in a campaign? caller: it doesn't seem to be. host: why do you think that is? caller: they deprive the needed neighborhoods. they are stealing the money for themselves instead of putting it in the community where it belongs. host: this is the headline from nbc news. gop onslaught of crime adds titans senate races. one is wisconsin with ron johnson facing lieutenant governor. this is one of the recent ads from the johnson campaign and a response from the barnes campaign.

>>'s administration has released 800 criminals, including 44 child rapist. it's terrifying. i don't want him anywhere near the senate. two releasing predators, he is a threat to wisconsin families. >> we knew the other side would make up lies about me to scare you. i will make sure our police have the resources and training they need to keep our communities safe. i will bring back manufacturing and pass a middle-class tax cut. if that scary, then so be it. i approved this message. host: outside of being a political issue, is a concern in

your community? (202) 748-8001 for republicans. (202) 748-8000 democrats. independents (202) 748-8002. send us a text if you like, that is (202) 748-8003 this is from stephen in michigan. in north carolina, good morning to kathy. caller: good morning. it's not too bad here. i continue a pattern where it's happening. when i was growing up, we had guns. we noted not to pick them up. it started from school.

you have these parents that don't make their kids mind. when they go to school and misbehave, then they want to put them on something like ritalin. that wasn't the answer. that's where it got started. a gun can be lain anywhere on the table. is that going to shoot i itself? if they would be stricter toward you had to keep your kids where they wouldn't be getting in trouble so much. ours was a good example. my oldest son wouldn't listen in school. my husband went to the social service and asked them. what is considered abuse? we didn't get spanked above the

belt. that's where a lot of it is coming from. these kids get in school and misbehave. they do the opposite of what they are supposed to be doing. when you're going down the road and the crime is all around you. i don't have a gun. i'm going to get my permit. you just don't know. host: simon in maryland. go ahead. caller: hello? host: sharon, i'm sorry. go ahead. caller: how are you doing this morning? thank you for letting me call in. i'm concerned about the crime that's happening all over the country.

people fail to realize that god has laws and we must follow his law. i have five adult sons. none of them get in any trouble, since they were little boys. their father made sure they didn't do those things. we didn't allow them to be with kids that were bad. we didn't allow them to hang out with people like that. caucasian people fail to realize they perpetrate crime during civil rights and nobody said nothing about that. they prevented black people from doing this or that. fascist are trying to bring back america. god bless this country.

this is the best country in the world. host: this is from usa today this morning. what about chicago?

capitol heights, maryland. good morning. caller: crime rolls downhill from capitol hill. they pass bills without reading them. most of the bills they pass, they exempt themselves from the repercussions of that bill. you have police pursuing an annual quota of killing innocent people. they make it a practice in the united states on a daily basis.

when i do go to court, all of these are crimes. you can't buy food without having poison in it or cancer-causing chemicals. nobody is addressing anything. everybody is overlooking the things. people just take it as a way of life. host: tim is next in illinois. caller: there are 1000 mast shooters. it costs one million years to keep them in prison. i would like to see the death

penalty. the voters can do it since elected officials are not going to do it. taxpayers are being punished for other crimes. we should execute them quickly. host: does illinois have the death penalty? caller: no. no they don't. it's a crime against the taxpayers. they've got to pay to support these murderers. host: michael is in oklahoma city. good morning. caller: good morning. i worked for the police for 10 years, answering 911 calls. i think people are expecting too

much from police. a lot of the problem is our local news stations. the easiest thing for them to do is to check the police departments to look for crime. crime is drama. it's drama because we imagine ourselves the victim of a crime. every local news station, you can guarantee it. the problem with police is they can't solve all the problems. you do not need a man with a gun that escalates most situations. you need someone looking at the drug situation. the mental health situation. the economic and opportunity situation for that. police can't do this.

people are afraid because their local news is scaring them. one other thing, it is true. there is an undercurrent of white supremacy in law enforcement. police, sheriffs, fbi, military. host: we have about 15 more minutes about crime. is it a concern in your community? republicans (202) 748-8000. democrats (202) 748-8001. independents (202) 748-8002. a couple of people mentioned education in relation to crime. a major story about where kids are in education after the pandemic. this is from the washington post. the headline, scores fall

coast-to-coast, especially in math. let's hear from brad on the independent line.

caller: we are concerned too much with the wrong kind of crime. we should replace where our parties are in terms of crime. alex jones can talk nonsense about sandy hook and he was fined $1 billion. george bush and the penny -- dick cheney can lie about w md. biden consent weapons to ukraine. if you try to sell your neighborhood weapons, see what happens to you. pfizer can sell drugs and require children to be injected with drugs. they can make congress make them non-liable. if you sell drugs in a neighborhood, see where you go. bill clinton hung out with epstein.

bill clinton can fly around with him. these other crimes we should pay attention to. the last thing we did in afghanistan, a drone strike killed seven children. host: louisville, kentucky. go ahead. good morning. mute your volume. go ahead with your comment or question. caller: i've got it muted now. i'm calling about crime in my city. it's gotten to the point where i'm afraid to really go out. i don't own a gun. i raised two children. they don't own guns.

i have a 14-year-old grandson who is living with me. i often tell him that guns aren't the answer. what i believe is causing all the crime, if you go back and look in 2020, that's when the crime rate really shot up. it's escalated since then. we have elected officials who get on tv who get on the radio and they say things that are making people hate. they are making people afraid. when you have a country where half the people are full of anger and afraid, you have so many guns in this country, what do you expect?

what do you expect if you put guns in the hands of so many angry people? the pandemic escalated part of it. i do believe it is our elected officials who were causing this crime spree. when you are afraid to leave your home, you're no longer living in a free country. it is escalating daily. i'm afraid for my grandson it. we have taken him completely out of school. he does school online. this is no way for children to be brought up.

this is no way for people to live. host: what grade level is your grandson? caller: this is his first year of high school. he is missing what he should be getting as a 14-year-old boy. until we do something, i believe in free speech. i also think that to let these elected officials stand up and say the things they say, i don't know how to stop them. i don't know if we can stop them. host: the issue of crime and guns, it's been a topic in a number of debates, including the pennsylvania congressional race.

here is part of that debate. >> some cities are working toward banning guns in public places. do you believe individual cities should be allowed to make their own gun laws? should that be made at the state level? >> we can have local control over gun access. the larger point that we deal with in washington is gun safety laws. there is no question that to remain static, to not change anything in the wake of horrible shootings. i was at orientation in 2012. i was sitting next to a lady.

she was a newly elected member of congress. her cell phone went off. i saw her take the call. i saw the blood drained from her face. she closed up her phone. she walked out of the room. it was elizabeth esty. she was elected from newtown, connecticut where the sandy hook school. she took the call telling her that 20 little kids had been mowed down in ar-15 by some kid with no business holding it. six or seven adults were killed as well. we have to do sensible things with gun safety laws. that's where we need to do them. that's where we set the tone it. i am in favor of sensible gun safety laws. i am a gun owner. i'm not interested in going to run and sweeping up people's

guns. we have to keep guns in safe hands. >> matt cartwright made the argued why you shouldn't send them back to congress. we saw parkland. we saw las vegas. this year, we see you've all the. this is a tragedy. in 10 years, he hasn't done anything to stop it. they just keep coming and coming. he's asking you for two more years. let me tell you what i believe. he said we should have local control for guns. ok, scranton could outlaw you from having a weapon. hazelton could say you could have a weapon while freeland says he couldn't defend yourself. we need to crack down on people who commit crimes with guns.

we need to crack down on illegal guns. there are shootings and carjackings and it's horrible. criminals with stolen and unregistered guns. that is a real threat. we need a federal government that is run by his pal that will crack done stop that. we did stop low so -- local prosecutors that are letting people out of jail without bail. we are having a crime wave. it started in 2020 and they did not support our police. host: is crime a concern in your community? this is from joan in minnesota. richard in las vegas.

on the independent line, david is next. good morning. david in springfield. you were on the air. caller: i think that with any of these issues, we have to look at why we have that issue. i think it's because of a lack of civility. if you take abortion for example, when you watch these commercials they get upset when we have something like sandy hook happening. what does that say to the younger people in our society?

you knew right from wrong. now there is no right or wrong. i think it's the lack of respect for life. children grow up and they say my neighbor just killed their baby. why can't i go shoot somebody i don't like? that is my feeling on it. it is a lack of respect overall for life in our society. host: next up is annapolis, maryland. good morning. caller: i'm confused by some of the comments given by senators and congressmen where they are on the same topic. how can it be white supremacy when the majority of the officers that were above me were

all african-american. we are supposed to be supporting the country. when they say that gun control is going to fix, how can it fix all. it's a deterrent and everybody should be armed eight escalated situation, if you don't have a weapon, they are going to take control of a situation if they think they have one. ud escalated it because you someone they're going to think twice about. everybody has a different opinion and there is no one answer, but it is not a political solution, it is a national catastrophe at the moment, the way the killing has been going on. host: that wraps up our first hour of phone calls here on "washington journal." thanks for the spare there's more head on the program. up next, cook political report

publisher and editor-in-chief in the walter, talking about the key issues and key races across the country. the run-up to election day now just over two weeks away. later on, washington post's craig whitlock will talk about his investigation into the revolving door between you retired u.s. military personnel and lucrative jobs with foreign governments. ♪ >> in brad snyder's new book, they report the "conventional wisdom about the former harvard law professor and super court justice" is that he struggled to hold the seat formerly held by oliver wendell holmes. he was portrayed as a failure in

the principal villain. yet, none of these characterizations ring true. georgetown professor brad snyder eases 700 faces to examine the justices life. >> book notes plus is available on the free mobile app or where you get your podcasts. ♪ >> live, sunday, november 6, from the texas book festival in austin, one author, the ceo and president of the lbj foundation, will be our guest, talking about u.s. presidential history. jfk and the presidency. joining the conversation with your phone calls, facebook content -- facebook comments, and tweets.

on c-span two. >> c-span now is a free mobile app, featuring your unfiltered view of what is happening in washington live and on-demand. keep up with the day's biggest events with live streams from proceedings and hearings, white house events, the court, campaigns, and more from the world of politics, all at your fingertips. help us stay current with the latest episodes of "washington journal" and c-span radio. plus, a variety of compelling podcasts. c-span now is available at the apple store, google play. download it today. c-span now, it or front row seat to washington, anytime, anywhere. >> "washington journal" continues. host: any walter, the cook

political report publisher and editor-in-chief, on now to talk about election day, just over two weeks away from today. i want to start with the president. early september, you did one about democrats winning over the net voter. you quote pew as well in this. democrats are still going to vote democratic. guest: it has been true over the last 10 or 15 years. it is very hard to get people who disapprove of the president to vote for the party of the president. that may be true even if you like that candidate. there is a connection between -- you think a party here in washington is doing a bad job, you're probably going to vote against that party on the ballot. if you like the job the president is doing, you've over that party. the challenge for the democrats

since the very beginning of the cycle is, can they win in states or districts where the president is unpopular? what we have been seeing in the polling, at least these polls in september and even early october, are that many of the voters have put themselves not as strong disapproval, not people who say, i absolutely cannot stand president. the polls ask a stepped question, strongly approve, approve, somewhat disapprove, strongly disapprove. the somewhat disapprove people are the ones where looking at. i don't truly dislike the guy, but i don't think he is doing a great job. those folks were actually voting more for democrats than we had seen in previous midterm years. it also helps answer the question as to why so many democratic candidate, especially senate candidates, were doing so much better than biden in states

like georgia or in arizona. it seems as if what we are getting is the answer that these voters who are not crazy about biden, they are also not interested in voting for a republican. host: we will explain the senate races tightening up. guest: this goes with my question i raised very early in the cycle. how much can you over perform the president? getting some of those voters is important. but can you get more than a small amount, or are those senate candidates -- it's not at the race is necessarily tightening, it is that they hit their ceiling early on. they consolidated all of those voters, including those who might not really approve of the job the president is doing, to give them a 46%, 47 percent, 40%

on the ballot. host: and they are not getting anymore. guest: you are kind of trapped there. that is always the challenge. when you are looking at an incumbent and you are at 48%, it seems you just need to percent more. but that is often easier said than done. host: before we get into the broad house races out there, giving away the secret sauce of the cook political report, as you look at all the house and senate races, what is it your organization writers and analysts are doing, looking at these individual, particularly when it comes to individual congressional house races? guest: we look at it both from a 30,000 foot perspective, as well as getting in and on the ground perspective. understanding the bigger, broader political environment. that is pretty important.

how do people feel about the president, how do they feel about the state of the country, how are they feeling about what the top issues are? which you all talked about just a minute ago. then, getting down to individual races, what are the unique circumstances in those states that helps us to understand which way these races can go? the overall political environment, it trumps about 90% of what happens in these races. the 10% is what is going on on the ground. there are some democrats, even as the wind is blowing up against their face, they will be over to -- they will be able to overcome that. host: there seems to be a bit of a demarcation this summer. there seems to be wind in the sales of some democratic races. how has that changed? guest: that's a really good question. earlier in the year, what you saw was maybe gale force winds

or higher in the face of democrats. it was not just at the president's job approval ratings, in some cases, at all-time lows that we had seen for a first-term president, but inflation continued to bite. we were seeing more and more challenges that the administration was struggling with. or importantly, we were spending a whole lot of time -- if you think about the media narrative, where was our attention? it was on what democrats were not doing. they were not getting things done on capitol hill, they were fighting amongst themselves. we were hearing about joe manchin and is he or is he not going to support president biden? over the summer, we moved from being completely focused on democrats to one that started to focus on the former president. we had the january 6 hearings. we had former president going

and supporting republican candidate's, and stumping against many of the people that voted for impeachment. republicans who voted for impeachment. he was in the news a lot. he is also incredibly polarizing, much like the current president. and as he said, we had the dobbs decision. what you can feel was a wind that was category four category five. the wind had not lessened in the face of democrats because the intensity on the side of democrats, in terms of their interest and engagement, that started to go up as the lens and focus was on trump, abortion access, and not as much on the things that were hurting democrats. host: what are the raw numbers for the house? how may seats do republicans need to win two take control of the house, and where do you

think that may stand right now? guest: republicans only need five seats to pick up control of the house. the challenge for democrats is that they have many more vulnerable seats, what we call tossup's. those are the close races. there are over 30 of those right now, the lions share of those, more than 20 of them, are in -- were once held by democrats. i think it is something like republicans, in order to win congress, would only need to win about 70% or 20% of the closest races that we have -- 17% or 20% of the closes races that we have in that category. the bar is significantly lower than, say, if they needed to pick up 50 seats or something like that. the good news for democrats is, there aren't as many competitive

races out there as there were in 1994 or 2010, when republicans made really big gains in the house. there are just fewer and fewer democrats in districts that are conservative or are red-leaning. most members of congress sit in a district that the presidential candidate of their party carries. host: any walters hero thousand till 9:00. she is the publisher and editor-in-chief of the cook political report. we welcome your calls and comments about election 2022. republicans, (202) 748-8001. immigrants use -- democrats use (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. text, (202) 748-8003.

guest: to be fair, it has been a long time since we have seen people saying things are on the "right track." what you're seeing is a combination of things. what makes people upset with the status quo? there will be democrats in the group who say, when i really don't like is donald trump or what republicans are doing. but i think it fundamentally signals the frustration with the fact that, one, we are coming out of the reality of the pandemic. the economy, especially with inflation, is a real day-to-day issue for somebody people. -- so many people. and i hear this a lot when i talk to voters. maybe we are just broken past the point of being able to be fixed. our political system, the way we

are unable, it seems, to even have a conversation about politics. there is just a sense that things are in a really, really bad place. we are seeing in the data as well that it is not just concern about the direction of the country, but the direction of the economy. there is a tremendous amount of pessimism out there, not just that the economy is bad, but it is not expected to get better. host: explain why and how you and your team do that, and why that is important. guest: the good news about all of our new technology that we learned about in the pandemic, like zoom and other technology, is that focus groups used to be a time-consuming and expensive process. i like to go and watch voters in

a group, with a moderator, talking to the voters. i have to travel to that and sit behind glass, and listen as they were going about the conversation. now, i can do it from the comfort of my own home on a screen. we had an opportunity to listen to a lot of voters from lots of different places all around the country. these are usually done by third-party groups. the cook political report is not sponsoring these groups, but is invited to come and watch and report on them. i find that is a really good way of understanding the nuance of racists. when you look at a pole and you ask who you voted for, how you identify yourself, but when you listen to voters process through the issues they are struggling with, you get a real

appreciation for how these things are landing in real life. and how complicated politics is. voters are not robots, humans are not robots. we are being asked to vote in this very binary way. yes or no, d or r, up or down. but we have a lot of thoughts going on. i like this person for this reason, but i don't like they are doing that. then, we have to make a choice for just one of them. host: for lack of a better term, do you think voters are more non-binary? guest: they are more independent. we have heard a lot of voters in the groups who say, especially since the roe v. wade decision, you know, i am pro-life, but i don't want all these restrictions. i don't think there should be no abortions. this is me personally being pro-life. i don't think i should be able

to dictate my opinions onto other people. that is where you come to appreciate that these terms we throw around in politics, they don't fit these voters. they are not wearing those clothes the way we think they are. host: we have some calls for you. first, jim in virginia, democrat line. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. host: you bet. caller: i'm not trying to be disrespectful to ms. walter, but i wanted to respond to a call from your previous section. this pertains to what she's speaking about, as to the people who are processing things, nuance, and it is difficult because of so much misinformation. if you give me a couple minutes here, i can explain what i'm talking about. a fellow called in and seemed to

be an obvious trump supporter. he was completely climbing up and down bill clinton for anything with epstein. i don't know how any millions of people listen to c-span, but they all heard him tell them that bill clinton was hanging out with sexual deviant epstein. people don't realize -- for example, epstein was a very high profile financial investments counselor. i imagine, like the clinton foundation, he probably managed assets and funds for the clinton foundation. while, the clinton foundation, for example, actually provided aids medication for over half the people suffering from aids in the entire world. host: i appreciate your call this morning, but to your point about disinformation, we get all kinds of colors on this program.

guest: it is really hard in this world to understand how to process the information that we get every day. i have a hard time, and it is my job to go through it every day. listening to so many of these voters, especially early on in 2021, when we were going through that second bout of covid, and they would say, i just don't know what to believe. i go on facebook and my friends and family are saying this thing, and i turned the tv on and i hear this thing, and then i logged onto whatever social media platform and i hear this thing. i don't know which one is correct. the reality is probably there are pieces within all of those that was probably true in every one of those. but it is much too much to ask a normal person to have to sift through all of it.

i think, to the caller's point, there is a whole bunch of information out there and you have to decide half -- how to process it, besides people deliberately selling misinformation. we know that is happening. but there is also an opportunity for individuals -- i always say this to people. they say, i don't know what to believe. if there is something that you read and you have to ask yourself, do we really think this is true? just process through that a little more, do a little more digging. there are plenty of ways to find at least an answer closest to the truth. host: here is steve in florida on the independent line. caller: yes, good morning. i think you are doing a good job here. why are we begging our enemies for oil? that's what i can't understand. that makes no sense. i cannot believe that the people of pennsylvania would vote to

shut down their fracking to rebuild philadelphia and pittsburgh. i cannot believe that vote. you would have to think that your taxes would agree to shut in their oil and ep's. even the liberals over there want their oil because it funds all of the colleges over there and everything. we have to produce domestically in order to keep our sovereignty. anyway, i think there is massive groupthink in the polling. i think there are way too many democrats involved in this thing to get a fair shot at really getting what the truth is. there is massive government censorship now that really has people upset. host: all right, steve. any walter. guest: the issue of energy is a really, really important one.

in a state like pennsylvania, where the issue of fracking is not on the ballot in the sense that people are voting up or down, whether we should frack, but the representatives you sent to congress, who are supportive or not of certain regulations, rules, of that process. in the senate race, this has become an issue because the democratic candidate had been not supportive of fracking. again, in a state that really is, the caller is correct, a big driver of their community, there is a reason why republicans are keen on that issue. host: so they cannot focus in on price gaps. guest: exactly. and we know that winter is coming, and natural gas is spiking for a lot of people. host: here is clay in louisiana. morning, go ahead. caller: good morning and thank

you for taking my call. the program is very interesting. i think it is very nuanced about the election and so on. i think one of the biggest issues, besides inflation -- i am retired, i am a super senior. i will use my wife, as an example. she is as nonpolitical as you can get. she probably would not even vote unless i urged her to. she is afraid we live outside of a multicolor to an area in new orleans. she is afraid to go out into the city, to go out dining like we used to, because crime is so prolific and a lot of our friends say this is an issue not factored into the election. host: clay, is that going to send your wife to the polls? is she going to vote this year? caller: absolutely she is going to vote, no question about it.

crime is an issue that is not being addressed. host: we certainly talked about in the first hour before we came on the air here. it's a big part of the attack ads we are seeing. guest: it's absolutely correct. the issue of crime, for so long, and it usually is, is a local issue. these are things that mayors and governors deal with. these prosecutors that we hear about and some of these cities, these are not people that members of congress can do anything about. this is local government. i think it is the overall sense that democrats have not taken this seriously enough, have not paid enough attention to the fact that many of these cities that again are run by a local government, but they are not getting pushback from national

democrats, or they aren't getting the kind of interest in helping to solve some of these. or, in many cases, they say this isn't something you should have to worry about because you don't live in my district, this isn't in my district. but it influences how people perceive the entire state. how you feel about what's going on in portland or seattle or philadelphia, even if you do not live in those cities, the perception of them is that the cities are not safe, and they are cities that are being run, for the most part, by democrats. it sends the message that it is democrats themselves and their language on crime, their opinions on crime, that are if not making it worse, certainly not making it better. host: there's a headline this morning, republicans fault rebound puts a chill on democratic summer momentum peered we talked a little bit about that. what has given republicans that

rebound? guest: i think a couple of things. remember, i talked about the spotlight moving from being all about democrats to really moving all about trump and abortion. those issues have faded as the summer has turned to fall. what are we back talking about? we are talking about inflation, gas prices, these cities that are still having really difficult crime concerns. these are all places that put democrats on the defensive. i think the challenge of making abortion as a sort of motivating issue beyond where it went in the summer is that i think it energized democrats. it got them to really focus and pay attention, become more interested in turning out in the election. but it has not moved beyond that. it motivated democrats to a certain point, but that

day-to-day concern, your cost of living, your safety concerns, those are what really are overshadowing everything else. i think it is also true that if you live in a state where the issue of abortion, if you feel like there is more at stake, like you are in a state with split control, maybe a publican and a democrat, with a trigger law on the books, we would revert back to pre-row restrictions, who is elected governor is going to have a big say in what the abortion laws will look like next year. it's not so true in a state like oregon or massachusetts or new york or california, where it is already either a very democratic legislature or, in some cases, like nevada, it is already in

the state constitution of protection for abortion access. it is not quite as existential of an issue there as it is in michigan or pennsylvania. host: i want to ask you about an important governors race in a minute. in michigan, there is a referendum on the ballot about abortion. guest: that's right. that's another good point, that you are turning people out to be more focused on the issue. host: let's go to patrick in maryland, democrats line. good morning, you are on with any walter. caller: good morning to you. thank you for accepting my call. i have a loaded question. this is my question. are you going to write or approve an article that states, prior to the election, that the american people should trust the outcome of that election? the reason why i'm saying that is because i can see -- i'm sorry. i can see the innate kind of

close election, whoever wins, the other candidate is going to claim fraud or there will be a reporter or an article that is going to claim fraud. so i'm going to charge you. i would like to know, pretty much a yes or no answer, will there be an article charging the candidates to state, both republican and democrat," i will support the outcome of the vote?" oh? guest: it has become part of every debate in these tentative elections. the question is being asked of candidates, specifically those candidates who have argued that the 2020 election was not appropriately decided or that they deny that biden won the

election. those people are being asked directly time and time again whether they will accept the outcome of the election. the answer is, yes, it is out there. it is being asked constantly. the question is what will it look like in practice? i think what we know with many of the states, especially the ones that are the closest, the georgia senate race we know that the closest to the election likely goes to a runoff. you can't win with a plurality you have to win with outright more than 50% of the vote. host: one with the runoff happen? guest: december 6. we know states like pennsylvania , i can't remember the results. we have a process by which the ballots are counted, you're going to have secretaries of

state in -- and other election officials who are going to be very vigilant and diligent and be transparent about what they are doing. ok? here is the early vote results, election day results, here is what we are still waiting on and going through that process is going to be very important but we know states like oregon, washington, california not only vote by mail states or states where you have a lot of people voting by mail, there are rules there that same we can wait to certify these until a certain number of days later making sure that any ballot that is postmarked on election day, gets counted up to a certain number of days. host: early voting is way up in a number of places, including georgia. guest: georgia is definitely

seeing a surgeon there but others are not. nevada is not looking as robust as it did in 2020. we are not in a pandemic anymore. some of this is >> host: it's not a presidential election. guest: they are used to voting a certain way. that's going to continue to be the case. host: let's hear from jim in north carolina. caller: i just have one comment because there are so many issues that need to be addressed, in my humble opinion will be addressed in this next election. i'm going to call it the great correction. i never really thought i would say this in my life, i'm proud of c-span for having this young lady on here that tells it like it is.

about crime and democrat cities, everything else she has talked about. obviously, there is a lot of issues because it's all over the place. i believe there is going to be a great correction, nobody ever said that. i said it. and thank you for having her c-span. i'm shocked that i'm even making this call. have a great day. host: thank you, jim. i want to ask you about the donald trump campaigning for candidates. guest: it helped republican candidates because most of them succeeded at the senate level. but it also helped, i think to motivate democrats. as they saw him out on the

campaign trail they were reminded that he is still in the picture and if there is one thing that motivates democratic voters it's donald trump. he was the great get out and vote. it was as good for democrats because it was for the republicans who got his endorsement. those individual candidates, maybe not wanting him to spend as much time in their state as we get to the next 14 or so days. he brings with him maybe more baggage than it's worth for these candidates. they needed his support to get through the primaries but he needs -- his presence is so polarizing there are voters

still making up their minds. they still consider themselves undecided. they don't want to see him sort of becoming the issue in the last few days. host: i want to get your thoughts on some closing sentences period let's take a listen. [video clip] >> let's talk about what this is coming down to in these races and why i'm optimistic about it. these are close races. they can be gold, silver, bronze. these are a tough fight. but that's what they are and it is a big change from what the media showed. here is the thing, in these districts the republicans have said that if somebody wins want to subject medicare, social

security to this. has that they would like to review medicare and social security every five years. they have said they would like to make it a discretionary spending that congress could decide to do it or not. social social security and medicare are on the line. a woman's right to choose is on the line. the planet is on the line. issues made to prescription drugs, for years we have been trying to get the secretary to negotiate for lower prices. we couldn't get it done. so we had a democratic president and a strong majority in the congress. to get it done. host: focus on the speaker's comments there. this seems to be a late argument that democrats are making. what is behind that? guest: earlier in the summer, the push on abortion, the idea that painting your opponent as

an extremist, the attachment been donald trump denying the election of 2020 those are going to be issues that help define the race and put the republican on defenses that a democrat could win. what we also know is that the economy is front and center. when you are the party in charge and the economy is not doing well, it's hard to say, she's not incorrect that they passed legislation that addresses the cost of prescription drugs. but that doesn't go into effect for another year or two years. for people in their day-to-day lives thinking about something that's going to be happening in the future, that's not what you are voting on. you are putting on what is happening to you at this moment. inflation, the frustration of high prices, gas, cost of your

rent it is more salient. so if you are a democrat trying to say look at all the great things we have done, they are not going to land well. voters are not going to hear that. if you say, ok, maybe it's not that democrats are here to make things immediately better but republicans will make it worse per you have to get the swing voters to believe that even though they don't like the status quo right now, they are frustrated with the status quo that the bigger risk is change. that is what the argument, the heart -- the hard part is this is what democrats have been saying for years and years republicans are going to cut your social security, medicare. it is true that there are many plans out there specifically senator rick scott the plane out

there the speaker talked about, expecting a a broader way to look at the budget. again, it's very theoretical at a time when people's day-to-day issues are not theoretical. host: isaac in new york, democrat line. good morning. caller: good morning, and i'm very refreshed by this person. very logical and very real. one of the things the republicans are talking about, crime. as it happens in new york city, and i happen to be a new yorker. i was born there in brooklyn. murder rate is down by 52% as opposed to last year's august. the prices of gas is down, the

level of unemployment is down and they focus on this narrative that crime is out of hand. in new york city there is a very low murder rate and it has very strong gun control. is there any point here were these people call up and say if everyone is armed, everyone will defend themselves. i can imagine mass panic shootouts happening in memphis as think memphis has the highest murder rate. i don't know what kind of contractual -- gun control they have. i think republicans are promoting lack of truth including the biden issue that the election was rigged. host: appreciate the call. guest: this is the hard part of these issues they are very real. crime, the economy.

each person is going to process that in their own way. i think the issue of safety is a very challenging one to get done correctly. you can talk about the statistics. if you look at the actual statistics, what were the biggest ways of crime? there are statistics about the economy. here is our unemployment rate. if you are feeling like i can't drive into the city because it cost me too much to fill up my car and, two, i keep seeing and hearing the stories about people being carjacked. i see there are people that are getting pushed into a separate track. it may not be a number. but the sense that it is not safe i don't think you can

dismiss that as a concern. people who are not trying to put out misinformation or trying to read into the data incorrectly. the data doesn't mean that much if you, personally don't feel particularly comfortable seeing the most of the state. host: take a look at so what you hear in some of these focus groups. guest: absolutely. many of the focus groups we sit in on are people who are conflicted. those of the people you really want to hear those of the people who want -- they are not all team blue are all team red. maybe they voted for biden but they don't know if they're going to vote for democrats or they voted for trump that they will vote for a republican.

this of the photos you want to get into their mindset. when you hear from partisan, the intensity of support is what you are looking for. if you are in a room without all democrats they're never going to vote for a republican but they say, not that excited. i don't know what they are doing in washington, it doesn't seem like they are getting the job done that is always something too. they're not convinced it matters. host: i assume you have been hearing some of that? guest: absolutely. host: let's hear from laurie in hill valley, california. caller: i. good morning. host: pick up your phone we may be able to peer you a little bit better. caller: can you hear me now? host: yes, we can. caller: i want you guys a lot and i just wish you have your

guests not too many journalists and maybe not reading so many repeating the news is already out there. like may be getting some guests who can speak directly rather than journalists all the time. i never heard of a lot of these people i see on your show. i don't know who's reading or listening to them that other point being abortion. abortion is a traumatic experience for any woman. back in the days of aids for everyone was so concerned about safe sex, that's what we need to keep doing so that women are not getting pregnant. i think culturally, a woman has a right to an abortion. all right, yes. but culturally and think we should all be encouraging young woman to use for the control and men is well.

it's such, when you get older and have children and you think back to having an abortion it becomes such a different way of thinking because you realize that maybe it was really an awful thing that you had to do. i just wish there were more voices talking to young woman about protecting themselves and not getting pregnant and that should be our main goal is to not let these women get pregnant in the first place. host: to your first point, we had a politico report on this before going back decades. we were alive with their coverage of the races across the country, congressional and senate races. guest: i think we are not a place where the teen pregnancy rate is incredibly low.

i don't have the statistics right in front of me but i think that the issue in conversations about this issue where the caller was talking about birth control. i think it is certainly more prevalent now than it was 30 or 40 years ago. the other issue with the portion in this campaign we have to room for that just because the decision happened this year doesn't mean that the abortion issue is going away under 2022. i think there is this perception that, it's going to matter politically or not going to matter. whatever the results are will say see it doesn't matter or see i told you it matter. this is going to be an issue for many of the states for a long time to come.

you talked about michigan, we will see other states in the future having the process of trying to get a ballot initiative in their state. that addresses this issue specifically. i think we will hear this debate happening in state legislatures over and over again i think we will have individual states that have already passed or restricted laws were certain cities or prosecutors in certain cities are going to choose not to prosecute or choosing to prosecute to the letter of the law. this is an issue that is like this one-time concern. just as you have been part of our political discourse, -- host: has the potential for federal legislation. guest: absolutely. host: was good to albany, new

york and hear from bill. caller: yes, what i would like to ask this walter is earning state legislatures and state constitutions, each individual states constitution regarding the legislature and the governor and how laws are passed and my direct question is regarding voting. in the 2020 election, it was my understanding that there were three state that think it was georgia, arizona, and pennsylvania there may have been another one that constitutionally did not change the voting, you know, the election boards. they did not change the voting procedure through the legislature and i want you to know that's right. but they did was i think the governor just changed things for

example when the pandemic was there all of a sudden you couldn't go to the polls. so things like mail-in votes, is it true they were doing without the legislature? do you know that? guest: and a some cases, yes. the secretaries of state will say we want to make voting as safe as possible. i am most of these states there was any outcry at all making it easier for people to go and say drop off a ballot in a dropbox or wisconsin was another state to vote by mail in that state you need to get a witness. if you are living by yourself,

there are a lot of older voters in the state of wisconsin say what am i supposed to do? i'm at risk i live for myself, i can't get a witness signature. this is the way the process is supposed to work. people who were elected as the officials in the state were responding in real time to a crisis. this the pet -- pandemic is over or we are not in the midst of it , other states have gone back to should we be doing this? should we have drop boxes? should we continue to allow whatever the rules were during covid to be rescinded or revised or continued? in pennsylvania, a legislator prefer the 22nd in a bipartisan way what would make it easier to

vote by mail? this is considered of course you want to make it easier for you. it is only when the issue with politicized -- was politicized that it became seen as something that only democrats wanted. host: those mail-in votes were counted after elections. guest: that was because there was an opportunity many times we should be able to count these pallets before the action date. we physically cannot go through all of them would public kittens have the lead? it is incorrect, it is mirage.

we cannot start to even process so is going to take a long time and raise questions about the integrity of the election. is going to help from the beginning that these early votes, these mail-in votes were cast immediately, there were something wrong with them. so that poison, the well was poisoned before the votes were even counted. host: three way race there katie brown, there is a democratic nominee and an independent. former democrat. i want to say just a couple of things. johnson campaign against your political report analysis of that race let's take a look. [video clip] >> if you want a right wing oregon you have two options for governor. christine drazen who wants to ban abortion, taking fundamental

rights away from oregon women or wishing gun owning becky johnson she believes convicted domestic abusers and stockers should be allowed to buy guns. pay for for 792. things weren't always this easy but we believe in oregon. lately though kate brown have let us down. they just seem to get it. it's time for a change. getting politics out of our schools and expanding school choice and let's make housing more affordable by making it easier to build. i believe in oregon, always have, always will. as a pilot, i have seen it from the air and on the ground. it is a total mess. we have never been more divided.

the result is failed schools, drugs, and crying. this is our call to action. i'm not running as an owner i'm not running -- i'm running as in oregon. host: it for privacy. host: who is leading in this race? 6 it's basically a three-way tie, not a three way tie what you have is the democrat, christina in the middle and the republican are the top how many votes she pulled and from home? what you notices the emma kratz, they basically should to nationalize the racing oregon we are a blue state, joe biden we didn't over donald trump remember that when you go to the polls.

the other candidates, the republican candidates an independent candidate saying we have problems here at home this is a governors race. we have crime issues, we have housing issues, we have school issues. i know that you all vote democratic rate? this is a blue leaning state put it comes to governor both issues that metaphoric and the key question on election day is whether voters, especially democrats are willing the same i go and against donald trump. i can also vote for a republican or governor because i think this republican is going to address the issues is always a challenge when you are wally.

if your party has been in charge this entire time your party has never else to point the finger. host: sow three way race with three female candidates? guest: exactly. they have voted a number of women to talk tough. host: all are from new jersey, democrat line. caller: thank you for taking my call. you guys are april pleasure to listen to. i just want to say if obama, biden, hillary there are things that republicans do to get their pitchforks and torches out and they attack criminals like crazy but it's their guy, 13. they have just taken it to a different level.

democracy is on the line here, people need to wake up. it could happen guest: guest: we have to prove it. really good point there is a pullout this week from be seen as asking voters a host of question but one of them is how do you feel about the other side your democrat what you think about republicans. i think the other side is basically a threat to democracy. is not simply, you and i we disagreed on these issues but fundamentally like you're a decent person. who knows? not only do we disagree on issues we disagree on what it means to be an american and i'm scared. we are living in a time were people are voting less on what they are excited about and more on what they are about. host: tim right here, stressing

ohio over democrat fits senate race any play and the brace with rudy, where do you see that? >> is fascinating. when we talk about the senate in control of the senate we talk about individual candidates this is something put in play for a couple of reasons. this is an open seat for portland. for it -- current foyer mayor has not decided to run for smooth but legislation. we wouldn't be talking much about it. he decided to step down the democrats can make a play here. i think tim ryan has done a very good job of putting it in place with the playbook that another democratic senator from that

state was also excused. they run as democratic populates. trying to make the distinction between themselves and these blue-collar. more working-class than a party then we see now that is much more tilted not just the coats, put to the kind of cities that they have more white-collar jobs, more quite, sobering appropriate voters. this is very much a throwback kind of race and the question for both parties, but really for our politics going forward is our states like these were voters, when they used for free

democrats the senate became a police state know it's more of a red state how much is it baked in right now that the lien of the state, the way they feel about the two parties is just so difficult to under -- overcome that even as several strong candidate like tim ryan is with the message that run is resonates ultimately it falls short because voters there say i like what he has to say but i just can't vote for a democrat. host: there are many things we can talk about and read about. -- amy walters, thanks for being with us. guest: great to be with you. host: we will be joined by craig whitlock to talk about his investigation with his team on between the revolving door between revolving -- retired

u.s. military personnel obtaining jobs with foreign governments. that's next here on the program. ♪ >> election day november 8, starting at 8 p.m. eastern watch the c-span live election night coverage to see which party will control congress and hear the results as they happen from house, senate, and governor races from around the country. see the victory and concessions speeches from around the country on the mobile app and on c-span.org, campaign 2022. ♪ >> in the new brad snyder book, the cover notes "the conventional wisdom about felix frankfurter, former harvard law

professor in supreme court justice, he struggled to fill the seat once held by oliver wendell holmes. the biography notes that scholars have pretrade frankfurter as a judicial failure, liberal lawyer, conservative justice, principal villain of the warren court, but none of these characterizations ring true. brad snyder uses 700 pages to examine the justice of's life. >> on the next isode of book notes plus, availablon the c-span now mobile app or where ever get your podcast. the c-span shop holiday sale is going on right now at c-spanshop.org, save 15% on popular sweatshirts, t-shirts, drink ware, and more. there is something for every c-span fan and every purchase helps to support our nonprofit

operation. scanned the code at the right to start shopping now at c-span shop.org. >> stay up-to-date with the book tv podcast around books, up-to-date releases, bestseller lists, and trends through insider interviews. you can find it on our free mobile app or wherever you get your podcasts. >> listening to programs on c-span through c-span radio just got easier. tell your smart speaker to play c-span radio and listen to "washington journal" daily at 7 a.m. eastern with important public affairs events throughout the day and weekdays at 5 p.m. and 9 p.m. eastern, catch

"washington today," for a fast-paced report about the day. tell your speaker to play c-span radio. c-span, powered by cable. >> "washington journal" continues. host: joining us next is the "washington post" investigative reporter and author craig whitlock here with us to talk about his reporting into retired u.s. military working for four and u.s. governments -- foreign governments. what started your investigation into this? guest: simple curiosity. one issue that came up in the trump administration was the emoluments clause, where officials are habited from contributing money to foreign governments. retired military officials are also subject to the emoluments

clause, we found out. they have to submit paperwork anytime they want a job, travel expenses, or even a gift from a foreign government. so, we wondered how often that happened. we put in a bunch of public records requests to discover more than 500 people since 2015 had applied for permission to get jobs with foreign governments and it was the first time anyone i was aware of was able to get their arms around that issue to find out how common it was. host: is that rate, in particular the former generals and high-ranking officers, has the number got up in the past few years? guest: i don't know the past few years, but certainly since the end of the war in a rack and the united states went to war in afghanistan in 2001, a rack in 2003, leading to a whole new generation of military officials who had a lot of experience in the middle east and south asia

and of their skills were in demand by governments of the persian gulf and in the middle east and since 2010 a number of these countries have gone on hiring binges trying to hire retired u.s. officials. host: what's behind the hiring binge? guest: weather has been a spending binge as well in the persian gulf in particular. since the arab spring of 20 a lot of these governments were worried about the potential for internal revolt, worried about threats from iran. particularly a number of the countries, such as the united arab emirates, qatar, they have all gone on multibillion-dollar investments in their armed forces and contractors to help guide them through that. host: we will talk about australia and a second but these middle east countries, what sort of expertise are they looking for from these generals? guest: everything.

the biggest hirer of former u.s. military personnel is the united arab emirates. only one million of their own citizens, one of the biggest buyers of weaponry over the next 10 to 15 years. they needed everything from helicopter mechanics to pilots and former navy seals to teach them how to shoot. they also liked people at the high end, retired generals and strategic advisors guiding them on how to build their armed forces, have the army communicate with the air force. anything you can think of, they outsourced it to americans. host: one of the key findings, most of the former military are hired by countries known for human rights abuses and political oppression, which seems counter to u.s. policy to allow a former member of the villa terry to work for that.

why are they being approved for those sorts of positions? guest: that's a really good question and we had the same question, countries like saudi arabia, the united arab emirates, are we enabling a lot of this repressive behavior by sending our military experts over there? the state department kind of hemmed and hawed about that saying that they are trying to professionalize these armies and bring them up to our standards but as our investigation found, by having these american contractors and advisors enabling these countries to take these actions in ways counter to u.s. policy, like in yemen, saudi arabia and the united have intervened militarily in the many civil wars, it's one of the worst humanitarian crises in the world and they are getting help from these retired military personnel to do that. host: craig whitlock is our guest, of "the washington post,"

talking about retired military officials and foreign countries. (202) 748-8001 is a line for republicans, (202) 748-8000 free democrats. and (202) 748-8002 for independents and others. to be clear, craig whitlock, your reporting doesn't say that what the former military officials are doing is wrong, the reporting you are doing is that the process seems to be expedited and as you mentioned, the countries they are winding up with have policies at times counter to what the u.s. stands for. guest: that's right. they put in this application and have to get approval from their former branch of service and of the state department. the ones that do that, we found, more than 95% get approved. they are rubberstamped in there isn't much scrutiny around what

they are doing. they just kind of go through the process, get the stamp and they can do it and it's totally legal . there's another basket that don't bother applying and they don't have any fear of getting caught. the law isn't enforced very well and the only thing the government can do is penalize people by finding them somehow for what they earn if they didn't go through the process. we found out that has only happened on fewer than five occasions in the last couple of decades. there is really not much incentive to ask for permission, but the ones who do, it's legal no question. host: i wanted to ask you about the expansion of the u.s. military workforce out of arabia. americans working for saudi's expanded after the khashoggi assassination. james jones, former nato commander, marine commodore, expanded his consulting business with the saudi defense ministry

following that assassination. did you talk to general jones in did he explain why he did that? guest: i did interview general jones and we have known that his company had first gotten those contracts to work for the saudi ministry of defense in 2017 and they are headed by the crown prince, mohammed bin salman, the de facto ruler of saudi arabia in the person who according to u.s. intelligence agencies orchestrated that assassination in october of 2018. we wanted to know if general jones tried to pull out of the country or if he had qualms about working for the crown prince and what he said in the interview with us is that he expanded his business with the ministry of defense after the assassination, saying that the u.s. government encouraged him to maintain ties with the saudi government and that it was a good thing, to keep the saudi's from pulling out of the american

orbit, allying themselves with russia or china. he has hired more than 40 or 50 retired u.s. military personnel to work with the saudi's. at the same time we interviewed other people who work for jones. a four-star general who worked there until last year said that they wrestled with this every day, is this an immoral thing we are doing working for an illegitimate government that assassinates people overseas but in the end even he decided we should stay. host: in some cases you and your colleagues reported that some of these military officials were actually negotiating for a job or certainly setting up the likelihood of a job after they retired from the military, correct? guest: that's right we found one general in the pentagon named joseph rank in charge of the defense policy in

the middle east and before that he was negotiating a job offer to work for the ministry of qatar, another small shake to him in the persian gulf, hosting the world cup soon. hearing that he was in charge of policy, in uniform he was negotiating a site deal to be a consultant for their armed forces and in his case that never came to fruition but there were a number of other officers we have found that had worked for the u.s. embassy in that country and had gone back to negotiate deals to work for their government there. i don't want to say change sides but certainly switched roles. host: do we see the same thing with folks who are diplomatic corps or department of homeland security with overseas postings and things like that? guest: we do. in the state department there are rules against lobbying on the behalf of these countries

for a year. the lobbying rules still apply, but the rules on whether they can accept jobs with foreign governments, there is no time limitation on this revolving door. they are allowed to apply while still in uniform. it's sort of startling when you think about it but it's one of these laws that has been on the books for 200 years, hasn't been updated or modernized and until now i don't think anyone within the government has paid much attention to it. host: our guest is craig whitlock of "the washington post ," and phone lines are open. (202) 748-8001 for republicans, (202) 748-8000 free democrats, and for independents and all others it's (202) 748-8002. sarah, good morning. caller: good morning. i just wanted to say that obviously we have dysfunction in this country and this is just another sign of the dysfunction and it is astounding how much

lack of accountability we have. so, we have the rise of dictatorships all over the world . democracy is in decline. and yeah, a part of it is what your guests just described with the united states and its own policies and it is a shame because, you know, it's just, it's just a reflection of the times, you know, so much moving to the left and right. yeah. it's all man-made. i wish they would hold people accountable, but i don't think that that will happen. thank you. host: this is a common theme since we published the series last week. people were angry. they didn't realize this was going on but it is a new form of the so-called revolving door where people leave government

service and go to places where they had contact when they were working for the government that were maybe unsavory. it's legal but maybe not the most ethical. people were angry about it. particularly with retired generals and admirals, people still getting lifelong pensions from taxpayers are maybe not the people who need saudi money, for example. host: playing devils advocate, a helicopter pilot or mechanic, the skills they learned over their 20 or 225 years they have been in the service, should they not be able to take those skills to a foreign country or a domestic company here in the united states, obviously? guest: certainly domestically there's no issue and overseas, it's all perfectly legal. i think the question is does this work against you in foreign policy interests, even if it is legal you have to come to terms

with that. is this who i want to work for? would you take that kind of job in the united states with a repressive company? probably not. but these foreign governments particularly in the middle east pay particularly well, it's hard to turn down the offers of money where the salary doubles or triples from when they worked in the u.s. government. host: let's say you are a high star lieutenant general. what is your pay scale here in the military and what kind of typical salary would you get? what were you seeing in your reporting on these jobs? guest: a three-star or four-star general making over 300,000, 400,000 dollars, it certainly enough to live on compared to the private sector, certainly for someone with that executive level of experience, the offers to work for foreign governments are often offers that are maybe double that for part-time work,

even. one situation we found is retired admirals in australia making as much is 800,000 dollars or $1 million as part-time consultants. if you are well known in your field you can make a lot more money doing this but it is important to remember that these people are still receiving their lifelong military pension. $200,000 in the u.s. army as a three-star or four-star general, you can get close to that for the rest of your life. it's not like social security and that's it, you get full salary for the rest of your life, almost. host: june, charlston, go ahead. caller: i feel that if we have people in the military they shouldn't be allowed to belong to another company and do what they are doing in these foreign

countries. i'm sorry, that to me isn't right. guest: this is a comment that our readers told us. that it doesn't pass the smell test. even if it's legal, even if these people obtained permission, it doesn't feel right that they should be working for foreign governments and americans by and large really look up to military leaders and people who dedicated their careers to serving the united states so to hear that they are working for a foreign government, there is something about that that doesn't sit right with members of the public. host: what kind of affected you get arc -- pushback did you get? guest: at the state department they didn't want to give us any of these records. we had to file two freedom of information act lawsuits.

we had to do we got the documents, we contacted people for comment, tell me are you still working for these foreign governments, why did you take the job, did you have qualms about it and the vast majority didn't want to talk, they recognized it didn't look good, they didn't want public attention. that was the argument the government gave for denying us the records for two years. they were worried it would cause people public embarrassment or harassment, even. this was the justification they used for withholding the records. last month a federal judge ruled in our favor sang that he found of the arguments by the government weak and unconvincing and that there was a clear strong public interest in knowing which u.s. military officials were working for foreign governments, particularly generals and

admirals. host: tom, michigan, republican mine. guest: think -- caller: thank you for taking my call. a couple of comments, the guest questioned the legitimacy of the saudi government, they have been around since world war ii and have been a staunch ally of the united states. it's a monarchy and we have no business getting into their so-called minutes harry and issues. the yemeni crisis is a crisis but the reason that saudi is even addressing that is because otherwise they will have iran right on their border. i question any american who would allow isis bases in mexico . i think that we really have to certify who our true allies are and quit this progressive nonsense around foreign. thank you. guest: yeah, tom, to clarify one

thing, i wasn't personally questioning the legitimacy of the saudi government i was talking about a retired air force general who said he was wrestling with the question after the to shoji -- khashoggi is as -- assassination, just make that clear. but as for their human rights records, it is a legitimate concern for americans. i don't question that. this foreign country approve the assassination of american citizen who had worked for "the washington post," longtime journalist, to say that people should just stand by and not say anything when someone like that is essentially hunted down in another country and chopped up into little pieces, i think most people would disagree with that. host: cynthia on the independent line, good morning. caller: good morning.

i have a couple of questions. from the private sector, small business, there are certainly guidelines and rules, like from the treasury. 13 or so countries that you shouldn't be doing business with. is it the point that what he's saying that there is no criteria for our retired military? how does that, working in other countries, how does that work with the five i's and our other relationship. i would think that the criteria would be there could be some oversight or guidelines that we have here in order to strengthen our relationships globally. does that make sense? guest: it does in those are all great questions. these other regulations from the treasury department or commerce

department, it all applies to these people but it's a separate basket of regulations. the one that we reported on is they have to get permission from retired military personnel and the state department. that's a different level of paperwork they have to go through. the only criteria we were able to ascertain that's in place is very vague, the state department and the military say that as long as it doesn't adversely affect the foreign relations of the united states, they can approve these kinds of jobs. that's an important standard but it's kind of in the eye of the beholder and what we found is that there is no real clear way the standard was applied. host: it also seems like there's an expedited process for approval. guest: that's right, it ran the gamut. some cases languished for years but in other cases like with less admirals coming to work in australia, a lot of those

applications were approved in a few days. they would be submitted to the navy while they were on active duty and within a week they would get preliminary approval. anybody familiar with the pentagon or the military knows that's really fast. they don't ordinarily approve things that quickly. it takes normally weeks or months to get decision on that kind of matter. host: this is from twitter, what percentage compared to enlisted are hired by other countries? host: it's a good question -- guest: it's a good question and it depends on the country. retired officers at 40%. in the united arab emirates they really hired a number of enlisted folks who had particular skills, like i said, helicopter mechanics, people who could help with patriot missile batteries. all of these weapons systems that the united arab emirates had bought, they needed the

american expertise to teach other people how to use it and maintain those weapons systems. host: ray and syracuse, new york. republican mine. -- line. caller: this guest in the previous guest are tied together in one way or another, it's interesting. my question was the connection between our military working once they have retired and exactly who they are working for is very problematic in my mind because we do have treaties with these foreign entities and but the treaties are now watching out for the good of america and one of the problems in the 2020 election that was brought up when you were talking coke

report was the question of integrity because of our laws changing during that just before the election. it seemed like a reasonable explanation that would have gone through legislators. but what if you understood that the people that saw the change in the law in those six or eight particular states were all also involved in overseas military operations at the very same time and what if they knew that the that the -- are you -- host: you are suggesting a connection there or what? caller: release of the virus in the election and the changes in the laws were done by the same

group of people. host: not exactly sure. you have comment on that? guest: no i don't, he's looking for connections and we didn't find anything of that nature. host: you mentioned former navy admirals who went to work in australia. this was on the submarine program. explain why they were hired. guest: right, so this was something that was kind of surprising to me, i didn't realize the extent of it but the government of us really has hired over the years six to -- six or so u.s. admirals, including the former secretary of the navy, as a high dollar consultant to advise them on which kinds of ships, particularly submarines, to purchase. they are a ally of the united states and in terms of the u.s. going to work with them, once those consulting arrangements were approved, their jobs kind

of changed a bit. they went from advising the australians on current ships they had to advising them over the past year on negotiating with the united states on the possible acquisition of nuclear technology for nuclear powered submarines. retired americans advising the australian governments on how to negotiate with the united states on one of our closest military secrets, how nuclear powered submarines work. this is something we have only shared with the government of written and we are sharing it now with australia. it's a sensitive issue that gets to whose interests are they representing? some of those admirals were then consulting with the u.s. navy and others were working for u.s. shipbuilders and submarine builders. there's a tangle of interests here on receiving money from a

lot of different places and countries and it was something that i think even the u.s. navy hadn't bought through. guest: i -- host: i was struck by your reporting on that, saying that while they want to build as many as possible, defense analysts say it would take decades to develop this homegrown workforce and australia has almost no experience with nuclear power, they have no nuclear power plant say for a single hospital that operates a tiny reactor for research purposes. what was behind this push? guest: nuclear powered submarines can stay submerged for months at a time and the current sufferings they have have to come up for air every so often and they don't have as much of the range and australia has decided if they want this nuclear power they could take the submarines and linger off the coast of china, as a for instance.

these nuclear powered submarines sound great but are not easy to build. you can't just go get one on amazon. you need a very specialized work orders to build one and australia as you pointed out has no nuclear industry at all. so for them to acquire that specialized technology and know-how to build them, there's no question they will need u.s. help the u.s. also needs nuclear submarines. they have a backlog in building them so it's a real question who will come first in the arrangement. host: we've got a few more minutes with our guest, guest: -- craig whitlock, so call in. matthew is next, new york, democrats line. caller: you need to ask lane something to me, mr. whitlock.

let's put aside mike flynn's shady sinead eggen's, in turkey, let's put that down to the failed administration. let's set that aside for a moment to get to the real crux of the problem here. how is it that the pentagon justifies allowing mike flynn to keep not only his rank but his pension, especially after all the treasonous act he has committed in trying to overthrow our democratic process? i have looked high and low, everywhere. i can't find a sensible reason why this man hasn't been brought up on charges. can you explain that, please? thank you. guest: i think i can and those are great questions. as you recall, mike flynn pled lt to lying to the fbi about his relationship with russian

officials when he was the nationals dirty advisor for president trump and president trump pardoned him of that crime . it isn't that you can just go in and take his pension. in our reporting on retired u.s. generals and admirals working for governments, one aspect of the case that people forget about is that he actually got in trouble for going to moscow to have dinner with vladimir putin and other russian officials at an anniversary program for "russia today," their propaganda tv channel. this is one of those cases where he didn't apply for permission to take money from a foreign government. was he find? he was in the end. it took many years and in this past spring the army sent him a letter saying that we will dock your pension about 60,000 dollars or you can write us a check. they could have find him more when they found out he had taken about $400,000 in payments from

the russian and turkish governments in their interests and the army didn't explain why they didn't penalize him more but this was a rare case where they did take action and in the end one of the times when michael flynn had to be held accountable ironically for going to dinner with the vladimir putin on top of everything else. host: here's dale, rockville, good morning. caller: i had the same question as the guy before about flynn. a general. if i had done what he did? i would be a general? i don't get none of it. going to drop that for a minute, i have one other question when it comes to the saudi arabians. 9/11, costing us our jobs, costless a lot. there are still americans out

there that want to know the truth. they came from saudi arabia. the majority of those people did . we still don't know the truth. i mean i don't believe that 9/11 was a hoax or any of that crap, all right, i believe the planes hit the towers and all of that stuff happened but we have still not found out how involved saudi arabia truly was. host: the story this morning from "the new york times," the saudi's are the largest purchaser of u.s. weapons. guest: that's right and this continues as usual, even after jamaal khashoggi was assassinated on the orders of the crown prince, western companies had stopped doing business in saudi arabia and were repulsed by this, but the saudi's have a lot of money and they do a lot of business with

the rest of the world. they buy a lot of weapons from the united states and over time that's what you have seen, this willingness to go back. and part of this was in fact that when joe biden went to saudi arabia this past summer and had this infamous fist bump, even he was sort of holding his nose as he did it, but sent a signal to the public that we need to continue to have relations with saudi arabia, even if we don't like everything they do. this has been an ongoing dilemma. your previous caller brought up a fair point, 15 of the hijackers from saudi arabia -- were 15 of the hijackers were from saudi arabia and we have had a lot of real problems with them over the years and no administration has really been able to reconcile how we work with a country that has such an important strategic relationship with the united states with the

fact that their human rights record is pretty poor. host: bob, pittsburgh, republican line. caller: watching the history channel, there was a general who expanded the military-industrial complex in this country and at the time i was thinking wow. basically he signed communism. and he was right. [indiscernible] with white people especially. it's probably mostly white people getting tired of this junk. host: before we wrap up, i wanted to ask you about your upcoming book. you tweeted a while ago that you were extremely excited to tweet out about your book about the fat leonard scandals.

reminder audience about the scandal. guest: fat leonard is a guy named leonard francis, a malaysian defense contractor who had hundreds of millions in contracts with the u.s. navy over the years and he pled guilty several years ago to bribing scores of u.s. navy officials including admirals so that he could get more contract money and it was this crazy scandal where he used frosted feuds, fancy house tell -- hotel stays, you name it, to get navy officials to look the other way so that he could rip off the government. he was in the news recently because he escape her before his sentencing in federal court, flying the coop, going to mexico, cuba, then venezuela where he he is currently awaiting extradition and it's kind of a crazy story about how this malaysian guy, this big guy, was able to bribe in corrupt so many navy officials. i've been working on the case

for years and the book will be finished next year. host: and the story isn't over. guest: that's the problem, he's a master conman and he escaped during sentencing, pulling a con on that justice department and a federal judge that he was out on bail, making them think that he wasn't a threat to flee the country but in the end that's exactly what he did. host: craig whitlock, thanks for being with us this morning. guest: you met, thanks for happening that having me. host: still ahead, opening the phones on anything that you are following in the news, it's open forum. republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents and all others, (202) 748-8002. we'll be right back. ♪

>> this election day, november 8, the control of power in congress is at stake. can democrats regain control -- retain control the senate? will republicans take the house? rally and candidate events as they happen on tv and on the c-span now app, on demand on our website, find our data rich elections page. >> there are a lot of places to get political information, but only from c-span can you get it straight from the source. no latter where you are from or stand on the issues, c-span is america's network. unfiltered, unbiased, word for word. if it happens here, here, here, or anywhere that matters,

america is watching on c-span. powered by cable. >> middle school, high school students, it's your time to shine. you are invited to participate in this year's studentcam documentary competition. picture yourself as a newly elected member of congress. this year we asked competitors what your top priority is and why. make a five minute to six minute video that shows the importance of your issue and don't be afraid to take risks with your documentary. be bold. among the $100,000 in cash prizes is a $5,000 grand prize. videos must be submitted by january 20 of 2023. visit our website, studentcam.org, for rules, tips, resources, and a step by step guide. "washington journal" continues.

host: it's our open forum. let's start with an international story and then get to your calls. from politico this morning, koreans exchanging warning shots on the sea border, warning that the shots were exchanged during the disputed western sea boundary amid heightened tensions over the recent barrage of weapons test, sending a statement that the shots were sent to repel a north korean merchant ship that they said violated the sea boundary early on monday. calls first here on the independent line, frank in philadelphia. what is on your mind, frank? caller: 1930 two, hitler's took control of germany. i was wondering, they started

that military program and i was wondering, did they have american advisers? as your guest, craig whitlock, was talking about. and here in the united states, where they and vice versa? host: sorry, we should have gotten you in a little earlier. craig was our previous guest. anything else? caller: yeah i was wondering if russia also had a lot of people in moscow and sing petersburg and i was wondering if the same thing was happening there with a lot of military advisers from that country. host: all right, going to perry and california. good morning, republican line. caller: yes thank you very much i wanted to say this, we give aliens of dollars ukraine and i

feel sorry for those people as well but we have got a lot of homeless in america for one thing. the other thing is, there's no accountability over the money. politicians, are they skimming off the top of these billions of dollars? what's going on here? host: in terms of accountability what do you mean? caller: they don't seem to know where the money is going. we've been doing this for years, giving money to other countries. i think the politicians are taking their share of it because i don't think americans even know where the money is going. host: ok to bob on the independent line. arlington, texas. caller: my question simply is i want to know, can anyone tell me is beto hiding behind chainsaws?

host: you are talking about beto o'rourke? caller: he's hiding behind the chainsaws. host: let's hear from john in louisiana. louisiana, go ahead. caller: i'm a retired pilot. there are retirees, working for singapore airlines, i don't remember them ever mentioning if there was something they had to do, anything special. the other thing i noticed, our secretary of defense got a waiver to become the secretary of defense, he worked for raytheon and by law he should have had to wait five years. i guess in certain cases they can waive even the most -- i mean he was a four-star general. then he worked for raytheon and now he's the secretary of defense.

host: someone else also mentioned that, i didn't have a chance to bring it up. thanks for doing that. (202) 748-8001 is the line for republicans. for democrats, (202) 748-8000. (202) 748-8002 four independents and all others. let's go to rhinelander, wisconsin, allen is on the independent line. good morning. caller: i wanted to talk about the issues of student loans. c-span has been bringing on guest very regularly over the past few months, typically from washington, d.c. think tanks and the narrative i'm hearing from these people is, you know, that canceling student loans, like ppp loans, is a costs to the taxpayers and i'm sorry, that's just completely wrong.

ppp loans required money to be drawn from the treasury. they required money to be added to the national debt. but you know, canceling these federally owned student loans that were funded by the taxpayers many years or decades ago, it's a completely different animal. not one dime of money needs to be done drawn in the treasury had not one penny is added to the national debt cancel these loans. and you know, the vitriol, the vitriol that i see against student loan borrowers as a result of this also narrative is very damaging. now the only other thing i have to say is that this comes down to bankruptcy and that has been clearly overwhelmed, and silenced in the shadow of the public narrative. dick durbin, john cornyn, josh holly are sponsors in the senate of a program that would return bankruptcy protections to

student loans as they exist for every other loan in this country . i would like to see c-span cover this critical legislation. there's also a house bill, hr 9110, in the house again. i think it's going to enjoy bipartisan some work and it could pass by the end of the year. that is what i have to say. host: onto the democrats line, falls church. caller: i'm sorry, i started before you heard me. i was reading a "the washington post" article this morning about trump voters and how they feel like the world is passing them by. i don't think that's limited to trump supporters. i think that over the last 20 years our economic system has become extremely punitive to people. we cannot afford to live in homes. we have to pay rents that are

increasingly more expensive. we cannot afford to buy our groceries and gas. inflation has been hitting. i don't think either party really has a plan to face that. we have the federal reserve increasing interest rate, but that's going to be punitive for, again, homebuyers and people looking to save money. meaning companies will be less likely to give you a raise because there will be less money for them to take out loans to increase their business. i think that neither party has a solution for our current economic system problems and i would ask trump voters to really look clearly and ask their candidates, what's the plan to fix inflation? they can attack democrats only one, but they don't have a plan and democrats, how are you going to fix inflation? if we are focused on the federal reserve doing everything for us it's not helpful to the individual. it's helpful to big businesses

and it's helpful for i would say financial institutions but not for the american people. what are they going to do to fix inflation for the american people and not big institutions? host: thank you, glenn. wisconsin, independent line. it's open forum. caller: yeah i'm wondering about the january 6 committee. who is ray apps? host: i don't know. caller: you don't know. you are in the news and you don't know. where do i get that information? host: you can search for that information. you can follow the hearings we have covered already if you want to. caller: you don't know who he is? host: i don't. caller: ok. host: onto carl in madison, mississippi.

caller: i wanted to make a comment, i was in korea. they came by when i was in the gulf war. 90. next would be 31 years ago. i used to go downtown to watch the baker's. i'm saying we've been over there . protesting that oil pricing that went down? and everything. i go back to my years in korea, when reagan was president. i worked with a lot of korean nationals. they was good people. i was hoping that one day that chapter would officially be closed but it will take a two koreas to come together. sometimes we get involved with keeping them separated. i'm going to leave it there, let

the lord to be in control of everything. thank you and have a wonderful day. host: just two weeks until election day and arizona officials already concerned about armed vigilantes at alec dropbox, sounding alarms over voter safety after two armed individuals call vigilantes dressed in tactical gear. deeply concerned about the safety of individuals exercising their constitutional right to vote and who are lawfully taking their early ballots to a dropbox with uniformed vigilantes -- lost that for you. sorry about that. i will go to ed in maine on the independent line. go ahead. caller: thank you for c-span. wanted to ask a question. after hearing about liz truss and her resignation, just for

wanting to implement standard everyday policies that conservatives are always talking about, cutting taxes, regulation and social programs, she didn't expand on how they were going to be paid for. it was going to increase the deficit. and this is what we talk about in conservativism all the time. i'm an independent and i believe in the policies of both sides and i'm just wondering if conservatives may be running out of options as to what to do about the economy. host: there is news from the u.k. on the prime minister front. rishi soon act is set to become the next prime minister after winning -- apologies on that, winning the conservative leadership race on monday, now facing the huge task of stabilizing the party and the

country at a time of economic and political turned -- turbulence. he will be the nation's first lead -- first liter of color and third leader this year, taking over from liz truss, who quit last week after 45 tumultuous days in office, leaving a staggering economy and a shellshocked divided party. juanita in south carolina. juanita, go ahead, independent line. caller: yes, i wanted to address the repayment of student loans. my husband and i know is never earned $80,000 a year in our best years. both of our children have college educations. my son was a veteran. my daughter went to school under a community college program and then completed her education in

virginia. my grandchildren, my grandson, worked in conjunction with the naval base that helped to pay for his books and tuitions with a masters degree in physics and now works for the department of defense. he was in a jobs work program. my granddaughter got her education through a community college living at home and working part-time. there are many options to give this money. are there not areas where hospitals need workers or ways that these young people coming out of college could help maybe somewhere in their chosen profession and have loan forgiveness that way? i will hang up and wait for some response. host: i appreciate the call.

bruce, rhode island, good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. so this is an argument that has been proposed before, but i appreciate the objectivity. the objectivity c-span offers all viewers. but that's part of the problem. at some point you have to stand up to people. particularly the election deniers. you have to say look, we are not broadcasting that crap on the air. it's wrong. there's no justice to it, no fact to it. if that was a republican call, sorry, you lost your spot, moving on. at some point i think c-span needs to decide whether or not they are going to broadcast these should -- election deniers that are totally unfounded. thank you for taking the call. host: up next is tosh in vienna,

virginia. go ahead. caller: totally agree with the previous caller. to answer one of the questions of the other callers, an interesting exchange between you , effective victims of the qanon conspiracy theory, ray epps. there was a video floating around that he basically was saying that violence was going to occur on the capital and now he's being labeled as an fbi informant who basically premeditated the attack but none of that is actually true. thank you. host: all right. silver creek, georgia is next. frank on the republican line. caller: i was just thinking about how america and how it's

going with the democratic party. china comes in, buys all the farmland. nobody says anything. look at what's happening in ukraine right now. the world's breadbasket is. the fact that we don't open our eyes to see what's happening. host: all right, we will hear from dean in trabuco canyon. independent line, go ahead. caller: yes i just had a comment , everybody seeming to want to blame both parties, particularly the democrats for the inflation. and if somebody has an answer for that, we just came out of a 1000 -- 100 year pandemic and on top of that we have a russia declaring a war that sent

gasoline through the roof. i know that either party has an answer for this. there are serious supply chain issues from all over the world. it's not just like we have inflation, the whole world has inflation caused by these circumstances and it just kind of annoys me that we always want to blame all the politicians and they certainly are to blame for many things but the inflation that's going on right now i'm not sure is one of those things. host: all right, thanks, dean, for your comments and thank you to all of you who participated this morning. we will be back tuesday morning at 7:00 eastern and we hope you are as well. have a great day. ♪ [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2022]

>> the focus is on infrastructure investment and how they can generate living wages for workers and employers. representatives from the department of labor and transportation join a panel discussion hosted by new american center on education and labor. live coverage on c-span, our free mobile video up for online at c-span.org. >> c-span now is a free mobile app featuring your unfiltered view of what's happening in washington, live and on demand. keep up with the biggest events. white house events, the courts, campaigns and