up, amy howe joined us. then, representative mark pocan talks about the approaching fund -- deadline for funding the government. 'washington journal' starts now. >> it is my honor to utter the foremost powerful were -- four most powerful words. the people have spoken. host: the u.s. senate is settled. the special election when over

-- election win over herschel walker. he gives the democrats more operational control over the senate. what will the majority in the senate mean for the 119th congress --118th congress. (202) 748-8001, for republicans. (202) 748-8003 if you would like us -- to send us a text.

we are also on facebook. and on twitter and instagram. we will also hear mark -- more from rafael warnock and herschel walker. 51% warnock and 49 two walker. this is the headline from the associated press. democratic wins against walker. he defeated the runoff election on tuesday and will be there for the rest of joe biden's current term. with warnock's second runoff

injury, democrats will have a 51 to 49 majority. there will be divided government with republicans having narrowly flipped house control. from this morning, politico playbook, more about what is behind the win. they write over the past 30 months warnock has 18 senate primary, and 12 runoffs. he finally won a six-year term. a lot has been said about how flawed a candidate like herschel walker was. and what it would mean for the power of eight current and former president. but they write warnock's three-point when underscores his

own talent. that he is one of the most compelling and effective democratic politicians. clinical writing is five election streak in a changing but conservative state should be recognized as a amazing political feet. he managed to combine a biography of going from savannah's housing project to martin luther king's pulpit. with messaging, organizing and -- for small fundraising. (202) 748-8001, republicans. (202) 748-8002, democrats. (202) 748-8003, for residents. the night georgia voters stood

up for democracy. and set -- sent a good man back to the senate. from former white house chief of staff, tweeted, trump has now lost four races in merger -- georgia. he has a swing state problem for 2024 that is real. those that win primaries and lose general elections are still losers says mick mulvaney. >> i want to say, thank you. [applause] >> thank you from the bottom of my heart. and to god be the glory. [applause]

>> for the great thing. that god has done. [applause] >> after a hard-fought campaign, or should i say campaigns? it is my honor to under the four most powerful words ever spoken in a democracy. the people have spoken. [applause]

>> i often say that a vote is a kind of prayer. [applause] for the world we desire for ourselves. and for our children. voting is faith put into action. and georgia, you have been praying with your let's -- let's , your head and your heart.

you have put in the hard work. and here we are standing together. [cheering] host: your reaction to this when last night. (202) 748-8001, republicans. (202) 748-8002, democrats. host: in new jersey. william. go ahead. caller: i am curious on the matter of how the federal budget will be decided. i know that will be on the program today later on. personally, i am a representative of a project,

advocacy against local poverty. i am wondering how congress will consider any of the changes to the program now that the majority will be decided. specifically for things like the international affairs budget for example and if that will be expanded or not. host: are you concerned that because of the split nature of the 118th congress it will be harder for that to happen? caller: depending on how congress will decide whether or not that will be a good idea. split nature could be may be even more of a better chance if no arguments regarding how the republicans could be convinced of increasing or expanding that budget, such as for national

security reasons, for economic prosperity, overseas and areas of interest. if no arguments are used like that then perhaps democrats may be more interested in expanding that budget with the interest of something like ukraine for example. host: we will he are -- hear more about the budget. on the rafael warnock when yesterday -- when yesterday abc.com announces how he defeated herschel walker. and from gregg leakes ting he was a political reporter for the ajc, here is his suite -- tweet. saying he did not win the runoff because of the flaws but because he set out to liberalize georgia

voters more than the 2020 campaign. from los angeles, democrats line. caller: -- host: from the washington post, republicans have not solved their herschel walker problem. 48 non--- it is not about who one, the supposing conspiracy that suppress the truth about joe biden son, hundred. --hunter. the continued obsession with french theory -- french theory --fringe theory

khomeini in the two feet on tuesday -- culminating in the defeat on tuesday. and plantation, florida. caller: in a way, i want to thank the democratic party for this victory because i probably only have about 20 years left on the planet earth. and they made it a lot easier for me to say goodbye to this life. on this earth. the democrats are turning this nation into a junkyard and it is hard to watch this nation is completely unhinged from the values i grew up with. it is a shame because the values i grew up with were values of

morality and standards of conduct. in those don't exist anymore. we have crime, worse than it has ever been in the united states. we can't recruit military people because people still vote democrat. we can't get police people on the police force. people still vote democrat. they have been saying there are 11 million democrats for 20 years and people still vote democrat. north korea has an icbm. and people still vote democrat. i just don't get it but thank you because when i'm on my deathbed it will be a lot easier.

host: another caller. caller: that guy was right about everything. joe biden is corrupt. he has been corrupted by china, russia, ukraine. who knows where? i have seen these clips of him snorting crack and with minor girls, and they look like minors to me. n.y.c. cutting crack with -- and why is he cutting crack with her credit card. host: senator warnock's margin in the victory, outdistance his 2% victory against the former senator, they say.

it doesn't bode well for the future of the country. ariel lou said senator warnock, -- the president said it will work in government people. trumpism has again been defeated and with this text, i am glad that the people of georgia said trumpism didn't work. walker does not have the skill to be a good senator. next up, david in charleston, west virginia. caller: hello, can you hear me? host: sure can. caller: the one thing i have listened to for the past couple of years that nobody seems like they would like to mention is that the reason trump one in 2016 was a bunch of the democrats voted for him because they didn't like hillary clinton. but you all want to keep saying

it was the republicans, that is why trump lost in 2020. the democrats figured out what an idiot he was so they didn't vote for him this time around. so give credit where credit is due. have a good day. host: this is from the drudge report, another maga down. they went in the senate. -- win. caller: i am not republican or democrat. you guys need to get together and work together because i am listening to all of you guys. and you are ridiculous and you are not getting the job done. that is why democrat is winning. i just called because young need

to get --yall need to get your asses together and get the job done. host: democrat from west virginia. eric. go ahead. caller: hi, i am a first time caller. i am ecstatic that warnock one --won. i think he is the best choice to represent the majority of the people in georgia. i feel like herschel walker is a mouthpiece and a puppet for the republican party. i also find it very rich that so many people continue to talk about hunter biden's laptop when he still hasn't even seen donald trump's taxes yet and i don't see how hunter biden's laptop

has anything to do with how his father is running the country right now. that is all i have to say. host: johnny on the republican line. decatur, texas. caller: i am not really thrilled about it. being a vet and what is happening to this country is incredible. it is making me and my family sick. we all served this country and what is going on. the border just opened up and what is going on with the presidency. it is incumbent -- it is incredible. the country we serve is going down the toilet and no one is saying anything about it. we have china in our backyard ever since biden got in office and i do think obama is pulling

his strings. i really do. we are dealing with china. for some reason i don't know. and we are buying chips from them. what is going on with this country? it is making me sick to my stomach. i wish someone would stand up and say enough is enough. host: raphael warnock winning reelection in georgia. most of the vote is in in georgia. if you are a georgia resident you can call us in on (202) 748-8003. also you can send us a text there. vice president harris is tie-breaking vote is now quelled , better days ahead, he says. these go from bad to worse for donald trump, by a new york jury

yesterday, they say. a text, a warnock winter will be good for georgia but the conspiracies will continue. and they say this, historic. after the race was called by the associated press, some of the comments yesterday. >> i want to say that i want to thank all of you as well because we have had a tough journey. one of the things i said is that when they called the race, the numbers are can add up. one of the things i want to tell all of you, never stop dreaming. i don't what any of you to stop dreaming and believing in america. i want you to continue to believe in the constitution and to believe in our elected officials. continue to pray for them because all of those fit --

prayers you pray for me. i felt those prayers. i want to thank all of my team as well, team herschel. and thank all of my donors as well because without you i could not have done what i have done. i want to think all of you as well because there are no excuses in life. and i will not make any excuses now because we put up one heck of a fight. and that is what we have to do. [applause] because this is much bigger than herschel walker. and i told them this the other day. i have done a lot of stuff. talk about heisman trophy, all of the allelic awards -- athletic wards in business boards. -- awards. but the best thing i have done in my entire life is run for the senate. because i got the chance to meet all of you and tear --hear what

you will feel about this country. i got a chance to go into your homes and invest into herschel walker and i thank you. i think you so much. you can't blame no one because i what you to continue to believe in this country. most of all, stay together. do not let anyone separate you. not let anyone tell you that we can't because we can. i'm here to tell you we can. as i said early on, god is good. and he is a good god, all the time he is a good god. i will never stop fighting for georgia. i will never stop fighting for you because you are my family. we are all winners.

i want to say, god is a good god. god bless you guys. stay together, continue to believe. always cast your vote no matter what is happening. in god we trust. continue to cast your vote. never, never give up. god bless you guys. thank you. [applause] host: herschel walker late last night. warnock prevails in georgia giving democrats 51st senate seat. while walker, -- he made a series of missteps and contended with eight damaging flow of headlines about his personal life and business.

allen, in florida. caller: i just want everyone to take a minute and say thank you to those ballot counters. for those people that took the timeout to count the ballots under all of the stress. talking about the election is fake. everybody just take a minute, our democracy stood up and is

continue to stand up to the threat and lies. god bless america and everyone who was a listener. host: our independent line. ralph. caller: i am a first collar. host: oh great. caller: i have been paying attention a long time and i don't get everything but i get most of it. i was thinking, when donald trump came in. we all know what started happening then. but a lot of people don't believe that and as time goes on. this battle went on. and we see who did what. and it is still in the air but my main point is when chuck came in -- when trump came in he was an outsider. and everyone else was an insider.

and he called it a swamp that needed to be drained. and we all know that. who is paying who here? i have made -- i have never made $174,000 my whole life. people are to used to being led like sheep. and they don't understand what constitutionalism is anymore. so we will go down this big spending that -- path the same way the roman empire went down. we get the government we deserve. thank you. host: next up is rob and overland park, kansas. caller: i have set donations to

help the warnock campaign and i am proud of him and everyone that voted for him. it is a good day for georgia. that you have a confident person that leads as a center. to the veteran and senator that -- called in. how can you overlook the january 6 instruction and the mar-a-lago documents. is this what you feel you have to defend question mark i'm -- to defend? without democracy we do not have a republic. host: this is from the washington times reporting on

the current set up. democrats joined republicans in a move to repeal military vaccine mandates. cheryl democrats are including a republican back measure to appeal president biden's covid-19 mandate for service members dealing a severe blow to the white house. after initially signaling he would consider the proposal after speaking with house minority inner kevin mccarthy over the weekend. more than a dozen senate republicans last week opposed a procedure vote to advance the act. mr. mccarthy told fox news that the bill will not move unless the vaccine mandate is lifted. the defense authorization bill

is one of two key pieces of legislation that must get done before the lame-duck session and the other is the spending measure for the fiscal year 2023. senator schumer the majority leader on the floor with an update. >> of the four negotiations continue between both parties on charting a path towards fully fund during -- funding the government in the next fiscal year. i spent most of the day yesterday going from one meeting to the next going to speak with mcconnell and lucy. and i stayed on the phone throughout the evening as senators work to bridge the gap between fundy. we are working very hard to get something done before the deadline. there is a lot of negotiating left to do. besides understand that fully funding the government is extremely important and anything less risk times -- risks harm to our trips. we do not want to see that outcome. both sides must remain at the table and continue to work.

tomorrow, senators will attend a classified briefing on the latest of elements on the war in ukraine. -- developments of the war in ukraine. i hope it sinks in that this is one of the most important reasons why we must reach an agreement, it is not an easy process but it is supremely important. for the well-being of our troops, for the preservation of our national security and for the tens of millions of americans who look to the federal government for a wide range of basic services. democrats and republicans must work together to fully fund the federal government. host: we are focusing on the wind last night --win last night. for republicans, call (202) 748-8001. for democrats, call (202) 748-8000. for independents, call (202) 748-8002.

nicole in chandler, arizona. caller: good morning everyone. inc. you for taking my call -- thank you for taking my call. i wanted to say first of all to the man who called and said he was rented -- ready to die because the country was so bad. i want to know if he is starving and on the street because a lot of people are. because of the things going on in this country between the republicans and democrats. and they need to stop putting people on the streets, having helpless. another man called in talking about, are we going to help people in other countries? what i saw in downtown los angeles tells me we need to help people right here in the united states. i have been working hard on my life and i cannot afford a dancing. but it doesn't matter -- i cannot afford a damn thing. those who voted for herschel

walker, he does not even know if he is running for the house or the senate. anybody voting for that full is a full. it does not make any sense. look for people who are educated and intelligent that care about what they're are doing in politics. i heard the united states educational level is that most people have a sixth grade education. stop fooling ourselves. you're telling me you will decide he will be is it on a sixth grade education? host: nicole, what do you see on the streets of los angeles that startles you? caller: the black people. they are on the streets. a have been turned out of their homes. densification -- gentrification has come in. someone who allowed all of the foreclosures to come through, as -- that is what happened.

he went to washington so that he can run economics in washington. after he messed up california. he allowed those foreclosures to go through. all of this people are on the street now. and they are out there and no one is helping them. those people worked for those homes. mac in the 1960's and they work hard to make away. host: here from political, -- politico, 2020 election despite complaints, top officials certified the lectern -- election results. they falsely a claim between 20 election was rick. -- 2020 election was rigged. they are expected to file a lawsuit in the coming days after she spent except criticizing the

administration of the election. in georgia, this is ronnie. from a lot of -- democratic caller. caller: thank you for taking michael. -- for taking my call. this was a good win for georgia senate race. i am a veteran. i sit here and see what is going on here. a lot continues to help veterans. dealing with medicare, with social security, and you have a guy who they want to put in for the republicans just beyond party lines is ridiculous. this guy is abusive, it was a

good when. -- a good win. host: reporter tweets, herschel was like a plane crash that rolled into a dumpster fire. you had to watch it squinting through one eye between your fingers. democrat line in washington dc. caller: good morning. how are you? host: fine, thank you. caller: i am calling about raphael warnocks win. he would

not have one if that was true. what that told realistically every black owned business in atlanta can be thanked for that lie. it was because there was nothing wrong with that. he won fair and square and there was nothing wrong with the voting laws. but they lie to people and that is wrong. as for your caller from west virginia he was trying to dismiss the hunter biden's laptop stories. i voted for joe biden. the laptop is not about hunter biden. it is about collecting millions of dollars. in other words what we accuse

him of doing, that is what biden is guilty of doing. if we can waste millions of dollars -- i don't even like trump. he is a very annoying person. but democrats wasted williams of dollars and millions of dollars and years. but joe biden has literally done everything we have accused trump of doing. that laptop is about the females, not about his personal business. host: in town hall, reporting, raphael warnock wins. he writes despite the performance,

warlocks advantage cap the incumbent ahead even though the turnout in georgia beat out previous records. another he says repudiation of claims, that the law would disenfranchise voters and reduce urges patient in the peach state elections -- dale, republican line. caller: i remember a comment, low information voters. the laptop, twitter. and to tell me that joe biden, hunter biden, sold us out. it is not good. host: atlanta, georgia.

tiffany. go ahead. caller: i just want to say with this last election we were utterly traumatized in the state of georgia. it was ridiculous. i am so glad it was over. the commercials. we had commercials on the tv. we had commercials on the radio. we had pamphlets being sent out every day. if you are on the internet you are seeing commercials on the internet if you are shopping for something online. we had old-fashioned claims flying over hide with signs that said go and vote and it got so

bad they were calling us on the phone. this election impeded on my life. it was the craziest election because when you look at both candidates, both men obviously have something going on. there's something wrong here. when i look back, what confused me. people were calling me from all over the country. asking what is going on. and like no, we are not crazy. host: did you vote? caller: i voted both, in both

like should -- elections. i voted from the beginning. it is the point on how traumatizing this was. we have got to really get people. to be honest, i have historically voted democrat but i am not satisfied with either party. host: how did you vote this time? caller: i will not say how i voted. host: that is fine. caller: i will say this. when i look at the dirt that was pulled up on these guys, to be honest, i would not do either one of them -- i would not date

either one of them. the republicans putting anybody up just to get control of the senate. and then this guy, i don't care what happens with your wife. that is out of my business. host: it sounds like you are glad this is over. thank you for sharing your part -- thoughts. mohammed in los angeles. caller: thank you for taking my call. midterms are finally done. the fact that donald trump wanted to destroy our republic remains there. so long as he is ready to pull over 40% --poll over 40% you will have leaders like mccarthy still supporting him even though

he wanted to overthrow the government. to the caller from texas the honorable servicemember saying the country with down the toilet , the country went down the toilet when donald trump took the office of the presidency. this talk about the open borders, it is all nonsense. republicans and democrats. republicans have controlled the house and did nothing about the border. if they were to get the illegal immigrants out of the united states the economy would crash. they don't do nothing about it. as far as the ukraine war is concerned this is all because of donald trump's fault. today he called the president of ukraine and said he will stop all funding to them until they find dirt on joe biden. the hunter biden laptop is all something to keep the base energized. there's nothing there. enter biden never ran for

office. donald trump is the most corrupt man to hold office. he said earlier the week he wanted to had the constitution terminated and then two days later said he did not say that. he lies about lying. hasn't seven years of the scrap been enough for you? host: senator mcconnell, trump would have a hard time becoming president giving constitution comments. the majority leader making those comments yesterday outside of the chamber yesterday. he has a talked about the assets on government funding. here he is. >> anyone taking the presidency that thinks that the constitution could somehow be suspended or not followed it seems to be what have eight very hard time --a very hard time

being sworn in as the president of the 90's. -- president of the united states. we are at an impasse. job one is to get the ndaa approved without extraneous matters. we have done this for 60 straight years and i don't think this should be the first year we do not achieve ndaa. regard to government spending. time is ticking. we haven't been able to agree yet. i think it is becoming increasingly likely that we may need to do short-term cr and early next year. we are running out of time. and that may be the only option left that we could agree to pursue. host: leader mcconnell talking

about the short-term measure or expiring on december 16. another aspect reported here and roll car. and you wrinkle and veterans dispute as negotiators see all mean westfield. -- omnibus. republicans have rejected the upper is a chance to increase nondefense spending and other policy area. representative debbie watson, veterans affair subcommittee, said tuesday classification of the funding as discretionary or military is part of the omnibus negotiations. generally whether or not you have it all discretionary or military or some, nation as part of the talk. here's part of the when -- for republicans, call (202)

748-8001. for democrats, call (202) 748-8000. for independents, call (202) 748-8002. four georgia residents --for georgia residents (202) 748-8003. georgia will find out whether they made the right choice, let's keep our state producing the breast -- best senators they can. he says in a tweet. the good people of georgia will be well served by this

compassionate manned -- man. in douglas, georgia. rudy. democrats line. caller: i am so proud of the citizens. we were able to see through the smokescreen and vote for a man of integrity. republicans you sue -- used to -- here we have a man that is a pastor, a phd, a pastor and senator. the sad part, ted cruz that challenge the credentials of the supreme court justice, jackson had no problem endorsing herschel walker who could not put two sentences together.

so the white people and black people who stood up for what is right should be commended and i am proud to be a citizen of georgia as a result of the selection. host: next up, sandra. indian trail, north carolina. caller: i am formally from georgia and i am not happy with the decisions they made. host: terry. go ahead. caller: i am happy that the people of georgia voted for senator warnock. he has a very good record. i am disappointed that 70 people -- so many people voted for a

fraud that the republicans put up. if that is the best candidate they could find that means the publican party is in serious trouble now and in the trouble and the people that endorsed him should be ashamed. there were facts brought up about herschel walker that people tend to a door. -- tend to act nor --ignore. a guy called in early talking about how people still vote for the democrats don't get it and the morality of the country. the morality of the country is still strong however the call of --cult of donald trump is diminishing. as it continues to diminish i hope people will see him for who

he really is. and that the republican party will gain -- i want to see good candidates on both sides. i congratulate senator raphael warnock. we are proud of him and patted the fact he has good -- had a good race. so thank you georgia. host: ron and fairfax, virginia. independent. caller: i am enjoying this morning's show. it seems there is a awakening happening. the caller from l.a. saying whether democrat or republican, there are still homeless.

i think georgia, -- it was like characters. all of the advertising that caller was talking about. it was being plagued by tens of millions of dollars. my advice to the voters who are aboard by the candidates, don't vote for either party. just stop voting for the people would be my advice. host: you are independent so what is your guiding rule, generally question mark -- generally echo -- generally? caller: after the war in 2004 i

voted for kerry and after that i felt horrible. and i voted for a guy who voted for the war so i said i would never vote for a candidate that has made a horrendous mistake. so i just map it to my values. i vote third party or libertarian or neither or i just don't vote. host: thank you for sharing that with us this morning. trump found guilty. they were convicted of criminal tax fault -- fraud. engaged in a off the books scheme debase executives. the jury tuesday found two entities guilty including conspiracy, tax fraud.

they could face a total of more than $1.6 million in fines. they write, declared his third bid last month. the conviction could compound where it some republicans who want to move on to other party leadership. in grand lake michigan. donald. caller: good morning. i would like to congratulate mr. warnock on this win win in georgia. what amazes me about my republican colors. -- callers, they go in about this thing about joe biden son.

they said they didn't find proof on trump but they found proof that his campaign was willie to work with -- was willing to work with the russian government. that is enough to investigate anyone. thank you to mr. warnock for beating an unqualified candidate. it amazes me so many people supported that idiot. host: their headline warnock wins georgia. it is bertha. go ahead. caller: i am so glad about governor warnock. even though i don't live in georgia. one thing that bothers me about trump is the fact that the fraud

. here a lot of republicans say he was not guilty. anything associated with his name, he is guilty. i don't think he signed for anything but he knew exactly what was going on. i think he should've been in jail by now. if i went out and so money from a bank -- and they keep allowing this to go on and on. one of the going to put him in jail? agile think he was the president -- don't think he was the president. if i did wrong i would be in jail. i don't understand why money always pays a price and whether you go to jail or not.

host: back to the hunter biden story. elon musk fires james baker overt suppression of documents on hunter biden story. elon musk has fired the deputy general over his alleged suppression of internal documents about blocking the hunter biden expose. he was exited from twitter today. send busk on tuesday. he question bigger before his firing about the events surrounding the laptop suppression scandal. the lawyers isolation was, and convincing. he quoted. --un convincing. athens, georgia. we hear from susan.

caller: good morning. thank you for allowing me to say couple things. i am an independent. i voted for trump the first time and not the second time. the runoff in the election to elect our senator has been extremely disappointing with both candidates. in my opinion and i have background in this area. warnock is a sociopath and herschel has a personality disorder. i voted for herschel because i thought maybe there was a chance that he would stay on his medicine and be somewhat better. there is no hope for warnock. when i look at all of the mudslinging that went on between

the two, it was actually disgusting -- absolutely disgusting. and i hate the fact that georgia and georgia citizens had to listen to all of the stuff two times. that is basically what i wanted to say. i love georgia. host: go ahead and finish her thought. -- your thought. caller: i love georgia and i am externally disappointed that not one. -- disappointed that warnock won. host: i appreciate your call. suzanne in florida, republican line. go ahead. caller: i have a couple of comments about this. it seems most people vote party line and it doesn't matter who

the candidate is. i've heard a lot of people saying herschel walker is not qualified but you can see that didn't matter in pennsylvania people --. people voted party line. on a good note, we should be happy in this country. we see two black men rising for senator. give me much. senator and that is what i want to say. host: thank you for that call and all of your calls this hour. there is more ahead. supreme court blogger amy howe will be here to preview arguments on moore v. harper, the case that could impact the future of federal elections and we will be joined by mark pocan of wisconsin, a top member of the appropriations committee talking about the government funding deadline and the vote to

protect same-sex in internet racial marriage. and we want to show you more from the congressional gold medal ceremony at the capitol honoring the police officers who defended the capital during the january 6 attack. [video clip] >> on january 6 we witnessed the gleeful desecration of the temple of our democracy and a violent insurrection against our republic. our community knows the profound terror of that day firsthand. members of congress led for their lives and staff were barricaded behind office doors, the support staff hid under second -- under furniture. the smell of gas and smoke all remain raw, yet that day the capitol police and the metropolitan police and additional agencies threw themselves between us and violence. and may i thank the national guard for continuing that

protection. [applause] again, harkening back to lincoln , with great patriotism, determination, and resilience, they put their lives on the line to protect the capitol, the congress, and the constitution. your valor on that dark day is the stuff of legend. like the dome, they fought to defend a strip -- a source of strength and hope, and we thank you for that. united in grief and gratitude today we award them the congressional gold medal forever etching their heroism into our history. in doing so we thank those

heroes for their service and sacrifice, especially more than 140 members of our protection left with lasting scars and many more suffering from indelible trauma. and may we always remember the fallen, and the martyrs for democracy including u.s. capitol police officer brian sicknick whose parents are here today, officer howard live in good -- lavengood, jeffrey smith and billy evans, killed in the line of duty later on good friday. let us acknowledge and thank them. [applause] [end video clip] >> washington journal continues.

host: amy howe joins us for the next 45 minutes. she is a cofounder and the reporter for the scotus blog and cofounder and editor of her own blog. a busy couple of days at the supreme court including today at 10:00 eastern. the cases moore v. harper, a very closely watched case considering the recent elections. what is it about? guest: it could have a dramatic effect depending on how the court rules on federal elections, elections for congress and the president. it involves something called the independent state legislature theory and that is the idea that under the constitution state legislatures have near-complete authority to regulate these federal elections without interference from state courts. and the case itself started as a challenge to north carolina's new congressional map.

every 10 years we have a census and the states have to redraw the maps. a group of democratic voters and civil rights groups went to state court in north carolina, and that is an important piece of the puzzle, and said the new map of the republican-controlled -- that the republican controlled legislature was a gerrymander. they said even though north carolina is roughly divided between democrats, republicans, and independents, the new map would give an overwhelming advantage to republicans. 10 out of 14 or 11 out of 14 seats. the state supreme court agreed that it was a partisan gerrymander and sent the case back for the trial court to draw new maps. the trial map was drawn by experts and so the legislature came to the supreme court earlier this year and asked the supreme court to intervene and

said that under independent state legislature theory that the state supreme court cannot step in and we have the sole power. caller: -- host: much of this was done earlier this year correct? guest: it started and february and march. they asked is the supreme -- they asked the supreme court to step in and the supreme court declined to do that but they agreed to take up the case and weigh in on the validity of this theory. host: why do we hear some people in the media write about this independent state legislature theory as a fringe theory, critics say, and why do supporters say it is an integral part of the whole process? guest: they point to the text of the constitution and there are two clauses. one is the elections clause in there is another one called the electors clause. the text refers to the

legislature meaning the body that makes the laws. it does not mean the state supreme court or a referendum i the voters or a veto by the governor. this is a theory that the supreme court has not endorsed. back in bush versus gore then chief gusted -- chief justice william rehnquist wrote a second concurring opinion that was joined by scalia and thomas and they said in that opinion that they would have reversed the decision of the florida supreme court on the grounds that it also violated this independent state legislature theory for the florida supreme court to step in with regard to the recount. again in 2020 after the 2020 elections, pencil -- pennsylvania republicans came to the supreme court and they said that the pennsylvania supreme court extended the deadlines for absentee ballots and

pennsylvanian republican said you cannot do that. several justices did not take up the case or weigh in and a couple said we need to take a look at this theory. host: did they mention this theory? guest: they did. host: in terms of the impact of the case, what happens if the court agrees with the republican legislature? what happens to the district -- redistricting in north carolina? guest: if the court were to agree with the republican legislature and a lot depends on how the court rights the opinion. they could say the legislature has complete authority and only congress can otherwise make changes. they could adopt a narrower version of the theory that says that normally the legislature has complete authority, but it if -- but if it has delegated authority to the supreme court or governor in a law then that

could trump the the theory. if the supreme court was to rule for the legislature it could go back and the legislature could draw a new map and an important change in north carolina was that the north carolina supreme court that struck down the map was at the time, a democratically controlled court. that court is now controlled by republicans. even if the supreme court were to say you can delegate your authority to the state supreme court the state supreme court could look at that and say that is not partisan. host: voters are saying the legislature does not fall outside of the own rules, if they write the process that the courts in the states can oversee and overrule the legislature in the case of drawing district maps. guest: they say when you look at what legislature meant, it is a

whole body that made laws but nobody intended when they drafted the constitution to mean that the legislature is not constrained by the state constitution, for example. host: she is a supreme court lawyer and a cofounder of scotus blog and her own howe on the court blog. 202-748-8001 is the line to call in for republicans. democrats, 202-748-8000. and for independents and others, 202-748-8002. the argument coming up today, 10:00 a.m. eastern and we will have that live on c-span. you will be in the courtroom today or that oral argument. what you will -- what will you be listening for? guest: so going in, the decisions by the supreme court to take up this case suggested that there are several justices that artists -- that are receptive to this theory. what i am listening for is if

there are a majority of the justices who seem receptive to it. what version are they going to look to? a version that gives the state legislature unfettered authority or are there narrower versions? host: this is happening at the same time that congress is considering potential changes in the electoral count law. how might -- what is congress looking to do in changing the law? guest: unfortunately this is not my area of expertise but it is something that i will be looking to see if that comes up as well and what the justices have to say about that. host: 202-748-8001 is a line for republicans. 202-748-8000 for democrats. independents and all others, 202-748-8002. let us go to missouri on the democrat line. you are on. caller: good morning.

i am really disappointed by the supreme court. the stolen seats that the republicans failed have -- filled how can you collect a prize for a contest that you did not win? i am saying kavanaugh and barrett should have stepped down out of fairness. the idea that everything has to fit with the constitution is quaint and unworkable. originalists, would clarence thomas would really like black going back to being slaves. the only voters being white -- being white landowners now? i think the supreme court should

reflect more of public desires. thank you. host: amy. any thoughts? guest: thank you for listening and thank you for your comments. host: let me bring marquette university that does a regular polling to ask what people think about supreme court. this approval is quite stark between now and 2020. the approval rating in 2020 was 66% and now it is 44%. the disapproval rating in 2020 was 33% and out is 56%. what do you think is causing that? guest: i think it was a reaction to the dobbs opinion and the hullabaloo surrounding the leak of the dobbs opinion and the dissatisfaction with the court, obviously. one thing that i have been blogging about and covering the supreme court for over 20 years and it has been interesting to

me. there have certainly been stretches in time in which the supreme court's approval ratings did drop because of the citizens united decision in 2010 or shelby county v. holder and then the supreme court tended to recover and bounce back. what i am looking to see is what happens if they do this whole this time next year or the year after, and whether or not the supreme court is able to rebound. host: you touched of the leak of the opinion in the dobbs decision and there was another reporting -- reported leak. this alleges another supreme court breach about the hobby lobby case. can you address what is going on in terms of looking into the leaks? host: with -- guest: with red guard -- regard to the dobbs leak john roberts indicated who the court's

marshall would be conducting an investigation. that is pretty much all we know about that investigation. it is ongoing as far as i know. i do not know whether or not the results will be made public when there is a results, or in what form. whether that could leak. talking about the accusations and the reports of a leak in regards to the hobby lobby case a couple of years ago, the supreme court's lawyer released a letter that said in essence justice alito did not do anything wrong. he denies having said anything about the decision to the couple that is mentioned in the new york times. they are talking about ethics rules they are said that they are balancing the duty to the public and being able to accept gifts from friends. having said that, the house

judiciary committee is holding a hearing tomorrow on supreme court ethics and is focused on the accusations in that article about the hobby lobby leak. the other thing that will be interesting, chief justice john roberts on december 31 at 6:00 p.m. releases his year end report. and some years that addresses things like how the judiciary is coping with covid or has coped with natural disasters. last year it was about ethics reforms and changes to the court and the chief justice said to congress we will deal with this. and i think that people will be watching to see what he says in the wake of all of the explosive allegations related to the dobbs and hobby lobby leak because it has been a year, what is the court doing to deal with this? host: gabriel up next in apex,

north carolina. republican line. caller: thank you for this wonderful conversation. i wanted to ask a specific question dealing with the prior cases from 2019 where chief justice roberts ruled with a lot of the current people who will be a big factor today in terms of the jurisprudence, but they ruled that federal courts cannot step into state matters. ruto as an election law made it where the actual state courts were the only check on partisan gerrymandering. i am wondering how those two will be in or out of alignment today and i wanted to get your thought on that. i wanted to ask if there was anything that, given where the court is with clarence thomas and the shielding capacity and the ability to recuse themselves

, what can be done by congress in order to add a layer of protection to regulate the supreme court. it seems like it is entrenched and there is nothing that can be done especially with lifetime tenure. it is one of the only entity is that has that status and it is dangerous to the regions you alluded to. thank you. guest: i think you raised two important points. the first one is the discussion and it was something i did not want to go on for too long of ruto versus common cause and that was a case out of north carolina involving partisan gerrymandering. as you said the supreme court in an opinion ruled that federal courts cannot consider claims of partisan gerrymandering and they are too political and the federal court should stay out of it. but the opinion by the chief justice made a point of saying that state courts, all is not

lost in essence. state courts would be available to consider claims of partisan gerrymandering under the state constitution. that is another thing i will be listening for, is what the lawyers who are arguing on behalf of the challengers and on behalf of the legislature and what the justices say about the decision in ruto v. common cause . and you talked about what congress can do in regards to the supreme coat -- supreme court and ethics. there is a code of ethics that does not apply directly to the supreme court and that is what congress is looking at, the possibility of adopting an ethics code. as a practical matter we are about to have a divided congress again. are they able to do something in the next couple of weeks, i am kind of skeptical.

i am not sure that it is something that would pass in a divided congress. host: you also covered one of the case, a case dealing with a same-sex couple and businesses not working with them, conservative justice was poised to side with a web designer that opposes same-sex marriage, what is called in this case? guest: back in 2018 they heard the case of jack phillips that was a colorado baker who made custom wedding cakes who did not want to create a cake for same-sex couples because that would violate his religious beliefs. the supreme court in 2018 ruled for phillips but on a narrow ground. they said that he was treated unfairly by the colorado administrative agency that considered his case because of the hostility to his religion. his case was over and the

supreme court agreed to take up the same question in the case of a website designer named lori smith who creates custom websites and she wanted to expand her business to include wedding websites, but she like phillips is a devout christian who says she believes that marriage is limited to one man and one woman so she does not want to create custom wedding websites for same-sex couples and she wants to put a notice on her own business website to make that clear. she says i will serve lgbtq people in other contexts. you want to create a website about an animal shelter that is great, but i will not do weddings. the colorado antidiscrimination law that would require her to do that violates her right to freedom of speech. the supreme court agreed to weigh-in on whether that violates or freedom of speech, not freedom of religion. and there seems to be five or

six conservative justices who were sympathetic. the three liberal justices, justice sotomayor, ketanji brown jackson were trying to illustrate further justices and the public to try and press smith's lawyer, kristin wagoner. it boiled down to there are two quotes to boil it down. justice sonya sotomayor said "we are going to carve out an exemption from antidiscrimination laws for the first time if we rule for smith." and then chief justice john roberts said "if we do not rule for smith we would be compelling speech in violation of someone's beliefs for the first time." it seems like they were sympathetic and they perhaps be

inclined to draw a line between service providers like website designers and artists. and on the other hand people were part -- people who are providing services to same-sex weddings like the guy who provides the chairs or the limo driver because that is not speech. host: that term was used a bunch of time, compelled speech. what does that mean? guest: when the government forces you to say something with which you disagree. and the government would have to pass a very high bar to do that and they say it is not met here. host: in essence it boils down to mayor making a first amendment case. guest: this is the argument that compelling her to create custom wedding websites for same-sex couples when it is contrary to her religious beliefs violates her rights to freedom of speech. host: let us hear from paul in the nation's capital, democrats line. caller: i just had a comment and

question. 59 years old and have lived in d.c. all of my life. when i started paying attention to the supreme court, which was in my teens and learning about it, i just feel like there is a gap between what we as a country feel the supreme court should be, and what it is. for as long as i can remember, there has been a partisan bench, of course, to the nominations and how the court rules. and then there is, i feel, this notion that the court can be because it is a legal body above it all. and i think that is not the case. maybe at some point before my life, it was playing out in my manner, but that -- but not that

i have seen. that is my comment but i also have a question and this is totally my endurance. has anyone been removed for the court -- from the court for for lack of a better phrase bad behavior? host: they would have to be impeached, correct? guest: yes, but justices have been and it is extremely rare. host: you want to comment on her view of the partisan bend of the court. guest: i would be glad to. there is, and i want to make clear that this is not necessarily my view, i am just saying what the other side would be. they would say precisely that the supreme court is not intended to reflect the will of the people. the supreme court justice says are not elected, -- justices are not elected but picked by the

senate and then -- by the president and confirmed by the president. they have life tenure so they can make decisions that are not popular. host: jeff from nebraska on the republican line. guest: i am a firm believer -- caller: i am a firm believer of the federal government staying out of the state business. let the states do it however they want to do it and control it through the courts and whatever they have to do. however, we really have a problem when it comes to federal voting. we need to set up a four day period of time, friday through monday and make it like something where we have a national holiday. and people can go vote, show their identification card, and vote with paper ballots. and if you have an illness or

you are military, or you have a legitimate reason why you cannot make it, you can use a mail-in ballot. but anything beyond that, people need to go. we need to get this in control. it is start -- it needs to get under control because it takes too long to get things counted. and there are just too many people out there, like myself. we do have -- there is a lot of problems. host: alright. keeping on elections for a moment on the supreme court, are there other elections related cases coming up this time? guest: not this term. the one thing in response to the caller, it is an interesting point talking about the partisan gerrymandering case and the

independent state legislature theory. there was an article last week in "the washington post" by sam wang that said the case that is before the supreme court involved a republican-controlled legislature that wanted to draft a map that would benefit republicans. but if you look at the national map that ruling in favor of the republican-controlled legislature would actually benefit democrats more because there are a bunch of blue and swing states that have not drawn partisan maps because they are constrained by the governor or referendum or the state supreme court. if those supreme court were to remove the constraints then they would be able to draw maps that favored democrats. host: a question from jim "isn't it true that both parties gerrymander their states?" guest: gerrymandering is a

bipartisan issue. the supreme court heard another pair of partisan gerrymandering cases, one of them was from maryland challenging a map drawn by the democrats. host: tim in wisconsin, the democrats line. caller: thank you for taking my call. i would just like to say, i do not have a lot of patiend3 for this -- patience to the supreme court, when you had trump putting three on, but i guess it was legal. and then you take into consideration that you can get 52 republican senators or 42 percent cast in this country for

senators, i do not think it represents the will of the people. as you stated, maybe that is not the case, but it should not represent the will of the federalist society people who can pick who sits on the supreme court for life, which is the scary part. they are in for life. thomas has been there for 40 years and will be there for another 20. i do not feel that that is right. thank you. guest: you know, i think -- thank you for listening and thank you for watching. host: you obviously cover the court and you've argued before the court. what do you think that most of us who just listen or sit in or read the newspaper, what we miss about the court's function and role? guest: the one thing that has largely flown beneath the radar of the left, so in the last year

or so with the supreme court's decision not to block the texas abortion law is what is known as the shadow docket which the supreme court hears oral arguments in those arguments are now livestreamed including biases and which is wonderful because it opens up access to the court to everyone, you can go to the supreme court if you can stand in line and you can read the opinions on the website. but a lot of action happens outside of the normal process on the shadow docket. the emergency appeals that come in asking the supreme court to step in, and the supreme court has been somewhat responsive to the criticism that it can swoop in and issue an order that blocks a government program and do that without any explanation, but for example they are hearing org you -- oral arguments and

they will fast track some of these cases and rule on them based on a cousin. -- a couple of dozen pages of briefing but there is a lot going on behind the scenes. host: the court issued a challenge to the federal immigration policy and a number of tates -- of states are challenging the policy. guest: there are roughly 11 million undocumented immigrants in the united states who could be subject to deportation. and so the biden administration adopted a policy to prioritize who will they -- who they will deport. they said we would deport people who are convicted of serious crimes and people who have entered the country recently. and so texas and louisiana challenge policy in federal court in texas as being inconsistent with federal immigration law.

they said it requires you, the biden administration to deport people who meets the criteria and they said it cost the states money because we have to pay for education and to incarcerate these people and for health care. and so the question is whether or not this policy should be allowed to stand, but there are important questions and that is in and of itself an important question. the biden administration says we cannot deport everyone who is subject to deportation, we have to prioritize and immigration officials has always had discretion. if we have to deport everyone who we pick up that will keep us from being able to focus on the people who need to be deported the most. there are other important questions in the case including about whether or not the states can bring a lawsuit at all in the first place. the state say this has harmed

us. the federal government says it has only home -- harmed you indirectly. and what the argument is that anytime a state has suffered an indirect injury of even a dollar then you can march over to federal court and file a lawsuit and that is going to be unsustainable. host: steve calling from chagrin falls, ohio. democrats line. caller: good morning. there are a number of things that come to mind. the one with respect to the court, it has become more politicized, for sure. and the fact of maybe these conservative interest groups doing their vat -- various vaccine things to influence -- various back scene things would influence things. i think it goes to bush versus

gore when the supreme court swoops in and ignores the state dominance in governance on how they do elections. and that was probably the beginning of it. the other one is this website situation now. or, case. it is interesting because there is -- she brought the suit up, nobody asked her to do anything. it is kind of like a political type of case in a way. but my question regarding that is, if it is really free speech, about free speech, and everybody has a belief or religious belief that they do not want to be involved in promulgating some sort of speech, ok. making a website that does not agree with their viewpoint. well then what about a newspaper publisher? and somebody wants to advertise

something in their newspaper, and they say no, i do not agree with that that is against my belief system. is that what the court is opening up, people can just pick and choose the things that they wants to help other people communicate? so the communication platforms and how we try to persuade people about things, that is a whole ball of wax. and if the court comes in and makes a decision on a case that really has no case, it is somebody's belief that they do not want to do something that nobody has asked them to do so. they are really opening a can of worms. host: we will get a response. guest: one of the points that you raised the idea that lori smith has never actually tried to offer wedding websites to

anyone or has never turned down a same-sex couple, that is the argument that the lawyers representing colorado and some of the justices were making. normally we deal with facts, and we do not have a lot of facts about how this will work suggesting that the state courts should send the case back to the lower court. there did not seem to be a lot of traction for that idea, but it was certainly an argument that some of the justices and lawyers are making. and then to get to your point about the supreme court being politicized. we are at an interesting point in the supreme court's history. i will not say if the court is politicized or partisan. but we are at a point where each of the justices really kind of reflects the ideological bent of the presidents that appoints them. that has not always been the case on the supreme court. in the period since i started

following the court you had justices like john paul stevens and david souter who were both republican appointees that by the end of their career were solid members of the court's liberal wing. you had justice anthony kennedy who is not member of the liberal wing but sometimes crossed over to join the liberal justices on important issues like affirmative action and the rights for lgbtq people, and abortion. and that as one of the earlier callers said, became a rallying cry for conservative republicans who have been focused for decades on changing the makeup of the court was to say things like no more souters when they had a nomination available to make sure that they were picking someone who was a serious conservative justice. host: in very short order after

the dobbs decision this summer, bipartisan and bicameral support came behind legislation to enshrine in law the right for same-sex marriage and interracial marriage. why did some people feel that that was necessitated after the dobbs decision? guest: that is a great question. in the dobbs decision the majority opinion by justice samuel alito carved out a special role for abortion. he said that our decision regarding abortion does not implicate some of the other rights to privacy including the right to contraception, same-sex marriage, interracial marriage that has been the subject of the supreme court decisions. those are different, this case is just about abortion. in a second concurring opinion justice clarence thomas suggested that because those

rights are on the same foundation, the right to privacy which is not found specifically in the constitution but the supreme court has read the constitution to include might be in jeopardy because of the reasoning in the dobbs decision. so the reaction to both the reasoning and the thomas opinion is pretty -- in particular because justice thomas in the past has written these separate opinions that sometimes seem to reflect only his views. but as the supreme court has become a more conservative court some of the things that he has suggested over the years that the supreme court should do the supreme court takes up and do. host: becoming more conservative and they gained a new democratic appointee and justice qanon she brown jackson. you're in the -- justice catania brown jackson. you are in the courtroom, what

is her role in the arguments? guest: she has been very active, she has been one of the justices leading the response to the use of history when you are interpreting that constitution. there is the idea that you look at the text but you then you also look at how the people who drafted that text would have understood it when it was drafted in the late 18th century or the case of some of the amendments, the mid 19th century. the idea of history and tradition were at the center of some of the court's rulings last term in the dobbs case in a case called new york state v. briuan involving the second amendment. she turned around relatively quickly and said that two can play at this game asking in a decision about voting rights, wasn't the 14th amendment to the constitution actually intended not to be neutral with regard to

race but to help african-americans. she was active in the 303 creative website designer case with a lot of different hypotheticals for the lawyer. and she has written a couple of opinions and has not released any opinions after oral arguments but a couple of but -- a couple of opinions dissenting from the decision not to grant relief to death row inmates. host: mike in new york, independent line. caller: good morning, i was just wondering if amy could enlighten us a little bit on the federalist society's involvement with supreme court appointees. it seems like the six conservative dissenting members are all members of the

federalist society. i was wondering if she could give us an idea of the agenda behind the society. i know skelly was a member, and of court -- scalia was a member and we know what he did. if she could give us a little information on her involvement. guest: i am not sure that all of the justices are members. the federalist society is an organization that was formed some time ago. initially in response to the perception that conservatives were underrepresented in academia. it became an organization that became heavily involved with the selection and nomination of judges and justices during the trump administration in particular. so many of your viewers might recall that before the november

2016 elections, donald trump had announced that he will release a list of potential supreme court nominees if he was elected president. i think he probably had a lot of assistance from the federalist society in coming up with those names. that list that's a lot of credit for getting trump over the finish line and getting elected in 2016 because they were some people who were social conservatives who were not convinced about this real estate developer from new york. and that gave them a lot of comfort that if he were elected, he was going to nominate solidly conservative justices and judges, particular to the supreme court so that they would have a chance to overrule roe v. wade. host: one more call, don in new

mexico. caller: good morning. it is my distinct opinion that there is no reason that this case should be before the supreme court. there is no injured party. what we are dealing with is a a case with a potential injury. so will you give me three examples where he supreme court has reached out and taken a case on the basis of potential injury? guest: i am not sure i can come up with three off the top of my head as i said earlier, this was certainly an argument made and this was also made at the stage at which they decided whether or not to take up lori smith's case in the first place and obviously there were at least four justices who thought they should go ahead. it does not seem to be getting a

lot of traction. host: we will have live coverage of the north carolina redistricting case. moore v. harper takes place live at 10:00 and you can hear it live on television and amy howe will be targeting it -- will be reporting on it for her scotus blog and her own blog. next we will be joined by democrat congressman mark pocan from wisconsin and a top member of the appropriations committee talking about the government funding deadline and a vote to protect same-sex and interracial marriage. later freshman republican congressman matt rosendale of montana will be with us. he will talk about his priorities for the republican led house in january. and he will add his support for kevin mccarthy. that is next. ♪

>> fridays at 8:00 p.m. eastern, c-span brings you "afterwords" where nonfiction acid -- authors are interviewed by journalists on their latest books. this week, steve case shares his book "the rise of the west" where he talks about his efforts to create startup and cash opportunities and generate jobs around the country and he has interviewed by the atlantic magazine ceo. watch "afterwords" every friday at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> c-span now is a free mobile app featuring your live and unfiltered view of what is happening in washington. keep up with the biggest events of live streams of floor proceedings and hearings from the u.s. congress, white house events, the courts, and

campaigns and more at your fingertips. you can also stay current with the latest episodes of washington journal and find scheduling information for the tv networks and c-span radio plus a variety of compelling podcasts. it is available at the apple store and google play and you can download it for free today. c-span now, your front row seat to washington anytime, anywhere. >> washington journal continues. host: congressman mark pocan wrapping up his fifth term as a congressman of the second district of wisconsin joining us from capitol hill to talk about things ahead in the lame-duck and in the 108 teams congress. i -- 118th congress. i think we wanted to start on the final vote on the same-sex marriage bill that has been approved by the u.s. senate. we touch upon how it was necessitated by the decision in

the supreme court on the dobbs decision. guest: necessitated by clarence thomas' remarks that should be opened up and i'm glad that we are doing this in a bipartisan way because all it is doing is affirming what the current law is. i am shocked by the people who voted against it saying that you do not support current law around marriage for interracial and same-sex couples but it is important. i think tammy baldwin deserves enormous credit for the affected behind the scenes work. it will ensure that no supreme court can play politics with marriage. host: among other things our guest is the lgbtq+ caucus on capitol hill. also a member of the appropriations committee and congressman, will bca spending bill on the current fiscal year spending for 2023?

the current measure is set to expire the 16th. guest: congress does nothing but on deadline so i am not surprised. the 101 of congress, it is a one bill that you have to pass every year. the omnibus is important to get done. if i were the republicans in the house going into a new session with a small margin like we have had. i would want to get this off of the plate so they can start fresh with whatever they are moving forward. i think the senior appropriate or in the senate is a democrat and the one who is a republican is both leaving so they would like to get it done. i hope we can do our jobs and get that bill across the finish line even if it is not next week. we were told we might have to be here through the 23rd, as long as we get it done. host: the democrats will be in the minority in the house anyway with new leadership up and down on the democratic side led by

hakim jeffries. aside from being in the minority party, how will your party's approach differ in the 118th congress. guest: we work very closely on things like the infrastructure bill and the build back better agenda and the inflation reduction act. we did a lot of things, four big bills and i will argue that any one of them would've been the previous big bill. we want to work with the president and democratic senate so i am hoping with this small margin that they have with some of their elements causing issues that we can talk to the moderate republicans and having them work with us to get things done because at the end of the day the only thing that is important is that we get things done with -- for the american people. i think the extremist element will be the tail wagging the dog and we have to figure out ways to work around that very unproductive kind of obstructionist element within their caucus.

host: mark pocan with us and we welcome your calls and comments at 202-748-8001 for republicans. 202-748-8000 free democrats. -- for democrats and for the others, 202-748-8002. where is the latest request on funding from ukraine, the latest request from a few weeks ago. guest: i think that will be packaged as part of the must move bills and it is important that we continue the funding. hopefully we will continue to have bipartisan support moving forward. but what rush has done is wrong and we have to support the people in ukraine. host: and this would come on top of what the congress says has been appropriated so far. $13.6 billion in march of this year. $40 billion in may. $13.7 billion in september. republicans say and a majority

of house republicans say that they would support a bill that would call for an audit of our spending in ukraine. what are your concerns about that? guest: i hope they are sincere about an audit for all defense spending which is something we have asked for for a long time. there should be an audit of how we spend our dollars you cannot pick and choose right now while they are at war. what is happening right now is something that we have to work with our allies and ukraine is an ally. and i hope that we will support the president's efforts. and part of that means we are not sending troops and that is something that is also bipartisan support not to do. host: let us get to the calls. here is debbie. roswell, new mexico. independent line. caller: hello, am i on? host: yes. caller: i have a question of -- not about policy but i might go

off topic. my question is simple. i want to know why and how, because i think you guys are all hustlers. every single one of you you have normal salaries and within a few years you are all millionaires and i want to know how and why this is happening. you are not millionaires in your regular life, so how is it once you get into congress and the senate all of you are millionaires and you are one of the richest one. i looked up all of you guys and none of you had the salaries before so what are doing? host: we will open it to the congressman. guest: i think you have the wrong congressman, i am not one of the richest. half of my colleagues are billionaires and many come into congress that way. i am not. look it up again it is pocan because i think you are wrong on that. to be fair a number of people

come here and have a my colleagues are millionaires already. and there is a problem with that. i, as -- i come as an everyman and i live check to check. if you have more people representing their constituents, decisions might happen. it is always important to get the right information. host: carla on the republican line. illinois. caller: good morning. ok. i have a question for the representative. i wants to know -- i support supporting ukraine, ok. call putin a war criminal and that we need to help ukraine support their borders and keep russia out. so how is that any different for what joe biden is doing to america with the open borders here. we might not have bombs and missiles flying over our borders

but we have sentinel -- fentenyl from china and mexico. so when do we call president biden a war criminal? guest: so that comparison is ridiculous but i will try to answer the thrust of what it is. we need to do more to stop drugs coming from out our country. most of it is coming through the ports not just through the border. some poured -- some try to put misinformation out there that we need to do doing more of doubt -- around this and we have passed bills and we will continue to do things to stop those efforts. but to compare that to ukraine, that is a little bit crazy. host: john, pennsylvania. democrat line. caller: hello. host: you are on, go ahead. caller: i am calling about, talking about reasonableness with the republican party. and i am asking what is

reasonable about the president running around the world trying to get oil from other countries and sending the jobs there and not doing oil drilling here when we can benefit from the wages that are being paid and also from the energy crisis that might be going down. guest: you bring up a good point in that the oil companies here are busy ripping us off right now. they did not increase production and instead they increased maximizing profits to their shareholders and that is why gas is as high as it was. in march when they had the deep-freeze in texas and they did not invest in their infant so refineries went down and prices went up and stayed up. we have audio from oil executives saying they did not production in order to return money to their shareholders. that is fundamentally the problem.

it is nothing that any political party is doing and that is what the oil companies are doing and i have no respect for the american people. there is more that can be done and relying on any foreign country is not a good idea. a good ideas to invest in energy -- electric vehicles and i think that is the best end result. host: madison, wisconsin. jean anne on the independent line. caller: good morning and thank you for taking my call. i am an independent and i have a lot of questions. first of all with regard to appropriations and so forth and accountability. i think yes in ukraine, accountability on the spot is not a reasonable option. what about the covid relief?

was there accountability? i do not believe so. people could ask for special dispensation for paying a minimal fee of a couple of hundred dollars to be excused from their taking of the american money. secondly, with regard to the border, i am kind of embarrassed that our president did not bother to go to the border when he was in arizona. you need to look and see what is going on. it is apparent that these folks are not being adequately vetted. i am sure that there are wonderful people that are coming through. but there are also people who do not like our country much

guest: the real problem fundamentally as we need to have a comprehensive law dealing with the immigration. when i first came in there was a bipartisan bill that i believe has 69 votes. it will be a great thing to work off of again, the problem is john was the speaker, republicans were in charge of the house and now was donald trump estates, -- it is too toxic to talk about the border and because of it we cannot get to the place that is reasonable like you're asking for. address it in a comprehensive way. i do not want to leave refugees behind. i think we can do more. we should be. there are things that should be done.

the real problem is we cannot get back to that point, not even 10 years ago were we had bipartisan, 69 senators voting in one way. that is what we have to get back to. host: there is reporting on potential immigration deal. congress is working to reach a last-minute immigration dose, reporting -- deals reporting potential immigration proposal that will provide a path of legalization for 2 million undocumented immigrants brought to the u.s. in exchange for 25 billion dollars increase funding for border patrol, security, bipartisan framework which is in flux, they say which would extend title 42 for a year. what do you know of anything about that? guest: the senate operates in different roles. many of the roles --rules were

invented when whigs. the problem is you cannot have -- a couple senators have tried to make a deal going to the normal committee process where you have infrastructure to put a bill together. i hope we can do when they had a bill that has 69 votes. it would be great to do that again. the issue might be hyper charge it would be difficult to see it happen especially if it is done in a lone wolf strategy. host: question from jim in california who ask, does the congressman feel comfortable not raising the debt ceiling now? speaker mccarthy does not have the votes to do so. guest: we should not have a vote on the debt ceiling. some of us come to washington from normal places like wisconsin.

anywhere else, if you appropriate the funds, we do not have a second vote on whether or not he put the stamp on the envelope to mail it. that is with the debt ceiling is. it is a weight you allow the instruction is to obstruct the normal process and make it not work. we should get rid of that. to have this vote in a regular basis, the vote is when you decide to appropriate the funds. develops when the rest of us will sign a contract -- the votes is when the rest of us will sign a contract. you do not have a decision to mail the monthly payment for your vehicle. i would hope we find a way to permanently get rid of it, but to have that hold anything, it is part of why washington frustrates that many people. host: let's hear from chuck in new york, republican. caller: i am shocked you can see you to spend billions of dollars

in ukraine. obviously ukraine has something on biden and hunter that congress will find out. billions of dollars to ukraine. why report ukraine? what do they have on biden and hunter that hopefully the new congress will find out, we keep sending money over there. it is costing us money. it is wasting lives. you are big on health care, when are you going to talk about long coated and dr. fauci -- long covid and dr. fauci? you guys are not talking about it. suny upstate hospital in syracuse, when i get ppe to his staff. you should look at that. guest: there is a cure to derangement syndrome called the

remote and you can put it on a different channel. anyone who thinks ukraine is robert houle -- rabbit hole of the hunter biden story, he has already been investigated we will talk about in the house for several years. russia invaded ukraine. they committed atrocities. to say we are going to do nothing and compare it to something else is ridiculous. yes a look at history and what is happening. that is why congress in a bipartisan way has supported our efforts in ukraine and i hope it will continue to do so for those reasons but they are true atrocities happening in -- for all those reasons, it is why we are involved there, not for any fox news derangement syndrome. host: we go to john on the independent line. caller: thank you for taking my call.

i once asked about the twitter think. it comes on the back of the previous caller, his opinion on that whole situation. trying to get donald trump put in jail for eight years on collusion. you will find out like that here and start like you stated. as far as the southern border, 1200 opioid deaths in wisconsin. like ronald reagan said, for me once shame on me, for me twice shame on you. ronald reagan said he was going to give amnesty if you sealed

the border and that never happened. the fence has never been completed since 1981 when ronald reagan was in office. i would really not like to see the debt ceiling and other stuff held up due to the democrats wanting something and republicans for nothing. host: congressman. guest: i agree with john. we should not be holding things up over the debt still an issue for the reasons i mentioned. it is an arbitrary second vote that does not happen in state legislatures. if we have pass an appropriation bill and we send the money to a bill of congress, there should be a backup vote that allows them to stop the process and that is why we should be getting rid of the debt ceiling vote

completely and get rid of it for the future. host: headline from the guardian about the january 6 committee, issued criminal referrals as doj antigens high in. -- and tensions heightened. what you think is a legacy of the january 6 committee? guest: i think we are seeing right now. they are exploring whether or not there will be criminal charges around january 6. and while connecting those thoughts to remind people what happened. all of this is on video. we saw it, we heard it. everyone around the country. for people to try to change what happened, senator johnson said, that is why you need to remind people, if you do not remember people -- history, things will happen like that again. i think it is important it is

done and hopefully, we will get to the bottom of why things happen as they did on january 6 make sure it never happens again. host: in florida on the independent line. caller: thank you for taking my call. a couple of things. you mentioned something about the oil. i am reading right now that the biden administration has the lowest federal leases since the end of war world two. we got that issue there. but it is ok to go to venezuela, back of the saudi's --beg the saudi's. we need to account for every

dollar that has been spent there. we need to account for the two point trillion that the pentagon cannot account for. y'all are wasting our money. that is my money. i want to know where my money is going to. i have a right to know that. we are not falling for it. it is time for accountability. host: he talked about auditing -- you talked about auditing, whether response that you have for our caller? guest: she's adding her voice to why we should do that. we outed almost every other program -- audit every other program but when it comes to the pentagon we do not. it is a large expenditure of federal dollars. it is something others have asked for for a long time and i

think there's bipartisan support to do such a thing. we should move forward on it. i agree. we should have accountability, it is public tax dollars. we owe people that accountability. host: jay in georgia on the democrats line. caller: hello. i want to make a point, we are hearing these people call in and they do not seem well-informed as you mentioned. they think it is the job of the congress to educate the population. for example, there was a caller on oil production. how much oil was the u.s. producing year ago and put that out? you can have a chart of all that. on the immigrants, how many immigrants are coming across the border? we can find that data by do not have time. the callers do not have time. one woman called

about your income and wealth. i know the data is out there but there ought to be a simple way. most of the callers do not realize it. 70% of all federal spending -- is on old people in the military. when you come social security, health care, medicare, and the military, that is 70 since -- 76 every dollar --70 cent of every dollar. it is up to congress to educate the people. guest: i think we do try. the problem as i see it, there are so media -- many media sources. a social media you only see what you want to see. it will reinforce your worldview

you will not see other things that give you facts. it is part of the problem. we have charts that show expenditures but the mainstream media now is not so mainstream because the other new sources and 24/7 cycle that is out there. people can just see the information they want. that is why, as you rightfully mentioned, many people are uninformed on the backs but they are informed on the spin. that is our real problem. people just get the news they are supposed to see according to the algorithm of much of the social media. that is something we have to figure out. host: if you want information about congress, go to c-span.org. there is a link to congress. if you missed today's session in the house or senate, you want to watch past sessions or pass

hearings, it is all there c-span.org. jeff in virginia on the republican line. caller: good morning. my question is, the congressman said earlier that he would like to see the republicans work with the democrats to get stuff done. but it seems like the new normal is for the last several years, investigations with russian collusion, now we are dealing with more investigations. when is the time to set these investigations aside and do something for the american people? guest: a couple observations. some of the investigations get a lot of attention from the media but it is not like every committee does investigations. out of the major committees, oversight and government roof probably does the most. it is their main mission. leica appropriations, we do not do investigations. we are talking about the budget

bill that we have to get done. sometimes it is disproportionately reported. one of the things we are hearing with the incumbent republican congress, it is going to be hard for them to pass bills because they are going to have a handful of additional votes. therefore they are going to double down on doing more investigations so it does not take a majority in congress to do that. i do not think he would get away from the investigations. because the incoming republican congress but in reality, it is a small portion of what is done in washington. host: congressman mark pocan of wisconsin. thank you for meeting with us this morning. guest: thank you. host: republican view from capitol hill coming up next. republican matt rosendale of montana. he will talk about his

priorities for the republican-led house coming in january and if kevin mccarthy should lead them. >> american history tv, saturdays on c-span two exploring the people and events that tell the american story. at 8 p.m. eastern, professor richard explores what 11 by examining the correspondence of a farmer from a german-american family near south dakota. at 9:30 p.m. eastern on the presidency. presidency historian talks about the collection of papers she and her late husband wrote and donated to the university of texas austin and other collection as to understanding the 1950's the presidency. exploring the american story,

watch american history tv saturday all c-span 2 and find the full schedule on your program guide or watch online any time c-span.org/history. >> congress gets back to work in the wake of the midterm election. watch as the incoming 118 congress elects its leaders and make key committee assignments, great is new members, ss and agenda for january -- and assess and agenda for january 2023. follow it all, live on the c-span network and c-span now, our free mobile video at or anytime on demand at c-span.org. >> fridays at 8 p.m. eastern,

c-span brings you afterwards from book tv a program where nonfiction authors are interviewed by journalists, legislators, and more on their latest books. this week co-founder shares his book where he talks about his efforts to create start up opportunities and generate jobs. he is interviewed by atlantic magazine ceo nicholas thompson. watch afterwards every friday at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> if you are enjoying book tv, sign up for our newsletter using the qr code on the screen to receive a schedule of upcoming programs, discussions, festivals and more. but tv every sunday a c-span 2 or anytime online booktv.org. television for serious readers. >> middle and high school

students, it is time to get out your phone and start recording for your chance to read -- win 100,000 total dollars in current prices by entering c-span documentary contests. we are asking students to picture yourself as a newly elected member of congress and tell us what your top priorities would be and why. create a 5-6 minute video showing the importance of your issues opposing and supporting points of view. be bold with your documentary, do not be afraid to take risk. there is still time to get started. the deadline is january 20, 2023. frozen ts sit -- for rules and tips to get started visit our website. >> "washington journal" continues. host: congressman matt rosendale represents montana.

he also sits on the veteran affairs committee. welcome to washington journal. guest: thank you for having me on. host: let's start with a preview of the 118 congress. you have said you told see in and you will vote for kevin marked -- kevin mccarthy speakership. there supporting -- is reporting of a meeting. what came out of the meeting? guest: there is back and forth on who will end up being the speaker for the 118 congress and there are still a lot of opportunities for us to make some changes and have someone who wants to be the speaker to support those changes. there's a lot of folks over the last 20 years that have said washington is broken. they campaigned on the fact that washington is broken.

it is truly is -- truly is and because we have consolidated the power of all the decisions and to the hand of a few selected individuals and as the speaker what they call the rules committee which is a group of nine people that makes most of the decisions about what legislation is going to come to the floor, what amendments will be allowed to change that legislation, and the rest of the body simply is in a position where they have to vote yes or no and that is it. you do not have the collaborative process that most of the folks who have ever served in a legislative body in a state have been ever -- able to participate in. by consolidating that power, isolating the ability or freezing out the ability for other members to participate, we do not have the ability to

represent our constituents at the same level as those nine individuals that have consolidated all of the power. what we are doing is -- to defuse this power back to the body to have basic changes. number one, we have single subject legislation come before congress, which would eliminate a lot of the deals that are made back and forth to buy those virtually and then to allow what they call open rule so each member would be able to propose amendments to legislation as long as they were pertaining to the specific legislation that have been introduced and brought to the floor. by doing that, we each have the ability to represent our constituents equally. host: you tweeted about this and

you say, each member of congress has earned and deserved equal participation in the legislative process. that will only happen if the house returns to government legislative body before nancy pelosi took control, kevin mccarthy is not willing to take those changes. have you made any in rows with kevin mccarthy? guest: no. we hear a lot of rhetoric, we see a lot of fanfare taken place. we see emphasis given to the oversight committee as we go to the 118 congress and that is really important. we see time spent on the southern 40 -- border. as far as changing the process on the house floor, we have not made any progress. that is how we are going to change congress. that is how we are going to restore order.

that's how the constituents across the nation are going to have equal representation. host: it would not just follow for republican members but for all members? guest: that is exactly right. we are trying to make sure everyone has an equal voice in congress. anytime you try to set a process that benefits one a party or the other, that is going to get turned around and it is white we have the ripple effect on a lot of legislation and a lot of conduct. we are not talking about dramatic, radical changes. we are talking about reestablishing regular order to congress so that we can have this collaborative process restored and i personally believe it will bring collegiality back to congress. host: our guest is congress men matt rosendale.

-- welcome your calls and comments. republicans, 202-748-8001. democrats, 202-748-8000. independents, 202-748-8002. one of the first things that could come up as a potential call for an audit on spending on ukraine. this headline reflects mainstream republicans back the audit of economic aid. it was defeated in vote because of the unity of democrats who still control the panel sending a message to ukraine that america's support for the war was in question. do you support that measure by representative greeny? guest: i do. we are nearing $80 million sent to ukraine and there's been no accounting whatsoever.

we see the ftx cryptocurrency has arisen an essay filed for bankruptcy documents, there was investments coming into ftx from ukraine. there's a lot of money around that no one has been able to get an accounting of. if you're going to authorize taxpayer dollars to go overseas, we need to know what is happening with that. i have voted against additional funding to go to ukraine. i think it is tragic that russia has instigated an unprovoked war and invaded that nation. it has killed people, dislocated a lot of people. however, we have a lot of problems here that are going to ignore. we have an invasion taken place in our southern border right now. it is 4 million people in our country illegally under the biden administration, we have

had thousands of fentanyl over the southern border. logic 5000 people have died from drug overdoses -- 105 thousand people have died from drug overdoses. the components came here from china. we have our own invasion taken place and i think we need to focus on the problems taken place in our country and for those funds that have been shipped overseas, there has to be an accurate accounting of what is taken place. host: let us hear from our callers. mike on the independent line. make sure you meet your volume --mute your volume. caller: yes, thank you for taking my call. i just want to say to you, when you guys, republicans start

talking about the border and the fentanyl crisis, those are talking points to me because these problems have been around for decades, not only under democrats but under republican administrations. when you guys had the power when donald trump was in office, you had the congress and senate and did not do anything about the border. you did not solve that problem and you were talking about building a fantasy wall and you guys never got the job done. do not try to say this is a democratic problem. all of y'all are guilty with that and the fentanyl crisis, it happened under republicans, not democrats. stop playing games with this. if donald trump announces he is going to run for president after all of the garbage he has been in balance with -- involved with, the immoral things he has been doing, the races things, you would fall in line and vote for him.

are talking out of your mouth -- you are talking out of your mouth. host: we will give our guests the chance to respond. guest: i appreciate you calling in but your facts are not right. if you look under the trump administration, there were several policies that were put in place and to dramatically reduce the illegal immigration taken place in the southern border. the security system that was associated with it was helping, it was not complete, but we have tremendous gaps in the system but the policies are just as important. i have gone down to the southern border three times and that was local law enforcement, customs and border patrol, ranchers and farmers, which actually is more than the president has done.

what we have seen, the customs and border patrol are saying, you do not need to send us more people. you do not need to send us more money because if you do that all it is going to accomplish is allow us to process more illegal immigration faster and release of people into the country. what will help is to continue funding the security system on the southern border and reimplement several policies. number one, there remain in mexico policy. that policy was to say, if you come to our country and you are trying to claim asylum, a status from plink your country of origin -- fleeing your country of origin, rather than be released in the u.s., you will be detained on the mexico side of the border and by that simple fact being put in place, 75% of the people there were detained

in mexico ended up going back to their country of origin and it dramatically reduce the amount of people that were even coming to the united states trying to claim asylum and status. they knew the likelihood of being released into the country while they were awaiting from their hearing date -- for the hearing date to determine if they earned status was not worth it. i returned a bunch of them. -- it returned a bunch of them. the facts are in the favor of public and the party and i'm sorry, your information is wrong. host: congressman rosendale represents montana. you were represented the eastern part of montana as the state gained a new seat for the 118 congress after the 2020 senses.

how does it feel? guest: is great -- it is great. pre-1990 we had two representatives in the 1990's senses and reallocation of congress, we did up losing one of their representatives. for the last 30 years we've only had one voice. in order to get the population split equally across the state, i'm still going to end up with about three quarters of the state that i will represent. as of january the third, i will go from representing the largest district in the nation by population to having the smallest district in the state by about 540,000 constituents. host: let us hear from alan in florida, republican. caller: yes, can you hear me?

host: yes. caller: the democrats are complaining about the republicans when they take over congress with the investigations but everybody forgets for the last six plus years, they have been investigating trump. wasting taxpayer dollars. you have democrats like schumer, saying that we have all this evidence. they have nothing. they wasting our taxpayer dollars and this is on both sides of the parties. democrats and republicans. the american people did not voted out, we need term limits. we have all these dinosaurs in d.c.

they get to vote their own pay rates, i do not get to vote for my payraise. it would be nice. all politicians are crooks, in my book. host: a response from you. guest: i wont hope to think he does not think i am a crook -- would hope to think he does not think i am a crook. i believe term limits are a good thing. i think the american public expects the representatives to come for a certain amount of time and they return home to their farm or their job and live under the same laws they created. i do not believe our founders intended for anyone to have a career in politics. i think it is an obscene term. as far as the republicans and democrats, spending a lot of time on oversight and research,

there is too much time spent on that, especially when we have a doj that's demonstrated they are selective and biased about the determination on who they're going to charge with -- and prosecute. congress is not charge and prosecute we put the spotlight on bad practices and corruption. i would like to think as we go forward to the 118 congress that we monitor how much time is spent on government oversight. i would like to see reduce down 20% and to take the time to work on things that are important to the country. i think i donestk energy production -- our domestic energy production as important and ties into everyone's cost-of-living. we have seen gasoline and diesel fuel prices increase about 60% under this administration.

an act by the administration to reduce our domestic energy production by just about 2 million barrels a day that is very problematic. on the natural resource committee, we have introduce legislation to increase domestic energy production and i think is going to be important we continue to pursue that. as i was talking to michael earlier, we need to secure our southern border. this is an invasion taken place on our southern border. fentanyl is a big problem. it may not be where mike lives, in the state of montana, we have an 1100% increase drug overdoses and deaths as a result of fentanyl. arrest directly related to fentanyl. it is a big problem and it is a big problem if someone in your family is one of the folks that died. we are losing a generation of young people as a direct result

of fentanyl overdoses that is coming in from the southern border. those of the kind of things we do need to focus our attention on, to make sure we provide a good and positive agenda for the american people. host: congressman is a member of the freedom caucus on capitol hill. i want to get your reaction to criticism of our program by don bacon of nebraska. [video clip] >> multiple votes for leader mccarthy. as long as he stays in the fight, we're going to support him but at some point there would not give in and not be a part of the team. will not be held hostage by them and caved to their desire and their 3% of the conference. i will work across the aisle to find a republican we can mutually agree to. it was most important i agree to a democratic speaker.

i agree with a republican. i think they are moderate democrats willing to work with us to find the best republican possible and i think it is important to do this because you cannot be held hostage by five or six people out of 222. host: matt rosendale? guest: he is certainly entitled to his opinion on things. we want to find a coalition speaker as well, someone we can trust, someone who will help us restore regular order to the body, which is all the opponents are working on. there were 36 people that voted against mccarthy being the conference for his nomination. there are over 50 people that voted against -- there somewhere between 36 number 50 people that is not happy with the governance or the agenda he has laid out.

what we want to do is make sure each of the members of congress, this is not about matt rosendale, this is about each member of congress being able to represent their constituents on equal footing is that of going back to the same old days of being in this exclusive club of just a few people that are able to dictate the agenda of congress. host: lyle in minnesota, good morning. caller: good morning. i'm a federal retiree, 30 years of the postal service. i am impacted by something that is called wep. we have had so many changes in congress. we cannot that straightened out and it affects my social

security. i do not get my full entitlement because of this law that was put in place way back when. we keep on trying to get this fixed and i think all the members of congress are waiting for us to die off. host: any familiarity with that? guest: i am not. the way it was described, it sounds a gay requirement that says if you earn a certain amount of income, -- like a requirement that says if you are in a certain amount of income, it is reduce, but i am not certain. i think that does warrant having some consideration given to it because if you try to device people -- is a device people to stay in the labor pool a much of them to be incentivized to do some you do not want to be taken

away their income. host: to wyoming, clarence on the independent line. caller: good morning. i agree with you that you have to have single issue bills you pass and i also think congress should be held responsible for not always doing the constitutional duty. if it has not been done, they should be held responsible for that. i can't remember the other thing. taxing the budget. you should be held responsible for that. there's no reason we should wait for so long to pass the budget. the only thing that is required is to provide for common defense. host: all right, congressman.

guest: thank you so much and you are so right, at the federal government focus on the things they are obligated to take care of like making sure having commerce across the state then we would not have nearly as many problems for the national debt we have acquired right now, which is nearing $1 trillion. single subject legislation is critically important for us to get back to because it eliminates the dealmaking that goes back and forth in congress right now. it also provides a lot of transparency in government. if you bring a piece of legislation and everyone has the ability to thoroughly discuss it, the american people know what is contained within that legislation. when you bring up 1000, 2000 page bills, you are given 12-20 hours to review and then they try to pass it.

there are a lot of people that do not know what is contained within that, including many members of congress. that is why i would not vote for legislation like that. if i can identify exactly what is going on, how my spending will be contained within it, i'm not going to support legislation like that. so the point clarence makes are valid. host: alexander in new york on the democrat line. caller: good morning. i would like to say yesterday republicans loss herschel walker loss. mccarthy was not shaking the hand of a family policeman who lost their lives. the republican party does have a great deal of an identity crisis on how to move forward.

this makes congress coming up, you republicans have a real opportunity to not only demonstrate what you can do within your party, but reaching out across the aisle. the freedom caucus aged shamefully, you have people like marjorie taylor greene talking about people reminded the people's leadership in the bottom of a slave ship when talking about electric planes that are being commissioned in canada. it is the absurdity of we ship a party wants to somehow -- which the republican party must've pushed the country forward, but it is so dangerous. you do not seem to understand, we have to move beyond all this toxic rhetoric and you cannot normalize the behavior of people like marjorie taylor greene or your former president. you're going to continue to lose

and i guarantee you're going to continue to lose if you somehow think this is ok with other half of the country. guest: i appreciate you calling in. it has always been my emphasis to focus on policy and not on personality. if you can do that, if you can have an honest debate about the differences in policy, you can have strong, rigorous debate, but you should be able to come out of their room still having a relationship with those individuals. when i refer back to the state legislator in my time i spent in montana, i was elected by my peers as the senate majority leader. i think that is because i had the ability to have discussions with a variety of individuals about the policies themselves. while here in washington, i believe in supporting and promoting and embracing federalism. most of the things that take place appear, should not.

we should be asking the state to govern a lot of this policy. that is where my emphasis has been. i am more than glad to have a conversation and debate with anyone about things they do need to be taken care of at the federal level. one of the most bipartisan committees that exist in congress is the veterans affairs committee. i have been able to work to my counterparts on the other side of the aisle on important issues to make sure i veterans, once they have served, -- art veterans are able to receive what they were earned and promised that we do that in a fashion they can get them when they want them, where they need them. there are areas we can find that agreement but i believe the discussion and debate is good, let's keep it on the policies themselves, not the personalities and that is where

you are going to see progress. host: thank you for joining us this morning i had a today session. guest: thank you so much for having me. host: still more in the program ahead before the supreme court comes in at 10:00 a.m. eastern. will have open forum. start calling we will get to you calls next. republicans, 202-748-8001. democrats, 202-748-8000. independents, 202-748-8002. >> listening to programs on c-span with c-span radio has just got easier. tell your smart speaker to play c-span radio is to washington journal -- listen to washington journal. catch washington today for a fast-paced report on the stories

of today. listen to c-span any time, tell your smart speaker to play c-span radio. c-span, powered by cable. >> preorder your copy of the congressional directory from the 118 congress. it is important information. the president's cabinet, federal agencies, and state governors. scan the code on the right preorder your copy. it is 2995 -- 39.95 plus shipping and handling. >> be up to date in the latest and publishing with book tv, podcast about books. with current nonfiction book releases plus bestseller list, industry news, and trends with insider interviews. you can find about books on

c-span now or ever you get your podcasts. >> there are a lot of places to get political information but only c-span you get it straight from the source. no matter where you are from, where you stand on the issues, c-span is america's network. unfiltered, unbiased, word for word. if it happens here, or here, or here, or anywhere that matters, america is watching on c-span. powered by cable. >> "washington journal" continues. host: it is open forum. you can call for republicans, 202-748-8001. democrats, 202-748-8000. independents, 202-748-8002. a chance to chat ahead of the supreme court oral arguments this morning in the case of more

the. this is the headline from the washington post, supreme court to consider fundamental change in election authority, legal battles of rachel gerrymandering -- races gerrymandering. the case of the supreme court hears wednesday bring stakes like no other. the justices will take up and both sides agree could be a fundamental, radical change on the weight federal elections are conducted. let us get to your calls. jeff in florida. caller: yes, i am sort of disappointed that the republican representatives that was on there is not there because i would like to say this to his face, i find him to be a liar,

anti-american and the reason i will never vote republican again. the democratic representative explains that the larges majority of fentanyl that comes across the border is not into texas, it comes through the ports. they are interested in fixing something, put more expect her's -- inspectors in the port. secondly, he diminishes the attempt to let american people know what donald trump did in his attempt of overthrowing the government. to diminish that, to say it is not important, there is nothing more important than a president who becomes a traitor. last of all, i would like to say , they cannot decide for things like roe v. wade, put it on the

ballot. the american government is supposed to represent the people, put it on the ballot, let the people decide what is right and what is wrong. take the supreme court out of it. as well as, changing how the supreme court justices are appointed so they cannot be used politically ever again. host: to barbara in west virginia on the independent line. caller: yes, i would like to speak to the representative to tell them, i think they should make the house and the senate all sit down when they have these meetings and talks, we pay them to be there and i think they should all be in their seats and be there to vote, not just say, i am present and so

and so most of our -- wants to vote a certain way. we pay them to be there and i am hoping they will change that and make it more so they will hear the american people. i like what he said about getting their own voice. i hope they all can get a voice, even the democrats and republicans. thank you. host: robert in alabama, republican. caller: thank you so very much and your program is very interesting this morning and went all the different points of view, one of the things that concerns me about our government -- it seems like we do have a position as stated clearly but when we look at the other side

of the aisle, on both sides we seem to demonize and criticize and adjust the system and it really -- our justice system and it concerns me that no one is listening to each other. i do not know how we can do that except with term limits. host: doug eskin of carolina. caller: good morning. it is always a pleasure to talk to y'all. the last gentleman that was on, it seems like and i follow the news and everything and i know fentanyl has been out there but now it seems like it is the main talking point. fentanyl, fentanyl coming over. i wish these people would concentrate on the real problem, then the violence that is killing people, not the

fentanyl. gun violates -- violence is like prayers and prayers. they always forget it was ronald reagan, i am free flowing, they gave amnesty. we forget about that, but it is democrats that is running over the border. i appreciate your time and your show. host: it is wednesday, december 7 marking the anniversary of the bombing of pearl harbor. this is from the associated press hawaii. a handful of survivors of the attack on pearl harbor are expected to gather at the scene of the japanese bombing on wednesday to commemorate those who perished 81 years ago. when a dozen or more travel to hawaii from across the country,

to pay their respects at the annual remembrance ceremony. part of the decline reflects the a in h -- as they age. it will make them 98 today, many of the still alive. 2400 servicemen were killed in the bombing that launched the u.s. into world war ii. u.s. arizona loss alone hundred 77 sailors. texas is next, mark on the independent line. caller: god bless all of our veterans. ever since i was a teenager, when i go to a grocery store to cash my paycheck, i wait in line and i grew up in a town of san antonio, texas and the people

waiting ahead of me, most of them were hispanic as some of them were illegal, some of them were illegal, but the paychecks -- legal, but the paychecks they were sending the book of the check or have of it if not most of it to another country. the money they were earning here was getting sent to another country to a family member, i imagine. how to that benefit america? as for gun violence, they need to al al -- outlaw hollowpoint bullets. they are very deadly. we need to all be independent or republican because a republic -- this is a republic it. i democratic system is people for the government and a republican system is government for the people. host: mike in pittsburgh on the

republican line. caller: i am looking at this moore v. harper case and historically, it is about individual rights and not majority rule. this could also take the money out of politics because it is not cost money to campaign in front of the state legislature. also, it is in the constitution because acb senators were elected by state -- used to be senators were elected by state legislatures. we are republic -- a republic not a democracy. host: that case is coming up momentarily. moore v. harper is the case

dealing with the north carolina election map and whether state courts can roll on maps that govern federal elections. oral arguments, momentarily. live coverage here on c-span. on the democrats line, go ahead. caller: thank you for having me on. i would like to ask the question that is not get answered, what is the cost to guard our border? how is that, it seems like is that freedom of justice of all, telling people where they belong? host: next up, david on the independent line. caller: thank you for taking my call. on immigration, i have been an immigrant advocate for a long

time, representing countless people in immigration court. talking about the supreme court, every source, wyler veto from about 1981-1982, it is a case about the oral arguments. it is a hold for employment that no one is enforcing on employers. we have the right line about fentanyl, the left expanding asylum and other protections. if you want to know, it's always been the jobs and remittances. wyler v. doe. everyone check it out. host: davis on the republican line in lake lapd, florida. we continue in open forum. go ahead. caller: thank you for the call. i would like to do something different this time.

and i'd like to ask you a question. my first question is, what do you think about chip manufacturing in the united states? host: you're asking me? caller: yes. host: the nature of this show is that a conversation -- caller: i understand that. people don't understand. i'm hoping the -- you as the editor and all that would understand about chip manufacturing. and apparently people don't understand. i was in mining. rare earth metals are rare. in other words, just to simply take a note. host: i do know part of the recent legislation that passed, the infrastructure legislation calls for some of that reshoring, i think is what it's called, of the mining of that

rare earth metals for those chips, for the rare earth material that go into those chips you mentioned also go into the high tech batteries used in cars and other cases as well. caller: however, what's the source of those -- rare earth metals that go into the chip manufacturing? host: i'm saying some of the legislation that's recently passed has called for it to be reshored, brought back to the united states as opposed to being gotten from other countries, including china. caller: 90% of our rare earth metals are imported from china. i wonder why people understand the big lie about green energy. the rare earth metals, taiwan doesn't have the raw materials. the u.s. has some. but our -- it's a big attack on energy.

they won't allow us to mine here in the united states. they say they will, but it's a big lie. they'll mine cambodia, australia, currently our pentagon -- i'm not sure. they approved big legislation. in any case australia owns 51 -- china owns 51% of the rare earth metals in australia. host: appreciate bringing up the topic. we'll go on to rex in altoona, pennsylvania. good morning. caller: hello. i'd like to talk about the border. i see mccarthy and his posse at the border talking about the drugs coming across, people coming across. i'd like to know how -- what his plan would be to do this? i don't see any end in sight. i'd like to see him and all of

his posse that was down at the border make a contract with the people of america that they would have this problem fixed in three years, because it seems like the republicans are throwing this up as their main battle against the democrats, and they don't have a solution. even the man that was on earlier, the congressman, he said he's been down to the border several times. what good did that do? i can walk down there and look at the border and say yeah, there's a problem here. it just seems like they are griping on it. i would like to see mccarthy and his posse get together and solve the problem for the people of the united states, which i think there isn't any end. i don't think there is a way that anybody can stop the flow of people across the border 100%. or the drugs. that's my comment. thank you for having me on.

host: sure. roseville, michigan, next up. ray on the independent line. caller: yes. i can't believe i'm agreeing with a republican from florida about term limits. there should be. any time in history independents should be getting to the white house maybe we can solve some problems. i believe -- they need to have some -- i believe the american people might like it this way. we vote independent in the white house. but not concerned about the frivolous -- like i said i couldn't believe i agree with a republican from florida where they have most of the oath keepers, the proud boys and oath keepers come from. host: nice to end the program with people agreeing with one another. we'll end it there. thank for your comment. thanks for your calls this morning here on "washington

journal."