president when you're trying to say maybe he didn't know. he knew. he got all that money from china. our president has sold out to the chinese like everybody said trump was to the russians but there was no proof of that. there is more proof dumb and dumber sold out to the chinese. guest: i think the answer to that question is the same as my answer to the earlier question. there is still so much we do not know, there are still so many unanswered questions. it is hard to say whether or not there is any claim in all liability -- is any criminal liability at all. host: the question i was trying to get out is is there legal distinction between what somebody knows and explicitly directing action. guest: there is no legal distinction. >> "washington journal" continues. host: joining us is julie rovner

, chief washington correspondent for kaiser health news, here to talk to us about republicans commitment to america and what they have said about medicare and social security. i want to start with the leader of the republicans in the house, kevin mccarthy. he spoke about what they want to do on medicare and social security. i will have you respond to it. [video clip] >> when republicans were in power those eight years, discretionary spending increased zero. i watched democrats take over and they increased it by 30%. they went from four chili dollars to $7 trillion. i watch the debt and inflation grow under their policies. we have to get our house in order. republicans will always protect medicare and social security. we will protect that for the next generation going forward. we will scrutinize every single dollar spent.

it is the right of the hard-working taxpayer that pays it. we want to make sure it is spent wisely and not the way the democrats have spent it. host: you heard kevin mccarthy saying they will protect these programs and yet we have heard from viewers since the beginning of the 118th congress that some republicans want any vote on the debt limit to include cuts to these entitlement programs. is that true? caller: yes -- guest: yes. kevin mccarthy has re-rated -- has reiterated the one thing republicans agree on. they do not want to be seen as doing anything to harm those programs. there are a lot of republicans in the house and senate who would like to make very big and probably very controversial changes as part of an effort to reduce spending, control the

budget, and preserve programs which do need to be at least tinkered with if they are to withstand the retirement of future generations. host: what is the status of each of these programs? guest: social security, according to the last trustee report in 2022, is expected to result -- to exhaust its trust fund in 2035. the medicare trust fund is not scheduled to be exhausted until 2028. that is longer than it was last year. over the many years, that is more years than the medicare trust fund usually has. there is some time to deal with both of these issues. congress at some point is going to have to grapple with them. host: how much federal spending goes to each of the programs? caller: i don't -- guest: i don't have the actual statistic but is a large chunk of the

federal government and what we call mandatory spending. the speaker was talking about discretionary spending that went up under the democrats. social security and medicare and medicaid continue unless congress steps in to change them , unlike other programs that have to be renewed every year and appropriated for every year. these are programs that do not change unless congress goes in and makes changes to them. host: if you want to get the debt under control, can you do it without touching these programs? guest: probably not. almost certainly not. they are such a large chunk of federal spending and so they will have to be done to preserve the programs for future generations. it is always very controversial to touch social security or medicare. as we found out in 2017 when the republicans were trying to

appeal the affordable care act, people are sensible about cutting medicaid because now something where people are on medicaid and medicare. we have called these programs the third rail of politics, touch them and die. president george w. bush in his second term proposed a fairly minor program to privatize social security and basically got his head handed to him and republicans have shied away from that ever since. it is politically very risky to go after these programs. on the other hand, at some point the parties left to get together and do something. host: a republican on the house floor last week explained how entitlement programs like medicare and social security are the primary drivers of the national debt. [video clip] >> the vast majority of u.s. spending is what we call mandatory. it is entitlement.

you get because you work 70 quarters, because you turned a certain age, because you are a certain tribal group, because you are a certain level of poverty, you get these benefits and their automatic. it is a formula. over here, this green part, that is discretionary. this is what everyone thinks of as government. that is your fbi, irs, all of those things. here in the blue, that is defense. i will show you on shorts later, my brothers and sisters on the left will say cut defense, get rid of it. believe it or not, it is not enough money to keep us in balance. there needs to be an understanding of reality. your government is an insurance company with an army.

i note that is trying to be on humorous but it happens to be the truth. host: julie rovner, insurance company with an army? guest: that is a pretty good description. that was a completely accurate description of how mandatory spending works, how our entitlements work. if you qualified, you automatically get these. if congress wants to change them and the president agrees, you can do that. that is what happens in most of these budget reconciliation bills. that is what the bills are for, congress to make changes to the nondiscretionary part of the budget, which is the congressman points out is the largest part of the budget. we have seen many changes to medicare and social security. most of them have been small. some have been significant. in 2003 it was republicans who pass the bill to put prescription drug benefit into medicare and did not pay for it.

both parties are guilty for letting things on that have made these programs more expensive and more generous. host: before we get to calls, are there bipartisan proposals for adjusting these programs so that they can remain solvent? guest: probably not in congress. nobody wants to step out. there are a lot of bipartisan proposals on the outside. commissions have tried to come up with ways to shore up the programs in a fair way. congress has been loathed, it is politically very risky to tinker with these programs too much. i think this is probably not going to be the congress where we will see the republicans and democrats hold hands and jump. host: what are some of these

bipartisan proposals by outside groups, by commissions? guest: one of the quick ones is to take the cap office social security tax. right now you only pay a social security tax up to $147,000 of income. there a lot of people who make more than that and they do not pay their social security tax on anything above that. the reason is they want the benefits to be balanced with how much you paid in. that is why there is a cap. taking the caps off, people could afford that. that would be one quick way to bring a fair bill of money into the social security program. host: let's see if our viewers for that idea. bob in utah, democratic caller, your thoughts on these entitlement programs. caller: they are entitlements. your boss pays a much in from

social security and unemployment and all of the other taxes. that is the cost of being an american, it is the cost of doing business. i've been on both sides of the aisle. it is just being an american. we are the only country that is civilized, we have to have programs like this, safety nets. host: let's talk about us versus other countries. guest: we have a relatively skimpy social safety net and social insurance program compared to most other countries that have nationalized health insurance, nationalized paid family leave. earlier retirement. in france there having a big guest: artist security age is going up to 67 already without changes.

medicare you do not get until you are 65. we do not have a generous social security net that many other of our companion first world countries in europe and asia. that is something we have chosen not to do. we do not want to pay higher taxes so more people are left on their own to fund their retirement and if they get sick and putting their kids through college. host: are there bipartisan proposals to continue with raising the age you can retire and receive the medicare benefits? it is already region 68. is it automatic. are there proposals to make it automatic? guest: it is automatic and they did it in 1983. when social security was within a year of running out of money. it was an emergency. it was bipartisan but there was

this thing hanging over their head. president reagan, o'neill was speaker of the house and they did the deal therese slowly to over how many years it has been since 1983. it is not quite as 67. it is at 66 in a couple of months. that is something they try to do far in advance when paula bryant was the speaker had a lot of proposals to raise both retirement age and medicare age. bryant wanted to not affect people close to retirement who have been planning on retiring at a certain age so they would do it like they did it in 1983 over a longer period of time. but if you do that you need to start it soon. this is not been a serious

discussion among democrats, republicans for a while. host: dave in wisconsin, democratic caller. caller: i would like you to clarify something. medicare advantage is promoted as being medicare. i was led to believe it is not. medicare, the money you get from social security to medicare is given to private health companies wherever. basically medicare is self is being slowly privatized and people are led to believe it is medicare and it is not. for them to use that term medicare and -- in all the advertisements are always on tv saying get your medicare through this or that. it is not medicare.

i'm stuck with it because it is cheaper but you are at the whims of the insurance companies. they decide to deny you coverage, that is the way they make their money by denying things. tell me if i'm wrong. guest: we will do the quick medicare 101. medicare is three programs. medicare part a is hospitals and nursing homes. you and your employer each pay 1.45% of our the payroll tax. medicare part b covers doctors and other outpatient bills, it is voluntary and most people take it because it is a good deal. medicare part a and b together do not cover, they cover half of sears out-of-pocket costs right now. in the past people have bought supplemental insurance that

covers the large deductibles in some of the premiums and co-pays . in two thousand three, the republicans added a drug benefit , they created a new program called medicare part d which is voluntary which is run by private companies. right now you have a couple of choices. get medicare part a automatically. by part b and by part d and by supplemental insurance or go to medicare part c and that is medicare advantage. it is run by private companies. the deal with the government is private company says you give us the money you would us. all medicare part a and b we will provide those benefits and more benefits because it is more money than we need to provide suitable care to the beneficiaries. we can offer extra benefits like

vision care that medicare does not normally cover, like dental care, hearing aids. things like the medical -- regular medicare benefit does not have. people like part c because they can get extra benefits. the trade-off you have to stay within your insurance company network which you do not in traditional medicare. that is the deal. she ago in department plans, the caller is right -- you can go in the private plans. we know more than half of medicare beneficiaries are offering a medicare advantage plan, medicare part c. you have a choice to stay traditional, go and buy your own supplemental coverage. going to medicare part c. you should know if you go into medicare advantage, you can change plans every year. it also go back to traditional medicare but if you go back from

medicare advantage, you might not be able to by supplemental coverage. that depends on the state you live in. some states require it some people can get caught in medicare advantage because they cannot afford the co-pay, deductibles of traditional medicare. host: julia rovner's kaiser health news chief correspondent covering health care policies for years. she wrote a book health care policies in politics a nz a review. of europe was the follow-up on united states versus other country -- a viewer it was the follow-up believe -- on united states versus other countries. guest: we do have the most expensive health care system in the world. mostly the government does not limit things like drug prices at least under the medicare population.

they are just starting for medicare. we have a more expensive health care system than other countries. other countries have higher taxes to pay all of these social benefits. it is a trade-off and he had decided they are willing to pay those taxes because they want the benefits. we have not gotten there. host: on twitter, there is an easy fix to ensure social security, remove the taxable maximum. if every american pays the same percentage of their income regardless of how much they make , funding social security would not be a problem. guest: it is not enough to fix the entire problem but it would go a long way. taking the cap top of social security tax -- off of social security tax. congress has taken the caps off of medicare part of the social security tax. social security tax is part

three different programs, one is the old age program of social security. disability insurance program for people who have worked enough quarters and become disabled before they turn 65. the medicare part a tax which is 1.45% both paid by the employee and employer. that 1.45% does go on now as a way to help shore up the medicare trust fund. host: in chester, virginia. jerry, good morning. caller: good morning. you answered all of my questions. i want to ask, you talk about medicare advantage, 50% now of all the people who are on medicare or medicare advantage. we got rid of medicare advantage

and just went for single-payer, with the program become solvent and it would it be for the payroll tax now and also social security tax, race at the 15% and raise the payroll tax get rid of medicare advantage. would that make medicare -- traditional medicare solvent? guest: it depends on how you do it. it depends on what kind of been a want to offer. how much you want to raise the tax. this has been the hard part. everyone can talk about keeping the program solvent, medicare for all or expanding access, but i depends on what your benefit packages is going to be and what your taxes is going to be. nothing is free. you're going to have to paper things.

-- pay for things. host: kathleen in mississippi, democratically. what do you think? caller: good morning. the whole united states -- i have social security, medicaid, and food stamps. but my medicaid card can i go -- when i go to another place like jackson mississippi it is three dollars. they could've $9 million coming into each state. by day and they keep president obama's care and help the poor -- why did they not keep president obama's care and help the poor? guest: the caller is talking

about medicare expansion as part of the affordable care act. originally every state was required to expand medicaid to all people with incomes under a hundred 33% of poverty. right now medicaid in many states you only get medicaid if you are low income and pregnant and located -- and low income. if you are simply low income, single adult who are able-bodied, you're not eligible as you did not meet the categories. i got rid of the categories and said if you are low income you can have medicaid. the supreme court of 2012 said that was to pour for the state and it was going to be voluntary. what we have seen his have of the state started out expanding and half of the states, run by republican, did not. in years ensuing we have had valid measures where voters in

the more conservative states have said, there is a lot of money coming from the federal government. the federal government offered to pay 90% of this cost and a lot of republican states have opted in but there are still about a dozen states that have not. south dakota just voted to expand it. many of those are large states, georgia, florida, texas and some smaller states which are read, alabama and mississippi. it is mostly states across the south and the conservative midwest and rocky mount estates. there are still some states that not taking advantage of the money. they have not wanted to for one reason or another. they do not believe as given health insurance to people who are able-bodied. host: darnell in texas, independent. caller: hello.

i would like to see more income streams social security. for example, europe have lottery systems to help pay for social security. they have a lottery. also, if your social security card for the first time in charge it to develop be -- and charge it to hundred dollar fee. guest: likely it is not my job to come up with how to fix social security but i have looked at other countries and a lot of them have value added taxes. they have different ways of raising the money to pay for their social insurance programs. the u.s. could look at those. we are not the same as other countries. we have different values. we are different that shows what we feel is fair to tax. that is something that does need to be thrashed out by

legislature. host: in france in this debate, the process we are seeing over the issue of raising the age there, i do not know if you know this, is it because they are not collecting enough to support their programs? guest: yes. one of the issues in france, i have been following it a little bit, it is hard if you are a older worker in front it is hard to get hired. you have older workers who could not retire and cannot get a job. it is a big problem. what other countries do -- everybody has their issues with the balanced of how much do you tax the public and what kind of benefits do you give them and it is why every country does it differently. every country frights -- fights over it. we are not unique in that. host: al maryland, republican.

caller: i wanted to find out how much to be spent on medicare yucca how much does the government spend and the people? guest: i do not have the total amount in front of me. host: i will like -- look for that. guest: without supplemental insurance, it is about half of seniors, and covers half of seniors health care costs. sears are responsible for half of their costs because many of the things -- medicare does not cover eye care, dental care footcare, hearing care, a lot of mental health care that medicare does not cover even though we have gotten better about that. medicare has large deductibles there's a 20% copayment in part b that goes on forever.

the drug benefits requires co-pays. it was one of the things that was made, i cap instituted that are starting this year that people a medicaid part d the prescription drug plan will not have to pay more than $2000 out-of-pocket per year for their drugs. these to be a 5% co-pay that would on indefinitely. medicare does not have a lot of these caps that private insurance have we had to pay a certain amount out of pocket. congress tried to do that in 1980. 1988 they're going to have seniors pay themselves and there was a protest about it and congress rebuild it. to this day, traditional medicare does not have many out-of-pocket caps. host: from the kaiser website, key facts about medicare financing, in 2021 benefit

payments total up from 541 billion in 2011. spending on part b services accounts for the largest share of medicare benefits spending, 48%. medicare spending is projected to rise from 10% of total federal spending in 2021 to 80% in 2032 -- 18% in 2032. what is your reaction to those numbers? guest: i have seen those numbers before. it is a large substantial outpouring of federal dollars. on the other hand, it is a popular program. even to the people who do not realize it is a government program because they may have private insurance now. medicare advantage or a private medicare part d plan or the traditional medicare that is

administered by a private insurance company. you often see people, lawmakers say all the time, people come up to them at town meetings and say do not let the government get a chance on my medicare it with a medicare is already a federal government program. host: funding for medicare which totals 880 8 billion in 2021 outcomes from general revenue, 46%. payroll tax percent, 34%. premiums paid by beneficiaries, 15%. can you talk about that breakdown? guest: pare, hospital and limited nursing home and if it does not cover mostly traditional long-term care. that is financed by the payroll tax, 1.45 percent paid by employers and employees.

that's what you are automatically eligible for. part b, the voluntary part, supplemental medicare insurance, the beneficiaries pay 25% of the premium and the rest 75% cost that comes out of general revenue. the talk about medicare going broke -- when people talk about medicare going broke it can never go broke because it comes from general revenue. we talk about the medicare trust fund we are really only talking about pare -- part a. it is what you have this combination of tax revenue and general revenue and beneficiary premiums that fund medicare in general. host: amy in georgia, democratic caller. caller: good morning. we know republicans want to

dismantle social security and medicare or privatize it. i would like to know, how you approach your job as a journalist. you're covering a story from the aspect of health care and you need to interview a republican lawmaker about health care issue , how do you approach it knowing the person you are interviewing does not believe in social safety net as we have it and now after january 6, 2020 want to do not believe in united states democracy? how do you go into a room with a lawmaker who says, i do not want this form of government yucca how do you approach interviewing this person and getting real answers? guest: my job is to be a translator between lawmakers and the public.

i will talk to anyone about anything. i have found there are republican lawmakers who are serious about health care but they disagree with democrats on how best to deliver it. many republicans are stronger believers in private sectors that they think they can deliver care more efficiently on the cost effectively than government can. it is an ideological disagreement and we see that across the public. there are some republicans who would like to get rid of the social safety net who believe the federal government is too large and too powerful and more things should be handled at the state and local level. i am happy to talk to them about that and explain that to people. in a democracy it is up to the public to decide what they want and for lawmakers to explain to the public what they're going to support and what they might want to vote for you -- host: mike in

massachusetts. caller: there are two root causes to all of this whether it is private or public. the wealthy are sucking the life out of society and the real in them do it -- we are letting them do it. the people who are letting this happen as conservatives because of their ideology. we have cco paygo from hundred times the salary -- ceo pay go from a hundred times the salary the past few decades. we have watched our quality of life erode. i do not understand why people think this is acceptable. you know what i did today, i took a sick day because i am sick of my ceo making 50 k to a hundred k a day.

it is 10 to $20 million a year. and for what? we are seeing every aspect of our life go down the tubes. it is all because of that. we have health care industry -- host: i'm going to jump in. let's talk about the cause of health care. guest: it is a lot. we are by far the most health care inspect -- most expensive health care system among industrial countries. every other country limits how much of health care sector to cause -- health care sector calls. it is not that we are important the drugs from canada, we are important price controls. the conservatives do not want to do that.

even some democrats do not want to do that. we got in medicare, we have price limits and in medicaid, what hospitals and doctors can charge, but not that many and they are not that popular with the providers. we have a much more privately health care system than most other countries. not all of them, but most of them. it is something we have not dealt with. people complain if you talk and look at public opinion polls, health-care costs are huge issue in the red sea and the surprise bills congress tries to deal with and people getting other bills, there may have 5000 or $10,000 deductibles cannot reach. most people do not have $500 for an emergency. it is difficult to pay 5000 annual deductible for health care. host: karen in alabama,

republican. caller: good morning. the call it before talking about republicans believing in a democracy, it is not the case, it is the democrats. vaccination was perfect. the people in the country there plus to make laws based on what the people want. my point of calling in, without social security and medicaid, we pay taxes into the system, so they should never be a problem with it. we need to look at where they're spending money. ukraine, for example. barbie sending billions of dollars into ukraine instead of putting in social security? yesterday you had somebody on the spending billions of dollars for the electrical vehicle charges over the country.

we do not need that. we need to look at the climate change and all of these things democrats are doing and where is the money spent in ukraine and fiber all the waste is going and put it in social security and medicare. host: linda in florida. caller: i always thought social security came during the depression time. during the depression time when america collapsed in the body had money and the banks and this and that. that is the purpose of social security. depression time when america collapsed in the body hadif they get rid of social security, that depression we seen years ago would it take a bigger effect today. is that the true purpose of how social security came about? i do not think people realize without social security, if the

country, which it looks like it is going down, if it goes down, like during covid, cannot work, that is the only safety net they have to survive. is that the sole purpose of how social security came about? guest: that is where social security came about. there has been efforts to create a social insurance program before that but because during the depression there are so many people destitute and it still took franklin roosevelt almost a full term to get social security through. there were controversies about that. it was another 30 years until 1965 to get medicare and medicaid. there have been efforts to institute these programs there's also been opposition to them. they had been expanded over many years. medicare has been expanded.

medicaid has been expanded. but it has not been unanimous. there's always been an argument over it. i think there will always be an argument over it over the extent of the social safety net and how much people are willing to pay in taxes for how many benefits. host: from robert in mississippi. the talking with julia rovner of kaiser health news. caller: a couple of quick things. i'm trying to get my point here. as far as pay more taxes for better insurance, we pay twice as much for our medical expenses. right now, i am paying about $15,000 per year for insurance

and that is including medicare supplement and a blue cross blue shield thing. that's a lot of money. collegiate 200 -- i only get $239 a month for social security because i worked for the government and they penalize you if you are a government retiree, no matter how little your retirement check would be. with the issuance be so much, i pay $50,000 for insurance, i could easily pay -- $15,000 for insurance, i could be happy and have $7,500 left to my benefit. guest: that is the trade-off. those are the decisions that we need to make. are we willing to penalize -- pay the health system less,

hospitals, doctors, less than they get paid now that will lower the cost of insurance and people would have more money in their pocket if they paid higher taxes and the government will provide more of the benefits rather than private industry or private insurance? there are people who would like to get rid of the insurance -- private insurance industry and have the government take it over. there are people who would like to get rid of the government and have private insurance take it over. we are about the dvd in terms of government providing benefits and private provided benefits. we will have to decide which way to go. host: >> c-span's washington joul every day we take your calls live on the air on news of the day and discussed policy issues that impact you.

coming up sunday morning, defense reporter for the hilda -- for the hill talks about the latest military package for ukraine. and abortion access in the u.s. since the dobb decision overturned roe v. wade. we will discuss the future of the pro-life movement with the government relations director for concerned women for america. and the need for the federal government to focus on issues impacting boys and men in the u.s.. watch washington journal, on c-span now our free mobile app. join the discussion with your facebook comments, tech -- texts and tweets. >> tonight on c-span, ukrainian president volodymyr zelenskyy addresses the world economic for

then secretary blinken and dr. -- and alayna zelenskyy also discusses the -- olena zelenska also discusses the war as it marks one work -- one year. live coverage begins at 12:00 eastern on c-span. or online at c-span.org. c-span is your unfiltered view of government we are funded by these television companies and more including comcast. >> you think this is just a community center. no. it's more than that. comcast is partnering with community centers so that students