>> coming up on washington journal the latest headlines and we will take your calls live. we will also discuss the debt limit ceiling and federal sending -- spending. and later peter adams of the news literacy project discusses public trust in the media and efforts to combat misinformation. washington journal begins now.

♪ host: good morning it is wednesday, january 25, 2023. and it was yesterday that top democratic meters let -- met with president biden -- leaders met with president biden. and while repuans on capitol hill continue to call for negotiations to limit federal spending. this morning we are asking for your view. what is your message to congress and the debt limit in federal spending? democrats (202) 748-8000 republicans (202) 748-8001 independents (202) 748-8002 text (202) 748-8003 if you do text us please include your name and where you're from

otherwise you can comment on social media. on facebook.com/cspan and also twitter @cspanwj. this is the meeting with the president and vice president and as they discuss the battles of the 118th congress. and it was after that meeting that chuck schumer look to the leaders outside of the white house. >> the bottom line is that we said the house and senate are going to be on the seems -- same page talking about what we should do. one of the things we want to do on the debt ceiling is save a republicans and show us your plan. they passed payrolls, and they made commitments to put bills on the floor. well, let's see what their plan is. let's see what their plan is on

the debt ceiling. do they want to cut social security? medicare? veterans benefits? what is your plan? we do not know if they can even put one together, but we are unified in saying that we will stand together and help working families and not do the things they want to do to help out the lc. the first thing they wanted to put on the floor is to tell the ultrarich wealthy people who lose -- use lawyers and everyone else to take advantage of tax rules they said we want to let you keep doing that. they said if we -- if we just close that rule we would not have a debt ceiling in the future. but that is where we are. host: that was chuck schumer on the hill yesterday. kevin mccarthy was asked about his plan on the debt ceiling and

this is what he had to say. reporter: i've not heard anything with the white house on bout scheduling a meeting. and you have been clear on what republicans need, do you see yourself changing your mind at any point? >> it is very disappointing about the white house. i do not think anyone in america would live this way. that they would reach the limit on the credit card and not look at the limit of where their spending the family city or county can do this. when joe biden was vice president they called it the biden talks he prays the id -- the idea -- she praised the idea of working together. i think we have to be sensible and responsible. we have to have a responsible debt ceiling. i'm not saying never have a debt ceiling, i'm saying get $31

trillion 120% of gdp. your party has been in power for four years. you increased discretionary spending. i want the president to look me in the in tell me -- look me in the eye and tell me there is not one wasteful dollar in public spending? no one believes that. the leader of the free world pounding on a table being irresponsible saying no, no, no, just raise the limit. make us spend more. that is not how adults act. that is not how elected officials and be american public leaves their elected officials act what i have asked for is to sit down and let us find common ground. and eliminate wasteful spending to protect hard-working taxpayers that protect the future of america. the greatest threat to america

it does not matter if you sit before a four-star general they will tell you the debt is the greatest threat to the nation. for the president to say they would not even negotiate is irresponsible. host: that is kevin mccarthy yesterday on capitol hill. we are asking on washington journal of what your messages on the debt limit and federal spending. many members will join us from capitol hill to offer their thoughts on these first two hours at washington journal. and then we have a live gavel-to-gavel coverage of the house today at 10:00 a.m. and there's plenty to discuss this morning but we mainly want to hear your views on the fetter -- debt limit and federal spending. democrats (202) 748-8000 republicans (202) 748-8001 independents (202) 748-8002

google looks for your texts, tweets, and facebook messages as well. were taking our first caller, good morning. caller: good morning. host: you're thinking about the debt limit and negotiations that are quickly approached she -- approaching. caller: my thought is that democrats spent more money than the u.s. should handle. i think the government should shut down for a wild so they can have a big reset. host: what does a reset involve? caller: it means we have to stop her wasteful spending just like democrats did the last four years with spending on infrastructure bill, climate change, nothing has been done on those two bills. absolutely nothing. host: when it comes to spending

cuts should entitlement programs be on the table? caller: some entitlements but social security and medicare are not entitlements. that is what we pay into we work. host: what about military spending? should that be on the table? caller: no i think we should spend more money to get our military backup and stop supporting the ukraine issue. soon there will be a war and i think that we will not be able to handle it. host: good morning, it you are next. -- you are next. caller: a partially agree with the gentleman before me i got social security for 50 years and i just have insurance left from when my husband died it was 10 years ago and it only lasts so long. i feel like i deserve my social

security and also medicare. about extra medicare from humana and i believe that they need to leave that out of the discussion . period. it is scaring the old people that have aged into this age. it is scaring them to death. there will be nothing but's -- but street people everywhere. there will be nowhere for me to go to live. everybody -- they need to think of their constituents. i know republicans have worked in statuettes. so please, mccarthy, get your act together and quit acting so bossy. and that you will save the world because you're not. you are just trying to punish democrats. i am an independent actually i called on the wrong but i want them to believe entitlements which i am entitled

to our own money back. i wish they would leave that out of the discussion. host: this is the headline from the front page of the washington post today and their story on the negotiations and the meeting at the white house. the house gop puts the third rail on the table. social security medicare are among the potential dark targets to/the deficit. this is michael out of delray, california. thank you for getting up early. caller: yes, i think you should not just look at cutting spending in order to increase revenue. one thing i would suggest is that the budget cap be listed on all the employees because if you make 300,000 or so, that you would play -- pay 100% lico. and that would be one way to see

that social security is maintained area no one should be allowed to retire until the age of 65. there should be no retirement before 65 and that would be another way to increase revenues for security. because that is what i am concerned about. host: how do you force people to work until their 65 if they don't want to? caller: if they don't want to work they will give up the social security they should be getting. i do not think it is unreasonable for people to work until they are 65 years old. you have a lot of government employees that retired at 50 it is absolute insanity. it is cradle and grave government spending. we have cops, firemen, and teachers, but it is outrageous. the public would have to pay someone with a able body to work.

host: what line of work are you in? and how late do you think you will work? caller: i'm 62 and i will probably work until i am 70. host: what do you do? caller: i am in advertising. host: good morning this is jaclyn from ohio. caller: good morning. my name is jaclyn. i am worried about what republicans suggest is harmful to the american people. they never suggest anything that is helpful. why do people vote for them? i just do not understand. and that is all i have to say. thank you. host: annie is next -- out of pennsylvania. good morning, sir. caller: hello, how are you?

host: i am well go ahead. caller: in this whole discussion i would like you and the democrat callers to remember two things. first, when democrats say we need to cooperate to work things out a mean to do everything they want. and for example you say you will raise social security 10% and someone says no, we would like to only raise it 5%. that is what they call a cut area keep that in mind all morning. host: this is jeffrey in the independent line. good morning. caller: how are you doing this morning? host: doing well, jeffrey, go ahead. caller: i do not associate with any of the parties.

i'm not a democrat, not a republican, not an independent. but i do -- i'm 68 years old and i have had this job and i am paralyzed on my left side. i wonder how they would let a guy like me make it if they cut out my social security. host: how much do you rely on social security each month? caller: all i get, i have no income. i used to drive a truck and i drove 11,000 miles a day seven days a week. i have worked myself and now i am paralyzed. and i cannot work and i wish i could area now i hear that some crazy guy in the government

wants to cut my only means of living? i want -- my country. host: jeffrey in nebraska more from capitol hill yesterday the senate minority leader mitch mcconnell was speaking to reporters about these issues. the debt ceiling and the federal spending this is what he had to say. >> as some of you recall i have been through a few of these debt ceiling situations. the one that seems to stand out the most was in 2011. when i negotiated with the then vice president joe biden the budget control act in conjunction with raising the debt limit. it actually worked. it reduced government spending two years in a row since the first time right after the korean war. however, over the years, most of us on our side felt it was

squeezing -- realistically. democrats felt the same way on the domestic side and we gradually pulled away from it. but if you're genuinely worked -- interested in cutting spending it actually worked. at that time, the federal deficit was about $12 trillion. it is now $31 trillion. in the course of the last conference, the democrats had not a single republican vote racking up another $2.7 trillion on top of what happened during the pandemic. here is where i think we are. i cannot imagine any kind of debt ceiling measure they could pass the senate, but also pass

the house. so, even though the debt ceiling could originate in either the house or the senate, in this current situation, the debt ceiling fix, if there is one, has to be dealt with will have to come out of the house. still, i think it is entirely reasonable for the new speaker and his team to put spending reductions on the table. i wish him well in talking to the president. that is where a solution lies. host: senate minority leader mitch mcconnell yesterday. a lot of focus in the headlines on that last statement on where the negotiations should come from. this is a story from nbc news mcconnell puts the onus on mccarthy to negotiate the debt limit solution with biden.

other headlines to that effect today. this morning this discussion we are having your views and message to washington on the debt limit and federal spending. join the conversation by calling in. democrats (202) 748-8000 republicans (202) 748-8001 independents (202) 748-8002 of course, this story while taking a lot of space on capitol hill, not the only story today. there is plenty more to talk about. here is another story that is getting a lot of attention. former president mike pence discovers classified documents at his home. a handful of documents at his home in indiana. the fbi retrieve them last week according to a representative for mike pence. according to the national archive they characterize this as a small number of documents with classified markings that were inadvertently transferred to the home of the former vice president at the end of the

administration. they were found january 16 and placed in a secure date until they could be returned to the proper authorities. that is a front page story on usa today. it is the latest in a series of discoveries of classified documents. the most recent coming from the president himself after his time as vice president to the obama administration and former president trump as well. the january letter from -- notes that he was unaware of the documents. and he understands the importance of protecting classified information and stands ready to cooperate fully with the national archives in an appropriate inquiry. and merrick garland has upper -- appointed to prosecutors to oversee the trump and biden document cases. that is the latest on the classified document front. and here is another one from the pages of usa today from jason rosenblatt former correspondent

-- rosen a former correspondent who oversees correspondence as has also worked in the area of classified work in various issues he says the documentation -- document cases dramatize what national security experts of every political stripe have known for decades far too many u.s. government can view classified documents. and he goes on to note that a major flaw in today's classification system is that it was created in a pre-internet era where information was much less spendable. and the frustration to journalist the over classification and retention of records stifles academic research. and there is a call they are to rethink how we classify documents in the entry. we will be updated is more

documents emerge from wherever but that is the latest on the front. back to your message to washington on the debt limit and federal spending issue. west virginia, line four democrats, thank you for waiting. caller: hello there. i am just going after a question -- going to ask a question. all the democrats want a republican to do is lay there plan down the side -- beside the democrat plan and let the people make a choice. and he -- they asked in particular what is your plan? show me a plan. and he did not tell them a plan. he talked around it. and i am 75 years old, his plan is that we save five cents. he wants to give the rich a tax break, nobody will see no money. joe biden come in there as president and he is helping the

republicans and the democrats. and he is trying to hold them back. all the -- that mccarthy can do is do paperwork and show a plan. tell the american people what you're going to do. and we compare. and talk about it. that is all he is saying. if the american people are stupid. host: we will talk to a couple republican members and ask them what their plan is today. we have a camera set up on capitol hill we have four members scheduled to stop by in the first two hours of washington journal today including don bacon, dan user, bill foster, and genji should caskey inspected to the stop in chat with us about these issues and the federal spending and the

debt limit and these plans. as we do that, we will share that conversation with your phone calls until about 9:15 this morning. on the washington journal. after that, we will talk about the issue on news literacy in the united states how we can our news and a house hearing at 10:00 a.m. that is our plans for the washington journal today. it will be your calls that are the main focus. scott, in pennsylvania, independent. your next. caller: i just want to say washington is talking about social security is an entitlement. when reagan was resident he said on national tv he says it is not entitlement it comes from a direct different source. i am 60 years old i got my social security statement here. i pay 47 thousand dollars in social security tax. my employer paid $48,000 in

social security tax. my medicare tax i paid 12,000 dollars and my employer paid $12,000. now, if this is an entitlement where is that money coming? host: that is got in pennsylvania. this is roberto in fairfax, virginia, republican, good morning. caller: good morning. good morning. i think that there is a lot, obviously, blame going around for actually anything -- before anything has actually been done. it is all an attempt to hang what we all should -- we all know has to happen which is the reduction in the amount of spending in the federal government. but schumer is trying to shoot for being responsible. even though he knows he needs to be responsible. they will not negotiate. host: so the question where should the cuts come from in

your mind? caller: from everywhere. we need to -- i mean, i am in the military. i would be open to having the military budget being scrutinized and cut back. we should not be spending money overseas if we cannot spend here domestically. i would cut the -- like one of the callers said earlier, go to a baseline budget where zero is the starting point. instead of having a 4% or 5% increase built into the budget automatically, and then claiming that we will all increase 1% to represent the cut. i would go to zero baseline cut -- budgeting. i would say we spent this much last year let's spend the same amount this year. and let's start there. is not it negotiation. host: do you think we could do that with the pentagon's budget

as with the end of last year the pentagon failed an audit for the fifth time. it has yet to pass an audit of its budget. caller: and there is a reason they cannot pass the audit it is because there is so much money being spent. and it is so uncontrolled. there is no accounting system in the world that can capture the 700 or $800 billion that is spent. there is 8 -- an enormous amount of waste and it is taken advantage of by the military-industrial complex. they know that they can offer outrageous costs because there is no alternative. where are we going to buy a tank? there is only one manufacturer. where will we buy aircraft

carriers? there is only one manufacturer. they can charges what they want, and we can be dominated by that for years and still have in operable components because where's the navy going to go other than to newport news to build us aircraft carriers. host: i think it's a lot more than 12 million for an aircraft carrier but your point is taken. caller: the budget needs -- there are adults and conversations that need to happen. -- adult conversations that need to happen. but they are blaming each other. mcconnell is throwing mccarthy under the bus figuratively speaking trying to get that -- maybe earn political points with schumer. this is all a game to them. what i would do is they if there is no negotiated budget no one in congress gets paid.

and they are the first ones who are going to miss a paycheck if they did not figure out a way to balance this budget. spend responsibly, and not raise taxes on the entire american people who are already suffering from high inflation and not getting a value from the dollars they are spending. as of today. host: roberto, fairfax, virginia. here are comments from social media. db rogers saying joe biden is he responsible for wanting to raise the debt ceiling we need to live within our means. cut discretionary spending on michelle obama trial, and others. and this is tony saying lifting the caps on payroll taxes may help, but people acting as if it will solve all the problems are misguided. it may help, but the rich simply

take less compensation in their salary to get around it. and this is time zone saying maybe it would be a good idea to get rid of social security completely. think how much more money we could send to ukraine. give your comments on social media. and we want to hear from you on the phones. it is democrats (202) 748-8000 republicans (202) 748-8001 independents (202) 748-8002 to the who's her state, mark, good morning. --hooiser state. mark, good morning. caller: good morning. and i am 75 years old and i have worked my whole life oftentimes double jobs. i used to work 80 hours a week driving a truck. i just retired and the whole problem is with this country is there are too many lazy people sitting especially in inter-cities that are not

willing to work. and they need to get out there. the problem we have is a lack of morality in the country. we have so many young kids that do not have a father in the home they, instead were brought from woman to woman and we have to pay for all of their children and secondly, -- thirdly of all, i believe that no one's should -- no one should cut social security but they should decrease spending so that inflation does not continue to rise that is causing more dollars from social security to be sent out. if we can get rid of the access -- excess spending and foolishness in the country, then i think we will be able to survive financially. host: that is mark in indiana. it is 7:30 on the east coast. having a conversation with viewers about your message to washington on the debt limit and federal spending. we have president biden and

several members of congress joining us today. the first is -- joining us from capitol hill. thank you for joining us. host: thank you for having me on c-span. caller: what is the middle ground on the debt limit fight in federal spending? caller: our side of the aisle cannot demand the moon. we only have a four seat majority in the house a one seat minority -- some of our demands cannot be met. it is not possible but on the other hand it is wrong for president biden to refuse to negotiate because we do have a government. a lot of the spending that we have done on the last few years was on a party like vote. and we ran on -- leads to inflation or it has helped increase inflation he has to beat us in the middle as well. i think good ideas are out there for example, i propose we keep

spending inflation in the next coming year or two years and i think it will point us in the right direction. we need to mention with half republican and half democrats with social security and medicare if we do nothing with these programs that will go unsolved. but if one party tries to fix it, it is not a recipe for success. it will be overturned. so we have to work together to solve the care and social security problems. but those are the ideas i have. host: a lot of viewers this morning focusing on social security and medicare specifically and the ideas of potential cuts in that. dig into that more. what do the commission like you are talking about where were they find agreement on those programs that as you said, can cause a lot of concern. caller: i think we have to look at democrat proposals and

republican proposals and find out which combination works the best. for example, right now we have social security cap on an income level certain people stop paying social security in tap -- tax. maybe just as higher. and putting retirement age at over 40 years old. and maybe you can fix social security for years to come if you have retirement fixes. we cannot do it republican only or democrat only solution. that is a recipe for disaster you will not get anything past from the house or senate you have to work together to fix this. host: what about military spending should it be on the table? caller: i think we should keep it within inflation right now. you cannot cut the military in my view with the rise in china rated they are making advancements to a 20-1 pace to what we are right now. china is mirroring our gdp in spending.

and russia, if they succeed in ukraine, you can that that the nato countries will be next. and we have the largest exploit of terror in the world. so we cannot reduce this year, but we are at a right level, i think to keep with inflation. host: explain that war spending within inflation for those who are not into the details of how that works. caller: all through in a number saying inflation is 3% we should keep our spending within 3% or more than 3% because over time that is how you reduce your deficits. for the year you have a better impact on the overall done it will take a while to do that. we've done a good job in the 2000 time frame to keep spending down and over time we have a balanced budget but this time we cannot do it that way without putting a bipartisan team together. and look at mandatory spending.

mandatory spending is only 5% of the budget. people focused on the 25% we cannot balance much on the 25% so we need to look at the long-term reforms that will addressed the physical footing. so let's say right now inflation is 6% we want to spend below 6% increases. caller: a lot of proposals from your republican colleagues. we will not ask you about all of them, but one of them involves the irs and establishing a national sales tax of 30% national sales tax what do you think about that proposal? caller: i do not think it will get out of first base. i was told initially by the speaker's office, not the speaker himself, that they will put this bill so they can vote on it up or down. i'm trying to use clean language here but it has to be put on the weight of the committee. excuse me, where it can be

studied by the entire committee. i do not think we will get out of the committee because they are so tight to do -- it will be a doubt a 23% or 25% sales tax. or maybe higher as you mentioned area there is no appetite for that. there are a few people who like it and want it to slow down as part of the speakers vote, but i say let's give it a free look at the committee. but i do not think it will get past the committee. host: you're talking about the committee process one way to get around the committee process would be the idea of a discharge position -- a discharge petition excuse me. from the washington post explaining the process. it would allow democrats to force to vote to raise the debt ceiling as long as they have the support by as few as five republicans to make an end run as it were around kevin mccarthy

and the committee process. is that something you see as a possibility with republicans joining in to do a petition to get away from the debt ceiling crisis? caller: now but the president we have right now. he says he ricky -- refuses to negotiate. and you have to have five republicans to get on board. we cut reckless spending because we have an inflation problem. most of these votes were done on party line democrat vote so we want the president to meet us halfway we cannot demand the moon, but we can expect some cuts in spending. the president has got to be does have -- halfway to get us out of this with the petition. host: i know you have a lot of work today but we work on? what should our viewers watch for on capitol hill? caller: we have our first hearing with the 118th congress.

i enjoy being on that committee and i served in the u.s. air force and commanded five times. it is in my comfort zone. so we have our first committee hearing they are. then i have a variety of meetings with caucuses. for example i have a stand up to main street republican caucus we will have our second reading for the new congress this year. we have meeting members that are part of the caucus and i am proud of the efforts over the last two years to get this going. i am not the chairman anymore, but it is profitable what we are -- what we will be doing. in one line we are conservatives who want to govern. we want to find consensus areas with democrats. that is only way congress works. you either have a separation of powers, you have to work with your counterparts across the aisle to find a way to make things happen. we do not know the values, but you have to find common values

so we can help abide solutions on the border, for example, support law enforcement, diversify energy sources, and things like that. host: congressman don bacon. no stranger to the washington journal. we always appreciate your time, sir. caller: yes, sir. host: and we are back to the phone calls as we discussed your -- republicans and independents. the sun is rising on capitol hill this wednesday morning. january 5. -- january 25. this is scott in gladstone, illinois. democrat. good morning. caller: good morning on the debt ceiling i think it will get past, i do not think that they will pull back to long on it because there are voters out here that will take care of the problem down the road. as a democrat, we need to quit some of the spending and get our house in order. and i have one more thing to say

about all these papers floating around. you know, when we elected the president and he came into office, they come in with no papers. and when they walked out of the building for their final day they often walk out without any papers. and the national archives can get the libraries or those people what they can have. it is pretty simple area this country needs get back to some simple facts and truths. we will not always live forever. it is time to wise up, america. good day. host: that is scott in illinois this is susie in carolina. good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call i cannot -- did not mean to call in on the republican line but that is only number i could get through. host: we do ask callers to stick

to their party line. how would you describe yourself, susie? i am -- caller: i am independent. and i called about the debt ceiling. the way to get the debt limit under control is to stop the spinning. michelle obama made about the trail in georgia. and does nancy pelosi really need a park in her neighborhood? this is how we are going to get the spending under all. you did not buy what you cannot afford. host: that is susie in east flat rock north carolina. is there a west flat rock, north carolina? caller: no, it is just on the -- the neighborhood of

hendersonville north carolina. to russell in massachusetts. good morning, euronext. -- you are next. caller: good morning. my point is that we need to start over the republicans passed in the senate and $1.9 trillion tax cut. it is not a republican or democrat thing. i'm tired of hearing people say that. let's get behind this. the country spends and spends but let me hear of this you never hear of section eight in the deficit or food stamps. it is always the surplus of these things. too much money is going from people's hand and there's not enough americans working. i can tell this from a couple of people i live next to out will not get personal but they do not work. they always have food stamps and section eight and they always

have the things -- if they want the section eight assistance these people want assistance it needs community service. if you do not want to work go serve the community i should be able to demand that. let's look at the one-point trillion dollar -- one-point trillion dollar -- 1.5 true -- host: how does russell in massachusetts this morning this is the scene from -- the photo from the wall street journal this morning. it was president biden meeting with democratic leaders and vice president kamala harris at the white house yesterday to strategize about the issues we were talking about yesterday to talk about the spending and that limit fight we have ahead. this was president biden speaking briefly to reporters yesterday at the front of the meeting. >> americans are starting to feel effects of the laws passed.

they will only now be going into effect. we are in a situation where we promise people medicare. and there is nowhere to go from about $400 a month area and $35 a month. there was a promise and guess what, as of january 1, it is a reality and people are feeling the effects of that. there is so much more of that out there. and we are discussing how we can communicate the progress. for the middle class and working class families. you know, we have talked a lot about this around the table. i decided this timeout i think you are all in the same boat, i want the wealthy to continue to be able to do well, but i am tired of trickle-down economics. i want to build this economy from the bottom up in the middle out. when that happens for folks, have a shot, the middle class does well and the wealthy are doing just fine. so we want to also talk about

the extremely republican economic plans. apparently they are serious about cutting social security and medicare. and i love their 30% sales tax. that vote, we will talk a lot about that. but look, i have known potential republicans in the economy and their take on my view. host: president biden from the white house yesterday. we are asking for your calls to discuss your views on the debt limit and federal spinning. this is a call from new york, and independent. good morning. caller: caller: good morning. it bothers me that every time i watch your show most people are ignorant as far as politics are concerned or finance is concerned. i wonder what these people --

where they are going to school. because the debt limit is already spent. it has to be paid. there is no getting around it. and your representative bacon is talking gibberish. host of the people do not get it. they did not understand what these people are saying to them. they go back to school, take some business courses on economics and socials and so on because i am a businessman and i had to do that myself. i understand -- host: is there a time to talk about federal spending reducing federal spending. if so, we ensure that be? you obviously do not think it should be during the discussion over the debt limit. caller: definitely not. as far as the debt limit is concerned, what you got to do, we broke it. and what became of this magnificent tax break to the rich, if you want to fix it, go back to that time.

and then it will be fixed. but it will take hell to get back to that time. host: we have third -- over $31 trillion in our national debt. what do you think about that number? caller: it is astronomical, but i tell you this, we are not going to get out of this in the next like 20 or 30 years. it is impossible. here it is, you have got to go back to the beginning where reagan misted up and start taxing the rich. and taxing them accordingly because when you have rich people getting golden parachutes for like $30 million when they get fired, that is insane. i am just saying. and if you look at the course of the executives, first workers,

it has been stagnant. and the executives are going up like 3% or 400%. that is unimaginable. that is why we are in this predicament we are in because of reagan. host: this is raul in miami. republican good morning. caller: good morning thank you for having me on the program. i had interest in representative bacon's idea that we should put together a committee to figure this out bipartisan committee. i would like to remind him and all of your listeners and viewers that this has already been done. i would encourage everybody to look up the simpson bowles plan on the internet. simpson bowles plan. this is a bipartisan report that came out in 2010 during the obama years it was a partisan board compared -- prepared by congress that had six steps in

order to fix the u.s. national debt. now what's going on 13 years now. if we had implemented this in 2010 we would be in a better situation than we are an right now. but unfortunately congress has a nasty habit of kicking the can down the road. the problem is, you cannot fix this in norma's deficit that we have. and the spending that we have simply by addressing a trail named after michelle. or some other important project. the fact of the matter is, the biggest components of our budget are social security, the military, and medicare. those three segments basically dwarfed everything else. there is not enough money in all of the work projects in the government to basically tackle this problem in a serious fashion. you have to go after social security, the miller --

military, and medicare. that is one of the things the simpson bowles plan did. it was not easy or fun, but it actually address the issue in a serious way. but of course, it was not adopted, why? because it was politically difficult. imagine what it is like now 13 years after it was presented with a bipartisan committee back into thousand 10 the obama administration basically certified that. host: c-span was there when those two committee members presented their findings. and had the hearings from march 8, 2011. the fiscal responsibility giving their report to congress. you can watch it on our website at c-span.org or all of our coverage of the simpson bulls commission at c-span.org. we want to take viewers back to capitol hill.

we've been chatting with you all morning long about your message to congress on the debt meant and federal spending. a few members of congress also agreed to join us today stopping by on a busy day in capitol hill. republican from pennsylvania joins us now. good morning to you. guest: good morning. host: we ask viewers for their message on congress -- to congress on the debt limit and federal spending. what is your message to america? guest: our federal debt was 14.96 trillion in the past and today it is 1.4 trillion dollars and rising. certainly, during the covid years, there was bipartisan spending that took lace and right or wrong it took part on a partisan basis. and the biden administration came in and thought it was a wonderful idea to double down on that even though we were in economic coverage and that we should spend another $5 trillion. that is what got us at 31.4

trillion dollars. we have a huge spending problem. the good news is that our revenues are way up from the former revenues secretary of pennsylvania. and the normal road rate for revenue is 2% or 3%. that is relatively healthy. right now it is in the neighborhood of 9% or 10%. unfortunately no way near keeping up with the mandatory spending iron meant for the discretionary spending that the democrats in the past congress thought was a good idea to raise by 12%. what we have now is we have a debt that's been hit far earlier than predicted. because of the excess of spending. along the way, many of us knew that. i knew that. when they told us that 10 plus 10 equals 16 no, it is not equal 16. 80 walls quite a bit more than that. so we knew we were going to hit this early. as we did, we had credit cards

that have been over utilized and it has not just been maxed out, it succeeded its limit by a lot. so what we are simply stating with republicans and speaker mccarthy is that the american people want to see some responsible actions taken here. and we have a debt, the democrats in the biden administration have spent a lot of the taxpayers money exceeding 31 point $4 trillion. the debt that needs to be paid, we get that. republicans and speaker mccarthy and the leadership that i'm asking for is that we simply state that we will not do it again. that will not happen again next year. that we will not exceed the credit card limit. that we will put a hard limit on the credit card going into next year. that is what the american will want. yet the a vitamin -- the biden administration says we were are not going to negotiate that is irresponsible. host: this is marianne in new

hampshire that wrote in ahead of you coming -- coming on. but saying that cutting spending and raising revenues should be on the table when discussing the budget bill. but raising the debt ceiling is irresponsible. caller: what if your -- guest: if your teenage child spent the credit limit over by thousands of dollars you would of course pay it but you would say look we are not going to do that again. that is a reasonable discussion. that is what is happening here. the united states is stating we will not do this again. we will not exceed the credit the budgetary limit the debt ceiling and god knows what it will be preceded by 1.5 trillion extra dollars. and put our nation and a terrible position.

spending is the root of many evils. spending is the number one cause of inflation which is in response to that increased interest rates which are crushing retirement accounts and increasing the cost of housing. causing workforce shortages because of the amount of funding that the states have right now is going out to those not eligible for such levels of unemployment. and other entitlements. it is wreaking havoc on our economy. imagine how the american people feel taxpayers who -- we we are spending trillions of dollars in making things worse, not making them better. ok? that is hard to swallow we will work on stopping that. host: i know already in the 118th congress you introduced a triage of measures. bringing spending under control. host: because of the inflation

induced by the biden administration in the spending, inflation should be associated by the cbo to any budgetary initiatives. so all of -- i am stating to my bill is that inflation be applied to the american people and they actually know what it is what the actual cost is. then we need to apply the same inflationary number making it real, not nominal. and by the way, it is climbing rapidly over nearly $400 billion within our mandatory spending. people need to understand that $400 billion to service the debt, not bring the debt down, simply to pay the interest on the debt, as part of the -- as part of our budget. that is on the rise. it cannot get up to 800 billion

or more. it will be more than that federal defense budget. clearly, we have an issue. republicans have the majority in the house. we will be bringing responsible fiscal restraint without putting our nations debt at risk. and we are going to do it this year. host: i numbly -- i know we only have a minute or two left, what is the jurisdiction of the financial services committee? what do you think should be the focus of the committee in the next two years? caller: our chairman -- guest: our chairman patrick mchenry date out his priorities which i agree with wholeheartedly. i am happy to be on financial services committee it will be beneficial to the commonwealth of and sylvania as well as my district. i am also on the small business committee so i care greatly about access to capital for small businesses they only have ash only 19% of them say they

have adequate access to capital. i am also focused on the esg unfair mandates. i think perhaps illegal mandates that have been put on financial institutions and small banks large and small. these carbon emission mandates for investment where there is no place for that frankly when we do not base it on outcomes in -- of investment we are basing it on ideology. that is wrong and outside the charter of such banking and investing. so, patrick mchenry is probably one of the most talented people in this house and i will be working under him. to do a number of things. capital formation, data privacy, as well as a few other of the priorities that he has set. and i'm looking forward to his oversight as well on the

transactions the monetary transactions that have taken place in china to the cartels and terrorist organizations. there is monetary policy to it. there is a good amount to do. host: we will let you get through today on capitol hill. we appreciate your time. caller: thank you very -- guest: thank you very much. host: back to your calls and your message on the federal debt limit and -- federal spending. caller: yes i think we need to think about where we want to head with our budget is a country because we cannot talk about the budget limit and the debt ceiling without thinking about the other factors that affect it. right? you cannot think about revenue. we have one side giving massive tax cuts. they are the front of the aisle and we traditionally know that

people when they get more money they are more likely to own it -- own up to it and then put it back in the economy. and then we have congress in our government spending much in ways that we do not understand. one of the ways to solve this problem we have to think about how much of an investment return we are getting on this spending. the younger people in the workforce that are coming host: the best spending and wars, another story we have been tracking they are probably saying in your headlines this morning. ukraine is set to get advanced tanks according to u.s. officials. a new york times, reversing as long standing resistance, biden administration plans to send tanks to ukraine saying it will be a major step in arming

ukraine and its efforts to seize territory back from russia. the number of tanks could be in the area of 30. new york times reporting the defense secretary austin has come around to the view desk committing to sending american tanks necessary to spur germany to follow through with this tanks. officials giving germany the political cover to send his own tanks outweighed defense department reluctance. that's the latest on that front. it is just at the end :00 a.m. on the east coast and we are in our two of the ongoing discussion asking for your message to washington on the debt limit and federal spending. phone lines. democrats, 202-748-8000. republicans, 202-748-8001.

independents, 202-748-8002. jackie is waiting in virginia, independent. good morning. host: yes. -- caller: yes. i am waiting in virginia. i think we could cut the debt limit and federal spending if we cut the congresses -- host: congresses what? caller: i think they should cut congresses salary and their benefits, not the people who have paid millions into it. i worked 36 years of my life and i am handicap now. i do have a college degree. i think they should work on what

they spending in congress on these idiotic things that do not matter anymore, like the impeachment and all the money they spent on them. let's cut salaries in washington. host: got your point. michael in minnesota, on the line for democrats. caller: good morning. my idea is to raise the tax levels to what they were prior to ronald reagan being president. take the sealing off of the money collected for social security and medicare. that is another tax break for wealthy people. it is horrible. i have medical people in my family. one of them as an uncle a mile

away for me and he is very wealthy, but it is i believe at $170,000. i am paying a higher rate than he is and he is extremely wealthy. he's a very nice guy. but that is what got us in the situation is ronald reagan tax cuts for the wealthiest americans. one other thing i would like to see, maximum wage. we have a minimum wage. i do not know how it will get implemented but a maximum wage is implemented. host: what would be if there maximum wage? caller: i have no idea. it is one of my ideas. here is a good example. i worked at a place in minnesota and we had great benefits and the ceo of the company i worked

ceo of the company i worked for he came and had a meeting -- i drove a truck there? and anyway, he said guys, never in my dreams did i expect to make as much money as i did. he said i make $2.5 million a year and he said the guy i'm going to replace me they're going to pay him $25 million a year. i said how do they justify that? he said, you are going to lose your benefits. that was free health insurance and great pay. it went away to pay that one man. host: that is michael in minnesota. we had to dilute, georgia, john, a republican. ok. we go to pamela. caller: good morning.

correct me if i am wrong, a previous caller said there is a capital individual to pay into social security after earning a certain dollar amount you -- that cap should be removed. that should give social security more revenue and make it more solvent. didn't legislators give themselves a huge raise? if they're looking to cut expenses why would they do that? host: i do not the members have given themselves a race in over a decade. may back in 2009. caller: i just read they got a 29% raise. host: they have not given themselves a raise in quite a while. it is $174,000 a year. caller: everyone should pay into social security might help solve the problem. host: the cap issue that the

amount paid is capped at a certain level. it is not that people will be paying, if you make above that level, it stays at the highest part of that cap. caller: yes, after you make hundred $97,000, they still take social security out of your income? host: yes. it is capped at that level. you are still paying into it. it is not that you can make enough to not pay into it. caller: all right. maybe they need to look into that. changing the cap. host: got you. joe in connecticut, democrat. good morning. caller: hello. thank you for taking my call.

i think it is very easy to spend for the politicians because they want to be reelected. it is extremely important to have term limits and they are looking at that now. as far as social security, they are always saying they're going to cut this kerosene years. they're not going to cut. the thing is, i worked for the government and we had they would fall now with the windfall, i worked over 40 years. my husband dies and i cannot get in the social security, which is unfair. we have a lot of money spending on social programs which we need, but i think people that

graduate from high school should have a draft and a lot -- allowed male and female to serve their country and if they are ineligible -- if they cannot pass the test for the military because we only have 10% of the population with the military, we should have a peace corps. while these children -- a lot of these children do not have structure. maybe they can have service for these kids, homeless people. host: there is a peace corps. you're talking about a med into a public service? caller: yes. we have all kinds of storms, hurricanes, disaster areas they can go to. it will be more worthwhile. a lot of these kids come from

homes that are messed up and they do not have fathers in them. the mothers are working two jobs. they put their hands on the kids. the kids are running wild. they are out there killing and shooting people. host: did you benefit from some sort of public service or military service when you grow up? caller: no. my husband has. i had retired early because they had a handshake. i would've worked until i was 70. but sometimes -- one caller called in and said people should retire at 65. it all depends. i had a job using the brain and sitting down, you are an

accountant. that is different. but if you are a fireman or a police officer and you have all of that stress, your body wears out. your body wears out. host: james in south carolina. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i have heard two callers reference ronald reagan's tax cuts. he is not in this conversation. our national debt was $5,000. host: 5000? caller: $5 trillion in the year 2000. it is 2 -- 2023 and our debt is almost $32 trillion. it is not ronald reagan's fault what is going on. to the american people, you need to take the blinders off and stop following the mules.

host: this is linda is enough colonic, independent. good morning. caller: hello. i have three points i would like to make. one, the only time we had no debt was under clinton and it just so happens that was the same time as the.com bubble and it was so much money made by day traders. host: you're talking about balanced budgets? caller: yes. it was oversight because all of that money was visible. all the money made in.com, there is no way to hide it. the other thing, i favor the cap. the only reason i know there was a cap, i had a business before

and when i was doing payroll that is how i learned about it. i said well, do people know about this? it is absolutely unfair. if corporations what to be people they should pay taxes also. the sales tax, what about old people? we've already been paying -- paid income tax on everything we made and a few pennies we have saved for the feature and now we are going to have to pay additional $.30. we are being taxed twice on that money and at a higher rate. that is my thoughts on this. host: on the payroll tax cap when it comes to social security

, a story from cnbc.com from yesterday, about senator joe manchin talking about this issue and background on it. in 2020 three wages up to hundred 60,200 dollars are subject to a 6.2% tax for employees and employers and it goes to social security. a one point 45% medicare tax is paid by employees and employers so star note -- there is no wage limit. social security combined trust fund to become depleted in 2035 at which .80% of benefits will be payable however more recent projections in congressional budget office indicate that combined funds may be depleted as early as 2033. the fund covers medicare part a

which pays for inpatient hospital care and other services and full benefits in 20 28 after which 90% of benefits will be payable. 20 more there on this discussion on social security and the payroll cap. a segment will be doing a deep dive into some in the coming days here on washington journal. it is 8:15 a.m. on the east coast and we are talking about your message to congress on the debt limit, federal spending and keeping you updated about the other stories happening around washington. from capitol hill, the story from the new york times today, speaker mccarthy exiled representative shift from the house intelligence committee making good on a long-standing directx about the california democrat in his first major act of partisan retribution as the new york times describe it.

the move was anticipated tit-for-tat after democrats voted in 2021 to eject two republicans of georgia and arizona from congressional committees. it was also payback they write from nancy pelosi the bar former president from spreading electrolytes that fueled the january 6, 2020 one attack of sitting on the special committee investigating the rise at the capital. this was speaker mccarthy explaining to reporters yesterday his decision not to place adam schiff on the intelligence committee. >> what happens in the end subcommittee, you do not know. we'll have us end subcommittee, what did adam schiff do as the chairman of the intelligence

committee? he lied to the american public. when he put out a memo, he said it was false. we had a laptop, he used it before the election to say it was false and said it was the russians. when he knew different. he knew the intelligence. he talked to john arata class -- john ratcliffe and he knew his position as chairman knowing he had information the of america does not in light of the american republic. when i whistleblower came forward he said he did not know the individual although his staff met with him and set him up. i would not be like democrats where they remove republicans from committees. yes, he can serve on any committee that he would not serve on the intelligence committee. i've always put the national security of america first.

if you want to talk about swalwell, let's talk about it. i have been briefing and the fbi it never came before this congress to tell the leadership of this congress that eric swalwell had a problem with the chinese spy until he served on intel. it was not just hus who was concerned about it. the fbi was concerned about putting a member of congress on the intelligence committee that has a right to see things others do not not because of his knowle and relationship with the chinese spy. they brought it to the world of the leaders. i got that briefing. i do not believe he should sit on that committee. i believe there are 200 other democrats that can serve in the committee. this has nothing to do with door sensors. he is not on the intel committee. those voters elected adam schiff even though he lied. they elected swallow even though he lied.

they will not serve on a place that has national security because integrity matters to me. host: speaker mccarthy on capitol hill talking to reporters. back to your phone calls as we continue to get your message to washington on the debt limit and federal spending. phone lines. in virginia, good morning. caller: my problem is the republicans get in and they forget about the natural disasters we have been having constantly for the past 20 years due to climate change. we have to pay for those natural disasters. republicans fill the best way to balanced the budget is on the back of the seniors and therefore they go after social security and medicare.

they forget to tell their constituents that the federal government pays for their medical insurance. and even when they reach 65 and are still working as congressman or senators they can collect social security on top of their regular salary. they go home with a big paycheck but the rest of us have got to go ahead and double down. they did not balk when trump gave a big tax break to the corporations and millionaires and we are expected to pay for that right now and they blame it on the lives of people and set blaming it on themselves. thank you. host: brian in the keystone state, republican. good morning. caller: good morning. good controversy back and forth.

i'm looking at both parties. the illegal alien issue they come in the country working for employees -- employers and employees are not paying the tax. the businesses are not paying the fica tax and the companies go through temp agencies and hire the illegal aliens and they are using services like medicaid but they never pay into the system. you have businesses and employees not paying into the system. they will give these people social security numbers and find where they have been working for the past few years because of the employer's essay this is what you owe us an basically the amnesty program and say we give you guys amnesty but turn yourself in and we give you a social security number and you start paying into the system. it should remedy the system. host: use the word amnesty and and becomes a word that gets thrown around on capitol hill

and get people back into the corners. do you think republicans will support any sort of amnesty on capitol hill for illegal migrants? caller: i think you would for the simple reasons. once you give them a social security number -- they come across the country because they wanted to find work in a better life. if they couldn't do it a -- legally, they would do it. the company is hiring these people will like the meatpacking companies -- they will start paying their fair share also. taken the caps off social security is good but once again both parties jump on this. 2016 election. both parties are on a comprehensive program to get immigration system in place and all of a sudden both parties jump off of it because big businesses said we are using these guys edit they are using

these poor people, it is slave labor. they are paying substandard wages and not paying into the system themselves as employers and they have these people captured and say you're going to work for us for what we tell you you're going to work for a we will have to turn you in. that affects their entire families. i do not know why both parties are not involved in this to say let's get these people legalized and get them amnesty and social security numbers so they can contribute to the system they are using. host: this is randy in minnesota, independent. caller: good morning. i want to say kudos to the last gentleman on here. our system -- a government is way to bake. we need term limits on the officials.

we need to take a hard look at sacrificing social security for instance, i am a veteran, disabled, i put my heart and my soul, everything into this country and to see it rollback because of big government. a gatsby. -- it gets me. i'm afraid to go into stores because kids are running out of the door and the managers cannot take care of that. we need to start getting back to the basics. if youif you owe $10, you pay $. if you buy something that is more than what it is worth, you should not buy it. you cannot afford it. we cannot afford some of this crop. the stuff sent to ukraine, who is watching detail -- the tail?

all the special interest groups being paid off to our senators. i'm sorry for being disgruntled but after almost 70 years of living in this country, it is no longer my country. thank you. host: charlotte in pennsylvania, democrat. good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. i want to say, yes, our financial problems to go back to reagan. after reagan, the bank started sending out credit cards everybody. anybody, even if they could qualify or not, you got a credit card. i know this because i got the applications in the mail. it started with reagan and it is going forward. since reagan they had believed in breaking up companies, selling off assets, going overseas, etc. it is from reagan going forward. we need to get rid of the caps

on social security money taken out of people's paycheck. there should not be a limit of a hundred 50,000 and after that they do not get tags. the people making millions of dollars, if they pay in, it would help. i lost my other point and i apologize for that. it is ridiculous. please take the cap off of what people pay into social security and look at putting back some of the taxes on people that reagan got rid of. thank you. host: pol in indiana, good morning. caller: good morning. what i want to talk about, why are these democrats when they did trump, try to impeach him, not republicans are doing the same thing with biden. i get so tired of hearing that

stuff. i am disabled. i clean carpeting and i was on my hands and knees and my bones in my foot were broke. my right knee has been cut open five times, my left feet twice. i have a herniated disc and i get staph infection's all of the time. i take 25 prescriptions. last year i made close to $15,500 in social security. my might -- if my wife was not here i would not have a pot to be in. host: this is julie in florida, independent. good morning. caller: good morning. i think it will be quite helpful

if we had a real definition of what the debt ceiling is. i do not think a lot of people understand it or maybe i misunderstand it. my understanding is that selling we have to raise it because of the spending we already did -- the debt selling we have to raise it because of the spending we already did. social security and medicare is our money we were forced to pay in two. it should not be in the general budget. we should work towards a balanced budget in the long run. i would like the finger-pointing by these guys to knock it off. they're all elected to be up there. they should be working together. that is why have to say about it. if i have the definition wrong, i would like to be corrected. host: i want to go to one of the members who work on capitol hill , congressman ben foster of illinois joining us from the

11th district. good morning. guest: good morning. host: to julie's last call, she does not think people understand what the debt selling is. can you help? guest: it is a statutory limit on the amount of bonds the u.s. government can finance to pay its existing obligations and then paying those bonds back and the interest on the bonds becomes a government obligation. it is something spelled out in the constitution that we should not question. this is why it is a serious thing. what we are seeing is a repeat of what happened back in 2011. we had a wave of newly elected republicans who felt that the main value and reasoning they have been elected with their ability to blow the place up. they were a well educated in how fiscal and monetary policy is supposed to work and on the history of these issues.

as a result, they threatened defaults. we would not pay these debts the government has obligations and government has built up over time and as a result u.s. that got downgraded and the markets behave badly and the net result was a disaster for middle-class families in america. the total wealth of american families dropped by $2.4 trillion. not the defaults, the simply threat of default, what they are doing now. all of us are worried as they threatened defaults again, we will see the market react valley and a repeat of this disaster. this is not just something that bothered washington. one example, the average family mortgage interest payments was a hundred dollars a month higher because of the antics the newly elected republicans pulled in

2011 and unfortunately we have a new wave of newly all republicans who have not spent time to educate themselves about the damage that will be done if we even threatened to fall in our debt and they have chosen that is a negotiation tactic and it is a shame. host: what is your understanding of what happens if we do default? guest: it is a disaster. it is unknown. the rock solid assurance that government obligation should be honored is in the constitution and we have never defaulted on it and we never should. the idea of starting to default on those obligations something equivalent to imagine the white house came and said we are not going to negotiate with congress and we are going to do that by placing a nuclear weapon on the first steps of the capital and less negotiate. when you do and to destroy the underpinnings of our financial system as a negotiating tactic, i do not believe it is what any of us should be elected to do. host: you want to end the threat

of default with the end default act? guest: gets rid of the limitation how many treasury bonds we can issue. it is a restriction that congress voted for ourselves. it is something that only two countries in the world have. if you want to control spending, you control it when you make the decision to do the spending and not the decision about whether or not you pay your bills. it is equivalent to saying, where going to go to dinner, decide how much to eat, and at the end we are going to the sites whether or not to pay the check for the food you have already eaten. that is not the way to handle negotiations like this. another important point in the discussion, the united states has more than enough money to pay off his debt. when this happened a decade ago after the financial crisis, the

what of americans was about $60 trillion -- walt of americans was $60 trillion in the debt was $15 trillion per year now the wealth of america has gone up to a hundred $50 trillion. the debt has gone up $15 trillion per year we are far from bankrupt as a country. the film in america -- families in america on aggregate. the only difficulty is for the majority of that wealth piling up the top. the problem with the growing federal debt have been in 1980 when we decided we are never going to ask the very wealthy to pay the tax rates that traditionally paid. in 1940's and 30's, we had a tax bracket to only apply to one person, the rockefellers. these are the tax policies that made the economy of america the

envy of the world. there is enough money to pay this debt off. if you look at recent behavior of the orchard millionaires in our country, when they have that much money they stop spending it does you see elon musk, very effective now has more money than he can sensibly spend and now he goes in the process of earning $44 billion by overpaying for twitter and blowing the company up. this is the other reason why it is important to view this not as a spending problem, but a tax problem caused by the misguided tax cuts for the very wealthy there were put in place starting in 1980 with ronald reagan reinforce under george bush and continued under donald trump. host: when will you be willing to talk about spending cuts and if we get to that point, what

spending cuts would you be willing to put on the table? guest: i'm distressed by the fact that the first spending because public is seem to be talk about social security. as of your pointed out, this money was paid by ordinary americans with the expectation that this will be provided and medicare are the last things and at the first things we should be negotiating over. host: congressman foster, i know you have to run today. what are you working on today? what should viewers be looking at from your committees? guest: we going to find out today, i am back on financial services. at the very top of our agendas is to possibly regulate cryptocurrencies. he saw with the collapse of ftx, what goes wrong when we do not regulate an important and volatile sector of our financial services industry

that has to change and there is a bipartisan understanding of what is on our agenda. host: we will look to it and an issue we have covered and will cover again. maybe you can come by and talk about it down the road. congressman foster, thank you sir. we'll take -- will come back to your phone calls on the issue of the debt ceiling and federal spending. good morning, thank you for waiting. caller: it might retribution, but i cannot understand the process to alike the majority speaker of the house when nancy pelosi stepped aside. i cannot understand how they kept going over and over again like they had to get this republican in. i do not think that she should

be ok because there is no government. i do not understand the process of being elected. host: they had to elect a speaker first so they could establish the rules of the house and everything flows from there, but that is the first vote the happens of every congress and a cap happening because nobody was reaching -- it kept happening because nobody was reaching the majority until the final vote. caller: democrats and never reach the majority? host: majority of all the members that were there. even though they kept electing hakeem jeffries they did not have a majority of the members in the chamber. we have been talking about the federal spending and debt limit, any thoughts? caller: just like the congressman that just went off, united states has enough money to take care of that. i think everything is going ok. host: ed in tennessee,

republican. caller: what we need to do, we need to develop an america first policy. senior citizens have paid into that stuff all their lives. they are entitled to it. the third thing i would do, nobody is going to say anything about it. how close to a trillion dollars a year we spend on the border. transporting people all over the world. that money ought to be put in senior citizen social security. fighting this war in ukraine which they note nobody is going to win because russia, where not letting ukraine when this war. it is dragging us into the war. the cold and stuff.

we need to do, take care of america, and then get america back on track and then we start taking care of everybody else. if we do not need -- if we do not need -- if we do not do that, we need everybody up there. host: president trump talked about america first. do you think we were at a place where we are america first when he left office? caller: i figured you would come up with democrats. president trump was the best president ever. he did more for black folks than any other president. not just democrats talking about trump and everybody else then do this, ask of them about it. host: bob in milwaukee.

good morning. caller: hello. i want to bring up a fun fact about social security. several years ago, there was an expert on 60 minutes, and he explained that it everybody was paid back from the government, the retirees, would be the first three years, anything after three years as a loss for the program. i bring that up not that it pleases me to say that but people are adamant that the government owes them. i am taken aback a lot by that.

i think the capital social security should be lowered. for those who have high pensions, they should pay a lot more in taxes. i think that will go a long way for it to become solvent. that is all i wanted to say. thank you. host: in 2020 three, wages up to a hundred $60,200 subject to a 6.2% tax for employees and employers the ghost of social security. we have been talking about raising the cap. several callers on that front. members of congress on proposals including senator sanders of vermont, proposing reapplying payroll taxes for those that turn over $250,000 along with other changes.

a separate bill from john larson, democrat of connecticut, calling for applying payroll taxes starting at over $400,000. some proposals to lift the cap at a certain point. steve in ohio, democrat. good morning. caller: hi. i have thought about the fact that 90% of the wealth in the u.s. is controlled by one person of the population. this means 3.4 million people in the u.s. controls 90% of the wealth.. therefore they also control 90% of the debt. $31 trillion.

90% of the wealth is supposed to be paid by those folks that own 90% of the wealth, that is the 1% of the people. the other thing, the defense department is raking in joys of dollars -- trillions of dollars of expenses 10 times more than the rest of the world spending on defense. how can russia have supersonic missiles we cannot do anything about? we cannot even track them. and they spend a lot less money. the inefficiency of our defense is incredibly absurd. why do we spend that much money and have sub capable systems

yucca -- systems? ? host: good morning, republican. caller: i listen to these people talking about people who do not pay enough taxes and i listen to people talk about we have to cut spending. i do not know if they'll continue with the 87,000 new irs agents but if that ever happens, they need to put these irs agents in these government bureaucracies and watch how they operate and watch the fraud that occurs and then we can get the deficit down. these bureaucracies go on these most extensive hotels, most extensive restaurants, and spend the rest of the day after their two hour meetings in the morning on taxpayer expense and has to

be eliminated. everything i hear about people complaining of those who do not pay taxes or people need to cut the spending, cut out the waste and fraud and abuse and we will not have a problem. nobody seems to talk about that. let's get those irs agents in the baraga seas and let them watch and see how people operate -- bureaucracies let them see and watch a people operate. host: sacred general report there are 74 generals appointed by the president. they is selected without regard to political affiliation but they are the watchdog as these individual federal agencies throughout the year are actually reports about waste, fraud, and abuse in these different agencies. have you ever taken a look at those? caller: i have not. how many did you say they were

yucca host: 74. they have a large staff that work under them and they focus on individual departments in the federal government. caller: i believe there are is probably at least 30% that is wasted. i do not know what connection these people have and we should take it out of the government agency and make it private to go in there and examine these people. i need time to get a government agency, there in the same -- any time you get a government agency, there in the same bo at at the take money away from the taxpayers and send it on themselves. get a private agency to audit these people consistently. i think that many we show up to be anywhere from 30% race that

occurs -- waste that occurs. host: we have and asking viewers about your message to washington on the debt limit and federal spending. members of congress joining us throughout the program. drilling is now jan schakowsky from illinois. congresswoman, good morning. guest: good morning. host: we have been in congress nearly 25 years? you have entered the federal spending fight, the debt limit debate. how concerned are you about this one? is it something different about this fight in your mind? guest: but we are seeing is the republicans now want to use this as a leverage to try and get some unfortunate things like reducing spending by reducing social security. many of the knowledgeable watchers of c-span1 no, raising

the debt ceiling has nothing to do with new spending. it is not hard to say over and over again, this is about paying the bills. bills that have been occurred -- incurred approved by congress in two law. this is like saying, we want to make a big deal of whether or not we pay our credit card bills. no, you have to do that. that is what raising the debt ceiling will allow us to be able to go forward, but we have to. host: why do we still have a debt ceiling? guest: we should not. where one of the few countries in the world that require a vote in order to pay the bills. it should be automatic. we should get rid of a vote on the debt ceiling and just say, we pay that.

these are approve expenditures. we have a constitutional obligation, not to endanger the faith and credit of the united states of america. we should just get rid of it. host: at what point would you be willing to discuss reducing federal spending? if you got to that point, are there specific places you would want to look at? guest: i impose the $2 trillion worth of tax cuts during the try biden administration that would mostly -- the trump administration that went mostly to the wealthy americans that was not paid for creating a huge deficit. under the biden administration it has been somewhat reduce. the very idea of things we hear from republicans, i heard may last night, the idea that raising social security retirement age to 70 years old. my view of that is kind of make

my day, propose that because most americans really rely on social security for a big amount of their income. host: you are in congress in 2011 when president obama negotiated over the debt ceiling and federal spending, how did that turn out? was it a good idea? guest: this president, president biden has said we cannot negotiate over the debt selling. it is a terrible thing for republicans to even consider negotiating, to use it as leverage, to get things that they want the has nothing to do with paying the bills. three times under the trump administration, without any fanfare, the debt selling was raised, and the debts were paid.

i think this is a bad idea to have as a negotiating point and the possibility of a government shutdown if there is a disagreement and we do not want to see. host: you're on the budget committee. do you think we will get a balanced budget in the near future? guest: the closest we have come to a balanced budget under the current administration, we were there, if you look at the history under the democrats, our economy has been best in we are getting closer to reducing the debt. i do not know if most americans understand that. under republicans as when we have been in the most trouble with the most debt. but we have to do is make sure that ordinary americans benefit from our economy and that is when we are able to reduce the deficit. host: i know you have to run in

a minute. what are you working on today on capitol hill? what he won't reach -- viewers to watch for? guest: the committees are not in order yet. we are looking forward to working on the democratic side to make sure we have committee assignments and get to work. i think the american people was he wants committees get to work, where going to see bipartisan action. i hope to be the ranking member of the consumer protection committee. this is not partisan. it is making sure consumers are protected from harm and i'm hoping they're going to be able to get to work in a bipartisan way. i'm looking forward to the committees getting in operation and they should happen this week. host: what is a bipartisan win

on consumer protection? what would you be able to bring in republicans on? guest: we were able to get help for children with dangerous products. we were able to pass out of the full congress committee and protection for a privacy bill that had almost unanimous support out of our committee, all republicans and almost all democrats voting for it. if we can get privacy protections for online consumers, that would be a huge benefit. i'm looking forward to working on that. host: congresswoman jan schakowsky from illinois. it has over 1000 videos in c-span video library if you would like to check out homework over the nearly 25 years on capitol hill. thank you for stopping by. guest: any time.

host: coming up on 9:00 a.m. on aeschylus and we continued with the conversation. asking your message to washington on the debt limit, the issue of federal spending. phone lines, democrats, 202-748-8000. republicans, 202-748-8001. independents, 202-748-8002. len in north carolina on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. i have a lot of stuff. the conversation has been very interesting. social security, what you pay in has to be somewhat equivalent to what you get back out of it. i think everyone would agree to that. everyone would want that. if i am making a million dollars a year and i'm paying 6.2% in

and the highest limit you can get out of social security now is $3000 a month, i'm not sure what it is because i do not understand social security or how it works. i cannot find a lot of information on it, even online. if you look at some of the information on social security, you cannot read through it necessarily and figure out exactly how they are calculating it. the ceiling on the wages is probably a good bad thing but if i was making a million dollars i would not pace 6.2% and only get $3000 on it when i retire.

and pay for everyone else. i think what is wrong with this country, people do not want to pay for what they have. social security was never to be europe -- your retirement pay. it was supposed to be something to help you through retirement, not be your retirement. people do not understand it. on the budget, at my house, when i make $2000 a month, i pay house payments, all the utilities, and i buy my food with that. we all know that is not enough to make it work. you have to cut back somewhere. i was interested to find out that there are oversight delegates to -- the look into

how much is spent in the government and you never hear that. you never hear or maybe i have my head in the sand. host: on the inspector general's you are referring to, some of them come on the program to talk about their reports. plenty of content available on c-span.org. you also started your comments by talking about not understanding social security. it is a topic we have covered over the years and videos on that. as we are chatting, one from last fall with william of national academy of social insurance looking at the future of social security in this country. it might be one place you can start and i promise you there will be more videos as well. all available on c-span.org. josh in illinois on the line for democrats, good morning. caller: good morning.

i want to take the conversation for where you had the older gentleman, he said republicans got in the house and wanted to blow things up. i think he was referring to the tea party which is kevin mccarthy himself and a bunch of others. soon as i got in office they started yelling about the debt selling. as soon as they got in office under trump, the first thing they wanted to do was get rid of health care and give tax cuts to the richest people. they did not address the debt ceiling at all. trump added a trillion dollars to the debt ceiling in four years. obama added a trillion in eight

years -- $8 trillion in eight years. if a republican comes on here, i ask that you ask about -- i just saw him on the program last week or so and i did not know he was still a part of the republican party to where they have to sign a contract they will not raise taxes, vote for any tax rate is at all. if they raise taxes at all, they give her married. the -- they get primary. avicenna contrite because they would never vote for any kind of tax increases at all. host: tax pledge they call it. the tax pledge is available online. to get the support you have the sign a pledge not to raise taxes.

we talk about members come on. we have had four members come on the program and there was a lot of discussion on the debt limit and federal spending on capitol hill yesterday and there will be again today. this is mitch mcconnell yesterday speaking with reporters about debt limit talks in washington and the need to address the national debt. >> this is not a good time to talk about the dead, i do not know when that is. the debt ceiling provides an opportunity to enter into a discussion about what admiral mullen said years ago when asked what was our biggest national security threat and it was the dead and it is only gotten worse. during the pandemic, it was broad agreement on a bipartisan basis we had to do what we did. as the pandemic and that, not a single republican supported

either of the two reconciliation proposals lester that added about $2.7 trillion to the spending spree. this is a good time to talk about it and try to get an outcome for. host: that was mitch mcconnell, the senate minority capitol hill yesterday. we've been showing much of the discussion throughout these debates in talks among the white house and among numbers of congress about federal spending, about the debt limit. it was democratic leaders went to the white house yesterday to strategize with president biden about the 118th congress and after that meeting, the minority leader in the house spoke to reporters. >> president biden, democrats in the senate and the house have a plan. we will continue to talk to the american people about investing in the health, the safety and the economic well-being of

everyday americans. we have a plan to continue to drive down the deficit. it's been reduced in the first two years of the biden administration by approximately 1.7 trillion dollars, that's an extraordinary accomplishment in two years. we have a plan to make sure the wealthy and well off and well connected, multibillion-dollar corporations, pay their fair share. on the debt ceiling, there is a responsibility to pay the debt that the congress has already incurred. that is what the debt ceiling is all about. we are ready to have a common sense, forward-looking discussion about the future through the appropriate mechanism, the budget process. it's the appropriations process. where is the republican plan? is your plan to cut or eliminate

social security? show the american people if you plan to cut medicare, show the american people. cut veteran benefits? show the american people. host: the house minority leader hakeem jeffries yesterday. back to your phone calls asking for your message to washington on the debt limit and federal spending, to the banks of the ohio river in west virginia, good morning, democrat. caller: how are you doing this morning? i have had a couple of points and i hope you will let me make them come i will go fast. one thing that needs to happen is that congress needs to have the same programs as the american people have as far as social security and pensions and all that stuff. number two, they should have term limits and i think that would stop this degree back-and-forth. i also believe they should have mandatory drug testing for all congressman. the last point i want to make is

that call from the 70-year-old veteran earlier almost broke my heart. we got veterans living on the streets, i forget how many commit suicide every day and i feel sorry for these men. one thing i want to prove pose is maybe c-span can help me with this, i want to start a movement for the next political season coming up, whether you are a democrat or republican, make your candidate pledge that veterans health care would be 100% covered no matter what those men and women need, 100% whether they have a splinter in their finger, they can go to any hospital or doctor and get it taken care of. i wish every person who has their own candidate coming up for president, have that candidate promise that he will make a bill that all veterans, 100% of their health-care care coverage is taken care of.

i don't know how to start that but maybe c-span could have someone on to talk about that, maybe people could put it on facebook. i call it the bones law because one of my buddies is a veteran from vietnam and the stuff he has to go through for health care's predict list, but these men and women sacrifice their lives for us and they are committing suicide and they are homeless, that's ridiculous. maybe you guys can help me with that and whether you were a democrat or an independent or republican, make your candidate pledge that when he gets elected, whoever it is, would promise to write up a bill, and i think any senator that would veto it should be voted out of office, what do you think? host: we got your point. tammy in wylie, texas next, republican, good morning. caller: hello? host: go ahead. caller: you guys keep saying

that they will cut social security and medicare here but every time i hear it, i hear mccarthy saying they are not and i heard mcconnell say no they are not. why does it keep coming up that way and why does the president keep saying that and jean-pierre or whoever that is. host: who do you believe in these discussions? democrats say what they think is going to happen and republican say what they think is going to happen. who do you believe? caller: i don't know anymore because i think this whole country is going crazy. we let the border in, we get our identity stolen, people are getting money for nothing and then we are out here working and trying to survive and barely making it because is just getting worse. host: tammy in texas, this is lewis in salisbury, north carolina, good morning. caller: good morning. i am sure a lot of americans

look at their credit and their credit report and they also buy things in the find it on their credit report and it shows good standing because you pay every month on what you spend. this is just ludicrous what republicans are trying to do. we already spent this money, the american people. what they really want to do is biden and the democrats told republicans they will try to put social security on the chopping block. why would you negotiate to pay your bills but you want to put in a stipulation of cutting social security? where are the republican people? when republicans online today on c-span, you know what they talk about? they talk about the border. and these are old people.

they said home watching c-span and they are talking about the border. the republicans are trying to get the democrats to be the ones to cut social security. we are not going to vote on cutting 6 -- social security so they will default on the debt ceiling. republicans, you can look at it, you can deny it, but they already told you in primary and the general election, this is why the republicans are trying to do, suck it up, get ready. host: that is lewis in north carolina and a few minutes left as we round out this conversation on your message to washington on the debt limit and federal spending. we've been taking your calls and i want to get in a few more text messages.

just a few of the conversations happening on twitter. it's also happening on facebook and there is a text messaging service and the phone lines where jim had called in from crystal river florida, republican, good morning. caller: good morning, fellow americans and thanks for taking my call. we are so in debt that the

congressman was 100% wrong in saying republicans are creating the debt. obama, biden took it from $9 trillion to when he was out of office at $18 trillion. numbers don't lie. we are taking into trillion dollars in taxes approximately, spending 4. the top 1% pay for over 90% of all taxes. i'm personally getting taxed probably 55% overall with property taxes and federal taxes. the lower taxpayers are paying zero on their federal taxes. i don't -- personally pledge $5 million personally if we could pay one penny of principal. one penny, we are so in debt, we

are at 150% debt to gdp right now. with the interest being higher right now, we are paying more in interest payments, almost the same as our military debt. what the republicans are trying to do is put stipulations that we won't keep increasing it. come 2023, social security and medicare will be defunct. it will have nothing in it to pay you. no more hands out, open hands for freedom, for free money. if we don't put stipulations on it now, you will not have it in the future. look, you have to control it. you can still keep spending your personal money and you will always have nothing. if we don't put these stipulations on the government,

all the freebies are gone. i would say even cut the military. we spend 10 times the next five countries. if we don't even cut the military, we will have to start making cuts. 2030, you will be forced to anyway. if you don't put these stipulations on now, you will have a real mess in the future. good luck, fellow americans. host: that's jim in florida with the discussion on spending by presidents. foxbusiness with a wrap up if we go by just dollar amounts what presidents have spent and just focus on this century, george w. bush, $6.1 trillion added to the debt from 2001-2009. then barack obama added 8.34 trillion dollars during his time

in the white house from 2009-2017 area republican president donald trump added nearly as much national debt during his four years in office as obama did in 8, 8 one 2 trillion. if you go by dollar amounts, those are the three most recent former presidents. this is cindy and clayton new jersey, independent, good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i think we could look at the 87,000 agents they want to hire. i don't see why we have to have salaries for that many more people in that department. i also think we could possibly look at all the leftover covid funding that's left over. i don't feel we will default on this but i feel we need to start looking. we do our budgets for our homes and i think they should do the

same with our tax payer. also, i am a senior citizen and i'm on social security and i wanted to mention a couple of things about that. in 2033, if we don't make some changes, there isn't going to be money for our social security. the other thing we have to look at is our youth of today. instead of crt and is gender training in this money the government is spending for all this stuff, i think we need to focus our children on work ethics. look at what our kids are doing today, the generation that should be out there getting a job or an education or a trade, they are out and there won't be anyone to pay in on social security if we don't get our youth into a work ethic and

start working a job and keeping a job. there won't be money paid into social security in the future if we don't work on our future children. also, i wanted to say someone had brought up about social security and what we pay them if you have a pension, you should pay more. i do have a pension and i wanted to say that with the pension, if you make over $109,000 from pension and social security, i don't have that income but i did prior. they didn't calculator wrong and you have to pay more on your medicare and your drug prescriptions, you have to pay more from all of that. i am paying 22% of my federal income tax. i am not getting a break.

host: that's cindy in new jersey. our last caller in this segment, the house is in a 10:00 a.m. eastern this morning and between now and then, we'll turn our attention to the topic of trust in the media and efforts to combat misinformation. we will be joined by peter adams of the new literacy project joining us after the break, stick around for that conversation. ♪ >> fridays at 8 p.m. eastern, c-span brings you afterwords from book tv were nonfiction authors are interviewed by journalistand legislators on their latest book. this week, republican congressman argues that big tech companies are hurting commerce and censoring speech in his book" crushed." watch afterwords every friday at

8 p.m. on c-span. >> from c-span essentials this weekend, during her stay warm sailedwing on now as c-span shopped at or. save up to 20% and her collection of c-span sweatshirts, blankets and drink wear. there is something for every c-span fan and every purchase helps support our nonprofit operio enter the code on the right to shop now through monday on the c-span shop stay warm sale at c-span shop.org. >> book tv every sunday on c-span2 teachers leading others discussing their latest nonfiction books. at 8 p.m. eastern, philip wallick shares his upcoming book, why congress? he explains the legislature is

an unnecessary branch of government. at 10 p.m. eastern onfterwrods can bock argues that big tech companies like apple and google are hurting commerce and censoring speech in his book" crushed." watch book tv every sunday on c-span2 and find the full schedule on your program guide or watch online anytime at book tv.org. >> "washington journal" continues. host: our guest is peter adams, senior vice resident at the news literacy project, news lit.org to explain what we mean by news literacy. guest: good morning and it's great to be with you. simply put, news literacy is the ability to evaluate the credibility of the information we see in our lives in a busy

information environment, the ability to record highs misinformation and the harm it can cause in our lives and the role of the free press in a democracy. host: what is the role the free press is playing today in this democracy? guest: it's not in a challenging one in american history if you look back to serve as a watchdog and hold the power to account. i think the job of the press is more complex than ever because they are contending and competing for attention with more sources than ever before in human history. many of them are sharing misleading and highly opinionated or outright false information. that makes their job harder but it makes the press and the role more valuable today than it's ever been. host: how should a viewer with so many places to look for media, how should they evaluate the news and determine what is misinformation? guest: that's a huge question.

when it comes to credibility, looking at the source of the information in trying to honestly evaluate the sources included, trustworthy sources don't have two go by their word. they show where it's coming from and when it comes to the more subjective aspects of journalism, the word shows, tone , language, you should look for an aspiration to be as fair as possible and be inclusive and the copperheads of an provide people with context and serve the public. when it comes to misinformation, there is a lot of red flags we can talk about. probably too many to list what if something seems engineered to spark a strong emotional response like fear or outrage, that's the time to slow down and be cautious and take a further step to do a quick search and look at what standards they are reporting on that subject.

host: let me get some specific examples. you talked about tone and language. what are buzzwords that should raise that red flag is viewers are trying to be good consumers of the news? guest: sure, there are a lot of claims about what the media doesn't want to tell you or what big pharma doesn't want you to know about vaccines and things like that and that's always a red flag area it's editorial language that is a big red flag, anything that seems engineered to outrage you i think is a big red flag and anyone who's claiming to have information that no one else has is something to give pause. host: what is the news literacy project and you keep a list of what our credible news organizations? is that something viewers can

look for? guest: the news literacy project is a national nonpartisan organization that works with educators and the broader public to teach people how to navigate the information environment. it's how to identify credible sources of news and information and how to end the -- identify individual pieces of journalism for fairness and sourcing. also how to recognize misinformation and the role it plays on the harm it causes in our lives in the lives of others. and to really look at the role of the free press and look at the role of technology in our lives on the role that algorithms play online so ultimately, what we want is to empower people to play a more equal and active role in the specific life of their communities and the country. when it comes to a list of credible sources, we don't publish such a list on her site.

we want to give people the skills and ability and knowledge to do that for themselves. we are not going to source any particular news outlet, but we will help draw in the focus for people with the practice of quality journalism involves, what wally journalism looks like, and help them recognize it for themselves. host: doing that this week is your fourth annual news literacy week, what does that mean for viewers and the folks who go to your website? guest: we actually have a special url for news literacy week.org which takes you to a rundown. it's to bring the public tips and tools and resources to talk with educators about a resources for them in the classroom and host engaging events online and

you can find links to registration with a couple more happening this week. it's just to raise the profile of the importance of news literacy in our lives and why this is such a vital life skill and a civic responsibility for everyone. host: we are inviting viewers to join this last segment of cnn -- of c-span. to do that, the phone lines are split a recent gallup headline come americans trust in media remains near record lows, 34% of americans trust the mass media to report the news fully, accurately and fairly do those numbers surprise you? guest: they don't. but they do bother me. a slice of that issue and trust

problem is earned and deserved but there is a chunk of it that i think is not that it's due to misunderstandings about the way news organizations work, bent the -- about the way news media operates on a lot of that is in lamed by partisans and activists and pundits who don't like what the media reports. it makes for an easy target for folks and a simple answer to what is a complex practice and institution. i think it's of deep concern and i think there's a lot these organizations can do but we also have a civic duty to develop a more nuanced understanding of the reality so we see something that's problematic and hurts our trust, we can let those practitioners and reporters and editors and news organizations know in a way that resonates with what they do and can be put into practice. host: what's the biggest misunderstanding of how the news media works? guest: one is that every single

news source has some kind of systematic partisan orientation that filters down through their straight news division. news organizations have opinions the size of their newsroom. that's confusing for many folks because there is a rigorous firewall in newsrooms before the opinion site in the street news site. if a reporter takes up in -- a particular position, the folks on the street will not cater to that opinion. the editorial board can take a position and the newsroom has worked hard to remain independent of that. i think people think that they cherry pick coverage or others cherry pick it for them and push it into their social media feeds and it starts to create the perception that the world is stacked against them for the mainstream media is stacked against them. it doesn't mean they are perfect but it's not a conspiracy to

promote a particular candidate or take down a particular candidate at reputable organizations and i think that's a broad-based misconception. host: why does a new -- what is a newspaper have to have an opinion? guest: that's a good question. that's the kind of critical question we want people to ask. we want to empower the public to have that conversation themselves, it's an historical practice where the editorial board is made up of journalists typically who have worked as beat reporters and editors for many years and they offer their opinion as a group. it's supposed to represent the opinion of the paper and it's inherently confusing for news consumers to see that. i think newspapers either could consider getting rid of them or clearly and regularly explaining to the public why they keep their editorial boards and

endorsements in political races. it's a pretty political -- it's a pretty important debate in journalism now. host: you talked about sourcing so let me read you the first two paragraphs of the lead story in the new york times. why do we have so many unnamed sources? why don't we go with officials? guest: that's a great question. it's one that everyone should ask. the number of unnamed sources you see from a news source should be limited and they should make it clear why they are using them.

one thing the public doesn't understand about anonymous sources of that sometimes they are necessary. in this case, some biden official may not have spoken to the press at all. they all certainly wouldn't have if they had to be on the record or wouldn't have said the same thing with the same degree of honesty. journalism involves really difficult decisions and one of them is went to rent someone anonymity on the record to include that in a story. it is incumbent on the news organization to independently verify the information so that the number is correct before they include it but often, it benefits the public notes -- to know things that people are sharing from officials who cannot share something on the record and that's a judgment call they have to make. if there's any way to get someone on the record, it should be in on the record source whenever possible. if you are consuming a new source that's full of anonymous sources, that's a red flag.

host: why couldn't those officials go on the record? two paragraphs later it says the announcement is expected to come today and the biden administration got this story as the lead story. then they will get their announcement today. why not just go on the record and say it will happen today? guest: it's a judgment call the new york times had to make whether they wanted to run the story now or hold off. if people disagree with that decision, that's the time when you would reach out and write a letter to the editor or post a nuanced critique to social media. i think it is something to watch out for and be careful with. folks often see these things and really have to trust the news organization to verify it. it does draw on that kind of

capital that a news organization has and if they do it too frequently or too recklessly or for sensation, it can diminish that. host: two years in the biden administration, do you think press treats the biden administration the same way they treated the trump administration? guest: i don't think the press should treat any two administrations exactly the same because none -- because no two are the same. there is a mistake that people make thinking that the aspirations to be journalistically objective or is fair and accurate as possible means being completely neutral and having the same number of positive stories about one administration as the other. the reality of politics in their world do not promise that kind of absolute evenhandedness in terms of numbers of stories or treatment.

i think they scrutinized biden's recent scandal over top-secret documents that were found in a few different places and i think we can analyze that coverage and compare it. the news literacy project is not to take a position to make an announcement and say the press is upholding its duty as a watchdog under biden or it did under trump or it didn't. to really empower people to make that judgment or themselves and look at the coverage and go back and make that assessment if they feel that is something that is the case and put their own biases in check because their own feelings affect the way it affects these stories. if they feel there is something there, they need to respond. host: let's take some callers this morning, tim in toledo, line for democrats. caller: how are you doing? i just want to say that this is

a conversation about literacy and misinformation. with literacy, we misuse words today in society. like game of the century every week or something. the hyperbole is out of control but the misinformation is the big one. i call a conversation debates because i was in debate class in school. my teacher told me i am not here to teach you what to say but how to say it. you want to recognize when someone is given a half to perpetrate a lie. somebody will say pollution is all right. pollution is bad weather is changing the climate or not. there are so many different

aspects. i even have a couple of bumpkins in my family that don't want to debate me anymore because they say trump never lives. have you ever heard him give a speech? he is full of misinformation and he was on a scale that was mind-boggling. guest: what jumps out to me and is a concern is that it's something we say a lot, our aspirations to teach people not what to think but how to about news and information and understand not just the press and not just the standards in app or -- aspirations of quality journalism but also our information architecture and what social media does and how it works. and why it can be a powerful tool that create positive change but why it can also cause real problems and harm and how to think about those things for themselves and take action.

i appreciate the call. host: in new york, this is lee on the republican line. caller: two years ago, we had three conservative tv news outlets, one american newsmax and fox news. they canceled for american news off the air and last night, the canceled newsmax off the air. periodically, they talk about canceling fox news but even the mainstream media has objected to that. at&t is partisan. they own verizon and they roam -- and they own directv. we are being canceled out i don't understand how they can do that.

host: peter adams, are you with us? we will reestablish that connection. as we are establishing that, we will talk to mark from oklahoma city, independent. good morning. caller: good morning. host: what are your thoughts on this question about media literacy? caller: it seems like one stations for the left and the others for the right. who can you really believe? host: how do you make that determination yourself? [no audio] do you want to answer the question? no> ?we will go to anthony in arizona. caller: good morning. one of the things that seems to

be missing again is critical analysis. critical analysis to me is essential to situational awareness, the light a lot of our communities. test the lifeblood of our communities. here they are getting ready to rollout in our school district, a 68 new curriculum that is a proposal. it will help students through school all the way up to high school. it will give them the ability to be more critical and understanding. for instance, how science works. if you start at an earlier age, not just look at the end result but look at how it actually gets there. host: you think a program like that would make these students

better consumers of the news when they grow up? caller: without a doubt. i have to say that how many meetings have you gone into and as soon as you walk into the room, everyone there is on the phone? they are scrolling up their screens. people go to movie theaters and they are scrolling their screens. i worked in i.t. and i worked in systems engineering so if you can keep someone's attention on any specific device, then they don't look around and we have got to get people more into themselves and understanding what makes me at her, not what feeds into me and then i take back that information and say that i know this because i saw it onx or y or z.

host: this is ike, republican in arizona. caller: good morning. host: news literacy is the topic. caller: my opinion is that the mainstream media, they have their own narrative and i watch a lot of newsmax and the lady before said last night that directv canceled newsmax so you can watch it. for me, you watch mainstream media news and then you watch newsmax and you see where mainstream media barely touches or doesn't talk about it at all and you actually see it on a station like newsmax and it's just frustrating to me that i

feel like a lot of lives -- lies are being perpetrated on the public. host: what's a recent example of that happening where you don't feel the mainstream media is covering something and you feel like an organization like newsmax is all over a story? caller: for example, probably the biggest one was the riots we had a couple of years ago in washington state, seattle, oregon and all that. the mainstream media doesn't really touch on everything. they don't tell you everything that's going on. i've seen a lot of stuff -- i watch news and i watch everything. just like the lady also said, oam got canceled and you were talking about conservative news organizations. for me, i just watch as much news as i can because i like to

see was going on in the world and keep abreast of everything. i find that mainstream media is telling the exact same story and it's redundant. they don't tell you everything that's going on. host: this is from lacey, washington, independent. caller: good morning. can you hear me? host: yes, sir. caller: i think your guest has shown his bias by some of the comments he made about legitimate media. i would like to ask a question related to an incident that occurred when reagan was elected. after reagan was elected, you had the news journalists in a debate in a group discussing the election.

the question, i believe was sam donaldson asked -- why did americans vote for this man after what we said about him? what's wrong with americans? donaldson was legitimately upset that people didn't hear everything they said and they responded differently and elected reagan. the other journalists all agreed. something's wrong with americans. how does your guest respond to the legitimate media making those type of comments? does not show their bias? host: we have peter adams back on zoom from the literacy project, talking about this issue of misinformation and about consumption of news. did you get that question? guest: i got some of it.

it's where a little opinion leaked into straight news from sam donaldson in the 80's, is that right? host: for just the times in general where news media get caught showing their own bias. guest: i think the practice in general but not commenting on what he said and i'm not familiar with that context. in general, the practice of journalism is incredibly complex and we are his people to make judgments and they sometimes get them wrong. they do have feelings and beliefs and ideas about the world and even though there are methods and standards in guidelines, sometimes the biases creep into coverage in some ways. what makes it more complicated is that we are all very opinionated and strongly biased

to me all have our personal histories and beliefs and they affect our perception of coverage. no one thinks the media is biased in their for whether you are democrat or republican or conservative or liberal. i think people agree that journalism should aspire to be fair and transparent and accountable and i think people on the whole believe that straight news coverage is intended to inform you and should be distinct from opinion. it should be -- an opinion free zone. there are a lot of formats particularly in broadcast television news now were commentary and news reporting are kind of landed. i think that's for folks to keep their eye on and talk back if they don't like it. a lot of the audience watches the shows with host whose opinions they agree with.

consuming and finding coverage that we feel sticks to the facts is straight and impartial is the way to go. you need to talk back to sources that are not heading that mark. host: what you think cable news stations do that? why did they start mixing news and opinion? guest: it's engaging, it's what people want. we like to have our biases and beliefs can back to us, it feels good. he gives you an opening when you are told you are right about the world and institutions are stacked against you and it feels good. there may be some reality and truth to that at different moments and different times. it's very different than the dispassionate and impartial search for the truth. i think we all to dish we all

need to keep that in mind an immediate diet area host: rich from new jersey, you're on with peter adams. guest: first of all, we don't have a free press no more. that is over. the big three like abc, cbs, nbc, they are so partisan, they don't report the real news. they hide stories. the new york times, washington post, c-span puts them on all the time have light continuously including the five years with trump. the time that they allocate for democrats on scandals is rooted list. they just cut it down to absolutely nothing including c-span. i remember when trump was on c-span every day. they have done hardly anything

on biden. a few minutes here and there. this is ridiculous. they are controlled by the democrats and the democrats send them memos. member the story when he said he got his email hack? he hit the wrong button. they wouldn't let anybody see after they posted everything that they said, how they wanted to separate americans. all of a sudden, the media can't post that. they will sue us if we say anything. this is ridiculous, we have no free median anybody thinks we have a media now is really out of it. even the gentleman sitting there looking at right now, i don't know what his agenda is but if it was a free agenda, he would have minutes on his website of who is showing what and who is not showing what. host: do you want to address

those concerns? guest: the concerns of what my agenda is is to make sure we share the importance of these skills. i don't think it's controversial to say that journalism should be fair and transparent and i appreciate the caller's asking for those ideals and think it's important to go back and look at coverage. people say this thing i care about is not getting enough coverage. everybody feels that way about their issue as important to go back and actually look at that for yourself and do something with that weather's reach at involved or to documented on a website. our organization is quite transparent. we use a variety of sources and our undoing is from a variety of sources.

i don't want to get into the cynical belief that everyone around has some sort of secret, tactical agenda. our agenda is to help americans navigate what is good and complex and confusing in this information environment. i think we still have a free press so i would disagree with the caller there. they are not perfect and there is a lot of issues but it can always be better. if you pick up a few daily papers and take a look, you will see. host: we do something different on this program. we bring reporters on to talk about their stories and we allow americans to call in and ask questions. as somebody who studies news literacy, what are some questions to ask a reporter if

you get a chance come about their story about how the after their story or did they were working? guest: making the practice of journalism more transparent and more understandable to the public is of vital mission and a vital need. having journalists on to talk about their work, you can ask them why they decided to do the story in the first place. how is the decision made in your newsroom and how did you decide where to start and who did you talk to, who did you talk to who you didn't quote in your story because you cannot include every perspective in a story. how did you make that decision? it's a necessarily subjective decision in the practice of journalism about who to talk to and how much to quote them and what to include what they said so talk to them about those kinds of decisions and how they

are made. i think you will hear a lot of careful consideration that these are not easy decisions but they are made on deadlines and we have to appreciate the reality of that. we have to hold them to their own standards many of which publish those on their own websites. you can bring those into play in those conversations. host: if you asked those present from a reporter, what answers from reporter would concern you? what would make you skeptical? guest: bad answers to that question on the newsworthiness side would get a lot of clicks so that's not sound judgment. if the sourcing was a bit lazy, if they just reprinted oppressed relief -- release or took a spokespersons word or published

it or broadcasted it, if the same for an official, that would be a big red lag as well. i think you are looking for someone who has a concern for the truth and is putting the public first and is trying their best to be fair and accurate and include the information people need. host: what is false balance? guest: that being impartial or pursuing journalistic object committee and mistaking that for being neutral. evidence for the realities of climate change is overwhelming. if you treat that like a 50 50 debate and you have someone who lays out the evidence and you have someone else who agrees

with that, you get a perception that the scientific community is on that question. you might pursue impartiality but what you are doing is pursuing false balance or a neutrality over impartiality. host: to burlington, north carolina, pam, democrat. caller: good morning, i could say so much. i used to watch fox news. i love shepard smith. he couldn't take it anymore. there are so many journalists out there that, to me, are trustworthy like anderson cooper. there are so many people out there that you can trust. i guess what's fearful to me is, over the past six or seven years, you've got these crazy

stories or conspiracy theories like jewish space lasers, italian space lasers or -- i guess it's really hard for me to understand how people can believe these things about people like even democrats being demotic or drinking the blood of children or transgender human beings who are grooming our children. i just don't get it. guest: i think the rise of conspiracy theories and conspiratorial inking, it's long been a part of our lives. i think social media has changed the game there.

the ability for people engaging in a conspiratorial explanation and idea to network and meet one another and to have to share those theories and have them fester and then to use social media to push those out to the larger world is a big problem. the platforms on which they are operating are engineered to catch us at our cognitive worst. we are sort of in automatic mode and are not inking riddick the, just reacting quickly. quick shares are their bread and butter. as consumers, we need to recognize the role we are playing. these conspiracy theories also play two major vulnerabilities in the psychology and the things

we feel like we need. we really need and crave similar explanations in the face of complexity. conspiracy theories offer that. they break the world down into good and bad. the underlying suppose are very basic. there is good and evil, secret conspiracy to do this and people glom onto that and it's important for us all to watch out for selves and our loved ones because the radicals don't just distort the national conversation but also cause real harm in people. host: in the next few minutes, the house is expected to come in for the day we will take our viewers there for like gavel-to-gavel coverage. until then, we will continue with peter adams, talking about how we consume the news. news lit.org is the website.

this is angela at of johnstown pennsylvania, republican, good morning. caller: good morning, john. i'm 83 years old and i have a comment that i have one question for the guest. whenever the democratic representatives from illinois were on, we were talking about the debt ceiling. i look at it as like a credit card. there was a guy on and then the representative from illinois was on. she mentioned that they have all the money in the world to pay the debt ceiling off. if you have a credit card and you over charge, what would you do? host: we are running short on time and the house is about to

come in so what is your restaurant? caller: as i said, the point is that you would pay your debt off, number one. you wouldn't continue to increase your debt constantly. i don't lend the republicans for increasing the debt, i blame the democrats. host: dave from florida, go ahead. caller: the news business has become a business and perhaps information and news is the most precious commodity we have. not even a single cell organism can survive without accurate information. one red flag that might like up the bulb in your head is when any news organizations calls itself fair and balanced, that should set off an alarm right away.

there is no such thing as a fair and balanced news report. it's either true or it's false. not fair, not balance, the world is not fair and life is there. it's either two plus two equals four or you are claiming two plus two equals nine or 27. host: mr. adams? guest: i appreciate the caller and their emphasis on facts and things that aren't up to date. that's an important part of the national conversation. we have to agree on facts and truths. and things that are verifiable. i think journalism is more complex than that. people have to be trained in decisions have to be made about coverage. it's the inclusion of showing your work.

it's to accentuate that and complement that is in them or part of that. i appreciate the caller. i 100% agree that all organizations need to be accurate in their reporting. host: peter adams the senior vice president at news lit.org area you can find them on twitter as well. what was the website for news literacy week? guest: news literacy week.org. host: thank you for being with us. that will do it for us this morning on the "washington journal." we will be back here tomorrow at 7:00 a.m. eastern and we now take you live to the floor up the house of representatives for gavel-to-gavel coverage which should begin momentarily. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2023] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org]