that.

"washington journal" starts now. ♪ host: good morning. it is saturday, february 18, 2023. the defense budget for the current year is $858 billion, up 8% from last year. what do you thint th number? if you think the defense budget toouch, call (202)-748-800 . too little, (20-800. if you think the defense budget

is the right amoun (202)-748-8002. if you are active or retired military, your line is (202)-748-8003. you can also text us on that line. we are on social media at facebook.com/c-span, and twitter and instagram @cspanwj. welcome to "washington journal." before we get to your calls i want to show you a report that came out, a poll from the council of global affairs from last summer. it says, americans split on increasing defense spending. let's look at those numbers. here is poll numbers. 38% of americans want to spend the same and nearly an amount want to stay the same or cut back.

51% say maintaining the budget is important to foreign policy goals. here's fiscal 2023, which is the current one, the top line number is $858 billion, up 8%. it was 45 billion moreollars than originally requested. $45 was added by congress, $30 billion for the ener department, which is the nuclear weapons program. here is $10 billi for defense related activity outside the nda and $4.6 million pay raise. let's look at ranking member adam smith, democrat, on the

house armed services committee at a brookings event in january. he was asked about ways to cut the gun budget. [video clip] >> if we have to tighten belts, is the list of economies you mentioned earlier where we should look? you mentioned older systems we should retire or do you have more radical ideas? for example, certain kinds of weapons are necessary? it seems you want to keep some aircraft carriers, f-35's, etc. but i wonder if you had any more to add to the list. >> the biggest is let's get rid of the systems the pentagon wants to get rid of. that is the continuous fight we have over the systems i listed earlier. you can save a lot of money if we get rid of those systems. i think you can absolutely do that. but those basic procurement reforms i described, taking a

problem-solving approach instead of a requirements approach, could save money. but the approach should be let's look at the budget we have and what we need to do, and look at it from a cost-effective manner. part of the problem and the biggest argument i have made consistently over the last four years -- and i will address your issues on how i voted in a second -- if you go, we need more money. you are just going to throw more money at it. if you say, this is what you got, make the best of it. i have used this line many time before. we have not yet seen the entity that can be cut by 10% and still get better at what they do. do i believe we could cut the pentagon 10% and they could get better at what they do? yeah, i do. it might not happen but it is

possible. but you need to get into that mindset. not, oh, my gosh, we have a problem. give me another check. i has been dealing with public policy for 32 years and that is always the approach. the world is what it is. in the world there is a finite amount of resources unless you are elon musk or jeff bezos. but for the most part, you have a finite amount of resources. when you get good at it is when you accept that and say, i am going to make the best of what i have. other than what i listed, which is not insignificant, but look at it that way. we have to live with $800 billion. can we do it? absolutely. and then you have the partners. there are other people starting to step up because the threat from russia and china has become very real after ukraine and the threats they have been making to

taiwan. host: that was ringing member adam smith. we are talking about the defense budget and what do you think about defense spending? do you think it is too much, too little, or just right? the numbers are onscreen. too much call us on (202)-748-8000. too little, (28-8001. if you think it should be kept write about here, (202)-74 . we have a special line set aside for activretired military members that is (202)-748-8003. let's look at what the wall street journal editorial set about this topic. they said, "defense spending as ye.hare of gdp fell to 3% last far below the average. it barely grows for a decade under current law. the only times in history u.s. defense spending fell this low were in 1940 and 1998 to 2001.

no bonus points for noticing these came on the people of world war ii and the 9/11 attacks. those defense troughs did not last." let's take a look at the health speaker. kevin mccarthy was speaking on fox news in january and he talked about possible budget cuts in defense spending and spending caps. [video clip] >> did you make an agreement with the freedom caucus you would go back to 2022 spending levels? i spoke with them last week and they said, if you do that, that is a $75 billion cut in defense spending. are you willing to cut defense spending and not have any negotiation with the white house as joe biden once? >> let's pause. if we go back to 2022 levels,

that is what we were spending two or three weeks ago. that is not cutting by $75 billion. does defense getting more than $800 billion -- are there areas that can be more efficient? yeah. eliminate the money spent on wokeism or worried about the environment. i want our men and women trained to be able to defend themselves, to have the best weapons system possible. i am sure they can find some places they could be more efficient. we have some of the best navy seals, the best rangers. they come to me every single day and tell me where that waste is in the pentagon and want to be more efficient. but every single level of government should be doing that. this is not our money. this is the hard-working taxpayers' money. we should start every day, how can we be more efficient? how can we deliver a more effective to the american public and do it in a more secure way?

why would we sit back and be so arrogant to say, no, there is no waste in government? host: that was the house speaker kevin mccarthy. we are talking about defense spending. we are asking you what do you think? is it too little, too much, or just right? david says it is just right in akron, ohio. caller: thank you for taking my call. i think the defense spending is too much. anybody can research can research the 1960's speech eisenhower made where dwight eisenhower question patriotism. he was a republican general, served in the military. he warned the american people of the undue influence of the military industrial complex. war had become a business. the military contractors were making a lot of profits. they had a personal interest in

saying we need all this military hardware when we did not need it. if you look at the money spent in the vietnam war, the iraq war, the war on terror and now the ukrainian war, we do not need all this money for defense. there is all kinds of waste. if you did an audit, i'm sure you would have no trouble finding waste that things are being spent the do not need to be spent. they have this unaccounted for money. i consider myself a mainstream patriot but not a wall street patriot. this is all wall street driven. the use of people that want to cut defense, they use it as a political weapon. oh, you are weak. i am 69-years-old. when i was in high school i was doing research i found the colonial history of the world.

they would say, oh, if we do not go to vietnam, they will be coming to the west coast. all of this fear mongering and scare tactics. host: we will take a look along those same lines in an article from the alaska native news. this is the headline, as pentagon budget nears $1 trillion groups tell biden, enough. in response to reports the biden administration may propose the highest level of military spending in u.s. history for fiscal year 2024, a broad range of nearly 60 advocacy groups on tuesday urged the white house to divert "some of our supersized pentagon budget to better meet the needs of the emyrick people." i want to show you a quote from that report they are talking about. "this year's military budget is the second highest since w

war ii. it is 10 times russia's military budget and more than 2.5 times that of china. it is greate the next nine countries combined. about $452 biwill go into big weapons coors. itnot take many more years of our military budget to hit the $1 trillion mark, astonishing given the pentagon has never been able to pass an audit or properly account for the billions already receives." let's go to todd who says the defense budget is too little in litchfield, illinois. caller: hey. i think we ought to rounded out to $1 trillion and buy more ammo. the systems we have, we do not need to keep upgrading. host: you said we do not need to keep upgrading the systems? caller: i am not an expert but i

think we should get more ammunition for what we do have. they keep threatening about running out of ammo. host: joe is a retired military in florida. caller: good morning. how are you? host: i'm ok. caller: interesting discussion. a couple of key notes about the audit. we got to do a better job accounting for the dollars congress appropriate, number one. number two, there is a lot of accountability issues at the leadership level. in other words, there is no way to tie execution of the budget to performance reviews. i think if they were to do that, you are going to start seeing

good accountability and stewardship of the dollars. somebody highlighted the defense contract piece of it. that is also -- i think that is necessary to some extent but at the level they are spending right now almost half of that is going to big corporations. you have got to look at that. that is where the performance reviews -- and when you say "audit," the dod should not be auditing itself. if you look at the way it is run right now, you have dod signing off on with the independent auditors are doing. there a lot of changes that need to happen. that is what i think. host: the inspector general. let's go to chris in florida, tomuch. what do you think? caller: thank you for takinmy call. i want to say i am a staunch

republican but if adam smith ran for president, he nailed it. everything he said i could t say better myself. but i did gea ck out of more ammo todd. [laughs] i laugd til my stomach hurt. host: why? we are running out of ammunition beuswe are sending it to ukraine. caller: the way he said iwas funny. st: let's go to jayn waldorf, maran you think the budget is too much. caller: tay we are celebrating the 20th anniversary of the eugene carol junior.g of admiral he was an officer admiral in the navy for 35 yea.

promoted an agenda after he worked for a defense contractor, he said, there is a lot of illegality. that was back in 1980. cutting the defense budget was one of the things he pushed for as well as abolishing nuclear weapons. i pport that. i used to work for the center for defense information. anyway, we are spending too much money on the military and, as people have said, there is trillions, not billions, unaccounted for in the pentagon. $21 trillion to be exact. host: let's look at this from the wall street journal regarding aid to ukraine and audits. it says this headline, u.s.

watchdogs want to track arms aid to ukraine up close. the article says, top oversight officials responsible for tracking over $110 billion in u.s. military and economic aid to ukraine said they would press to deplete auditors and investigators directly into the war zone. inspectors general from the pentagon, state department and u.s. agency for international development said, thus far, they have been able to conduct critical oversight tasks remotely using personnel based in washington, poland and germany. but following the trip by the trio to kyiv in january they said they would press to put some of the 177 auditors scrutinizing ukraine aid on the ground in ukraine. the has limited the number of

government personnel for security reasons. let's go to earl who is retired in redding, california. caller: i am a volunteer vietnam veteran and i saw a lot of waste in that war. but i do not think the money we are talking could make a difference. my background was finance and i cannot relate when you start talking billions and trillions. there is no way. you would have to put up a chart and show people. i do not think anybody can relate to those kinds of numbers. i do not think congress and the senate relates to it. these people, they never worked

a day in their life. you are seeing more and more business people getting involved. i will say this. president biden made a comment not long ago that if we started supplying things like tanks and planes, to ukraine we would be in world war iii. i would say to the american people the more money we throw the pentagon, may be the less american lives we will have to sacrifice because i think we are close to taking on russia and china. god bless america. host: in woodstock, connecticut, you say the budget is too much. caller: it is too much. in 2001, september 10, donald rumsfeld said we had $2 trillion we had no accounting for.

the f-35, everybody said it was a crappy plane and they keep it on the budget. we have to stop spending money, sending money to other countries like ukraine. ftx told you what is happening in ukraine. all that money went back to -- it went to ukraine, they put it in bitcoin and sent it back to the politicians. that is where your money goes. that is how nancy pelosi becomes a millionaire. that is how joe biden becomes a millionaire. they take that money from the american people and they give it back to themselves. they are all paid off and it is right out in the open. you can find it very easily if you even look a little bit. so, you want to keep spending this kind of money when you have homeless veterans, homeless regular people because of their

reckless spending. that is what is going on with inflation. all of that money you are sending to ukraine and all these other places. host: are you against sending any military aid to ukraine? caller: yes. ukraine is a money laundering operation for the democrats and the other crooked politicians. if you were to find out who was crooked, you would find out maybe 3, 5, 10 people did not take money from the government. host: let's go to danny in st. petersburg, florida. why do you think the budget is too little? caller: first off, i agree 110% with the caller in front of me. we are spending too little by the way we spend it. anything we manufacture or put toward ukraine we should start

producing it here or in friendly countries. get the money laundering out of it and he is 100% right, this is a money laundering operation. you do not go into government to get rich. you should go into government to serve the country, that is the way to supposed to be. pardon my language, i am po'ed about the whole thing. host: russ is 77-years-old and is a veteran. he said the budget is too high. how many aircraft carriers do we need? this tweet says the defense budget is too much. to keep spending more to make sure they get more money in the future. if they do not spend it, they could get less money in the future, so they spend, spend,

spend. unfortunately, most governments do this, sabotaging our country in the process. sonja sends a tweet that says, overall, it is needed in this dangerous world. waste and redundancy are built in and a perpetual problem. let's go to portland, oregon. mark is calling to say it is too much. caller: hey. host: hi. caller: i did 13 years in the army and i did supply. i saw the prices on the things we purchased. we could buy it for $45 down the street but the army pays $300 for it. there is this cost-plus thing. i believe we are spending way too much money for everything. host: i want to know what your experience was.

don't some of these things, i mean, there is specific requirements for defense, for the military. it is not like you can get everything from walmart or get it off of amazon. these things have to work every time, the first time after being in a box for 10 years. caller: but we had humvees and they were a terrible vehicle. they broke down all the time. we could have bought a jeep, which we used to have in vietnam. . i don't understand why they gave us such crappy material. and they do not even feed us well. host: ok. jim in green bay, wisconsin, retired military. caller: i am not retired, i just had several brothers serve.

i joined the air force because they would not let me join the army or marines. when you get more people that do not want to be in the military the budgets are cut. when you do not have the draft, when you do not have the ladies, you spent too much money trying to impress your friends. therefore, we have to have people in the military that do not want to be there that say you are spending too much money. when you ladies take over the world that is when things are going to straighten out. my mother told me that and she had 15 children. host: let's look at how the defense budget is split. here are the categories and the defense budget goes into several categories, one being military personnel and the other operations and maintenance, procurement, research and development, test and

evaluation, and then other things that are typically less revolving and management funds, military construction and family housing. let's talk to david next who is in silver springs, maryland. what do you think? caller: thank you for taking my call. i am kind of surprised -- i feel it people are not understanding how incredibly fundamental our national defense is. in my opinion, even if there is bloat, even if there is waste, whatever it takes to guarantee our national sovereignty is kind of worth it. without that all of our other institutions can be undermined by the will of foreign powers. host: this is a text we got from larry in new jersey. he says, more defense spending

is necessary, mainly to protect the integrity of elections at home. let's go to frank who is in florence, oregon, retired military. caller: yeah and i am not retired. i got discharged from the coast guard on reserves. host: sorry, active and former military. caller: i am ex-military. i spent a couple of years in vietnam and was appalled by the useless spending going on. my big problem is the defense contract makes enormous contributions to republicans to build the constituency that should not be there.

i went to a town hall in oklahoma 15 years ago and a couple of staffers for the local congressman wanted to talk about the f-35, which was a useless plane. it was constructed with two different engines, i think one was rolls-royce, but it was absolute pork. the people that went to the town hall were completely uninterested in the defense spending or contracting out. they wanted to talk about abortions and i was there to talk about private prisons. it was quite an interesting congregation. host: let's move to brian in hibbing, minnesota. you are also former military. caller: yes, i am.

i was classified as 4f, which means in the event of war, i was a hostage. can i ask a question? host: go ahead. caller: what is the percentage of tax money that is paid to the military? is it about 40%? host: are you talking the portion of defense from the entire federal budget? caller: yes. host: we do have those numbers. we can get those on the screen but essentially the defense budget is 50% of discretionary funding. half of the discretionary budget for the united states but it is 14.4% of the total federal

budget. i hope that answers your question. caller: it is kind of confusing for me. i got thrown out of math class. [laughter] host: that's ok. we got you here on c-span. don in california says that is just right -- dawn in california says that is just right. caller: good morning. host: good morning. caller: i am not military but i have family in the military and i am a student. the american system is functioning as it should. america is basically an oil company with an army. what we are seeing is practicing what it knows. capitalism has truly infected every aspect of our lives to the

point where i have classmates who cannot fathom education being offered for free. but at the same time have no comprehension on the fact that the u.s. military uses more oil on a daily basis than small countries. every single day. we are being told this world -- look someone said earlier -- this world was a proxy. we american citizens were squeezed. host: you are talking about the ukraine war? caller: yes, ma'am. what that did was allowed for corporations to, for example, raise gas prices to unprecedented amounts. it also corresponds to the fact that rent doubled in america during a global pandemic.

i called to say the united states government is spending just the right amount of money on defense and it is functioning as designed. host: larry in louisville, kentucky. you think it is too little. caller: i do. host: why? caller: because i think that overall what we need to be able to do is defend ourselves and we have to have the best functioning look of how far we are going to be able to go. with nuclear warheads it is going to be stupid for anybody to be pushing the button. however, there are a lot of things short of nuclear warheads that they really need to keep up.

so that we do not have to step into that role. who can outlast because none of us can. host: you want to see more budget going toward nuclear weapons, to modernize the nuclear triad. caller: we already have the nuclear warheads that could kill everybody two or three times. what i am saying is that we need less nuclear power so we can hopefully survive and nobody starts pushing the buttons. host: let's look at senator mcconnell. this is from december. it is just before the senate passed the 2023 minority defense

bill. he praised the bill's provisions and spending and warned of the national security threats that are proposed by china. [video clip] >> today i want to focus on what most senators agree is the long-term security challenge our nation faces. that is the chinese communist party. the legislation will pass today that includes provisions to extend our security assistance to taiwan. it steps up our investments and capabilities that are crucial to operations in the indo pacific from space assets to naval mines. it re-prioritizes countering china's nuclear breakout by curving the biden administration's attempt to

retire our arsenal. it bolsters sea launch deterrent capabilities and that is not all. the strong bipartisan bill puts new weight behind the long commitments to stand with vulnerable countries in china's orbit and vulnerable people within its own borders. it will authorize a new joint force headquarters right in the region. and make sure u.s. military installations are not commercial destinations for goods that have been produced with uighur slave labor. host: that was senator mcconnell. we are asking you what you think about the defense budget. too much, too little, just right? we have a line for former and active duty military. give us a call and let us know what you think. let's talk to earl next. he is in texas and you retired from the military.

caller: yes. host: go ahead. what do you think? caller: i think the budget is ok. i also want to say i had a conversation at a v.a. facility. we talked about some things that had never come up. i was in vietnam and i don't know if you heard anybody say anything like, freeze the ranks. why did they freeze the ranks and nobody got paid? they stayed at the same amount of money. i do not know when they changed

it. nobody told me because i was in the middle of it. host: you are seeing freeze the ranks in terms of the number of troops or the pay for the troops? caller: the pay. you got paid by what rank you were. even though you did the job i was so upset when i returned from vietnam. i did not even want to return. while in vietnam i was a squad leader and i returned the same rank as when i went over. host: this is from roll call. this is an article with the headline, lawmakers to pentagon -- curtailed defense spending wishlist. since the department requests billions of additional dollars

outside the budget influential lawmakers from both parties urged the defense secretary in a letter tuesday took her tail the department's submission to congress of unfunded priorities list. annual request for billions in spending above white house budget proposals. "the department of defense must show taxpayers it is a responsible steward of its funds, wrote four senators. that must eliminate the practice of sending floating wish lists on top of the core budget submissions." frank is calling from missouri. what do you thin caller: our nation, when you consider all the homes people and the wealth gap there is way too mh spent on the military.

a strong military is fine but we are like $34 trillion in debt. the biggest debtor nation in the world. it is the fatcat like donald trump and ronald reagan that always wanted to spend trillions and trillions of dollars on military. i think they just want to protect their wealth from somebody getting at them. the united states is not going to be invaded because we have -- host: but frank, is an invasion the only security threat you see that we need a defense department for? caller: when we have got $34 trillion in debt but we got

people out here who have the right to keep and bear arms, the chinese are not getting very far. but we have people living on the street, even veterans living on the street. in washington, what they do with the budget is they ask for $35 million for a tank project and then they have to ask again next year and more the next year to keep the pipes open for their projects. host: let's hear from june who is in oklahoma. you think it is the right amount. caller: i think it is the right amount but i do not think it is

spent correctly. i think we need to spend more on our personnel so we can get top quality people going into the military. but the previous caller was right in the aspect we spend too much on materials that is not necessary. i know for a fact we have equipment that is too heavy for use around the world because we cannot access certain places. you will get stuck because the thing weighs tons. they go maybe 100, 200 miles on a vehicle and then they melt it down and remake the same thing. it is extremely wasteful and the other countries around the world are not going to spend money on those antiquated items. our threats are going to be more modern than that and we need to

spend the money to protect ourselves. host: i want to show you something for other news while we are talking about this topic. the munich security conference is going on as we speak. the vice president is in germany and she spoke recently. here's an an article from politico. it says, u.s. formally accuses russia of crimes against humanity in ukraine. the vice president told the munich security conference the u.s. will hold guilty russians and their superiors accountable. the united states has determined that russia is committing crimes against humanity in ukraine, that is from the vice president announcing that today. the latest salvo in the west to hold moscow accountable for its wartime atrocities. we will get you more of that during open forum. joshua is in shasta, california.

you think the defense budget is too much? caller: i do. not only that i pretty much entirely disagree with our foreign policy. when you vote to spend to give all the money to the nazi government in ukraine -- and yes, the ukrainian government has genocided ethnic russians since we put in the battalion -- you kill any possibility of social reform and any possibility of help to the working people in the united states. host: frank is in springfield, ohio. you think it is the right amount. caller: i agree with the other

caller. she said it is the right amount but we do not spend it correctly. there's a lot of waste going on. i worked in the government for almost three years and i see a lot of waste that occurs. they need to change the way they get rid of things. there are things that they just throw away that they can actually sell to get the money back. i see it firsthand all the time. it is a lot of waste going on. however, it is like any other corporation. the government is the largest corporation in the world. with corporations that is what happens.

it is kind of hard to get it all together. i also see where the management is not up to par as well. host: speaking of management, let's hear from defense secretary lloyd austin. he was in brussels, which is nato headquarters, earlier this week. he was talking about the future of nato and upcoming changes to the members defense investment obligations. [video clip] >> we talk today about how to ensure nato remains prepared to confront the dangers ahead. at the madrid summit in june, nato leaders agreed on a fundamental shift in our collective defense and deterrence. we are strengthening our capabilities for the long-term to deter and defend against all threats across all domains. we are upgrading our defense plans and putting more forces at

higher levels of readiness. today we discussed the progress we have made since madrid as we move toward the summit in july. our leaders will agree on a new defense investment pledge to ensure the alliance has the resources to carry out these new plans. we had productive conversations about that pledge and we look forward to working with our valued allies to ensure that we do even more to invest in our shared security. we also discussed our progress in building ammunition stockpiles and boosting defense industrial capacity. nato allies have dug deep over the past year and both president biden and i are deeply grateful.

but we still have much more to do. even as we rush to support ukraine in the critical months ahead we must all replenish our stockpiles to strengthen our deterrence and defense for the long-term. host: that was defense secretary austin. we are talking about the defense budget and taking your calls. darrell is in greenville, north carolina. why do you think it is the right amount? caller: i think the budget is comparative for the amount they spend but we could save $100 billion or more in the ukraine subsidies. if donald trump was still in office, i would bet my right arm that if he was still in office putin would never have made it to ukraine. i believe he was that strong

enough a leader and the ones we have now -- that is all i have to say. host: james is next in west point, mississippi. what do you think? caller: i'm former military and i think we spend too much. i think the congress raided the social security funds long ago and never replaced those. i also think we need to pay our military personnel but we spend too much on items not needed. we could put part of that money toward bringing down the national deficit and to supervise states that receive federal funds. there is a lot of waste in that area. that is my thought. host: take a look at the hill.

here is an article that says, eyeing defense spending cuts. how gop targets the military wokeness. the budget will be on the table as republicans seek to negotiate spending cuts in exchange for raising the federal debt ceiling, and have placed a bullseye on wokeness in the military. let's go to dan in sioux falls, south dakota. what do you think? caller: i think it is about the right amount. i think we should feel fortunate we live in this great nation and we are protected. could you imagine if you lived in ukraine and had to deal with putin? here's the deal. 9/11 they came to the northern border. these republicans talk about the southern border but they are coming from the north. the balloon came up over the northwest part of our nation. was shot down three more over there.

i was up in alaska once for the summer. we were a boat ride away from russia. i had seen a russian ship in the harbor south of anchorage. i think we are doing a really good job. we are protecting the homeland. don't worry about the southern border, worry about the northern border. north korea is up there and i think we have to do even more. but we should feel fortunate we live in a nation that we can live freely and not have to worry about people invading. right now in ukraine, russia's forces took 6000 ukrainian children and took them back to russia. that is a war crime. that lady that was talking about everything would be better if trump was president, you are wrong. biden is protecting us and doing a great job. thanks a lot and have a good day. host: frank in la mesa,

california. you are retired defense department? caller: yes. i worked for several different companies trying to support the maintenance of ships and planes, including the foreign military service. i feel that we have taken too much time on funding certain projects. the congress and the budget think is too long. by the time the budget goes through and funding goes for an upgrade for system, it is taking too long and it is already out of date. for example, the chinese can do their upgrades in a matter of one or two years. we take 5, 10 years. host: i know the defense department is pretty unhappy about continuing resolutions

because they cannot start new projects and that ends up wasting money. caller: right. the other waste is in the maintenance department. nobody knows who has the parts and where they store it. i was setting up a database at the navy base north island but i had access to japan, germany, italy, spain, all these places that had navy bases. basically, i kept track of who needs what. ended up trading things. you are sending two or three of this, and i have this or that. it help you maintain the readiness of the f-18 airplane. i have not worked on the new one because i retired, but the funding of this money, for example, in ukraine in the effort to fund the military in taiwan so the chinese do not take over, is questionable to

me. i do not know what we are doing in ukraine. ukraine should have been left alone and we should have never gone in because it is supposed to be neutral military wise. let them trade with everybody, let them do business and we do not need to be there. host: got it. paul in charleston, south carolina, what do you think? caller: good morning. here is the reality of the actual spending. i used to have contracts with the government, paris island marine base in south carolina and georgia. before the fiscal year they

would get orders and make sure they used up their money whether they needed it or not. i would always get generous orders in september to fulfill their budgets. i worked for a state agency and we saved $1 million one year on our budget. the next year the governor gave us $1 million less. the next year we had to spend all of our money. that is the reality of what the government does. host: let's look at social media. here is a text from sue in new jersey that says, i would agree with senator warren. the need for additional money outside the allocated budget should be questioned. they should explain what it is needed for. a text says -- tweet says, if we do not spend an equal amount on pursuing peace, we will never find it and that is the idea. here is a text from mike in florida, the u.s. spends more on

defense than the next top eight countries combined. the u.s. can easily cut 25% and still protect the country. unfortunately, fear mongering will win out. we will keep spending more money. this is from tony in south carolina, the main purpose of government is to protect the people. no, we are not spending too much on defense. additionally, we are there to protect almost every other nation on earth against tyranny. let's go to a call from colusa, california. robert, you think it is too much. why? caller: i think people spend too much money. they should quit worrying about things so much. host: duane in aberdeen, south carolina. you think it is too much. caller: we are not using our defense money the way we should. we should go back to our war

policies of world war ii. we took the war to these people. we should not just be giving ukraine weapons to defend itself. we should start bombing russia because putin is never going to quit ukraine until he starts getting hit in the mouth. until we start acting tough like we did in world war ii we should be cutting back the spending. thank you. host: an article from politico. the headline says, biden prepares largest pentagon budget in history as funding cuts alone. lawmakers have threatened defense cuts in larger battles of the debt ceiling. that would be for next year. the biden administration is preparing to ask congress for the largest pentagon budget in history, according to the chief financial officer, as partisan squabbling raises the spectrum

of deeper cuts to the military's funding plans. officials are "very close" to settling on a topline number, which the white house will include as part of its overall physical 2024 budget request set for release march 9. we will be looking at that and that is the time we have got for this segment. thanks to everybody that called and joined us on social media. up next on "washington journal," barry ford of the council for a strong america discusses a new report, tracking the economic toll and adequate childcare in the u.s. is having a parents, businesses and taxpayers. later, as part of the spotlight on podcasts series, richard lim shares about his podcast called "the american president." we will be right back. ♪ ♪ announcer: historian robert

kagan has been writing about foreign affairs most of his 64 years. the first book in his trilogy on the american foreign policy was published in 2006 and focused on u.s. history before the founding up to the spanish-american war. a senior fellow at the brookings institution, he had completed the second book titled "the ghost at the feast: america and the collapse of world order -- 1900 to 1941." he writes, americans have complex attitudes toward power and morality. they have a sense of distinctiveness and remoteness in a tumultuous and highly contested political system. >> robert kagan on this episode of book notes plus. book notes plus is available on the c-span app or wherever you get your podcasts. ♪ announcer: c-spanshop.org is our

online store. browse through our products, apparel, books, home decor and accessories. there is something for every c-span fan and every purchase supports our nonprofit operation. shop now or anytime at c-spanshop.org. ♪ announcer: sunday on q&a, journalist alex talks about the tastes of the pridents impacting america. >> king george eats hotdogs and drink beer and asks for seconds. there was a political motive here. this was before the u.s. entered the second world war. fdr strongly feared hitler and

wanted to join the allies against germany. he realized that the king and queen were a unique couple and if he could humanize them, and make them appealing to the american public, it might help to sway the public mood. it was a theatrical moment. >> alex prudon with his book "dinner with the president." ♪ >> listening to programs on

c-span through c-span radio just got easier. tell your smart speaker "play c-span radio," and listen to washington journal, public affairs events, and catch washington today for a fast-paced report on the news of the day. listen to c-span anytime, just tell your smart speaker, "play c-span radio." host: >> washington journal continues. host: i'm joined by barry ford, president and ceo barry ford. we are talking about a near report on the lack of adequate childcare in the u.s.. guest: it is a pleasure to be here. host: if you would like to join us on this conversation, ask a question, make a comment, you can call loss on our line -- us

on our lines by region. if you are in the eastern-s central time zone, -- eastern-central time zones, you can call us at (202) 748-8000. if you are in the pacific-mountain time zones, c all us at (202) 748-8001. guest: we mobilize and recruit business leaders through our organization, retired admirals and generals. we have over 800 retired admirals and generals. it is comprised of over 5000 law

enforcement executives, police chiefs, and prosecutors. what they have in common is that they know the future of our public safety and the strength of our economy is incumbent upon what we do to support children throughout their lives. we organized them to be advocates for those investments based on their own personal backgrounds. our law enforcement leaders emphasize the connections between early childhood and community safety. our military leaders tie it to national security. our business leaders understand its importance to the economy. host: i wanted to ask you, the report was issued by ready nation. tell us about who they are. guest: ready nation is comprised

by over 2000 is this executives, a diverse group of people. it ranges from fortune 100 c suite executives to proprietorships on main street. we have senior executives of chambers of commerce all over the country. sorry, i didn't answer it initially. we are primarily funded by foundations. the florence -- large state foundations support our work. for example, gaetz, johnson, the ford foundation supports us. we also get some support from individuals, including armed -- our board members. host: let's look at some of the numbers from the report. working parents -reduced

participation in the labor maet , lower returns, businesses lose $3280 per worker in lost revenue and extra recruitment costs. then there is the cost to the taxpayers. they lose $1700 per working parent in text. how are you getting those numbers? when you think about the cost of childcare, you're really thinking about the parents. guest: the numbers you cited are the numbers for 0 to 5. i want to focus on what the report really focuses on, 0 to 3. the total cost for not having high quality, affordable childcare is $122 million.

per parent it is $5,000 a year. $5,520 a year. for the total aggregate of parents the total cost is $78 billion. for the taxpayer this is lost to tax revenue, people not being able to be in their jobs, work disruptions, being forced to take shorter hours, things like that. the cost to the taxpayer is $21 billion. host: how do you get to those numbers? guest: let me be clear, the report is based on a national survey. we surveyed over 800 parents

both men and women of children 0 to 3. the sample was designed to be representative of the entire country demographically. we ask them questions based upon four different sets of issues. the effect of the lack of affordable childcare on their productivity, the time they could spend at work, disruptions to their employment, whether they were able to continue with training and take promotions through their career paths. across those 4 dimensions parents reported distress, and frankly, in many cases, that childcare was preventing them from being effective economic actors. we took the answers to all of those questions across those four dimensions and asked an

economist, put it into a model and give us what the economic impact of that is. host: the report says that the total losses amount to 122 billion dollars every year. we were just talking about the defense budget, which is also a lot of money, but that is double what it was backin -- back in 2018. why the dramatic increase? guest: of course the pandemic is the biggest one. the second is ineffective or incomplete policy action at the federal-state level. we need to talk about both. the pandemic contracted opportunities for the workforce, but it also dramatically cut

back on the availability of childcare because childcare centers had to close, providers had to lay off people. availability of childcare was not there. what we realized in our survey were the impacts on parents and workers was more than double parents reported they had to work part-time, have other work arrangements. 3 times the parents said they had to end their employment, fired or laid off. double the parents said they had to take some kind of -- they were unproductive. they had to go to work late. stress! host: a lot going on there. guest: double the number of

people were facing those things because of the pandemic. host: let's take a look at president biden. he was speaking about this topic at the state of the union. this was last week, talking about relief for working parents. [video clip] >> let's make sure working parents can afford to raise a family with paid medical leave, affordable childcare. [applause] >> that will enable millions more people to work. let's restore the full child tax credit, which gave tens of millions of parents breathing room. when we, do all these things we increase productivity, we increase economic growth. host: that was the president at the state of the union talking about childcare issues. barry, he talked about the child tax credit.

this was about a failure at state and local levels, even the federal level. explain that. guest: the american rescue plan, the covid relief dollars that went into childcare were critical. they were important because they helped stabilize the field, but they were not enough to replace the struggles the field had before the pandemic. the crisis in childcare existed before the covid-19 pandemic. what the pandemic did was make everything worse. the rescue dollars prevented that public health emergency from basically destroying the entire field. what it hasn't done, and what frankly policy has not done yet,

is help the field rebuild and become stronger and more resilient. this is something that state policy makers have realized. more needs to be done. president biden's comments are absolutely right. it is not that it needs to be done only for the benefit of families and children. we need to do it because it is how we remain competitive as an economy. it is how this country is able to succeed in the 21st century. other countries are investing millions and billions of dollars more. host: i will remind everybody of our lines. they are very region this time. those numbers are (202) 748-8000 if you are in the central-eastern time zone.

(202) 748-8001 if you are in the mountain-pacific time zone. (202) 748-8002, if you are a parent. we have a tweet that asks what are your future goals? guest: one of the things i am most proud of is our ability to mobilize unexpected messengers who can break down the ideological divisions that have hampered most of their public policy comments. i'm frankly most proud in the engagement of our membership groups, are enforcement executives, or business leaders -- our business leaders who are impressive to work with. they are deeply committed to the investment in our children and

our ability to engage them has been important. host: here is a tweet from ron. he says " tricklenomics republicans cannot figure out why no one is having a b's. they cannot -- having babies. they cannot get time, off work they cannot buy a home." he did talk about decent wages. they cannot get time off. this was interesting in the report about lower productivity at work. it says 64% said that they had been late to work because of the results of childcare problems in the last 3 months. 64% had to leave work early. 53% reported being distracted at

work because of childcare problems. 54% missed part of their work shift. what do you think, barry? guest: i think that highlights how stressful it is to be the parent of a young child in the u.s. economy. we as a country do not have the public supports families need to be fully engaged in the economy. this is the problem -- we require parents to figure it out on their own too much. we ask them to spend too much of their money to do this. of course they are going to be distracted! of course they will be worried! they are not able to afford stable arrangements/ that is why our business leaders have been focused because they

know that in order for our economy to reach its full potential, we have to enable parents who are working to feel fully present in their work. the only way we do that is make sure their children are safe, they are in nurturing and supportive environments, and they are of high quality. host: there is one more text before we get to calls, vicki in wichita, kansas says, " there are so many women who would stay home with their children, like i did, that there is cultural pressure. i think stay-at-home parents need more respect." guest: i agree with you. what we are driving towards here, and i want to make this point dramatically, this is not simply about the government providing childcare, or supporting childcare. what this is about is

structuring an economy that allows families to make choices that benefit them. in order to do that, we need to have an infrastructure, we need to have a system that enables families that need work, and frankly that is most families. children under 3 are in households where all available parents need to be in the workforce. if that is the case, we need to have a system that allows that. we also need to support family choices. leave, paid leave, other kinds of leave options, if a parent wants to stay home with their child. they need the support to do so. host: jonathan is calling us from california. he is a parent. caller: hi. thank you, mr. ford. i am a parent and i can relate to what you are talking about.

it is extremely stressful. my wife and i have had to cut back on hours, or not go in to certain kinds of jobs or potential promotions. what can we do about it? what can the average viewer at home, what can we do to make a difference on this issue? guest: i appreciate that question, jonathan. the key, i think, for citizens all over the country, if you really care about this issue, his first call or write your member of congress. that sounds simple and pat, but right now on a bipartisan basis there are members of the senate and the house who said they are open to doubling the childcare development block grant, and that would be a huge benefit for low income families all over the country. i also think that there is an

appetite to increase childcare tax credits that will allow middle-class families to supplement what they are spending in terms of childcare and help support the cost of it. host: speaking of that, barry, there is an article by the new york times. it says " how other countries safer childcare, the u.s. is an outlier. the democrats' spending bill tries to shrink the gap." guest: it is interesting you mention that. it is a fact that i use often because this is not what about the u.s. should or should not be doing. we are competing with countries who have made different choices,

who i think have made.correct choices -- having the public resources flowing to parents, $500 a year does not even begin to cut it. i don't want this to be perceived as simply a democratic issue. we are a deeply bipartisan organization. sorry about that. we work across the country. i have staff in 10 states, members in every state. from north the quarter -- north dakota to new york, policy makers are making the choices to invest their state resources to try and mitigate this problem. the issue for them is that no

state is wealthy enough to solve this entire problem. that is why you need a federal partnership. host: speaking of that, let's hear from republican governor kristi noem. she is south dakota governor. she highlighted the need for improving access to childcare in her state of the state address earlier this year. [video clip] >> i know one of the biggest challenges families face is access to childcare. families might have to go on a waitlist for many months before the child is even born even defined childcare that -- to find childcare adequate to meet their needs. one parent may even need to stop working. we will be completing our overhaul of childcare rules and regulations. we have been working with childcare providers to rewrite

those roles in a way that makes sense while prioritizing and keeping our kids safe. we will be releasing $40 million in federal grants for childcare providers. we have several meetings with providers so those grants will target exactly what they needed from start up funds to quality initiatives. we also heard from childcare providers and the problems they face with the workforce. we will make it more attractive to work in the childcare field. currently childcare employers struggled to give benefits to their employees. we with -- host: i want to ask you about something she said, which is about the childcare industry. a lot of people were laid off during the pandemic. here is a chart from berkeley

about childcare jobs nationwide. there was a depth during the pandemic. is it back? guest: it is not fully back. we are still 5.5% down from what the workforce was in february 2020. that is 58,000 childhood educators who are no longer in the field at their posts so to speak. what that really means though -- i want to make sure people understand this -- it was not nirvana in 2020. we were in trouble then. we prevented the collapse of the industry. we need to do more to bring it back. it is powerful that a republican

governor is saying this, what noem said. it is critical. the early childhood workforce needs to be paid in a way that makes it attractive, that keeps people in the field, and allows people to grow in the field. one of the key indications of quality is the quality of the childhood educator in that room. if we do not pay them enough to make a living wage, if they have to be on public assistance, then you get to a place where you will get a complete turnover over and over again. host: let's talk to danny. he is apparent in brooklyn, new york. how old are your kids? caller: my grandkids now, but it was the same problem with my kids. let me tell you about myself. i was a refugee child post-world

war ii. the urban situation that existed began at 6:00 in the morning and ended at six clock in the evening. at that time it was not childcare, but childhood education throughout. there was a lot of athletics. there were 3 months of vacation every year. somehow, that got us through the very difficult and chaotic time of postwar europe. at the end of 12 years of education, we went to college, which was 4 years. the issue is high quality teachers, extended school days so parents can have all the time needed for the economic issues they have to face, and i wonder why is american school so short,

the pedagogy so crummy? it is custodial care for the kids. people wonder why the kids come out so bad. it was a hell of a struggle because of the low quality of the schools. host: dan talking about the quality and also extending school days. that will cost a lot of money. guest: i appreciate dan's frustration, but let me say two things. first, our focus with this report is on before school, because so many kids show up to can garden not ready to learn -- kindergarten, not ready to learn, which puts them back and makes it more difficult for the k-12 system to function. one of the things that needs to happen throughout a young

child's life is to recognize that kids are learning all the time, and they start learning from birth. it is not simply the responsibility or the requirement for the k-12 system. it is frankly something that we as a society need to take seriously so we are supporting kids, no matter where they are, live in healthy, nurturing environments. i think most parents would have issue with 6:00 to 6:00 as a school day! host: unless they need it. guest: unless they need it. most parents would say i want my child cared for in those hours when i cannot care for them myself. creative, nurturing environments for them to be and whether they are in or out of school. host: let's talk to joe, a

parent in north carolina. caller: good morning. it is a simple fix. there are three things you can do to fix the system. number one, stop giving money to foreign countries in the budget. number two, but all of the illegal aliens back where they came from, not to give them food, clothes, everything else. number three, put $6 trillion back into the social security trust fund. you would give the elderly people a boost in their living. you would give medicaid a boost, medicare a boost, disability and the veterans. they can take it out and put it in the treasury. host: you are a parent. tell me about your kids. how old are they? caller: we have a great-grandchild. he is two years old. we have four kids, 4 grandkids who are 26, 25 --

host: i'm curious about the two-year-old. is he in daycare? do the parents stay home? caller: the two-year-old has autism and the mother takes care of it the best way she can, and everybody helps out, and the 11-year-old keeps on getting sick and the mother does a very good job, but you cannot afford medical insurance on the kid. this is what i am saying. all you big shots, put that back into social security and with $500 billion a year you would end all this nonsense. he has a nice, custom suit on. host: [laughter] he did mention a two-year-old with special needs. guest: part of what is so challenging about some of these problems is it is not a

one-size-fits-all. we need to have a system that allows parents to be in control and understand and get the support they need, what their kids need to be ready to learn, what kids need to be the best they can be. that will not be the same in north carolina as it is in south dakota, and it will be the same from county to county -- won't be the same from county to county. the idea of private-public partnership, all hands on deck, and the state, community, and federal government all need to be a part of solving this problem. host: in arlington virginia, "

$122 billion is a huge loss. what do you see happening in the long run if we do not address this childcare crisis now?" guest: in the long run, we continue to follow behind -- f all behind. we are beginning to see it in the academic achievement. i think we lose innovation. i think we lose our edge in terms of economics. we begin to damage our national security. high-quality early childhood education, not just support. we were talking about this economic impact report, but frankly the impacts are multiple, not just to the economy. it is to the health and development of young people, which means that it will begin

to add to the number the department of defense is dealing with. 77% ages 18 to 24 are ineligible to be in the military. or obese -- either they are overweight or obese, they cannot pass the entrance exam, or they have some involvement with law enforcement. it keeps you in school, keeps you safe, keeps you on track, helps you develop healthy habits, so if you choose to you can help serve the nation. it is not just the economic losses we are facing. it is also the cost to our national security. host: let's talk to cheryl in manteca, california. you're also apparent. caller: i'm a -- also a apparent. caller: i'm a grandparent now.

what i wanted to say here is mr. ford brought up a wonderful point. it has to be a holistic approach. , corporations, the government, the parents, everybody working collectively. what i think would be a solution to this issue is, most parents, when your children are young they're concerned about their safety and making sure that when your children are in childcare, they cannot speak for themselves, so what is important to them is safety. i think if we could come up with a model that says when parents are commuting to work they can bring their children to work and have a child facility on site that they can bring their children to because

corporations, when they hire people, they do the legwork in making sure that they pass whatever safety checks they need to pass. number one, the parents will not have to worry about getting the children ready in the morning and taking them somewhere 10 or 15 miles and then have to go back on route to get to work, they have this one destination, be able to drop their children off when they take their break they can check on their children. that would ease a lot of pressure on parents, if they had to work late, the facility can be set up so it is conducive to work hours. that to me would solve one portion of the issue. the other thing is, when you get into special-needs children, now if you have something where corporations are working with you, now you free up monies

that can be spent on giving special needs children the resources that they truly need and the quality care that they need. bringing the government into this makes it worse, because at this point incentives for corporations could be built into it. incentives for parents as part of their benefits package. to me, it seems like we need to think in a whole different way. host: all right, let's get a response. guest: what the color raised is really important, i think. no one part of our society -- caller raised is really important, i think. many corporations do organize childcare, but only for large

and really wealthy private entities can do that. half of the american economy is made up of small businesses. it is not realistic to think that every private sector employer i going to be able to provides childcare on-site. some manufacturing facilities, it is completely inappropriate to have young children anywhere near the work of their parent. a lot of companies and private sector actors are trying to engage in collective action. you will have a group of smaller companies coming together to see if they can collectively help support a third-party, some kind of contractor who will provide childcare service for profit or nonprofit. even that is not enough.

part of what needs to happen, i would argue, and part of what our members are looking for is there needs to be federal and state government incentivizing with tax credits in order to enable employers to help catalyze the support of childcare providers. there also need to be direct grants to childcare providers. in many communities there just is no provider. there is no licensed childcare provider anywhere close. half of america lives in a childcare desert. for every 3 children there is only one licensed childcare slot.

we need to do a lot more to support the development of supply. it is not a market where supply and demand really functions. the reason it does not function is because too much of the cost of childcare has been put on the backs of parents and parents cannot pay enough to childcare providers so that childcare educators can make a living wage. there needs to be other resources, more money, and the logical and obvious place for that come from our state and the federal government resources. host: keith is next, palm bay, florida. caller: i really appreciate what you're doing, this to ford -- mr. ford.

you need to be commended for trying to come up with a solution. the previous caller said a holistic view. the one color asked do you -- caller asked steele what is that thing i can do most to help -- asked you what is the thing i can do most to help. i would say call around to your family first, see if they need help anywhere. ask around your neighborhood, see if they need any help. we keep looking to the government to help micromanage. they should be helping the entire country, instead of micromanaging .we need to get back to families. i suggest parents sit down, if they going to have a child and plan out, which one is more apt

to go further in a career? which one is more apt to take a 5 year period off. i remember studying during the 60's and 70's. i don't know if it was mr. spock, but the most important period in a child's development is from 0 to five years old. guest: i think families do this already in reaching out to families, friends, neighbors to help with informal childcare arrangements. that is how in these childcare deserts i just men and -- just mentioned people are going to work. they figure it out. the point is that in doing so, the stress and figuring it out, is costing us billions as a

country. the core answer is,, yes parents need to be in the driver seat as for what they need. if a family determines that the parent should stay home, we should have the infrastructure that supports that decision. we do not live in a society that supports parents staying at home. there are a number of states that try to improve how they are creating their state-level childhood institutions what they can put inputs -- in place to support the decision of, most often, a mother to stay home. this is not something that can

happen without the economic supports necessary to because happen. most families in the united states depend upon two incomes to make ends meet. host: david is a new jersey. caller: i want to say that mr. ford is out of touch. the real problem is out of wedlock births. when you talk about the family, there is no family from the very beginning. the father is often absent. that means there is only a single income coming in. for you, i look at the federal deficit. everyone comes on this program talking about more federal spending. the ceos just put out a report saying we will be $19 trillion more in debt in the next 10 years. there is no money. as a parent of 2 sons why is,

it my neighbor's responsibility to provide childcare for me? host: ok, we are running out of time, but he mentioned out of wedlock births. what are the statistics? around that guest: i don't have statistics on what portion of this population of parents with kids under 3 are resulting out of wedlock births. i don't know what that number is. what i will say though is there are single parents who have children under 3, and they need to be in the workforce. they need to be able to support themselves. that is something i believe is really important to the future of the country, not just their

future. this is something that david said, that i think is really important. the cost to the economy is a cost born by everyone. it is not just of the family that cannot find childcare. it is everyone. the cost of the country as a cost everyone faces. this is not about moving public money to benefit people who are undeserving. this is about the national government doing something that is really important to our economic strength. that is what it means to be a strong america. we should do this with self-interest in mind. we should do this because this is what we need to do to be a stronger country. host: one more call, kate in adrian, michigan, works in

childcare. caller: good morning. i would like to ask real quick about headstart. it seems to me they have a model you could use. i think it is a wonderful program. quality seems to me -- be much better now. 0 to 3 parents should stay-at-home with their children, if at all possible because that is such a crucial time for children to develop. host: headstart is great -- guest: headstart is great and we should do more to support its growth and stability. it will help enhance the quality of experiences for children and their families, but i want to come back to this. i inc. parents of infants and toddler's -- i think parents of infants and toddlers should be allowed to stay home if they want to, but most families need

both parents in the workforce to make ends meet. we should have a sensible policy that allows them to go to work free of concern and the worries of the welfare of their children. host: barry ford, counsel for strong america president. coming up, it is our spotlight on podcasted series. richard blinn discusses his series on the lives of american presidents, but first it is time for open forum, your chance to share any political or public policy issues on your mind this morning. you can start calling now. the numbers are on your screen. we will be right back. ♪

>> book tv, every sunday on c-span two, features leading authors discussing their latest nonfiction books. at 8:00 p.m. reverend otis mos , shares his book dancing in the darkness. rafael -- his interview with senator warnock about the spiritual challenges of today. then joanna schwartz discusses how the legal system handles police misconduct with her book, "shielded." watch book tv every sunday on c-span2 and find a full schedule on your grandma died or watch online anytime -- your program guide or watch online anytime. ♪ >> since 1979 in partnership

with the cable industry, c-span has provided coverage from congressional hearings, pretty briefings, and committee hearings. no commentary,, no interruptions and, completely unfiltered. c-span, your unfiltered view of government. ♪ >> there are almost 80 new members in the 118th congress and this diverse group includes first-generation of americans and a record number of women and minorities. c-span interviewed half of them on their upbringing and political philosophy. monday here from nathan moran greg lanson, cindy came longer, kevin kiley, and he ogles, and

eli crane -- andy ogles and eli crane. watch on c-span or online at c-span.org. ♪ >> sunday on q and a, journalist alex prudon author of "dinner with the president," discusses how culinary taste has impacted -- >> he had a big headline, saying "king georgia eats, hot dog and drinks beer asks for seconds!" this was before the second world war. the u.s. was in an isolationist

mood at that point. many americans were still annoyed with great britain as not repaying their first world war debts, but he realized that the king and queen were a unique couple and if he could humanize them and make them appealing to the american public, it might help to sway public opinion. this was a kind of theatrical moment." >> alex prudon with his book, "dinner with the president," on c-span's q and a. ♪ >> washington journal continues. host: welcome back to washington journal. it is open forum so i will be taking your calls on anything public policy related up until 9:15.

i want to start before i get to your calls with vice president kamala harris. she is at the munich security conference in germany today as we speak that is going on. a little earlier this morning she announced that the u.s. has formally determined that russia has committed crimes against humanity, and she spoke about russia's attacks on ukraine earlier this morning. [video clip] >> their actions are an assault on arcana -- on our common values, and attack on our common humanity. let's be clear. russian forces have pursued systemic attacks against a civilian population, gruesome acts of murder, torture, rape,, and deportation, execution style

killings, beatings, and electrocution. russian authorities have forcibly deported hundreds of thousands of people from ukraine to russia, including children. they have cruelly separated children from their families. w have alle seen the images of the theater in mariupol where hundreds of people were killed. think of the image of the pregnant mother who was killed, following a strike at a maternity hospital where she was preparing to give birth. think of the images of civilians

shot in cold blood, their bodies left in the street. the jarring photograph of the man who was riding his bike. think of the four-year-old girl who the united nations recently reported was sexually assaulted by a russian soldier. a four-year-old child. barbaric and inhumane. long before i was vice president of the united states, i spent the majority of my career as a prosecutor, beginning as a young lawyer in the courtroom and did later -- and later running the

california department of justice. i know firsthand the importance of gathering facts them up against the law -- facts and holding them up against the law. in the case of russia's actions in ukraine, we have examined the evidence. we know the lingle -- legal standards and there is no doubt. these are crimes against humanity. host: that was the vice president speaking earlier this morning in munich at the munich security conference. it is open forum, and we are taking your calls. i went to show you something first before i do. that is an article in the washington post. it is titled, "the crisis in american girlhood."

"the cdc reports a third of girls weighing suicide. when sophie nice and created a website for teens who had experienced trauma, her idea was to give them space to write about trauma they could not share. he received posts about drug use and suicide but the majority wrote about sexual abuse. road one anonymous poster, 'i was sexually assaulted.' th -- nearly one in three high school girls said they had considered suicide. a 60% rise in the past decade. nearly 15% had been forced to have sex. 6 in 10 girls were so persistently sad or hopeless,

they stopped regular activities. very sad report from the cdc. let's go to your calls now, louis calling us on our line decrats in arizona. od morning, lou. caller: i really enjoyed the show this morning. i think some very pertinent facts were given out. our country needs to do everything we can for children. children are becoming the next adults, the next workers, and we have to safeguard them from violence, from starvation, and from unwanted sex. thank you. host: next is kent in erie, illinois, republican line. caller: i have two topics i will try to get to. a problem a color mentioned is as a boy in the 50's, women did

not go outside the home and -- a caller mentioned is as a boy in the 50's, women did not go outside the home to work. taxes were 8%. most of the men in our hometown worked for john deere. they made $100 a week, but they brought $92 home to the wife and children, who were home. there were no 8 million programs, like the department of energy the department of education, the department your last fellow was involved in. all of these programs did not exist to so there was no need for the two people to support the government because they only paid 8%. the part most of their money home to the family. to get to my point, the little village i live in, you get within two miles of it and you look into the air.

you will see huge wind turbine. the town decided this ostensibly would provide enough energy for the schools. it did not work. the wind turbine seldom ever worked, and when it did it did not produce the energy needed. now it is junk. they could not get parts for it. now it stands there as a tribute to man's gullibility. it is junk. i don't know how many millions of dollars we paid for it, but i hear all over the country that these things are falling apart. they are killing the whales, there killing the birds, they don't work, and now we have one in our village that is a tribute to man's ignorance. host: let's go to duncan in oklahoma, independent line. caller: good morning.

i'm originally from a different country. i grew up in the largest u.s. military base in the world, the camille zone. i have watched this country fall apart for the past 50 years. i came to the states in 1964, went to a private school in georgia, and when i graduated i applied to the air force economy and almost turned down on the grounds that i was a wet back. my father was an american. his family was land-grant in this country. i served in the united states air force. in the meantime i got my citizenship back. i emma citizen by declaration.

-- i am a citizen by declaration. no matter who you are, what your parentage is, nobody ever is an american on the last the senses, the question was pick a race that you belong to. according to the constitution of the united states of america, that does not happen. host: i want to get an update on that situation in ohio. this is yesterday governor mike dewine held a press conference to update on the safety and health hazards situation in east palestine, ohio as a result of the train derailment on february 3. there has been environmental testing because 20 cars carrying hazardous materials and 11 of

them derailed. [video clip] >> the air has been tested. no contamination of concern caused by the derailment in any of these homes. there are in the community, 20 monitors, strategically located throughout the community to continue to monitor outdoor air. we have a map somewhere. there is a map there. this is a map from u.s. cpa that shows all places where they take it air samples over the past two weeks. the experts tell me these monitors are coming back clean. clean for contaminants of concern associated with the train derailment. this monitoring started early on and this monitoring will continue. we will continue to do this.

we have 20 monitors. these monitors are moved around and they will continue to be moved around the community. we talk about water. residential well assembly. -- residential well sampling. the results of the miscible water source have a come back and results are the drinking water five wells that go into the community system, those five wells all come back clean. the water is safe to drink. we never thought the municipal water was contaminated. out of an abundance of caution, our ohio epa to example which were analyzed and they came back and shown to be safe. we do not need to drink bottled water if you're on municipal

water. if you get your water from a private well, you are encouraged to use bottled water until your water is confirmed to be safe. that is out of an abundance of caution. today 38 private wells have been sampled. more private wells are scheduled for testing today. these samples take a while to get back to the lab. we do not have results back yet we expect them very soon to start coming back. to schedule testing for your private well, call 330 8493919. host: it is open forum we are taking your calls till 15 a.m. eastern time. bronson is in colorado on the democrats line. caller: good morning america.

i have spoken before. i am a disabled veteran. i'm a aduate of colado state university. i am an activist's 73. i have several issues. i will be brief. i want to point out the gargoyles of the world. the top of the list is hitler's. the second one is vladimir putin from russia. i was a touch on the immigration issue -- i want to touch on the immigration issue. these numbers that are being played out, -- that are being

put out, we will one million-3 million, they never speak about that across two or four times. they counted individually. that is wrong. when they say 2 million people, 3 million in the last year, it is half of that. host: patrick necks in new jersey on the republican line. good morning. caller: good morning, america. i want to touch on mental health crisis with our children. we have to remember the solution , signs reveals the benefit of bible reading will increase hope. it will decrease suicide or depression and anxiety.

it seems like since 62, our public schools have declined to government indoctrination to the religion where man is the measure. without god we do not have education. it is not about the ducky -- ducky or the often, but the lamb. america needs to repent and return back to god. host: senator john fetterman, here is an article from cnbc.com, likely be in the hospital for a few weeks for clinical depression treatment. he is 53 years old. he's a freshman lawmaker. he checked himself into walter reed national medical sector -- center in maryland. here's the white house press secretary commented on the senator's for depression yesterday. [video clip] >> i want to say a

few words about senator fetterman and before we continue, millions of americans as you all know go untreated with the depression every day. senator fetterman did the right thing and brave thing this week by getting the help he needs. the president is committed to making sure every american can get help they need. which is why he made addressing mental health priority from its earliest days as president. his administration has made unprecedented investments in health services including better incorporating mental health into the broader health, security and bipartisan fighting to get more mental health resources to school and fostering 988 suicide hotline. in the state of the union speech, the president contains a call for republicans and democrats to work together -- continue to call on republicans and democrats to get this done.

they are thinking about john, giselle, and the entire fetterman family today and they are grateful to senator fetterman for being an example. host: it is open forum. robert is next. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for the opportunity to speak on the government and what is on my mind. at the start of this open forum segment, you play a video with kamala harris, our vice president, and she was speaking about the horrors that russia has committed on the ukraine and she described a lot of horrible and humane things and this -- stuff like that. i want to say, i would remind her in our nation that

everything she described that russia has done to ukraine was done to black americans here in america. that history should not ever be erased. it should be taught. it should be appreciated that should never happen again. everyone should be educated. you have adjustment on here that talked about education of children and supporting the families so children can get an early education. as a black man, he never mentioned about the education of what's ron desantis tried to stop black history stuff. host: i think the reason is he is focused on childcare between 80 and three years old. not in high school or junior high level. caller: thank you for correcting me.

also i would like to say, i pray black people be so concerned about themselves, education, well-being as they are all other races and people. so that we can be a true partner of this nation and equally loving care like everyone else. thank you for listening. host: jason is in minnesota on the line for democrats. good morning, jason. caller: good morning. i was not going to call this morning but two republican callers a while ago, both mentioned about 50 years ago and how things were 50 years ago. let's look to the future. same thing with the republican let alice come what is the first thing they do? hunter biden laptop. they keep looking back.

i really love america. we can do this together. donald trump did a big black shop on republicans and we got to get --a whack job on the republicans and we got to get it together. biden is talking about the future. looking to the future. everything will be ok we can all work together. enjoy your day everybody. got a some nice to somebody. do the little things. do what you can. host: ava in mississippi, public in line. caller: good morning. i noticed your hosts quite a few mistakes people have made. i would like to call to your attention in a couple of things that were not correct. that before thanksgiving somebody called in and said

george washington should've helped the pilgrims more. he was not born when the pilgrims came to america. another caller said clark thomas was charged with sexual harassment. he was not charged. he was accused. the one i want to correct is somebody said in mississippi the blacks used to have to pay a fee to vote. that is true, but we all did. i am white. i will be 80 years old summer and i had to pay a fee the first time i voted. it was called a poll tax. i only paid it once in my life but it was not just the blacks, it was the blacks, mexicans, anything in our state that voted had to pay it. this has been corrected. last june, a lady, said the man was praising y'all coverage on c-span and he said how good it will cover kennedy assassination for you was not on them. just last week, somebody said

john kennedy said we have nothing to fear but fear. that was fdr. i want to call these things to your attention. c-span may have not have known known about the poll tax in mississippi. i wanted to correct a few things. thank you very much. host: here is an article from the new york times. this headline of four hits cnn as a leman is is reviewed for comments about women. the assertion that the presidential candidate nikki haley is not in her prime put a harsh spotlight on is struggling morning show. here is the white house press secretary. she indirectly responded to those comments from cnn don

lemon on nikki haley not being on her prime age for politicians. [video clip] >> switching topics that you brought up when you said neither of you, john kirby, a future prime yet. does the president have anything to say yet of this national conversation that was parked after a claim that was made that nikki haley is not in her prime because woman hit their primes in their 20's, 30's, and 40's? >> i would not commit directly to that. that is something totally that needs to be addressed. >> i only bring it up. >> i want to say something. give me a second. we look at the president's administration and we have talked about the numbers before. there are more women in his senior advisory and staff than

men. when you think about that, you see a president that truly takes pride and deep consideration in making sure there are diverse voices around him and i think that is important. what i want to say is watch his actions. watch what he has done. you just asked me about julie sue and i laid out with the president has done in having the most diverse administration. i think all you have to do is look at the numbers, look at the people around him, look how he is lifted up different communities, including women. i'm going to leave it there. it is a priority for him. host: we take a few more calls. and that in nevada, and a pen,

good morning. caller: good morning and thank you for taking my call. i would like to bring up the probation needs to be abolished. it is human trafficking and again a lot of people, we need to end this mass incarceration. we need to end the word minority when we speak about human beings . we are all created equal and are no such things as minority. we are equal. that gives us the opportunity dividing people. also, this is huge, the pandora papers. i am calling about how they stole the black family wealth and even there vision of the nfl which was coach eddie robison. now that the super bowl has

ended, i think that it is important that everyone will look at a lot of the history, like black wall street, how a lot of black wild has been stolen, hidden offshore the pandora papers, 600 journalists with larger 17 countries and they have exposed this wealth and it is hidden wealth that was , these wars with vladimir putin and biden family, politicians, global wealthy people who have had these money and again that is why my family has been attacked with domestic terrorism and i would like very much, i was impressed with the show you guys had on and it was afterward s and it was charlotte and how the police have become to be untouchable -- shielded and how

the police have become to be untouchable at the office first name, joanna. host: check the website and you will be able to search for that. c-span.org. john is our last call on the line for democrats. caller: good morning. i wasn't make a couple quick comments. an earlier caller who is making the claim in the 1950's people were only paying 8% and only men that were working. that is completely false. but the my parents worked their entire lives to make a decent life for the three children in my family and his claim that taxes were only 8% is false. top-tier tax rate in those days was 90% and his other claims about windfarms is also completely false. we have multiple large wind farms in the state of wisconsin generating megawatts of electricity, not that i think it is the only source we should be using, but it is in addition to

our normal energy generation, which is a good thing. if i can make one point that is out of that area, the think about minorities in this country and blacks in particular, defeating their own purpose by being too obsessive with continuing to push the message about how they have been put upon and treated badly and no one is denying that history, some people are, but the average person understands all that. i continue to be obsessive about this, eventually the impact of that message is going to become minimize, and the entire purpose is going to be defeated, which they should take that into account because as it has gotten to the point of being ridiculous because why people have been treated badly in this country and other groups so maybe what we should do pay more attention to how we treat each other in this country and if we are

divided, we are weak. we are united, we are strong. host: coming up next on "washington journal", are spotlight on podcast series. richard lim joins us this president eight we can talk about his history podcast, "this american president" will be right back. ♪ >> american history tv exploring the people and events that tell the american story. all lectures in history, a look back at the look -- life of immigrants and working class in america. in the late 19th and 20th century with the northwestern professor and a look at first lady's donation to the mist and national museum of american history. joe biden formally presented two ensembles she wore during 2021 an evening event. explain the american. watch american history tv every

weekend and find a full schedule on yograguide or watch online anytime at cspan.org/history. >> pre-order your copy of the congressional directory of 118th congress. it is your access to the federal government with bio and contact information for every house and senate member. important information for congressional committee, the president's cabinet, federal agencies and state governors. scan the code at the right to pre-order your copy today. it is plushipping and handling. every purchase helps support our nonprofit operations at c-spanshop.org. >> there almost 80 new members in the 118 congress and this diverse group includes first-generation americans and a record number of women is an american. c-span interviewed more than half of them about their upbringing, career, and

political philosophy. on monday eight :00 to p.m. eastern, here from reckless and, cindy, kevin kelly, and he ogles, and eli crane. watch new members of that 118 congress at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span or online at c-span.org. >> there are lots of places to get political information, but only se spent do you get it straight from the source. no matter where you are from or where you stand on the issues, c-span is america's network. unfiltered, unbiased, word for word. if it happens here, or here, or here, or anywhere that matters, america is watching on c-span. powered by cable. >> "washington journal" continues. host: welcome back to

"washington journal". it is our weekly podcast spotlight segment. we have joining us richard lim, the host of "this american president" podcast. welcome to the program. guest: thank you for having me. host: tell us about the podcast. when did you started and when -- what does it cover? guest: my friend and i, michael o'neill, he is the producer of the podcast and this was back in 2017 and i have been a fan of presidential history for the bulk of my life, ever since i was a kid, my mom would take me to the library and i will read about presidents and other things kids love to read about, athletes and superheroes. i've been reading about presidents ever since then and i had a job in 20 that was not very satisfying and in order to stay same and continue my passion my friend and i talked

about starting a podcast because what is the point of learning these amazing lessons of history without being able to share them with people? we started reading -- printed out space in a library with the microphone we borrowed from a friend and ever since then it has grown and i have my own personal studio in my house and i get to talk about historical subjects that i'm learning about as well. it is like getting a phd or masters degree but being able to choose what topics i want to learn about and sharing them with people who want to listen. host: do you have outside funding for the podcast? guest: we have ads, revenue generated from ads and we have pastry on -- patreon so people can support us from that and different ways. we do get revenue. host: our mind our viewers they can start calling in now. we have a comment or a question

for our guest, republicans 202-748-8001. democrats, 202-748-8000. independents, 202-748-8002. and you can contact us over social media as well. the podcast says that it examines what the lessons of history can teach us about our world today. what are examples of what history can teach us about today? guest: well, one of the things you always see historically is that whenever time you are in, it is always the most critical time. it is always worse than it has ever been in all of history. whatever election is happening is the most important election that is ever happened. i think one of the lessons of history is the nation keeps going. the world keeps moving on. no matter how crazy things can get, there's always a reason to be optimistic.

we look at what was happening in the run-up to the civil war, people thought the country would dissolve at that point. the country was so divided that a war had to be followed in order to the problem to be resolved. if you look through the 1930's and 1940's, the great depression, world war ii, and throughout the cold war, those were dangerous times and scary times. in essence, our time -- our time is not that unique. there's never been a perfect golden age in american history. we have always had problems but we always managed to get through them. history makes me optimistic about the future because i do believe matter what happens, we are a strong country and i think history proves that. host: at the start of every administration, c-span holds a survey of presidential historians.

we ask them who the top presidents were. here are the ones that take the top spots. abraham lincoln has been consistently on top followed by george washington, fdr, and dwight eisenhower. anything surprising in that? guest: it is make assistant. eisenhower has risen in recent years because during his presidency there is this perception that he was lazy, he would go golfing a lot. people thought he was not very intelligent which did not make a lot of sense. this guy rose to be the top commander during world war ii and let the d-day invasion, but when people saw the classified documents about how he ran his administration, people realize he was fully in charge. he had a clear strategy and was much more effective. presidential reputation change. you look at grant, he was considered one of the great

heroes during the 19th century in american history and was considered a terrible president after that and in recent years his reputation has revived. i think it is a good lesson that history is always evolving and changing our perspectives are taking. the book is never close on a given president because you never know when information is going to come out. this podcast is helping to appreciate lesson on presidents. grover cleveland's of the world. zachary taylor. people like to look back and say they were failures and they did not think any more about them. but their lives were a lot more interesting and they accomplish a lot of amazing things. herbert hoover is often criticized what happened during the depression but he was a self-made man. he saved millions of lives during world war i create a lot of these historical figures are like icebergs. people only see the tip of the iceberg by so much more there

and that is what my podcast about, showing the whole picture. host: do you have a favorite presidency? guest: i'm pretty conventional in that. i have the doors watch is in the background -- george washington in the background. the first time i got interested in washington i was in a family reunion in china and one of my relatives who did not speak english was saying bad things about america, but he said that american he respected the most was george washington because he was willing to leave power twice in his career and to a lot of people around the world that is something that stands out in the a nose of history and i think it is a big reason why america is a republic to this day. host: why is it that you think certain presidents take out for people? what makes it -- how does it affect the legacy? guest: often times, the things that make you stick out are not forgiven president are not

things they plan for. kennedy was talk about the challenges you face are charges you cannot predict. george w. bush could predict it 9/11. herbert hoover did not know the worst depression in history when it happened during his presidency. often times these situations are really things that the president can control. president lincoln said he is not controlled events, events have controlled him and we consider him one of the greatest presidents. a lot of presidents talk about how humbling the office is because they are really at the mercy of larger historical focus -- forces. harry truman did not prepare his whole life to make the decision to drop the atomic bomb but that is what history handed to him. i can see why the president's

proposal humbled because so much of is out of their control. host: how do you think the presidency itself has changed over time? guest: immensely. there was a time washington was president that presidents do not even run for the office actively. the office salt the band. presidents do not even introduce the personal residences with legislation. it was silence i should they disagreed with because they thought it was the purview of people's representatives. there is a clear separation of powers. that changed over time and the power of the presidency has changed immensely. the president is now can change the fate of the whole country. they can invade countries. they can protect countries. that is reflective of the fact that the power the other states has risen to a global superpower.

so much of what is happened since, the technological advances that have happened have changed the face of the presidency from what it was will market him as president. host: if you like to make a comment or a question for guest you can do so. you start calling now. republicans, 202-748-8001. democrats, 202-748-8000. independents, 202-748-8002. we had an article about about -- you had an article a while back talking about program address title how george washington warned us about tribalism. she talked about the farewell address and the relevance and the importance of it. guest: george washington had been in power in some way for a quarter of a century. you consider he was the commander for eight years through the american revolution,

head of the constitutional convention and eight years as president. that is longer than any other president to be at that level. he knew how hard it was create a republic, whether it was defeating the colonial powers that ruled over them, winning the war and establish a new government, executive that government, and what he said was, he could have this perspective of being at that level what was best for the country as a whole and it is easy to think what is best for yourself or individual group and legitimate reasons that lisa had been, but never threw that in a way that takes away from the benefit of the nation as a whole. that was always his message. that is why he cared so much about ensuring the union remained strong, having a firm foundation.

it is a message we often forget about because we are so focused on our own self interest in our own group or demographic or anything like that but he is always thinking type that nations -- tie that interest to the nation's interest as a whole. host: david in virginia on the republican line. caller: good morning. i've have a question about george washington faith. i wonder if you could question -- comment about his faith and from another perspective, jfk. there is a movie that recently came out, i think it was called blonde about marilyn monroe and it really made jfk look bad and how he mishandled marilyn morel wonder if you can comment on jfk's faith. those two presidents formed the backbone of america. jfk and george washington's faith. guest: short, thank you.

the whole idea of the founding fathers religious views have been debated. if you look at the writings they produce, it is clear the idea they were ds is not true because 70 of them express the idea that -- because so many of them express the idea that not interviews -- enter beings -- intervenes. going oh so much about someone's heart but i would say, george washington was a very devoted member of his church and he affirmed the doctrines of the anglican church which became the best batali -- which became the church. he essentially wrote at the end, a speech he believed the only way america could survive was to imitate the divine author of our religion, which many people interpret to be jesus.

a lot of those things speak for themselves. he says in the book that he felt george washington was a question but again that is something he knew and was private about it, but he was a constant in his church. president kennedy was somebody that grew up in the catholic church, in terms of his faith, that was what he was familiar with. a lot of people would look at it -- his private life and question how much of that faith he really followed. those are matters go beyond what any biographer can really understand. host: another david in texas, republican line. the morning. caller: good morning. since you mentioned rama turnout, i thought will start with washington and i'll try to

be comfortable -- careful about what others are selected. i thought washington was fantastic. the shipment -- relationship with jefferson and washington when washington was trying to be nonpartisan and other parties did not play the role they play officially. jefferson is a democratic republican and other guy was a federalist. to me, #represents the but it's me -- thomas jefferson represents the academy -- russia was a great president, hamilton was also. he started talking about kennedy. personally i think candy is one of our worst presidents.

you could've the difference between how i got into vietnam and also the way he had done more to help. there was a disaster of a plan. in the meeting two months later, in austria, he was warned not to go. everybody was warned not to go. he was sick and he was young. he felt like he could do anything to kennedy and ultimately the letters to -- that led us to castro being upset about the invasion. that lisa said the human -- cuban missile crisis and it takes 20 years before hbo does a movie to show would actually happen. we did not make the russians blink. we had active missiles in turkey.

host: lots of history there. go ahead. guest: a lot of people look at president kennedy and run the reasons -- one of the reasons people admire him so much is because of the inspiration he gave with his features. he is on the most quotable presidents of all time. there are a lot of historians that essentially say, compare that to his actual record. the fact that he was assassinated for his 30-year-old president. he really served three years as president. as i so much you can accomplish during that time. we would at the transition from eisenhower to kennedy, there is a huge transition there is a generational transition but also the fact you're going from a man who had paid a huge role in wendy world war ii way to your service or -- junior senator.

that show that the meeting in vienna and of course with the bay of pigs failure. host: our third david for the excitement, in new jersey on the independent line. caller: good morning, c-span. thank you for taking my call. which president has faced biggest challenge and will be known for making the right choice? what can be attributed to making that choice? guest: there are a lot of different examples about that. in terms of making the right choice, when i look at what george washington did, i know i keep going back to him, during his time a lot of people wanted america to support the french revolution because the french had supported the united states and help united states when and

there was alliance between the united states and france and people felt they helped us in our revolution, we should help them. this is when america was really in a weakened state and watches him firmly said, no, we not going to assist them in revolution. it is a fundamentally revolution from ours. the revolution seeks to overturn every form of authority. he was right in that. very soon the french revolution went to anarchy and i think of something to take for granted. there are people right outside of washington's home burn victim -- turning -- threatening him and it is easy to forget someone is expected as washington was attacked but i think the fact that he cap is otto's war -- the fact that he kept us out of war of the nation survive in the early years.

host: next to michael in indiana on the republican line. caller: yes. i really love this segment and i love richard lim. guest: thank you. caller: another reason why i say that, i am bias. my birthday, i was born a washington's birthday. my middle name is george and i have an uncle george born in the same day and we got together frequently to celebrate our birthdays and he also served in world war ii. i miss him. i love this. i wish you well. i would try to get a hold of your podcast. thank you. guest: thank you. i wish you well. host: i want to show you from "politico" and this is from an article that which is published

by michael schaefer and says, there's no shortage of data on the public'view of the sitting president but holding on the presidency, the historical symbol of nationhood is harder to come by, and yet it appears having a country where any chief executive is looking to crack 50% al ratings is having an impact on thetution itself. the long weekend formally known as george washington birthday may now be known as president's day, but the country is in no mood to celebrate. what do you think about that? guest: it is funny because i saw that article just this morning and i think the title of it is americans are sick of the presidency or something to that effect and it had me thinking and i thought about this for a while because i someone who loves studying the presidents, one of the unhealthiest aspects, i believe of american politics,

is the fact that so many people put so much hope onto the president of the united states. there of been certain times in american history where america has needed a strong president, especially during wars or that is how americans felt, but often times americans would be better served not to put all their hope in the president because that is not our system was designed. our system was designed so that all the branches of government would essentially check each other so people would not put their faith in just one branch. all interest would be checked. knitting biggest done has to be done by consensus -- anything that gets done has to be done by consensus and food by senators and the president chimes in. it is very unhealthy for people to believe we can fix all of our problems by voting for one

person. when people have that hope inevitably the person is going to the point that because no one is capable of satisfying everyone's hope and that breeds disillusionment. i do not know how many people say about it for so and so but i was disappointed in them. someone who admires to in a great deal, though something he would even say. it is why he left power because he said no country should be to depended on one man, no matter how admire they are. if do not put all that hope they would not be at disillusioned when someone disappoints them and would not place and misplaced hope in way for you will be in a much better place as a country. host: lee in florida on the democrats line. good morning. caller: good morning. fantastic conversation this

morning. very enlightening. i'm excited to dive in the podcast. my question is, which former president in your opinion would be able to navigate today's climate, whether it is dealing with the pandemic or the current inflation? never getting current topics. which former president do you think would be the most successful? guest: well, i am partial to a few presidents. i'm a great admirer of president eisenhower. i think he found a way to rise above of all the partisan bickering that he was leaving tapping in the 1950's. he was the last president i think you could say was above it all. i know not everyone loves him but i know a lot of people love them too but president reagan was a man who could communicate to the american people.

there is a reason why he 149 out of 50 states. people want massachusetts in california and i think he was to rise to the challenge in many ways. president lincoln was somebody who did not shy away from challenges. he had a firm stance about we needed to happen as far as preserving the union and he also had political savvy to get it accomplished. i was sent by those figures. -- i will stand by those figures. host: richard in florida on the independent line. caller: good morning. i will have to disagree about the characterization of washington. we had at that point, people oppose washington. the issue was the french revolution.

executed lee to 16th and at that point a variety of countries attacked france to try to ensure democracy did not spread to their country to their monarchies. the question the united states to support france in their battle with these other countries. we had an alliance with france under which francis sent 40,000 people to support the american revolution and that alliance promise we protect the french. when washington decided that he was directly violating the alliance with france. the idea that washington would make a statement as an alliance at the united states it had only achieved as independence on the basis of an alliance with france , it is kind of ridiculous and

democrats at that time indicated washington disingenuous. washington did not leave the presidency because he had problems, he left to go back to his place. he left office in 1797 because republican press had attacked him from a whole verity that he no longer felt he could stay in office read i guess i have to look at washington differently. it might reflect on the fact that yorktown, washington can only bring 2000 people to fight.

french losses were twice the losses of american, both wounded and dead. the end of it washington tried the claim will allow the premier the end of it washington tried thedemocrat in united states, benjamin franklin to become the father of the country, not washington. i think make it washington a saint is an overstatement of his role. host: ok. let's get a response. guest: i would say in his former address washington says permanent alliances are the ones that need to be -- we need to be vigilant about. he did say temporary alliances for specific interest at the moment, are legitimate, and that was how foreign policy work. if you look at the fact that the united states was such a week country during that time, and

surrounded by empires, and costly threatened by that, i would say declaring traumatology was essentially a matter of national survival. i would also say the reason why washington was elected unanimously twice as president, even by people who supported the constitution or against the constitution, people from the north and south because they knew he was a man of humility. do not think there is any proof that he ever took credit that he should not have gotten. i think that is something that fits the narrative for people who do not want -- who want to take him down. there's nothing to say that george washington claim credit on his own. that is something that i think it assumed. host: let's go to david in florida on the democrats line. caller: yes, hi.

i wanted to comment on the fact that i do not understand why so many people discount the accomplishments of jimmy carter. he is probably one of the most honest presidents we have ever had. he did try to do his very best. his ability to set up the energy department. he was ahead of his time also learned when you get solar put on the white house within reagan torrid write out. -- but then run at reagan right out. his work trying to get a vote with health care kennedy was against it. he wanted this on stamp on it. there is so much to me did by his president that people are not even aware of. if people were to study the history of jimmy carter and the things he did, i do not understand why people do not even count him. host: what do you think richard?

guest: i would say president carter, there were certain things he did. for instance, deregulation, people look at the deregulation of the 1980's that happened after president reagan's term and there was say, that started under jimmy carter and i think that was something necessary at the time. there is a question about jimmy carter's understanding of perception, how things look and its ability to project power. some people believe that he negotiated the panama treaty, essentially spent a great deal of political capital on that. who is not necessarily the wisest move right off the bat -- which was not necessarily the wisest move we are facing the cold war and the treaties which felt as well.

jimmy carter also started support for the regime in afghanistan which had consequences later on. we look at -- when you look at the things he succeeded in they do not necessarily fit the water for the democratic party would support now. that says a lot. host: bob is next in michigan on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. i have a question regarding the assassination of james garfield. in the book i have about presidents, it says a disgruntled office seeker. any more research been done in terms of, he was the first to recognize the negative effect on the u.s. economy. anymore research been done a small conspiracy composed 2 --

opposed to a disgruntled citizen? did hayes, his vice president have anything to do with that? guest: i want to correct, hayes was not his vice president. it was chester arthur. there has been good work done on garfield. there's a book coming out pretty soon about garfield, biography, titled president garfield. it may have information. i interviewed a gentleman named todd harrington who walk -- works at the garfield house and he talks about how garfield was the last link republican, the last person that believe the republican party for into the gilded age, before he moved on from the great changes during the civil war, that it still had to work it took us -- secure the rights of african-americans and in that sense garfield was something -- somebody that cares a great deal but the more

applications of policies at the time -- about the moral applications of the policies at the time. as far as the assassination, a disgruntled office seeker. that the chester arthur as someone who is against civil against civil service reform in the presidency and chester arthur ended up supporting civil service reform. it backfired on garfield's murderer but it is a fascinating time in american history and i think james garfield really could have been a march -- much better president than is remembered because he served such a short time. host: linda in detroit, democrat. hello, linda. caller: good morning. i've heard so many conflicting views about thomas jefferson and

his perception or how he felt about slaves in slavery. can you clear that up for me? guest: thomas jefferson did say several times that he believed slavery was wrong. it was immoral and there were he did propose to have slavery abolished, at least in slave trade abolished in washington dc and so on. jefferson was also a product of his time andy held prejudices -- and he held prejudices and is quoted as saying, he was musing about african-americans and saying -- there was this debate at the time about whether african-americans were equal to whites and there were whites that said no, they are inherently equal and some

compared them to see the feudal era went white peasants were in a similar situation, according to what they said, and jefferson muse whether he felt african-americans were inferior and unfortunately, it is a part of his legacy. it is a reality of who he was but at the same time to somebody who wrote this incredible document that all men are created equal and i believe he pointed the way to a better society for the one he was in. host: tyler will be our last call. republican in indiana. hi. caller: good morning. i was watching the program today and i think podcasts, like the joe rogan podcasts, these people are making podcasts to political nowadays and live in a timer podcasts are such a huge grip of society. so many people watching

podcasts. my wrist -- my question for richard lim -- host: well that is the last call. sorry about that. guest: good way to end it. host: richard lim is this american part -- "this american president" podcast host. thank you for being on the program. guest: thank you for having me on the show. host: thank for everybody that called in or joined us on social media. that is the end of today's "washington journal". will be back tomorrow morning 7:00 a.m. eastern in the meantime, have a great saturday. ♪