the c-span now video app or online at www.c-span.org. coming up this morning, oregon democratic congressman earl umauer talks about the president's budget requestei released today and the progressive agenda. then a clor look at the administratio's economic polici wh the former president and ceo othfederal reserve bank of kansas city, thomas pony. later, the wilson cee's andrew redmond on the recent killing of two amerins kidnapped in mexico and the state of cartel violence in mexico's northern region. "washingn urnal" starts now. ♪ host: good morning, it's

thursday, march 9, 2023 and the house meets this morning and the senate meets later than that and we are here for three hours with you on the "washington journal." legal filings from a lawsuit against fox is look to the inner workings of fox and getting criticism at its highest levels for president donald trump and tucker carlsen is facing backlash from congressional white house and law-enforcement officials for downplaying the january 6 capital rides on his primetime program. we want to hear your thoughts on the network, do you trust fox news? the foreign loans or by political party, democrats, [video clip] , guest: democrats (202)

748-8000, republicans (202) 748-8001, independents, >> last night, additional new evidence came to light that rupert murdoch and fox news new donald lied about the 2020 election yet they allowed the big lie to air in their network all the same. more and more evidence keep pouring out that these are the undisputed facts. i have never heard of a news organization push a story with such intensity while acknowledging very candidly behind the scenes that what they were peddling was total balderdash. in one email, just revealed last night, mr. murdoch admitted sometime after january 6 that"

maybe sean and laura went too far. come referring to primetime host sean hannity and laura ingraham. in another instance published last night's washington post mr. murdoch speculated that if they were losing the election, donald trump was going increasingly mad. murdoch says " donald trump is going increasingly mad." then he worried that president trump's allies plans to overturn swing state results, that sounds ridiculous and could lead to " riots like never before." murdoch, the head of fox news allowing these lies to continue and worried they could lead to riots like never before. caller: host: chuck schumer on the floor of the senate yesterday and meanwhile, it was tucker carlsen firing back at

critics of his reporting this weekend january 6 on his program last night on fox news. [video clip] > monday, we showed you unreleased videotape from january 6 that proves that three of the most important claims our leaders have made about that day were untrue, their claims relies. we were not shocked to discover that we knew there was a reason the congressional leaders had been hiding this and reporters in washington were not demanding to see it, they were lying to us obviously. what was actually surprising and we can't get over this is how they responded when they were caught lying, they didn't seem embarrassed or apologize and they weren't curious about what happened on january 6. let's see it. they spouted rage and his layers tends to do, they doubled down. they told the same lies they been caught telling with greater aggression.

it's midnight they said as the sun rose behind them, who acts like that? in this case, the social path turned out to be both democrats and republicans. the lying in washington is far more deeper and bipartisan than we realize. we followed the stuffer a living. you sometimes hear people say the partisan system is an allusion and underneath the manufactured debate, the leaders on both sides are in fact secretly united in a common love of money and power and the deception required to get them. honestly, we cannot bring ourselves to believe that, it's just too dark. but now we do believe it because we have seen it. host: tucker carlsen last night on his program on fox news last night. plenty of writing about the opinion pages in his -- in today's papers. this is usa today --

to the op-ed pages of the washington times -- two views on tucker carlsen, asking you this morning, your view on fox news, do y trust them? (202) 748-8000 for democrats to call in, (202) 748-8001 republicans, independence, (202) 748-8002. a three hour washington journal with the house in a 10:00 a.m. eastern and we will be there from dez for gavel-to-gavel coverage. ivan is up first from pompano beach florida, republican, good morning. caller: good morning. host: go ahead. caller: i absolutely trust most of what i hear from fox news

namely because of their success. everything they have said starting with jillary and trump was true. nobody thinks that anything they have said does not come to pass. they said hillary was going to win and everything msnbc has been basically lies with adam schiff and everyone else coming on your show. no democrats will come to fox news to be interviewed. what i'd like to say is i thank god for tucker carlsen. he is very brave and i am very thankful to him because he opened my eyes to the democratic party. now we know, we don't really have anybody who can stand by us. republicans or democrats.

people need to wake up. host: this is eric in massachusetts, independent, you are next. caller: good morning, how are you doing? i do trust fox news. i think this way of reporting, which is why watch it. a lot of people won't watch it. they will listen to the view and they will talk about tucker carlsen being a crazy person. watch the tucker carlsen video that we are just now seeing and i don't know why it took so long. they talk about how tucker carlsen cherry picked the video. why are we just now seeing the video? obviously, they cherry pick the video we've been seeing over and over again for two years. they talked about the qanon

shaman as being a leader of the insurrection. as you watch it, he has all the clips from all the other media outlets making this guy out to be an awful person. he walked around with two officers for 10 minutes like they were literally walking hand-in-hand and then he walked by nine officers in riot gear and nobody even gave him the time of day. he walked right by them. he supposedly was some type of insurrection as leader. i also say you also hear that this was a racist mob of white supremacists. there were blacks in the crowd. if we are going to have a white supremacist, thousands of white supremacists attacking the capital, they will allow blacks to walk around in their group? does that make sense to anyone? host: eric in massachusetts, he

used the term cherry pick which was the term used by capitol police chief tom major after tucker carlsen's program aired earlier this week. this is from the statement he put out tuesday. his program conveniently cherry picked from the moments of our 41,000 hours of video and the commentary fails to provide ext out the violence that happened before and during these late friend's death had nothingc do with hiic aions on january 6. the department maintains as anyone with common sense would thatad officer sicknick not fought valiantly for hours when he was assaulted, he would not have died the next day. that's a statement from the u.s. capitol police chief tom manger. it was that statement that was referenced by senate majority leader mitch mcconnell when he was asked about tucker carlsen's

january 6 reporting on tuesday. this is what he had to say. [video clip] >> my concern is how it was depicted which is a different issue. clearly, the chief of the capitol police, in my view, correctly describes what most of us witnessed firsthand on january 6. that's my reaction to it. it was a mistake in my view for fox news to pit this in a way that was completely at variance with what our chief law enforcement official at the capitol thanks. host: senate majority leader mitch mcconnell on tuesday. this is the headline from today's usa today --

it was kevin mccarthy's office that provided the video that tucker carlsen viewed when it came to his reporting on january 6. speaker mccarthy was asked about that and about mitch mcconnell's statement this week yesterday on capitol hill and here is what he had to say. [video clip] >> one of your criticism of the house select committee was that it failed to investigate that day and a newly released footage, tucker carlsen portrayed capitol police as tour guides. what is your assessment of the way the officers acted that day and secondarily, do you believe the sentencing the sentencing was justified or too extreme? >> the one thing i want to make sure is that the capital is protected and secure.

i want to make sure the offices here have everything they need to provide that. my role for january 6 is to bring transparency. i don't think the way january 6 committee handled it by not letting republicans on and picking and choosing what was shown, i let people make their own decisions. host: speaker mccarthy on capitol hill yesterday and here's one more headline on this topic from the new york times -- asking you this rning your thoughts on fox, do you trust fox news. this is walter here in washington, d.c. this morning. caller: good morning, how are you? host: i'm doing well, go ahead. caller: i trust fox news as much as i trust all the other networks. all of these networks to excellent reporting on stories

and they all two propaganda stories for their political parties. i consume all these networks so you have to do do all that in order to get the full story on anything. there was nothing wrong with tucker carlsen's reporting because he did share some information and for the police chief, the question should be asked of him as to why there were black and white u.s. capitol police officers that hoarded from supporters inside the u.s. capital. no one including the january 6 committee are aware that someone gave orders to the u.s. capitol police officers to let trump supporters in. over 300 were let in so that should be answered. the january 6 committee cherry picked everything especially trump's words.

i didn't vote for trump and he is a disgusting man. however, january 6 was not solely him. we have things that took place especially from the fact that the u.s. capitol was left open and vulnerable to attack that day. that is solely on nancy pelosi turning down -- and she did do this, by the former police chief . they confirmed that nancy pelosi said no national guard for security. nancy pelosi along with mitch mcconnell and then sergeant at arms in the senate are responsible for this. they should have been able to stop that altogether. host: we got your point. this is ohio, independent. caller: good morning. we cannot face the truth and they talk lies. the strong people, the callers calling in, they can see the truth and they give opinions but it's based on truth.

we've got officials in washington, both sides of the aisle, obviously lie, weak people live just like carlsen said. a lot of other people say it. these weak people make an opinion of their own and sound like a fact. they say trump committed a crime because he didn't agree with the 2020 election. where in the hell in united states are you not allowed to have an opinion? somebody labels you that you committed a crime. because they say you committed a crime. host: that's john in ohio, this is sharon and marilyn, good morning, democrat. caller: i don't like the fox news network because they have these people that host the news network and they speak lies. in the united states, we should have enough of all this because haven't they learn from 9/11?

haven't they learned from that? hello? host: i'm listening, anything else? caller: haven't they learn from 911 when the terrorists came here and blew up the world trade center and then we had the insurrection? all of this is based on lies. we need to get it together because we have to think about our children, the future of our children. they look at this stuff and some of them can get ideas from that and be doing the same things. we are trying to run our country in a proper manner so other countries can look at us. host: that's sharon this morning, lenita is in alabama, you are next. caller:caller: thank you for taking my call. i consider c-span a family program. second of all, you were showing scenes from the january 6 and

instead of you blocking out the f-word, you let it be on air, i think that's appalling and that's my opinion and we all have one. second of all, i watch fox news but here is the difference, i have seen that if there is a speech going on or if there is something someone is saying, we get to see the whole thing and draw our own opinions. whatever tucker carlsen does, we all do that, we are human first. i think we need to drop this. it's over, we've got more serious things going on in the united states. host: what are you referring to, january 6, the 2020 election,

what needs to be dropped? caller: the whole thing. it's been wrote to death. get over it. move on, we've got critical things going on in america right now that needs to be addressed. this should be over and done. host: about 10 minutes left in this first segment. we will be joined by congressman earl blumenauer at 7:30 a.m. he is a member of the budget committee and the democrat and we will talk about president biden releasing his budget for fiscal 2024 later today. we showed that clip of senate minority leader mitch mcconnell from earlier this week. this is from the washington post --

we will keep you up dated if there are any more updates on his condition. back to your phone calls, kathy in north carolina, independent, we are talking about fox news, do you trust them? caller: no, that's why i called. i only don't trust them because they pander to a certain audience that they are trying to impress so they can raise their advertising revenues. to me, that's not journalism, it's basically they are a tv show trying to satisfy a

particular audience that they play too. host: do you feel that way about other cable news networks? caller: to a certain extent, they are always trying to get a lead on with their audience is trying to see. in general, i trust other stations more than i trust fox. but i do watch as much as i can. i watch bbc news as well. i tried to get a handle on what the foreign press is saying. if you listen to all of it like that gentleman said, you conform a more informed opinion about things. i think that is the first thing that people need to do is educate themselves and not just what something that satisfies and urge you have like many people who watch fox. that's primarily what they are doing. the woman who commented about we need to get over it, absolutely, we need to drop all of this hate and vitriol.

regarding what happened in 2020, i think it was a free and fair election and there was nothing nefarious going on. the same thing with any of the elections that have been happening since donald trump started running in 2016, he was always attacking the present saying how nothing is fair and he was always blaming, he was planting the seed ahead of time for how things would go later. i can see what he was doing. i had eyes and in years and i could realize what was going on. host: the other big story keeping fox news in the headlines this week is the dominion voting system high-stakes and high dollar lawsuit against fox news for their handling of claims that dominion voting machines were rigged during the 2020 election.

it is through that lawsuit and various text messages and emails that have offered a window into fox news and its feelings about donald trump. some key comments that have been found in the emails and text messages from tucker carlsen. we knew previously he privately warned that trump could easily destroy us if we play it wrong. what we didn't know is that he was speaking in the context of trump's business ventures. someone tells him in one of these communications that one of the bright sizes trump has a low rate of ethics in his business ventures.

jack is in upper marlboro maryland, democrat, good morning. caller: good morning to you. host: are you with us? i think we lost you. give us a call back and try again. hudson, florida, go ahead. caller: i don't think fox is against what happened that day, they said five officers were killed that day. one who was walking around was

supposed to have been hit in the other four they are trying to find out if they were killed that day or died in march. that makes a big difference in saying five officers were killed on january 6. they showed the one officer walking around and one was supposed to be -- that's the problem, they brought out the films showing that what they said was a lie. if the other four didn't died that day, that's a light, too -- that's a lie, too. host: from the white house briefing room, they were asked about the reporting this week. here is some of that exchange. [video clip] >> i was curious if you had a broader comment about the ongoing lawsuit between the voting systems and fox news which has turned up evidence that there may have been fraught around the reporting around the

election. do you have a reaction to that? ms. jean-pierre: we agree with the chief of the capitol police and the bipartisan lawmakers. you heard them yesterday and they condemned this false depiction, the unprecedented violent attack in our constitution and the rule of law which cost police officers their lives and that's what we saw that day, and attack in our democracy. as it relates to the tucker carlsen question, their own attorneys and executives have repeatedly stressed multiple courts of law that tucker carlsen is not credible when it comes to this issue. npr back in september of 2020 said you literally can't believe the facts tucker carlsen tells you. that's what fox's lawyers say.

in the washington post recently, their shows are not credible sources of news. to have said what he said when we saw capitol police officers lose their lives, it's just shameful. host: from the white house briefing room yesterday. we are asking you if you trust fox news keyport, new jersey, independent, good morning. caller: i can definitely say no and fox news as a purveyor of fear every time you look into any facts, it ends up being half of what they say is true. when people be officers to get to those doors, if you cross-reference some of these things, you will find that some

of the officers who killed themselves were probably complicit in all of this. can't -- fox news campy trusted. they are purveyors of old-time news, anti-immigrant and anti-other, it's a classic thing that any authoritarian regime uses to brainwash their subjects. that's it. if you look at the other stations, they have agendas and they push those agendas but if you look at the pure facts the law of a lot of these situations, nine out of 10 times,, fox news will be telling you a bunch of nonsense. host: lee in north charleston, south carolina, good morning. caller: i agree with the gentleman before me. he is correct. kathy in north carolina is a smart lady and very aware of what's going on. i just think we have a united

states society that has gone rogue in believing negativity. when you get up in the morning, everything is negative. they make excuses for criminality. that tells me we have more criminals walking in the united states than we think. i think it's because of their upbringing. they weren't nurtured, they weren't told what to do or how to do it or be kind or be a good person. host: one more call in this segment. our lines for republicans, tampa, florida, charlotte, good morning. caller: good morning, how are you? host: what are your thoughts on fox news? caller: the only thing that fox news got wrong was the 2020

election if dominion wanted to sue somebody, why didn't they sue somebody for screaming russian collusion in the 2016 election? who is ray epps and why hasn't he been charged when he was the purveyor of the january 6 thing. let's talk about the summer of love riots, let's talk about all those parents who burned down the capital and burn down the church instead of getting arrested, they were bailed out and were page 20 grand each. host: that's our last caller in this segment of the washington journal. more to talk about this morning including we will be joined by oregon democrat earl blumenauer, a member of the budget ways and means committee and we will discuss resin bidens budget being released tay and the agenda for the budget committee going forward and later, thomas hoenig former president and ceo

of the federal reserve bank of kansas city will join us and we will discuss the president's economic policy. stick around, we will be right back. ♪ ♪ >> today, the senate environment and public works committee will hold a hearing on the east palestine, ohio trained roma disaster. federal and local officials and the ceo of norfolk southern railroad are expected to testify beef or the committee. watch the hearing live today at 10:00 a.m. eastern on c-span3, c-span now, or online at www.c-span.org.

>> american history tv, saturdays on c-span2, exploring the people and events that tells the american story. at 4:15 p.m. eastern, the six to fifth anniversary of the department of justice civil rights division created by the civil rights active 1967 which focuses on the division over the decades and honors the contributions of leaders, staff and alumni and at 8 p.m. eastern on lectures in history, university of california davis history professor on how the red scare evolved into a wide-ranging conspiracy theory and the rise of communism in the united states in the 1940's and 1950's.exploring the american story, watch american history tv saturdays on c-span2 and find a full schedule on your program guide or online any time at www.c-span.org/history. >> c-span now, is a free mobile

featuring your unfiltered view of it happening in washington live and on-demand. keep up with today's biggest events with live streams of floor proceedings and hearing from the u.s. congress, white house events, campaigns and more from the world of politics all at your fingertips. also stay current with the latest episodes of "washington journal" and find scheduling information for c-span's tv networks plus a variety of compelling podcasts. c-span that was available at the apple store and google play, downloaded or free today. c-span now, your front row seat to washington, anytime, anywhere. >> "washington journal" continues. host: back at our desk this morning, oregon democrat earl blumenauer, member of the house ways and means committee. the biden administration is set to unveil their 2020 budget plan , their request later today.

what are you expecting? guest: it's going to be an actual plan. my republican friends have these hocus-pocus, unspecified things that they can't bring themselves to make an actual decision. there will be a combination of reductions in spending and revenue increases. it will have a trajectory over the course of the next 10 years which will have reductions in the overall deficit. most important, i'm appalled that we are careening toward very probable shutdown of government in the fall and we are having this nonsensical debate over deficit reduction with a group that doesn't have any plan at all. host: revenue increases another term for tax increases? we expect to see a new tax on

households worth over $400,000 and the buyback tax and a couple of other taxes? in a divided congress, do you foresee those tax increases getting any traction? guest: the republicans in the house are pathologically opposed to raising taxes. as a practical matter, you are not going to have a meaningful reduction in the federal deficit without addressing some of those increases. they are talking about a modest increase in the tax for medicare. it's something the majority of the american public would support, concentrated on people who make over one -- over $400,000 per year. if you go back to the american public, that's reasonable for them. there is also the opportunity to reduce spending even if the republicans talk about it

without being specific, we will offer things that make a difference. host: why do we have a federal budget? guest: the notion is to provide a framework for government spending. we are spending hundreds of billions of dollars per month and being able to at least attempt to go through the process puts us in a framework to understand what the issues are. host: when was the last time we fully went through the process. guest: this is going to be a struggle as long as we have republican partners who don't have any proposal. i haven't seen a line item about the expenditures. you are not going to deal meaningfully without dealing with either entitlements, revenue increases, talk about defense. my republican friends are willing to spend billions of dollars to avoid retiring the

latest modern battleship that doesn't work. they are willing to spend billions of dollars to keep it afloat because they don't want to lose jobs in their districts. that's not being serious about the deficit. host: what is a place you would be willing to look to for cuts? guest: for instance, dealing with some of the agricultural subsidies. the trump administration was handing out subsidies like tictac's. insurance goes not to the people who need it but to large agribusiness. this is an area where there is significant opportunity to reduce billions of dollars of government expenditures. while we reformed the program to help more farmers and ranchers. these are serious proposals that would make a difference. host: before we get to the fiscal 2024 budgeting process,

we are dealing with a debt ceiling crisis right now. you talk about proposals by republican colleagues and there is one in the ways and means committee, a federal default bill, can you explain what they are trying to do? guest: it's hard to explain what they are trying to do. they have an idea that somehow, they will prioritize government payments toward the obligations the government has. we are having one point 2 billion dollars in payments. 100 million payments per month. there is no capacity to somehow go through all of these and pay them individually. the fact is, if for the first time in history, we default on any of them, that's a signal to

the people who loaned money to the federal government that we depend on for expenditures we have already made. host: our guest in this segment is earl blumenauer. you are a frequent guest of this program. if you want to join the conversation, (202) 748-8000 republicans, democrats, (202) 748-8001 republicans and independents are (202) 748-8002 . you already have calls. guest: that's very precise. host: we try to be precise here. we want to hit that gavel at 10:00 a.m. the line for democrats, you are off. caller: good morning. i want to -- i want to ask you a question about the debt ceiling. it seems to me that the republicans in trying to hold up

the debt ceiling, what they are trying to do is rollback spending that has already been authorized by the congress, signed into law by the president and potentially even interfere with the revenue from our taxes. the president has a constitutional duty to spend the money that congress authorizes and to collect the revenue that they authorize and a duty to pay the debts. shouldn't this be fought in court? we are putting the president in a constitutional catch-22. guest: i think it would be unfortunate if we go off into a never never land of litigation. we know how long it is to be able to move things through the courts. we have seen, particularly with a polarized court system, that produces uncertain results.

that's not my preferred option. my preferred option is for congress to do its job. explain what people are willing to reduce. use the revenue raising power and there are a number of things -- one of the things most obvious is to collect the taxes that are already due and payable. we have a taxing gap every year of several hundred billion dollars. it should be declared on people's tax returns and they should pay those taxes. one of the first things that this new republican congress did was to try and rollback the capacity of the irs to collect taxes already do. they were proposing to jettison those expenditures which would raise the deficit over $114 billion. it's another example of how they are simply not being serious in

dealing with unrealistic proposals. host: the head of the congressional budget office capitol hill this week talking with members about these issues. did you get a chance to chat with him? guest: i didn't, i had other meetings scheduled. host: speaker mccarthy was with him on capitol hill and that's what he had to say. [video clip] >> no one party can solve this. the country wants us to work together. when the president delays are opportunity to negotiate together to solve this problem, it only harms our economy more. we look at the projections of growth to fall and we see inflation continue to rise with runaway spending but when you look at what has transpired, the 50 year average, we are spending a higher percentage of gdp then we have it any time. the revenue that's coming in is that a higher percentage than

the 50 year average. 20% of the gdp is coming in and revenue and we only hit that in 1944. we have more money than any time coming in but it's because we are spending so much more. host: that was speaker mccarthy yesterday on capitol hill. guest: we have our friends who want higher defense spending. i mentioned agricultural subsidies that can be reformed. the notion that somehow we are going to go through this without actually having a plan -- kevin has not given any specifics about what they are willing to reduce. they are not willing to raise taxes. they are not willing to take on meaningful reductions and expenditures and they approved billions, $1.7 trillion in tax

cuts and didn't replace it. as i mentioned, we will have these proposals to prioritize the debt but they are not willing to extend what they would actually cut. that's not serious negotiation. host: the last meeting of the ways and means committee is taking place today with president biden set to unveil his budget at 2:30 p.m. eastern and you can watch that on www.c-span.org and our video app, c-span now. the house oversight committee is holding hearings on waste, fraud and abuse when it comes to pandemic relief funding. we are airing that committee at 2 p.m. eastern on c-span3, www.c-span.org and the free c-span no video app. congressman earl blumenauer is with us for another if teen minutes. next is republican, good morning. caller: good morning. i would like to talk about the

hike cost of everything. food, gas and it all started with biden executive orders. you guys just go along with it. you think it's ok we spend six or seven dollars in gas. it's ok that our forests burned down because of additives and you got it tier system which is extortion you can't even see what your neighbors are spending on their electric bills but all of a sudden, you get put in atier's high interest rates are driving her home prices down and the cost of building materials to fix your home are high. you know what, democrats? you have ruined this country. guest: [laughter] i think you're caller gives us

too much credit. first of all, we are not spending six and seven dollars per gallon for gasoline. we have had them hold steady and are going down of late. those are international forces. the war that vladimir putin has waged in the ukraine is upsetting international markets. no one party has controlled the economy in that fashion. as a practical matter, what democrats did was rescue and economy that was risking going into freefall with the pandemic, mass unemployment, many opportunities for people to get thrown out of their homes. we had massive rescue programs, some of which were passed overwhelmingly on a bipartisan basis to rescue the economy when we were in crisis. now we are moving forward. i think it's reasonable, the

approaches we've taken in terms of trying to make sure we go after cases of fraud where people cheated. there is opportunities to claw back some of this. the expenditures that really drove the rapid increase in the deficit were things that were absolutely necessary to prevent the collapse of the economy in the midst of the pandemic. i voted for them and many republicans voted for them, they were necessary. now we have very strong employment numbers. we have the lowest unemployment in my lifetime. the economy continues to go forward. any increases in terms of lending costs, the interest rates are an essential part of trying to control inflation. i think the federal reserve is piloting a reasonable course and

it's necessary to be able to stabilize the economy. this is not going to change overnight but the trendlines are very positive and we are recovering from things that were absolutely essential. host: back to our line for democrats, maryland. caller: can you hear me? host: yes, sir. caller: i would like to ask the congressman -- i am a younger voter. i am part of the progressive left wing. i just don't understand since biden has been in office, why have you all continued to ignore the younger voters of the base which is starting to be the most important base in the party? i believe you haven't done anything in relation to the debt or budget plan. you have done nothing for the younger voters. host: what is something they could do for the younger voters?

what is one example? caller: the problem with the democratic party is they don't play hardball like the republicans do in relation to killing the filibuster. job biden has enabled the behaviors of the likes of joe manchin and kyrsten sinema. i believe they should be kicked out of the party. guest: your caller has an interesting concept. if you kicked kiersten and mansion out of the party, republicans would have a majority. does he think that would be better, having republican chair committees, set the agenda and move forward? i think not. what has happened and one thing i am very proud of is what we did with the infrastructure legislation. his rebuilding and renewing america. we talked about this on the show before.

i've been championing that for years in congress. we got the biggest infrastructure investment in our lifetime. host: what does that mean for voters in oregon? guest: we are rebuilding bridges and roads, we have broadband expenditures that are taking place. working with infrastructure and dealing with water infrastructure so that we and fix those pipes or children are not being poisoned, drinking out of fountains and schools. it's creating a number of economic -- opportunities for young people. the job market for younger people in the building and construction, helping in terms of climate change. its largest increase in proposals to reduce carbon emissions while improving energy inefficiency and electric vehicles. it's unprecedented. that is something that young people care deeply about and we are investing in their future, preventing the climate crisis.

i categorically disagree with your friend and taking out to people from the democratic caucus, republicans would be in charge and that would be self-defeating. i don't think your caller wants that. guest: host: republican, good morning. caller: good morning, sir. i was calling as much as i could. sir, i have a question that both democrats and republicans, you guys are in a big party. you have a big pot of money. and you stir it around and try to help each other out get money. i looked -- guest: i don't understand what you mean, stirring it around and helping each other out? can you be specific? caller: the big pot of money you collect from all of us in the

300 and 65 million people we have in this country? you just take money from everybody. every business, every corporation and you just stir it around and you throw it out there on ideas and things you come up with. guest: right, government collects money from everybody to help pay for services and priorities, social security, medicare, i just mention infrastructure investment. it has to be paid for. the tax system should be able to meet those needs. that is what congress has done since the founding of the republic and whether we agree or disagree with the priorities, that's what government is required to do. i think our proposals in terms of investing in things that will make a difference for people for generations to calm, when we

look at that infrastructure investment, i think those are major reasons why unemployment is at an all-time low. more people are at work on things that would help rebuild a new america. i am proud of the record. i think there are things we can do better and i will be working on that. somehow, to think we are not going to meet the needs of the american people and everybody will participate in terms of the connie as a practical matter, lots of people don't pay any taxes at all in terms of role tax liability because of how we have changed the laws but that is something that is reasonable. we can make it better but somehow, that's not what we do whether republicans or democrats are in charge. i think that's fantasyland. host: in terms of congress doing

its job, you would like to see a few more members of congress joint in the effort? democrats want to expand the house of representatives by 150 seats? guest: there is a lot of talk about regionalism and going back to the basics of the constitution. if the basic constitution they apportion people in the house of representatives based on population, we were supposed to increase the house of representatives as the population grew. we did that until 1923 when we froze the size of the house of representatives. since then, the size of the districts have basically tripled. it's harder to be able to deal with the needs people have. during the pandemic, i was overwhelmed by rick west for help from people -- i was

overwhelmed by requests for help from people. with the districts getting larger because of population growth and freezing the house of representatives, it's harder to meet with people and deal with their needs and be able to give them the service they need. my legislation would expand the house of representatives, shrink the size of the districts down to something more manageable and deal in the future with orderly expansion like the founding fathers envisioned. other countries do this. we don't in the quality representation is eroded. we cannot help them we are overwhelmed by bigger numbers. it's harder for people to get access to their members of congress and as a practical matter, it's really hard to be

able to have people break into the political process. we have these massive district ends very expensive to campaign. if we increase the number of districts, it will be easier for new members to join congress, refresh that body can energize it. this is what the founding fathers envisioned when the constitution was written. host: right now it's about 760,000 can -- constituents per member of the house? guest: the numbers are actually bigger but that's on average. getting back to make it more manageable is the issue. host: pasadena, maryland, line for democrats, good morning. caller: good morning, i listen to you every time you were on c-span and i love your ideas. the last one is no exception.

can you explain to republicans one more time that the pipeline the president canceled was not even finished to bring us oil and it had no intent to bring us oil. it went from canada to the gulf coast to china. they are angry about china, i don't know why they want a pipeline rebuild. people don't seem to under stand economics and infuriates me. guest: understood, there is a lot to be infuriated about. as a practical matter, there are some real problems in terms of how we extract and transport oil in this country. there are exports that continue to make it difficult to meet all of the needs here.

as a practical matter, some of the exports with natural gas have helped prop up the energy supplies in europe. there are global markets we have to acknowledge. the united states has the opportunity to undercut the situation we find ourselves in, being at the mercy of russia and certain oligarchs in the middle east. the legislation we passed would increase renewable energy sources. it's cheaper now to have wind energy and solar energy than drilling for oil. we are not at the mercy of the oligarchs and the russians. that was one of the legislative accomplishments that democrats undertook in the last congress. it will help make us more energy efficient and not add to global

warming. i'm from the west. i have seen the climate crisis up close with forest burning and drought and we've got to get the climate crisis under control by reducing carbon emissions. we have taken a big step for to be able to undertake that. host: in our final 90 seconds, explain another one of your ideas th you are working on with senator ron wyden to expand votes by mail. guest: there has been a lot of controversy about the election process. oregon had been pioneering for 25 years vote by mail. people have 20 days in the comfort of their own home to be able to analyze the ballot, they send it in, all the signatures are verified and there is a paper trail. it saves money, it is efficient,

it's dependable and it's convenient. we are looking to expand the oregon model, boost participation and provide the security i think americans want. i am hopeful that we can make progress on our legislation. it's been proven effective in oregon for 25 years. other states need to be able to have that capacity. host: comeback again and talk to us about that down the road. congressman earl blumenauer, member of the budget committee, we appreciate your time. guest: likewise, it's always fun. viewers have interesting things to think about. host: coming up next, we will be joined by thomashoenig former ceo of the federal reserve bank of kansas city and we will talk about president biden's economic policies and later, the director of the wilson center's mexico institute will discuss the killing of two americans in the

kidnapping of americans in mexico. stick around. we will be right back. ♪ >> if you are enjoying book tv, then sign up for our newsletter. to receive the scheduled upcoming program, book festivals and more. book tv every sunday on c-span2 or anytime online at c-span.org. television for serious readers. >> the name of america, which belongs to you in your national capacity, fourscore and seven years ago -- >> asked not what your country can do for you -- >> presidents have delivered pivotal speeches. times of challenge and farewells and on saturday, watch our 10

part cd -- series, speeches that defined the presidency on american history tv. here is the words of -- we will features features -- speeches by two presidents. first lyndon johnson. again, in 1965 when speaking about immigration and richard nixon's 1959 appeal to the silent majority to help a nation at odds over the vietnam war and his 1974 mobile office resignation address following the watergate scandal. >> i have never been a quitter. to leave office before my term is created -- is complete is different from every instinct in my body but as president, i must put the interests of america first.

>> watch our 10 part series saturday at 9:30 am and pm eastern on american history tv on c-span2. >> preorder your copy of the congressional directory. it is your access to the federal government with bio and contact information for every house and senate member, import information on congressional committee, the president's cabinet, federal agencies and state governors. scan the code on the right to it is 29 point $95 plus shipping and handling -- it is $29.95 plus shipping and handling. host: we welcome thomas hold make --hoenig joni is very --

going is via zoom. guest: good morning. host: right mind is where we are on interest rates and what we know about when the federal reserve will and won't do during the meeting this month. guest:guest: in the past year, they have raised interest rates to virtually nothing to 4.5%. the purpose of which is to slow be inflation rate, which was nine percent on the cpi and it is still above 6% and they're trying to get the invoice number down and increase interest rates and the shrinking of the balance sheet towards a lower number i suspect is also underway to get control of inflation. it is a big job.

even though it has been a year, bear in the early stages of things that would appear, given the testimony of sharon powell -- chairman powell. host: what hints at the optimism? guest: given the strong numbers relatively, in january, regarding retail sales and inflation numbers, is that they are going to look carefully at the new employment numbers coming out, even tomorrow, and the inflation numbers that will come out before they meet again and they will make a decision and the decision will be either 25 or 50 basis points depending on the numbers. that is my take on his testimony. the inclination -- that was almost certain and now if he -- with the stronger numbers and depending on what numbers come up next, it could be based on his comments.

perhaps as high as 50 basis points. host: why is it taking so long to bring down inflation? did you expect this is where we would be after a year of efforts at raising interest rates by the fed? guest: it is hard to predict where things will be but i don't think we should be too surprised because one of the things i did early on was compare this period with the 70's and in the 70's, we had inflation and the federal reserve would raise rates and the economy would slow and inflation will come down. we are in that mode. i would keep that in mind and the second thing is, prior to the great recession, the 2008 recession, interest rates were low. from the time they starting --

started raising rates in 2004, before the great recession came in late 2007, that is a good piece of time, more than three years so we are a year into this although the rate increases have been sharper than they were in that period, they are still below where they were at the terminal rate in 2006 when they stopped raising rates. we shouldn't be all that surprised with where things are at the moment. host: our focus on rates, the fed, monetary policy and we are joined by thomas hoenig this morning, distinguished senior value -- lol george mason university or cadiz center --mer catus center. republicans it is (202) 748-8000 , democrats (202) 748-8001,

independence -- independents, (202) 748-8002. i want to ask you about this ceo who says the fed has a credibility problem and they referred to you in a interview with foxbusiness. >> well, the federal reserve has a track record of zero interest rates, very low interest rates for over a decade and for each time there was a slowdown, the federal reserve has backed off with lower rates. they did that in 2019 and they did it in the early period during that decade and the interest rates were cap slow and they were quick to make sure any financial bumps in the road were addressed by either liquidity provisions or reductions in

interest rates. you're coming forward and if the economy slows or if there is a financial stress or significant stress, i think there is a lot of people thinking, the federal reserve will ease again. either wall street or others in the public are convinced that they will ease off. what you have to do, if you are the fed and you heard jay powell talk about, we are going to bring inflation down. we are willing to risk a recession and we don't want one but we will risk it to get inflation down. they are talking very tough. the real issue will come at the slowdown starts and they will keep interest rates high. they are in different quote

position because of the track record they have in the issues we face and it will be a challenge for the federal server to go forward here. host: a conversation about the topic and exchange here with senator elizabeth warren, democrat of massachusetts. >> the fed has raised interest rates for a times in the last year for the most extreme rate hike cycle in 40 years. the fed's goal is to slow inflation in your tool is designed to slow the economy and throw people out of work and you haven't tipped the economy into recession but you haven't bought inflation into control. maybe the reason for that is that other things are keeping prices high, things you can't fix with high interest rates like price gouging and supply chain kinks in the war in

ukraine but you are determined to raise interest rates. according to the fed's on report, if you continue raising interest rates as you plan, unemployment will be four .6% by the end of the year, more than a full point higher than it is today. chair powell, if you hit your projections, do you know hundred people who are currently working will lose their jobs? >> i don't have that number in front of me. i will say it is not a intended consequence. >> but it is and it is in your report and that is 2 million people who will lose their jobs. people who are working right now and making their merges. -- mortgages. if you could speak directly to the 2 million harvard people who have decent jobs who you are

planning to get fired over the next year, what would you say to them? >> i would explain to people more broadly that inflation is extremely high and it is hurting the working people of this country badly, all of them. all of them are suffering under high inflation and we are taking the only measures we have to bring inflation down. host: that exchange from tuesday on capitol hill. his raising interest rates the only monetary tool to fight inflation -- is raising interest rates the only monetary tool to fight inflation? guest: it is the only tool for the federal reserve and fiscal policies and other factors but that is not the federal reserve's purview. the thing that was left out of this conversation and understandably so but if you leave interest rates at zero,

you would reignite inflation and values would go up will stop those holding -- assets would win and inflation would move from 6% to 9% or higher and what we have learned that when inflation hits to those kinds of levels, you will lose more than 2 million jobs. you will lose far more so the fact is we have an inflationary problem and we brain -- blame people for inflation but the one solution is that we have to bring demand down and the other factors the senator was correct to weigh in, the war in ukraine and other charges that are addressed -- shortages that are just. that is not enough. between 2018 and 2020, the federal government increase

their spending 50% for one year and captain there -- kept it there. if you don't want to reduce spending, which i understand there is another issue, interest rates become the primary tool and interest rates spoke the economy by increasing excess demand that was created earlier and that is not pleasant because no one wants to see people unemployed. one of the consequences of slowing the economy is it increases the unemployment rate. the unemployment rate is 3.4%, which is an historic low we -- and we don't want to see it go up but one of the consequences is an increase in employment and increase equilibrium around sustainable interest rates so people can be employed.

host: let me let you chat with colors and we will adjust your picture their on-screen. that is better douglas, static -- douglas, staten island, new york. are you there? caller: i can't hear the program and you guys keep cutting me off. i asked -- thought when you asked me to turn the tv down, i would hear. host: what is your comment? caller: i will get it when i get to the person or. is that ok? host: you are on with thomas hoenig. what is your question? caller: i didn't know if i was on the program. i want to thank you very much to -- for allowing me to call in and i had a question for mr. hornig. --hoenig.

host: i will let you work on that connection. democrat, good morning. caller: thank you for accepting my call and i marvel that people call in and can figure out the time delay -- and cannot figure out the time delay. i have a comment. we had a very weak dollar and there were raising interest rates to cut down on the amount of money thrown around circulation and with this, i have been told the dollar is trading well on the target and we don't have an excess of money . 2022 of y'all in this dream reported the best year ever and

profits. -- in profits. $200 billion. we were not affected by the war in ukraine and we get our exports from -- all oil from mexico and we have plenty of oil. it was in the price of oil but the price of gas that set iv for -- by the refineries and when the price of gas goes to five dollars to seven dollars -- host: what do you want to take from the strong and weak dollars? caller: -- guest: there could be a number of reasons and one is that interest rates -- you would see some strengthening, dollar and secondly, the dollar is the world reserve currency and is the safer currency especially in times of volatility and uncertainty and that brings the dollars in an that strengthens

the dollar -- and that strengthens the water -- dollar. that is some of the reasons that you would have a stronger dollar and how -- is experiencing high inflation. the united states would not be less attractive than the other countries relative to the inflation problem. that is how i would address the dollar in the short time. we have. -- on the short time we have. on the second, energy companies did have a shortage temporarily -- it's an --i -- shortage temporaril we have seen prices come down and that is the market and it is part of capitalism.

products go up and it brings people in, supplies go up and prices come down and we get -- we can consume more oil and gas, gasoline, and lower prices and that is the process we have experienced here in the last year. host: dale, arizona -- in arizona, this is richard. caller: good morning. host: are you with us, richard? something is going on with the calls. michael in cleveland, ohio. caller: good morning mr. hoenig. i was talking about -- someone was talking about a little about what i want to talk about. you know what the historic gap between oil prices and the price

of a barrel of oil and do you think there is any price gouging going there? guest: as gouging in the price -- priced gouging in the price of the will? host: i think that is what he was talking about. guest: to the extent there is a global market and there is, it is a global market and it is hard to cap what you might call price gouging. you're going to have spikes in prices and i don't think if that is that necessarily price dodging because it price -- if prices ce back down -- we tend to want to blame someone and i can understand that and ifhere was a monopoly, you would look into that but it is a global market and i don't see and i

ven't seen evidence that there is a price gouging that would be -- that you could point to as a reason for these problems. host: do you think a recession is inevitable sometime in the next year or two? guest: the odds on a recession are fairly high because, number one, we have interest rates significantly and we have inflation so that means as sharon powell said in his testimony, there would be likely further increases. as long as they increase rates, -- that might involve a recession and it is not necessarily the case but it has proven to be the case and i would suggest, if you think about in the last recession the rakes -- rates peaked in the

summer of 2006. the recession came 1.5 years later. we are one year into this and the likelihood that in the next half or early next year, we could have a recession if interest rates stay high or rise further than they are, and slow demand, so we get inflation numbers back down to the fed reserve 2% goal. host: loss vegas, -- las vegas, nevada, doug. caller: this is my explanation for the start of inflation and it made me a lot of money. i hope gas goes to eight dollars. when they were doing the run up to the election with double -- with the bull crap, i listen to

joe biden and the speaker of the house and they won a dollar oil and they want to close down -- they want to eight dollar oil and they want to close down the oil industry. anyone who heard that, you have bought a lot of oil stocks and you're waiting for eddie to do it and they did. god bless you all and keep getting that a dollar gas -- eight dollar gas. host: what is the price of a barrel of gas in las vegas? i think we lost doug. would you like to join in? guest: i couldn't follow what he was saying but if he is talking about the light simulation, i think that is not a good thing because over time, high inflation creates more uncertainty and it is difficult to invest any creates higher unemployment and we get stagfla

tion and no one wins. you don't want more inflation. the part of it i understand where some people would say is that we have had over two dates 8 -- two decades of asset inflation and there are winners and losers and winners are those who hold assets because the assets go up and those who are wagers, they lose relative who -- to those who have a lot of assets and that is caused by inflation. you need to get inflation under control. both asset inflation and price inflation of goods and services. that is where we need to focus. we need to concentrate on getting inflation back in control and one of the things, in the period were interest rates were near zero from 2010

through the late $.20 -- 2010s, -- the only way you would raise and -- wealth in the nation is through more output through individual working. that is productivity and if you stymie productivity with a zero interest rate policy, you make people poor in the long run although those who hold more assets are relative to be richer to those who do not so inflation, asset, or oil price is not healthy for an economic system over any reasonable period of time and that is what the federal reserve has to get under control and is responsible for in the past over this decade, causing this asset and place inflation. they have to correct that mistake and they need to do it systematically so we don't harm

her people -- more people than we have. host: i would point out, gas is not eight dollars a gallon anywhere in the country. at gas buddy.com, they have their map and the highest rates for a gallon of gas in california and parts of washington and colorado, about four dollars -- $4.30. the lower prices are in parts of texas and midwest. gas buddy is a place you can go to look at gas prices. host: michael in independence. -- an independent. caller: i am not talking about the inflation or budget but i think the inflation is absolutely crazy. i know inflation is going to happen but it went up when the

latest president took office. what i want to call about is the question of do you trust fox news? host: we did buy question for the first half hour of the program and we are about to lose thomas hoenig so i want him to respond to the first part of that, how much an administration or any individual president can impact inflation in the country. guest: administrations do impact inflation and so this congress because of the spending power they have. the congress sets the spending level and the president proposes budgets and spending so they have a sense of responsibility, although the congress has the ultimate responsibility for the spending package and it has been significant. government spending, in 2015,

was $4 trillion and is now over $6 trillion. we have added the spending and the debt has increased from $18 trillion, to $21 trillion. that is in enormous spending and the federal reserve has monetized that part and they bought the debt it sells and printed money so those contribute to increasing -- inflation. the fiscal and monetary side bear responsibility. they need to bear responsibility for getting it back under control. congress needs to decide how it wants to spend money and pay for it and the federal reserve has to say, here is the money we can provide without accelerating inflation. here is what we are willing to do and that process needs to be -- become serious in the near future or we will have a long

history of inflation or interest rates will have to rise extremely high in order to stanch inflation. there are choices to be made ahead of us and i hope they choose well. host: sen. whitehouse: --thomas hoenig we appreciate your insights. he is a former president and ceo of -- in about a half-hour, we will be joined by andrea rudman, a discussion on the kidnapping and killing of americans across the u.s. and mexico border in the state of cartel violence but first, it is time for war of your phone calls and we are discussing t sate moving yesterday to block overhaul of d.c.'s criminal code and it is the first such action tan

congress in 30 years. we have a special line for d.c. sints to talk about i (202) 748-8003. phone lines as usual for democrats, republicans and independents. start calling in and we will get to your calls after the break. >> friday at 8 p.m. eastern, c-span brings you afterwards from book tv, a program where nonfiction offers are interviewed by journalists and legislators and more. mia love, reflects on her journey to becoming the first black republican women to be elected to congress in her book qualified. she is interviewed by eugene scott. watch afterwards every friday at 8 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> c-span has unfiltered

coverage of the u.s. response to russia's invasion of ukraine and bring the latest from the president and other white house officials and the state department as well as congress. we have international perspectives from the united nations and statements from foreign leaders on the c-span network. the c-span now free mobile app and c-span.org/ukraine, our web resource page where you can watch videos live orn-demand and follow tweets from journalists. go to.org/ukraine -- go to c-span.org/ukraine. ♪ >> this 1979, in partnership with the cable industry, c-span has provided complete coverage of the hall of congress, from the halls as senate floors -- and committee meetings. c-span gives you a front row seat to how issues are debated and decided with no commentary,

no interruptions and completely unfiltered. c-span, your unfiltered view of government. >> washington journal continues --"washington journal" continues. host: here is the headline from the front page -- page from the washington post. phone lines from democrats, republicans and independents. in a special line from -- for d.c. residents, (202) 748-8003. congress on wednesday voted to overturn local bc legislation for the first time in more than 50 years as some demo tenet -- mccright joined republicans and blocking a major hope or will to d.c. loss -- overhaul to d.c. laws.

that remarkable turn of events is historic in a city that has struggled for full autonomy for its entire existence and after making headway in persuading democrats lost -- writ large to unite in supporting d.c. statehood is now left wondering about the future. the measure passed in the senate, 81-14 and the statehood advocacy group called that the a paternalistic pattern of oppression for the 700,000 people of d.c.. " we choose our leaders in the district to decide our laws like each state but the senate include -- continues to -- more from those stories in this senate -- segment but we want to hear from you and d.c. residents. (202) 748-8002 (202) 748-8003 -- (202) 748-8003.

here is how some of the debate in the legislation played out and this was republican senator tom cotton. >> washington dc is in the middle of a carjacking car wave and there have been more than 100 car jet -- carjackings in the nations capital this year. i think that is more than one a day. two thirds of d.c. passengers use guns to carjack. what did washington dc do? did they support the police and install more cameras? no. they passed a law to reduce criminal penalties for carjackings. and other serious crimes. i wish i were joking but i am not. washington's answer to higher crimes is less prison time for violent criminals.

the only reason this is not going to happen is because congress retained its constitutional authority over our federal city, because washington is not a state nor should it ever be state -- a state. in this case, even some democrats and president biden got skittish about the political price they would pay for being this week on crime. house republicans voted to disapprove washington's crime bill, 31 democrats voted with them. i suspect something similar will play out later here today. president biden says he will sign the resolution of disapproval when it passes because in these are his words -- and these are his words " i don't support some of the changes d.c. counsel put forward ."

those are presidents words -- the president's words. i hope it is more than a passing moment of sanity but i have my doubts. host: tom condit -- cotton on the floor yesterday and he was one of the senators to vote against that legislation. another person who spoke is cory booker. >> the councilmembers completed a monumental path, modernizing 120-year-old d.c. from a code to make it more consistent, clarifying conflicting provisions and bring it in line, not just with current best practices reflected in many state criminal codes but trying to address urgencies where you have a city concerned about the crime in its communities. d.c.'s efforts are not unique

and 37 states have gone through similar processes. red states and blue states and purple states and the process was spearheaded by an independent bc criminal code reform commission which is a nonpartisan agency representative of prosecutors, victims rights advocates and all of these nonpolitical people came and negatively -- unanimously endorsed what we have for us today. the first time any part -- present politician got -- falling to concern this unanimous -- voting to concern -- confirmed this unanimous recommendation. that processes what the republican leaders said, it looks like what they did there, in need of adult supervision. think of how pertinent his take -- paternalistic it is for this body not any part of this process, now saying the adult supervision as if they are children.

the d.c. criminal code was about keeping d.c. state -- save. -- safe. they said they need to do this crew -- -- create to create a sacred city -- safer city. all of these open up the opportunity for d.c. not to have the security they want so this is about d.c. safety, unfortunately, it is now embroiled in scare tactics where political, opportunistic actions are taking place to use as a way to win political point. host: senator cornyn booker on the floor of the senate and he was wearing a d.c. statehood pen he was speaking on the senate floor. if you're wondering why congress gets a shape -- gets sa here when it comes to a d.c. counsel provision, here is the history.

congress has oversight of d.c. laws and budget because of a provision in the u.s. constitution that grants congress the exclusive authority over the federal district. over the past 50 years, congress has used that authority in. ways such as restricting how pc spends coupons to subsidize abortion or the development of a legal recreational marijuana industry but it has not used its power to disapprove of a d.c. piece of legislation since 1991, went inside to maintain building height restrictions in the nations capital and the house has passed this and the senate has passed this president biden has said he will sign this approval. we are talking about this and we want to hear from d.c. residents. (202) 748-8003. the phone numbers are open to all viewers. we will start in d.c. with paula, democrat. good morning. are you with us?

caller: i am. good morning. host: what are your thoughts on this move by the senate yesterday? caller: i am a d.c. native born and raised and i may be oversimplifying it and probably i am but i feel like that the congress cherry picks when they want to get involved in d.c. politics. not even politics but the facilitation of the city. i agree 100% with senator booker that this has become politicized to the point to the point where our leaders cannot keep the city safe. i cannot imagine -- having some

sort of culinary -- preliminary contact meeting, however it works, with the hill to progress and do this. i do believe that this is grandstanding at the highest level. we are political points as we normally are. --pawns as we normally hall -- are. the city doesn't get any of the benefits -- host: all outcome are you still with us -- paula, are you still with us? i think we lost paula but this is chris, tennessee, republican. your thoughts on this move by the senate and the efforts to block a d.c. counsel piece of legislation. caller: i it is a good idea. they should do more of it and i

think, it is common sense. if you can do the crime -- time, don't do the crime. these people ought to be locked up whether they are a kid or not. maybe have it in public, do a public reformation where they scold him in -- them in public and put their face on tv. hopefully that might stop things. host: that is chris in tennessee, and here is some of their thoughts yesterday as this was happening in the senate. mike davis saying the senate must overturn the woke d.c. politician's crime bill. it is long past time to -- for congress to reclaim the nation capital for all americans. this is a congresswoman from new york saying house republicans forced the left democrats to

back down from their reckless crime bill and this is a win for creating a nation as a. john is in washington dc, democrat. caller: good morning. thanks for having this and i appreciate the caller from tennessee, his sentiments that somehow we should step in and -- host: step in here and what? john, we will go to jacob in iowa and make sure this isn't a problem for -- on our end for cause being dropped. jacob, are you with us? we will work on getting the calls back as we do. let me give you a few statistics about d.c. and crime in d.c.. this is from the metro section of the washington post.

they note that a man was shot and killed and two others were as well including a 15 euros -- a 15-year-old boy was injured during a shootout and that was tuesday night according to d.c. police. it was a deadly incident as national political leaders turn their focus to crime in washington dc. it came a day ahead of the senate vote that we have been talking about. here are statistics from that same story. d.c. has recorded 40 homicides this year. 33% increase over the same period in 2022. the district is any -- on pace for -- the last time d.c. has -- had over 200 killings was in 2003 and crime in d.c. is up 25% drop in any part -- driven in part --

it was third in that group per capita killing in 2022 and the trend is the same for robberies. at d.c., near the bottom of the cities in per capita auto theft. those are the numbers and let me try to bring in calls. i apologize if you were dropped. this is rebecca, greensboro, north carolina, independent. caller: can you hear me? host: yes, ma'am. caller: i am calling on the behalf of the gordon project. host: your group has called in before and you can give us a quick 10 seconds but it is not the topic we are talking about. do it real quick. caller: i encourage everyone to email and call their members of congress and send them to protect the international

affairs budget and make foreign aid a priority. host: that is rebecca in north carolina. president biden is unveiling his budget today. president biden is set to unveil the biden administration fiscal 2024 budget today at 2:30 p.m. it is an event in philadelphia and c-span will cover this. this is a d.c. residents, skip. good morning. caller: yes, i think with the city council, overruled a veto by mayor bowser, who was against this bill. it was a 13-1 over right so it was not close and -- override and it was not close and i don't understand certain parts of the bill. i philosophically am against

congress running our city because how would other people in other parts of the country feel about that, if you have congress intervening and especially republicans in congress who have not condemned what happened on january 6, was was a criminal act. they have the nerve to talk about crime and they will condemn that, even though i am personally against the bill that the city council voted for, i also condemn members of the republican party. host: for fall two don't live in d.c., the chief of the d.c. metropolitan police department spoke out against this bill strongly, correct? caller: yes. the bill that was passed by the city council, that is correct. the mayor and the police chief are against it and i personally am against it. it is the hypocrisy of the

republicans in congress who condemn the crime and yet they don't condemn what happened on january 6. several members don't condemn the criminal behavior of january 6. host: that is skip in d.c.. how to north carolina, ira -- out to north carolina, ira. caller: good morning. i am doing well. i hope everyone is doing well. i watched c-span every morning and i watch eleanor holmes norton, yesterday. she was a waste of time. d.c. needs to hire a younger delegate. she didn't answer anyone's questions. moving on. d.c., they need to come to grips with the fact that they will never obtain statehood as long

as d.c. remains majority back -- black. it is not going to happen and we need to start -- stop dancing around it. as soon it becomes majority white, that -- they will become a a state because my folks will not want to pay tax -- as much as we like to dance around the topic, everything in this country is about race and it is about black folks who are descendants of slaves. i believe there is a bias, that i don't even think folks are really conscious of and a lot of things that happen in the country, i don't think people set out to do it but i -- it is ingrained that i think black folks are the only folks who will go so far and once they get to a certain level, we have to

tone it down and keep folks where we think they ought to be. d.c. came up with the autonomous bill and they started exercising the economy. i feel like congress is like, these black folks are getting a little too much power and they have a little too much say. we need to stop it. my last two seconds, for older americans -- black americans, please stop voting for joe biden. how many times does he have to film his nose at black folks and yes, we solidly vote for him. democrats in general. if you can't get reparations, stay home and don't vote. if they cut the check, we will participate. thank you so much. host: this is tom, line for republicans, lancaster, california. caller: i would like to talk

about the crime in tc --dc. bail the banks out again. you talk about -- everything under the sun besides how many trillion dollars does j.p. morgan have in their thing and higher interest rates, your billing the banks of -- bailing the banks out. you are not representing the people. host: you are talking about congress and we're talking about the city of d.c. and the city council and the effort to overhaul the criminal call -- code in the district. this is someone in rockville, maryland across the border from d.c. caller: good morning. i was calling to highlight the fact that because crime has

increased, not just in d.c. but in the borders of d.c. as well as maryland and virginia, i want to note that the overdose rate is increasing as well as the crime is made and done by juveniles. i would like to congress to vote -- focus on treatment services. i do think the laws are leading it -- lenient on juveniles who do crimes and we do them without providing services and we need to focus on that without any sort of correction. i do think that we are trying to put a band-aid on a problem and we are not highlighting the fact that the crime is correlating

with the fact that the increase of substance abuse is increasing. host: this is jeffrey in north homestead, ohio. my free democrats in your thoughts for this move of the senate to block the overhaul of the d.c. criminal code. caller: i, at this from attack -- i come at this from attack -- from cleveland -- host: the rash of auto theft? jeffrey? i hope we didn't lose you. kevin in d.c. go ahead. caller: i was calling in. i listen all the time. this one subject caused me to call in. i find it funny that we have summary republican colors calling in about d.c. state --

so many republican callers calling in about so many things going in d.c. where they have -- when they have their own high crime problems. you look at mississippi, the crime worry there is high and kentucky, florida, texas. they don't want anyone telling them how to conduct their business so why are they in d.c. business? host: that is kevin in d.c.. best -- this is dale, riverdale, maryland. caller: i'm calling from riverdale in your conversation is interesting. -- and your conversation is listening. while i was listening, i looked up the law that d.c. is trying to pass and it sounds like a lot of your colors have not done that -- callers have not done that. it seems sensible and there is one thing in the new law that

allows people to ask for a jury trial rather than having the judge decide it for anything less than six months. that keeps people from being railroaded. i don't know. have you read it yourself? host: i have not read the entire law but it is a debate that is happening in the building behind me and playing out in the pages of the newspapers on my doorstep. the idea of congress being able to step in here and say, no, you can't do this, there are callers that disagree with congress having that ability. what are your thoughts on that? caller: definitely. congress should get their nose out of d.c.'s business, no question but pertaining to the law specifically, i don't see this as a huge political play by

our leaders to say, we ought to be soft on crime but if you read the article at the washington post this morning, that is not what is going on in the bill. host: i read the same story that you did on this from the washington post on sentences. how would this legislation have respect -- have effect sentences, -- would keep its mandatory minimum of 24 years and the code which change the maximum punishment from first-degree murder from life in prison for first of three -- first-degree murder and there is opportunity for the sentence to 457 years. for most crimes including robbery and blur girly and carjacking, the new code will have lowered maximum penalties and replace -- replace the sentencing to unmute tiered

system. -- a new tier system. carjacking, if a person were convicted of carjacking in d.c. under the current law, they would be sentenced to somewhere between seven and 21 gears in prison --yea if you are not armedr, -- years if you were not armed -- that person would face a maximum sentence between four and 18 years. if convicted of armed contracting, they will face a maximum sentence between 12 and 24 years so that is one example digging into this criminal code that has been blocked by the house and the senate. this is michael in tampa florida. and dependent -- independent. caller: i moved out of tampa for one -- to tampa to one reason.

i lived in new york for several years. it is not a race thing and not political. during the pandemic, it was mayhem. d.c. is one city that maybe threaded -- threatened by crime but it is always rampant in blue skate -- states. some calls are -- callers are saying republicans and democrats but let's look at the constitution. it says you can carry a gun. you need to protect yourself. i moved to florida and within a month, i bought a gun to protect myself. the crime is rampant in the cities and that is true. also, we have to find --fund the police. they are not our enemy but they are here to help us to get through our lives on a daily basis. period. host: from the u.s.

constitution, article one, section eight, clause 17. this is the one at issue with the district of columbia. the congress should have the power to exercise inclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever over the federal district and -- the acceptance of congress become the seat of government of the united states. time for one or two calls. birch run, michigan. frank, republican. caller: someone had the idea of trying to make it into as -- a state, and since it is not, they can dictate the loss in d.c. --l in d.c.. aws is one of those things, it is majority black and they want to make these penalties to a misdemeanor crime. you can't do that and you have

to have laws in every city. host: the people here in d.c. make the argument that there is more residence of d.c. then there are in some states in this country and they are paying taxes but they don't get the representation in congress. they don't get a vote in congress. caller: can you imagine the president of the united states having to pay taxes? that is a state because you lived there more than six months? the representatives or senators that live there, they have to start paying taxes to that state? host: what about the people who lived here their whole life, have worked here their whole life and pay taxes in d.c. their whole life? caller: you don't think the laws they have therefore somebody who commits a crime should be a

misdemeanor? host: i am talking about representation in congress. norton got the boat in committee, does not get a vote on the house floor of passage of legislation. caller: that is the whole point. they try to make that a state so they can say it can happen. host: do you think that is a good thing? do you think they should be able to have that representation, or no? caller: no. host: that is frank in michigan, our last caller in the last segment -- in washington journal . coming up, we are joined by andrew ruddiman, we discussed the kidnapping of americans in mexico, the state of cartel violence in mexico. we will be back. ♪

>> today, the senate environment and public works committee will hold a hearing on the east palestine, ohio train derailment disaster. federal and local eta officials and the ceo of norfolk southern railroad are expected to testify before the committee. watch the hearing live today at 10:00 a.m. eastern on c-span three, c-span now our free mobile video app, or online at c-span.org. ♪ >> american history tv, saturdays on c-span two, exploring the people and events that tell the american story. at 4:15 p.m. eastern, the 65th anniversary of the department of

justice civil rights division created by the civil rights act of 1957, the celebration focuses on the work of the division over the decades and honors the contributions of leaders, staff and alumni. at 8:00 p.m. eastern on lectures in history, university of california davis history professor kathryn olmstead on how the red scare -- in the 1940's and 1950's. exploring the american story. watch american history tv saturdays on c-sp t and find a full schedule on yogra guide or watch online anytime at the spend our board -- c-span.org/history. ♪ >> book tv every sunday on c-span two features leading authors discussing their latest nonfiction books. at 8:00 p.m. eastern, florida republican governor desantis shares his book about his

leadership in florida and how his successful blueprint for america. at 10:00 p.m. afterwards, mia love, former republican congressmaof you to reflect on her journey to becoming the first black republican woman to be elected in congress in her book, qualified. she is interviewed by axios senior reporter eugene scott. which -- watchable tv every sunday on c-span two and get a full program or watch online anytime at book tv.org. ♪ >> "washington journal" continues. host: andrew rudman joins us, the director of the mexico institute at wilson center in washington, d.c. on the kidnapping and killing of americans who crossed into mexico from brownsville, texas last week. what is your understanding of what happened, what we know at this point? guest: good morning.

thanks for the invitation. i think it is obviously tragic, what we understand is four or five people from the carolinas drove to brownsville and crossed out of matamoros for one of them to have a medical procedure. our understanding is there was perhaps confusion between rival cartels, that this was a wrong place, wrong time and the u.s. and mexican authorities collaborated quickly to rescue the two hostages. unfortunately, not before the other two had been killed. i think it shows the u.s. and mexico can, when they cooperate, can act quickly to bring people to justice. they were arrested. one person in mexico, apparently a person who was guarding them. now, they are looking for others.

this is presumably not just a one person operation. host: tell our viewers about this part of mexico and cartels operating on the border. guest: this part of mexico is one of the most dangerous. the state department ranks it as level four, which is do not go. the state department provides travel advisories and mexico is a large country, like ours, so they do travel advisories on a state-by-state basis, or even more discreetly than just a state. tamaulipas is one of those states recommended americans not travel to. it has notoriously been a dangerous state. it has per capita the highest number of disappearances and all of mexico. it is about a little over 18,000 out of 3.5 million. it is not a safe place. host: the state department recognizes not traveling to this part of mexico. you can drive across the border

and do that anyway. guest: right. the state department can make recommendations, but cannot prohibit you from going to mexico. if people want to go, they can. it is important to keep in mind there are over one million border crossings everyday between the united states and mexico. while this is tragic, it is one really tragic event in maybe 900,000 not tragic events. it is important we not take it out of -- nobody can go to mexico under any circumstance, because that is not the case. host: one of the headlines from today's paper is the front page from washington times, senators want military in my saccone citing the killing of americans, legislation would declare war on cartels. it is senator lindsey graham who is sponsoring this legislation. there is the headline from the washington times, this was lindsey graham yesterday. [video clip] >> i do not know if it is a lack of will on behalf of the mexican government to bring these

cartels to bay, or lack of capability. either way, it is the same result for the united states. chaos, heartache, terrorism, murder. it needs to come to an end and we are going to do two things today. we are going to introduce legislation in the coming days and trying to make it bipartisan. to designate these groups, foreign terrorist organizations under u.s. law to open up more capability to go after them and their conspirators all over the world. secondly, we are going to introduce an authorization to use military force for the united states military can go in and destroy these labs and networks. once designated an fto terrorist organization, the second step will be engaging in is giving the mill -- the military to go after these organizations, wherever they exist. not to invade mexico, not to

shoot mexican airplanes down, but to destroy drug labs that are poisoning americans. it is time to get serious and use the tools in the toolbox. not just in the prosecution lane, not just in the law enforcement lane, but in the military lane, as well. hopefully, this will change behavior of the mexican government. nothing would please me more than have a meaningful partnership to take these drug cartels down and stop killing americans. if mexico will not cooperate, we are going to have to do what is in our national cured interest. host: carolina republican lindsey graham on capitol hill yesterday. the idea of the u.s. military going into mexico to destroy these labs. is there a precedent for that in the past? guest: i do not know -- certainly, the last time u.s. troops went into mexico was over 100 years ago in the mexican-american war. i know that is not what senator graham is suggesting. i think security experts will

suggest that the military is probably not the best tool to address drug trafficking. certainly, you could use the military to blow up a drug lab. as long as there is demand for the product. as we have seen, cartels are involved in what they traffic and how they traffic it. we need to be more nuanced. it is possible that the designation might open up more opportunities. i am not certain. if it does, i think that would make sense. host: you are talking about the designation of the foreign terrorist organization? how do we designate cartels right now in mexico? guest: there are certainly -- they are certainly designated as criminal groups. i am not an expert in what the nuances are between if you name a terrorist organization, they are now referred to as

transnational organizations. one of the points senator graham made is important is -- all of the world. it is important to remember. this, like many challenges the u.s. and mexico face, our bilateral, but global at the same time. we need to cooperate, including cooperation between china, mexico and the united states to stop the movement of precursor chemical, as well as pursuing the finances of the cartels. it is more then just using the military to go after particular mexicans or others operating in mexico. host: let me give the phone numbers for viewers to join in the conversation. andrew rudman is our guest from the -- the director of the mexico institute wilson center. if you want to join the conversation, republicans it is (202) 748-8001. democrats, it is (202) 748-8000.

independents, (202) 748-8002. a special line for border state segments, we want to hear from you. (202) 748-8003. john from roz well, you are up with andrew rudman. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. there is one thing most of those people here in border states, whenever we travel to mexico, you leave your car on this side of the united states. you walk over the border. if you need to go further into mexico, you rent a car. you do not take a car with american tags into mexico. you stop and talk to the border patrol. they will tell you which regions of mexico to avoid. these are basic things. we have traveled to mexico many

times, had great times. never had a bad time. host: john, do you mostly travel for vacation to mexico? what do you travel therefore? caller: many reasons. the health care system in the united states, you can go to mexico and get something done for a third of the price. that is why those people from south carolina were going. they have better health care, we wouldn't have to go to other countries to get the same health care for less price. and, the exact same quality. host: let me focus on that with andrew rudman, another headline from today's paper. usa's front page, many in the usc mexico as an oasis for health care, medical tourism south of the border arrives for easy access and low cost. guest: that is true. the caller made an important point, people travel regularly to mexico for cosmetic surgery,

sometimes experiment treatments, to purchase drugs at lower costs. they are generally the same drugs produced by the same companies. there is movement. there are also, at times, -- what we are talking now, individuals, any of us including the caller driving across the border, walking across the border as he suggests himself. there have been efforts to have more organized medical tourism for that reason, because the costs are lower. you can often find doctors in mexico trained in the united states who have exactly the same knowledge and skill. host: is this something the mexican government is encouraging? have these procedures here? are there tax incentives, are they investing in medical facility south of the border to encourage americans to spend their health care dollars here? guest: in the past administrations and mexico, there was a more active effort to remote medical tourism.

i have not seen as much of that under this government. people on the mexican side of the border do promote it. if you cross the border, you immediately sign for dental care and -- and popular reason to go to mexico, dental insurance is expensive and not always as generous. dental care -- you hear people say, i needed a cavity fille d. it was a third of the price. it does happen, it is more on a local level then a national effort. host: what should viewers know about andre men well lopez and his views on the united states, border crossings from the united states into mexico? guest: that is a broad question. lopez recognizes the importance of the u.s.-mexico relationship,

understands both from an economic standpoint as well as a cultural and historic standpoint. 40 million americans trace their roots back to mexico. long-standing folks from the border, long-standing relationships. i think he understands that. he has implemented lower tax regime in the northern part of mexico and the border area to try to promote the commerce between the united states and mexico. host: john in jupiter, florida. independent. good morning, you are on with andrew rudman. caller: i have a simple solution for this nonsense. execute the drug pushers in the u.s. kill them, instead of letting the people die. you would do a better job by preventing the jobs -- the drugs coming in. execute the drug pushers like they do in other countries that

do not have drug problems. it is so simple. guest: andrew rudman on how we deal with drug dealers in this country. guest: i think john makes an important point, sometimes, we talk about the drug trade as if the drugs come through the border, are brought by mexican cartel to the border. we forget about, how does drugs get from matamoros, wherever they cross, how do they get to washington, oklahoma, any other state. i think whether we should execute them, that is a legal question or a legislative question. you raise an important point, which is to remember the -- there is trafficking in this country, as well. it is not entirely a problem in mexico. host: on how mexico treats its drug dealers. as the mexican government outdone by the cartels? guest: the mexican government is indeed outgunned by the cartels.

there have been stories, you can find them on the internet of some of the cartels showing off their weaponry. there was a fairly infamous case where the mexican government attempted to arrest a senior drug cartel leader, the son of guzman, the cartels mass or says and eventually surrounded the military, forcing the military to withdraw. no doubt a serious challenge for scope. host: how many cartels are there in mexico? guest: i am not sure who knows exactly how many there are. there are two or three primary cartels. the gulf cartel operates in brownsville, matamoros. again, the challenge is the cartel -- it is not quite the same as a corporation in the united states. there is a lot of infighting and splintering.

often when a kingpin is eliminated, what happens is, there is fight for control of the cartel so you see an increase in violence. host: which one of the three was el chapo's cartel? guest: you got me. i think it was helly scope. host: the line for democrat, good morning. caller: there seems to be a big demand, so to decrease the demand for drugs in united states, perhaps we should use money for drug addiction by putting up billboards all over the interstates. that, use of drugs finances terrorist organizations. perhaps it will weigh on the conscience of the american public that demands these drugs. guest: again, that is an interesting idea. i think the connection you are making is an important one.

these organizations that sell drugs also are engaged in other illicit activity, whether smuggling of people, cigarettes -- we had a program at the wilson center several months ago about the illicit movement -- the movement of illicit cigarettes from the u.s.-canadian border through latin america. it is the same groups. you are right, the drug traffickers are involved in a lot of other activities that we would prefer to see eliminated. host: the power of the internet at my finger tips. el chapo is in the -- cartel. this is a shade in michigan, independent. good morning. caller: good morning, mr. rudman. i have a question, hypothetically speaking. i assume you can hear me. hypothetically speaking, because i do not want to be misconstrued. some of my friends in washington county have a little debate, you

could say. the question we have been debating is, would it be constitutionally legal for u.s. citizens to go stand or large number of u.s. citizens to stand in the middle of the rio grande and prevent these nice people who are good, hard-working immigrants who, sadly, to prevent them to cross the border by physically -- like, pushing or blocking, these potential, nice immigrants from coming into the united states because -- could american citizens constitutionally, legally do that, sir? host: a citizens arrest, a citizens border stop? guest: i am not a lawyer. an email is reluctant to try and play one -- i am always reluctant to try and play one on tv. i think the border patrol might be concerned about that, only

because it might impede their ability to enforce u.s. law. i do not know whether constitutionally one could make an argument that you could not be stopped from doing it. host: spokane, washington. laura, republican. good morning. caller: good morning. my question is this. according to our constitution, the president does not have the authority to write eos or policies that violate congressional law. that is exactly what he is doing regarding our border. to close that border won't stop a lot of sex trafficking trafficking, human organ harvesting and a lot of american lives would be saved from the fentanyl. it is not america's fault we have these people that want to come over here and use these poor immigrants as slaves and children and here, we have a president that is being allowed to violate our congressional laws. we have a very good immigration laws, ok?

with a stupid piece of paper. he does not have that authority. host: human trafficking on the border. guest: human trafficking is a huge concern. it is the same groups that are trafficking drugs, that are trafficking people. there are people who live in conditions in their countries such that they decide the rational thing to do is to sell all their worldly possessions and often walk hundreds of thousands of miles to get to the united states for a better life. you are absolutely right, the really bad people take advantage of that and abuse them, rob them, cheat them, etc. it is something that has to be addressed. i think the point there is that this is not a u.s.-mexico problem alone. this is a hemispheric problem. it is why back in the summit of the americans last june, most of the countries in the hemisphere

signed the los angeles declaration committing that the countries of the hemisphere would try to collaborate together to improve the conditions such that migration becomes an option, not an obligation. host: on migration, what is the status of mexico's southern border? guest: mexico has a border challenge, as well. it is a jungle area. it is not an easy area to prevent people from crossing entirely, and there is movement. we know there are people coming from south america, elsewhere through the mexican government does dry to stop people from coming unlawfully. when people are fleeing what they argue is a reasonable fear of persecution, there are international obligations to let them move and not impede them or send them back into danger. host: how did mexico feel about the remain in mexico policy? guest: mexico as a sovereign

country had to agree they would do that great i think as an example of mexico recognizing that it is a shared challenge, i think there were concerns on both sides of the border of the burden of taking care of large numbers of migrants both from u.s. border communities, as well as on the mexican side. i think the recognition that these people -- the united states has a right as the caller was alluding to to enforce its laws and make decisions on whether people should be granted access or not. i think there is an understanding that something had to be done, but i think their hope would be the sorts of things are not forever programs. host: edward, burbank, california. independent. good morning. caller: can you hear me ok? host: yes, sir. caller: a couple of comments and observations. one of them is, we always hear our economy is 70%, 80% consumption. there doesn't seem to be efforts

to dry up that consumption. on the other hand, i have seen articles where they say most of the weapons that the cartel uses are bought in the united states or acquired in the united states and taken south into mexico. you never hear much about that. if the person could comment on that, that would be appreciated. host: thanks for the question. guest: edward, that is indeed correct. that is a good point. under the current high-level security dialogue and the biden in 10 yield framework between the u.s. and mexico, there is a first time focus on that part of the equation, the southward movement of weapons produced and bought and sold in the united states and exported to mexico. that is important to remember, that it is two way commerce just as legitimate commerce we have is two way. host: what is the bicentennial agreement, what administration did that fall under?

guest: the bicentennial framework was signed by the two current administrations, the biden administration and the lopez -- administration as a replacement or successor to the marietta -- merida initiative. the intent was to establish a framework under which we would collaborate to prosecute the cartel, to protect american and mexican citizens, including a focus on health, which is novel for a security agreement to be focusing on health, recognizing the demand issues many people have raised this morning. host: was the desk how long was the merida initiative in place? guest: merida extended well back into the early 2000s. over time, shifted from being primarily weapons to more technical support and technical assistance and training. lopez over door, when he came into declare he wanted the merida initiative ended and

negotiated a new agreement. host: what was his biggest concern? guest: lopez'security policy, in his bump sticker fashion way of describing things is, hugs, not bullets. he wanted to create conditions and people didn't feel joining the cartels is the thing they need to do, so he has implemented a number of cash transfer of programs to try to give people alternatives. it clearly is not working. i think the truth is that long-term, he is probably right. you need to give people a legitimate job. you need to give them a future so they do not fall subject to or become prey of the cartel. that is a long-term process. i think what is missing and the episode out of matamoros gets to that, there needs to be an enforcement.

-- be an enforcement piece. there are legitimate concerns about whether this administration is doing this. host: north carolina, joe, line four democrats. you are on. caller: very good. i want to say that i worked with the special task force set up in the 1980's near el paso, war as -- juarez. we found a way to our vehicles when we got out to eat, we got back before dark. having spent time down in texas and a lot of friends of mine lived down there. since i have been retired. they were telling me that they had stopped going across the border years ago because of the danger of kidnapping. of course, we realize that has

always been an issue. my friend -- my family had been friends with the fox family years ago. my question was, how are they ever going to control the drug situation? over 15 years ago. the issue is, the oligarchy doesn't look at it in the same way we look at things. and of course, hugs is not going to deal with the issue. fentanyl is a big issue coming into mexico. host: you talk about your back on. are you former law enforcement? caller: no, military. the issue -- my concern is, having been stationed in central america, things are so bad. those borders cannot be controlled. it would be the great migration to the north. host: that is joe in wilmington.

sounds like a lovely morning in wilmington with the birds chirping. [laughter] guest: very true. host: those are good points. certainly, as long as the conditions are such an central america, south america, there are 7 million displaced venezuelans around the hemisphere. guest: there are haitians migrating from all over the hemisphere. you are right. my understanding is, it is because they cannot provide for their families and themselves safely in their country, so they move. that is why i think those strategies need to be long-term and short-term. the long-term has to try to create the condition such as i said before, migration is people -- something people can do if they want to and they should be legal procedures to do so. but, it is not something people should feel like they have to do.

host: garden grove, california. nancy, you are next with andrew rudman. caller: thank you very much. i have a twofold question. one is about when you are crossing as a migrant into the different country before you reach the united states, i thought it was the policy that you had to apply for asylum in that country and that is not happening. secondly regarding sex trafficking and drugs in the united states, who are the cartels sex trafficking two in the united states? we have all the satellites, all these drones, all this spy equipment. how come we do not know where these sex trafficking and drug dens are, and we are not taking care of them in the united states? it is very concerning for the people of america and our children. thank you. host: the first part of it was on country asylum.

guest: right. you are right, traditionally under international law that is meant to be what happens. i think what is happening in this case is that the migrants who are fleeing are probably expressing their plan to go to the united states. i think the reality is, for the smaller countries to ourselves, it would be difficult for them to manage those kinds of flows and support them and the mexican government, invest money and tried to increase the budget of its migration agency. it is difficult because of the flows. that is a topic that has come up, about whether or not mexico should be a country where people have to apply for asylum or whether they should permit them to come to the united states. something i think the two governments will have to continue to talk about to figure out. there may be procedures -- the

latest biden administration approach where migrants from venezuela and nicaragua, haiti and cuba have to apply on an app and essentially register. they cannot just appear at the border. i think, as an effort to address that situation. on the other part, the point you make about sex traffickers moving in is the point i was trying to make earlier which is, once the traffic people or the merchandise gets to the united states, there are cartels and criminal groups in the united states that are moving them. i know something law-enforcement at the state, local and federal level are always looking at. clearly, they are not catching all of it. host: time for a couple more calls with andrew rudman of the wilson center, mexico institute director there. wilson center.org. what is the wilson center? guest: the wilson center was

created by congress in 1968. president wilson was the only president to receive a phd and went into public policy. the point of the wilson center is to represent that fusion between academia and public policy, so we try to through research and our convening power, bring people together to resolve difficult challenges like the ones we are talking about today. host: the specific program, the mexico institute at mexico institute on twitter, easy enough to find. guest: right, absolutely. we do what i just described with a specific focus on mexico and the u.s.-mexico bilateral relationship. host: diane in new york, republican. good morning, you are next. caller: good morning, greetings from inside the blue line. [laughter] host: what is your question or comment? caller: oh yeah, you betcha. fentanyl is a thing. we are a town of 3200 in the middle of the adirondacks.

four people have od'd in the last two years. totally disgusted with the administration. you cannot even go to vermont anymore. they are bad. they are coming in, the illegals over the border up there. we had a van with six migrants, seven migrants, died just the past couple of days ago up in mussina. i just wanted to mention vermont crime. oh, yeah. last summer, we had a truck in the middle of the field right down the road from us and they found a 76-year-old man burned. host: that is diane in new york. is there anything you want to pick up on? guest: i think what diane mentioned about fentanyl is obviously a huge concern over 100,000 deaths in the united states in the past year. as i said before, it requires more cooperation from china and

from mexico and the united states collaboratively to stop the movement of the precursors and as we have talked about several times, the demand issues in the united states. host: at the mexico institute, do you study border crossings of the northern border? guest: we have colleagues at the canada institute. host: we will have them on. guest: i will pass that on. host: rachel in wisconsin. line for democrats. go ahead. caller: i called dr. i heard the caller -- called after i heard the caller ♪ [indiscernible] crossing the border. getting that question answered, it brought something up for me. while we are doing well and there is prosperity between how we are doing in the united states and mexico, venezuela, the south american countries,

while there is that disparity, there is always going to be people who want to move here. it is all privilege to handle these tough conversations and do it well, do it diplomatically, legislatively, humanely. we can do this. we can do this by leading the conversation. it comes down to, i do not know. it is a sad state. host: andrew rudman, how do we do this? guest: high think she -- i think she raises a good point. in terms of -- on the question of migration, i think we know what tools are in terms of a balance between enforcement and creating provisions that allow people to come to the united states and work legally and be able to return to their countries. h2h visas for agricultural workers are one example.

the truth is, there are more jobs picking strawberries in california then there are americans that want to fill them. yet, we want strawberries. so, creating provisions that allow people to come, be vetted, work legally, make a decent wage, be treated fairly and not abused, which is what often happens with people who have entered the country illegally, is part of the solution to address our label shortages, create -- labor shortages, create opportunities for folks who feel they cannot stay where they are. host: last call from the show me state, republican line, good morning. caller: i noticed every time the u.s. goes into a country like mexico and arrests somebody like el chapo for selling billions of dollars worth of drugs into the u.s., they never arrest anybody on this side of the border

because if el chapo was selling billions of dollars of drugs into the u.s., he has to have a u.s. counter card. the last part of that is, for every thousand dollars somebody gives el chapo for drugs, they are making a $10,000 profit. as i said from the get-go, nobody on this side ever gets arrested. why is that? guest: i am not a law enforcement official, but i think probably saying nobody gets arrested is probably an exaggeration. i think you are certainly right, it has come up several times in our conversation, the fact more needs to happen on both sides. the other part i think needs to happen more and the u.s. and mexico are trained to work on it is following the money. at the end of the money, arresting el chapo did not stop the flow of drugs, smuggling people or other contraband. all it does is change who is leading the organization. host: you can follow andrew

rudman on twitter @andrewrudman. he is the director of the mexico institute at the wilson center. next, 20 minutes before the house comes in for the day. we will take you there when they do. until then, it is open form. any public policy, political issue you want to talk about. phone lines are yours. phone lines are on the screen. start calling now. we will get to your calls when we get back. ♪ >> 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 daily at 7:00 a.m. eastern. important congressional hearings and other public affairs events throughout the day and weekdays at five a clock p.m. and 9:00 p.m. eastern. catch washington today for a fast paced report of the stories of today, listen to c-span anytime. tell your smart speaker play

c-span radio. c-span. powered by cable. ♪ >> there are a lot of places to get political information, but only at c-span 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 forward. if it happens here, or here, or anywhere that matters, america is watching on c-span. powered by cable. ♪ >> preorder your copy of the congressional directory from the 118th congress. get your access to the federal government with bio and contact information for every house and senate member, important information on congressional committees, the president's cabinet, federal agencies and state governors. scan the code at the right to preorder your copy today for spring delivery. it is $29.95 plus shipping and

handling at c-span shop don't work. -- c-span shop.org. >> c-spanshop.org is c-span's online store. browse through our online collection of products, apparel, books and accessories. there is something for every c-span fan and every purchase helps support our nonprofit operation. shop now or anytime at c-span shop.org. ♪ >> "washington journal" continues. host: here is where we are this morning. in about 18 minutes, the house is scheduled to gavel and for the day. we will take you to the house for live coverage when they do. the senate is in, both expected at 11:30 eastern time in the senate. you can watch that on c-span 3. having a hearing on that ohio

train disaster in east palestine . it is norfolk southern railway ceo alan who will testify about the derailment of one of his company strains in east palestine, ohio. c-span3 is where you can watch that. you can watch on c-span.org and the free c-span now video app. speaking of alan shaw, ahead of his testimony, the washington post has this on the op-ed pages of its newspaper today. alan shaw, we are committed to helping east palestine recover. in his op-ed ahead of his hearing, he writes that we are firmly committed to the residents of east palestine and the surrounding communities in ohio and pennsylvania. i have been to the area five times since the accident. many people i've met with our angry, scared and concerned about the future. i understand their skepticism that big corporations such as

norfolk southern will do the right thing and we are determined there --to earn their trust. we are going to make it right. alan shot writing today in the washington post. he will be testifying today before the senate environment and public works committee, 10:00 a.m. on c-span3. your phone calls now, letting you lead the discussion for the last 15 minutes of the program. letting us know what is on your mind. jack, butler, pennsylvania. democrat. good morning. caller: thanks for taking my call. this is a little story real quick. about a year ago, i went to court to get a traffic find reduced. it was reduced to five mile an hour, speed limit which give me a $186 fine. the guy in front of me had three bags of heroin. he got a $15 fine and got let go on his own recognizance. if that is how you are going to treat him, you are not working on demand. this fentanyl, heroin problem is

a supply and demand problem and you are trying to get the supply without doing anything about the demand. host: thanks for the call. from keystone state to the lone star state, in arlington, bob, independent. caller: good morning. i have been calling for about 30 years. i have a bunch of programs taped and whatever. i want to pass on to the viewers how they can find their part of the program easy. when they loaded up on the computer, they will find something that says more information about and it has program id, a number. if you go into that number in the search, you can find it automatically. otherwise, searching is a challenge. i have a program that was done back when i did the tocqueville

tour, where my wife called in and she asked brian the hardest question he has ever been asked while he was over in france doing a four hour program with tocqueville residents. i could go and listen to that call because i've got it pegged with a program id number. host: bob, thanks for being a veteran of the program and c-span.org. we try to make it as easy as possible to search for these programs. that search bar at the top of the page is helpful, but you are right. each of these programs has an id number and you can search that way as well. i will pass along your thoughts on searching to the folks who run c-span.org. this is rick, fredericksburg, virginia. good morning. caller: good morning. the problem with the border is probably the biggest problem that i believe has ever taken

place in the united states. i went to walmart, they have great, organic food. vegetables. i got there after speaking with no less than six people the other day, none of them spoke english. they were somewhat broken. i spoke to the manager about it. he said, they tell us to hire whoever comes in. i said, you do not check if they are legal or illegal immigrants. he said, i am not sure. that was the manager. that means whatever you want it to mean. unless the united states gets it together pretty quick, as far as this illegal immigration goes, it is significant and it is going to change the dynamics. that reminds me of genocide. were you listening to the last segment? i imagine that is why you brought this up. caller: i listen to you all the time. host: our last guest av example of, there are not enough

americans in this country to pick strawberries, yet americans want strawberries. the idea of bringing in foreign labor to do that, migrants to do that work. did you hear that part? what do you think about that? there are jobs in these countries -- in this country, but americans do not want these jobs. caller: i get that. if you took the money it costs us to deal with this, you could probably pay teenagers $150 an hour to pick stuff and you would come out billions ahead of where you are by dealing -- i say we would have 100 million illegal immigrants in this country. it is totally absurd. it is going to catch up with us when it kills pieces of paper, your money, that is why we have inflation. if you do not think the cost of taking care of all of these people is outrageously unbelievably expensive, then you

probably went to public school. best of day. host: about 10 minutes before the house comes in. this is tom in california. democrat. good morning. caller: i just wanted to comment on the drug problem in america. we use a law enforcement approach on drug policy. we have been since at least 1930 . that morphed into the nixon administration, forming the dea and the controlled substance act. it was in 2012, nixon's senior domestic policy advisor admitted the whole premise of the dea ncsa was built on racist problems. if you look at europe, the european union uses more of a public policy approach rather

than a law enforcement approach. there drug over death rate is 5800 compared to america's 100,000 -- 107,000. if we use more health policy approach then the law enforcement approach, we make it better results and cut the drugs off -- cut the legs off the cartels. host: that is tom in california. trying to put my hands on the number -- the previous caller of 100,000 illegal immigrants in this country. the -- policy has it as a much lower number. el salvador, guatemala, india and honduras being the top five

countries of birth for the unauthorized population in the united states. mike in oak grove, missouri. independent. good morning. caller: good morning, john. i tried to call in the other day . they were asking who we would like to see as president. my answer to that is, i would like to see john kasich and liz cheney team up. they would be good for the country. what was bothering me today is the six-year-old that shot his teacher, nobody's going to face charges. we have a gun problem in this country. that might be part of it right there, not charging people when they need to be. i am not somebody against guns, that is what is bothering me today. the other thing that is bothering me today is the reappearance of the orange raccoon on television.

thank you for taking my call. host: to the six-year-old, the story about the six-year-old who shot his teacher. state prosecutors in newport news, virginia said yesterday that they would not seek charges against the six-year-old boy who shot his elementary school teacher in january and has yet to decide whether any adult associated with the case would be held criminally liable. nbc news.com without reporting. this is peggy, georgetown, south carolina. republican. good morning. caller: good morning. i would like to comment on the transfer of the black community that went north years ago. they are coming back south. now, they are bringing with drug selling. someone got killed -- host: this is the black community in general?

that seems like a big generalization. caller: in the town that i live in, it is on the coast. that is what is happening. they have come back and are living with their aunts and uncles. there are like four and five families living in one house. they get lots of government giveaways. that is what is happening. host: this is rory in california, democrat. good morning. caller: good morning, thanks for taking my call. i am a modern democrat, i am voting for tulsi gabbard because i assume joe biden was not capable of doing the job. for one thing, you recently stated a statistic of 11 million illegal immigrants. they have been using that same statistic for over 25 years. we know at least 5 million illegal immigrants have come over the border since biden was

inaugurated. the fentanyl problem, it is coming from china. it is our worst enemy. it is manufactured in mexico by the drug cartels. i think we need to wage war on the drug cartels. host: so you would be in favor of lindsey graham's proposal he talked about yesterday? caller: yeah. 100 thousand fentanyl deaths a year of american citizens, that is more than the vietnam war. we have a borders are that has never -- border czar. i voted for tulsi gabbard. i think she would have done a much better job. i've thank you for taking my call. have a good weekend. host: here is a segment from today's washington times,

senators want military in mexico , leaving senators wednesday called on the u.s. to declare a war on mexican cartels saying the killing of two americans by gangs should earn a response by the full might of the united states military. senator graham of south carolina, senator john kennedy announced legislation to declare nine cartels foreign terrorist organizations and authorize the use of military force, the same mechanism that deployed troops to afghanistan and iraq against those gang those are two lead paragraphs on washington, times, their lead story. melbourne, kentucky. jack, independent. caller: good morning, john. good to hear from y'all this morning. i had a couple of comments about the january 6 happening. everybody went in the capitol that day broke the law. i went to d.c., i used to go to the capitol. you have to go through the

procedures they have. the way i feel about it, both sides are playing up this. one side, some of the politicians, a lot of the news media play up the violence. the other side, fox news a little bit, played it down. it is hard to tell from these tapes who did what. one thing that did strike me as bad is that lawyer for that guy who dressed like -- i do not know what he was called, a shaman. he said they didn't turn over all the evidence to the lawyer. if i understand the american system, that is how it is supposed to work. that does concern me, you cannot just put people in jail and let them have a defense. that is about it.

thank you for c-span and all you guys do. host: how did you get from d.c. to melbourne, kentucky? caller: i was in the air force for 26 years. i have lived around the world. host: about a minute and a half, maybe two minutes depending on how closely they are running this morning before the house comes in. ruth, baton rouge, louisiana. republican. good morning. caller: good morning. i often hear it is the cartel at the border. the cartel are throughout the entire united states. when these people come over, they owe money. they do not get jobs here. their job is either to be in a brothel with young girls or sex slaves and the men have to sell drugs in order to pay back the cartel. if they do not do that, the cartel murder them or their families. this is throughout the entire

united states, the cartel is here overlooking these people and collecting the money they owe them like slaves. host: tim, seattle, washington. democrat. caller: hello, hi, john. i want to talk briefly about the fentanyl crisis. i understand i am time constrained. it all comes down, in my belief, to personal responsibility. i would like to see the senators , state leaders, go to the states, the areas that have the most radical deaths of fentanyl -- critical deaths of fentanyl, sit down and ask them why. it is personal responsibility in my belief, going and talking to them, having some sort of forum and getting to the critical issue of, why they feel fentanyl is going to cure everything. we have mental health,

everything. if we can curtail through personal responsibility for people to look at themselves and take a hard, critical look and understand this drug is not going to cure any problem, cut it out. host: that is tim in seattle, washington. our last caller in washington journal. our reminder today at 2:30 pm, an event in philadelphia president biden unveiling his fiscal 2024 budget, we are showing that on c-span.org and the free c-span now video app. plenty of other coverage throughout the day on the c-span networks. we take you now to the house floor, live coverage gavel-to-gavel begins now on c-span. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.] the speaker pro tempore: the

house will be rd