♪ host: the washington from may 8 and the lead up to the debt

ceiling meeting, both sides -- president biden and democrats doing their call for a clean bill and a separate issue on spending issues. congressional republicans demanding spending cuts take place before any debt ceiling occurs. call and tell us if you think if it's president biden and the democrats taking the right approach, 202-748-8000 is the number to call. if you think it speaker mccarthy on the republicans, 202-748-8001 . if you think neither has the right approach, 202-748-8002 is the number to call. you can also text us at 202-748-8003. post on facebook and on twitter and you can also follow the show on instagram. it was not -- on friday the washington post a gay pole looking at how both parties are approaching it and giving the results.

they asked the question congress typically passes legislation on a regular basis will allow the government to pay its debts. do you think congress should allow government to pay debts and only of the president agrees to spending. 26% of overall adults said that. 58% said the debt payment and federal spending should be separate. when you break it down by party 16% of democrats saying to allow the government to pay debt only if the president allows spending cuts. 74% democrats pushing back saying those discussions should happen separately. 24 percent of independent saying the government should pay only if the president agrees to cut spending. 58% pushing back against that. 40% of republicans saying that spending cuts should be part of an overall approach to the debt ceiling. 26 per saying said it should be handled separately.

14% suggesting no opinion on that. and it comes to who takes blame on the current efforts of the debt ceiling. the washington post asking those respondents. among overall adults, 39% saying with republicans that congress is taking blame if the debt ceiling does go into default. 36 percent saying it was president biden's fault. 16% saying both equally and neither, less than 5%. 78% of, cried saying it was republicans fault. among independents, 37% of those saying it was the republicans in congress. or will be for blame if the debt ceiling defaults prayed only 29% saying it was president biden could be held for that. 9% of republicans saying it was her republicans in congress and it will be their fault taking blame if the fault occurs.

78% of those saying it would be on the shoulders of the president if that happens. this is to the lead up of tomorrow's white house meeting, the white house, how speaker mccarthy and the senate majority leader in house minority leader hakeem jeffries. stay close to c-span for that discussion. your thoughts on the debt ceiling per who has the right approach. is it president biden in the congressional democrats with separate discussions on spending and a clean debt ceiling raise. is it the house republican saying cuts need to take place before discussions on raising the debt ceiling take place. perhaps you think it is neither who has the best approach. 202-748-8002 the number to call for that. we will take your calls in a moment. the sunday shows yesterday this discussion took a large part. among those responding was the house budget committee chair on

fox news defending the position of republicans and calling for those cuts. here is part of that discussion. [video clip] >> what you are proposing in the house, you did get something passed calls for drastic cuts. they -- it reduces discretion or spending from 2023 to 2024. defenses off the table saw republicans would need to double the cuts in nondefense discretionary spending to achieve a 1.4 $7 trillion in annual spending target. the post says you've created a brutal hunger games scenario so where did these cuts come from? >> think about it. to go back to 22 spending levels is to go back to spending levels last year. where was the apocalyptic rhetoric from democrats then and all their phantom funding cuts. the cbo before covid projected we would be spending hundreds of billions of dollars left -- less than we are spending today.

our government has grown by 40% since we entered covid. we've got to right size the bloat and the waste in our bureaucracy. there are reckless spending spree initiatives by this president that need to be reversed. we don't need 87 irs -- 87,000 irs agent to close the tax gap. we don't need covid money that's been hanging out there for two years. the public emergency is over and we need to take that money back and put it towards the treasury under children's future. the democrats overwhelmingly supported welfare to work in 96. president bill clinton signed it and we are saying we have a labor shortage, we have to come out of recession and we don't want to trap people in dependency on the government from receiving public assistance -- they should be looking for a job or working.

that's a fundamental responsibility and expectation of the american people. host: we will hear more from members of congress as we go along. we will hear from you during this time when it comes to the approach on the debt ceiling. who has the right approach in your opinion. if you think it's president biden and the democrats, 202-748-8000. the number to call if you think it's the republicans, 202-748-8001. perhaps you think neither has the right approach, 202-748-8002 . some of you posting on facebook, this is marked on fasaying whene approach and wasteful spending forcing the government to the fault they love wasting our money and not sticking to a budget. this is steve saying the republicans only care about the debt when they are not blowing it up. they increased at 7.8 trillion under former president trump and cut taxes permanently, it's like having a credit card debt and telling your employer you want a

salary decrease. dan from facebook saying when it comes to that approach it's the democrats adding pay what you owe to that and then robert on our facebook page, republicans no doubt. you can post your comments on our facebook page if you wish. facebook.com/c-span is how you do that. twitter is at c-span wj. those of the numbers if you want to pick what best represents your thinking when it comes to that approach on the debt ceiling. if you support president biden secession -- position or if you think neither is doing a good job on this. in richmond, brenda says it is neither with the right approach. tell us why. caller: i don't think either one of them did a good job. i think they are too caught up in blaming someone else.

they do not want to do anything. it's like there's two groups of them and they are both very incompetent in what they are doing. and the other guys saying you are incompetent. neither one affirmed no they are doing. this managements i'm working on the debt is arguing they might get something done. host: we have a line if you think neither party is doing a good job or solving these issues . j edgewater, florida says speaker mccarthy with the republicans with the right approach. tell us wide. -- tell us why.

caller: i've never heard anyone ever say in politics that they're not willing to negotiate it's just my way or the highway which is what biden has put out there. i don't even see how democrats have a right to say anything when all they want to say is if you don't do it our way we are just, to destroy the country. that's kind of a pretty lame discussion. i think the republicans have got something going right now. they have a few democrats on board. a couple bills passed to reduce the deficit some more to stop the spending. i think the democrats just need to come along and make the american public feel safe and secure by getting together and having a discussion. if they don't do this they should maybe do this on tv or have c-span go in there and sit in a room with them and put the cameras on them and let's see what happens. host: that's jay in florida.

the white house picking up the discussions for the first time tomorrow with congressional leaders in place for that discussion when it comes to approaches on the debt ceiling issue. sheila in buie, maryland says president biden and the democrats with the right idea, go ahead. caller: i do agree with them on some things but i agree with the republicans that these -- because the thing about it, if they don't work as young people, as adults they won't have any social security or medicare. i really do think we need to cut back on giving free money to people to just sit at home. i had to work. there are people still working trying to pay into social security and to be able to receive medicare. i think they need to set them up

for the future. thank you. host: the hill reporting and these lead ups from the talks tomorrow reporting the parties come together to reach a deal to hike the borrowing cap in the debt limit suspension. president biden could lift the debt ceiling unilaterally, the white house is reporting discussions with a bipartisan group house lawmakers could use a procedural tool to force the debt ceiling height to the floor . that's just some of the options that could play out or others in the lead up to the talks tomorrow. when it comes to approaches, who do you think has the right approach? you heard from house chair -- budget chair jodey arrington p let hear from hakeem jeffries. here's part of the conversation. [video clip] >> is the obvious solution here

a short-term pond and it looks like this, you raise the debt ceiling through september 30 and you make the debt ceiling and the budget deadlines converge. doesn't that give everyone what they want? you don't negotiate cuts directly for the debt ceiling and you do give their up -- they're republicans get their budget. isn't that the uncomfortable compromise that's the best way forward here? >> i don't think the responsible thing to do is kick the can down the road when president biden has been saying for months the position of leadership where, of house democrats has been we to avoid a default. america should pay its bills, protect the full faith and credit of the united states of america but we are open to having a discussion about what type of investments, what type

of spending, what type of revenues are appropriate to protect the health and safety of the american people. that's a process available to us now. i don't think we need to delay those discussions for a few months. >> i understand that but are you ruling it out. no one is saying there are better ways out of a lot of problems. the question is if it avoids default is this a way out? >> we have to avoid default. what is in front of us is president biden has convened a very important discussion on tuesday so we can find a way forward to do what is necessary to continue the strength -- to strengthen our economy in a manner that works for everyday americans. >> are you following president biden's lead. that if they come up with a handshake in some form are congressional democrats going to support the president's decision.

>> we are in lockstep right now in terms of the path forward president biden laid out. ultimately everyone evaluates on the merits any particular piece of legislation that's presented. we are in lockstep with president biden, with senate democrats. we want to do the right thing for the american people. host: perhaps that is an approach you agree with. you can call us on our lines. if you think the right approach is the president and congressional democrats, 202-748-8000. 202-748-8001 if you think it is speaker mccarthy and the republicans. if you think neither has the right approach, 202-748-8002. jolene in galveston, texas on our neither line. you are next up. caller: how are you doing. i was just an essay neither of them really have the best approach. i think they need to understand

money as a concept. how can you owe money to yourself. the debt is kind of just imaginary and did -- we are going to implode over this number we created so we could have what we deem an economy. we don't really have an economy not when it's bought and sold by rich billionaires and not the workers and we don't own any means of production. we make sure we can -- that's the main issue right now. i do think there's much more better ways to do this getting out of capitalism and transition to a socialist society. have a good day. >> from our line on those who speak -- support the republican and speaker mccarthy, we hear from eddie next. caller: i'm surprised how ignorant people are. they don't teach civics anymore.

they don't teach economics anymore. printing trillions of dollars at 0% interest. of course they blaine trump for the virus with spending that was nancy and chuck. >> when it comes to the speakers approach, why do you support it? >> you have to cut the budget, you can ask government to pay for everything. you should say what can i do for my government. you've got to cut the spending. lower inflation, high interest rates. the banks are going great -- going broke. they tried to sell it at a discount. the banks are going broke. thank you. host: janet on our facebook page

says the let's make a deal method that reminds me of the porkbarrel days, anita from facebook when it comes to approaches, the democrats pass a clean bill like they did for former president trump. gary from our twitter feed starts with the words stop spending money and all caps and then follows up whoever takes this issue is the winner. and then gordo off of twitter. dems should respond with a counter offer on reducing defense spending and the salaries of every government employee to achieve the reductions desired. maybe that's part of your thinking when it comes to who you support, many a week in washington coming to the forefront. larry in maryland, support president biden and the democrats. hello. caller: i am somewhat find this

whimsical in when trump was in office this was never an issue. and as soon biden of course is running for reelection or the democrats are in office, it suddenly becomes an issue. if the deficit was that big of a deal today it certainly was a big deal then because he increased it more than any other president in the united states. however i think what is interesting is it's going to be a political ploy for next year's election but i think more importantly i think the real fight will come when the government's budget has to be passed in september. though this is a precursor to that, that's going to be a doozy because it's going to happen -- it will be the last budget

negotiations before the elections, it won't be, but it will be happening before -- it will happen and that has been so contentious with this particular measure of getting the debt ceiling increase, that's going to be an interesting play as to who is really in power and where america thinks the country should go. i find it curious that currently this becomes an issue when a democrat is in power when it was not previously an issue when trump was in power. host: that is larry in maryland. let's hear from our neither line , dan in maine. caller: this may sound out of line but there is a resolution that's going through the congress to vote through the

foreign affairs committee of the senate and house and the resolution is called ukrainian victory resolution. i think everyone should read what the ukrainian victory resolution reads. unless you want me to read it. host: we will stick to the topic as far as the debt ceiling concerns. calling in on the neither line when it comes to approaches, why is that? caller: because we are totally out of control in terms of spending money in this country. and -- we are going to sort of hit the brick wall financially sometime in the near future and no one really knows what can happen. but clearly there is a schism in the world that's says is good to be the chinese and the russians against the west. host: i'm going to pause you there to stick to the topic. thanks for the call.

the hill reporting in the lead up to those meetings tomorrow as far as stances the various parties take. it's been sustained by deficit spending to the negotiations over future government outlays. and passing through the house given them some leverage at the starting point and talks with president biden. democrats emphasize hiking the limit does not authorize new spending but merely empowers the treasury to make good on obligations already approved. with that in mind they are insisting on divorcing the two debate, raising the debt ceiling quickly as a stand-alone bill to ensure jittery markets but no default is forthcoming. that's a general idea of the stance taken on this issue. this first time if you think -- what you think of those stances

and if you support one or the other or think neither works. 202-748-8000 if you support president biden and congressional democrats approach. supporting how speaker mccarthy and congressional republicans it's 202-748-8001. or you do think neither is the right approach. 202-748-8002 is the number to call. when it comes to that debt ceiling plan that was passed, not the budget from congressional republicans, but this idea fothdebt ceiling. it says it would raise the debt ceiling to 2024 and reduce spending to fy 20 levels. part of those efforts including the recovery of unspencovid funds and would issue new work requirements for recipients of federal aid, it would clawback funds for the irs for collection issues. it would block new debt

cancellation and repeal granite -- green energy programs amongst other things. courtney in georgia says speaker mccarthy and the republicans taking the right approach. thanks for waiting, go ahead. caller: i think most people don't really understand what's going on. i'm certainly not in a try to make myself sound stupid but i don't understand what it is. most people know what they spend their money on. most people know what they are going to spend their money on. if you look at these bills that they passed or the inflation reduction act. if you see what they put in their and what they are spending on. i can't even remember all of the stuff watching them debate on whose spending what and something like $160,000 to the

new york matt or the new york kennedy center for the arts. they are spending money on things that we don't even know they are spending it on. host: it's those things that make you say speaker mccarthy has the right approach on this. caller: i think he does. he's going to raise $1.5 trillion. why does he think he's saying he's knocking to raise the debt ceiling. they're going to give them another 1,000,000,000,000.5. so they are working towards it. you don't say i need some help to solve this and any juice it down to the table with me and then the other person says i'm not can negotiate with you. it's clear they need to sit down and talk. host: that is expected tomorrow at the white house.

look to c-span for those discussions. not open to cameras but we will hear from both parties as the discussions take place and various people go before cameras to talk about what resulted from the meeting from those congressional leaders. this is james in north carolina saying it's president biden with them right approach. caller: i think it's biden in the democratic party because let me just say this, if you are on welfare in this country, you receive less than $1000, we are spending too little, not spending too much. we need to spend a whole lot more and we need to illuminate corporate welfare and make them pay their fair share. there is no reason why we have this homeless problem and all that. there's enough money to solve that.

the problem is greed. people don't want to do it and i blame the republican party. thank you very much. host: orlando, florida saying neither party has the right approach. thanks for calling in, go ahead. caller: good morning. i am very concerned american, third-generation. i have never seen or experienced this what we are living, this civil unrest. it is no longer -- it is in our face. this has, as consequences that were laming -- laying blame. we are beyond blame. it's now in our face, what are we going to do about it. obama was in eight years, let's look at the simplicity of it. where it's coming from. get to the root.

we are playing a division here. this is no longer -- america needs to unite. we need a meeting of the minds and the people -- i have lived homeless with a 12-year-old. i cannot even get medical help. my mom, 84 years old, a diabetic , you are holding the people hostage or tired or beat old -- we are exhausted. our kids, our future, we are losing that. it is a war, let's play the politics game. let's look at the simplicity. this is our future america united. our forefathers are rolling in their graves. what are we doing. it's not family -- host: her thoughts there. let's go to temple, texas saying

president biden has the right approach. go ahead. caller: the right approach is we've got to pay our bills. everybody calling on the phone and sending text messages i'm sure they pay their bills. they are not asking for money from us to have extra money, they are asking for money from us to pay our bills. when trump was president, he gave the rich people millions and millions of dollars and they did not give that to us. and he passed his bills three times in a row every time he wrote one. but now the democrats are trying to get money to everybody, not just the rich and they should be allowed to do that. thank you very much for the call. host: half hour done, half hour

to go when it comes to has the right approach on raising the debt ceiling. if you say it is present biden in the democrats, 202-748-8000. if you say it is speaker mccarthy and the republicans, 202-748-8001. if you think neither has the right approach, 202-748-8002. text us at 202-748-8003. because of those meetings set to take place tomorrow the white house on these discussions between the president and speaker mccarthy and other congressional leaders we are devoting the whole show tomorrow to the idea on those discussions getting your thoughts on it. one of the ways you can reach out to us aside from the phones and text if you are on tiktok and active on tiktok, we have a short video there you can see and you can make a video of your own with a response to the question we've asked when it comes to the debt ceiling and those issues.

you can leave comments there. if you want to post a short video, go to the tiktok site. put your name, where you are from, your message and we may be able to use it on the program tomorrow. you can see more there. let's go to rick in tennessee. supporters speaker mccarthy's approach on this issue. hello, go ahead. caller: thank you for taking my call. i will make it quick. i'm a very conservative republican but i think that some of the cuts they are proposing go a little too deep. i'm opposed to the student loan bill because we had to pay our own way when i grew up and died to pay my own children's way, but some of the other -- and i had to pay my own children's way. i think there is a happy medium and that's what we will get to eventually, but there is talk on both sides right now and i wish

we would stop that and grow up. host: aside from that, what other areas would you like to see cuts after may be seeing cuts not happen? caller: there doesn't need to be any cuts in the social programs. people hurting enough as it is. it's hard to make ends meet. we are on a fixed income are self, we are retired. we do ok, we live ok but it would be harder if they cut social security or the people that are on welfare, they are just barely getting by now and i don't want to see people hurt. host: what about these additional work requirements when it comes to select social safety net programs. caller: we used to have that to some degree and you had to call so many people to continue some things and ask for a job but

they cut back on that and they never really did check on that too much and some of the areas of the country. i'm ok with that. but people that can work that are disabled, they need to shorten up the process for them to be qualified. host: rick in tennessee giving his thoughts. iris is in michigan says neither party is right on this approach. caller: hello pedro, how is my man? hey america. why don't they put it on the ballot so we can have a say in this. if they gave up some of those houses and residents to go to and lived in one house maybe they would think clear. this variety bends his mind a little. he doesn't live like the rest of the country, even the ultrarich usually have one big residence.

maybe he could sell the plane, his brand-new one. host: you said neither party is right on this. why are republicans not right either? caller: well -- i just think the american people ought to have something to say about this. we used to have things like that. that we had a say in, not just tuesday and around the country. bring us in. host: harry is next in georgia. supporting president biden's approach on this. caller: thank you, c-span. love you guys. i'm just in a read a little bit from section four of the 14th amendment. it says the validity of the public debt of the united states authorized by law including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties, for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion shall

not be questioned. so i say joe biden is taking a constitutional approach to this. you do not question the public debt. i will just say this also. if you understand macroeconomics, money flows through the economy like blood throws -- flows through your body. would you want to cut your blood flow in your body by 20% all in one? host: so you would support the use to let more debt spending continue. host: i would. finish your thought. caller: i was going to say -- what was i going to say? host: it's ok, you got your point across.

part of the discussion on the sunday shows was on the abc network the janet yellen was questioned by potentially if they could use the 14th amendment taken circumvent the debt ceiling and keep this from happening. @cspanwj --[video clip] >> he said he's not ready to invoke the 14th amendment. it says the full faith and credit should not be questioned. he -- the location being they would continue to issue debt saying it's unconstitutional not to. it didn't seem like he took it off the table. >> our priority is to make sure congress does its job. there is no way to protect our financial system and economy other than congress doing its job and raising the debt ceiling and enabling us to pay our bills

and we should not get to the point where we need to consider working in places in -- issuing data. this would be a constitutional crisis. >> is it on the table, could it be considered? you just said there's no way this can be done without congress is that a hard and fast position that the president will under no circumstances invoke the 14th amendment. >> all i want to say is it's congress's job to do this. if they fail to do it we will have economic and financial catastrophe that will be of our own making and there is no action that president biden and the u.s. treasury to prevent that catastrophe. >> i'm still not clear whether it's on the table or off the table. >> i don't want to consider

emergency options, what's important recognizing with the responsibility is. and avert what will surely be regardless of how it's handled what's option is what option is used to handle it, and economic and financial catastrophe. host: the treasury secretary janet yellen from the sunday shows. the editorial section offers its own discussion. move the debt limit deadline the editors write saying it's encouraging house democrats have been moving to use a discharge position that would allow them to get a debt height bill but it's a long shot. all democrats and five republicans would need to vote for it. a short-term debt hike gives her

republicans and democrats time to negotiate. the sooner they endorse this the better. there are no winners in this fight highlighting the post-abc news poll showing americans finding both parties at fault. the editorial adds a plausible compromise framework coming into focus. the democrat from maine laying out a plan for which lawmakers can start on most everyone can agree on clawing back unspent emergency covid funds saving about 50 billion in the next two years, from there a combination of revenue enhancers and spending moderation would be the fairest solution that would not plunge the economy into recession. more there if you want to read that from the editorial pages of the washington post. who has the right approach when it comes to debt ceiling discussion. on our neither line this is jason in ohio. caller: good morning. i would like to talk about the debt we actually have, whenever

i look at my debt i know what i have. when it comes to our government, they have a hard time showing -- the debt, who do we owe it to. i would like to see congress and the senate, our founding fathers it was founded as a public service. we have been way too many career politicians and their what money is spent where. telling them what to spend. i would like to see them to downstairs salaries or -- for just a couple of months. and see how they like seeing whether their debt goes. thank you for taking my call. host: paul is next in illinois,

supporter speaker mccarthy's position on this. hello. caller: good morning. i support the speaker's position. i think is a country we have to get a handle on our expenditures beyond anything. we have a runaway system that's gotten us in this perilous position. but the one sanders approach from maine i thought was a good beginning in terms of rolling back some of the expenditures we put on the table that haven't been spent. there we might have a return on some of the expense, the amount of money we are spending on just the interests is phenomenal.

i do approve the speaker's position. host: giving us his thoughts. from the wall street journal, highlighting the meeting set for tomorrow on both negotiations discussion on the debt ceiling. david harrison highlighting that some officials increasingly seeing a short-term extension until later in the summer is the best case scenario or an agreement with house republicans in the coming weeks, her republicans barring its demand entirely that could talks of spending which democrats acknowledge. a white house spokesman saying the short-term extension is not our plan, adding mr. biden is expecting less during the white house meeting still calling for other conditions including others familiar with the plan.

thomas in pennsylvania, supporting president biden's position. caller: i support biden. it should not be used as a bargaining chip. they want to pass legislation that will hurt low income people . proposes any other time biden would veto it. they are basically using it as a hostage situation. a lot of people calling in regards to support for speaker mccarthy, this affects a lot of the people that are calling. a lot of people that are calling could be affected if joe biden decided to agree to what mccarthy is proposing. so many people would be affected by that.

in regarding to student loans and how they pay their debt and people shouldn't be able to take advantage of the student loan forgiveness. a lot of those wealthy people took ppp loans and were forgiven for millions of dollars but when it comes to the average american , why should we not be able to except that type of offer and have a little relief on our end? i don't agree with what they are doing and i believe it is never for the benefit of the average american person, it's only for the upper echelon and the people in the higher ups making the most money. thank you. host: linda is up next in mississippi on our line for neither side taking the right approach. linda, hello. caller: i think they are both wrong. the democrats are saying all of this was going to be paid for

with the amount of money coming in for taxes. and the republicans were taking office and not taking that budget and breaking it up among those 218 people and making each one of them go through pages of the budget and line out the waste. my credit cards are maxed out and it's all because of how inflation hasn't -- affected me. the interest on my credit card that i pay, i may end up $50 paying off my debt because the rest of it is going towards interest. we have got to start somewhere. host: linda -- caller: everybody needs to cut back. host: linda in mississippi giving her thoughts. she chose the line for neither which means both sides, and

neither side is taking the right approach on this. along the other lines, one supporting the president's approach and speaker mccarthy's approach. you can also text us your thoughts. some posting on her facebook page. this is cindy saying when it comes to approaches speaker mccarthy is applying the wisdom of god cutting wasteful spending while raising the debt ceiling. it's not only wise but also common sense. debbie from facebook saying democrats are taking the right approach. when congress approves new spending that's when the debt ceiling needs to be raised. you don't overspend and then a higher limit. among those of you calling as well. let's hear from david in delaware on our lines for those who support speaker mccarthy. hello, david. caller: hello.

i definitely support speaker mccarthy's approach of taking the debt limit, raising it but also dealing with the debt. i think the democrats chose this option when they had the majority, they passed all the spending and they didn't bother raising the debt limit. they are the ones that created that and now they need to sit down and negotiate and the way they should do it is the senate should pass something which they don't have the votes for what biden is demanding, they are going to have to deal with that as well. they need to pass something, the house is already past something, it needs to be voted on or there needs to be an alternative. if they need to do something in short-term ones they have good

faith, do it but we are going to start dealing with this debt. seeing the sovereign debt crisis in the united states and that's going to cause a whole lot more disruption than going back to 2022. you're talking a very modest proposal and if we can do that modest proposal, there's no way they can do the big problems if they let this keep going. we're going to have a real crisis in this country. we need to stop it and the way to stop it is baby steps right now. host: carrie is next a supporter of president biden's approach. >> it's a revenue problem, of the debt ceiling is a separate issue from the budget, president

biden put his budget out in march, they have to raise the debt ceiling, otherwise we will have a catastrophe, the debt will increase if we do not pay our bills. congress already appropriated for this debt, it was approved, we should pay it just like we have to pay the bill when it comes to. mccarthy has no power. he gave it all away to hold the gavel. it is like i said, it is revenue. what they are concerned about is getting rid of irs agents over the next 10 years so that the rich do not have to be audited. we need them to chip in. some money to get this economy moving, they need to pay their fair share in taxes. host: carrie in las vegas when it comes to support you saw the house republicans supporting that debt limit legislation the starting point of least in their

thoughts for discussions on the debt limit. the senate following suit giving support to the republican effort for the washington times saying mr. mcconnell, the senate minority leader is name to a gop letter addressed to the senate majority leader chuck schumer, the letter warned senate republicans are united behind the house republicans conference in support of spending cuts and structural budget reform as a starting point for negotiations on the debt ceiling. it was signed by 43 gop senators and other republicans moving to block any measures that raises the borrowing limit without spending cuts and other fiscal reforms. the letter was spearheaded by senator mike lee, republican of utah on fox news yesterday talking about the letters creation and what's behind it. here is a portion from yesterday. [video clip] >> as the speaker of the house meets with the white house, it's fair he arrived name position of

negotiating power. we have not only the republican conference in the senate backing what the republicans in the house passed a week before last, we've also now god a solid block of republicans, more than enough to block any so-called clean debt ceiling bill for moving forward. anything that raises the debt ceiling without substantive spending or budgetary recourse. we have republicans were assigned a letter who have said they would stand with us while not signing the letter to ruth -- who refused to bring debate to a close on any clean debt ceiling increase bill. what this means, they can do this. whenever you've got 41 senators unwilling to bring debate to a close on any legislation it cannot pass. we now have more than enough to stop exactly the kind of legislation joe biden wants. what that means is the white house left, to the table and enter into real talks with the house republicans starting with

speaker kevin mccarthy. >> how confident are you those republican stick together. and hang tough on this. are you sure mitch mcconnell is going to go along with this. >> senator mcconnell as the senate minority leader has signed the letter is with us. we have 43 republican senators who've signed this letter. looking exactly as i just described. we have two more hoover strategic regions -- reasons did not want to sign but will stand with us in the vote. others may decide to join us yet. host: that was from the sunday shows yesterday. for the next couple of minutes talking about these negotiations set to take place and also the right approach when it comes to the debt ceiling issue.

jerrod in delaware saying neither party has it. you are next up. caller: good morning. i want to give you some thanks from everyone that's listening. donald trump added one point $9 trillion per year to the debt. that's more than any president before. that's more than barack obama who added 1.1. donald trump added more debt than any other president. i think what they are doing here is bypassing saying we've added all this debt and now the republicans say democrats need to pay for it. the deficit has been passed every single year. i don't member any talks about cuts. kevin mccarthy not saying anything. no stalemates or anything like that. why is it now that it's time to argue about entitlements in the

deficit over the past four years it wasn't. i think biden has the wrong approach, but it is a start. i don't think we should hit that emergency button janet yellen was trying to avoid talking about but at the same time i think trying to make the country and democrats pay for it is ridiculous. i think they need to get off this republican cult but this democrat called. and just people need to understand what's going on. as long as they can keep the people divided than the government can stay in control and we won't have any resolution -- revolution. the deficit isn't something to kill this country over. entitlements are important to everyone. more -- host: jared in delaware.

let's hear from south carolina, supporter of president biden. caller: good morning. thank you for what you do. i've been listening to some of this and it's not that complicated. from what i understand, congress controls the money. i think if i remember correctly it's the house of representatives. the money they are talking about raising is to pay our bills. if you don't pay the bills, something bad will happen. it's the matter of congress putting the bill in front of the president. so they can raise the debt ceiling so that we have paid our bills. the last time they played chicken with this we lost our aaa rating. take care. host: don't forget for tomorrow to watch out for that discussion that will take place, that

expected meeting at the white house between congressional leaders in president biden, the discussion taking place over the debt limit. watch for that following up as far as what happened on c-span as well. follow along on our website. as far as events for today. there is a hearing or at least a forum on improving election policy, election officials discussing policies and procedures to improve election systems. this is sponsored by the senate for election innovation and research. that set to start at 9:30 this morning. you can watch that on c-span two. the website is c-span.org. right after this program, a discussion about foreign policy goals and working towards those goals such as building strong democracy and market systems. it's hosted by the center for strategic and international

studies, that will be at 10:00 on our main channel. you can watch along on our website and apps. connecticut, says neither approach is good when it comes to the debt ceiling. caller: good morning. i think congress is good at spending money, i think we've tried this debt plan in the past and they haven't stop the rate of spending. i think a large reason is a large portion of the country doesn't pay taxes. we don't hold elected people accountable. right now they care who gets the money, they don't care what they get for it. a lot of them, we don't care. one of the most important selling points was they were not in a pay for it. the solution to the overall

budget thing was if you make income, you pay taxes and if that's the case, we want to be interested and make sure they actually deliver something the funds that they spend. host: one more call on this topic. this is michael from florida, supporting president biden's position. go ahead. caller: the debt that they have is due to the trump administration. we have to pay for all those things he did, the tax cuts. you have to pay for them. those people on social aid assistance, we are barely getting by. everyone's thinking they have a cadillac. if he does it's 20 years old. let's just try to pay for the data that we had trump as well

as biden. thank you. host: keep a close eye on c-span , amongst issues of debt ceiling again. getting your thoughts in light of that meeting. you can participate in the usual ways. if you are savvy with tiktok and want to post your own short video, think about sending that in. we invite you to go to our c-span tiktok site. some of you responding typing what if you want to post a short video, even i did it. it's the first time i posted on. you can post there as well. we may be able to use that during the course of the program tomorrow. two discussions taking place in the program, not only discussions of the debt ceiling, immigration policy coming into focus. joining us to talk about that is allen of newsweek, their

congressional correspondent will join us next. later on we will talk about immigration policy later on this week with the end of title 42. discussing preparations for the end of that policy and what happens after it ends. those discussions coming up on washington journal. ♪ >> listening to programs on c-span3 c-span radio just got easier. tell your smart speaker "play c-span radio app," in the lesson to -- listen . catch washington today for a fast-paced report on the events of the day. just tell your smart speaker

"play c-span radio." >> order your copy of the 118th congressional directory now available at c-spanshop.org. it is your access to the federal government with bio and contact information for every house and senate member, the president's cabinet, federal agencies, and state governors. scan the c theight to order your copy today or go to spanshop.org. every purchase helps to support our nonprofit operations. >> a healthy democracy does not just look like this. it looks like this where americans can see democracy out work. get informed straight from the source on c-span. unfiltered unbiased word for word from the nation's capital

to wherever you are because the opinion that matters the most is yourwn. this is what democracy looks like. c-span, powered by cable. >> c-span's campaign 2024 coverages your front row seat to the presidential election. watch our coverage of the candidates on the campaign trail with announcements, meet and greets, and other events. campaign 20 24 on the c-span network. c-span, your unfiltered view of politics. >> washington journal continues. host: this is alex rouhandeh of newsweek. he is there congressional correspondent joining us. thank you for giving us your

time. what is the mood on capitol hill? how would you describe it when it comes to these debt ceiling talks? guest: the mood on capitol hill is really wait and see. last week the house was out, the senate was in so a lot of my conversations with senators were based around seeing what happens. on the republican side they have been deferential to the house and speaker mccarthy, saying that the conversations belong largely between him and biden. on the democratic side they have been waiting to see what happens. leader schumer in the house and later jeffries have been saying they want a clean line.

you have also seen some worries on capitol hill if things will. really some conversations with lawmakers about the 14th amendment, which is a legal theory that under that amendment the biden administration could lift the debt ceiling on itself. senator durbin highlighted the catastrophic effects that a default could have. i also spoke with former ag richard blumenthal and they stressed they would like something to see don at the bipartisan level, but leaving -- host: you spoke to republicans. ted cruz said as far as constitutional arguments there are some questions. guest: i spoke to ted cruz who has argued in front of

the supreme court 9 times. he said there was no viable argument. we saw on the sunday shows secretary janet yellen was also pushing back on the fact that that would be an option there. i spoke with bernie sanders and senator elizabeth warren who stressed, let's let it be a wait and see. host: one of the other things possibly from several fronts is a short-term extension. is there an appetite for that? we are not seeing a ton of appetite get for that. they want to get this done now. republicans have been forceful about wanting to wrap this up, at this moving ahead by that june deadline. democrats have been saying this needs to get done now. we can't hold the country hostage.

we will see how this shapes up with this week starting essentially on tuesday. host: with the players involved going to the white house, what are the expectations? is senator mccarthy expecting something to happen? guest: less time the president and senator mccarthy had a meeting, we saw mccarthy offering positive sentiments saying it was, a productive meeting. they have not publicly met since so that tone has shifted. we don't know what tone we may see coming out of this, especially with the public posturing regarding the democrats' desire for a clean debt limit and republicans' insistence on getting other budget cuts. host: you mentioned janet yellen. how much of the tone switch between the players involved when she mentioned that june 8

deadline? guest: it seemed to heat up the climate on capitol hill, especially among reporters who are trying to see what will be happening here. among lawmakers themselves that has not changed the tone a ton. senate democrats are saying the same things they were before. this will be catastrophic, pointing to a moody's report, the loss of one million jobs. similarly, republicans are saying we need to use this as a tool to negotiate. i heard conversations on capitol hill among a number of republican members that are not totally sure whether they believe what secretary yelena saying, casting her as a member of the administration. host: we knew what happened as

far as senator mccarthy is concerned. how are they hanging together on this? host: it is -- guest: it is tough here. we have the more conservative members, the freedom caucus types that are saying -- some of them did not even agree to support this measure. congressman ken buck, a founding member of the freedom caucus did not vote for this deal that the republicans passed saying it did not go far enough. mccarthy is in a bind here. he needs to stay firm here so he is really pressing a negotiation here among the conservative members of his conference, we are likely to see pushback. host: senator schumer has numbers to look at as well, especially in light of this letter issued by republicans. guest: 43 senate republicans put

their names on this letter that was led by senator mike lee of utah, saying they are behind the effort of the house republicans. the democrats need 60 votes to advance the clean debt limit, and that letter is indicating that will not happen. schumer has been put in this tough position here where he is staying firm on his hopes for a clean limit, but we are not seeing a vital path just yet. host: our guest is with us until 8:30. if you would like to ask him questions, give us a call on the lines. (202) 748-8000 for democrats. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. independents, (202) 748-8002. if you want to text us your

thoughts, you can do that at (202) 748-8003. a timetable of sorts -- congressional republicans are pushing towards the summer. how much time do they have two work at the details before that june 8 deadline. guest: we only have a few weeks before this deadline hits. this week is short. tuesday is when things are starting, so there is not a lot of time left. in previous months this year, we have seen how much time it can take with the different roles in place to get things moving in congress. a lot of people are worried about the time left here. host: 12 working days in the house for that june 1 deadline. guest: there will be talks about who will potentially give up their recess, so to speak. willoughby the house or the senate? host:host: and the likelihood of either -- will it be the house

or the senate? host: the likelihood of either of those things happening? guest: no one wants to give up their recess. it is hard to tell. maybe we will get some better clarity after the meeting between the president and congressional leaders. host: before we go to calls, a brief explanation for the audience, what does title 42 do and what are the concerns there? guest: title 42 was a public health order brought out by the trump administration, but has largely been used under the biden administration when we have seen historic numbers of migrants coming to the southern border. it allows authorities to expel migrants, limit certain avenues of seeking asylum. the administration, a number of

leaders in congress have been adamant that has been significant in terms of keeping things in order at the border. host: the white house has a general plan. what are the congressional concerns about title 42 going away? guest: there are 1500 troops being brought as support but in congress we are seeing them trying to attempt to address this. senator kyrsten sinema and senator thom tillis along with senator joe manchin, senator joe cornyn voted for the bipartisan bill that would extend title 42 for 2 years. in the house republicans are moving forward on their hr-2.

we are likely to see a vote on that by tuesday. host: because title 42 was put on under covid, is -- guest: it is a public health order and that is how they have been using that authority. with the pandemic, the formal health provisions under the pandemic coming to an end, that too is going to come to an end. host: this is alex rouhandeh with newsweek. he covers congress. if you want to ask him questions about what is going on in congress, you can call the line or text us at (202) 748-8003. independent line is up first. this is from illinois. caller: ia wonder if we will hear anything this week from our supreme court on the following issues.

when the legislature can pass a law and money and then bait and switch the american people by clawing the money back for something else, a very gray area. another thing i wonder if the supreme court will look at is the blacking of the white house law books -- log looks by congress. guest: yes, the supreme court has certainly been a major focus as of late with various sort of ethics concerns coming to light among the various justices. i cannot speak to all of the

points you made regarding the supreme court, however when it comes to the biden administration, different sorts of departments withholding document,s sometimes -- withholding documents, sometimes those are a source of security concerns. you may see some pushback there. when it comes to the supreme court in congress, one of the major pieces as of late has been with the absence of senator dianne feinstein, the democrats have not been able to move forward with their nominations for different warships across the country. that is the main focus when it comes to the supreme court on capitol hill, the movement of the judges, and the different ethics concerns. that is what i would say. host: we saw senator durbin hold

that hearing last week on ethics issues in light of the reporting on clearance thomas. will there be any follow-up? guest: it will be interesting to see. senator durbin had said that the conversations regarding the status of congresswoman dianne feinstein have been between leader schumer and dianne feinstein. last week, they discussed of the severity of shingles and how painful and damaging it can be, especially to people in their 80's. senator feinstein is in her late 80's, almost 90. it can be in excruciating disease. we do not know how long she will be out. when it comes to subpoenaing justices to get to the bottom of

some of these ethical concerns, the democrats do not have the ability to do that without bipartisan support until senator feinstein returns. host: is there any reporting on when that return will be? guest: there has not been any hard date given by her. there have been some murmurings among frame press reports that she may return soon, but it is too soon to say. host: this is from max in georgia, independent line. caller: hello. good morning. thank you for taking my call. i have two quick comments. number one about title 42, we need to get better security on the border. i am ok with legal immigration, but illegal immigration brings drugs and crime into the country. number two, term limits.

i wish these congressmen and senators would have term limits. you have them in power and they have been there for 20, 30 years and they are out of touch with the working family. guest: thank you for the question. on the title 42 ending, and what might ensue after that, the push for different border efforts with the house republicans' hr-2 bill, that effort could be the rebuilding of trump's border wall. it would also see funding for additional agents. it would see funding for security. it would also close off, limit certain avenues for asylum. including bringing back the trump remained in mexico policy where individuals seeking asylum will wait in mexico instead of

being in the u.s.. those efforts are what the bill looks like right now. we don't know what support we may see in the senate on that front. i i've spoken with the democrats, including senators chris murphy and padilla, who have said they are waiting to see if it even passes and move from there. different republicans have said they are optimistic it can be a starting point. senator thom tillis has been one who has said that to reporters in the hallway. that is what we are seeing there in terms of actions to address the situation at the border. on term limits that is an interesting point. we are not seeing a lot of significant talk on capitol hill about term limits. different parts of congress operate under a seniority system where in committees -- were

committees are offered to more senior members and they can use that influence on committees to support state efforts. there are incentives to having lawmakers longer but that can come up against the sentiments of the american people like you who have concerns about lawmakers getting out of touch. host: what is the timetable for this week? guest: we are supposed to see a vote on it on tuesday. it is going in front of the house rules committee on tuesday. leader majority -- republican majority leader steve scalise spoke to axios about the date, but with this congress and the different factions in fighting, we can never say for sure whether something will happen on the day leaders say it will. host: do mean amongst

republicans over this bill? guest: exactly. this bill has been an area of a bit of infighting for weeks. we see the conservative house freedom concha's -- freedom caucus members pushing for a bill that limited avenues for legal immigration even further. congressman chip roy of texas stood adamantly behind those provisions. he came into direct conflict with tony gonzalez of texas represents almost a third of the border, spinning the largest border district in the country. gonzalez, who was cochair of the gop's hispanic conference said he did not want to see these avenues of legal immigration being cut off. he was focused as a member of the homeland security committee

on the border enforcement side, but we have seen these two come together. we have seen them cosponsor the bill. mario diaz-balart has put his name as a sponsor for the hr-2 border bill. congressman diaz-balart has cochaired the hispanic conference, so we are seeing all of these wings of the republican coming together. it looks like they may have enough support to get this agenda forward. host: four our guests, alex rouhandeh of newsweek. let's hear from ann. caller: good morning. i would like to make a couple of points. one of the things included in the republican debt ceiling bill that i understand is there is to be a 22% across-the-board cut in

all programs that will affect social security, medicare, and medicaid. republicans are not really talking about it. it sounds like it would affect a lot of people. it sounds like calers agree with that program. the debt ceiling is paying the bills already incurred. president biden has said he wants a clean debt ceiling, and then separately he will discuss the budget, which he has already put out his budget in march and they can do that separately. the republicans are trying to hold hostage certain policies. they did not negotiate under the previous president, president

trump, they pay that debt ceiling bill three times and had no problem paying it. guest: do your first point, as we saw ring the state of the union, there was a gop uproar when biden spoke about cuts to medicare and social security. publicly that is something they have said they are not in favor of doing. in this package the democrats are adamantly against, the gop package put forth, we see different caps on discretionary spending. democrats have argued that cuts to these social programs, including different requirements to raise the number of hours individuals have to work to receive these sorts of government benefits, there have been a lot of democrat opposition to that. on that point, we will see where these negotiations play out. there have been some republicans

who have talked to different members of the media. they might not have supported this bill, if it were going to be seen as a final piece to come through congress, but because there is likely to be negotiations, some of them put forth their support to get the ball rolling when it comes to figuring things out here. to your second point, moving forward i think there will be lots of different talks on that first subject. host: the caller's point on the budget, what is its status? guest: they have stressed the point of keeping the focus on these debt limit negotiations, so the president put forward his budget. republicans say they are focusing on these negotiations here. host: ken is next. ken is in michigan on the independent line.

caller: good morning. i have a quick question to see if this is in the reality scope. the federal government employees 18.2 million people. i work in automotive in detroit here. our largest companies around us like amazon only employee 1.6 million people worldwide. when we run into a tight situation -- we cut on both sides. automotive credit limits don't go up. usually a headcount reduction. this is happened all over. when we talk about doing a cost reduction, or science reduction, is that possible with 18.2 million employees in the federal government? my second question is, when someone says discretionary spending, it is not mandated.

if you are taking the discretionary portions away, why is it something we have already paid for if it is someone's choice, someone's discussion to spend it? i would like to hear your thoughts on those. guest: do your first concern about the jobs cut, that is one of the reasons democrats have been so adamant about their stance on a clean debt limit. they really don't want to see these sorts of programs be affected. really, i think that is where we are seeing that stance come from in one respect. caller: 18.2 million people, that is $1,000,000,000,000.25 on average -- that is $1.25

trillion on average. guest: those concerns you raised are partially and effort from republicans to see the national debt not grow. that is why they went to see these caps on the discretionary spending front. host: when it comes to investigations by the house, what is the status on that? guest: the investigations have been ongoing throughout this congress, and we will see how they continue to move forward as time moves on. the big thing on capitol hill right now has been an effort by senator chuck grassley of iowa and congressman james comer of

kentucky, concerning this alleged document from an unnamed source that the fbi has regarding activities of the president's son hunter biden. that document, which i believe is an interview, has not been released yet. republicans have been wanting to get that interview released. the fbi hasn't. that is one area that has gotten some movement and talk on capitol hill. democrats are pushing back on that, saying it is partisan. host: i know you cover congress, but former president trump is expected on cnn this week as part of an interview, and the expectations coming out of that particularly with his presidential bid. guest: president trump has not been on cnn since the time of his 2016 campaign. he has been on fox and friend

outlets that are more friendly to the gop. we will see how he is challenged in a different way in that setting. we will see what sort of things he says there if he talks to registered republicans. depending on what the president says, that could take up a lot of energy on capitol hill as reporters seek to get the different lawmakers to weigh in on his comments. wearing a busy week when we have title 42 expiring, debt limit negotiations, the house gop bill coming forward, it will be interesting to see how many stories come out of capitol hill about the'former presidents remark -- about the former president's remarks. host: we will squeeze in one more call. caller: i am doing my budget.

i and with my family. i get my bill and to say "oh my god. we have overspent." i cannot tell the company we will not pay you. i have to sit down with my family and discuss how we will cut back. that is why we need to raise the debt ceiling, then they can decide what to do. host: because you addressed to that, can i ask you ma'am -- can i ask you what you are watching in terms of debt ceiling discussions? guest: we will see how the tone changes from senators. will any of the republicans who signed onto that leader start to speak differently? will senator schumer suggest he is open to something that is not a clean raise? will leader jeffries say similar things?

i will bet reading in between the lines, seeing how the tone changes. host: you can see our guest work at newsweek.com. alex rouhandeh works at newsweek. more on those title 42 discussions with our next guest, andrew seeley -- andrew selee. that conversation coming up on washington journal. ♪

>> since 1979 in partnership with the cable industry, c-span has provided complete coverage of the halls of congress, from senate and house floors to 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. ♪ >> c-span now is a free mobile app, featuring your unfiltered view of what is happening in washington live and on-demand. keep up with the day's events with white house events, the courts, campaigns, and more from the world of politics all at your fingertips. you can also stay current with the restoration issues -- the

most recent episodes of washington journal. c-span now available on the apple store and google play. c-span now, your front row seat to washington anytime anywhere. >> c-spanshop.org is c-span's online store. browse through our latest collection of c-span products, apparel, books, home decor, and accessories. there is something for every c-span fan and every purchase helps to support our nonprofit operation. ♪ >> be up-to-date on the latest and publishing with the book tv's podcast about books with current nonfiction book releases

as well as industry news and trends through insider interviews. you can listen through our mobile cpan now or anywhere you get your podcasts. ♪ >> c-span's campaign 2024 coverage is your front row seat to the presidential election. watch our coverage of the candidates on the campaign trail, meeting greets, speeches -- meet and greets, speeches, and events to make up your mind. c-span -- watch on c-span now or anytime online at c-span.org. c-span, your unfiltered view of politics. >> a healthy democracy does not just look like this. it looks like this, where americans can see democracy at work, where citizens are

informed to our democracy thrives. get your information unfiltered, word for word. the opinion that matters the most is your own. this is what democracy looks like. >> washington journal continues. host: this is andrew rouhandeh of the my -- this is andrew selee of the migration policy institute. good morning. as far as the institute itself, explain to people what it is. guest: we are a nonpartisan independent think tank that works on migration issues around the world. we work on a lot of the migration issues in the u.s., but we try to be balanced and evidence-based. we assume migration is generally

positive, but it depends on how you manage it. it is generally good if you manage it well, but how you manage it really matters and people can disagree on that. we bring in different opinions and tried to figure out how we balance them with equity. host: we are here to talk about title 42. as a management policy how has it been since it has been enacted? guest: the assumption of title 42 is that it is the toughest measure ever implemented at the order. --implemented at the border. it has turned out not to be a great enforcement. it has been somewhat -- a lot of people get in. the fact that people get sent back to mexico and not their

country of origin for a migrant perspective is sometimes preferable. for people who are concerned about asylum and protection, it does not allow any access to asylum. it has worn out its welcome because it does not give people access and it does not work as enforcement. host: when the country was suffering from covid the most, was that an accurate application of it at the time? guest: i think it was a justifiable application. o was a skeptic -- i was a skeptic at the time. you can make a case for why people should not be coming into the country. it outlived its usefulness as a public health measure. i think it has so many holes in it at this point. host: what happens thursday? guest: thursday at 11:59 p.m.

all chaos reigns. host: [laughter] guest: the numbers back until 20 were much lower. there was a period in american history when they were higher, but in recent memory the numbers were a lot lower. the trump administration struggled with the rise in numbers. they eventually got it back down with title 42. it is a lot more time-consuming. there are a lot more people coming. it is unclear the u.s. government has the capacity to process everyone who will arrive at the order in a fair and efficient way. i think you will see a lot of chaos in the first few days. host: secretary mayorkas said we go from title 42 to something called title viii, different processing there. guest: title 42 was a measure

that allowed the u.s. to expel people. usually to expel people to their country of origin but you are not doing a lot of process. now they have to do process. if someone comes in, if they say they have a fear of returning to their country, the u.s. has to do something about it. they are about to announce to roll we think that says if you come between ports of entry and you do not have an appointment, we will presume ineligibility. they do have to do some process to see if they have a fear of being returned and to deport them they have to formally do paperwork, put them on a plane, and return them to their country of origin. i think they will be doing that a lot. host: our guest andrew selee of the immigration institute will

take your questions. democrats, (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001. independents, (202) 748-8002. if you live in a border state, (202) 748-8003. you can use that same number to text us your comments as well. those border state residents, what have their experience been like? what are they expecting thursday? guest: it has changed over time. there were massive amounts of people living in border communities. what the white house is working with them with is how to process them quickly. the numbers went way down. i think they are expecting a huge dilution because the government will not -- huge dilution because the government will not -- huge deluge because

the government will not be able to process everyone. my colleagues went from san diego all the way to brownsville, and we were able to go to border patrol stations, places of entry, and talk with ngo's. we were quite impressed by that. a a lot of this will break down. it will take them longer to process people. numbers will go up because they are no longer certain they will be able to get in. host: sec. mayorkas in brownsville, texas last week. spoke about -- he talked about what happens afterwards. >> we are building pathways. at the same time we will deliver consequences for individuals who are arrive at our southern border irregularly.

that is our commitment and our obligation of cutting smugglers out and taking care of the needs of individuals who qualify for relief. in a post-title 42 environment, we will be using our expedited removal authorities under title eight of the united states code. that allows us to remove individuals very quickly. we will by may 11 finalize the role we published. individuals that do not pursue our legal pathways will be per assume do an eligible for asylum and will have a higher burden of roof to overcome that presumption of ineligibility -- proof to overcome that presumption of ineligibility. guest: the experience will undoubtedly be different. i think it is a smart strategy

on paper. anything that government does on paper, you have to figure out how to put into practice. they have tried to open up as many legal pathways as possible. there are means in the labor market for people to come and work. it is hard to do, but they have stretched what they got a little bit. they are trying to offer protection needs for those in the region. they will open several centers in guatemala to screen people ahead of time. skip the smuggler, if they have protection needs, and if not tell them there are likely not to get -- if someone shows up without a visa or without an appointment for asylum already ahead of time, they will process them an expedited removal, which means

-- they assume that over time the more people who get returned, the more people will realize they cannot get the border. it will bring numbers down. host: some of those things expected after may 11. we spoke about those regional processing centers in guatemala, the streamlined family reunification process for cubans, el salvador in's, guatemalan -- el salvadorians, guatemalas. can you describe how that works? guest: in northern mexico you can get on this app and schedule an appointment for asylum. the app has some glitches. people cannot always get on it. i hast trouble recognizing darker faces. it has trouble recognizing children.

it is still a draw for people to northern mexico. they know they have to begin to process people earlier. many of us love the idea that any human being that shows up at our barter can ask for protection. i is -- at our border can ask for protection. it is a beautiful idea. the reality is that is it has become a really hard process to manage for most countries these days. anyone can show up and ask for asylum. what they are trying to do is push it back earlier, identified people with real need. we need to catch some of these people earlier on before they hire a smuggler. host: our first color comes from jeannie. she is in virginia -- caller comes from jeannie. she is in virginia.

caller: i live in what is considered a rural area. i am noticing and influx of migrant -- noticing an influx of migrants who are staying. it used to be that migrants would come and work the fields and go home. when you become americanized, you will do like americans. people cannot work the fields year-round. they will have a period where the fields are dormant. same thing -- the main thing here right now is tomatos and people are out there working the fields, but as soon as they get a chance they will go for other jobs. i am seeing that on the roads, immigrants working on the roads, immigrants working in fast food, and i am wondering about what happened while of the americans who used to do those jobs myself

-- happened to all of the americans who used to do those jobs myself. when you have more immigrants you will, be using more farmland that will go under pavement, housing, and roads. housing we have very little of here, but you will lose florist, you will lose wildlife -- forest, you will lose wildlife. host: we will let our guest respond. guest: that is a, great set of concerns and a legitimate set of concerns. what you want for some jobs, you want a mix of things. we have always wanted some people to come here, to become americans, to stay in this country. it is what made us an entrepreneurial society, but not for every job. agriculture is a good example. it is often helpful to have

people come in for circular migration. it turns out a lot of migrants prefer that too, because it does not mean they have to stay for years in the united states. we have one program for cultural workers for the -- workers called the h2a program. lawmakers are trying to make it easier to access and to create incentives for people to use it, rather than create a draw for people to come across the border illegally. the bush administration gave a huge boost to this administration. we have seen this program grow throughout the years. her many -- tourism is this way also. it is seasonal. it is good to have the seasonal workers because it allows them to stay rooted in their communities, and allows them to

be here in temporary ways. there is no magic wand to make it happen. host: there was a story today over concerns -- about concerns over resources. host: that is a heat -- guest: that is a huge issue. there will be a question of lawyers who are able to help with the expedited hearings. there are not enough clearly. that will be a huge issue. there are always concerns. we want a growing population to pay taxes as the rest of the population grows older. we need people coming to this country. host: luis is next. you're on with our guest. guest: top of the morning -- caller: top of the morning to you guys. i may have missed you over this

comment, but we do know 42 was placed on with the trump administration due to the covid. when i am not hearing is that there was a republican appointed by trump judge who removed 42 and did not notify the biden administration of what he was about to do, now biden and the asked for a court order to give them time to set up. can you tell me why this republican judge, appointed by trump, released 42 when covid is still in america? guest: the administration has wanted to end title 42 since last year. they want to do and it, but the courts kept it alive -- end it,.

but the courts kept it alive i will stay away from the reasoning there. they kept it alive for a a while. it looks like it would in in september -- would end in september. when the biden administration ended the public health emergency, that ended their rationale. the supreme court said the public emergency is ending, there is no reason you keep title 42. they understand it will be chaotic at the end. it will be very chaotic this week. there will be lots of pictures of people crossing rivers in overflowing border patrol stations. it will be a mess. in the long term they have to build a better system, a system where fewer people show about

the border in the first place, more people have access to legal pathways, and most people know that when they get to the border it is too late. host: let's call it a search. will that be a consistent thing, or does it taper off? guest: it tapers off eventually if they do the right ring -- the right thing. it tapers off if they are able to create legal pathways. people will keep coming, if they do not have another hope of coming into the u.s.. if they know how to get into the u.s. legally, there is a good chance many of them will get in line. we. have created with canada and spain some additional pathways those countries have you should be able to walk into a processing center and learn how to get to a country where you can earn more money.

a a lot of people would be willing to get in line if they knew it was hard to get across the u.s. border in the first place. people have not known that until now. host: this is from danny. he is in yuma, arizona. caller: good morning. good morning mr. selee. with all due respect, please let's keep this conversation real. this all started -- these people are breaking american law. they are breaking the law by line jumping everybody else. i am down here in yuma, arizona. we are a small community. the consumption of all these people, and all of the drugs coming through is not right. joe and the democrats and

mayorkas, they all lie. the press conferences, all they do is lie. unless you watch fox and see the drone footage of people coming across here, you would not know. i did not mean to get all fired up there. host: what do you want to learn from our guest? caller: ok. what i would like to learn from our guest is why don't they just shut down the border like trump did and start from scratch and do it legally,? i am all for legal immigration. i am dating a mexican national on the others, so please do not call me -- on the other so please do not call me -- on the other side so please do not call a racist. guest: i have been to yuma, and

it is a beautiful city. dispassionately, we did a report in 2013, looking at the effect that the numbers of mexicans have gone down and central americans are next. it became really visible in 2018 under the trump administration. the reason is central americans there are reasons -- americans, the same reason europeans came to the u.s. earlier, they know they have a better chance of a good life in the u.s. the trump administration was able to shut it down, but only because of the global pandemic. i don't think we would have seen the numbers go down this far otherwise. i think you are right that the

biden administration was not clinical in trying to keep some of the enforcement measures going. they were trying to do it. the created a perception that it was easier, but people were coming anyway. they started coming at the end of the trump administration before biden even got there. it is less about politics than it is about policy and reality. you have a few crises in the atmosphere. nicaragua has melted down, venezuela has melted down, cuba is going through a particularly difficult patch. you have that, you have central americans who know this is their best option. we will see what happens. hopefully, they hit on a way of helping people while discouraging people from the border. i think drugs is somewhat

separate. . they tend to come through ports of entry in vehicles. we sometimes conflate these issues, but they tend come through different pathways. host: back in october, there were 2.7 million border crossings. what does that number tell you? guest: we are on a pathway to have a similar number this year. through canada and other seaports and elsewhere, it is encounters and not people. the number of people are less and then there are people who are not detected. sometimes we say the number of people is less, but there is probably another 600,000 or so. it is a large number of people. it is the largest we have ever seen. it is hard to know for sure because in the early 2000's a

lot of people were coming. we do not really know how many people came across the border. it is a large number. the last caller hit on something important here. immigrants come -- i would never blame the immigrants themselves. people come because they're trying to make a better life for their family. the reality is it is not good for us as a country to encourage people to do that or two have a system that encourages people to do that. host: let's hear from michael. michael is from texas, democrats line. you're on with andrew selee. caller: i am a veteran, and i am on social care. i am disabled. i know about all of the bases, the u.s. army bases, all of that

are not being used. they can use those bases and use them and take people from the border, take them to all of these different borders without overcrowding. they have barre -- barracks, housing, they can use them, they can bring planes in their, they can deploy you out of there. they talk about securing the border. they have to put people on the planes, to come to the base is not being used, haul them there. they have facilities. they can check them out and everything they need to do. if talking about, i am going to send them to a sanctuary state and all that kind of mess. host: ok, michael. got your point. thank you. guest: it is a great point. i think there is a lot of interest in doing this.

it is complicated. when you try and do things across the u.s. government, i marvel at watching this from the outside. how complicated it is to do each step along the way, particularly when you are working among agencies. i think there is a challenge logistically. there is interest in doing this, in particular where i think they may end up doing this, people waiting for their asylum hearings. what we do now is let people go in the united states or keep them in custody. in a detention facility while they have the first step of their asylum process. we let them free for the second step and they go with their families. that is somewhat unfair. if someone gets a negative decision down the road, you have to remove them from the life they have started in living with family members. they have probably started a job. it would make a lot more sense in people in some intermediate state that is not a detention center. his and intermediate -- an intermediate state while people

get their asylum case decided a few months, not ears as it is now? there are ways of building this. with the afghans, they were in military bases. when the u.s. government wants to do this, they can do it. because the military was involved in the afghan action to get people out, they opened up military bases and had people there. i remember being on an airplane with an afghan family that were headed to be to their final destination, moving to canada. i asked the young boy, how was it on the military base? he said it was boring, but they treated us well and we ate well. i think you can create a condition that is not a detention, it does not feel like a detention center. but, it is an intermediate between being in detention and let loose to start a new life while you're case is being decided. host: it seems the perception is

that if someone comes whether to the processing center between the processing centers, they give an inside lump -- an asylum story. they are automatically granted asylum. guest: in the past, the first step of a asylum process was called credible fear. the bar was fairly low. the idea was he wanted, people when they first arrive, they do not have the documents, a lawyer. you want to keep the bar fairly low. the problem is, 80% of people at one point were actually getting through the credible fear process whereas only 25% or fewer were getting asylum in the end. it was a broad funnel and narrow at the end. what they are trying to do now, they are trying to do a presumption of ineligibility. they are checking to see if people can meet a much higher standard, in which case they will allow them in on asylum. we had -- we went from low

standards that let a lot of people in. host: troops set to go to the border. what is their role? guest: logistics, part of the thing military does well. i have had a chance to interact with border patrol for 30 years. one of the things i was fascinated with, there has always been lots of former army and navy, sometimes marines in the border patrol. how much they are in leadership -- that ship positions. military trains people to do logistics. a lot of people are moving into leadership roles have this military background, logistics. i suspect the soldiers are going to do the same thing. they are sending them to do surveillance. a lot of it is getting basic nuts and bolts of done. it is what the u.s. government has when it needs additional people. the military gets used not in domestic law enforcement, but in

all sorts of other ways to back up other law enforcement agencies because they have extraordinary ability to move in situations and problem solve and make things move in the way they need to. host: is there not enough current staff to handle what is going to happen after thursday? guest: not even slightly. the numbers go down, yes. we do not know where it is going to be two months from now, maybe the answer is yes. right now, they are going to be overwhelmed. that is why they want military there. to have other people doing things rather than having the military do logistics stuff -- there is a lot of stuff border patrol officers have to do, moving people around. they have created a group of people who are processors, but they need more of that to be able to handle the numbers. host: we are having a conversation with andrew seele of the migration policy institute. we are going to hear from ralph, republican line.

caller: good morning, everybody. the democrats open border policy is simply a way of importing democratic borders to create a one party system. it is completely wrong. thank you. guest: hey, ralph. i do not lead to politics, so i have to say if that is the democrats plan, it is a shaky one. the evidence suggests the latino hispanic voters are increasingly up for grabs between the parties. things change over time. historically, yes, latinos and hispanics were in the democratic column. but, that is changing now. you are seeing increasing number of latino elected officials who are republican. a lot of them in texas, and florida. i am not sure. i cannot say there are no democrats who have never thought of that. that would be a bad plan. host: asking about the

employer's role in all of this. twitter, how would an employer know their new hire is using someone else's social security number? she adds, they do not. to the idea of the employer's will in hiring -- where do they fall? guest: about a quarter of all employers in the u.s. use the central system for checking people's social security. there is a central database now. it has never been mandated. it is mandated in a few states. it has never been mandated nationally. it has gotten glitches. there is a lot of fear there will be false positives where people turn out to be in a sense using a different social security number, there -- they are not. it needs to be developed. i think someday, we are going to have to get to the point particularly if we can have a say in conversation about immigration in this country, and we figure out how do we get a number of people we need for the

jobs we need in which sectors, how do people come in in an orderly way? i think there will be a conversation about how we make social security numbers much more verifiable. host: do you think employers are adequately punished if they are found to hire people that are illegal immigrants to the united states? guest: they are, but there is not a lot of inspections. overall, the numbers that have been punished are fairly low. yes, there is not much disincentive there. it is not a cure all to verify people's social security numbers. what happens also is that people often higher contractors. contractors are not necessarily subject to the same verification. there is lots of ways of layering this. no system will be perfect. right now, no. there has not been an appetite for it. the sense has a was been, the system is kind of broken. do not force us to be totally compliant unless you are willing to fix the legal immigration

system. that has been the stalemate for a long time. i think we are going to get the point where we have that conversation, how do we have the legal immigration system we need and make it credible? host: many congresses have debated that. what has been the sticking point? guest: it is that. we have tried for years to do coverage of immigration reform. how do you actually think about -- it was a three legged stool, let's legalize people who are here already. we can debate how long you have to have had been here. some large group of people, let's figure out the legal immigration system for the future and do the enforcement side on e-verify, the database. i think that is broken down. it has been a one shop deal. you're able to get everything down in a one shop here. that is not going to happen in the congresses we have or polarized politics now.

we need to start thinking about smaller advances that democrats and republicans can reach some summer to -- some sort of agreement on. host: what is a good chunk to start with? guest: i would start with asylum and border management now. i would add in their daca, young people have been here since they are kids. i think that is something you would see a lot of support from. a lot of democrats are willing to go with some tighter, better funding for the border patrol for ports of entry and tighter restrictions on asylum at the border. host: we have republicans voting on a border bill this thursday. what do you think the concept it offers? guest: i think it is the old enforcement only approach, which has not worked well. i do not know if it is going to pass. there are a number of republicans that are skeptical about this.

either number of republicans that are very aware you need to open legal pathways at the same -- at the same time or you get tougher at the order. if you do not give people a line to get into, they are unlikely to be deterred by enforcement. enforcement will likely keep getting overrun. i think we have seen the biden administration try to do something -- i would not say open borders, but we are probably too much on the permissive side. you are seeing republicans go all in on enforcement. i think somewhere in the middle, there is a meeting ground. whether politicians can get to that meeting ground, i do not know. we also recognize legal pathways. we need to not just control migration and give people a way in, but because the job market in the united states needs this. we know we need workers in some sectors of the economy. host: we have set aside a line for those in border states. this is chris in new mexico.

go-ahead. caller: good morning. we have a labor shortage and -- in a number of sectors like hospitality, agriculture and construction. i have long advocated a comprehensive guestworker program with i/o metric ids -- biometric ids that will allow u.s. officials to keep track of who is here and give those people rights, access to the court system if they are not. i am wondering if that sounds like a reasonable solution. secondly, it seems that all the fox watchers in here are calling in complaining that the border is wide open. that is not at all true. but, that fox advertising that

the rest of the world gives the people in latin america the idea that it is wide open and exacerbates the problem. i will take your comments on fine -- offline. guest: thank you, chris. i love new mexico, by the way. i agree with what you're saying. i think we have long advocated for the -- visa, that would allow people to come in temporarily but with a bridged permanence if they worked a number of years. five years, 10 years or might be industry specific. they would work in specific industries. they would have some ability to move among employers. it is often good for the economy. how that would be negotiated is a political question. it is a political question and how you decide how flexible that is. we clearly need a lot more workers than we have right now

in the u.s. economy. we are going to need almost all growth in the labor market right now comes from immigration, and all growth in population and labor market in about 10 years will come from immigration. most of it right now. we are going to need to figure this out sooner or later. the biggest reason to do it is it helps all of us. it helps the economy as a whole. i think we are going to get to that debate. the border is certainly not open. it is more porous than it should be. but, it is not open. the reason it is not open is you have to use a smuggler to get across it. people know now whether or not they are afraid of u.s. enforcement. they are afraid of what can happen to them along the journey. i am worried we have outsourced enforcement to smugglers in some ways. people might know they might be able to eventually get in, especially under title 42, but the cost of doing this is putting yourself in the hands of criminal organizations that may or may not treat you with dignity and may subject you to a

really dangerous or horrific situation in your life. i hope we can get to a place where we have more legal pathways like you are talking about. we can figure out who needs protection early before they get a smuggler and we are tougher on the border. those three things would begin to change the equation and take the smugglers out of the picture. host: you have probably seen that headline stemming out of that shooting in texas in may, that person suspected had been deported four times. i suppose this shapes the conversation. guest: overall, immigrants commit fewer crimes than those native born. i say somewhat jokingly, if you are concerned about safety, go to a immigrant heavy neighborhood. immigrants are much less likely to commit crimes. that said, the fact someone has been deported four times can manage to get back into the country again and stay is disturbing and that tells you the system is porous at the border in a way it should not be.

we should be able to check people -- i do not know if they ever flagged him for violent behavior. that would be a different question. it is less worrisome if someone crossed multiple times to work and went back. if someone is flagged for violent behavior and is able to make it back into the country, that should worry us. host: five more minutes with our guest. brenda in south carolina, democrats line. caller: i am very enlightened by the fact that the hard total labor force growth is from the immigrations and not from any americans. that amazes me. i think as a democrat that biden has not done enough to do things to alleviate all the people, the masses, that have come in and the overflow to the border towns. it is this concert in, --

disconcerting, i do not think even any of our border towns need to deal with that. i think with all of the influx of immigration coming in, i wonder with an employment opportunities, are they question when they come in? what skills do you have? where can we put you in the country that would actually be a boon to us, like we have infrastructure bills, roads that need fixing. we even have doctor blights in rural areas. i do not know how many doctors come in. that would be beneficial to our people, also. that is all i've got to say. host: thank you, brenda. guest: love south carolina. my brother is from south carolina. we get more people through legal

immigration. we have talked lots and lots about people coming illegally across the border. the reality is, we get many more people through the legal immigration system. those people tend to be -- we are mostly getting people still through family connections, not through employment. there is parts of the system we bring in people for employment as doctors, nurses, engineers. most of it is family ties. same with people coming across the border, they have to figure out their job prospects. it surprisingly works in this country. i have been amazed people find their way into the niches in the economy where their skills match. that is partially because recent immigrants move a lot. that is true whether they come in legally or not. they are willing to pick up and move somewhere in a way the rest of us do not necessarily do, including immigrants who have been here a long time. we suddenly have a bunch of things. infrastructure bill, chips bill,

investment in green technology. an aging population that needs care workers. i am beginning to work where we are going -- to wonder where we are going to get these people from. if we tamper down the polarization on the border, maybe we can get to some of these conversations. what are the right legal chanters -- channels for? this in rural areas, they are more likely to offer -- born. we need doctors, we need nurses, we need people to work in nursing homes. we need people to build factories. we need engineers. we need scientists. if we can get to that conversation at some point, that would be a huge advantage for our country. we should be thinking about where immigration fits in.

the debate i wish we were having was, how does immigration fit into making us stay successful, innovative, entrepreneurial country for the future? host: one more call from arizona, janet is on our republican line. caller: first of all, i do not agree with anything you say. guest: [laughter] thank you. caller: i am 76. i am sorry. i lived in the valley my entire life. i just moved up to a little, rural town. we are going to see if we like it. i know what it is like in arizona. i seen it come. we do not have to watch fox. we watch our local news. i am sure the people in texas, everybody can tell you what it is like. it is horrendous. they have destroyed our neighborhood. what are we going to do with them? we do not have enough hospitals to take care of people now. we do not have any facilities to take these people and they have these little letters -- they

show it when they come in. they are told what to say and they cross that --right now on washington journal, you use have both sides on the same subject. i loved it. that is what i miss on your show when mr. lamb was on. i loved him. host: thank you for watching. this is the guest we have. you have asked him major points. we will let him respond. guest: i have only got this morning, at least for this hour. look, we agree on the fact the numbers are too big. we do not want large numbers of people coming to the border and entering unauthorized or even entering with permission. we do not want to be making decisions at the border. this is why i think -- i go back to the three-part solution. i do not know if it is going to work in practice. you begin to figure out how you can have more people coming legally who are decided earlier. they forgo the smugglers, they are legally entering.

you have more people getting protection earlier and you are much tougher at the border and do not allow people to come in other ways. it is going to take a wild to get there. i am not sure if it is going to happen in short order. where we disagree is, despite the fact so many people are coming to this country legally but also in the past three or four years through unauthorized channels, it is surprising how well the system works. it is surprising the fact most people get jobs. the folks you see in shelters are predominantly venezuelans who did not have ties in this country, some nicaraguans. you do not see salvadoreans, mexicans, guatemalans and cubans in the shelter because they are going with family, getting jobs quickly, moving into the labor market. it is surprising how well it works. it would work so much better if people were entering the country legally. we have got to figure out how to get more of these people in

legally and be clinical about not letting in those that do not have a way of entering legally. host: the website for our guest organization is migration policy.org. andrew seele serves as the president of the migration policy institute. coming, we return to the question we started with this morning. debt ceiling and various factors to approach the deadline. president bide sayto raise the debt ceiling with later talks on spinning. eaker mccarthy once talks on spending before that happens. you may agree with the president,he speaker, maybe neither. if you agree when it comes to the approach on the debt ceiling with president biden, the number to call is (20 748-8000. if you agr with speaker mccarthy, call (202) 748-8001. it --f you think neither has the right approach, call (202) 748-8002. ♪

>> watch video on demand anytime online at c-span.org and try our points of interest feature, a tool that es markers to guide you to newsworthy and interesting highlights of our coverage. use points of interest anytime online at c-span.org. ♪ >> if you are enjoying book tv, sign-up for our newsletter using the qr code on the screen to receive the schedule of upcoming programs, author discussions, book festivals and more. book tv every sunday on c-span2 or anytime online at book tv.org. television for serious readers. ♪ ♪ >> c-span shop.org is c-span's online store. browse through our latest collection of c-span products, apparel, books, home decor and accessories. there is something for every c-span fan and every purchase

helps support our nonprofit operation. shop now or anytime at c-spanshop.org. ♪ >> c-span now is a free mobile app featuring your unfiltered view of what is happening in washington live and on-demand. keep up with the day's biggest events with live streams and floor proceedings and hearings from the u.s. congress, white house events, the courts, campaigns and more from the world of politics all at your fingertips. stay current with the latest episodes of washington journal and find scheduling information for c-span's tv networks and c-span radio, plus a variety of compelling podcasts. c-span now is available at the apple store and google play. download it for free today. c-span now. your front row seat washington, anytime, anywhere. ♪ ♪ >> the up-to-date in the latest

in publishing with book tv' podcast about books. with current, nonfiction book releases plus bestseller lists as well as industry news and trends through insider interviews. you can find about looks on c-span now, our free mobile app or wherever you get your podcasts. ♪ >> "washington journal" continues. host: washington post recently did a poll asking people questions about the upcoming debt limit and the talks set to take place this week. one of the questions they asked about is the approach that both sides have taken on this issue. the question is, without the step of passing that legislation, the government could default on its debt. do they think on with should? they asked people if they should put debts if president biden agrees to cut spending or if that should be handled

separately, some people offering no opinion. overall adults, 26% saying the government should pay the debts only if the president is allowed or if the president agrees to cut spending. 58% of those saying the debt payment and federal spending should be handled separately. i am not surprised, democrat saying only 16% of democrats in the president should agree to spending cuts. 74% saying the debt payments and issues of that should be handled separately. republicans with 40% saying the president should do spending cuts before debt ceiling is raised. 46% saying those issues should be handled separately. with that spirit and mind, we want to ask you about who you think has the right approach when it comes to debt ceiling discussions? if you agree with president biden about the issue of a clean debt bill being passed and later discussions on spinning, call (202) 748-8000. if you agree more with speaker mccarthy and republicans, issues

of spending should be addressed first before the debt ceiling is raised, call (202) 748-8001. perhaps you think neither party has the right approach on this issue. (202) 748-8002 is the number to call. you can noise text us at (202) 748-8003. it was late last week when president biden in an interview on msnbc was asked about issues of the debt ceiling and the approach he and his administration are taking on the issue. here is a portion of that interview. [video clip] >> it might be ok with us defaulting. it could hurt you more politically. given that, are you prepared to vote for the 14th -- invoke 14th admin meant to? -- thedebt ceiling >> i have not gotten there yet. here is the deal. first of all, this is not your father's republican party. >> no, sir. >> this is a different group. i think we have to make it clear to the american people that i am

prepared to negotiate in detail with their budget. how much are you going to spend, how much are you going to tax, where can we cut? in the first two years of mayan ministration, i cut the debt by $1.7 trillion. more than anybody has ever done in history. their budget goes in and there is no possibility they can pass their budget. zero possibility. they cut -- anyway. i am sure you can get going on it. >> when you say this is not your father's republican party, is kevin mccarthy an honest broker for you to negotiate with? >> i think he is an honest man. he had to make a deal that was 15 votes. 15 votes where he just about sold away everything that the far, far right. there is a republican party and there is maga republicans. the maga republicans have put in

-- put him in a position where he wants to stay speaker, he has to agree with things he maybe believes, but are just extreme. host: the june 1 deadline is the deadline to meet for the debt ceiling. the president will meet with congressional leaders tomorrow at the white house to discuss these matters. you can give your thoughts about an approach, who has the right approach when it comes to dealing with the debt ceiling. if you think it is president biden and congressional democrats, (202) 748-8000. if you think it is speaker mccarthy and congressional republicans, (202) 748-8001. if you think neither side has the right approach, give us a call at (202) 748-8002. you can text us at (202) 748-8003. starting us off, mark in silver spring, maryland says the president and democrats have the right approach. go ahead. caller: i do agree with the president and i have two quick

points supporting my position. one, the speaker argues if any parent should take away a credit card from their kid if they are overspending and you tell the credit card company, well, i am not going to pay you because i'm going to teach my kid a lesson. what is going to happen to your credit rating? what is going to happen to this country's credit rating if we do not pay the bills? second point, the republicans claim they want to pay bills, but if they cut the country's revenue on the irs, what is going to happen? this is called defunding law enforcement from going after tax cheats. now, who is defunding policing? what happened to the law-abiding citizens?

this year, the irs answered 85% of the calls. before funding of this past previous budget, only 15% of the calls were answered. the speaker leads the march to attack the u.s. credit rating and at the same time the funds law enforcement against -- defun law enforcement against crooked tax cheats. host: let's hear from cynthia, saying neither side is taking the right approach. cynthia is in texas, hello. caller: good morning. i do not think to say there is a budget ceiling is a misnomer in the first place. [laughter] every time the budget goes around, that is number one. number two, you cannot spend more than your revenue. number three, you are going to have to stop the new committees, the new organizations, if the

government continues to expand on, starting with green energy. it is not a necessity. we can function with what we have right now. we might have to put off our green agenda and some of the other pet peeve projects that each congressman and each representative in the senate receives from increasing their spending. go back to the have-to's. go back to a balanced budget. go back to, we cannot spend more than we take in. host: ok. cynthia air in texas. the hill talks about this meeting separate tomorrow, and remind people of the various sides and positions taken. republicans maintaining that the raising the debt ceiling because it has been a necessity to deficit spending is connected to the negotiations over future

government outweighing their debt ceiling package combined those issues in the past -- in the house giving leverage as a starting point in the talks with president biden, democrats disagreeing, emphasizing hiking the debt limit does not authorize -- nearly empowers the treasury. with that in mind, they are insisting on divorcing the debates, raising the debt ceiling quickly as a standalone bill. assuring jittery markets no default is coming. you may think both positions do not work. pick the line that best represents you. supporter of president biden's position and democrats, this is michelle in colorado, hello. caller: hi. i went over the debt limit that mccarthy and president biden -- i do not like what mccarthy is doing. i think he was pushed into hurting the people of the country.

as a veteran, the cuts he is making to veterans is a hard idea and i take care of my mom. she gets $1530 in social security. with rent, that does not cover it. they want to cut social security and stuff. hurting people is not the way to go. i think taxing the rich and making them pay their fair share would be helpful. that was my thought. host: the house gop plan social security and medicare not mentioned on that. one of the issues or at least some of the issues would be raising that that ceiling. it would happen in 2024 and reduce spending currently going on to fy 2022 level. it would limit future spending growth to 1% annually over the next decade. it would effort to recover unspent covid-19 funds. it would impose you were rk

requirements for recipients of financial aid. it wouldlock student debt cancellation. it would also reform energy permitting and repeal green energy programs. that is some of the proposals being used as a starting point for speaker mccarthy and republicans as they set to meet with president biden and congressional leaders tomorrow. president biden asking republicans to put forth a budget to debate back as a discussing point. let's hear from sarah on our nido line in south carolina. hi. caller: hi, how are you? host: i am well, how about yourself? caller: pretty good, thank you for asking. i wanted to call in because i saw there were three options to call in on. i think both parties have valid points. but, i cannot agree with either one totally. it is very disappointing to me that they are not setting a good

example for the country, where we are in a lot of turmoil now on many different levels. of course, the debt ceiling is a huge one. but, it is very hard for me to understand why they cannot come to an agreement for the good of the country. i see from my perspective that there is a lot of waste in spending, a lot of money not used that has been given to groups. i do not understand why there is not better policing of how the moneys are spent. because i think there is a lot of money out there that just is not used the way it was designed to be used. i wish the two groups would get their act together and form a

common solution for what we've got going on right now. it is going to be very hard. the two parties are so politically divided. i have a hard time sometimes talking to friends and family, because you cannot discuss politics without people having a fit. [laughter] i am like, how can you have a conversation with someone and you cannot because they are going to think ill of you and i'm taking, everyone is entitled to their own opinion. people are not allowing people to have an opinion anymore. host: ok. that is sarah in south carolina. let's hear from margie, supporter of speaker mccarthy's position in pennsylvania. caller: good morning. i would hope speaker mccarthy would hold his ground. i think the list you just showed

is reasonable. the longest walk begins with a single step. i do not think the man on the street has any idea of what $31 trillion even is. do they even know that $1 trillion by itself is millions of millions? i would think we have to start someplace. hold your ground, speaker mccarthy, and come to some kind of a deal. the president might say it is nonnegotiable, but the first check that somebody does not get, they are going to blame the white house. they are not going to blame speaker mccarthy. thank you. host: that is margie in pennsylvania. let's hear from -- next up. caller: hello, hello. thank you. i assumed the neither addition.

i believe they should print the $1 trillion platinum coin. we should do the legal option, which even though seems embarrassing or awkward or weird, it is important if we believe we should not default. and not raise the debt ceiling. thank you. host: you mean, the 14th a minute discussion has been going on the last few days? caller: no, no, no. i mean, the $1 trillion platinum coin. it is a legal option to print this going to resolve the issue. host: in georgia, the previous caller talked about blame, particularly if the government does go into default. the washington post survey or polls ask that question, the question was of the debt limit is not raised in the government goes into default, who would you blame? among all adults, 39% would blame republicans in congress. 36% would blame president biden.

16% would blame both. democrats, 78% would blame republicans with 9% claiming present biden. independents, 38% would blame republicans. 29% would blame president biden. 24% said they would blame both equally. 9% republicans blaming republicans in congress. 10% saying both equally would be appling. to that vein, that is why i am asking the question as far as approach is concerned, who has the best approach on the issue? let's hear from randy in michigan, supporter of president biden's position on this effort. good morning. caller: good morning, pedro. i would like to start by thanking you and all the men and women it takes to bring us this program. you are doing a great service for the nation. i have no problem with negotiating when you negotiate reasonably. but, i have to bring up a few points on republicans list they

are negotiating for that not make sense. you want to roll back spending to 2022. let's take 4% interest that we have had and it has been higher. that puts it 8% behind already right off the start. you want to reduce spending to 1% annually. that is not taking account of inflation. i agree, rollback covid fretrvet using them. that is a good idea. most of their list does not make sense for their argument about being fiscally responsible, because they are trying to put us in a spot where we are behind right off the bat. i am not sure if this is just mentality of the january 6 continuing where they cannot get the mob to overthrow the government, they will break us

doing it this way. but, i have to go along with president biden on this one. the debt ceiling, there is no negotiating on. you pass it, the budget process is where you negotiate. they are the ones that want regular order, then argue for regular order because right now, you are not. host: ok, that is randy in michigan. we are going to take these calls for 15 minutes or so. pick the line that best represents you when it comes to these debt ceiling positions that have been taken. do you agree with president biden and congressional democrats? (202) 748-8000 is the number to call. do you agree with speaker mccarthy and congressional republicans? (202) 748-8001. if you think neither has the right approach, (202) 748-8002. you can post on our facebook page, our twitter feed, also tiktok. we have a tiktok page in which we posted a video we are going to use for tomorrow's program

for these discussions, particularly as these discussions take place at the white house. if you want, go to tiktok and record a short video of your thinking of the question we posed. make it about a minute in length. make sure you put your name and where you are from. post the video there. we may be able to use it for tomorrow's program. follow along on our tiktok page. let's hear from diane in new jersey, saying neither approach she supports. hello, diane. caller: hi, how are you? i do not know really what is in the budget that they could cut here and i mean, i do not work for the government. i really only has bits and pieces all over. they want to attack the programs that hurt the most vulnerable. children, veterans, senior citizens. we are really in a bind. if we do not increase the debt ceiling, then you are talking even more with veterans, the

senior citizens with social security. so, all along, i always said tax the wealthy. i called once before saying donald trump -- i think it was in 2018, he paid $750 in federal tax. i had to pay over $1000. i made $75,000 a year. i do not get it. we need help with the irs. i want to make a point on that, also. because it took me over a year, it was almost 14 months i had to wait for my last refund check. i finally got a refund, because i retired and i did not have all this income anymore. i am losing my train of thought. [laughter] host: it is ok, diana. we can leave it there.

thank you for the call and participating in the program this morning. sunday show yesterday oklahoma republican jim langford on abc talked about the debt ceiling and made the case from his perspective that the debt ceiling has been a source of negotiation and past administrations and congresses. here is a bit from james lankford yesterday. [video clip] >> you go back to 2017, senator schumer said the debt limit was leveraged democrats to negotiate with president trump. at that time, senator biden was there under the bush administration. there were five different ceiling votes at that time. he voted for one, he voted no on two of them. on two of them, he did not show up to vote. on the 20 keep ash on the two he voted for, he stated we need to raise taxes at that point. speaker pelosi used that leverage with president trump to increase printing around the

debt limit. it seems odd every time there is a republican involved in a debate, media talks about, oh, there is this great calamity. we have always paid our bills. democrats and republicans have both use this moment to say, let's talk about what is the direction, what is the future? the debt limit increases under the trump administration, none of those were clean. speaker pelosi demanded additional spending for every single one of them. these are not moments where there is this always clean unless republicans are negotiating, but republicans are united at this point to say we should look at debt and deficit and say what are we going to do to slow down our spending? >> are you prepared to specify the kind of cuts you are talking about? the house bill does not specify the cuts. >> right, yeah. the house bill they put out was their first parameter, the beginning of a negotiation to say the house has been prepared to negotiate this. this will be in negotiation between the speaker of the house

and the president, the same as it was during the trump administration when it was speaker pelosi and president trump. they should have sat down months ago to talk about this. for whatever reason, president biden had determined he does not want to negotiate on this and said it has got to be clean and has made promises. if you will do this today, i promise i will do something later on budget. host: speaking on the senate's position, senator mike lee of utah drafted a letter he is sending to senate majority leader chuck schumer saying 42 republicans and others will support an effort to support the house republicans on their position on the debt ceiling fight, saying we collected those issues saturday preparing a debt limit increase with spending cuts. he said more about this on the sunday show if you want to check out what he had to say about the issue.

in tennessee, this is income a supporter of speaker mccarthy's position on this. caller: i think they need to let the people decide who they want as president. host: dean, this is about the debt ceiling and who has the right position. who do you think? caller: the debt ceiling, they need to leave it alone. let the people do what they got to do. host: ok. let's go to charlie in michigan, says neither approach is interesting to him. go ahead. caller: hello, yes. yesterday, i found out on google that congress wrote themselves a raise of $4600. is this true? host: i do not know offhand. it is a discussion on the debt ceiling, you said neither approach is interesting to you. why is that? caller: well, it seems like they

want to cut the budget but give themselves a raise before they start talking about a new program. host: ok. a supporter of president biden's approach in kentucky, this is wilda. caller: good morning. i would like to ask a question. i have not heard anybody else ring up yet all the cuts the republicans are making are going to affect middle and low income people. why are there no cuts to corporate subsidies? host: why is that of interest to you? caller: because, we support the corporate's, the low income people -- when they have a tax or something, they pace it down to us. it does not cost them anything. when they make cuts, it is to every thing that affects the lower income people and not corporations. corporations are making

outstanding profits. host: ok. wilda in kentucky. new york times, an op-ed by larry tribe, why i changed my mind on the debt limit. is the headline. he makes this argument this morning, saying he question is not whether the president can tear up the debt amid stature to ensure they can continue paying bills that purchase government bonds. the question isn't whether the president can become a one-person supreme court, striking down laws passed by congress. the right question is whether congress, after passing spending bills that created these debts in the first place, can invoke an arbitrary dollar limit to force the president and his ministration to do its bidding. there was only one right answer to that question, it is now. there was only one person with the power to give congress that answer, the president of the united states. as a practical matter, what this means is mr. biden must tell

congress as soon as possible before it is too late to avert a financial crisis the united states will pay all of its bills as it comes due even if the treasury department must borrow more. goes on from there, goes to the argument of the 14th amendment you have heard any commentators on, perhaps this weekend on the sunday show. larry tribe in the new york times this morning if you want to read his thoughts. peter is next on the idea that neither side has the right approach on this. peter, good morning. caller: good morning. the cbo s means the biden budget will result in a increasing the deficit of a total of $360 billion over the next 10 years. that would be 195% of gdp. now, that does not include the

revenue that the biden administration says they will get by funding the irs. so, a lot depends on those 87,000 irs agents. additionally, the $400,000 cut off, people not being audited who are below $400,000, those who earn more already contribute nearly 50% of all the tax revenue according to the irs. while the bottom 50% contributes only less then 3% of all revenue. thank you. host: ok, let's hear from dave in florida, a supporter of speaker mccarthy's position on this issue. hi.

dave in florida, hello. one more time for dave. ok. let's hear from dale in west virginia, supporter of speaker mccarthy's position on this issue. good morning. caller: good morning, pedro. i believe speaker mccarthy would offer the big guy 10%, we could get an agreement going. host: when it comes to the debt ceiling discussions themselves, what do you think of that? caller: well, 10%. seems to work for him. host: let's go to dave in las vegas, supporter of president biden on this. hello. caller: first of all, president item once to raise the debt limit, the republicans do not. they are not for the average person, they are selfish. they need to read the debt limit, not the fault it.

they are against everything but helping the american people. the republicans are no good. they have been taken over by the communist party. host: ok, ok. that is dave in las vegas. a few more minutes left in this conversation. there are a couple of events you can watch today as the day goes on in washington. there will be a policy forum taking a look at election systems, particularly the policy that goes behind how they are set up and managed on c-span two. it started a little bit ago. it is sponsored by the center for election renovation and research. if you are interested in hearing about election policy, follow along on c-span2. after this program, a discussion taking a look at foreign policy goals. when it comes to global development and assistance, sponsored by the center for strategic international study.

if you are interested in hearing about that and discussions of foreign policy overall, go to our main channel, c-span. go to our c-span now app and you can also follow along on our website at c-span.org. willie in savannah, georgia. a supporter of president biden's position on debt ceiling issues. good morning. caller: good morning, pedro. how are you doing this morning? host: fine, thank you. caller: i think that if the republicans can just map out their positions on what they want to cut, just tell the american people what program they want to cut instead of sitting down talking about it, tell us what they want to cuts. then, the american people can decide for themselves. i think the debt ceiling has been raised several times under

both administrations and there has not been no complaints. host: we have been showing people throughout the morning thus far as that debt ceiling plan they passed a couple of weeks ago and congress, using as a starting point -- we will show it again as you continue your comment. gohead. caller: i think that will be the best point right there, pedro. thanks again for bringing c-span and what you do and how c-span bring it to the american people. host: before you go, are you saying you aee with the republicans as far as their approach? caer: no, i do not. i agree with president biden. i am with president biden. host: why specifically on debt ceiling? why do you support president biden -- president biden's position? caller: they are talking about cutting, that would hurt the middle class people. simply that. host: ok. one more piece from the minority leader of the house who will also be at those discussions

tomorrow at the white house. hakeem jeffries on the republican proposal, what he expects to happen tomorrow. [video clip] >> is the obvious solution here a short-term hunt and it looks like this essentially raised the debt ceiling through september 30? and make the debt ceiling in the budget deadlines converge? doesn't that give everybody what you want? you did not negotiate, cuts directly for the raising of the debt ceiling and you do get the republicans -- the republicans get their budget negotiations with a. isn't that the uncomfortable compromise that is the best way forward here? >> i do not think the responsible thing to do is to kick the can down the road. when president biden has been saying for months, the position of leadership, the position of house democrats has been, we have to avoid a default.

america should pay its bills, protect the full faith and credit of the united states of america. we are open to having a discussion about what type of investments, what type of spending, what type of revenues are appropriate to protect the health, safety and economic well-being of the american people. that is a process available to us now. i do not think we need to delay those discussions for a few months. >> i understand that. but, are you rolling it out? if that is the way out of this, no one is saying, there are better ways out of a lot of problems. the question is, if it avoids default, is this a way out? >> we have to avoid default, period,. . what is ahead of us now, president biden has convened an important discussion on tuesday so we can find a way forward to do what is necessary to continue the strengthen our economy in a manner that benefits everyday americans. >> are you following president

biden's lead, if president biden and speaker mccarthy come up with a handshake in some form here or congressional democrats -- our congressional democrats going to support the president's position? >> we are in lockstep in terms of the path forward president biden laid out. ultimately, everyone evaluates on the merits. any particular piece of legislation presented to us. we are in lockstep with president biden. we are in lockstep with senate democrats. we want to do the right thing for the american people. host: tomorrow is the day when president biden sits down with house speaker kevin mccarthy, the minority leader you just saw there, hakeem jeffries, leadership in the senate as well . discussions about the debt ceiling and where that goes forward, who knows. stay close to our program tomorrow. we will ask you and spend a good majority of the show talking about these issues, particularly in light of that meeting tomorrow. you will have a chance to give your input and what you would

like to see happen you always stay close to our app as well and follow along with what's going on there. a few more colors. rest in tallahassee, florida, in support. hey, pedro how are you today? host: great. how are you? >> i have a problem. we need to do this debt ceiling thing and get it over with. if we default, this will be worldwide consequences. worldwide. i don't know if the republicans understand that. one of the things they want to cut is the new 87,000 additional irs people. why did they want to cut that so bad? maybe because they don't want the people who are not paying their fair share to be audited. we have got to pass this. playing chicken here is not going to get it done. it's not going to get it done in

america is going to be in serious trouble if we don't pay our bills. thank you very much. host: before you go. what about this idea about congressional republicans talking about that ceiling issues and will discussions on future cuts actually happen? >> we have to have budget talks, i agree with that. but you cannot hold the american people hostage with this debt ceiling. these things can be talked about once this has passed. but i'm saying again, it will have worldwide consequences if we don't pass this debt ceiling. it needs to be done. host: sarah in north carolina, saying neither approach worked for her. sarah, hello. caller: hello.

i agree with barbara on a certain point. what are they going to do for the people that's on social security disability and doesn't have enough month-to-month to buy groceries and medicines? they need to add that in. host: ok, sarah. caller: they need to think about the people that have voted them in, because we can vote them out. host: ok, sarah in north carolina finishing off this round of calls. thank you to all of you who participated. again, tomorrow's program will get more of your input when it comes to debt ceiling discussions. we will be hearing from you about these issues. make sure you tune in at 7:00 tomorrow morning. right now, taking over is the csis, center for strategic and international studies, on foreign policy and veldman as well. that program is set to start in just a few minutes.