>> cominup on washington journal, your calls and comments. addressing ring prescription drug prices, we speak with rachel cohrs and a look at house republican investigations in the biden family with susan ferrechio. later, the stalemate over raising the debt limit and the potential impact of a default th shai akabas. washington journal is next. ♪ host: good morning it is wednesday, may 10, 2020 three.

house and senate convene at 10:00 a.m. eastern, it was yesterday all for top congressional leaders traveled down pennsylvania avenue for a meeting with president biden on how to handle the current impasse of the debt ceiling and looming default crisis. the meeting lasted about one hour and ended without agreement, they promised to meet again later this week. we are getting your thoughts on the state of negotiations over the debt ceiling and the economy , we are doing so on phone lines a split as usual by political party. democrats (202) 748-8000, republicans (202) 748-8001, independents (202) 748-8002. you can send us a text, that number is (202) 748-8003. please include your name and where you are from. catch up with us on social media, twitter @cspanwj and facebook.com/cspan. good wednesday morning, you can go ahead and start calling in.

here how two major newspapers described the state of negotiations yesterday. first from the wall street journal, dialogue on debt limit yields little is the headline they went with, washington going further saying no progress to break the deadlock on the debt is the headline on the front page this morning. speaker kevin mccarthy after the meeting with congressional leaders and the president yesterday at the white house. [video clip] >> 97 days ago, i was right here after meeting with the president. february 1, i came down to see him, saying let us work together. we can lift the debt ceiling, we can curb the increasing debt. now three banks have closed. nothing has changed since then. the only thing that has changed is the house has raise the debt

ceiling and passed the bill, that is why we had a meeting today. everyone in the meeting reiterated the positions they were at, i did not see any new movement. the president said the staff should get back together, but i was very clear with the president. we have two weeks to go. if chuck schumer could pass something, we would go to conference right away and solve that, but i do not think chuck schumer can pass anything. the president has waited 97 days without ever meeting. every day i ask that we meet, he said no. the house has raise the debt ceiling in a responsible manner, curb spending at the same time, broadus economic growth. i asked the president a simple question, does he not believe there is anyplace place we could find savings? he signed a bill that the pandemic is over, we have $60 billion that have sat out there that has been appropriated for more than two years that we can

pull back and save the taxpayer money. we could put in growth packages that help us economically, cutting the red tape so we can build things in america again. we could have items he voted for, like work requirements that just passed in wisconsin with 82% of the vote to help our supply chain get stronger. i would hope you would be willing to negotiate for the next two weeks, so we can solve this problem and not take america on the brakes. host: that was kevin mccarthy yesterday after the meeting at the white house, president biden with a different description of what happened during the meeting. here is what he had to say. [video clip] >> i thought it was a productive meeting with congressional leadership about a path forward to make sure america does not default on its debt for the first time in history. i am disappointed but not

surprised to hear the republican minority leader of the senate saying at our meeting that the united states is not going to default, never has and never will. he is correct. we agreed to continue discussions and we will meet again on friday. in the meantime, our staff will meet today and daily between now and then, everyone in the meeting understood the risk of default. our economy would fall into a significant recession, it would devastate retirement accounts, increase borrowing costs. nearly 8 million americans would lose their jobs and international reputation would be damage to the extreme. moody did not say the last part about damage to the extreme. default is not an option. i repeated that time and time again. america is not a deadbeat

nation, we pay our bills and avoiding default is a basic duty of the u.s. congress. they did it three times under my predecessor without once, one time, creating a crisis. the markets are undermining the unshakable trust the world has in america's commitment to pay its bills. national debt went up 40% under my predecessor. that is the problem we are dealing with today. i might note parenthetically in my first two years, i've reduce the debt by $1.7 trillion. no president has ever done that. i told congressional leaders i am prepared to begin a separate discussion about my budget, but not under the threat of default. host: that was president biden yesterday after the meeting at the white house. at that meeting, it was the top for congressional leaders, akeem

jeffries, chuck schumer, mitch mcconnell and kevin mccarthy, the meeting ending without consensus, without a deal, but an agreement to continue talks. we are getting your thoughts on the state of negotiations. democrats (202) 748-8000, republicans (202) 748-8001, independents (202) 748-8002. as you are calling in, this chart from gallup putting out a new poll yesterday, looking at american confidence in its economic leadership to do the right thing on the economy aspect, whether they have confidence in various leaders. 35% said they had a great deal or fair amount of confidence in president biden to do the right on the economy. that nearly matches a low, it was the 4% for president george w. bush when they pulled on this questi in 2008.

other economic leaders are not doing much better, chairman jerome powell just 36% of americans saying they have a great deal or fair amount of confidence he would do the right thing on the economy. janet yellen, 37%. democrats in congress, leadership of congressional democrats, 34%. republican congressional leaders, 38%, topping out with the highest marks. that was released from gallup yesterday. getting your thoughts on the state of these negotiations after the meeting athe white house yesterday, we will start in new jersey with jim on the line for democrats. caller: good morning, thank you for taking my phone call. it is not up to any president to enact any legislation whatsoever, whether it be fiscal

legislation, social or whatever. it is up to congress. consequently, the fault lies within congress. both sides of the aisle should come together. he proposed the budget, now it is up to congress to enact whatever should come about. it is not his responsibility. responsibility falls upon congress. host: you talk about the budget proposal, the washington post notes in the front page headline that could be an avenue for some sort of agreement on this debt

ceiling question. biden has left open the possibility of a deal on government spending that also ends the impasse over the spending limit, the scenario would allow both sides to claim victory, with republican saying they secured cuts in the budget and the white house maintaining they took steps needed to avert a default. those meetings on the president's budget proposal happening today, among gaetz for congressional leaders and the white house. again, the leadership team, the top for leaders in the house and senate and the president are set to me again on friday. this is rob in new york, independent. caller: good morning. i just want to say, this seems to be another distraction. the u.n. had a report that was called replacement migration, that is all starting thursday when they throw the borders open. you guys are talking about the budget. we are about ready to lose our country and you are fiddling

while rome burns and it pisses me off. host: independent, this is kyle. caller: hey, john. can you hear me? host: yes, sir. caller: good deal, you look dapper today. host: what are your thoughts on the meeting at the white house yesterday? caller: i have to say, i am not too sure about it, as i have not checked up on it too much. the debt ceiling, every few years it seems like this is such a stressor. every few months, it is such a stressor. like the last caller said, i do not want to echo anger, but it seems like there is so much more going on other than the debt

ceiling. but to keep with your discussion , i do not know if we can as a nation. it seems like the media is not in touch -- maybe the reason why the debt is out of control and spending is out of control is because we are not being informed. if possibly we were better informed about issues, but how can we do that if the media is owned by the interest of the raising of the debt? host: so is the media talking about this too much and there are other important things going on, or is the media not talking about enough? caller: it is all -- what you guys report on, you know, of

course there is a reason to report on it. but where do you give your focus? there is a lot of other stuff to give your focus to. host: we will leave it there, this is tennessee, republican. caller: good morning. host: go ahead. caller: i just wanted to say about the debt and everything, i feel like they know -- biden knows what is going on, how everything is. they are pretending to look over it, they do not care, i reckon. we are about to be in more with china and everybody else and all

that stuff. letting all of the migrants come over here across the border, take it over. our economy, everything is so high, shortage. i'm 67 years old, i have never seen nothing like what is going on now. host: the u.s. debt clock is the website that viewers are familiar with, the current u.s. national debt estimated 31,000,000,000,700 37,592,000,000 and counting. the date that which the u.s. would not have enough income to cover its debts could be approaching in a matter of weeks

, the bipartisan policy center is one of those institutions that tries to get exact dates when the u.s. would not be able to cover. economic policy director will be joining us in a later segment today at 9:00 a.m. eastern if you want to stick around. new jersey, democrat. you are next. caller: as far as the debt ceiling, the democrats should not be caving in. under the trump administration, they raised it three times without any strings attached. they do with the republicans want to do, it would erase

everything that joe biden tried to do. the $35 insulin, they want to wipe that away. there was a lot of good that joe biden has done, he said earlier he dropped the debt by $1.7 trillion in just these two years , yet i blame the democrats for not getting the word out. raise the debt by 25% in more years, more than obama did. host: you mentioned the insulin prices, we will talk about that. there is a key hearing on that today before a committee meeting at 1:00 p.m. eastern that you can watch on c-span.org or the free app. in about 45 minutes, we will be

joined by rachel cohrs to talk about the hearing, what to watch for. join us for that discussion. pat in wisconsin, independent. caller: good morning. i just think that this debt ceiling crisis is a completely fabricated crisis. i do not think the government is going to wake up tomorrow and have an epiphany and seo, it is at 31 trillion dollars, we might as well start paying it back. host: closer to $32 trillion at this point. caller: yes, so i think it is completely fabricated. just raise it. if they really wanted to get serious about the debt ceiling crisis, you are going to have to cut spending and raise taxes at the same time. but i do not think either side really wants to do any of those.

we have an overinflated budget -- start with the military budget. it is at $800 billion, you could cut that in half and still have the world's largest military budget, so that is where i am at with it. host: here is were senator mitch mcconnell is at with it, his comments after yesterday's white house meeting. [video clip] >> all of you know i have been through a few debt ceilings over the years, let me first make the point the u.s. is not going to default. it never has. and it never will. however, elections have consequences. we now have divided government, we did not have a divided government last year. in 2019, i told president trump

who is no fan of speaker pelosi that they needed to work it out. why? we had divided government. the solution to the problem lies with two people, the president of the united states who can sign a bill and deliver the members of his party to vote for it, and the speaker of the house. there is no sentiment in the senate, not 60 votes, for a clean debt ceiling. so there must be an agreement and the sooner the president and the speaker can reach an agreement, the sooner we can solve the problem. host: mitch mcconnell yesterday putting it on the president and the speaker. yesterday was the first face-to-face meeting between the speaker and president on the topic of the debt ceiling since february, speaker mccarthy was quick to point that out in his statements after the white house

meeting. they are set to meet again on friday, no consensus after the meeting yesterday. getting your thoughts on the phone lines. as usual, democrats (202) 748-8000, republicans (202) 748-8001, independents (202) 748-8002. jackie in michigan, democrat. good morning. caller: good morning. mitch mcconnell is right. elections have consequences. if the republicans do not raise the debt ceiling, how many republicans do think are going to get reelected next year? they know that. it is the one thing they care about more than anything else, it is their jobs. host: before you go, why do you think americans will blame republicans when speaker mccarthy pointed out in his statements they passed a bill last week that would raise the debt ceiling and have budget cuts included? why do you think americans will

blame republicans if it does not happen? caller: because their budget and their cuts is going to hurt average americans. since we are the ones voting them out or in, they are the ones that are going to vote them out. americans are not going to allow that. host: this is chance in minnesota, independent. good morning. caller: good morning. my name is chance, i served in the u.s. marine corps for four years, two years in the army. my opinion is americans need to come back to reality on both sides. the debt ceiling is a distraction. you have millions of illegals coming over, yes i am saying illegals. they are not citizens. it is a distraction for what is coming.

the country is divided, parties have turned into factions and factions turned into division, as you've been seeing. host: how do we fix it? caller: we have got to come together. host: how do we do that? caller: there has to be a calming down of the bickering. you have politicians that have been in office for 40 years, we need to wipe the slate clean, get fresh ideas in get the guys who have been there for 40 years out of office and start fresh. our founding fathers did not put their life on the line to turn to british rule back in the 1700s. people look up a history book, they will see we are repeating history. host: this is a lane in washington, republican. morning. caller: my question is -- a debt

limit to me would be you cannot exceed this amount. when they say they cannot pay their bills unless we extend the debt limit, i got thinking about that. why would they not be able to pay their bills if we do not extend the debt limit? it is because they have overspent from the current debt limit. if they had stopped spending at the time when they reached the debt limit, we would not have bills that have to be paid under the new debt limit. so i think there should be something in the debt limit bill that says you cannot spend more than this much money. if you do, you have a problem.

we are going to take the money away from you instead of you continuing to exceed the debt you're supposed to spend the money on. that is my thought about it. they should not be able to do that, either treasury, the congress, somebody needs to stop it when they start approaching the debt limit. host: in an agreement, you want to say something to the effect of automatic budget cuts coming in if they cannot come to an agreement? caller: it is my understanding that what they want to do is keep with the budget of 2022. the budget of 2022, according to biden anyway, was not that bad. because he had the country running really well, government

was running really well. everything in the economy was good. now that they want to go back to 2022 budget, i do not see what the problem is. they have already passed the 20 budget before and we lived on it. why can't we live on it again? host: might be a good time to go back to 2010, the washington post wrap up of what they call a fine d.c. tradition, debt commission. panels that have tried to cut spending over the years to avert fiscal crises, this is a look back at 2010. president barack obama appointed the former white house chief of staff and alan simpson to lead a bipartisan group to address the federal budget, that commission had unique power. if the super majority voted to

approve the recommendation, the proposal would go to congress for an up or down vote. the coaches propose the government cut three dollars in spending for every one dollar in new revenue collected and raises social security by 2075, restrained defense spending, raise taxes on the wealthy while eliminating middle-class deductions. it aimed to reduce the deficit by $4 trillion over a decade and won the support of a majority of commissioners, but fell short of the super majority needed to advance in congress. legislation in 2012 based on the recommendations were soundly defeated. a look back at some of the debt commissions over the years, the washington post calling it a d.c. tradition. in new york, this is shirley. democrat. good morning. caller: good morning.

i just want to say, this is money, we have to pay our bills. i want to see the budget that biden has and mccarthy has. and hear mccarthy say we can do this, we can do that. where is your bill in black-and-white that the people can see? i remember when trump raised the debt ceiling three times, he told his people i made you money today. that was not the problem, he made money for himself. show us the bills in black-and-white. we can have our own opinion. i am not just about party, i am about what people can do for us.

i am not going to vote on party. ifo on country and what it means to us. that is all i have to say, thank you. host: paul, independent. caller: good morning. what i would like to say is people have to remember now when we are starting to talk about the debt -- first off, we always go to the very last minute. we do it with the debt, we do it with the budget. secondly, people need to remember that much of this debt problem came about because of covid. i do not hear anybody talking about $10 trillion, trillion dollars spent, in covid.

that is part of the problem. the other problem is, as an independent, the democrats and republicans both keep saying we need to have a discussion. the democrats keep saying republicans never have a plan. they do not have anything, they do not put anything up. well, guess what? they now have a plan. if you want to have a discussion, you have to have an open mind. you did not say let's have a discussion and when you say ok, well, i would like to do this, you do not turn around and say forget it, i am not going to talk to you now. basically, the two clips that you showed, one of mccarthy and

of biden, that is what happened. mccarthy was like, here is what we proposed and he is what president biden said. we just agreed to meet again, because we are not talking about what we are going to do. host: go ahead. caller: lastly, it is not cuts. like the one woman said, you are going to go back to a budget from six months ago. you are not going back to the 2010 budget, you are going back to a budget from six months ago. you know, they are not really cutting anything. they are just reducing the amount of spending. lastly, i will say this about the budget. the budget needs to go back to regular appropriations. not the on the best stuff.

-- omnibus stuff. host: bringing up the republican bill to raise the debt limit and cut spending, the washington post with a pretty good wrap up of what is in the bill, if you would like to learn more. the reporter on that story breaking it down, here is what is in the gop bill to raise the debt limit and cut spending, cut spending by about $3 trillion over the next 10 years. new work requirements for those on some social welfare programs and other parts of the legislation broken down in that article, if you want to dive in. ella in florida, republican. caller: good morning. we have to cut spending and one thing people are not talking about is that i am an executive

recruiter, i work nationally. hundreds of thousands of people are being laid off. in large part, it is because of generative ai, which many people understand as chat gpt. about 86% of federal revenue comes from income and payroll taxes. that means 70% of gdp is consumer spending and as everyone is being laid off and replaced through automation -- it is not just office workers. but wendy's just announced drive-thru's are going to be chabad driven. the federal government will have less and less revenue to run the country. people are going to be dependent on government support and the fact that the white house

appointed kamala harris to be the czar of ai is a slap in the face. this will not get better. goldman sachs announced 300 million jobs worldwide are going to be eliminated because of the technology that is automating the worker. that is 300 million, that is the population of the united states. host: ella in florida this morning, it is just after 7:30 on the east coast. we are talking about the meeting at the white house yesterday ending without consensus on how to move forward on the debt ceiling, keep calling in. to keep you updated on to other stories we have been tracking, both on the front page of the new york times today. a manhattan jury on tuesday found former president trump liable for sexually abusing and

defaming a woman and awarded her $5 million in damages. the former magazine writer had sufficiently proved that mr. trump sexually abused her nearly 30 years ago in a dressing room at a department store in manhattan. the jury did not find he raped her as she had long claimed. the verdict came after just under three hours of deliberation, the findings are in a civil case, not criminal, so mr. trump has not been convicted of any crime and faces no prison time. mr. trump's lawyer set outside the courthouse yesterday the case would be appealed. also this story about george santos, the republican congressman who has been a target of numerous investigations into his personal and campaign finances has been charged by federal prosecutors in new york, according to three

people familiar with the investigation. it comes after months of investigation by the office of the u.s. attorney for the eastern district of new york, that has been conducting one of the inquiries into his financial and campaign activities. the specific charges are not yet clear, he could appear as soon as wednesday in federal court. we may be finding out more today. back to the conversation about the debt limit, about the negotiations. congressional leaders heading down pennsylvania avenue to the white house, we showed you comments of most all of them so far who were in the meeting. chuck schumer, the senate majority leader in that meeting, here are some of his comments. [video clip] >> there was bad news and good news from today's meeting. the bad news, we explicitly asked speaker mccarthy would he take default off the table, he

refused. president biden said he would, leader jeffries said he would, i said i would. but he would not take it off the table. instead of giving us a plan to remove default, he gave us a plan to take default hostage. that is a shame. that makes things more complicated. the bottom line is very simple. there are large differences between the parties. if you look at what president biden had proposed and what speaker mccarthy has proposed, they are very different. we can try to come together on those in a budget and appropriations process. but to use the risk of default with all of the dangers that has for the american people as a hostage and say it is my way or no way, or mostly my way or no way is dangerous.

we again repeat our plea to speaker mccarthy, take default off the table and let us resume negotiations in the budget process, in the appropriations process, where we have legitimate differences. that is the good news, the president asked people from all four of the leaders and himself to start sitting down as early as tonight, certainly tomorrow, to see where we can come to an agreement on the budget and appropriations process. there are probably some places we can agree and places we can compromise, hopefully. but that has to occur as part of the budget appropriations process. host: that was senate majority leader chuck schumer yesterday after the meeting at the white house, it lasted about one hour. we are getting your thoughts on phone lines and looking through social media comments. twitter feed is a good place to

go. biden should demand the gop passed the debt ceiling with the same deal the democrats gave trump, no strings attached. they cannot hold the economy hostage. this from cindy, stop spending and reform social security and medicare before they go broke. we are only a few years away from that happening. on twitter, biden in the democrats have yet to negotiate or produce a bill, the republican house passed one weeks ago while biden and the democrats point fingers. any default on the debt is on biden for lack of leadership. next in washington, democrat. good morning. caller: why are we pretending that biden is dealing with rational people? marjorie taylor greene, matt gaetz, all these insurrectionists who tried to overthrow the government are the

puppet masters of the republican party. we are dealing with the rational people. they want to destroy the country and cause confusion. host: this is rick in alabama, independent. good morning. caller: good morning. before i get to the debt situation, i want to make a comment about the vice president. i hear people calling in all the time bashing her, fox news bashing her. she is qualified to be the vice president, look at her resume. she is overqualified. i get tired of people calling in bashing the vice president. back to the debt situation, yesterday they had the meeting with the president, the four leaders. everybody agreed but mccarthy that default on the debt is not an option.

it is not an option. i do not understand why they even talked for an hour. if he was not going to take that off the table, the meeting should not last an hour. this is not something to play around with, you are going to hurt a lot of people demanding the president make all of these cuts he had previously put in place. now mccarthy wants to take all of that away. the irs situation, he does not want all of these agents investigating corporations not being there taxes. he wants all of that to go away. in my opinion, there is no negotiation. let the republican screwup like they always do. that is all i have to say about it. host: tennessee, republican line. good morning. caller: good morning.

i have two points, first i want to discuss what chuck schumer just said about they need to go ahead and pass a clean debt ceiling, then talk about cuts in the budget and appropriations. what i have to say about that is asked joe manchin how trustful chuck schumer and joe biden is to pass a bill, then say we will talk about the other stuff later. may 2 point is kevin mccarthy and house republicans passed the bill, they did their job. they passed a bill to cut the deficit, which is what joe biden said he wanted. now it is up to joe biden and house senate democrats who will not allow kevin mccarthy's bill to even come to the floor. i do not know why everybody

keeps saying it is up to kevin mccarthy, kevin mccarthy, when it is not. joe biden asked to raise the debt limit, it has been raised. just because he don't like the amount, he is checked out. the first time in history, if this government shuts down, it is going to be blamed on joe biden and the democrats. not republicans, they did their job. host: california, democrat. caller: i was thinking about, why don't they have a reconciliation bill? to reconcile the debt to the budget. the purpose of the debt ceiling was because they cannot pass a budget, now we are at the point they cannot pass a debt limit ceiling. if they have a debt, every time they have a bill passed, identify the effect on the debt ceiling. then maybe they could reconcile the fact they could raise the

debt ceiling according to the bill that is being passed. i know that is in retrospect on spending, but when there is revenue that's been cut, that raises the debt as well. host: are you saying rather than big increases to the debt ceiling every once in a while, though it seems to be happening more frequently, smaller increases with each spending bill? caller: that way, we are keeping up with our spending and identifying exactly what it should go through. if you reconcile it to the budget every time, you either know you have to raise taxes or what you need to do to match the ceiling. host: coming up on 7:45 on the east coast, about 15 minutes left in this first hour.

talking about the white house meeting yesterday, about one hour long and ended without a consensus on how to move forward on the debt dealing, avoiding a default crisis. though an agreement to meet again, the leaders of the house, senate and president on friday at the white house. here is how it was put this morning on one of the morning newsletters you can subscribe to here in washington, longtime congressional reporters running punch bowl news. if you want to be optimistic about progress on the debt limit negotiations, here is what they have got. the white house and congressional leadership aids planned to meet beginning today to discuss whether there is any common ground for negotiation. speaker kevin mccarthy, chuck schumer, hakeem jeffries and mitch mcconnell will meet again with president biden on friday. if you want to be realistic, without the progress of debts and negotiations, here is what is going on.

biden and the party leaders made practically no progress in their white house meeting tuesday. the hill staffers and biden administration officials are not on the same page when it comes to what they are discussing. democrats believe they are negotiating a spending agreement outside the context of a debt ceiling, republicans believe they are negotiating a debt limit deal with a spending cut component. biden publicly flirted with invoking the 14th amendment to lift the borrowing cap and the tenor of the white house meeting yesterday between the big four and biden was at times quite testy. that breakdown of where we are on the debt ceiling negotiation. jerry in virginia, independent. good morning. caller: good morning. the bottom-line is joe biden has to find money to support 12 million illegal immigrants. there's already been 6 billion

come since he took office, that is set to double the next three months. these people are not workers, they are dependent on us for food, lodging, clothing, health care and cell phones. the bottom line is, joe biden has to find the money. where is he getting the money to support these people? host: in florida, republican. morning. caller: my opinion about everything is how are we going to pay the debt when they are letting our youth diana degette killed, murdered on the streets? how is that going to pay the debt for the future -- die and get killed, murdered on the streets? open the border, make a deal with china to kill us all, then pay the debt? how? host: in texas, democrat.

good morning. caller: i am 71 years old, i served in vietnam. i am 100% disabled now. what the republicans were talking about, they want to cut my money. i think i deserve my money, because it comes in the gay needed to and i am able to take care of my bills and things. what you people don't understand is your word is your bound. if somebody tells you what you owe them, you are supposed to pay a bond because you are supposed to keep your word. trump was president and he raised all of the money and gave it to the rich people and took the money away from us regular

citizens. biden is a lot fairer than him, he is giving him a chance. trump did not ask the democrats with they go along with this, he did what he wanted to do. that is why he is getting punished now. host: in michigan, independent. caller: good morning. i want to say ditto to jerry a few minutes ago. people are losing -- every time i see one of these videos on fox news of all these illegals coming across the border, i see dollar signs. we are going to have support all of those people -- people in this country keep saying we need the workers. we do not need millions. there are 25, 50,000 people to

pick their crops out of the field, where will the others be employed? i am in southeast michigan, we have help wanted signs all over the place. the people here will not do the jobs. those people will not do the jobs. i cannot figure out why joe biden will not close the southern border. that is the biggest drain on our economy right now and it will only get worse. these people are willing to let this country go into bankruptcy to try to support all of those people. host: larry in virginia, democrat. caller: i have got a couple questions. has there ever been a clean bill raising the debt limit? host: that has certainly happened in the past, a clean debt limit bill. democrats have touted their efforts to do that under the trump administration as reason why they think it should happen again. caller: so historically, there

has never been a bill to raise the debt limit that had other things attached to it, is that correct? host: in past discussions, there has been negotiations. if you go back. caller: meaning there has been, historically, a debt limit bill that had other things attached to it, not clean? caller: yes. host: -- host: yes. caller: ok. when we raise the debt limit is that -- are we saying that we can borrow more money? host: yes, it is raising the limit on the government's credit card. right now, we have a debt limit that we cannot go above and they have raised it several times in recent years. when we get close to hitting the

limit, they say you cannot go above this limit, or it has been suspended for a period of time, that has happened as well. caller: i believe i understand it better, thank you for taking my call. host: somebody who can probably give you better answers to those questions and give you historical references, shai akabas will join us at 9:00 a.m. eastern for a conversation on the debt limit, on the so-called x date where we run out of money to pay the bills. we will have that discussion with him for about 30 or 40 minutes starting at 9:00 a.m. eastern. this is mohammed in maryland, good morning. caller: good morning. this is a message to everyone, i am here to discuss something to you all. listen.

money, in itself, is not real. they make it seem real by the actions and the people that are among you. it only takes two people to agree upon something for something to be considered reality. i have three ways that i can assure you it is not. if everybody were to take a second and look up into the sky and we saw there was an asteroid, maybe three hours left , my question to you all is this. the bills, the conversation, everything going on, does it all matter? in actuality, it does not. that josie you it never mattered at all. -- that tells you it never mattered at all. host: this is jerome powell talking about what reality would look like if there were a

default and the debt ceiling was breached, we were unable to pay our bills. he was asked about that at his press briefing when he was talking about jobs numbers last week, this is what he had to say. [video clip] >> i am wondering if you could talk about effects of a debt limit standoff, you have said the ceiling needs to be raised. are there any economic effects of getting close to a default and what that would look like? >> i would not want to speculate specifically, but i will say this. these are fiscal policy matters and therefore congress and the administration for elective parts of government to deal with. they are consigned to them. from our standpoint, i would say it is essential to debt ceiling be raised in a timely way, so the u.s. government can pay all of its bills when they are due. a failure to do that would be unprecedented, we would be in uncharted territory and the consequences to the u.s. economy

would be highly uncertain and could be quite adverse. i will leave it there. we do not give advice to either side, we just would point out it is very important that this be done. the other point i will make his no one should assume the fed can protect the economy from the potential short and long-term effects of a failure to pay our bills on time. it would be so in certain, it is just as important that we never get to a place where we are talking about or having a situation where the u.s. government is not paying its bills. host: that was jerome powell last week, this morning in the washington post, in their wrap up of the meeting we talked about yesterday, they take a look at what markets have been doing as negotiations have been going on. wall street has mostly ignored the political situation as investors expect lawmakers to

reach a deal before a default happens. they held steady on tuesday before dipping near the close of trading, with the nasdaq falling by close to .7%. they are more likely to attribute price fluctuations in the bond market over the past few weeks to the federal reserve interest rate increases rather than concerns about the debt limit. we have about five minutes left to wrap up this segment, but we are talking more about the debt limit again at 9:00 a.m. eastern. tennessee, republican. good morning. caller: good morning. i was outside looking for asteroids and the sky just now. host: did you see any? caller: i did not. look here, this money they are wanting, this is money that has already been spent by biden, now they have to pay the bill. host: this is money that congress has already approved the spending on over the years.

caller: is that the obama walking trail, the lgbtq+ whatever it was they were building, the protection of two different nations borders other than our own, this money we are talking about? host: it is money congress has spent. caller: right. biden says in his first year he reduce the debt by $1.7 trillion. if that is a fact check, that is incorrect. when biden said -- host: he is talking about the deficit, the difference between receipts and spending on a yearly basis. coming down from covid spending times. caller: he said he reduced it by $1.7 trillion, the debt. host: he is talking about the deficit, the total amount of spending by the government per year. on a year-to-year basis,

reducing that amount of spending. a big reason for that as we were spending more during covid times. caller: so the money they are talking about raising in the trump era also basically the same thing he is trying to do now, trump invested in the united states. that is what made our economy boom. anyone who says they were not living better under the trump era and are living better now under the biden era, there is something seriously wrong with these folks. i hope i made a little bit of sense, i'm slightly confused. host: that was joe in tennessee, maybe a point you toward today's lead editorial in the washington times. they take up some of what you were just talking about, they say outside of the insular bubble that is washington, reasonable americans understand well that the biden urge to overspend other people's money is a vice, not a virtue.

faced with a future in which more than $1 trillion in tax menus to be wasted annually on debt interest alone, taxpayers can find no rationality in the white house refusal to bargain over spending limits. they see through the claim of achieving historic deficit reduction they spending downturn of one point $7 trillion last year, writing those savings were entirely a result of funds appropriated, not spent, for coronavirus of relief -- coronavirus relief rather than presidential prudence. they say it is as nonsensical as a rooster taking credit for the sunrise. democrat, good morning. caller: good morning. here's the issue. the shiny object seems to be the deficit, that is the wrong focus. the focus is to get joe biden

out of office, that is what the republicans are working on. number two, the taxation -- if you want to control the budget, that is to say nonprofit organizations are not paying taxes. yet they are out there working as a political consultant and that is the issue. the republicans want to/-- slash the irs and not supply the resources so they could look into these matters, that is why we are not collecting proper taxes. host: one more call, republican.

good morning. caller: how are you? host: doing well, you have about one minute. go ahead. caller: quickly, i want to let you know these callers are kind of crazy. there are no illegals that come over the border, they do not have any benefits. i do not know what this idea is. we put them to work at the slaughterhouse and they do not pay into the system, they get no benefits. the other thing i want to say is i was talking to marcus and adrian and all these rich politicians -- host: you're going in and out.

who is marcus and adrian? caller: they are my friends. they talk about these rich donors. host: you're going in and out. that's going to do it for the first segment of the "washington journal". plenty more to talk about this morning. we turn our attention to the issue of rising drug prices in america. rachel cohrs a stat news'and later susan ferrechio washington times joins us for another key capital event on the hill today. we'll be right back. ♪

♪ >> listening to programs on c-span through c-span radio app just got easier. tell your smart speaker play c-span radio and listen to “washington journal” daily at 7:00 a.m. eastern., important congressional hearings, and other public affairs events throughout the day. weekdays at 5:00 p.m. and 9:00 p.m. eastern catch “washington today” for a fast paced report on the top stories of the day. listen to c-span anytime. tell your smart speaker, “play c-span radio.” c-span powered by cable. >> watch a video on demand anytime online at c-span.org and try our points of intest feature.

use it anytime online at c-span.org. ♪ >> c-span campaign 2024 coverage is your front row seat to the presidential election. watch our coverage of the candidates on the campaign trail with announcements, meet and greets, speeches, and events to make up your own mind. campaign 2024 on the c-span network, c-span now, or anytime online at c-span.org. c-span your unfiltered view of politics. ♪ >> if you are enjoying book tv, sign up for our newsletter using the qr code on the screen to receive a schedule of upcoming programs, discussions, festivals and more. book tv every sunday at c-span 2

or anytime online booktv.org. television for serious readers. ♪ >> since 1970 nine in partnership with the cable industry, c-span has provided complete coverage of the halls of congress from house and senate floors to congressional hearings, party briefings, and committee meetings. c-span it you a front row seat how issues are debated and decided with no commentary, no interruptions, and completely unfiltered. c-span your unfiltered view of government. >> "washington journal" continues. host: rachel cohrs is back with those ahead of the hearing for -- the need to make affordable for all americans.

for folks who may recall we are talking about insulin prices during the inflation reduction act in 2022. why talking about pricing again today? guest: when democrats pass inflation reduction act it only did the job halfway. if you're not a medicare you are out of luck right now. there is no pricing production for you when you go to the pharmacy. democrats realize they are not able to accomplish everything they wanted to so they are returning to the issue this congress. host: who are we hearing from today? guest: the ceos of three large is manufacturers and also the largest companies that act as middlemen between drugmakers and insurers, who art apart -- who

are part of the whole system where patients are seeing high prices for insulin and i think there are questions about whether they are serving the patients. host: the hearing is at 1:00 p.m. eastern today. you can watch on c-span.org and c-span now up. the three largest drugmakers and then the other folks. pbm, explain the term? guest: a pharmacy benefit manager and they are to be negotiating discounts between health insurer and drugmakers. think of it by going to cosco, you buy in bulk you're getting a better price, but the problem is of those discounts are not necessarily going to the patients who are taking the medication. the pharmacy benefit managers keep some of the discount for themselves and some of them go back to the issuers and use that money to lower monthly premium payments for everyone in their

house plan. that is went -- the money is get spread out amongst different people but not going to the patient that is taking the medicine. host: are we seeing drugmakers pointing fingers to the other side of the table and pbm plenty big respect for who is responsible for high prices of insulin? -- pointing fingers back for who is responsible for high prices of insulin? guest: yes. one of the drug companies saying 84% of the list price goes back to payers in the form of the discounts. there has been less than 20% of the actual price that we think of we think of insulin for themselves. host: which members of congress come at west side are they going to come down on our are they saying it is not matter who is responsible let's get the prices down?

guest: there be tough questions especially for pbm because congress did take significant action on pharmaceutical companies last august. their attention has shifted to the rest of the health care system and what do we miss last time. there have been questions about the value that pharmacy benefit managers create for the health care system. they're not actually researching medicine. they're not manufacturing. they are this administrative. so i think lawmakers will have question. host: rachel cohrs of stat news'with us. start calling in with the phone lines as usual. democrats, 202-748-8000. republicans, 202-748-8001. independents, 202-748-8002. insulin prices but with talk about drug prices in general as well.

rachel cohrs a large portfolio at stat and covers those issues. as folks are calling in, what are the main congressional proposals right now to do with insulin prices here? guest: there's almost a family feud in democratic party over how fixed insulin prices were people who are uninsured to have insurance through their employers. the first one is from senator raphael warnock from georgia and a senator john kennedy, who is a republican, and they are trying to cap prices at $35 a month for all insulin products, for insured patients and uninsured patients. another proposal from senator collins is aiming to make one insulin product in any given category available at $35 a month and they also have tweaks? how generic competition --

tweaks to generic competition. a third one from senator sanders which aims to put insulin prices at $20 a value and that is controlling the price not just the cost. we are seeing several different competing proposals. senator schumer has committed to putting one of them on the senate floor that he is not chosen which one yet and it is getting nasty between the senators as a complete. host: has he said how he will make the decision? guest: no, not yet. he is not made the hard choice. he will make the decision? guest:host: bill cassidy has hee down on a side? guest: i do not know he has endorsed any particular legislation. as a whole, republicans are more skeptical about regulating

prices for private insurance because they see it as meddling in private market more and they were more willing to get on board with cost controlling medicare, government payer. host: let me get you some calls. phone lines again. democrats, 202-748-8000. republicans, independents as usual. mike in ohio. caller: good morning. host: go ahead. caller: i was recently diagnosed with prostate cancer. i was prescribed to get his i.t. go -- was prescribed to get a medicine and it was expensive on the open market and some referred me to mark cuban's plus company and we are saving

hundreds of dollars per month for the same composition of the drug. i wanted to share that. i know a lot of people are with the horrendous cost of pharmaceuticals. host: have you looked into plus drugs? guest: i'm sorry to hear about your diagnosis. mark cuban has taken aim at the middlemen in this industry and their goal is to buy the drugs and sell them for cost-plus, a certain amount so they can make some profit, but it is tied percentagewise to skyhigh list price. from limited number of medications but there are brand-new dedications. patients can get savings through

this system. there is questions about availability for this sort of model, but it is an interesting disruptive force. host: four pharmaceutical makers, they're likely going to point fingers at pbm for cost of drugs, do they like the idea of cost-plus drug.com or similar tech companies? guest: i do not know that the capital format lobby like we think of it has engaged much because it has mostly been on generic medication so far but i think it will be interesting to see how they engage in this model does become -- at this model becomes more widespread. host: p format lobby efforts in 2022 is of to secrets.org or you can check out there various, companies and

lobby group, -- what our expectations for pharmacy spending in 2024 election cycle? guest: we have seen early indications from burma that -- pharma they have sent a significant amount of money to bill cassidy, ranking member on the house committee, so far this year. it is early in the cycle but he looks like a much more industry friendly alternative compared to bernie sanders even though he is moderate in his party when it comes to drug pricing issues. he not been traditional favorite of the pharmaceutical industry but given his position of influence and power at this point in time to influence

legislation at the pharmaceutical industry does care about, they have decided to give him significant sums of money so far this year. host: i was looking at the open secret report. here is one number. the total number of lobbyists recorded lobby on pharma issues and are 78 separate lobbyists talking to members of congress on this issue -- 800 78 separate lobbyists talking to members of congress on this issue. caller: good morning. i'm curious. i am not sure if some people are aware regarding insulin. the major insulin manufacturers are trying to keep it hidden but i have been on the about a year now and it has been on the market fda approved, it works

very quickly. it is not stay in your system as long. so you have a less chance of excellent reactions but i think they're trying to keep it hidden. it is made by a company called mankind. it has two n's in it. they may be seeing very popular by us diabetics. i've been a diabetic girl for 40 years. host: inhalable insulin? guest: i will recommend the patients because their doctors about different treatment options. host: linda in connecticut, democrat. caller: good morning. i worked in pharmaceutical

industry for some time and insulin in particular iti workel industry for some has not changed in decades. the fact we do not have a generic is a shame. but we are arguing -- insurance company should not be arguing with the scented. the argument should be with the pharmaceutical companies. if you took profits all insulin over the last 20 years, they are staggering. as for the insurance company, policyholders the need to benefit of the cost decrease to the cap on insulin prices for medicare. everybody should enjoy the benefits of a price decrease. consequently where there is a decrease, it should be equal in sharing but once again, we have everyone arguing with each other

when the real villain in pharmaceutical industry. with 848 lobbyists really have a total of 565 congress between the senate and the house of representatives. they are not just advising them, they are writing the laws. that is who we need to be looking at. guest: it is certainly true and i think you will hear from pharmacy benefit managers this afternoon that drugmakers, that is there prices. the three major insulin manufacturers have committed to lowering prices significantly for some of their excellent products by the beginning of 2024 -- excellent products by the beginning of 2024. it is important to remember there is arcane medicaid policy enacted during american rescue plan near the beginning of the bite the administration -- biden

administration. congress implement and patient august of last year -- inflation reduction act of august last year and they viewed that is there move on issues in that sector but they are looking at other areas and i think senator sanders is not completely satisfied with the drug companies action so far. host: chemical -- can become back to pbm and this headline from start that you wrote -- stat news'last week that you wrote. guest: we -- when we first saw legislation, there's a certain date that i would've started in 2025 but will result revised tax that would not be marked up this week we notice the start date is conditioned upon the passage of

the actual law. it is pushed out at least 10 months, potentially further, from the original start date that had been -- they had been aiming for. it stretches all the timeline for when patients see any potential benefits from the legislation. host: 10 minutes left with rachel cohrs of stat news. this is gabriel in north carolina. good morning. caller: good morning. two questions about this. i practice medicine. i want to put that out there and i've seen these issues that are around and having access to insulin. as a competent a situation -- it is a complicated situation. you see any difference in inclusion of other medicine that are often part of the insulin discussion?

the other alternative that are superexpensive that quite often will keep us from -- and the other part insulin can be cost-effective but there the other side of that which is test strips that are needed for people to track with actual sugars are so they know what's prime minister and we sometimes seen as stationary squeeze on one side they lower the cost of the drug they make it where the test strip are ultra expensive and they make up their profit margins by jumping the price of that. as somebody progress in medicine i see this is a huge -- practice in medicine in this as a huge problem.

if you do not address one you are going to have both. guest: absolutely. the conversation so far in congress has been limited to the excellent products themselves. there's a couple reasons for that. the political of the insulin caused. it is easier to explain to people essay insulin is that esalen and the other products. there is also a factor where congress is behind in industry practices. it takes so long to get any reform passed on any issue that sometimes they may be behind certain innovations. when you are talking about glp-1 medication for treatment for obesity, medicare does not cover these medications even though they are exploding in popularity and demand in private sector

space. the conversation is more complex. insulin does not encompass all the cost patients have for managing their diabetes however the conversation we're seeing right now on the hill is limited to insulin. host: the 878 lobbyists, to write is limited to just the esalen and all the other issues. -- wonder why it is limited to just the excellent and not all the other issues. guest: i do not know what pharmaceutical managers are making these themselves but i will say pharmaceutical companies are in favor of these cost protections generally. they're not endorsing specific legislation at this point but it is beneficial for them if patients do not feel the pain at the pharmacy counter. there is no pricing control on the backend to make sure there's any limit on what drugmakers can

charge. overall, patients end up paying one way or another, whether it is the pharmacy counter or whether it is the monthly premium payment. host: the hearing today at 1:00 p.m. eastern on c-span ansi c-span.org. you mention testimony we have seen already. we see the opening statements for those who are testifying. anything else surprising in testimony you have looking at so far? guest: we have seen testimony that we cannot discuss until the beginning of the hearing but it displays how pharmaceutical companies view this as an opportunity to talk about the programs they haven't omitted -- the programs they have intimated to help patients get -- implemented to help patients get

access. to help make esalen more affordable for people. i think they'll promote those programs, their decisions to lower prices beginning of 2024. host: paula in kentucky, a republican. good morning. caller: i take esalen and myself and i fail to understand they have three manufacturers, wiser are not enough competition to lower prices? guest: that is an excellent question. i think drugmakers will tell you the way that the middleman negotiate is actually better for them to have a higher price which does not make much sense but if you think about it, it is almost like walking into a store and they raise their prices so they can give you a bigger discount.

i think that is what is happening here in pharmacy benefit manager market where it is more possible for every actor in the industry if prices are higher in patients lose. -- and patients lose. it is counterintuitive but -- and popsicle companies will tell you that -- pharmaceutical companies will tell you the prices they are receiving has remained flat because in their words they are trying to keep up with the joneses on the discounts the other manufacturers are providing. host: we seem to pbm profit margins increase year after year? guest: it is hard to distill their profit off of any one product because the discounts they are providing our public -- are not public.

i think that is a concern the senate is looking into, transparency and what do we know about how they separated but insulin is an outlier in how big these discounts truly are. i think it is egregious example of how the drug prices is failing patients. host: ryan, independent. caller: good morning. can you hear me? host: yes, sir. caller: want to make a comment on rachel. they are not enough insulin to patients for to be profitable. also, who is the authority in the federal government to cancel or suspend pharmaceutical patents? guest: ok. i will address the second part

of the question. i think there has been a call by progressive democrats including senator bernie sanders for the national institute of health to use what is called merchant rights to lower the prices or to allow competition for certain medication for government research has contributed to the development of medications, which is the case in many products. that is one option for the federal government to generally lower drug prices by challenging some of the patents. the nih has not been chosen to do so but senator sanders has sent a letter to the bite administration -- biden administration say he wants to see more aggressive stance is to use this authority. that is important. he is a chairman that is going

to be running the confirmation hearing. it is an issue that is going to play out over the next couple of months. host: in terms of insulin patients. the number i found from a .2% of the population have been diagnosed with diabetes -- a .2% of the u.s. population has been diagnosed with diabetes. guest: i met her the patient population -- i've not heard patient population was an issue on profitability of the profit area. host: out of california, mike, democratic party it caller: thank you. i want to ask about tv commercial for all the drugs. the only place in europe they were shocked to see reruns or tv show and they say what are they doing? what is the deal is because i know doctors -- these are all

high-priced drugs. you go in there and also the nature of medical commercials, sexual dysfunction drugs and the drilling telly place like at 2:00 in the afternoon. everybody wants to talk about lynching. popular in the south and you call that indoctrinating your kids. it happened. in germany they take the kids to the champs and state this is it. we are not saying you're bad. things happen. it is not you. you did not do it. host: we will stick to the pharmaceutical commercial. guest: the trump administration did to try to change requirements for television advertising by drugmakers.

that law was struck down in the courts and it is not been addressed by congress or the biden administration since. host: stat news'.com to check out rachel cohrs work and the work of her colleagues. the hearing we have been talking about all insulin prices at 1:00 p.m.. thanks for your time. another key congressional event happening today, unexpected updates from house oversight committee james comer on his investigation -- an expected update from husky oversight committee james comer on his investigation into the biden family. later shai akabas joins us for a discussion on raising the debt limit and potential impact of default. stick around. ♪

>> order your copy of the congressional directory of 118th congress. it is your access to the federal government with bio and contact information for every house and senate member. important information for congressional committee, the president's cabinet, federal agencies and state governors. scan the code at the right to order your copy today. it is $29.95 plus shipping and handling. every purchase helps support our nonprofit operations. ♪ >> c-span now is a free mobile app featuring your offer to a view of what is happening in washington live and on-demand. about the day's biggest events with live streams of floor proceedings and hearings from 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. plus a variety of compelling podcasts. c-span now available at the apple store and google play. download it for free today. ♪ >> c-span shop.org is c-span's online store. browse our latest collection of c-span products, apparel, books, and accessories. there's something for every c-span fan and every purchase helps support our nonprofit operations. shop now or anytime at c-spanshop.org. ♪ >> be up to date in latest in publishing with the book tv podcasts about books. current and nonfiction book releases plus, bestseller lists, as well as, industry news, trends through insider

interviews. you can find “about books” on c-span now, our free mobile app, or wherever you get your podcasts. >> "washington journal" continues. host: washington times national politics corresponded susan ferrechio with those ahead of eight press conference scheduled to begin in 30 minutes with republicans and house oversight committee. we know the topic of the press conference will be an update on investigation into the biden family influence peddling. what else have you been able to find out about what chairman, will talk about today? guest: this of concern bank records the committee has been looking at it for weeks now. they obtained them from the treasury department and they are coming through these bank records and finding in their view suspicious activity by

biden family members involving taking a lot of money from foreign entities and shuffling the money around into various companies. ensuring that biden family members got a piece of the pie. i think the main element of this press conference is going to be around whether or not they have evidence that this involves president biden back when he was either vice president before he became president and whether or not this is influence peddling, and involves public corruption, exchange of money or official actions that president biden took or promise to take. i think that is the central part of this investigation and today we're going to find out whether the oversight committee has the so-called smoking gun connecting all of this to president biden. many people are waiting on the

edge of their seats here to see if they are able to prove this. they have been hinting at it and saying publicly they think it is influencing peddling but we have not seen direct evidence of it. information that has come out has been vague in details of bank records. some that has come out -- at least one bank release records. it showed a lot of money changing hands between a foreign entities and the president's son and his business associates as well as the president's brother. nothing indicating that the president or then vice president was involved in any of this. he has denied any involvement or knowledge of all of this. he is also said his son hunter biden has done nothing wrong. today is all about hearing what they have gathered so far from these bank records and will

probably get insight into where they are going to go from here. i doubt this is investigation -- this investigation is over. we get more information about that as well. host: the press conference set to begin in 25 minutes and we're going to air it on c-span.org. you can go over and watch it and i hope you come back afterwards for the rest of the "washington journal." for folks trying to keep track, you mentioned hunter biden. this press conference comes as we await an announcement from justice department concerning their investigation of hunter biden. what is a investigation about? are these two things crossing at all? guest: hunter biden, the son of the president, under investigation for tax crimes. and if filling out a gun form

with false statements. maybe something else in terms of his foreign business dealings but mostly centers on not reporting income to the irs. there has been no word on what has been happening with the investigation. it has been going on for years. whistleblower servers in rs to say there was pedicle ferret going on shooting hunter biden from -- a whistleblower surface in the rs to say there was political favoritism going on shooting hunter biden -- shielding hunter biden. people suspect he will get a slap on the risk because the president signed or this thing could drive on even longer. it is been a long time and this is all blown together.

for house republicans they want the charge against hunter biden to be postponed because they want them to have a look at what they are digging up to see if there are other crimes he can be charged with. they do not want them to end investigation now with minor charges involving tax crimes, they want them to look at the evidence they feel they are producing through their own investigation of bank records. that's were you see the disagreement between two entities. you want to see what house republicans say they come up with in their investigation and the ongoing probe by the justice department, independent probe, the president's son, hunter biden. host: susan ferrechio other washington times with us.

phone lines as usual. democrats, 202-748-8000. republicans, 202-748-8001. independents, 202-748-8002. to help preview this press conference for viewers, some names they might hear. can you explain who these folks are? james biden and eric sharon . guest: james biden as the president's younger brother who has been a very close to the president throughout his life. he raised money in campaign early in the year he has also been involved throughout his life and profited from his connection with his brother. there's is plenty of evidence of that and interviews and he estimated as such the fact that he is job by his brother has helped him when lucrative

positions and contracts has helped him throughout his career. that is not a big secret there. he also worked with hunter biden, the two of them together made money off of these chinese energy companies. also -- [inaudible] he has been peddling his brother's name throughout his own career. there is a whole host of other business associates who republicans are investigating. eric schwerin was a close family friend and financial advisor to the biden family. he was a business partner of hunter biden and he is the only business associate in this group who is willing to cooperate with republican investigators. i'm not sure he set for a

transcribed interview or provided documents but he had agreed to cooperate. there are several others that are not cooperating at this point. ralph walker, another business associate, and devon archer, who has his own legal problems involving defrauding native american tribe. he's facing jail time on that. they're not getting a lot of cooperation. eric schwerin could be an important witness. he was involved in the business deals and made quite a bit of money on them himself and was close to the biden family. host: let me bring in callers. this is jody, republican. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. host: go ahead. caller: i wonder information

about what is going on with the biden family is going to come out on all of the cable networks. is there going to be a spin on the left? if evidence coming out on the right? host: you are reading of the media coverage of hunter biden i somebody who has been on this investigation -- i somebody who has been on this is the -- investigation. guest: republicans complaint media is ignoring the story. it is not getting the attention i believe will be if president trump and his family. that is not to say the media has not written rail reported and extensive stories about the biden family and their business deals and how it is complicated

president by this term -- biden term. it is just about the intensity of coverage and the headlines. you see downplaying. this is not really the big deal that james comer is trying to make it out to be. if you look at other coverage where there is an outlining of business deals and you see that in connection with the vice president and it is something that looks like you need to be investigated here. people making a lot of money peddling his name and in many cases saying he is making promises that he would do things on their behalf. these things were happening according to court documents and

other evidence. it does not get the kind of coverage, sensational coverage, it would get if it were president trump. there's no question about that. if you think about the whistleblower who came forward watching the first impeachment trial if talked about the president was asking for something from ukraine president to investigate his political opponent in exchange for military aid. that is pretty significant. now you're looking at the possibility that president biden was connected to promises made on behalf of foreign entities, many of them are enemies, like china and russia, in exchange of something. that is what republicans say was happening. they need to be able to show us the details but if that is the case in they are to make that case that deserves full

coverage, no matter how you align yourself politically, because the public has a right to understand what is going on behind the scenes when our president is dictating foreign policy. what is going on in the background with his family and their finances. host: 15 minutes left with susan ferrechio other washington times. this is john in germantown, maryland. good morning. caller: hi. i was watching the debate where joe biden had lied about the laptop. it was concerning. i later saw him on television and him saying in public he had

the guy fired. he said a son of a bitch, i had him fire because he was going to get a billion dollars of the aid, the ukrainians. they're not going to get it unless his son, the company he just started working for, unless that company got favorable treatment by firing this guy. host: unpack that a little bit. guest: that is true. he did say that. i think the connection was not a firmly established was that he did it because his son was working -- being paid by the board, and energy company based in ukraine. without that exact connection and there are other reasons why this prosecutor was considered corrupt and needed to be pushed out and that was one of the reasons joe biden game at the time. you make a good point.

in the scrutiny of joe biden, there's always this assumption of innocence. that he did not do anything wrong. he could not have been involved in corruption at any time but we need to look hard at this. i think that is true. i think in terms of media coverage there's definitely bias in that direction. people were naturally suspicious of trump from the get-go. he was not a government guy. he came from business. he was a billionaire. he came into the oval office and people scrutinize him like he was going to be a carotid person from the get-go -- a corrupt person from the get go. people do not look as hard as

they would if it were trump or another republican president. i agree with that. host: this press conference on the -- by the house oversight committee set to happen at not -- 9:00 a.m. eastern this morning. until then taking your phone calls with susan ferrechio other washington times. peter in new york. republican. good morning. caller: good morning. i have followed your career for a long time. you are very honest and i appreciate that you are on today. i would like you to talk about tony blinken who was on joe biden's election staff. the fact that he called up mike morel who is the former director of the cia in order to accumulate almost 51 former

intelligence people to sign this letter stating that the hunter biden laptop, which the fbi had since november of 2019, was a phony russian plant. joe biden purposely saying they used that letter in order to defend hunter biden and pretend that it was not real. they purposely lied about it. i believe tony blinken should step down because he should not be secretary of state if he pulled this dirty trick. unfortunately, the deep state has been protecting the biden family for years now. there is no reason that this investigation and to hunter biden should go on for five years. host: let you jump in. guest: the committee is

releasing a report about this letter signed by 51 intelligence officials who said they believe the laptop and information on it wasn't disclosed ahead of the 2020 election but that -- was disclosed ahead of the 2020 election but that was russian disinformation. it was very influential. we have learned through mike morel who says antony blinken was involved in this letter. he has denied this as recent as a week ago. he said he had nothing to do with spearheading the letter. republicans are investigating the genesis of this letter. part of what they are leasing this morning is connecting -- releasing this morning is connected the signers and got the letter going to the biden

campaign showing they were in talks with the biden campaign about the letter and it was all about protecting the biden campaign and assuring the president, then candidate, was not damaged by this. i think this is what they are trying to shout with the report they're releasing on their investigation of the letter -- show today with report there releasing on their investigation of the letter. it looks like he did not earn big political favor. host: 65 page report before this interview this morning. for viewers who want to see the report to the judiciary committee, it is available at judiciary. house.gov. here is the front page. hunter biden statement how

senior intelligence officials in biden campaign work to mislead american voters interim joint staff report from the committee on the judiciary. there is a press site on the judiciary committee site. you can watch the press conference on c-span.org. this is patty from new jersey. independent. caller: good morning. i do not know the reporter personally but i know the washington examiner is extremely bias. host: susan ferrechio's with the washington times. national politics correspondent. what is your question for her? caller: i want to make a comment that hunter biden has been investigated for five years. i recall president trump was

impeached for trying to get information that was false. this whole thing is about a tax charge. i think it is pathetic that the republicans are going after the president, one surviving son. i thought that was awful. my question for you is it so important to investigate hunter biden and his business dealings? why isn't anyone investigating the trump children influence peddling? early in trump's term, jared kushner sister was in china selling condominiums with a promise of lunch with the president. if that is not influence peddling, i do not know what is. also, ivanka trump with herb patton she was in -- with the

patent when she was working for the president. the tip of the iceberg is saudi arabia $2 billion for jared trump him for scrounging around for whatever money they could get . guest: the house oversight committee are asking for information about the two billion dollar investment. he's also willing to look into this. i do know the trump kids got scrutiny for exactly what the caller is talking about in congress and in the media. i think with james comer said about today's press conference where going to hear as it is not about the biden family. there is nothing illegal about james or hunter biden or anybody saying -- profiting off the fact that they are related to the

vice president, at the time, or the president of the united states, that is not illegal. the issue is whether there is public corruption. whether or not anything was promise in exchange for their action on behalf of these foreign entities, who are china, russia, ukraine. that is what the focus is going to be. whether or not it can be connected to the president. that has public corruption whether it is something exchange for a promise made or official action taken. that is different from saying -- i dislike the robbing door in washington. members of congress -- it is like the revolving door in washington. the focus today is trying to show that president biden himself was involved in -- and there is public corruption here.

we have not seen the smoking gun on that. have to see what he comes up with in a few minutes. host: david in ohio. republicans. caller: i have been conservative my entire life. i think the past caller is right. i did not think my other republican friends understand is that when i talked to my friends on the left they do not care. if there is corruption, hunter biden did something wrong, throat him in jail. -- throw him in jail. they do not worship their leaders. what about harlan crow who has been buying our supreme court justices? it is on both sides across-the-board. host: susan ferrechio we are running short on time. final minute before we let you watch the press conference.

guest: i think he's effecting a lot of frustration by the public. they see the politician and money they make from their offices when they leave office, lucrative book bills, contracts, they make a lot of money. the higher up you are the more you make when you leave. the public's onto this and they see it. it has been a part of our government forever. i think today's press conference you're going to see a lot more detail about the inner workings of this kind of think. host: available at the c-span.org and the free c-span mobile video app. i imagine you will have a write up on this? guest: yes, we will be covering it. host: susan ferrechio washington times correspondent.

we return to the debt ceiling and what might have being if u.s. defaults. we talk with shai akabas economic policy director the bipartisan policy center for that discussion. stick around. ♪ >> 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 livestreamed floor -- livestream's and floor proceedings from congress, white house events, the court, campaigns, and more from the world of politics. all at your fingertips. you can also stay current with the latest episodes of "washington journal" and find scheduling information for c-span's tv network 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 to washington anytime, anywhere. >> since 1979, in partnership with the cable industry, c-span has provided complete coverage of the halls of congress, from the house and senate floors to congressional hearings, party briefings, and committee meetings. c-span gives you a front row seat to how issues are debated and decided, with no commentary, no interruptions, and completely unfiltered. c-span, your unfiltered view of government. >> watch video on demand anytime online and -- on c-span.org.

use pots of interest anytime online at c-span.org. >> c-span campaign 2024 coverage is your front row seat to the 2024 elections. watch our coverage with announcements, meet and greets, speeches and events to make up your own mind. campaign 2024 on the c-span network, c-span now are free mobile video app, or c-span -- or anytime online and c-span.org. c-span, your unfiltered view of, politics. >> healthy moxie doesn't just look like this, it looks like this where americans can see democracy at work, where citizens are truly influenced,

are republic thrives. on c-span, unfiltered, unbiased, world or world -- word for word. this is what democracy looks like. c-span powered by cable. >> washington journal continues. host: shy activist jones is no. --shai akabas joins us now. how worried are you right now about this one? guest: highfield concern and that level of concern will grow in the coming days as there continues to not be a resolution in the congress and president. it is important that they are talking to each other because they will not reach a deal without that.

they agreed to meet again on friday and i think that is a positive next step of the two sides are using mostly their original talking points and we will need them to move off of those ceviche agreement so i am concerned because we are months and weeks away from defaulting their obligation to the country. in looking back at history, we have always managed to come to resolution before the worst consequences have hit us so i accosted -- cautiously off the mystic -- i am cautiously optimistic. host: i want to bounce it off you, biden aids have left open the possibility of a deal on government spending that also -- both sides to claim victory with republican saying that they secured cuts and white house officials maintaining that they took steps needed to avoid default.

is that a path you see as a possibility? guest: that is the most likely outcome. the president is saying that he is intense thing -- insisting on a clean debt increase. the house has passed a debt limit increase along with about $5 trillion of savings that they would like to see. we need to see something in the middle and the president says he will not negotiate over the debt limit itself. the republican say they will ensue -- insist on savings. the president said he is willing to negotiate about the budget not the debt limit so it continues on how the two sides are deciding this. if it gets past rest -- rhetoric, they can get to sussex -- substance. host: explain what the x date is .

guest: we try to serve as a third-party objective ports in the discussion because the president has estimates on when we will run out of cash but because it is politics and there are members of the opposite side, those estimates are not always interpreted as objective so we tried to play the validating voice to give members of congress the information they need. what we called the x date is when the government will run out of cash on hand to meet obligations. there are accounting maneuvers to buy additional time for policymakers to work out a deal and those measures have been pushed into january and we expect to see that they will run out sometime between early june and early august. most months, perhaps weeks away. these are analysis -- it takes a lot of work because we have to

pay hundreds of billions of dollars of cash flows to come out of the government and it is important to acknowledge that not even the treasury secretary knows what day it will be that we meet our obligations. host: why don't they know that? guest: it is different from what other viewers are familiar with with the government shutdown. that is a specific date where congress has authorized or appropriated spending and when that date comes, if they don't make new spending decisions, there is no authority to spend money. if they do not meet the day, there is a government shutdown and some employees get sent home. what we are dealing with is the u.s. set out all the spending priorities, congress passed bills including entitlement programs like social security and medicare and annual funding programs. there isn't enough bartering capacity to meet -- borrowing

capacity to meet all of it. the difference is made up from borrowing from the public and if we don't have the ability by borrowing more money from the public by issuing debt, we cannot meet those obligations. we need to figure out all the cash flows of the government that happened over the course of each day and each month and when they will run out of the cash flows and hit ground zero. host: is there any way you can be more specific of june through august? do you have -- can you narrow it, that you feel more confident about? guest: many are wondering why we have a broader range. we see a danger point in early june because that is before the treasury reports look at quarterly taxes. once they get that in, that will help them buoy it. there is an additional measure. there's a two part window. host: the danger zone on the

front end -- guest: if they managed to get past that, it will likely be police until july when we reach that x date. host: what do you think this does what are credit standing -- what that does to our credit standing? guest: we saw that in 2011, the last time we saw this brawl. it was both because we were threatening not to meet all of our obligations on time and because we -- we were not sure if there was a by cart -- a bipartisan way to deal with our challenges. it is heading skyhigh, 200% gdp over the next several gaetz. s&p acknowledged that reality. downgraded as as a result.

other rating agencies have put out warnings to say if we see that kind of thing again or we go past the x date, they can downgrade further and that is dangerous for the country because it could lead to increases in borrowing costs, lots of other consequences. host: have we given them any more confidence in the past 12 years that we can deal in a body -- bipartisan way? guest: we have not and that is troubling because our debt continues to rise. we know it is a problem and there doesn't seem to be out will to do anything about it. we have had various episodes between 2011 and now and none of them have come close to the brink in 2011. we have come in weeks of -- four months in not making good on the obligation and when credit agencies are looking at any country, they have to decide how likely isn't -- is it that the government will not make those

debts. when we come in weeks or months every year or two of that risk, there is a natural reaction from them to save you are no longer the gold standard for credit will stop -- credit. . host: it is bipartisanpolicy.org to see his work. if you want to join the conversation, (202) 748-8000, democrats, republicans, (202) 748-8001, independents, (202) 748-8002. you mentioned the u.s. being the gold standard. if it is not the u.s., who is the next country to be the gold standard? guest: there really isn't one and that is why we have maintained that. there is a lack of competition and china has been the one

closest to it but there is concerns about how they handled their economy and their political system. there is a danger that we can migrate towards the chinese. the risk here is that we leave the promise, it will lead to higher borrowing costs in the country and it will not help us maintain the status of an global economic leader. host: this is ryan, lake roosevelt, washington, independent. caller: i am checking out your -- and you refer a lot to bipartisan and i have to ask you was all the positive outcomes we have had in the last three years, the last year of trump and the last couple years of fighting --biden, anything that

has been beneficial to the american citizen taxpayer average working guy has only been promoted by one side of the aisle and totally objected to by the other side. i will use an example, health care. if we are going to be about water and not -- the carpet pulled out underneath us with drastic, under -- unexpected medical bills. we want to keep our family economics working but we can end up in bankruptcy over a humongous medical bill that we already have medical insurance for but the insurance got what i pay for it. host: what is the question here? caller: if it has to be bipartisan, would you point out one bipartisan action that has been taken currently, recently

-- host: what do you do? guest: sure. [laughter] when i say it has to be bipartisan, it effectively has to be bipartisan to pass congress because the republicans have the majority of the house and the senate is controlled by democrats and you need 60 votes to move something and it needs to be bipartisan by definition regardless of what we want. in terms of your question of things have -- that have been bipartisan in the last few years, we have worked on several issues that have worked with -- helped working americans. last year, on an overwhelming bipartisan basis and that made improvements to be 401k and saving system to let people put money aside for retirement and emergencies easily.

there are issues where one party or the other appears more aligned with the working class and that is in the eye of the beholder. host: the house debt ceiling bill not a bipartisan vote. let me show you a graphic on that when it was passed. the entire roadblock, the 270 republicans who supported that legislation and that blue block, 215 democrats and four republicans who voted against that legislation. three members did not vote. what is your read on the legislation? guest: it includes a lot of provisions so there are a number of pieces i think have some element of bipartisan possibility and some that are not starters. the nonstarter categories are instead are undue actions the president has done. things like clean energy credits and the student loan provisions

that have been a major point for the president's platform. there are other places like caps on discretionary spending. all the agencies like education department and it energy department. those have to be appropriate each year. republicans would like to reduce that and have them grow slowly and democrats alike to see them increase and there is room between them. having negotiation about that over that portion of the bill seems logical and necessary. there are pieces that i think are opportunity -- opportunities for bipartisanship. the bills to speed up infrastructure projects to make sure we can build at a pace that makes more sense for a leadership role in the global

economy and our needs domestically. one person is speaking at the bipartisan policy center about the subject. there is a chance for some agreement and there is a provision in the house bill that would repeal unspent funds from the covid pandemic. we are sitting here three years after a lot of those funds were passed into law in some of them have not been put out in the emergency and it and we are no longer in the pandemic phase. there is a rationales look at the funds and see which no longer makes sense to have out there. the president said he would look forward --at that. host: this is in texas, kenneth, democrat. you are on with shai akabas. caller: i am wonder why -- wondering why the democrats don't cut off the red states

when they run out of money. the republican states have their hands out at every year, taking more money than they put into the federal government and they are the ones that want to cut back spending but their hands are out for more money. i know that kentucky takes like $20 billion a year that they do not put in. west virginia takes out $17 billion a year that they do not put into the federal government. if the federal government has to balance its budget, why don't the states have to balance their budgets to live off their own gdp? guest: the state do mostly have to balance their own budget and what you are referring to is what you're talking about the earlier part of the answer, where they received reports from the federal government that is contributing to the fiscal problems at a national level and some states received were reports and others. that is a challenge and one that

members of congress better what -- battle with an they want to see their states get an equitable portion and there are programs that go proportionately to their states, perhaps they have higher rates of poverty or lower rates of growth in gdp than other states. there are many reasons why certain states see more than others but that is a challenge to make sure all states are being treated equitably and there are situations where states are getting more money. that creates a dynamic word some would argue there being critical. it is challenging because there are so many parts -- host: joe, republican, good morning. the constitution state. caller: how are you? host: doing well. you are on with cnas --shai akabas. caller: you mentioned something

about the u.s. being the gold standard for the world. it used to be. we have turned into a third world country. this president, this administration is destroying this country in every possible way. when you talk about a gold standard? there is the gold standard anymore. he is destroying this country. host: i got your point. comment? guest: i disagree that we are a third word -- third world country at this point. we are the economic leader. we have major problems in this country. those need to be addressed and some of them are urgent. host: fargo, north dakota. this is the wind -- this is the

way -- this is luanne. caller: i just think that we cannot discount capitalism with capitalism. i want to say that there are things we can do. host: what is a common sense thing we can do? caller: have more money. we can spend more and i do think we can heard anything. i don't think there is a problem with doing all that. host: we can just print more money. guest: that is a challenge for us as a country because what we have seen in the past several years is high levels of inflation which is hurting many of our customers, that is a result because of the government spending more money. there's a limit of how much we can pump into the economy and

juicing inflation. it is valid because there are a lot of needs and that is why the government spends a lot of more money. we need to look at ways we can save money at the same time so we are not putting ourselves in the worst fiscal position we are already in and members of congress look favorably on tax cuts or spending reasons. tax increase since -- tax increases and spending cuts are less popular. we need to look -- and reducing our deficits. host: ken the 14th amendment be used to fix this impasse we have come to? guest: the 14th amendment says that debts of the u.s. cannot be questioned. it was ratified in the mid-19th century and it is not applicable

to the debt limit because it was not in existence then. there are some that argue that the existence of the 19th amendment means the debt limit should be nullified. it doesn't allow us to borrow the amount we need -- and it would call into question the debts the treasury department would issue to meet those bills. the issue is not so much a legal one, although that is important and i am not a legal scholar. the issue from my vantage point is the economic fallout. if the president were to say before -- the 14th amendment nullified the debt limit and issues debt above and beyond permitted by the debt limit, that could create a chaotic state of financial markets because their reaction to that and the reaction of credit rating agencies and the political world of republicans to that action would be severe.

it could lead to the same consequences we would fear with an actual default. if that initial -- if the treasury department issues above and beyond the debt limit using the 14th amendment as justification is called into question as a legal case, that could get up into disarray because it would cost -- the debts will be challenged and that investors would not be holding those debts that will be invalidated. they would ask for more interest rates and that could lead to a debt default. that is a long way of saying, i think there are a lot of convocations for a unilateral action. a debt limit -- but it is a really risky proposition and that has been why treasury secretaries have not gone in that direction. host: section four of the 14th amendment when it was passed

after the civil war, reits, -- reads, -- section four of the 14th amendment. this is christian in clyde, north carolina. republican. caller: i wanted to discuss from the house bill, the debts -- and a fan of it. i like that it brings the spending down to the pre-pandemic levels and i like how it calls back to unspent

kobani in the big fan -- a big fan i am a fan of our the work requirements of certain things it brings back from the clinton area. do you think it is possible that that could maybe happen again or get have been, welfare reform like that. i note the democrat party seems to be more of the left -- to the left and the clinton era -- of the clinton era? guest: thanks for bringing that up and that was a component of the bill that i made in my initial response and -- these are requirements that individuals who are collecting various benefit programs from the five -- federal government, it is food stamps, nutrition assistance program and medicaid

for health care. able-bodied people who are collecting those are working and in theory, that makes sense. the challenge has been in practice, a lot of those work requirements take people off of the programs may be in working but are not able to jump through all the hoops it takes to validate their employment. a lot of these people tend to be lower financial -- and we have to balance the desire to make sure people who are collecting those benefits are working with the fact that if we create two burdens of a system, it won't help the people that needed. that is abounds bounds that is difficult to achieve. the states are not equipped -- and putting that in place overnight would be a challenge and would likely result in more people being kicked off and not being able to validate their

employment than getting people to find employment. that is an underlying point, most people who are able -- able-bodied and collecting that are employed. the portion of the beneficiaries are -- that are not employed, or hopefully have been employed or kick out the program is small. the cost-benefit here is important and one is -- one that is stuff -- one that is tough to get right. the republican house bill would raise that to age 55. there may be one for compromise. the medicaid program does not have those requirements and that would be a bigger -- tougher task to put that in place given all the demonstrated complexities -- the administrative complexities. host: just about five or 10 minutes -- or 10 minutes left

with cnas --shai akabas. this is reba, in gaithersburg, maryland. caller: thank you for taking my call. one of my problems i have with the debt ceiling think, --thing, it is preceded by budget and the whole budget process of a point of view of a citizen is very difficult to problem because they act at the last minute like it is just happening but when you look, they were talks -- never talks about it before but none of it is easily accessible, that i have been able to find. so, anything you can suggest for actually following the budget from the bills to the pay cut, to the budget so we don't get hit with this debt ceiling from a citizens point of view every

year? my next thing, is there anything about the bills -- can i find out which bills didn't have a paygo? host: -- guest: thanks for your points and questions. many members of congress struggle to follow this. they will tell you about this and, -- host: they will tell you about this and come this program. guest: our prices are -- -- is broken -- our process is broken. that lays out the levels for all the appropriation bills for the various agencies for the year. that almost never happens these days and we get into these last-minute situations where there are continuing resolutions, continuing the last year's priorities are we have a

government shutdown -- for we have a government shutdown. the debt limit becomes this leverage point where the only opportunity to have that conversation about our priorities and our taxes for the future. that is why it gets used the way it does. that is not justifying position for the reason we are having a debate over the debt limit is that because we don't have that opportunity on annual basis to do so on a budget. we can see that we can propose a reform to the debt limit because we think they are two problems that are crying out for a change in the first change here is that it would de-risk the debt limit and make sure we are not the economy at risk every year and threatening to the pot on obligations and it would also ensure that the process each year to debate the full federal budget and figure out how we are going to reduce deficits into the future. those are important because the

debt deficit is a long-term problem that we maybe need to tackle now and the debt limit is a short-term problem. we can tie these two together and figure out a way to make sure we are preserving our status as a global economic leader and create a better form for handling our budget. host: nelson, republican, good morning. caller: can you hear me ok? host: yes, sir. caller: mr. shai akabas, i note -- i am sure you know most civilizations that have the client have the basis on their declining based on the national debt. it seems to be having -- happening to the usa of -- as well. i am not convinced that defaulting maybe a terrible thing. it might wake of the american public who are addicted to all kinds of government benefits and

that includes me. i get the social security and i'm 70 you -- and i am 74 years old and something needs to be done or otherwise future generations will have a difficult time, not to mention the declining of the u.s. will continue. perhaps we should go ahead and let's go ahead and default and then we can start fixing our national debt, which is going on $32 trillion. we can start applying common sense to all the government programs that we are all benefiting from, but which we are all using to kill this country. thank you. guest: i hear you and i am similarly concerned about the trajectory we are on and we have been on for the past several decades in terms of our debt. i don't think defaulting would do anything to improve the

situation and i think it would make it significantly worse. the reasons are, if we develop, -- default, investors will be -- there will be less demand among investors to buy our debt. we have to pay high interest rates and interest cuts are a fastest -- the fastest growing part of our budget. if it accelerates, it will be harder to fix challenges and if we default, there will be severe consequences. growth will slow down and unemployment will grow up. these are things that make the budget worse. this is a huge problem -- i don't think the costs that are likely to serialize our work -- to materialize are worth the benefit. there are other ways to inform the american public and we need more leadership from those in office. default would have serious

economic consequences that we cannot wrap our arms around and if we focus our entire for the quote system on how we mitigate the disaster on the default would create. host: it is not worth congress burning their hands on the stove here to learn the lesson? guest: i think this is more like setting yourself on fire. [laughter] we don't know that the consequences would not be catastrophic but taking that risk with our leadership position in the global economy -- it takes so many risks with what we have created and i think the consequences are so unforeseen, that they are likely to be highly damaging to the future. host: time for one or two more phone calls with shai akabas of the bipartisan policy center. go ahead. caller: i think people should be aware of the 1917, the law was

passed called the debt ceiling law and it never existed before that. 79 times the past this debt ceiling but having said that, we are the only nation in the world that has a program that says, you spend and then think about paying the bill. world war ii was paid off in 10 years when the republicans were really rational and how did they do it? they raised that taxes on the rich to 90% and paid off world war ii in 10 years. we have the ability to manage our budget but the republicans believe the -- to charge and spend and the democrats believed to tax and spend. you either pay your bill or your don't -- you don't. host: you raised -- guest: you raise valid points.

the debt limit was placed in 1917 and it was originally bare because until that point, the president, administration needed to come to congress every time they needed to issue new debt and that became untenable for us as a growing country and a large economy. it is important to recognize that the need to raise the debt limit is, to cover spending that congress is -- has already approved so failing to do that would be defaulting on the commitment that policymakers have made. as we were talking, we don't have a functioning budget process so there is no natural opportunity to talk about entitlement programs and tax policy on a regular basis and that is why we are in the situation. hence why these budget conversations are connected to the debt limit. it is urgent that policymakers ask if they want to avoid

possibly catastrophic consequences that we associate with crossing the x date. i think they need to find a way to come to common ground and make progress on the budget, not solve all the problems but take a step forward in the right direction and we could come back to this in the coming years. host: this is jane in north carolina. democrat. caller: my question is, in 2017, the republicans passed a tax cut for 1.7 join dollars that -- $1.7 trillion that help one or 2% of the population. they had no way to pay for it when they did that. i am 73 years old and i watching all of this. my social security is have my income and all i get are threats they are going to cut this and that. why is it that when they gave

that $1.7 trillion tax cut to the writ -- rich, they had no way to pay for that money coming out of the treasury, no money going back into it, and why cannot we tax the rich again, -- i can't even remember -- host: we can stop there because we only have one minute. guest: i cannot exactly answer that question because we are not supporter of the tax cut that were passed in 2017. it was not bipartisan but your point is important. most parties have contributed -- both parties have contributed to the debt limit and they have passed irresponsible tax cut policies. the democrats passed a very large package, much of which was probably justified by many economists said it was too much spending and it has in part led to the inflation we have seen.

those are a couple of examples. we need to get back on track and find ways we can raise revenue and cut spending to get our budget back. those tax cuts passed in 2017 will expire at 2025 so that rates seen at opportunity for congress to discuss what tax policy should look like and whether there are improvements to taxes that we can make it less complex. host: will you be providing updates? guest: we will and as we go to the next several weeks, we will get more information to narrow that range but we will never know with certainty when the x date is and that is the challenge lawmakers are working with. host: bipartisanpolicy.org.

shai akabas is the director of policy there. we appreciate your time. there will be open forum. four numbers are on your screen, call in now and we will -- phone numbers on your screen, call in now and we will get to your calls after the break. ♪ >> if you are enjoying book tv, sign up for your desk to receive the schedule of upcoming programs, professionals -- book schedules and more. book tv, anytime online at c-span.org. television for serious readers.

>> since 1979, in partnership with the cable industry, c-span has provided complete coverage of the halls of congress, from the house and senate floors to congressional hearings, party briefings, and committee meetings. c-span gives you a front row seat to how issues are debated and decided, with no commentary, no interruptions, and completely unfiltered. c-span, your unfiltered view of government. ♪ >> c-span -- 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 support our nonprofit operation. shop now or anytime at c-spanshop.org.

>> listing to programs on c-span through c-span radio just got easier. tell your smart speaker play c-span radio and listen to -- throughout the day and weekdays at 5 p.m. and 9 p.m. eastern, catch "washington today" for a fast-paced report of the stories of the day. listen to c-span anytime. just tell your smart speaker, "play c-span radio." c-span, powered by cable. >> "washington journal" continues. host: it is our open forum. there are 20 minutes left. through the day. democrats, it is (202) 748-8000, republicans, (202) 748-8001,

independents (202) 748-8002. some breaking news this morning from washington dc and new york as well. tom's george santos, the republican of new york is in custody today after being indicted on 13 federal charges including wire fard and -- wire fraud and money laundering. one count of theft and public funds, two counts of making materially false statements to the house of representatives. and he will be arraigned today at approximately 1 p.m. eastern. this rendered -- his surrender came one day after reports that federal prosecutors have fired -- have filed criminal charges against the commitment. it is our open form. --forum. caller: good morning, i love

c-span. i am calling to criticize c-span and you but i want to make one comment about that, when president biden says, he says there is one point 7 -- 1.7 join dollars, it is after 10 years and there could be three other presidents that talk about money . my criticism from six weeks ago. someone was talking about a regularities -- -- irregularities in the 2020 presidential election and you said 60 courts through it out. that is incorrect. three or four courts through it out. i am not saying -- there were some shenanigans. i put paper up on the class -- glass wall.

something happened and i'm not sure what it was and i will not say it was rate particularly -- it was raid --rigged particularly but something went wrong. when trump told people in his rally for people to walk to the capital, they leave it out. director rey was asked under oath was it an insurrection and he said no. host: that is bob. this is looking --lahune out of hawaii. caller: it is frustrating when you hear smany callers. when it comes to the debt ceing, -- we can tax the

extremely wealthy and the churches because they cannot keep their noses out of politics. they are supposebe separate but they are not. there are many ways you can save money without hurng social security or programs that we need for us. we are the ones thatut them in the power. when democrats have power, republicans refuse to work with them. when republicans are in power, the democrats try the republicans give in. they control whatever they want and they change it to the nerve to and the you hear them talking about things like saying it was not an insurrection. hunter biden's laptop, that is a waste of taxpayer dollars. they are talking about saving money and that they want to cut important programs? they have been trying to cut these programs for years but here they are trying to use them

as leverage, turning to default are the nation so they can get what they want. host: this is shannon in waterloo, iowa. independent. caller: i need to say that education is very important -- i wanted to say that education is very important. as a veteran, i get benefits to go to school and i don't think it is fair that people are not able to get education in the same way that i did. i don't think people should put their body on the line to get education. universal health care -- were is a racket. --war is a racket. it should just be waived, -- completely. there should be universal education. host: what you say to people who

say how do we pay for that if we do that? caller: taxing the rich. thank you. host: shannon in our. --iowa. roberta. good morning. caller: i am a little bit perturbed and upset with the republican party. they passed the debt limit and they turn around and they're trying to say joe biden is destroying the country. that does not make sense. they have been trying to get rid of social security for decades. mitch mcconnell and all of them have been trying to get rid of it for a long time. it doesn't make sense to keep fighting over this. this is crazy. they talk about entitlement programs. it was not an entitlement program when was well put into his office in 1935 and finalized

in 1936 and they keep talking about -- they cannot have it both ways. it is not going out or whatever but they tell everyone that social security is going to default. every prayer -- president that has ever been in office has taken money from social security. this is crazy and they want to default on the debt because of social security, medicaid, medicare? they want people to go to work, for what? this is stupid. host: fremont, ohio. democrat. caller: when push -- bush to -- took office, he put $1 trillion from social security and never put it back. the reason to do that is for the economy.

trump spent $8.2 trillion. what did he do with it? host: indianapolis, indiana. this is dickie -- vickie. caller: how about congress not getting paid? to shut up -- off every bit of government payment as to shut off retirees, they don't make sense stop -- cents. --sense. caller: thank you for taking my call. i have an important question. if the first text that trump put on -- tax that trump took off from the ridge was put back in place, how soon would you be -- would the budget be -- it is a

little more equal. i believe that banishes they tax you can put back. -- the tax you can put back. host: new york. good morning. caller: how are you doing. host: doing well. caller: i have been here on -- on here a few times. did you recall who i am? host: i have a lot of callers. what is on your mind? caller: every time i call on this line, get hung up on 100% and when you hang up on me this sign -- this time, i will stay on the line and let your producers infiltrate and let's have a real show. host: what is the issue you want to talk about? caller: the issue i would talk about is what i am talking about

now and i will come to washington dc and i will speak with you or any of your other hosts, pedro, and let's get it on. host: that is what we do here. we let people do it every day on this program. you don't have to come to washington and you could come in and talk about a public policy issue. caller: we will go to fred in jessup, maryland. host: we will go to fred in jessup, maryland. caller: i am wondering why you are not covering the huge story on hunter biden. i also went to c-span and all the liberal sites and they are not talking about it. host: we had a whole half hour segment talking about the press conference and in the half hours leading up to that and we edit

on c-span.org and also on our c-span app. you can find it as well so i am sorry you missed that. caller: did you -- host: did you watch that? caller: it was 30 minutes. this is a huge story. this is the reason why that balloon floated across the u.s. the president was compromised and paid off by the chinese. you have to cover this like you did trump. let's be fair and balanced. if this was trump, this would be a different bouquet. -- bouquet --ballgame. host: this is william in jacksonville, florida. caller: i am concerned about the debt ceiling.

why is it that republicans passed -- with trump with an under suspended --unsuspended ceiling but when there is democrats, to give you a hard time and there is a default. host: this is charlie, manhattan beach. independent. go ahead. caller: i would like to make one comment. when we are asked to tax the rich so they pay their fair share, i want to know what the fair share is. fair share is not a number. it is a talking point. it is important to say what a ship -- fair share is so we can evaluate it and decide if it is fair or not. host: do you have a sense on what a fair share is? is there such a thing? caller: i don't think it is a

real thing. [laughter] i don't think it is a real thing. fair share is, the entire country bank -- paying enough taxes to's -- to fix the bill for the country, whatever that ends up being. we have a graduated tax schedule. there could be adjustments to the. -- to that. i know taxes have been increased and reduced over the years. it becomes a toy, a political toy to play with, to talk about taxes. just say woodpecker sure is -- just say what the fair share is. host: this is cecelia, cherokee, alabama. republican.

caller: i was saying maybe we should default on that and only the most important things should be. because in my area, there is a lot of places wanting to hire. maybe then the jobs would be filled so they will get more taxes. --taxes paid. we can go to these lobbies and restaurants are shut down. people don't want to get to work. when we asked what is going on, they say people don't want to go to work and maybe we should default and a lot of these people should be off of these programs that is putting our businesses out of business and ruining our country. host: what are the major, most important things that you think should be paid? caller: of course, social

security and the medicare and the most vital thing, when you go to the grocery store, you buy cheap meat. you cut off the fat. you don't need to be having people were able-bodied to work, give the money to not work -- give them money to not work. that is the big problem. as far as the president, i will make -- i do not think the budget should be more than the president's job. when we think about the budget, what do we -- why don't we do it in my term and not 10 years from now because what is the next president wants to change something? host: this is well, cincinnati, ohio --will, cincinnati, ohio. caller: i wanted to mention real

quick about the fact that this whole thing was done in 2011, 2012, they talked about the fact that the republican party had fixed the debt and they would keep the deficit on the back of working-class people. it was wrong then and what they are trying to do is the same thing. i would add also that there was someone i the name of paul ryan who wanted to botch medicare. another gentleman, governor of illinois, was one it -- one of the 122 block grants medicaid and president george bush was in favor of privatizing social security. [indiscernible]

i've been working all my life and i have earned the social security. this whole idea is ridiculous and it needs to the -- it needs to stop. host: the house set to come in in a maple or -- in a minute or two. we will talk to fred, oshkosh. caller: my question is why aren't you guys covering the palmer interview news conference on all this corruption with the bidens? host: we had a segment on that this morning and we aired it in its entirety on our website, c-span.org so i don't think we are not covering it. caller: you have cameras in the room, why isn't it list? host: it was live.

we streamed it on our video app. caller: we are looking at c-span on tv and you're are talking about anything but. host: we have to take you live to the floor of the house of reppo -- representatives because we are committed to erring the house gavel to gavel and members of congress coming in right now. we will be back tomorrow morning at 7:00 a.m. eastern, 4:00 a.m. pacific. in the meantime, have a great day.