with your calls and comments live on e r. also, republican congressman hn rutherford, a member of the appropriations committee talks abouthstalemate over raising the debt ceiling, and at the end of the title 42 immigration policy. then a look at the house republican deblit and spending proposals with bobby kogan from the center for american progress. and david er, associate director of immigratiosties at the cato institute, discusses a and two title 42 and the economic impacts of legal and illegal immigration. washington journal is next. >> the bill is passed without objection. a motion to reconsider is laid on the table. ♪

host: good morning. the house passed a republican border bill yesterday that would require migrants to to apply for asylum outside less and includes funding to resume construction of the border wall and an increase in the number of border patrol agent. it is not expected to pass the senate and the white house threatened a veto. title 42, the public health order that expelled migrants without an asylum hearing, expired as of midnight eastern time yesterday. in this first half hour, we are getting your reaction and thoughts on the gop border bill and the end of title 42. and across can call (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001. independents, (202) 748-8002. if you live in a border state, you can call (202) 748-8003. you can also use the same line to text us, but send your first

name and/or city and state. we are on social media at facebook.com/sees dan and twitter and instagram@cspanwj. this washington post article says pandemic border restrictions lift. here's what it says of the biden administration thursday went about its border strategy would succeed over time despite a record and flux of micros of rossi west-mexico border as it lifts pandemic -- an influx of migrants over the u.s.-mexico border as it lifts a pandemic era policy. title 42 expired at 11:59 p.m.. thursday, thousands of migrants to cross the rio grande into texas or elsewhere.

including 800 miles away on a dusty strip of u.s. land between the border wall east of el paso. with processing centers maxed out, officials authorized the release of migrants without court dates at locations where facilities exceeding the hundred 25% of their holding capacity or other thresholds. a federal judge stepped in late thursday to block the release grant. as the midnight expiration time passed, homeland security secretary mayorkas posted a video statement to toy or warning, "people who arrive at the border without using a lawful pathway will be presumed and eligible -- ineligible for asylum. ." do not believe the lies of smugglers, he said. the border is not open.

shortly after, the american civil liberties union tweeted it was suing to stop the restrictions, saying they closed off access to safety for the majority of people seeking asylum in the u.s. as take a look at the gop house bill that passed yesterday and what is in it. it is called the "secure the boer act" and will restt construction of the border wall, whose personnel and technology atheorder, impos asylum restrictions, reinstate family detention, and require workers to check migrant status. take a look here at speaker mccarthy shortly after passage of the vote yesterday. [video clip] >> house republicans have shown they were focused on addressing our nations biggest challenges. by contrast, the white house had two years to plan for the end of

title 42. we all knew the deadline, but the white house produced no plan, miss the deadline, and bumbled into a another crisis. even president biden, who has only been to the border one time in 50 years, said this. "there is going to be chaos for a little while." since the white house keeps missing deadlines, i want you to know how we did it. we identified the problem. rather than ignoring it, we listen to the american people, and then we took action. host: that was speaker mccarthy yesterday. also yesterday, take a look at homeland security sec. mayorkas who responded to a reporter's question about president biden saying the border would be chaotic for a while. [video clip] >> even the fact you have had

nearly two years to prepare for this moment, how can chaos be the expectation? >> i have set for months and months that the challenge at the border is and is going to be very difficult. we have spoken repeatedly about the fact that difficulty may only increase at this time of transition. it will take a period of time for our approach to actually gain traction and show results. i have been very clear about this. the fundamental reason why we have this challenge at our border, and have had this challenge many a time before, is because we are working within the constraints of a fundamentally broken immigration system. we also are operating on resources that are far left than those we need and have requested. >> some measures you have been talking about to mitigate the search are not even in place yet.

it was not until two weeks ago that you announce these plans on whether or not these centers were opened yet. of the 1500 troops the president employed, only 550 are actually on the ground. even how long you have known that title 42 was ending on the 11th, why aren't these measures already in place. >> we implemented measures well before those few you identified. our parole process is an example. we have had 2500 department of defense personnel well in place already. we have searched resources of all types over months and months -- surged resources of all types over months and months. host: that was senator mayorkas. title 42 expired as of midnight last night. are getting reaction to that and the gop bill that passed the house yesterday. let's take a look at tweets.

from representative scott peters, a democrat, who says solutions to fix our border are not black and white. hr 2 is a harmful proposal that will take us nowhere. this is congresswoman jocelyn crockett, also a democrat. instead of offering support and protection to kids, this house bill proposes to throw them in jail like detention. we need fewer kids in jail, not more. hrt public make our immigration system were broken. is this really the best they have. senator joe manchin of west virginia says we are one day away from the end of title 42 and still the biden administration has no solution to prevent an unmanageable search of migrants at our southern border. representative kim but, a republican, says this is a terrible decision by joe biden and can mayorkas.

they have created a devastating security crisis at the southern border. scott perry says we would not have to pass a border bill if president biden would follow the law, enforce it, and commit to a sovereign space and same border. senator ron johnson of wisconsin says president biden and sec. mayorkas because this disaster and the legacy media enabled the border crisis by covering it up. now that this catastrophe is out of control, will the malfeasance, corruption, and cover-up continue? let's now go to your calls. david is first in south carolina on the republican line. good morning. caller: i wanted to make a few points. things have come a long way. i am the son of a legal immigrant. i watch a lot of c-span. i see no distinction.

many, many speeches. i have never seen a distinction between a legal and illegal immigration made by democratic elected officials. not once. host: what you mean no distinction? explain that. caller: when i hear them discuss immigration, i never hear a distinction between illegal and illegal immigration. yesterday, i saw a congresswoman driving about the fact that her family came across illegally and she was glorified for it. this is interesting because without the distinction between illegal and legal, by definition, that is lawlessness. there is about to be a wave of lawlessness and crime in this country. people who call republicans racist -- i have been called racist by senior democratic officials. i can name them and tell them --

tell you what they said, referring to people like me. i resent that. but when crime becomes rampant, the liberals will wake up and realize there is a mishap with sustaining this blindness. it is a myth that america is so wealthy that we can afford to open our borders, feed and care for the world. host: i want to go back to what you said about crime. the evidence does not suggest that undocumented immigrants are the ones causing the surge in crime. caller: but what is going to happen is the growing strain on resources and limited jobs will cause economic hardship. so people who maybe never committed crimes before may be forced to. or people who maybe want to commit crimes and think it will be blamed on the illegals. when someone breaks into your house and steals everything, and stills were cars, which happened to me this week, i do not care

what race they are. it does not matter. i love them as a christian, but do you have a right to defend what you own? the increasing message is america does not have a right. individuals do not have a right to own anything or increase their own wealth or do anything like that. this idea that we can feed and care for the world in just open the borders is ridiculous. it is going to fail and it will be too late for america and people finally wake up and realize -- we cannot help the world unless we are strong and work from a position of strength. host: doug in florida. democrat. caller: good morning. i have the perfect solution. since our republicans love their guns and hate illegals on the border, go down there and shoot them all. host: we do not condone

violence. ted in boston, massachusetts. independent. caller: good morning. if you want to fix the immigration crisis, go after the employers. the gop does not want to do that because they are the lobbyists that paid them. host: part of what is in the secure the border act that just passed yesterday is a requirement for employers to check immigration status and the right to work in the country through everify. caller: i am wondering, why didn't that happen 30 years ago when we were hearing about this? it is because republicans are disingenuous and do not care. he saw with covid that they did not believe in science, with education, they do not believe in books. they do not care. it is confirmed that these are

bad people who have no value for human life. if they were not disingenuous about every single topic that we face, i would trust them. but these people are the enemy. host: since you mentioned everify, let's take a look at republican dan newhouse. like others from the agricultural districts, he supported the gop bill only after changes were made to address concerns of requirements from employers to use the system to confirm immigration status. [video clip] >> we need asylum and workforce loss, issues that i and many others have been relentlessly working on since being in congress. the u.s. is blessed with fertile lands and a climate conducive to agricultural productivity.

without an adequate workforce, our farmers and ranchers struggle to harness their crops. this poses a direct threat to our nations food security and our national security and economic prosperity. mandating everify would have a devastating impact on the american agricultural industry, including processing of agricultural products if it were to be enacted without reforms to arrive for cultural labor system. -- reforms to our agricultural labor system. host: taking your calls. responding to title 42 ending at midnight and the gop bill that passed the house yesterday on securing the border. floyd, virginia, republican. caller: thank you for taking my call. i would first like to say that we need to change the name from immigration to invasion, because

we are being invaded. it is not immigration. our president is letting it happen. we need to put the blame where it belongs and it is on president biden, and on his family that stole money, took money from china. it will come out in a few days and it will be proven. the republicans are trying to do the right thing and trying to fix things. i hope they do a big investigation on where they took money from china, and prove what they have done. pray god bless this country. people, just pray. host: david in rochester, pennsylvania. the crowd. good morning. caller: good morning. host: go ahead. caller: why do you all keep putting up what the republicans

vote? they do this all the time about immigration. it is no longer the republican party, it is a cold. quit saying there are two parties in america. the question should be, do you want to have a dictatorship or democracy? host: this came on the topic of title 42 expiring and the gop house bill. what are your thoughts? caller: i think it should have been expired. the gop is not trying to go anywhere. they are a reckless crew, trying to america. quit calling them the republican party. our a cold. host: scott, johnson city, independent. caller: i want to say that it is not robot down here in johnson city. they just want to work. you know how the republicans say

that guns don't kill people, people kill people? they need to say the same thing about fentanyl. fentanyl does not kill people, people kill people. if people were not able to take it, it would not come people in the first place. host: james in kentucky, republican. caller: thank you for taking my call. i have two points. if they are coming up here, why don't we get with their leaders and make all of south america and mexico part of the u.s.? go down and rebuild their infrastructure, have open borders so people can come and go. of course comeau we are going to enforce -- of course, we are going to enforce crime. cartel days are over. they are staying in hotels. i did research. over time, if they stay in

hotels, they can claim the rooms as property. i don't know if the corporations know this. why not just go to a big field and build a big study? then slowly emigrate them and us we can. that is my comment. i am not against -- i am a republican but i am not against it. most republicans are. it is the way it has been crammed down everybody's throat. we want them to come in legally. i have worked and know a lot of people that are spanish. they are good people. but it is just the way they are doing it. a lot of republicans are afraid that we are losing the way we look. we do not want to lose that. we have worked hard. most americans work hard for what they have got and we enjoy this country.

i appreciate you taking my call. host: take a look at this article that says, "cities scramble to prepare for deluge of migrants as the number of people crossing the border is expected to double with the end of title 42." it is not just texas bracing for an influx of migrants, cities throughout the u.s. are expecting busloads of people at potentially record numbers due to immigration policy expiring. os officials expect as many as 13,000 people a day to cross the border, any seeking asylum, which is where than double the current average. jay in georgia, democrat. caller: good morning. thank you for taking me. the first caller nailed it as far as the democrats. i am a lifelong democrat. i grew up liberal.

but i have never seen such malfeasance in government as this government. i don't know what -- the general characteristic of democrats is lawlessness, whether it is in the cities, the d.a.s and the mayors or up here with dhs secretary mayorkas. when he just his job out and widens his eyes and tells the -- jutts his jaw out and widens his eyes and tells the american people we have security at the border, it is not just lying. i go back to the dhs secretary jay jordan under obama. he was famous for saying if they had a day when they had under 1000, it was a good day, coming over the border.

when it was over 1000, 3 thousand, it would be a bad day. they had 15,000 down in brownsville and del rio in texas, every day for the last three days. it is pathological. everything they do is pathological. host: good morning. caller: good morning. how are you doing? host: i am ok. caller: i am disgusted with the borders. we have to stop letting people in. we have no place for them. they have been adding up. we have no way to take care of them. they have to go back to their country and fight for their right. if they want to become a citizen of this country, they have to fight to get their work. host: what do you mean? caller: i don't want them coming

across the border and adding to the problems. host: what do you mean they have to fight to get in? caller: they have to be able to work to get in the country, but they are just walking right in and out into all the problems we have. we do not need all these people. cannot afford to take care of them. you have to put a stop to it because we cannot take care of them. host: let's take a look at some social media. this is a text actually from tony in florida who says, "i thought we elected adults. the selling points was a return to normalcy that this is not a surprise. this is the incompetence of afghanistan all over again." chris in illinois says, "democrats knew what was coming and did nothing to prepare. republicans answered with a building know will be d.o.a. in the senate must remain for a

good sound bites debate session." dashcam kicking that has gone on for decades because neither party cares about comprehensive, immigration reform. this from time zone on twitter. a government official said to not trust the words of republicans about the border. i trust the words of smugglers before i trust the words of government officials. a great question by a reporter, how can there be chaos when you have had two years to prepare? republican, good morning. caller: i wish they would stop taking texts because we are waiting on the phone and they send a text and they are not getting a phone bill going up. this is killing those guys were on the phone and waiting. this town is a border town and it is not a border town. this place is a mess. these houses are packed like sardines. i go to townhall meetings and try to get them to enforce the

town codes. you are afraid to do anything because they do not want to offend them. the marquees in front of schools are in spanish now. one of the worst things is the cars all over the lawns and sidewalks. i had cones i left in the front of my house so they would not park in front of my house, p on mile-long, drink beer, sit under my trees and smoke. they towed my cars but they will not told the cars on the sidewalks because there are so many people in these single-family houses. he would not believe this. they are not assimilating the same way that the other ethnicities did over the centuries -- or not centuries. president biden wants this agreement deal. when they come here, the first

thing their landlords do when they buy these houses is cut down majestic oaktree's that are 100 years old and healthy. that is the worst thing they can do for the environment, click down these trees. that is one thing they do so they can fit more cars in the yard. host: says you are in new york, an article from cbs says mayor eric as a -- adams uses immigration policies as title 42 expires. they easily cities right to shelter rule. it lifts the city obligation to immediately find private rooms for asylum-seekers, allowing the city to place families with children in cover get shelters, which means they can be put in barrick-like settings without their own bathrooms, refrigerators, and kitchens. chicago, democrat line. good morning. caller: good morning.

i just wanted to comment on the ending of title 42. i don't understand why republicans are annoyed about this. they did not even believe covid was real, so why do we even need title 42 if it is not real? second, you see the lines of people queuing up at the checkpoints. that is not illegal. that is a perfectly lawful way to come to the country, to go to a checkpoint and request asylum. those are lawful asylum-seekers, not illegal immigration. host: hirsch in mississippi, independent. good morning. caller: good morning. i am a doctor and an immigrant who came legally into this country. there is so much suffering here. people wait to get medicare and all these things. on the others, if you open the border, why not airports and

everything else? why not people come in internationally? this is a true american issue. let somebody come and take a tour with me throughout mississippi. there is so much suffering. people cannot buy groceries. they cannot get medicine. they pay hundreds of dollars to see a doctor. why not internationally people come? it is our own people suffering. let somebody come take a tour with me in mississippi. i am openly talking. i am a nationalist. stay here and open the clinic. my son is a u.s.-born citizen. it is not lack and white. it is a national issue. but everybody fly. host: john in chicago, illinois. democrat. caller: good morning.

my concern is that our war on drugs has put us in this position. we spent $1 trillion on the war on drugs, and have not done very much to stop addiction. primarily, my understanding is the war on drugs is to prevent the use of cocaine five citizens in the united states. cocaine is not an addictive drug. it is dangerous, but the danger with it can be controlled. i just think we are destroying central and south america, because of the amount of money that we are using. the money goes primarily for policing in the countries south of the border. and it leads to tremendous

corruption, but it does not stop the use of cocaine in the united states. my understanding now is that the cost of cocaine for a user in the united states is per gram half the cost of gold. or a product that is produced with the cost of producing sugar . host: alright. that is the time we have. there will be other opportunities if you did not get in on this segment to call and share your thoughts. next on washington journal, for the republican john rutherford -- florida republican john rutherford joins us to discuss the end of title 42, the house republican bill and the latest on the debt ceiling talks. later, bobby kogan comes to discuss the debt limit and spending proposals. we will be right back.

♪ announcer: nonfiction book lovers, c-span has a podcast for you. listen to best-selling nonfiction authors and influential interviewers on the after words podcast. on q&a, hear conversations with authors and others making things happen. booknotes+ is weekly hour-long conversation that regularly features nonfiction authors on a wide variety of topics. the about books podcast takes you behind the scene on the nonfiction industry with insider interviews, industry updates, and bestseller lists. find all our podcast fidelity and the free c-span now app or where ever you get your podcast. and on our website,

c-span.org/podcast. announcer: watch video on demand any time online at c-span.org and try our points of interest feature, timeline 12 that quickly guides you to interesting highlights of our key coverage. use points of interest anytime online at c-span.org. announcer: order your copy of the 118th congressional directory now available on c-spanshop.org. it interacts is to the federal government with biography and contact information for every house if -- every house and senate member. also cabinets, federal agencies, and stateovnors. scan the code on the right to get yr py right now or go to c-spanshop.org. every purchase helps support our nonprofit operation. announcer: a healthy democracy does not just look like this.

it looks like this. where americans can see democracy at work, the citizens, a republican thrives. it informed straight from the source, on c-span, unbiased, unfiltered, word for word. the nation's capital to wherever you are, because the opinion that matters the most is sharon. this is what democracy looks like. c-span, powered by cable. ♪ announcer: c-span's campaign 2024 coverage is your front row seat to the election. watch our coverage on the campaign trail with announcements, meet angry, features and events -- meet and greets, speeches and events to make up your own mind. watch online at c-span.org, or c-span now, our free mobile video app. c-span, your unfiltered view of

politics. announcer: washington journal continues. host: welcome back. i am joined by representative john rutherford, on the appropriations committee who represents fortis district. welcome to the program. guest: good to be with you. host: the white house leadership meeting between president biden and congressional leaders on the debt ceiling was postponed. it was supposed to happen today but has now been postponed to sometime early next week. what are you hearing? why was it postponed? guest: while i was hearing is some members that need to be in the meeting to have it be productive for not going to be there. who that was? i do not know. but that is what we are hearing. host: what are you looking for from those negotiations from that discussion? guest: i think we passed a bill.

republicans have now raise the debt ceiling. we passed a bill to do that. it will raise it $1.5 trillion. it has a $4.8 billion cut through limiting, spending, and saving some money already out there. and also growing the economy. when you look at, particularly on some savings, is $50 billion to $60 billion of covid money that has been sitting in accounts for two years. if they have not used it in two years, i would say we could use that as savings for the american taxpayer. host: will put this on the screen as to whether the house ceiling gop plan consists of. raise the debt ceiling into a 20, reduce spending the fiscal 2022 levels, limit future spending rose to 1% annually, to unspent covid-19 funds.

new work requirements for recipients of federal aid. lock sdent debt cancellation. reform energy permitting and repeal green energy programs. are you fully on board with all of that? guest: absolutely and i think 87% of the american public is as well. to just give an example on moving back to the 2022 numbers, all we are asking to do is move spending back to where it was just five months ago. the biden administration's budget -- under the biden administration's budget. i do not think that is unreasonable to say we are going to spend now what we were spending five months ago. host: and a lot of this has to do with president biden's priorities about green energy and student debt, increasing

enforcement at the irs. is it possible to negotiate on those things? guest: only if the president will come to the table. since february 1, speaker mccarthy has been trying to get the president to the table. it is 101 days now. the bill we passed is just a starting point. host: if you would like to call in and asked questions for congressman rutherford, you conduce by party affiliation. democrats, (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001. independents, (202) 748-8002. he will be with us until the top of the hour, 8:00 eastern time. if there is no deal reached,

would you be willing to let the u.s. default? guest: i am not willing to and i hope the president is not. host: but if he says i will not make these cuts? pass a clean bill, and then we will discuss the cuts, would you be willing to go along? guest: we have always negotiated for debt ceiling raises. back in -- and even when he was a senator. host: but congress didn't pass clean debt ceiling increases during the trump administration. so what is the difference now? guest: the difference now is they just spent $6 trillion over the last couple years as inflation is at a 40 year high. we were not facing inflationary issues than like we are now. that is why we have to have these cuts. you cannot just continue to spend more and give the

government a greater and greater ability to increase the debt without bringing back some of the spending. host: house minority leader joachim jeffries -- hakeem jeffries held a meeting and was asked about a couple things including president biden's townhall comments about the debt ceiling and the house republicans's approach to that negotiation. i will get your response. [video clip] >> at the townhall last night, the former president said to republican congressmen and senators that if they do not give max cuts, you will have to do a default. i wonder how this affects the discussions about trying to avoid the outcome? >> it is unfortunate because there are a lot of extreme maga republicans in the house to share the same position former president trump articulated,

which is that the american people either need to absorb dramatic, extreme, right wing ideological cuts, things like medicaid benefits for disabled children and seniors and older americans in nursing homes that the american people are expected to absorb dramatic cuts to health care funding that could result in millions of people losing their health coverage. the american people are expected to absorb dramatic cuts to food insecurity programs, when there are more than 30 million americans who are currently food insecure. the american people are expected to absorb dramatic cuts to education funding, anti-public safety funding. or if democrats do not bend the

knee to this extreme maga republican default on america act, the republicans are saying the other option is to default. that is exactly what president trump laid out last night. we have been saying this from the very beginning. it is an inherently unreasonable position. host: that is the house minority leader's -- leaders speaking yesterday. your reaction? guest: he left out that we are going to cut veterans too, and life. we are not cutting medicare or medicaid. none of those cuts are in the list you saw. these dramatic cuts, these maga cuts, as he calls them, do not exist. nobody -- we are simply rolling back to 2022, the president's

prior budget that was existing just five months ago. we are not cutting medicine or food. i believe that is a talking point for them, trying to force us to a clean debt ceiling. host: you are also protecting defense spending. that will not be cut and veteran benefits will not. which means all the cuts will fall disproportionately to all the other programs. isn't that correct? they will have more extreme cuts? guest: yes but there are areas that we can save money. i don't think anybody doubts that within our government. where the budget was five months ago is not a dramatic or drastic cut. host: let's talk to some viewers. john from brooklyn, new york. democrat. hello.

caller: how are you doing? i want to ask the guest, did republicans always cut taxes to help the rich? the tax cuts that trump gives the rich people, the wealthy people, they have not told how much we lost by him cutting those. how much income did we lose coming into the treasury department? they said they would tell us themselves but they never did. you said the republicans have a bill. you have a republican bill. you did not win the election, we won the election. you raise the debt limit three times under trump when he was the president. now we have our ideology and we won. our president put his bill up. if you are going to cuts, like she just said earlier, the only

thing you do not want to cut is military. you have to cut other programs but you are not doing it direct. you are trying to ease it under the table. you did not want to help people pay for their medicine, the stuff for diabetics. the republicans lost, we won. you raised it three times under trump, so give the democrats. host: all right. guest: i want to start by saying he is right, the democrats won, and elections have consequences. we have seen a 40 year high of inflation. that is what we are fighting against. that is why we cannot have a clean debt ceiling. because we are now facing the highest inflation this country has seen in over four years. that is the first first thing --

the first thing. when you talk about the tax cuts, which i assume you were referring to, the co said 68% of taxpayers cuts benefits from those tax cuts. yes, it does limit the dollars coming in from taxpayers. however, this is interesting because what happened was, when we made the tax cuts, the economy grew. back in 20,009, are going at 3.5%, 3.9%. i am with kevin brady who is chair of the ways and means committee. i asked him -- because when cbo's or the bill and said it would have a $1.2 trillion -- scored the bill and said it would have a $1.2 trillion deficit, that was based on 1.9% gdp growth.

i was convinced, as a conservative, knowing how business works, but they would reinvest in the economy and it would be growing a lot more than 1.9%. people were berating the president, saying dessie have a magic wand? he is going to make the economy grow at these numbers? he did have a magic wand. it was the tax cut jobs act. i went to kevin brady, the chairman of the ways and means committee. i said what is one additional point of growth worth in additional revenue to the treasury? when we grow the economy, instead of $1.920, just 3.9 -- instead of 1.9 percent, just 3.9%. in about four years or five years, if we had stayed on track, he would have actually paid the $1.2 trillion back, and

then the next five or six years, we would have been reducing the national debt. it was an investment to grow. what the democrats do is take money from taxpayers and give it to other taxpayers. that does not create growth. that is why we are seeing all this inflation. that is what we are responding to. this inflation and the food costs and everything we were talking about now that is going up, i think $71 the phone my car of the other day. i have never paid that. that is why we cannot have a clean debt ceiling. inflation is off the chain. host: greg, wisconsin, republican. in morning. caller: good morning and thank you for taking my call. a couple comments. thank you representative rutherford.

you laid out some interesting facts at the previous caller is either choosing to ignore or does not know about so thank you for educating all of us. i comment is, as a white male, heterosexual, married for many long years, sitting to the honorable jeffrey talk about maga. why is he trying to corral everybody as a maga person who is conservative. once a negative thing for a publicly -- once a negative thing for a publicly elected official who is supposed to be uniting us for one country. liberals and democrats including the great chief right and are trying to divide us -- chief biden are trying to divide us. they look at who is succeeding and benefiting from his economy. the same people complaining about maga this and buy that.

host: how do you define maga? guest: i don't know. i'll leave that up to them. it is a derogatory term they have come up with to try to attack republicans with another name to divide us. it is sad that we are couching everything. all the debate in these hostile terms. he just made a very good point. the economy we have under the chump administration, when we created the opportunity zones, the very people -- under the trump administration, when we created the opportunity zones, the very people he mentioned are spot on. we were helping people in the most challenged areas of our country because we have the capital to do it.

now we do not because inflation is ruining everything. it does not work when you take from one group of people and give to another group of people unless you are giving it to business where they can invest and grow the economy and we all benefit from that. guest: -- host: what should the administration do to bring down the inflation? guest: first, we need to look into the dependence of oil throughout our economy. it is in so many different areas. whether it is to make a product or deliver a product or to use that product. so let's get back energy independence. that is the number one thing i would do. host: anthony in kentucky, independent. good morning. caller: good morning.

why do we want to drill into our natural reserves? our public lands the government owns and not pay a full lease? why are the republicans -- now, i am independent. sides life. that's why are more lies coming from the right? just like he said, maga, can he explain how they call democrats "woke"? guest: i will tell you that we need to make america energy independent again. we saw with this did not just in driving down the cost at the gas pump where i just paid $71 but it goes through almost every product out there because this will be delivered using energy. that is an energy that we control, in this administration,

by having driven up -- this is off the side, but by driving up energy costs we are hoping russia. because russia is really just a big gas station. what we are doing is driving up the cost of fuel oil. they are the beneficiary of that. when we had energy and in this country, that is when the saudis and others ignited the fact that america has its capacity. i think it is -- it kind of put them on their back for. host: todd, republican. caller: just wrote quick. three things. one was on title 42, it obviously had its uses. whether it is viable now is for the people in office to decide, which apparently judges did in

regard to the debt ceiling. if we got rid of the irs and went to a diamond dollar tax, five cents a dime would go to the state in which it was levied. then they would get 2.5 cents. then 2.5 cents goes to the locality in which the tax was raised. the other five cents would go, split the nickel in half. two to the defense department, two to the general fund. then they can come up with a way of having a statistically mathematical equation to figure out how much we can spend and plan. i think a lot of people would appreciate that they can have more money spent. those that do not want to spend money on taxes do not have to spend it. host: we will take those two. guest: i think you made some great points.

that is why i am a fair tax supporter, because i believe, as you just said, that we should be taxing consumption, not reduction. i think our tax system is backwards. i think it is going to be a challenge to straighten this out. the reason we have all of these pages and pages of tax code's is because we realize that you should not be taxing production. we really should be taxing consumption. that is how they are trying to fix it now. i think the fair tax would be a good way to go on that. host: you have endorsed former president trump for the presidency. the governor of your state, four -- four, ron desantis is expected to run.

why not him? guest: he is a great governor. i believe he could be a great president one day. host: but not 2024? guest: just not 2024. i think with president trump, when you think back to 2018, 2019, the economy and the respect we had around the world. host: but we did not have the pandemic at that time. guest: we didn't. before the pandemic, we would still be living the life of 2017, 2018. i want to get back to that. president trump made that happen. he had the policies to make this happen. host: the indictment and the investigations do not bother you? guest: they do. i am a law enforcement officer. i know there is a due process. a civil case is a preponderance

of evidence. it is not proof beyond a reasonable doubt. the major charge in the indictment, they dropped. i want the whole thing to play out before i make a decision on that. host: lou, florida, democrat. caller: good morning. a couple questions. thank you for taking my call. price increases in our economy -- i don't know that you are -- that your estimation is right on that. who actually controls the prices in our economy? also, this money for the tax reform in 2017, to my estimation, our tax bank lost

$820 as of this year --$8 t rillion as of this year. who really controls the prices? why are prices going up if the government really does not control them? guest: obviously, it is not just the government. although the government and policies have an impact on what businesses are going to do. you can either encourage growth in business or discourage growth in business. this is why i was supportive of president trump because he had policies that encourage growth and business. the supply chain issues, all of these things impact. one of the most important things that president trump addressed was the bilateral trade agreement and usmca was a win for america, mexico, and canada.

host: larry, missouri, independent. good morning. caller: the only question i have for him is how does he consider the inflation that was worldwide and everybody is feeling it? how is that joe biden's fault. please explain the policy. as far as the world is concerned, didn't the republicans let saudi arabia take over one of the biggest oil refineries in texas? as far as trump's booming economy he grew, wasn't that inherited from the obama administration? thank you. i will take my comments off-line. guest: first, i think the energy

independence we were able to garner under president trump's policies did a couple things. the biden administration just benefited, quite frankly, from the strategic petroleum reserve that we filled up. i don't know the exact numbers but i will say $30 a barrel. the biden administration just sold at 100 dollars a barrel. that is a bad thing. we need to bring energy independence back so we can get the strategic petroleum reserves back in line. the cost of energy is such a driver in the world economy. you are right. the policies we make in america actually have lasting and impactful consequences across the globe. energy independence, i think, is one of the key elements we

should be working on. which is why the house pass the energy independence bill. host: wisconsin, mary, democrat. caller: hello. you say president trump like to help businesses grow. ok, well his tax cut to the corporations and the wealthy gave companies like conagra free reign to take a can of corn beef hash. it weighs the same but instead of being all meat and potato, it is now a third water. and make it instead of six portions, now it is four portions. you are still paying the same, maybe, or are you paying more because they could ramp up the rate and get the money while other people are complaining about inflation? that is how those corporations took their tax cuts. they are making more money, for

sure, absolutely. he definitely is growing growth. but, the people are getting nailed for it and biden is getting blamed for it and that is b.s. trump put in his china tariffs, which made everybody decide they were going to order more product from asia before those tariffs kicked in. so, the orders went through to asia. the manufacturers over there, the factories were ramping up. others in need for containers, all of a sudden, there is a sewage blockage. there is the pandemic. there is all this need for containers. last year, the ports were absolutely jammed trying to get product through from asia still. and, the shipping companies raised the cost of one container -- just the cost to ship one container from asia went from about $4000 to $20,000. that is the reason there was

inflation. host: ok, mary. let's get a response. guest: mary, china was responsible for a lot of that because they control most of the funding moved across our oceans. which is one reason i am a big proponent of the jones act, and actually increasing the number of american flag vessels hauling this cargo back and forth. you know, you mentioned those containers. i have jack's port in my district. i can tell you the problem on the west coast was that the chinese were shipping back empties, not taking our exports, because they wanted to get the empties back to china so they could send product back in them. so, i blame china for a lot of that. china has that capability,

because we are not in control of the tonnage being moved by our maritime industry. china controls that. host: before you go, should representative george santos resign? guest: i am on the ethics committee. so, i cannot comment on that. he has been indicted, as you know. you can probably extrapolate from that, where a police officer would stand. host: representative john rutherford, republican of florida and member of the appropriations committee, thanks for coming by. next, bobby kogan of the center for american progress discusses house republicans debt limit and spending cut proposals. later, the cato institute's david bier talks about the end of title 42 and the state of current u.s. immigration policy. we will be back. ♪

♪ >> fridays at 8:00 p.m. eastern, c-span brings you afterwards from book tv, a program were nonfiction authors are interviewed by journalists, legislators and others on their latest books. tonit, investigative reporter alexander robbins provides a behind-the-scenes look at issues teachers are facing in the classroom today with her but, the teachers. she is interviewed by education week staff writer, madeline will. watch afterwards tonight at 8:00 eastern on c-span. ♪ ♪ >> american history tv, saturdays on c-span two, exploring the people and events that tell the american story. at it a client p.m. eastern --

at 8:00 p.m. eastern, boston economics professor on the evolution of job skills and how computers and robots have changed labor markets and the types of jobs available. at 9:30 p.m. eastern on the presidency, for white house photographer who served under both presidents ronald reagan and barack obama, discusses the day-to-day workings of the presidency including history making moments he witnessed in his book, the west wing and beyond. exploring the american story. watch american history tv, saturdays on c-span2 at -- and find a full sc on your program guide or watch online anytime at c-span.org/history. ♪ ♪ >> book tv every sunday on c-span2 features leading authors this cussing their latest, nonfiction books. at 9:00 p.m. eastern, the former ceo of the bet networks deborah lee recounts her career in the

entertainment industry with her memoir, i am deborah lee. at 10:00 p.m. on afterwards, investigative reporter alexander robbins provides an -- a behind-the-scenes look at issues teachers are facing in the classroom today with her book. she is interviewed by education week staff writer, madeleine will. watch book tv every sunday on c-span2 and find a full schedule on your program guide or watch online anytime at book tv.org. ♪ ♪ >> 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 and how issues are debated and decided with no commentary, no interruptions and completely unfiltered. c-span.

your unfiltered view of government. ♪ ♪ >> healthy democracy does not just look like this. it looks like this. where americans can see democracy at work, where citizens are truly informed, a republic thrives. get informed straight from the source on c-span. unfiltered, unbiased, word for word. from the nation's capital to wherever you are. it is the opinion that matters the morse -- the opinion that matters most is your own. this is what democracy looks like. c-span, powered by cable. ♪ >> "washington journal" continues. host: local back to "washington journal." i'm joined by bobby kogan at the center for american progress, he was an advisor to the director of the office of management and budget in the biden administration. welcome. guest: thanks for having me on. host: let's talk about the house

republicans debt women spending cut plan. what are your thoughts on that? guest: first of all, regardless of what you think of the system, the approach being taken is totally inappropriate. the idea is we have a list of demands. the idea is if they do not get enough, they will force a default. from the backdrop, we should say that is not an ok approach. you get to the specifics. the main part, the biggest one is the discretionary spending cuts. we have two types of spending, discretionary, mandatory. the biggest proposal is they want to cap the base level back to what it was two years and from there grow at only 1%. host: they are saying five months ago in 2022. guest: yeah, but, the fiscal year 2022 runs from october 2021 through september, 2022.

they want to set the levels that began two years from that to be back. it is a good line. they say, oh, we are spending that five months ago. is it bad to go right back to it? those levels were locked in. technically, congress was late. technically, they lock them in in september 2020 one. those levels were locked in in 2021. they lasted a year. we used a continuing resolution, where we take what we have been doing where congress figures out what it was doing and then, we went into 2020 three appropriations, adjusted for inflation and other goods and services. a great blind to say, we were just doing this, so how hard can it be to get back? the answer is, it would be -- below current services, it would be an immediate cut of 14%. they are saying we are going back to five months ago, but it is a 14% cut relative to current

services. host: if you would like to call in and make a comment or ask a question of our guest, you can do that. democrats, (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001. independents, (202) 748-8002. you said it is not ok to link the debt ceiling negotiations with spending cuts. why is that on ok -- not ok? guest: the pretext here is, if democrats do not give enough of what speaker mccarthy wants, he will force a default. that is what is not ok. it is legitimate to debate our fiscal path. we do every year. every year, we find what level we are going to fund the government at. it is right now, negotiations will change and the path will be different. instead of that, what speaker mccarthy is saying, i want my proposal for this year, but for

10 years going forward. if you do not give me enough of what i want, i will force the government to default. you name it, we will force a default. you heard yesterday, speaker mccarthy said, looks like the president once a default. right? that is his framing, which is absurd. he said, if i do not get enough of what i want, you want a default. when the president says, hey, let's not default. host: let's hear from speaker mccarthy. this is from tuesday after he met with president biden, talking about that debt ceiling. [video clip] >> 97 days ago, i was right here after meeting with the president. february 1, i came down here to say him, saying, let's work together in responsible, sensible way. we can lift the debt ceiling and find a way we can curve this increasing debt that is affecting every american family with inflation and now, three banks of our four largest banks

are closed in the debt problem. nothing has changed since then. the only thing that has changed is, the house has raised the debt ceiling and passed the bill. that is why we had a meeting today. everybody in this meeting reiterated the positions they are at, i did not see any new movement. president said staff should get back together. i was very clear with the president. we have now two weeks to go. if chuck schumer can pass something coming -- has something, -- they have a debt limit. importantly, the president has waited 97 days without ever meeting. every day i asked that we meet, and he says no. the house has raised debt ceiling in a responsible manner. curve our spending at the same time, bring us economic growth. i asked the president this simple question, does he not believe there is anyplace we can find savings?

he signed a bill the house passed that became law that the pandemic is over. we have $50 billion to $60 billion that have been appropriated for more than two years that we can pull back to save the taxpayer money. we can put in packages that help us economically. cutting the red tape so we can build things in america again. we could have items that he actually voted for, like work requirements, that just passed in wisconsin with 82% of the vote, to help our supply chains get stronger. i would hope that he would be willing to negotiate for the next two weeks so we can actually solve this problem and not take america on the brink. host: that was speaker mccarthy from tuesday. bobby, your reaction to it. guest: i mean, the biden administration's position has not been that it will not talk about -- they have been clear they are happy to have a debate about this.

what speaker mccarthy is saying is, he wants that to be part of the debt limit negotiations. that is not how we traditionally have done it, at least under republican and its rations. the debt limit was suspended three times under the trumpet ministration with huge bipartisan support. mccarthy voted for all three of them. raised seven times since the bush administration, with huge bipartisan support, without any precondition. the difference here is that there is a democratic president. now, the republican house is trying to -- it makes sense, they want to get the policies enacted. the issue here is, they are saying if they do not get enough enacted, they will force a default. host: isn't there room for spending cuts? he mentioned $50 to $60 billion in covid spinning. we do not need covid spending anymore, right? guest: i believe the president said tuesday he was open to rescinding a lot of that money. again, whether you think it is a good plan or a bad plan, the

issue -- in my opinion, part of the issue is what he is saying here, if he does not get enough, he will force a default. what he said yesterday, it looks like the president once a default. the implication was, the president might not be giving him enough of what he wants. he is using -- i think what i would say here is that, i believe he feels outside of the context of the debt limit, he would not have the ability to force as many extractions as he is getting. that is why he was -- he is doing it this way, the leverage is much bigger. it is not about the content of what we think is good or bad policy. that is a normal debate congress always has. they try to find a compromise. the idea here is, the compromise is how they are making negotiations. there is a ticking time bomb

behind where speaker mccarthy is sane, if you do not give me enough, we will force a default. host: what happens as we get closer to that debt limit, do defaulting -- to defaulting? the american economy, the global economy, how would an amended -- an individual american feel that? guest: our entire financial system is based on the u.s. government debt being a sure thing. the government says, i will give you $10,000 at this time. you believe you are going to get $10,000 at that time. a lot of banks are capitalized with the u.s. government debt because it works like cash. the government says, it is worth $10,000, it is worth $10,000. if you are not positive you are not going to get the exact amount, these financial transactions that rely on it are more extensive. anything that has an interest rate is going up. if that is an auto loan, a mortgage, that is going up. if you are getting something

from a business and the business has credit, anything that is going on that has any sort of debt, financing going on, is more expensive. you will feel that at your kitchen table. that is even in the lead up. if we went over the edge, it will be much worse. if we went over the edge, the government would be forced to pull back its spending. what the government does, over 70% of what it does is go to people in the form of social security checks, payments to disabled veterans. all of that gets pulled back. now, everyone's pocketbook is less. now, i have less money to spend. if i am not getting my social security check, i have to spend less. local businesses are spending less. they are laying off people. host: let's talk to viewers now. kathleen is first on the line for democrats in mississippi. hello. caller: good morning. host: good morning. caller: what i say is, enough is

enough. this here is global. it is not just one, mississippi. it is all 50 states. if i get $914 a month and they cut off my internet down to $80 and we only go to payday loans, what is they doing about us? biden and harris are doing -- everything is coming our way. this is global. it is every state. everybody need to get on board behind biden and harris. that is what i say. host: all right, kathleen. any comment there, bobby? guest: i completely agree. i think the idea of letting us default on is inappropriate. we would all see the effects. anything we are getting from the government in any way, whether that is a, whether that is water

safety, that is all in danger under this. i completely agree. host: edgar is in norwich, connecticut. republican. the morning. caller: good morning, guys. thank you for taking my call. my question is that, i am a lifelong republican. although, i refused to vote for a convicted sex offender -- refuse to vote for a convicted sex offender. when i talk to my friends on the left, it seems biden has not delivered at all. now, he is shifting more to the center, which is odd. i just wonder, why do you think that, one, he is running again when i think he was just supposed to be kind of a one term guy? what do you think he has not really delivered on, like canceling student debt and paid family leave?

all of these things, it is hard for people. i do not think young people are going to vote for this guy. thank you so much. guest: thanks so much for the call. yeah, i would say obviously, every president is able to get some of what they are trying to enact on. and, not other things. the president was able to do the biggest green energy investment in american history. the student debt stuff is currently tied up in court. we will see how that one runs. to your point, the president was enabled to enact paid leave, which was a big thing he was trying to do. it was not for lack of trying. why he is running again? [laughter] i think that is not something maybe i am the right person to -- but i think there is more he wants to do. host: kim is next in nashville, tennessee. independent. caller: yes, good morning. i have a question and a comment.

i want to know if my social security check will be going down to the level it was in 2021. my comment is, i think we should take that proposal of -- that ran for democratic and stop the political contributions and make it, everybody has 500 political dollars to contribute. if they choose. it would make the politicians spend half of their day working instead of raising money and less beholding to the business. what you think about that? guest: kim, thanks so much to for the call. no matter what happens in speaker mccarthy's proposal, your social security check level will not effected. that is affected by social security law. he would not -- no part of his proposal would be affecting social security law. do not worry about it.

i will say, his discretionary caps apply to all discretionary spending. social security is not discretionary. that is why that one would not be touched in any way. the administration that runs social security is part of that. it's caps paul to cut the broad categories that includes social security. the administration that runs social security by an extreme amount. how you would live under the cap is under question. under 10 years, he says he wants to protect defense, the ba. if you do that, eventually, the cuts to everything else grow on average to be nearly 60%. social security would not work well if three out of every five social security administrative workers had to be laid off due to big budget cuts. to your comment on money and politics, i agree. it perverts the system. a lot of memories are sourced --are forced to spend a lot of their time fundraising. it messes with people's

incentives. i think there is strong agreement, especially in the biden administration. host: going back to what you said about defense and the veterans benefits, you have got a chart here in one of your articles with headline, fund lining -- funding for critical programs would be cut as much as 58% under gop proposals depending on medical defense and va medical care are protected. they say republicans will not touch that. guest: [laughter] that is right. i wanted to do it both ways. the funding caps that speaker mccarthy proposed are to the entire group of discretionary programs. i ran it one way, which say, what happens if everything fails? i ran it a different way. if you take them at their word, you are going to protect the fence and the va, -- defense and the d.a.. -- va.

they can pick which one they think is more fair. they do not like either of them. either of those is -- there is one scenario they are cutting defense by almost 30%. they say, we will not do that. now, they are cutting every thing by 60% and they do not want that, either. host: if this were to pass, how and when will these cuts take effect? guest: this is the bad part. the reason they love funding caps is that, it is very popular to say in general, we should cut government spending and not specify by how great it is easy to pass budget caps, hard to adhere to them and legislate to them. this happened in 2011 when president obama was president and republicans had won the house. similar things played out. they threatened a default. president obama gave them a big chunk of what they wanted. it led to 10 years of funding caps. they were so extreme that

republicans were not able to even write bills to them. they ended up cutting a lot, not as much as they proposed. even those were too extreme. first, you set a level. then, when it is time to write the appropriations bill to them, you try to would hear to the overall level. the house is right now working on that. they have said that next week, they are going to release their bill, which has military, construction and veterans health. that is an easy one to write. they say they will give them what they need. once you start writing the bill, that requires deep, deep, deep cuts to satisfy those. let's say the next one they did was defense and they did their defense increase. all of a sudden, you have to write the bills that have the huge cuts. that is where they start to fail. host: let's talk to greg in alabama, democrat. caller: yes. i got a tax check for this young

-- fact check for this young man on here. every one of the debt ceiling races, seven out of the last 11, was done had stuff added to it. you go back on c-span, go back, you see nancy pelosi puts stuff on the release bill to raise the debt ceiling. every one of them said --seven out of the last 11 has had stuff attached to it. there have not been no clean races. guest: i said they did not have preconditions attached. not that they were clean. the concept here is whether or not you say, hey, we will not raise the debt limit unless we get these, versus we will throw the debt limit. i will take the trump ones as an easy example. there were three, huge

bipartisan bills that were popular and had broad backing. then, they attached to it -- we will raise the debt limit while we are at it. the bipartisan budget act of 2018 and 2019, those were unrelated to the debt limit. it is very common for congress to take what our unpopular bills and attach them to popular bills that have bipartisan support. people conflate raising the debt limit with taking on new debt. nonetheless, it is always unpopular. the congress attached to these popular bills, totally understand you are right. there were other things in the bill. they are a bit more precondition. what is going on here is fundamentally different. host: denise is an independent in new jersey. good morning. caller: good morning.

i believe one of the questions i was going to ask was just asked. maybe, this is just so complicated. i was wondering if you could break it down. in my mind, the debt limit, it is basically like, you get your credit card statement. if i am speaker mccarthy, i am telling the credit card company, i am not going to pay my balance , but i would like to discuss what i am going to spend next month or the month after that. i think the credit card company would laugh and say they do not care, they just want you to pay the debt you incurred. is that what it is? it is the bills we have already incurred. then, they are talking about budgeting for the future and they are just smashing it together. if i tried to bargain with a utility company or credit card company that i had already

incurred bills on, they are still going to want the balance, correct? even if i promise to cut my electric usage by 20% or something like that. is that what is happening? it is kind of confusing. i am sorry if it sounds simplistic. i was hoping you could just explain it. host: we got it. guest: denise, you should not put yourself down. that is actually precisely right. [laughter] that is exactly what it is. the debt limit is a limit on how much debt we can incur. right now, we had to issue new debt to meet the obligations we had made. if we are not able to issue new debt to meet those obligations we have already made, we would be defaulting. it is totally right. how we want to budget for the future is basically unrelated to whether or not we want to pay our bills. that is why the u.s. stands part of the world doing this way. there is only other one country in the world that has a fixed

all her debt limit. the rest do not do this this way. basically, every other country understands if you want to change your debt, change your spending and tax law or both. that is what you do. do not go and say, well, let me think about not meeting my legal obligations. you are totally right. you would never go to your credit card company, you would never say, well, i might not pay this bill unless we can figure out something. no other countries do that. it is a fabricated crisis. of course, we ought to be paying our bills, no questions asked. host: let's talk to jack next in a butler, pennsylvania. line for democrats. caller: hello, are you there? host: i'm here, go ahead. caller: first, thanks for having me. i would like to tell you how my parents did it when they sat down to negotiate the household bills.

my mom would say, here is what i do not absolutely need. then, my dad would say, ok, here is what i do not absolutely need. what is going on now is, one is sitting down saying, here is what you do not absolutely need and the other is sitting down saying, here is what you absolutely do not need. they are trying to undo president biden's accomplishments. host: what do you think? caller: you got any ideas on that? guest: [laughter] yeah. i appreciate the call, jack. to the first part of your question, you know, if we were trying to figure out our household bills, figure out how we were going to budget in the future is not related to figuring out whether we want to meet our current bills. that is part of what is going on with this debt limit. to your other point of what the asks are, you are right.

it is a wild starting point for house republicans to say, if you want a temporary increase in the debt limit, we would like you to undo major, signature parts of your agenda. imagine if in the trump administration, instead of just raising the debt limit or suspending the debt limit with no preconditions, house democrats or senate democrats said, we demand that you undo your signature tax legislation. that is the starting point. you have to repeal your tax legislation or you -- we will force you to default. we would like you to pass the proactive. while we are at it, why don't we had more tax increases? why don't we do an additional $5 trillion to tax increases to the rich and large corporations? no one would go on and say, the two sides can agree. i am sure they will find something in the middle. democrats at that point have

said, looks like president trump once a default because he is not accepting enough of our demand. everyone would say, that is ludicrous. that is what is happening on the other site. not only is the whole tactic illegitimate and inappropriate, it is -- the asks are, i would like you to undo your major accomplishments in order for us to think about not defaulting on the debt. host: bobby, what do you recommend as far as places that can be cut? guest: i think the president has been open to resending a lot of the unused covid money. that is an easy place to talk about. the issue with the spending cuts is, there is a reason we have the spending we do. it is all popular for a reason. over 70% of our program spending of non-interest spending goes to the people in the form of medicare, medicare -- medicare, medicaid. the rest is biomedical research,

cancer research, investments in their future. or, budgets to carry out the day-to-day. transportation, infrastructure, defense. you are definitely squeezing a program people really like and it is good for america. host: david is in pensacola, florida. independent. good morning, david. caller: i have a comment and a question. my comment is, i feel like your guest is disingenuous. congress controls the purse strings. anytime negotiation for a budget and debt ceiling is just a bargaining chip, that is how politics is played. it is a blood sport. now that republicans have a bargaining chip to deal with, they are using it and that is called being pragmatic. the president who basically refused to meet with mccarthy until recently, he has been the cause of this coming to an edge of brinksmanship when he could've addressed this issue in a timely manner, which the republicans brought to him several months ago.

my question for you, sir, is, why are we taking a look at other than social security -- there are other third rails we do not want to touch, especially because the american people paid into social security. you talk about nefarious things, i call them nefarious because there is always hidden money in the government. investments in the future. those obligations, we need to look at what the government is obligated to the american people too. that is where the debt ceiling, those conversations would -- i would like you to address that. guest: sure. sorry for interrupting. thank you, david. appreciate the call. you are right, it is a bargaining chip. the point i was trying to make is that, it is an inappropriate bargaining chip. you are right. parties one to use the leverage they have. the question is, whether it is ok to use the american people at leverage. is it ok to say, if you do not give me enough -- it is totally right to ask for your policy agenda to be active.

-- inactive. the republican party the house of representatives. they control a chamber of congress. it is right for them to say, we control a chamber, we would like to try to get as much and acted as we can. it is how democracy works. that is an appropriate thing to do. the question is, is it appropriate for them to say -- the pretext is, if you do not give us as much as what we want, we will force the government to default. it is obviously a bargaining chip. the question is, whether that is nok one. i believe it is not. i believe it is not, but we can disagree on that. i think it is not ok to do that. to your point about whether we ought to cut investments in the future, again, it is ok to disagree on this. for instance, for school, some

of the stuff we do is give money to local school districts to help students with disabilities. something called idea. if we want to make the affirmative case will for white -- case for why we should cut the program, you are welcome to. that is a healthy debate, whether the spending congress does is good, bad, useful or efficient. that is a legitimate debate to be having. i think a lot the spending we do on kids is useful. i think the spending we do to help people with childcare is useful. i think the spending we do on nutrition, great stuff. i think the issue i would go back to is, this is within the context of, if you do not cut enough of these things, we will force a default. the final point i would make on this really quickly is, speaker mccarthy's plan is not to cut

individual programming. it turns out these programs are popular. he says, i am going to cut broad category and let other people figure it out. that is how he gets to distance himself from the actual result of the cuts. host: bobby kogan, center for american progress. thanks so much for being on the program. guest: thanks for having me. host: coming up later, cato institute's david bier on the end of title 42 and the current state of u.s. immigration policy. first, it is open forum. you can start calling in now. ♪ ♪ >> sunday on q and a.

long time columnist and author cal thomas shares his book, a watchman in the night, where he looks back at his decades long career in journalism and describes how politics have changed over the years. >> we have never had a divorced president or a president who was married to somebody who had been divorced until gerald ford. then, reagan had been divorced. we tolerated clinton because -- now we've gotten to a point where, trump is on wife number three or four? i have lost count. and all of these accusations made against him. i think at a certain point, character overcomes everything is. i'm certainly not supporting him in the next election. i hope somebody younger and with better character of quality it's the nomination. >> cal thomas with his book, a watchman in the night, sunday night at 8:00 eastern on

c-span's q and a. you can listen to q and a and all of our podcasts on our free c-span app. ♪ ♪ >> c-span campaign 2024 coverages your front row seat to the presidential election. watch our coverage of 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, our free, mobile video app or anytime online at the span.org. c-span, your unfiltered view of politics. ♪ ♪ >> be up-to-date in the latest in publishing with dv's podcast, about books. -- book tv's podcast, about books. bestseller lists, as well as industry news and trends through

insider interviews. you can find about books on c-span now, our free mobile app or wherever you get your podcasts. ♪ >> a healthy democracy does not just look like this, it looks like this, where americans can see democracy at work, where citizens are truly informed, a republic thrives. get informed straight from the source on c-span. unfiltered, unbiased, word forward. from the nation's capital to wherever you are. it is the opinion that matters the most -- the opinion that matters most is your own. this is what democracy looks like. c-span, powered by cable. ♪ >> "washington journal" continues. host: welcome back to "washington journal." it is open forum. i will take your calls on politics or policy related until

9:00 a.m. eastern time. lisa is first on the line for democrats. new bedford, massachusetts. caller: yes, hi. i believe that the republicans are playing a game. they are not really going in good faith on what is good for the country. i think they are only out for themselves and they are trying to make the democrats look bad. host: with respect to what, lisa? the debt ceiling? caller: yes, the debt ceiling. they are not trying to cut things that -- i am sure there is plenty of things that should really be cut, but, they are just trying to make -- they are making a game of it. saying, oh, well, we should cut. they were only trying to cut things that biden was trying to pass. if they really wanted to cut something, let's cut kevin mccarthy's budget and let's cut

secret service to trump. i'm sorry, he does not deserve it. host: all right, let's go to audrey next in misery, republican. -- missouri, republican. good morning. caller: i would like to share on some of the sloppy spending. my daughter works for a mental health company. maybe a year now. in her job, she has found out how all these people receive the money's. all the addicts who she tries to help get a free place to live, they get on disability the minute they are diagnosed with addiction. now, they have free housing and a monthly check to buy all the drugs they need or alcohol. she is really suffering, or struggling in how to help them because all of this is given to them. this comes out of our social security disability.

i am just sharing, this could possibly be a cut. there has got to be another avenue for that. host: brian is in woodbridge, virginia. independent. good morning, brian. caller: one of the things that the republican congressman had on before, he said that revenue grew because of tax cuts to the rich. he is insinuating the tax cuts actually had something to do with the revenue growth, when the factual information is -- i am a scientist, by the way. i deal with facts. the reason the revenue grow because there was the retail industry group. the end -- the retail industry grew because they were already rich with profits. they borrowed money from the banks. it did not have anything to do with tax cuts. the tax cuts to the rich subsidies, the corporations, was

a surplus to them. we took that surplus and government money, the taxpayer money, and they put it in their pockets in the form of bonuses and buying their own stock. they did not reinvest it into growth and manufacturing, or hiring more workers. as a matter of fact, they actually closed down factories in the united states and used the taxpayer money to build manufacturing plants in china. they made jobs in china. that was very false with that congressman said. also, when drug rehabs -- the one caller said drug rehabs are getting free stuff. they are only getting that when they are complying to not reusing drugs and rehabilitating . it is only temporary. if they do not comply and relapse and do not use drug use again, they do not get those re aides. they get kicked out of the

program for noncompliance. it is just to help them rehabilitate and get independent. it is only temporary. that type of misinformation from right-wingers, is depriving people of the ability to make responsible, adult decisions. host: all right, brian. let's talk to charlotte in pennsylvania, good morning. caller: good morning, thank you for taking my call. have we ever thought about not paying our congressmen and senators if they do not pass the debt limit? i would -- i agree with one of the other people who said, you know, get rid of trump's secret service. i think that every congressman and senator should not be getting a pension, should not be getting all of these benefits that they get for their health benefits if they cannot figure out how to pass it on to the american citizens that pay their bills, that pay them. they work for us. we do not -- we should not have to work for them to do the right thing.

so, let's freeze their pay or do not them paid until they pass the budget. let's get rid of all of their benefits. i do not see why they get the benefits and we do not. i would love to know what they were worth when they got into congress and senate and what they are worth now. host: all right, charlotte. title 42, at the border has expired as of midnight last night. here is democratic congressman greg sare of texas. he talked about the republican border bill and he called it an effort to politicize emigration without really seeking effective solutions. [video clip] >> i am the son of immigrants and proud to represent the heart of texas in the united states congress. for generations, my family has moved back and forth between texas and mexico, mexico and texas. people immigrate. sometimes, and search of safety. sometimes, for economic opportunity.

always for family and a better life. what folks are not immigrating for is to bring fentanyl into the country as focus on the other seida of the aisle have been talking about time after time after time in committee. it was laid out clearly that over 90% of folks arrested for dipping trafficking are u.s. citizens and lawful residence. that is why this republican anti-immigrant bill hr to is cruel, extreme and not based on fact. it would destroy the asylum system, cage children and families indefinitely and make the situation at our border worse. this bill would eliminate funding for much of the remaining, legal immigration system that we have, leading to chaos. but, chaos unfortunately is what top republican officials want. they want the immigration system to stay broken so they can blame democrats for it. this is a case of arsonists planing the firefighters for the flames. for example, congressman castor and i worked with the biden

administration to expedite funding to texas this month to ensure that migrants can sleep in a safe shelter while they process their immigration case, instead of being in a tent on the border. in stark contrast, this republican bill in front of us today would ban these sorts of shelters and services. migrants sleeping on the streets of texas maybe a better shot for fox news cameras, but it is a much worse deal for everyday people. host: that was greg gosar of texas. it is open forum. greg is next in las vegas on the republican line. hi, greg. caller: good morning, how are you? host: i am doing great. caller: good. i would like to know, as far as putting these people in these hotels, big hotels in new york, why don't they do that with some of the veterans on the street? host: so, ok. is that all you wanted to say, greg? caller: well, can i hit on

another topic as far as the budget and things like that, the debt? host: you can. i will remind you about the new york and the migrants, they are now being housed because they are at capacity and what they are calling their exile housing. though ahead. what is your other point? caller: i guess that is good enough. thanks. host: ok. john in ann arbor, michigan. good morning. caller: calling about the debt ceiling business. so, this person from progressive group, is kind of inept. he needs to point out that by threatening to crash the economy by not paying our bills, that is like a hostage. republicans, they hate the government and they hate the country. they want -- they are threatening to ruin the economy.

it is like a person coming in and putting a gun to our heads, saying, instead of negotiating the budget, it is all threat. they are going to blow up the economy. the guy, he never mentioned what is going to happen to everybody's savings, who are withholding treasury bonds. one of the banking problems that just happened was that, u.s. government treasuries, this bank that failed out in california, there treasury bonds were in -- they had all these long-term treasury bonds. we do not pay our debts, that mean the interest on the treasury bonds do not get paid. that is going to crash the banks, going to crash the economy. these guys are holding a gun to our heads. then, they will not come in with their actual budget except for a blanket 10%. they should pass this thing just like biden says. then, it is fine. it is great to negotiate budget cuts and have an efficient economy.

that is all very excellent. all the bad spending that the government may be doing should be looked at. that is all worth arguing about. but, not with a gun. you do not negotiate with a gun at one person's head. it is just stupid. it is a gun at their own heads. the republicans, they crashed this economy, it is not going to help them at all. it is very, very, very irresponsible and stupid. host: got it. ray is on the line for democrats, fayetteville, north carolina. caller: good morning, mimi. good morning, c-span audience. i am going way back to the duren report. why aren't the republicans talking about the duren report? you know why? in the duren report, if president trump did some stuff illegal -- let's go up to the biden crime family.

through yesterday, pressed one of the guys on this -- whatever it was, media interview they had, where is the smoking gun? there is no smoking gun. he pressed them. they could not come up with nothing. it is all just noise. that is all the republican party is about. noise. no evidence. show me the evidence. if biden's son is guilty, put him in jail. what has that got to do with biden? they cannot connect him with nothing to do with that. oh, god. people, wake up. thank you. host: angela, ohio, republican. hi, angela. caller: oh, good morning. thank you for taking my call. i guess what i wanted to address was the border situation, so i do not know if i can do that right now. host: yes, go ahead.

it is open forum. caller: oh, great. back in 2017, donald trump, he refused to sign the you win migration pack -- un migration pack because he thought it was up to the american people to decide who and how many and where they came from and immigration coming into our country. president biden has agreed to the un migration pack. i think the united nations has played a large part on the invasion on our southern border, and now, our northern border. i was sincerely hoping that someone would look at this and see if there is a way to have president biden get us out of un migration pack, or i think the only way to stop this invasion

and localization is to probably defund the united nations because they are using our money against us on our southern border. to break our laws. i think that is wrong. i think we have got to build the wall, and we have got to have orderly people that we want to come here that are, you know, we are spending so much money. host: angela, take a look. here is republican ship roy of texas, talking about the southern border and the gop bill that he said was a result of president biden's failure to enforce the rule of law at that border. [video clip] >> we are here today because of the abject failure of the administration to do its fundamental duty to protect the united states. we have a wide open border empowering cartels, empowering

china to the detriment of american citizens and migrants that seek to come here supposedly in the name of compassion. that is in the false name of compassion. dead migrants lying along the rio grande and ranches in south texas. the extent to which migrants stuffer -- suffer in the heat. thousands being sold into sex trafficking trades. being used as press, political ponds by a party devoid of anything substantive to take this country forward. republicans are standing up strongly to make sure this country will stand for the rule of law. that sets our country apart around the globe and attracts so many to want to come here. order patrol right now apprehended over 10,000 migrants on monday and 11,000 tuesday, the highest single day totals ever reported. 26,000 got a ways, 660 thousand migrants waiting in mexico. the present of guatemala confirming 80,000 venezuelan

migrants traveling to the u.s. ahead of the title 42 -- the general says he estimates 65,000 migrants are in northern mexico. i got a text from local law enforcement saying we are a most at broken arrow. every sector is near 150% capacity. dhs calling for border patrol agents to help the southern border. the first 550 service members of the army and marines were said to arrive. a shootout between the mexican army and human smugglers at the bridge. schools in el paso adding more security. el paso ran out of security. -- out of shelter. rounds bill declared an emergency. san antonio, their migrant shelters are expressing concerns of being overwhelmed. the new york city mayor, a sanctuary city, criticizing bussing, is bussing migrants outside of new york city to the

suburbs because my democratic colleagues and the democratic administration and democratic leaders and so-called sanctuary cities do not give a whit about migrants. it is about political power. they are costing lives. they are endangering americans. they are causing children to die from fentanyl poisoning, and they know it. that is what is so pathetic and sad. republicans offer legislation today that would force this administration to do the job it refuses to do. host: that is representative ship roy -- chip roy. hi, joe. caller: guest: thanks for taking my call. -- caller: thanks for taking my call. if we did this in 2011, we are not -- we are still paying extra money. basically, the terrorists have

taken us hostage. i want to get back to aaa ratings so we do not have to spend that much. what i saw with donald trump last night, we lost 150,000 from lost alamo's. they are back in china, making rockets because that guy disparaged chinese people. it is a mess. the regulation in kentucky, the trains are falling off the tracks because the regulations. they took that extra break off. they will not even put a scanner in texas so people will not freeze to death. i am sorry, but this new russian republican, i just disagree with. host: camille's in fredericksburg, texas, democrat.

are you there? hi, camille. caller: i am here. good morning. i'm going to say that homeless people, the solution of homelessness is making it easier to get ids. joe biden has been talking about making it easier, hillary clinton or bill clinton. what is going to make it easier is to loosen regulations on what --on getting ids. they do not have access to birth certificates or paperwork, they cannot get an id in the united states, which they need to get a job and social security. how are these people supposed to get the i.d.'s to get the job they are supposed to get?

host: that's all we've got for this segment. thanks, everybody, that called in. the ll be another open forum later in the program. up next, a discussion of u.s. immigration and border policy with cato institute's david bier. stay with us. ♪♪ >> watch video on demand any time online at c-span.org. and try our points of interest feature, a timeline tool that uses markers to quickly guide you to newsworthy and interesting highlights of our key coverage. use points of interest any time online at c-span.org. >> your copy of the 118th congressional directory now available at c-span shop dot org. it has contact information for every house and senate member and important information on

congressional committees, the president's cabinet, federal agencies, and state governors. scan the code at the right to order your copy today. or go to c-spanshop.org. it's 29.95 plus shipping and handling. every purchase helps support our nonprofit operations. >> sunday on "q&a," long time syndicated columnist and author cal thomas shares his book, "a watch man in the night" where he looks back at his career and how politics has changed over the years. >> we never have a divorced president or a president who was married to somebody who had been divorced until gerald ford and betty ford. and then reagan had been divorced. we tolerated clinton because it's only sex. and now we have gotten to a point where here's trump on wife number three or four? i lost count. all of these accusations made

against him. and i just think that at a certain point character overcomes everything else. i'm certainly not supporting him in the next election. i hope somebody younger and with better character qualities gets the nomination. >> with the book a watchman in the night sunday night at 8:00 eastern on c-span's "q&a." s listen to "q&a" and all our podcast on the free c-span now app. >> healthy democracy doesn't just look like this. it looks like this. where americans can see democracy at work. when citizens are influence. a republic thrives. straight from the sources on c-span, unfiltered, unbiased, wofrd for word. from the nation's capital to wherever you are. to get the opinion that matters the most. this is what democracy looks like. c-span, powered by cable.

>> be up to date in the latest in publishing with book tv's podcast about books. with current nonfiction book releases, plus bestseller lists, as well as industry news and trends through insider interviews. find about books on c-span now, our free mobile app or wherever you get your podcast. >> c-span's campaign 2024 coverage is your front row seat to the presidential election. watch our coverage of the candidates on the campaign trail, with announcements, meet and greets, speeches, and events. to make up your own mind. campaign 2024 on the c-span network. c-span now, our free mobile video app. or any time online at c-span.org. c-span your unfiltered view of

politics. >> "washington journal" continues. host: welcome back to "washington journal." i'm joined by david bier, the immigration studies associate director at the cato institute. welcome. guest: thanks for having me. host: what is the position that the cato institute takes on immigration and policy? guest: we believe america's immigration system is far too restrictive of legal immigration. you want to have legal immigration system that is open and welcoming to people from around the world who can contribute their talents and skills to our economy. host: take a look, this is what you said in your -- on your website, cato.org, with this headline title 42 failed, it should not be extended in any form. what was wrong with title 42? guest: title 42 is just to remind viewers is the policy

that allows border patrols to expel people primarily to mexico, which is just on the other side of the border. when someone crosses a border, title 42 would allow the border patrol to just put them back in mexico. what we saw is rather than reducing migration, we saw massive increases in migration. what's driving so much of that is the fact that when someone is caught, if they are just put right back in mexico, they just cross the border again. cross the border again. we saw these repeat crossings over and over and over again. what we want is a system where people can apply at legal ports of entry to enter the right way. that's what title 42 also prevented from happening. we had a policy in place, especially in the trump administration, that banned legal entry for people coming to the u.s.-mexico border. which if you're going to ban people from entering legally, they are going to cross the border illegally. if you ban them from requesting

asylum after they cross the border illegally, they'll try to evade detection. that's the worst border security outcome. that's the outcome we saw the most under this administration and under title 42. host: i'll rye mind the viewers if you would like to call in do so starting now. 202-748-8000. 202-748-8001. and independents, 202-748-8002. if you are a resident of a border state, we have a special line, 202-748-8003. also anybody can use that to text us. now that title 42 has expired and no longer in place, now it's title 8. explain that and how does that work? guest: it's just our immigration laws. of course how they are interpreted and implemented changes from administration to administration. we saw completely different implementation under the obama administration to the trump administration, and now we are starting over again with the

biden administration. what the biden administration's plan is we'll have a little bit more legal immigration to allow some more people to come legally, but the main focus of the policy right now is trying to replicate the conditions of title 42. they want to ban asylum for people who cross the border illegally, they have a deal with mexico to take those people who are subject to that ban back. we are going to start deporting people to mexico under our immigration authority starting today. host: what's wrong with that? guest: like i said under title 42 we saw people who are subject to title 42 who were sent back to mexico, recross the border again and again. led to more violations of the law. host: you think that will happen now? guest: absolutely going to happen again. and even worse, in this case there is no pending deadline. before when we sent people back under title 42, border patrol would tell them it's going to end in a couple months. just sit tight and wait.

now there is nothing to wait for. if they are subject to the ban and they are sent back, there is nothing to wait for. they can't immigrate legally again. they are going to try to cross the border and evade detection and sneak into the country. again worse from a border security perspective than right now. host: i'm going to play you a short portion of homeland security secretary mayorkas speaking about the administration's border actions going forward. secretary mayorkas: our approach is lawful, safe, and orderly pathways for people to come to the united states and to impose tougher consequences on those who choose not to use those pathways works. president biden has led the largest expansion of lawful pathways in decades. people from cuba, haiti, venezuela, and nicaragua have arrived through lawfully available pathways, and we reduce border encounters from

these groups by 90% between december of last year and march of this year. we are launching new and expanded family retpaoupbfication progression -- retpaoupbfication proses for families of cuba, el salvador, guatemala, haiti, and honduras. and schedule appoints at our ports of entry. to those who do not use our available lawful pathways, we'll deliver tougher consequences using our immigration law authorities. host: david bier, what do you think of that. guest: they can have a great increase in the number of people they are letting in legally. and start from a very low base. it's not sufficient. just to take one example we talked about scheduling appointments at points of entry. they are allowing, they cast a number of appointments at 1,000 per day when they know the demand is 10 times that.

so they are encouraging a situation where they are guaranteeing that if you show up at the port of entry, 90% of the people will cross the border illegally rather than through our legal processes at points of entry. they know this. he admitted it at the press conference. he blamed it on a lack of capacity. there is plenty of capacity. they are just using it to process people who cross the border illegally rather than legally. host: the house passed a border and immigration bill yesterday. what's your assessment of it? guest: it will make the situation even worse. that bill would actually prevent the department of homeland security and the president from processing people through the legal pathways they have set up. just for example, you mentioned cuba. we set up a process for cubans to be sponsored in their home country and come legally to the united states under this administration. and it led to a more than 90% reduction in the number of cubans showing up in mexico to request asylum at the

u.s.-mexico border. that's a great policy. this bill would roll it back. the effect of that will be cubans showing up at the border again crossing the border illegally. having more chaos rather than less. host: let's talk to callers. first shelly, who is a republican in alice, texas, a border state. hi. caller: hi. how are you? host: good. caller: you know what there has been so much that has been said about our border. people have no clue. you see all the immigrants on the border. you see them coming. you see that our own federal government is sending what'sapp to have mexican officials smuggle them across in places where it is hard to stop them. we are seeing constant violence.

we are seeing more and more criminal activity. this place is a ticking time bomb. we need help down here. and they need to stop. they need to stop them. i mean -- how many more of our citizens have to get hurt, injured, killed by the smugglers. the amount of drugs you have no idea how much drugs have been infiltrated into our communities. our children. we are watching them continuously. and there is nothing that we can do. they are paying them $3500 per person when they let them in this country. host: ok. get a response. guest: we need to defund the cartels. the way to do that is set up legal processes for people to

come n right now the cartels are controlling those crossings between the ports of entry. they are staging people. setting up how they want people to cross. they are allowing other people who want to sneak in to go around behind the people who are turning themselves in. it's a very chaotic situation. it's creating financial revenue for criminal organizations in mexico. but the best way to address that issue is to create legal pathways for people who have legitimate reasons for coming. and can pass a background check and be vetted by the u.s. government. host: there is a difference between asylum seekers and people that just want to come here to work. have a better life. what's the policy difference in those cases? guest: there is a very big distinction legally between those two categories. from the perspective of migrants it seems arbitrary. you could be facing a very severe threat on your life ready

to be killed by a criminal organization. that doesn't qualify you for asylum. you need to be persecuted based on a protected grounds with government collaboration or cooperation with that persecutor. that's what would create eligibility for asylum. for people who face other threats, they are excluded. if there is poverty or other causes, we have had an economic collapse in venezuela. much of central america is impoverished as a result of poor economic policies there. again, there is no pathway for those people. the only viable option for them is to try for asylum. try to make it clean. see if you can get it. that's all they know. that's the only way they know. anyone else who got into the united states is through those pathways. we need other options. we do need work and economic pathways for people to apply legally to come to the united states. host: where do you think people should wait for those asylum hearings? should they be forced to wait in

mexico? their own countries? can they wait in the united states? what are your thoughts? guest: they can wait in the united states. there is no benefit to our country to say -- kick them out, have them wait in mexico. they should be working while they are here. that's the fundamental problem that goes to so much of the chaos. the new york mayor anti-chicago mayor -- and the chicago mayor, all the nation's major cities are dealing with the problem of a federal government releasing people at the border who then have no right to work when they get to their destination. that is a huge problem. obviously it's driving some of the issues with homelessness and people having to sleep on the streets. there are 10 million open jobs in this country right now. there is no shortage of need for workers. we just need to make sure our policies match the economic reality. host: harriet in atlanta, georgia, democrat. good morning. caller: good morning. what i would like to see our

government do is to -- i want to see what your guest thinks about this, is to build a processing center in each one of those south american countries and then send 1500 to 2500 american troops to each -- to take care of and protect each one of those processing centers and drive those gangs and -- out so the people can stay in their own country and apply. then send those so-called dreamers down there to help them build their own economies and let it be -- let the dreamers have five to seven years and then they'll have vested here. they got free education when they were not citizens. and i think that would be better. not send them to the border but to each one of those processing centers. i want to hear what you think about that. thank you. guest: the u.s. government doesn't have a great record of

intervention in other countries producing better economic outcomes in those places. i would argue that we do need offshore processing. we can't process at the border t creates more kayous. it puts our government in reactive mode, someone shows up i have to figure out where to put them or place them. having some offshore processing, some overseas processing centers like we talked about, this is part of the administration's plan. it doesn't have funding for those processing centers right now. we'll see if they do get set up. but it's a good idea. we should try to, as much as possible, move this processing away from the border where we do end up with people in desperate situations. they feel like, oh, my only option is to cross the border illegally. no, if you start further south, start in another country, they can see that people are coming legally, it saves them a lot of time and money and threats along

the way. host: james, in washington d.c., independent. hi, james. caller: thanks for taking my call. i wonder if rather than focusing on obviously the details of the mess we are in for a lot of political reasons, your guest could zoom out for a second and speak to the incentive, one, for a comprehensive immigration system from an economic perspective. there are lots of studies out there that show that managed migration, and lots of other countries that are benefiting from this, that managed migration is an economic benefit. and two, the imperative to get this right as climate migration will pick up in the next 20 to 50 years. some of the numbers that we -- 50 million people will be on the move in the next 10 to 20 years. both the incentive and the imperative to get -- manage migration right. guest: the big picture right now

in the united states is that we are facing a massive long-term worker shortage problem. the social security administration estimates by the year 2050 we'll need 70 million more workers than we currently have. currently expect to have in order to fund social security at the current levels. if you look at the big picture, our labor force growth rate has been declining decade after decade. it's now more than 70% below what it was in the 1960's. this is despite immigration. we hear about iigrants coming in. they are just partially offsetting the decline that we have seen in the number of new workers entering the economy. this is a result of our low birth rates here in the united states. right now in this current moment in time we have nearly 10 million open jobs. there has never been this level of demand, this shortage of

workers to fill those positions. and if we allowed more immigrants, we would have more production. and production is ultimately the purpose of the economy. we want to produce things so prices go down and we can live wealthier and more prosperous life. that's what immigrants and workers allow us to achieve. without immigration, we are going to see decline in the long term in our labor force and in our economy. host: what are your thoughts on the e-verify system? do you think that should be enforced and that every employer has to check electronically the right of that particular worker to work in the united states? guest: e-verify hasn't worked. it's been tried and mandated at the state level. it hasn't solved the illegal immigration problems in those states. in fact, because it is applied on such a wide basis -- it has a very low in absolute terms error

rate, but if you are applying it to millions and millions of people, even that low error rate adds up. over the last decade we have seen nearly a million u.s. workers be flagged as ineligible to work in the united states despite ultimately then going on and proving -- their eligibility to work under that system. there are errors, problems with it from a u.s. worker perspective, and it doesn't work. most unauthorized workers in the united states can find identification. they can borrow a friend's social security number. and that will enable them to find a job even under that system. host: richard is a republican in divine, texas. a border state. hi. caller: good morning. i would like to see a moratorium on immigration. and stop illegal immigration. it's illegal. you call them immigrants, but they are illegal immigrants. i would like your guest to explain how they have benefited

my life. how has illegal immigration helped me. can i tell you how it's negatively affected me. it's decreased my wages, destroyed my culture. they are not assimlating in this country. i agree. i worked in construction. a lot of them hate america. they come in here and want to take america over. they want to take it back. they think it's their land. they are rightly justified to t they are coming in with good intentions. then the burdens. are they economically more of a benefit to our country than a burden? all i'm seeing is burdens. where i live in my town, yes. they are running through the neighborhood. the cops are being used all the time because we had illegals running through neighborhoods. some of them are running through with weapons. when is it going to be there is going to be an assault? they are threatening our population. how many americans are assaulted and hurt by illegal immigrants and even legal immigrants? i would like to see a moratorium on that. i would like to also say that trump had his hands on it and

that stealing elections has consequences. host: what do you think, david? guest: we have date why the from the census bureau that looks at the issues of crime, incarceration rate for immigrants. we know it's half the rate for native born americans. even lower among legal immigrants who are vetted by the u.s. government. the crime issue, of course, any large population there are going to be some people who commit crimes. you have to look at the big picture. the big picture is many of our cities in the united states has very, very high crime rates in the 1980's. there was a huge influx of illegal immigration. the studdies that have looked at this phenomenon have seen the decline in crime during the 1990's did coincide with more immigrants going into those communities, revitalizing their tax bases, and also because they are immigrants, they tend to be more entrepreneurial. they start businesses at twice the rate of u.s.-born americans. if you look at some of our major cities, new york city, a majority of the small businesses

in new york city have been started by immigrants. they are creating jobs for americans. they are revitalizing neighborhoods. the idea that there is this big drag on the economy is not borne out by the studies that have looked at this. the reality is when you have immigrants come in at the low end, that actually creates opportunity, more opportunities a bit higher up on the chain. for example, if you look at a restaurant, you have imgrants, they come in, fill some of the jobs in the back. that neighbors more americans to work in the front of the restaurant as managers or bartenders or other positions that are interfacing with -- other english speaking customers. the same is true with construction sites across the country. you see managers tend to be more americans. you see more immigrants working in the labor positions. this is how economic growth happens. we see specialization of labor, that creates more production, and better outcomes for

americans. host: richard also mentioned the idea of assimlating into the american culture. what are your thoughts? guest: again, we have actually some good data on this. the general social survey has been run ago survey on the values of americans -- running a sur vie on the values of americans and also of immigrants. when you look at trust in the institutions of the united states, immigrants have higher levels of trust in congress and the institutions of this country because they know what a lack of rule of law looks like in their home countries. they believe in the united states. they are actually the ones who naturalize are quite patriotic. but we need the values that make this country great. host: dianne in knoxville, tennessee. good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. david, i want to go back a little bit on the trump administration. with this title 42. the 85,000 immigrants that we have, kids, that we have in this

country that we cannot place. we don't know where their parents are. and another question is, do you have any idea what happened to all of those teenage girls that were separated at the border from their parents? whatever happened to them? are they included in that number? or what? i'll take my answer offline, thank you. guest: the child separation issue affected thousands of kids, hundreds are still separate interested their parents. this happened under the trump administration. they wanted to prosecute criminally parents who crossed the border with their kids. separate them. the parents went into federal custody while the kids were essentially put into foster care during that time. that is a very serious issue. obviously we still are trying to reconnect those parents with the

kids under this administration. as for the other issue, the unaccompanied kids. now kids are coming without their parents. and that's a very serious problem, of course, because then the kids, how are they going to be supported when they get here? many of them are working in very dangerous jobs. the reason why that phenomenon is so serious under title 42 is because if you come as an unaccompanied kid. you will be released and be able to be processed into the united states. if you come as a family you will be sent back. what is happening is parents are saying, i can't come. i'm going to be deported. i cross the border, i get expelled with my kid. my only hope at that point for safety for my child is to send them on on their own. that is what is driving this really high rate of unaccompanied child crossings. host: let's talk to marcus, next, in connecticut, independent. caller: hi, good morning.

i quickly just want to address the call from texas. super quick. you mentioned that when people immigrate to this country it lowered his wages. they don't have any control. those are exploited people. they come here with basically nothing. the people lowering your wages are the corporate bosses. the types of folks that the cato institute' sroe case for. i'm -- ind. institute advocates for. i'm glad you brought up these economic conditions mainly in south american countries. i wanted to go further and hear your thoughts. you talked about the economic insecurity in venezuela. you didn't mention the fact the united states still has sanctions on venezuela. we saw sanctions on cuba. that needs to end so the economies can grow

independently. not mention that is fact is disingenuous. secondly, guatemala, nick raga, el salvador, chile, argentina, these are all countries that the united states military has invaded or installed military dictatorships. you don't think that those pieces of context are important to mention here in terms of the broad economic conditions that we have placed those countries under? for the past decade? this is recent history. host: let him respond. guest: this is all great context. i would argue that the vast majority of the economic chaos proceeded any sanctions in venezuela or cuba. it is the economic policies that those governments have pursued that regression of their people, the political violence directed against dissidents in those countries that has created the chaos and those conditions forcing people to leave.

it is the consequence of that repression that led to the sanctions. not the other way around. we didn't create the economic conditions that led to a spiral downward in venezuela where now more than 90% of the population is living on less than $2 a day. this is a consequence of their policies. can the united states do a better job interacting with these governments? certainly true. but the idea that it's the united states to blame for their conditions is not true. in terms of our intervention, militarily, in central america, i agree completely. it is important context. we have repeatedly intervened in these countries. even disrupted democracy in these areas. at the end of the day, what should our immigration policy be? or immigration policy should be one that benefits the united states. and a policy that welcomes immigrants is one that would

benefit. regardless of what the ultimate cause of these situations is, we should have a policy that is welcoming to legal immigration from around the world. host: let's talk to john in texas, a republican. caller: good morning. i appreciate c-span. i'm not quite sure how you can explain the ability to say that they need to come legally. i lived in mexico for five years. my wife is from mexico. we did do it legally. we went to the immigration office, i submitted by mii.r.s. returns. three different years. so the fact that these people can cross the border illegally and have a right to work is insane. basically just a shield for the american corporations to get cheap labor and basically crew the american taxpayer and the american middle class.

that's all i have to say. thanks. guest: spousal immigration is one of the only categories of immigration to the united states that is uncapped. every other category except for minor children and parents of adult u.s. citizens are capped. and have incredibly long wait times. there is more than seven million people waiting for a company family-based. the annual limit on those green cards is 226,000. yes, there is a legal path if you want to marry a foreign citizen and you are a u.s. citizen you can bring them not united states -- bring them to the united states legally. there isn't a path if you don't fall into those categories. it's not viable for them. in terms of the wage thing, again, if you allow people to come into the united states, they are not just applying labor. they are also consumers buying goods and services and producing things of value. if you prohibit the landscaping

company from filling these open jobs that it has, they are not going to have demand for tractors and for other equipment to service those workers, which is costing americans jobs in manufacturing down the line. it's not the case that immigrants harm u.s. wages. host: one of our previous callers asked about the dreamers. what is your take on that policy? what should it be? guest: other countries have a much better policy about this. the u.k. has a process by which someone who came as a child can receive u.k. residency. it's not necessarily a path to citizenship, but it is a way for them to stay. the united states should have the same policy. if someone who has grown up in the united states, they are effectively an american at that point. they have the customs and attitudes of americans. they have assimlate food our society. they should be -- assimlated into our society. they should be given the right

to say. host: frank in california. a border state, a democrat, good morning. caller: good morning. how you doing? host: good. caller: i just wanted to talk about the last couple days i looked at the immigration system and in title 42. i'm a former employee of the federal government. i worked for the d.o.j. federal law enforcement officer. i understand both sides. but a lot of them don't come to solutions. these are human beings. we understand they are trying to come illegally or whatever. our immigration system is broken. -frpbg *b everybody knows that in the nation -- everybody knows that in the nation. i haven't heard how they are going to fix t they talk about fentanyl coming across. there has been drugs across our border for years. you never hear about fixing the problem or having a solution for these people. a lot of them they don't understand. they are not educated. i worked in the federal prison systems for 28 years. there is a lot of immigration

when it comes to our system. i don't know if congress has ever even looked at the data because they come and go. we spend tons of money transporting these individuals and no one talks about that. yeah, you can put up a wall. but if a wall, doesn't have boots on the ground, what use is it going to be? i know a lot of border patrol agents and they'll tell you, they get -- like we said earlier, labor shortages is across all our agencies. i worked for the prison systems. so if we start detaining these people, they'll endp in our prison systems. we are down in numbers. we have been for years. we advocate every year for that. i just want -- i'm speaking out for my brothers and sisters who work behind the walls and guard that border. they are going to be going through a lot. you don't have 12,000 people i heard the congressman talk about. that's nothing. guest: it's a huge problem from

a law enforcement perspective that we have such a large number of people entering the country illegally, but the solution to that is creating a process where they can come legally and line up to get vetted and processed. particularly abroad. we don't necessarily want it to happen at the border. we want people to get visas and travel legally to the united states and not go to mexico. when you have people crossing the border illegally, they are just trying to reunite with families, they are trying to find jobs in the united states. that is not the ideal way for immigration to happen. because it does allow criminals to hide in that midst. it's not very many. it's a small percentage according to the border patrol. it does happen. a better policy would allow border patrol to focus on real threats to the united states and not processing people who just want to seek safety for economic opportunity in this country. host: talk to larry in andrews,

texas, republican. caller: yes. listen to -- whatever his name is, the reporter, asked him what's the cost of the immigration. on the back of the american taxpayers. the local, state, federal. he turned the question around and asked him what would it be without immigration? i put in 30 years with a major oil company. i assume a return on our investments for the immigration. i'll take your answer off the line. guest: very quickly. most of these immigrants find jobs within a few weeks or months of getting here. and they immediately start

paying taxes as a consequence of getting those jobs. whether it's state and local sales taxes or income taxes. most are working with a social security number. so they are paying into a system that they expect to never get money back from. yes, there is a return on the investment. it happens quite quickly. there is also a long-term effect which is the kids who are born here, the kids who are raised here get educated here, they go to college at very high rates. higher than the native-born population. and they go on and contribute their taxes at a very high level at the second generation. the national academy of sciences report on the fiscal effects of the immigration showed the second generation is the most fiscally positive. in fact, all generations, all immigrants, first generation and second generation, are contributing more in taxes than they receive in benefits during their working lives.

host: david bier, cato institute immigration studies association director. thanks for being on the program. that's all the time we have for this segment. coming up is more open forum. can you start calling in now. the numbers are on your screen. we'll be right back. ♪♪ >> sunday on "q&a," long-time syndicated columnist and author cal thomas shares his book "a watchman in the night" where he describes how politics has changed over the years and his time in journalism. >> we never had a divorced president or a president who was married to somebody who had been divorced until gerald ford and betty ford. reagan had been divorced. and we tolerated clinton because as james carvel said it's only sex. and now he we are at the point where here is trump on what wife number three or four, i lost

count. all these al cuizations made against -- accusations made against him. a certain point character overcomes anything else. i'm not supporting him in the next election. i hope somebody younger and with better character qualities gets the nomination. >> cal thomas with his book, "a watchman in the night" on c-span's "q&a." listen to all our podcasts on our free c-span now app. >> c-span's campaign 2024 coverage is your front row seat to the presidential election. watch our coverage of the candidates on the campaign trail with announcements, meet and greets, speeches, and events. to make up your own mind. campaign 2024 on the c-span network. c-span now, our free mobile video app. or any time online at c-span.org.

c-span your unfiltered view of politics. >> be up to date in the latest in publishing with book tv's podcast about books. with current nonfiction book releases. plus bestseller lists, as well as industry news and trends through insider interviews. find about books on c-span now. our free mobile app or wherever you get your podcast. >> a healthy democracy doesn't just look like this. it looks like this. where americans can see democracy at work. when citizens are truly informed. a republic thrives. get informed, straight from the source. on c-span. unfiltered, unbiased, word for word. from the nation's capital to wherever you are. it's the opinion that matters

the most. this is what democracy looks like. c-span powered by cable. >> "washington journal" continues. host: welcome back to "washington journal." it's open forum. i'll take your calls up until the end of the program at 10 a.m. eastern. a couple of programming notes for you to be aware of. live today, this morning, the republican national lawyers association is holding a conference to discuss immigration, parental rights in education, and the supreme court ethics controversy. live coverage begins at 10:40a.m. eastern on c-span. c-span now, our free mobile video app, and online at c-span.org. saturday evening former president donald tmp headlines at a rally in s moines, iowa. live coverage of that begins at 8 a.m. eastern on c-span. you caal watch on c-span now and online c-span.org. also on saturday, fri

governor ron desantis is a featured guest at a picnic fundraiser hostedy republican representative andyeenstra. that's live from iowa at noon eastern on c-span. c-span now. and c-span.org. and we'll go to the phones now. dennis is calling us from walnut port, pennsylvania, republican. hey, dennis. caller: hi, how are you? host: ok. caller: listen, i just have a general comment i want to get out. i think that people have forgotten about the constitution of the united states. i think a lot of the troubles that would have your attention to the constitution. and let that guide our politicians. i think our politicians are not even following suit. host: in what respect, dennis? caller: there is a lot of overreach. things that we talk about. it's always talk.

just a spin. we need to keep the attention to detail. host: bob, next, grand junction, colorado, independent. bob, you have to mute your tv. bob? raymond is in florida online for democrats, good morning. caller: good morning. i was trying to get a hold of the last caller -- the last person you had on there. boy, he really paints a rosy thing about immigration. and this is coming from somebody that was a corporate chef for a large restaurant company. i had over 40,000 employees. probably 60% of those employees were -- i wouldn't say illegal immigrants. but immigrants and probably out of that 30% or 40% were illegal. believe me i have an understanding of what needs to happen from an immigration standpoint. but you have to have some

orderly fashion because if you don't all of a sudden all the hospitals will be overran, the schools will be overran. i believe in immigration. but come on, let's just be smarter and have some orderly fashion. host: rye rey phopbd, at your restaurant did you hire undocumented immigrants? caller: i'm going to be honest with you. just so everybody knows, when you look at the documentation, the letter a starts and a bunch of numbers. what we would do if the thing looked even somewhat legitimate, because you need the employee, you bring them on, and then later on -- i actually worked when there wasn't all this. we had what was it back then, it was the department that was before i.n.s. or whatever. they used to knock on your door. we would get a $500 fine for every illegal person we would have on our staff. i was based at a company out of california. we had one where we had 64 people in one restaurant at $500 a pop. we were fined. like i said i have been through

all this. i have sponsored people. i don't know if people understand what sponsor is. when you can go and sponsor somebody. i would take spongoring needs to be more prominent like they did back in the early 1900's where you respond. get back to real basics. i do believe in immigration. what i'm seeing down on that border with people pouring, and they have their kids. i'm sympathetic as anybody else, but you get to have some -- you got to have some kind of orderly fashion. if not, the schools, the churches, everything is going to be so overwhelmed that we are going to have a real hard time. it's not all rosy. i know that guy wants to say immigration is positive, positive. a lot of those people coming across they are not going to be able to get jobs. they have no documentation. they make it sound like these people go out and get a job. no. you have to hire them illegally. that's all i want to say. host: dorothy is in ohio. republican. hi. caller: hi.

i would hope you would give me a little bit of time and not hang up on me. first off, i want to talk about immigration, wink, wink. it is an invasion of illegals breaking american law. it is the cartels' human trafficking women and adults. and the u.n. solution to that was to hand out birth control pills to the women that are getting raped. i could go on and on. what about the 80,000 children that h.h.s. has lost. they have no idea. there is a good chance those children are now sex slaves now. it really does grind me when people call it immigration. it is not immigration.

and the other thing i was wondering, does c-span have a phone number where we can call your programming directors and stuff like that? is there a place i could look that up? host: you know what, try the website, c-span.org. caller: don't hang up on me. host: is there anything stphels. caller: one other thing. it's kind of a critique of c-span. let's take this title 42 thing. you guys have known about this for two years. i have not seen one program regarding the national security crisis on the border and the only time i see c-span bring it up was after the damage was done. title 42 ended. we are -- it's not tens of thousands, by the way. it is millions. right now there are 6.5 million

illegals -- host: dorothy you can check our website, c-span.org and look at all of our programming that goes back a really long time. i'm going to hang up now, is that ok? caller: that's fine, thank you. host: lakeland, florida, independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. how are you? host: i'm ok. caller: good. good. the first thing i want to say is mayorkas. mayorkas blatantly lied to the american folks saying that the coast is clear. are you serious? the human trafficker in chief, first thing he did was gone through everything that trump had that was working. the stay in mexico policy that was working. th-z an effort by this administration, the democratic party, to change our political landscape so it can rule in

perpetuity. democrats create the crisis, once they take the crisis, they convince the american people they have the solution for prices that they have created? are you serious? host: conswalea in texas, good morning. democrat. caller: yes. i warrant to talk about human rights. seeing people in cages on the border in the conditions they were living in? is insane. once you -- one shaoupbt do that to another human. also i would like to say that they are saying that like everybody that's trying to come across the border is a criminal. here to rape. to kill, to murder. that is not the case.

and i don't know what we are going to do about the crisis, honestly. but it is a crisis. and at the end of the day these people being trapped in cages like this and treated like this. if they do go -- whether they go mexico,ow are they going to feel about us? are we creating criminals? are we creating broken individuals? i think that's an important question. and that's all i have to say. host: republican in shepardsville, kentucky. good morning. caller: good morning. i just want to comment to the other person. yes, i do. i think the homeland security is responsible for all those people coming over. coming in, killing people. across our country.

you got people coming in. killing, murder, rapes, everything. sure. never let that happen. he makes the country safe. joe biden didn't do it. he's opened the floodgates now. rapists, murderers coming in. all coming in. we are going to kill somebody. and what it is, when you let them out, can't catch them. i would like to see somebody explain these parents, their child being shot. in the head or shot somewhere in new york. host: independent line, thank you. caller: thank you for the patience of your callers. since the biden administration reversed president trump's secure border, they are -- by

the way, the last call was correct. some of them -- there are some that aren't criminals, obviously, here's the problem. since biden opened the border wide, over 250 americans -- this is a fact, not my opinion. over 250 americans are dying per day from fentanyl poisoning alone because largely the open border. that's like a major airline crash per day. host: about fentanyl coming across the border. 95% of fentanyl is coming through ports of entry. that's correct. another avenue is coming across. you can't deny that.

they are starting to overrun the hospitals. when you have a free-for-all of the the hospitals were overrun. when they were texas to some degree. as president trump said on the town hall on cnn which you did not show, unfortunately, these countries are releasing their prisoners, their mental institution patients. it's causing troubles as the last gentleman said. there have been murders committed by criminals who came across. host: what are you seeing -- caller: how about the terrorists? host: what are you seeing in hackensack? caller: well, it's not to the degree it is in new york city where even the democrat mayor said come on. we can't handle this. and now he's trying to shift them around to different areas

which is a problem for the localities that he ships -- or moves them to. because they have -- they have their hospitals, they have to take care of them. it's a serious problem when the democrats start complaining. i'm trying to be fair. yes, there are immigrants who are -- they want a better life. host: what about asylum seekers? caller: that's fine. it depends, though. legally. yes. legal is fine on seekers, ok. they are not even vetting them now. if they had a criminal record because of the huge numbers. this is letting them go. this is not fair to the americans, ok. host: danny next in omar, west virginia. democrat. good morning. caller: good morning. how you doing? host: i'm ok.

host: i just wanted to talk about the republicans -- caller: i just wanted to talk about the republicans. i never seen a bunch of -- taking money, stealing money, wanting to cut everybody social security, wanting to cut this, and that. and give their self a raise. the only thing i can see we can do for the republicans is vote them all out and kill that party completely out because they are nothing but filth. i hate to say it that's true. including donald trump. host: let's talk to donald in indiana. republican. good morning. caller: good morning. how you doing? host: i'm doing ok. caller: i have just a couple things to say. number one, when biden ran for office he said he wants to tax the rich, tax the rich. when they questioned donald trump why he paid zero taxes, a lot of people realize all the

democrats in office right now, they are the rich. you think they are going to get rid of that policy they don't pay taxes? everything goes to the middle class and the poor. that's who pays for everything. the proof is in the pudding. who is getting hurt the most? as far as the border, the reason they want it open, they keep saying it's closed, when old chucky schumer got up there and say buckle your belt, they want all the ill lease coming or get rid the deplorable republicans that replaced their spot. the other thing is, they throw that thing out there the deplorable republicans. i think the democrats had lying dems and lying joe. host: t.j. in minneapolis on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning to you. thank you for letting me get in on this one. i want to talk about the debt ceiling a little bit. i think that the republicans should go ahead and pay the

bill. then negotiate. shouldn't be trying to use that as a steppingstone to negotiate. and to pay the deal first. and then talk about negotiating whatever that means. thank you. host: that will be our last couple of programming notes. first is that florida governor ron desantis is the featured guest at a picnic fundraise hosted by republican representative randy feenstra. 'lhave live coverage of that from iowa at noon eastern o c-span. that's tomorrow, saturday. and then later the same day, saturday, former president donald trump headlines at a rally ides moines, iowa. that live coverage begins at p.m. eastern. yocan also watch both events on c-span. r free mobile video app, c-span now. and online at c-span.org. that's all the time we have for today's washington journal. we'll be back again live

tomorrow morning at 7 a.m. eastern time. in the meantime have a great friday. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2023] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy visit ncicap.org] >> c-span is your unfiltered view of government. we're funded by these television companies and more, including spark light. >> the greatest town on earth is the place you call home. at spark light, it's our home too, and we are facing our greatest challenge. that's why spark light is working around the clock to keep you connected. we're doing our part so it's a little easier to do yours. >> spark light supports c-span as a public service along with these other television providers giving you a front-row