with these other television providers, giving you a front row seat to democracy. announcer: coming up on asngton journal," the headlines and phone calls. george mason university's jamil jaffer discusses the indictment of forr president trump and the gal issues involving the classified documents. politico reporter sally goldenberg discusses the week ahead for the 2024 presidential candidates. annie e. casey foundation president and ceo lisa hamilton discusses how the lack of childcare impacts families in the economy. "washington journal" starts now. ♪ host: good morning. this is "washington journal" for june 20 oh. in california, president biden

discussed concerns about climate change and touted his administration's efforts to reduce the impact. for the next hour we will show you recent polling about how americans feel about climate change, and we will ask you to tell us your views about climate change. republicans, we want you to call us now, (202)-748-8001. democrats, your line is (202)-748-8000. independents, call us at (202)-748-8002. you can also text us at (202)-748-8003. please include your name and where you live. you can find us on facebook.com/c-span. the conversation has already begun. we are on twitter @cspanwj and instagram @cspanwj.

i want to show you the newspapers from california about president biden's trip to the bay area to talk about his record on climate change. i want to read a little bit about what was reported in "the mercury news." biden touts record at stops in the bay area. there was the greeting from the democratic governor and local congresswoman at the steps of air force one in mountain view. there was the last speech to tout $6 million in funding for climate projects. there were two fundraisers with the wealthiest donors for his reelection campaign. president joe biden was

everywhere in silicon valley on monday. that is from "the mercury news." this has made front pages in many of the papers in california. president biden promoted a $600 million new investment in climate change. these are some recent pollings from cbs news and ugov about climate change. under the headline, who prioritizes climate change and who does not? here is what the article says. as has been the case for years, views on climate change are marked by stark political division. democrats and liberals continues to see the issue as more urgent while republicans and

conservatives do not. republicans also view addressing climate change as having a negative impact economically. 2-1 more republicans see efforts to reduce climate change as something that would hurt the economy rather than help it. the question is, climate change should be addressed right now or the next few years? 91% of democrats agree. 64% of independents agree. but only 44% of republicans agree with the statement climate change should be addressed right now or in the next few years. we want to hear from you this morning. what are your views on climate change? republicans (202)-748-8001, democrats (202)-748-8000, independents (202)-748-8002.

before we get to your calls let's look at president biden's remarks from california yesterday where he addresses what he says is the extent of damage caused by climate change. [video clip] pres. biden: i have toured many sites across the country that show climate change is the existential threat to humanity. in california, you and i stood together with first responders near monterey bay after touring the damage that was done by the devastating storms and killed 21 people. that comes on the heels of the worst droughts in california and a millennium. wildfire devastation has burned more acreage on the ground than

square mileage in the state of maryland. devastating. there has been historic tornadoes and flooding in the midwest and southeast. last week across the east coast and midwest we saw what you have seen in california -- millions of americans sheltering indoors. the air not safe to breathe. orange hayes covering the sky -- haze covering the sky. we are sharing cutting edge technology that is already used in california to detect early fires and helping canada. the impacts we are seeing in climate change are only going to get more frequent and ferocious and costly. last year alone natural disasters in america because $165 billion in damage.

but the worst of the impacts are not inevitable. my administration is doing all we can to recover and build so we can prepare and adapt. host: that was president biden yesterday in california talking about what he says is the impact of climate change. we want to hear from you this morning. first up, alan in brooklyn, new york on the democratic line. caller: thank you for the opportunity. i think the major problem we have is basic words are not understood properly to grasp the meaning of climate change. it is not a matter of complex regulations. simple words like "person" and "economy" are misunderstood. economy is used by the media in a way that is code for what is

the best interest for voters in the next few months or years? it does not generally encompass the welfare of the country over the lifetime of the country, including grandchildren. i think that distorts things because people are willing to say things that are good for the economy are valuable and we should do them, but when they are hiding the fact the economy is used as a surrogate for short-term interests of the living and leaving out the interests of the unborn and children, there's a big problem. another thing is the constitution guaranteeing under the due process clause the notetaking of life, liberty, or property without due process from any person. "person" did not include the interest of future voters. until we have something like a generational rights amendment that recognizes the rights of future persons when they are

affected by current voters destroying or damaging fundamental resources, like the atmosphere, then voters are always going to vote for the short-term economic interests before they do something that will require present sacrifice to the benefit of people who are going to be here in decades or centuries. host: ok. got your point. we are going to move on to joseph. joseph is in mechanicsville, virginia, republican line. caller: how are you doing? love your show. kamala harris, everything is a joke to her. she cannot stop laughing, like she is weed. host: we are talking about climate change. any thoughts on that? caller: i have been to an

antarctica and the penguins are doing fine. host: ted is calling from connecticut, independent line. caller: good morning. i would like to know how many cars, trucks, factories were on earth during the ice age? what melted all of the ice? i think we are on the wrong path. we better use what we have better than what we have been using. host: let's go to iowa where diane is calling on the democrat line. caller: i do believe we need to change the climate. we are sweltering.

i do not care if you are rich or poor, we are sweltering. i went to the grocery store yesterday and i am diabetic. what do i do with my plastic? i cannot take it to the recycling. they tell me to put it into, you know, your laundry container. and this plastic stuff we get around our bottles of water. i feel bad this is going to go into a landfill somewhere. it is the little things i should be doing and i do not know how to do it, you know? even our little city does not know what we need to do when we take it to the recycling the first and third saturdays. it was a pleasure to talk to you and have a good day. host: our next caller is tim in

north dakota, republican line. caller: it is sweltering here now. that blazing western sun coming down on my skin and a couple of months ago it was -25 below zero. i have always loved this topic. i grew up in pennsylvania in the topography of a little town called rock hill. you can see the boulders that the early farmers had to deal with that were pushed back and forth through the glacial periods. the last glacial period ended 9000, 10,000 years ago and i do not know what caused that warming and caused the oceans to

rise several hundred feet. and then we had the little optimum from 900 bc to 1200 ad. and then there was the little ice age that started 1200 ad. that caused desolation and the deaths of millions because of weather patterns that were endless cold rain, warfare, migration. climate has always caused migration, warfare throughout human history. people make these sweeping generalizations -- like the last lady from iowa. we have to do something about this. but nobody ever tells me the formula or the mechanics behind bending the earth's temperature to our will. how do we make it cool down? drive more electric cars and the earth will behave. weather patterns will begin to

calm down. there is no evidence of that. it is the same medieval thinking like throwing a virgin into a volcano or the american indians dancing to bring about the r ains. you cannot alter the earth's weather patterns. we cannot secure the border, we cannot balance a checkbook, we cannot win the weather more. it is a way of feeling like you have power when you do not. host: we are going to move on to gregory in sherman oaks, california, democratic line. caller: hello. it is amazing the contortions some people are going through trying to explain away the civil fact that the continued burning of fossil fuels in the intense number that we are burning them is filling the atmosphere with heat trapping gases.

it is fairly simple physics figured out in the 19th century. what we are going to do is make it harder to grow food, harder to stay well, harder to make our electrical systems keep running. look at texas. we have got extreme weather like never before in multiple places around the world. the people making the ridiculous -- talk about pseudo-religion. the man before me, that is pseudo-religion. these people are avoiding the fact that the current generation of people in the rich countries that have the most impact on the world and on all sorts of things, including how fast we heat the atmosphere, this generation has a power few generations have had. if we can figure out a way to rein in our appetites for all sorts of things that are

destroying the environment -- and you can see it, you can feel it -- if we can start the change in the way we generate energy and pursue our pressures objective in life. we are trying to avoid the worst possible outcomes of climate change and global heating. enough of this global warming. we need to talk about it as it is. it is climate destabilization and the effects for decades or centuries to come are going to be horrific. we the people of this time in the rich nations have the power to bend this curve of increasing carbon concentrations back. we can do it. host: all right. let's go to amsterdam, new york. john is on the republican line. caller: good morning.

i signed up for solar and i have been trying to keep up with what is going on. i think it is a good thing. but if new york state can have the same type of weather as florida, i am all for it. i think we are way behind the government. i hear 2030. we are not going to be able to afford these electric vehicles. we are not going to be able to have these geothermal heat pumps. they do away with the natural gas and other things -- we are not ready for that. you have got to have more of a choice. i went to some meetings on this, on climate change, and i think some people were going over and they were mad because of solar panels being put on people's homes. i think they do not understand but i think that is going to be

a good thing. we have got to start using the sun and wind power. i feel bad for the birds with the wind turbines, but maybe they can make them differently. we rely too much on china which is not a good thing. we have got to start doing things ourselves and we have got to start building things ourselves and get ready for this. i do not see any problem out in washington when they turn around and worry about climate change. they are not going through the winters we have had over the years. it is not so bad in new york state anymore as far as the winters are concerned. host: all right, john. let's go to the independent line. ted is calling from boston. caller: good morning. i don't know where to begin. it is bad in new york, to that last caller, when there is no real winter.

[phone ringing] host: ted, did we lose you? will lost ted -- we lost ted. i want to bring up the comments we are receiving on facebook in response to our question, what are your thoughts about climate change? albert writes, i think president biden is doing an amazing job listen to the scientists. but i think you do not have to be a scientist to know our climate is in big trouble. rich says, it is the government's new religion -- anything to full of people. steve says, climate has always been changing. the earth revolves around the sun on an axis. the sun has gravitational pull on the earth. the earth will someday be close to the sun and everything on earth will die.

man has nothing to do with that fact. debbie alice says, if you do not believe the world's climate is changing due to human, misuse you have been living under a rock. i do not know if we can turn it around but we must try for the sake of future generation. let's listen to more from president biden in california yesterday discussing new initiatives to combat climate change. [video clip] pres. biden: i am here today to announce we are putting our investment to work. starting tomorrow the department of commerce will launch the first and largest competitive climate resilience to provide $600 million to coastal and great lakes communities to protect against the impacts of

climate change from sea level rise, flooding, and storm surge. we are investing in people and places that have been hit the hardest but are also on the front lines of leading us forward. the department of energy is going to announce it is investing more than $2 billion to modernize our electric grid to be more resilient, including over $67 million in california. that can help ensure our electric grid is stronger, that the lights and air conditioning and admit stay on during heat waves and storms, so the lights can stay on in hospitals and nursing facilities. later this year we are hosting the first ever white house summit that convenes local, state, tribal, and territory leaders focused on climate resilience. it will include a roadmap for how these historic actions will build more climate resilient communities across america. saving lives and providing peace

of mind. this is how we are going to meet the moment. host: that was president biden yesterday in california talking about initiatives to address climate change. we want to hear more from you. what are your views of climate change? republicans, we want you to call us at (202)-748-8001. democrats, your line is (202)-748-8000. an independents, call us at (202)-748-8002. before we get to more of your calls i want to go back to this cbs news survey about opinions on climate change. it says the top reasons selected regarding -- this is -- a lot of people felt it does not need to be addressed right away. cbs writes says, there are

more pressing issues right now and the effects of climate change is exaggerated. for most americans, we know that pocketbook issues like the economy and inflation rank as top priorities ahead of climate change. a smaller majority say, "there is nothing we can do about climate change." that is cited among older people in particular. when you go down to the chart with the top reasons 79% of people had responded that climate change does not have to be addressed right away. 79% said it was more pressing issues. 74% says it was the effect of climate change is exaggerated. 56% responded nothing we can do

about it right now. i will read a little bit more about this. it says this group does not see economic benefit in reducing climate change. most of them see such efforts as something that would hurt rather than help the economy. in response to the questions about the economy, 41% said addressing climate change would help the economy. 31% said it would hurt the economy. 28% said not much impact. but if you break it down by the 57% who said efforts to reduce climate change -- if they want climate change addressed soon, 57% said it would help the economy. if they do not want climate change addressed soon, 55% said addressing climate change would hurt the economy. this is more polling on climate

change from cbs news. we want to hear from you so let's go back to the phone lines. mike is calling from florida on the republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. i hope everybody has a wonderful day. i think climate change is critical. however, i think we are not addressing the majority of the sources. it is an extremely complex problem. my concern is when china is building two coal power plants on a weekly basis and the third world countries are pumping pollution into the air. that is the situation. we just do not have to address only the united states. we have to address it where we are getting the majority of our products, and that is china. what really scares me is i was all in for the greenhouse back in 2010.

vice president gore made $1 billion flying around in jets. like our secretary of transportation, he is flying around on private jets. if we talk the talk, let's get together and walk the walk. picking up a little plastic bottle, put it into the recycle, we can all do this. but my main concern if you have a fire in the front in the backyard, the backyard will eventually get to the front yard. i think we can do it. i hope for the next generations. i hope everybody has a great day. host: let's go to brooklyn, new york, alexander on the democrat

line. caller: good morning. i am hearing everybody talk about the penguins being ok and the lady calling about the frustration that we have plastic everywhere, including the bottles we drink. yes, it is very difficult, like the last caller said. you have coal power plants in china. but the reality is the latest report from the ipcc said we are going to be above 1.5 degrees celsius by 2027. that means catastrophe across the world and we are projected to go above that by like 2.5 degrees celsius. all i am telling everybody who is listening is to forget the fact you are republican or democrat or independent. when the climate starts to

deteriorate to the point we have the worst air quality in new york city in the world because we have smoke coming in from wildfires that cannot be contained in canada. when we have california going from atmospheric rivers that are drowning people out in mud and you have non-stop snow, the environment is going to be so out of whack there is going to be no place to hide. when everybody starts to really feel the impact it is going to be too late for a lot of things we could have done decades ago. be mindful there is research out there. you can go to the ipcc and read the reports yourself. it is not biased toward the left or the right. the reality is we have got to stop using energy from dead dinosaurs. we have ai. we can look through satellites

at the moon. we can look across the universe and we cannot get out of technology that was invented in the 1800s? it is absurd. thank you for taking my call. host: alexander was referencing ipcc. that is the intergovernmental panel on climate change. it is the united nations body for assessing the science related to climate change. their website is ipcc.ch and they have the international impacts of climate change. eileen is calling from connecticut on the independent line. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call and thank you for the comments of the previous two callers. i think when we talk about it -- and it is not even climate

change anymore, it is climate destruction -- and most of it is human caused. we do not talk about our need to reduce our consumption. i am not talking about freezing in the wintertime time and only eating bread. in western society, our consumption is over the top. whether it is what we eat or what we wear or what we do for entertainment or leisure or whatever. so long as we are going to live in excess this is what is going to happen. i think it is a change we have to make individually in our minds that we do not need to be so excessive. we do not need to be so gluttonous. thank you very much for the

topic and i hope we keep talking about it. host: let's go to virginia now. jim is calling on the republican line. caller: hi. thank you so much for this form of electronic democracy. i appreciate the chance to share my opinions. they are contrary to a lot of your callers' because i have read the ipcc. it is not a scientific organization, it is a government organization. there is no scientific evidence based on any quantitative assessment that man is behind any of this climate change. if you are running the wrong direction, you will increase your aberration. biden, i praise him. we need to take measures to prevent the effects of climate

change but the effect is what is in question. there is no real scientific evidence to document that. i would warn you do not say that in a room full of people because they will cancel you. but read the ipcc reports carefully. they are not based on scientific studies of the environment. it is just fear. there is no scientific documentation connecting man with this increase of climate. host: our next caller is kathy in ohio, democratic line. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. the lady from connecticut was very eloquent and getting to the heart of how people have to change how they view climate change. i think that people have to use

imagery and compassion to be on the same page. for example, when we think about floods and terrible weather are we also thinking -- host: we lost our caller. let's go to jamie. jamie is in los angeles, independent line. caller: hello. host: jamie? caller: yes? host: go ahead with your comments. caller: as far as joe -- [indiscernible] -- i spend a lot of time researching.

[indiscernible] host: all right, jamie. mary is our next caller in oklahoma, republican line. caller: yes, i am calling about the climate change on the wind turbines. i have a friend. she lives by one of these fields. they are not windblown, they are motorized. when they turn these on she has no tv, she has no cell phone. people need to think about this. another thing, these electric lawnmowers. they are not worth crap.

if we do not get him out of there as president, we are all going to be in trouble. thank you very much. host: tony in massachusetts, independent line. caller: hi. i feel like climate change is being underemphasized and overemphasized at the same point for the wrong reasons. climate change can be a less immediate problem that a lot of things because there are things that are contained within less than a year of legislation that could have drastic consequences for an ordinary person anywhere in the world. the actual effects of global warming on the economy immediately -- production, consumption, and just pollution -- that affect the nearby areas

immediately and do not get talked about enough. and yet, if the problem is existential in 10 years, there could have been more damaging consequences in less than that time. the immediate issues with consumption of renewable goods are not be talked about enough because they are inconvenient. host: once again we have lost our caller. let's try mike in chesapeake, virginia, democratic line. caller: hello. how are you doing? good morning to you. a few callers back they were like, there is no climate change. i almost fell off the bed. i have been here 64 years and i

have witnessed climate change. i can or member being a young boy. i used to ride my bike in the ditch which is full of ice. i cannot believe these people. we have damaged the atmosphere. we have been polluting the atmosphere for 200 years. steam engines, gas engines, nuclear weapons, we have damaged the atmosphere. it does not take a rocket scientist to see it. i hope we can fix it. thank you for listening to me. host: we have been talking about your views on climate change but also some of the partisan divide s between republicans and democrats, those who lean liberal and conservative, when it comes to views on climate change. i want to bring up an opinion piece in politico that was written by two republicans. it was written by ryan costello,

who is a republican from pennsylvania who served in the house in 2015 to 2019, an francis rooney, a republican serving from florida from 2017 to 2021. both were members of the bipartisan climate solutions caucus. here is an example -- excerpt from their opinion piece in politico. it says, one important place to start is in re states where climate organizing, especially by trusengers, has paled in comparison to the bigger advocacy in blue states. at the end of the day lawmakers are responsivee voter their own state and districts. lyith the greater mandate to lead in republican and democratic districts alike can necessary for bipartisan action

while climate change is a uni and paramount challenge law of political gravity remain the same. legislative outcomes are born from the political infrastructure supporting them. if bipartisan climate solutions are our goal, we must build for them. that is former reps costello and rooney talking about how to create bipartisan agreement in congress when it comes to climate change. we want to hear from you. republicans, (202)-748-8001. democrats, (202)-748-8000. independents, (202)-748-8002. next up is robert in washington, d.c., independent line. caller: thank you for taking my call. a lot of people do not know

exactly what is going on here. i and a former federal employee of noaa. -- i a.m. a former federal employee of noaa. i have seen what climate change is and this was in 1981. we have had 210 aboveground nuclear tests. anytime you explode an atomic bomb it ionizes the air around it and it will change the atmosphere in and of itself.

this is called nuclear winter and then you have fallout summer. when i was doing the research in the arctic we were exposed to non-ionizing radiation. but they also have ionized radiation caused from exposure. this is what is changing our atmosphere. we have over 200 aboveground nuclear tests. some more full-scale, like the canary islands, where aboveground nuclear tests are being done. this is what is changing our atmosphere and this is the biggest elephant in the room. it is not smog and this, that, and the other. when you have ozone, ozone helps

clear because it is a sanitizer of sorts. it will, in a sense, get rid of a lot of pollution that might be in the air. ozone is not really a negative component. it is a positive because it is an exchange between oxygen and rays from the sun. host: let's go next to thomas in texas, democratic line. caller: this heat is not just starting. in 1955, me and my dad were picking cotton. before we left the scales to pick more cons you said, i want to show you something.

it was 105 degrees. she said it is 105 degrees today. she was showing us on the thermometer. the problem is refrigerated air. i like it but that is all i have got to say. host: let's hear from steve in san jose, california, republican line. caller: thank you for taking my call. i would have liked to have seen or heard at the start of your show the number of predictions by the so-called experts, starting with al gore.

, that have utterly failed. the first when i can remember that the world was cooling when it was the opposite. fox news i think about two months ago went through the number of predictions that have totally failed. to put them on video where you could see the predictor's lips moving. if i recall, it was a roundabout at least a dozen. i would have liked to have seen the start of c-span putting those predictions on.

what concerns me the most is not climate change but deforestation and how that is related to oxygen production. as we know, oxygen is produced by trees and plants and that is what concerns me most. what concerns me second is this climate change -- the concern about climate change is going to be taken too far. we are considering -- and this is my last point -- we are considering u.s. army tanks being electric and trains being run by batteries. this is illogical and it will not work. can you imagine a tank having to

plug in at the end of the day after it has moved into enemy territory 100 miles? host: all right, steve. we appreciate your call. this is president joe biden's invoice for climate. former secretary of state john kerry spoke at an event on climate change in march. he is talking about the environmental effects seen around the world due to climate change. [video clip] sec. kerry: what drives this is the reality of what is happening to the planet. i have spent 30 years or so taking this in and giving some back.

but a scientist said to me the other day there is a real possibility, and i worry, that we have passed five tipping points. those are the bering sea, the coral reef, the permafrost, the arctic, and antarctic. it is 70 degrees above normal in the arctic a few months ago. 100 degrees fahrenheit above normal in the antarctic. you look at "the new york times" and other papers showing record low ice at this point in time in the antarctic. everything that happens there is going to happen somewhere else in a different way or similar way around the planet, and it is. look at california. 90% of the warming of the earth goes into the ocean. because it goes into the ocean

the heat raises your moisture and moisture travels around the world, falls in the form of rainfall. the acidification comes from the burning of fossil fuels. that is changing the chemistry of the ocean more than it has been in millions of years. we are seeing the consequences of that too. what we are facing is a choice for humankind. i hate to put. it that way. i do not want to sound grandiose. i do not want to sound out of touch with anybody. . i do not think i a.m. -- i hope i am not -- but the reality is that we face human choices. host: that was john kerry on climate change. let's go back to the phone lines. republicans, (202)-748-8001. democrats, (202)-748-8000.

independents, (202)-748-8002. next up is tom in long island, new york on the independent line. caller: hi. thank you for taking my call. i'm watching this the last 20 minutes and i have to tell you my opinion. the world is living much better with fossil fuel than it has in the history of going back. before fossil fuel people only lived to be 25, 30-years-old. because of fossil fuel we have machines that feed the planet in agriculture instead of picking cotton or digging for potatoes. there are machines that are fossil fuel machines that can take care of all of this. america is probably the breadbasket of the world because of that. also, when it comes to technology, like medical, people

have more free time. instead of trying to wash clothes without a machine or agriculture there is more free time. they have a better education and they invent vaccines and band-aids and iodine, etc. look at the technology with electronics. we are watching your show here and, of course, the computers. they handle all kinds of problems and solve different things. life in the world now for 8 billion people is more and more comfortable. yes, there is poor and rich, but generally people can do a better job with fossil fuel. if you get rid of fossil fuel, what are we going to go back to? the caves? host: let's hear from alana in

albany, new york, democratic line. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i wanted to bring up a point i'm sure most people watching would know. a lot of people believe that they can understand all of this, but i wanted to say that there are people who spend their lives dedicated to science and they go up to the arctic and they do the science. there is consensus around the world of the scientists who are coming to these conclusions. but i do not think it should be up to each individual person to say, ok, i need to understand everything going on. we need to listen to the scientific consensus and stop trying -- because when you try to come up with all of the information yourself and come to the conclusion, you do not have

the education and you end up falling into conspiracy traps. one of my inspirations is a vegan who goes by the nickname tofu. they say it is not up to individual choices. we cannot make all little sacrifices and that is going to make the difference. in has to be a governmental thing and the corporations and the military that does most of the polluting. at this point, it has already started. we need to start preparing for the mass migrations and the effects of climate change already happening. it is not just little weather events. it is not this hurricane or that fire. it is an accumulation of things. climate is years and years if not -- not just it is called this year.

it is the bigger picture. host: all right. let's go to the republican line. freddie is calling from burlington, north carolina. caller: all this is, is a hoax. the noaa research centers said before there was dinosaurs there was no ice on earth. it was an asteroid that caused the first one. we are at the end. the oceans rising comes from volcanoes growing in the ocean. it is hundreds of thousands of volcanoes that is growing every day. and also, iceland, when all of

the ice melted, they found fossils under the ice. permafrost when it melts they find tusks from woolly mammoths. if you can stop deserts from growing on the earth, good luck. if you can teach people a man can be a woman and a woman can be a man, they stupid enough to believe in climate change. host: let's go to jay in deming, washington on the independent line. caller: hello. i think people have a soul reckoning to deal with. we are all connected,

unfortunately. even to the shiny happy homeschooled people. mercy, it is delivering. biases that operate around four-year terms are useless. climate change is not really under the direction of four or two or six-year terms. dealing with the politically has issues. it is not a political animal. individuals should not be responsible, individually, although we do have to do it collectively but we've got to get on the same page with the shiny happy homeschoolers. have a good day. host: let's go to the democratic

line. david is calling from appleton, wisconsin. caller: good morning. how are you doing today? happy to be here. host: thank you. what are your thoughts this morning? caller: i am one of those rare people that as i have gotten older i have moved further to the left. i was a lifelong conservative and i think what really opened my eyes to climate change was if you look at -- before one of my favorite president nixon created the epa -- that's funny. a republican created the epa. if you look at air quality photos in new york and los angeles from the 1950's and 1940's, it was abysmal. there were rivers that regularly caught on fire in this country. it showed me that we actually

can make the environment better. we can make the air better. we can make the water better. it is better now than it was 50 years ago. that's an amazing thing. i have gotten this little vixen, adrian that i hang out with, and she is telling me the orcas are coming back. we can do things that make the environment better. what about china? i like in america where we take on the big things. we do not say, hey, in ghana they are not doing such and such so why should we? that is so lazy. let's get back to taking on big problems and reading the world that way. i do not care what china is doing. i want to make our water and air

better here. and the idea -- think about all of the cars, all of the factories, all of the pollution. the idea that what we do has no effect on the planet, your brain has got to be broken. these people that call and say global warming is a hoax. really? do you not see all of the pollution? host: got your point. let's go to the republican line. dave is on the line. caller: i have no confidence in john kerry or the father of the internet. that guy talking about nuclear testing should have been allowed to speak longer. climate changes been around since noah and the ark and this biden regime has us on a path of

destruction. host: rob is the next caller in safety harbor, independent line. caller: glad to have a chance to get on. i want to state that the answer to climate change and all the issues we have has already been presented to congress who did a press briefing on june 12 in front of the national press club and it was opened to the public and the media to present for the energy sources that would stop pollution. allow third world countries to not have to rely on primitive and coal. i would ask people to look at the youtube video that was put on there. all of the answers are there.

it is going to be up to our congress to see whether they are going to sit on their hands or if they're going to allow we the people to take over the new technology and the things that have been going on. if you think about nicola tesla and free energy, that is where it is headed. i would ask pressure be put on. i have not heard anything from the media regarding that. where is their effort to spread the word and let people decide whether it is real or not? thank you very much. host: brian in avon, massachusetts, democratic line. caller: good morning. -- thank you for taking my call. we cannot waste electricity. we are supposed to be an edge country and -- an educated country and a few callers, big

words don't always mean big ideas. host: we are going to take a quick break. up next is george mason university's jamil jaffer who will be discussing the federal indictment of former president trump and legal issues involving the classified documents referenced in the case and later, amy -- annie e. casey foundation president and ceo lisa hamilton will be discussing the lack -- the cost and lack of childcare care is affecting families in the u.s. army -- economy. ♪ >> book tv every sunday on c-span two features leading

authors discussing their latest nonfiction books. robert moffat shares their views on how to reform medicare so recipients receive that are more affordable care in the future. at 10 p.m. on afterwords, a journalist reports on maternal health care in the u.s. and how those with political dynamics impact pregnancy and motherhood with her book ruth -- birth. watchable tv every sunday on c-span two and find a full schedule on your program guide or watch anytime online at booktv tv.org. >> if you are enjoying book tv, sign-up for our newsletter using the qr code on the screen to receive a schedule of upcoming pogroms, book festivals and more. book tv every sunday on c-span2 or anytime online at booktv.org.

television for serious readers. >> the sea sent -- the c-span bookshelf podcast feed. so you can discover new authors and ideas. each week, we are making it convenient for you to listen to multiple episodes with critically acclaimed authors discussing history. from the signature programs about books, afterwords, book notes plus. you can find the c-span bookshelf podcast feed and all of our podcast on the free c-span now mobile video app or wherever you get your podcasts or on a website c-span.org/podcasts. >> c-span now is a free mobile app featuring your unfiltered

view of what is happening in washington, live and on-demand. keep up with the day's biggest events with livestreams and four proceedings of hearings from the u.s. congress, white house events, the court, campaigns, and more from the world of politics. all at your fingertips. you can also stay current with the latest episodes of "washington journal" and find scheduling information for c-span's tv network and c-span radio, plus a variety of compelling podcasts. c-span now is available at the apple store and google play. download it for free today. c-span now, your front row seat to washington anytime, anywhere. host: we are here with the assistant president of law jamil

jaffer from george mason university. we will be talking about the federal indictment of former president donald trump and the legal issue that came up because the case involved classified documents. let's start there. what do we know about what kind of documents former president trump is accused of mishandling? we are -- guest: we know there are 102 documents found by the fbi after the president and his lawyers certified all documents have been returned to the national archives. only 32 of the 102 documents have been charged in the indictments but 10 of those documents are classified at -- above top secret. top secret requires if the information is released, it can cause major harm to the united

states, extraordinarily grave harm. above top secret is going part -- compartment information. that is 10 of those documents of the 31 and another eight are called special access programs. those special access programs are federally protected compartments that are more sensitive and go to a specific human source, a highly technical, highly confidential question, capability or the like and they are so sensitive, even the names of the compartment themselves are redacted. 18 of 31 are highly sensitive, above the top secret level. host: there have been a lot of conversation about, and i want to go ahead and set the scene here. a lot of people say he is the president. they gave it to him.

if you wanted to keep them, he can. do you agree with that, why or why not? guest: unfortunately, that is not the law. as a president, when he is in office, he has full authority to classify and declassify information. had he declassified the documents as president, they are not classified. there are two questions, can he keep them or not keep them and are they classified or not classified? he claimed he declassified them by keeping them. that is not the way -- you can write it down. though one ways to exercise a rmer declassification document. the former president himself declassified an highly classified image by taking his iphone and tweeting it out.

other than thinking about it, there is no evidence that we are aware of that he has declassify the documents and there is a question of keeping documents. if something is a presidential record that reflects his activities in office, it is required that they turn it over to the national archives. agency records like the last five documents issued here, if he did not take notes on them, go back to the agency in deal with them -- and they deal with them. does he get to take away and do what he wants. if there is a dispute of presidential record or personal record. it is hard for the president to make arguments that these documents were official government documents and classified and some above top secret level with his nose on them and at minimum, those are

-- presidential business. host: we are talking about former president trump's indictment in the way that classified documents are related to this case. you can call in with your comments or questions for professor jaffer, an assistant professor of law at george mason university. you can call in now. republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. you can send us a text message at (202) 748-8003. include your name and where you live if you send us a text. while we are waiting to receive some of your calls, you talked about the degree of different classifications.

we know if there are classified documents that were in former president trump's possession that are not included in the indictment that were perhaps too sensitive to be exposed? guest: it is possible. we don't know the details of what other documents were there and at a general level, there were certain level of documents classified at the top secret level. we know there are number of documents, a little over 100. 31 charged in the indictment and we don't know the details better in the 70's -- 70's that were not -- 70 or so that were not in the indictment. host: how are classified and nonclassified information treated differently in child. guest: there is a law passed by congress that allows the government to introduce classified material to the judge and allows the defense to look at it as well and allows the

jury to look at it if there is a jury trial in order to protect it without being exposed to the public. often -- and there's every reason to think these documents will likely remain classified and they introduce it very -- to the jury and defense. host: henry in nevada, missouri on the democratic line. you are on. caller: hello, what was the question again? i did not get the question. host: we are talking about trumps indictment and -- in the involvement of classified documents. do you have a question or comment? caller: yes, i would like to say -- it is too bad those documents were in his possession and i am assuming that biting --biden is

under investigation for his handling of documents as well. my opinion on that is those documents like that especially in a location like mar-a-lago where they found them at, they shouldn't be able to get that far but they did. what they should do next is fine -- find out if trump will have further input in releasing any information from that and if he has not or they cannot prove he was or has, and at the time he was the president, before he had the documents, -- he had no clearance in having them. it is a bit mess. -- a big mess. it also seems like maybe something is not all there in the picture. they read there is something we don't know that will come out -- maybe there is something we

don't know that will come out later. host: let's let professor jaffer respond to that. guest: the president is -- -- the former president is innocent until proven guilty so the justice department bears the burden of proof to prove that he had these documents and have them unlawfully -- had them unlawfully and willfully obtain them -- retain them and failed to turn them over. there are other charges that were brought against him, obstruction of justice. destroying or moving records and also conspiracy and making false space -- statements. all those relate to what some may call a cover up, allegedly a cover up. an attempt from the president to not only hide the documents from the fbi when they came to do their search but also their attorneys who did the search and

certified to the national archives and the fbi that they turned them over. there is a lot there for the government to prove in the president is innocent until proven guilty. this is in the first time we had a senior official identify classified documents. former vice president mike pence turn documents over. president biden had a number of documents from his time as the vice president that were at his home in the d.c. area. we will see what happens with those. secretary of state hillary clinton had classified information on a classified email server. there are a lot of senior

officials who have challenges with classified documents. why is president trump in -- been charged here and not others? the had the documents. he asked -- he was asked for them back and did not return them and if the justice department's facts are improvement, he avoided turning them over and his lawyers perhaps said they were not here or lost them or whenever they're in the first place. host: our next caller is diana in florida, republican line. caller: i believe this is a continuation on the constant witchhunt that they are doing to president trump. more than half of america loves president trump and he -- we want him back. we will vote for him again and this business of documents here and documents there, biden wasn't even supposed to have any documents. he was vice president, not president.

and trump looks like, that is all they want to do is go after trump. first it was russia and then it was other things and president trump didn't pack his own documents. all that stuff was packed for him. he probably was not even aware of what was in every one of those boxes. they were all packed for him. all this is is a continuation of this witchhunt and we know it. i think it is disgraceful that the justice department, the fbi, all of them are in cahoots. they hate trump because he wanted to clean up washington. they are scared to death of him. host: all right, diana. how do you respond? guest: diana raises a number of points that americans are concerned about, the idea that the former president is under investigation in a variety of places. these charges, january 6

insurrection and what happened in georgia and the efforts to identify more votes in georgia. there are multiple investigations and the president has made the point that this is part of a larger effort, a use of government resources to pursue him and those around him, which he argued during his time in office, the russian investigation were part of that. the challenge is looking to one side of the new york state and georgia charges, we look at the federal cases from january 6. you have evidence here that the government claims it has and has the burden of proof. that the president took these documents, he didn't have a clearance. he willfully retained them and -- and that he willingly retained the. two diamines -- to diana's point, maybe he didn't know.

there are a lot of things to suggest, at least as a government proves them, he may have known and talked to his lawyer saying maybe the documents were never here. saying to one of his aides, movies boxes from place a to place b. one wonders what that is about but the government has to prove that that demonstrates knowledge, willful retention of these documents and if he can, there is an uphill battle but there are a lot of people -- a lot of concerns that people in the country have about what is going on with the president and this is all taking place in a election cycle where the current president, for whom the attorney general works and special prosecutor works, running for reelection and former president trump also running for election and best -- and that makes this prosecution brought for political issues --fraught for

political issues. host: we have any indication yet what may be former president trump's defense. will it be i didn't know or will it be beazer my documents to keep? those seem like -- you can't table -- you can't say both. guest: we know what the president said publicly in the things he suggested and despite -- this might not be his defense but it appears to be some combination of i had a right to these documents. i am allowed to take them and negotiate with the national archives on whether i get them back or not, i declassify these document by thinking about them. i have a standing order to declassify. if you can bring witnesses, that may be a defense. and none of this really matters,

this is a conspiracy against me. folks are coming after me and this is a weaponized use of justice from the fbi. those are some of the defenses he laid out. declassification, authority to keep them and the larger witchhunt narrative taking place. host: jane is coming from hamburg, new york. independent line. guest: -- caller: caller: good morning. i find myself agreeing with the last lady. i have a question because this is legal. the declassification, when trump was president and he had possession of those boxes and he ordered these boxes to be sent to mar-a-lago as the president, doesn't that imply that those are considered presidential records and we have to go back to the president records act and find out if that was in court

and -- where the judges are very adamant about what are considered personal records. i don't know about this moving boxes. are they claiming he moved boxes out of mar-a-lago or around mar-a-lago and is in all of that under secret service protection? other than that, have a good morning. guest: these are great questions. as to the question about who are protecting the record and where they are removed, the indictment charges is a movement of documents within mar-a-lago from place a to place b and there a discussions about some of the documents going to a golf course in bedminster where the president is alleged to have shown documents in a recorded conversation to folks were not allowed to see them. there are questions about documents that went to bed ms. -- bedminster.

the main point about the documents moved by his aide, being moved the -- in mar-a-lago. the other question about the documents being guarded by the secret service. it is true the president have secret service protection but they are not there to protect the documents. remember the way beast documents are stormed normally. they are stored in a facility. it is a lot facility that is shelling around so singles can get in and out. it has safes and combination locks. when it is closed at night, it is closed with a combination lock with an alarm and a response after a certain amount of minutes and it is a specific circumstance where you maintain the documents. if you take the documents out of them, you have to put them in two separate individually marked

departments. and walk out and you have to have a courier caller -- card that says you are authorized to carry this information. no procedures were in place at mar-a-lago and eight that ballroom -- in that ballroom. the images raise a question, if they were classified documents, where they secured appropriately and that is the challenge here that the president will have defending himself. as to the first question, this question about did the president make them personal records by sending them to mar-a-lago or did he declassify them saying i will send them to the white house, was that like sending them on twitter, that is a constructive conversation?

the president has authority when he is president to declassify. did he make a declassification decision? it is hard to know and it is not laid out other than to say, i can do it by thinking about it. host: the caller mentioned bill clinton and there is argument made by former president trump that there is a case regarding president clinton and some records that were challenged and that he should have similar discretion so i want to first play the comments that former president made earlier this month, referencing the so-called bill clinton sock drawer case and denouncing his indictment and this was at a campaign event in columbus, georgia. [video clip] >> they don't mention the defining lawsuit that was brought against bill clinton and it was lost against the government, the famous socks

case that says he can keep his documents. these are minor details and that is the ruling law. when i left office and i was moving to florida, boxes were openly sipping -- sitting on the white house. this isn't someone smuggling boxes out, pictures of them sitting with people from gsa and other people waiting to put them on a truck but they were sitting outside of the white house waiting for a truck to come and the truck was there for a long time and they brought it to florida and they make it sound like it -- is that -- if that is a spy operation or something bad, we did a poor job. first things you learn, don't put them on the sidewalk in front of the white house. as a former president, we were negotiating with the national archives and records administration just as any other

president has done and the next thing i knew, mar-a-lago was rated --raided by gun toting fbi agents. we were negotiating. host: those were comments from former president trump not too long ago, comments he made in a rally around georgia. he referenced what is known as the presidential records act but i put out an article from the associated press. since legal efforts -- it says legal experts -- while the 2012 legal case involving clinton isn't a sound comparison to trump's current legal predicament. i will bring it to you, president john for --jaffer. tell us about this sock drawer case from bill clinton.

does it compare to the case president trump faces? guest: there are important similarities and differences. in the case of president clinton, he made these recordings about the time in office and he is talking about the official business he engaged in. he wanted to write a book after the fact. he stored these cassette tapes, these recordings in a sock drawer. the question was, are these tape recordings presidential records are they personal records? the presidential records act, as you pointed out, it is not mentioned in the indictment. everett presents three categories. there are records about the affect -- presidential time in office, personal records, things that are his, and federal agency

records, documents federal agencies create. the two candidates, these are for the agency and they go to the national archives. the question is are these documents like the clinton sock drawer case, are they personal records? 's like president clinton -- i president clinton's --ike president clinton's case -- the best record he can make is that they are my personal recollections of them and then they are mine. what are the notes about? you might argue it was a purely personal note. i love melania. that note is a personal record but the problem is it is on a document as an agency record

that is highly classified. putting aside whether it is a personal record, you can't take a classified document with you and stored in a insecure place and that is the fundamental challenge the president will face in making these arguments but there are some important similarities and differences in those cases. host: let's go back to the phone lines, republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. sheila is calling from youngstown, ohio. on the democratic line. caller: at a interview last night on fox news, trump returned to his defense that all documents he had were declassified. this -- if that was a case, anyone could have access to them at this point which is a bigger problem. any citizen can get copies and

send them to anyone in the world. his lawyers were ordered to get clearances to prepare for the trial. if these documents were declassified, they would not need to get these clearances and you think -- you would think his lawyers would object to that. this is a national security issue. it is not politically driven because we can see trump is only gaining in popularity with his base. i hope that people will take this seriously. thank you. guest: the president's argument is that he declassified this documents, then your caller is right. they can be distributed around the world and that may cause national security harm but the president has the right to make those decisions when he or she

is in office. if the president did it when he was in office, he is allowed to make the call. they can be released publicly. there is one small category of documents called firmly restricted data, listed in one of the charges and that is nuclear data that is controlled by statute by congressionally passed law about nuclear weapons information. they used to be restricted data and now it is firmly restricted data -- formerly restricted data. there is an argument that the class of -- the president cannot just declassified that. he probably can't take that action as well so i think the caller is right. this information can be plastered from paper to paper at the president classified it. host: our next caller is pats in keyport, new jersey on the republican line. caller: i want to go back to the

clinton sock case. have you studied the opinion issued by justice amy berman jackson? she said a president is in credit -- entitled to these documents if he determines they are personal and he said in her decision, it doesn't matter if they are cast -- classified, if because the impersonal, he is allowed to take them. should the espionage act even have been used? unless you have a case where you can prove he gave this stuff to china. guest: i am not sure it is a correct reading of the case but we can discuss what the right approach is an of the end of the day, the question about whether something is a presidential record versus a personal record is a statutory question. the president can make an

assertion but the decision is made by the courts in a litigation like this but the clinton sock case and the litigation going forward against the president. the president views might be weighed in that analysis. with respect to classification, at the end of the day, the president -- presidential records act does not change the rules about how to classify information handled under various laws including the espionage act. the president can make the decision to declassify something but if something remains prompt -- classified, provisions like the espionage acts apply regardless of the presidential act -- have an interesting thing -- and the interesting big is president trump, what will happen next, there will be litigation over whether these --

where these personal or presidential records. his lawyers will suggest these were not presidential records and we will see these issues litigated in the courts and we will know what the courts think about it going forward in this can go all the way from the district court to the -- to florida and potentially the supreme court. host: let's go to another caller in huntsville alabama. mark's on the independent line. caller: good morning. a couple calls ago, a lady touched on the same thing i was getting at. a while ago, your guess was talking about when this goes to trial, how the judge can see these documents, prosecutors can obviously, the defense and the jury will be able to see all these documents. they are classified -- if they

are classified, the jury gets to see these classified documents, when all these jurors have to be vetted and cleared -- whatnot all these jurors have to be vetted and cleared for top-secret security clearance if they are able to see these top-secret documents? otherwise, -- host: let's go ahead -- guest: the procedures under the classified procedure information that give the jury on a agreed-upon summary of the -- up what is in the documents. they don't necessarily get to see the document. what can happen, the lawyers, judges will look at the document and agree upon a summary that can be given to the jury. that is typically how these rings are handled. one caller asked about clearances for attorneys involved they need parents is, at the president declassified them in the caller is right, she

was right to ask the question but the debate is, where they declassified? the court will treat them as if they were classified, require everyone to get security clearances and look at the documents and if they are not declassified, ultimately, they can be released anywhere and the jury can see them but someone has to make that call and that's probably a legal call to whether classification happened or not. did the president give an order and where they properly declassified? these are things that will hotly be litigated and that is what makes this case so hard to bring . not only do you have these unusual circumstances, never before have's a former president be charged in any crime. it has never happened during -- at all but certainly never during an election. and not -- this is a very

challenging scenario. the justice department itself is between a legal rock, political and possible team -- place. host: speaking of that, i want to bring the concept of great males --gray mails. i have a definition omes from a new york times article and it talks about reat of a defendant to reveal classi information a trial using that threat to force the government's ho drop the case and perhaps create a plea te -plea deal to prevent classified information from becoming public. can you talk about the concept of grey mail? guest: it is a common thing that takes place and involves

classified information because the defendant and person being charged with the spy. people say the fbi -- the president is a spy. it proves are other things like retaining documents they are not allowed to have, there is a variety of things. in this case, the president is charged with woeful retention but that is what makes this case a real challenge, is that these charges are hard to bring. and proving them up is going to be hard for the justice department. we will see what happens but this is a real difficult issue. host: back to the phone lines. pete is in northern virginia on the democratic line. caller: thank you. the trump crime family has been getting away with things from the 1960's, whether it is civil metals -- matters or printer --

criminal letters -- matters. it started with the father. it is continuing with the son-in-law. anyway, i question this -- right question is what really is going to happen? there is no accountability in this country. nobody goes to jail. this case will probably never see the day of light. back in world war ii, there was something called loose lips sink ships. there were people in the normandy invasion that had secrets and if they -- or anyone caught them, they were either somewhat or put in jail. if this guy gets the labors of power again, when you are a showoff, what do you think will happen? host: let's pause and let professor jaffer respond.

that caller echoes what we heard from phil barr, over the weekend. guest: acting attorney general bar -- i believe attorney general barr believes the president made mistakes and the work -- charges are rented to bring. the caller is concerned that the former president has gotten away with prior activity and will continue to get away with them here. anything for the present at the timeless was teflon don and he was -- he has a managed -- he has managed to avoid things. it is not really fair to say he has gotten away with it. that is our system and we prefer innocent and even the guilty get away with it to prevent innocence -- to being properly charged. the government has brought these charges and they will try to

litigate them and it will likely take a while. it is not likely to happen. normally, defense one tries to go fast so they can get it resolved. in this case, the president has incentive to likely take as long as possible for a couple reasons. politically, the charges are benefiting him. they play into him, this narrative of being under persecution in the deep state and used against him. he has made these claims when he was in office and he is making those claims on the outside and this benefits him with the base supposed to voting on him --for him. for the president, this helps him likely in the republican primary and maybe in the general election and if he is elected, he has made the point that he -- if he is convicted, he will continue to run but he is elected, there is an argument that he will pardon himself an argument that the prosecution will complete, he will -- could

tell the justice department to drop charges. all these things are unprecedented. the charging of a former president during a put cycle. -- political cycle. host: republican line, rudy is in ohio. caller: hi. i think donald trump is instant as far as breaking these fake charges against him, the state --deep state. joe biden is the head of the executive branch and he lies and says he never sicced these prosecutors on trump. if it was up to joe biden, he lies about all the time and i think donald trump has a really good case because he was the executive and there is no declassification form to fill out saying that trump declassified this box in that

box -- and that box. he declassified as it however he feels like it and there is nothing in the constitution to describe the declassification process so how can the government go after and when he was the man by joe biden is the man, illegally going after trump? host: rudy, we have further argument about whether trump could be -- declassified but he also brought in joe biden in the concerns by many donald trump supporters that joe biden has weaponize the department of justice. what is your response? guest: the justice department is run by the attorney general and the attorney general appointed the special prosecutor but the special muscular does work for the attorney general and it is not a independent counsel that we used to have. that was a problem. the special prosecutor is a career justice prosecutor that works for the attorney general

and the attorney general can be fired by the president and the caller has a point. one of the biggest challenges of the entire station is the fact that joe biden was real -- joe biden is running for reelection. if he was not, there may be a strong argument that it is not -- it will be proper amended -- would be problematic. in a lot of ways, this is the worst case scenario politically in the sense of causing political questions about the prosecution that your caller brings. he is a sitting president running for reelection, his attorney, their special prosecutor bring charges against the former president, unprecedented and running for reelection. this is fraught with challenges. on the other hand, if you believe the president illegally had documents and did not store them properly, and willfully

retain them, that is a violation of law. everyone else gets prosecuted for that. why wouldn't i prosecute the president? -- why would not you prosecute the president? host: let's go to connie in california, independent line. caller: i want to say all about these boxes. joe biden took some when he was vice president. pence also took some. now that trump is running, all these things about these boxes being taken is nothing but talk about it. if trump was not running, with these calls about these boxes being taken, how come nothing -- i don't think anything would have surfaced. nothing would have been mentioned about [indiscernible] president biden had taken some. i don't think anything would have come out of that.

what do you think? but now that trump is running, all of this -- they are making a big issue of it but if he was not running, i don't think anything -- of these boxes would have been mentioned that joe biden had taken any. guest: this is a question that a lot of people have raised. why isn't vice president mike pence getting charges. what will happen with the biden investigation? will he be charged. what about david petraeus? what about sandy berger, president clinton's former lawyer who tried to sneak document out of his own drawer. what about secretary of state hillary clinton? why were any of them prosecuted? these were important questions at -- and at the end of the day, there's prosecutorial discretion

about the charges you bring and don't bring and in this case, why wasn't prosecutorial discretion used to bring these charges at the time where the executive branch running again. these are questions that will be raised almost certainly at the trial. there is an argument that a sitting president cannot be charged with a crime or cannot be prosecuted, the only remedy for that is impeachment. that was argued in a department of justice memo. former president trump is related -- reelected and he may point to that. and he might argue that bringing charges are unprecedented. there's something inappropriate about that and the case should be state off. --staved off, that is another argument he can make.

i will say this. we are talking about a lot of documents, some very highly classified, some very sensitive sitting down in mar-a-lago likely unsecured. it is hard for the justice department not to bring these charges knowing the facts they have laid out because they have to prove in the indictment. host: professor jamil jaffer, george mason university, thank you for joining us this morning. guest: thanks for having me. host: we will take a great -- a break and later on we will have annie e. casey foundation president and ceo lisa hamilton discussing the cost and a lack of childcare and how it impacts families and the economy the next is open forum. start calling in now. republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002.

we are ready to hear about any political issue you would like to discuss. >> democracy doesn't just look like this. it looks like this where americans can see democracy at work and citizens are truly informed, our public drives. it informed straight from the source on c-span, unfiltered, unbiased, word for word. from the nation's capital to wherever you are, it can -- because the opinion that matters the most is your own. this is what democracy looks like. c-span powered by cable. >> order your coffee of the 118th correctional directory now available at c-span -- c-spanshop.org. for every house and senate member. and important information on congressional committees, the scan the code on the right to get your copy today or go to

it is 2995 -- go to c-spanshop.org. it is $2995 --$29.95. >> q&a, here white raising -- on q&a, here white ranging conversations. --wide ranging conversations. at the about books podcast takes you behind the scenes of the non-fiction looks publishing industry. find all of our podcast by downloading the free c-span now app or wherever you get your podcasts and on our website c-span.org/podcasts.

>> c-span's campaign 2024 coverage is your front row seat to the presidential election. watch our coverage on the candidates 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 c-span.org. c-span, your unfiltered view of politics. ♪ >> "washington journal" continues. host: we are back in open forum and your chance to weigh in on any political news and topic of the day but before we get to your calls, let's chat with sally goldenberg, a national clinical reporter for politico. thank you for joining us. we have been talking about

president trump and it has been a week since he was indicted on federal charges related to his possession of confidential documents allegedly. has anything changed in the public when it comes to his support among republican voters? guest: he picked up support depending on which both you look at but right before this call, i checked into next -- and direct the polls on twitter and he is up on republic -- republican primaries. he is ahead of joe biden. his polling standing has strengthened since the indictment. host: over the weekend, we have heard a lot from different, other republicans against former president. one of them is chris christie, the former governor in new jersey. he was talking about the pledge, that candidates are being asked

to sign that they will support the eventual nominee no matter what. he has called it a useless idea but then he also indicated to still sign it because he wants to get on the debate stage. what do we know about this first debate? when it is it supposed to happen and how is it starting to shape up as far as which candidate might be able to participate? the bait >> guest: the debate is being hosted in milwaukee. on the 23rd or 24th of august. the requirements are that each candidate has 34,000 unique donors. polls as of now won't count but it will be polling starting in july and whatever called the rnc agonizes as well as signing of pledge saying that each candidate will support the eventual nominee.

you have candidates like asa hutchinson saying this pledge is going to potentially force us to support a candidate in a, including the polls been -- that have been discussed who have been indicted -- who has been indicted on serious charges and they don't want to have to do that. the rnc is not going to change that pledge despite the protests of some of these lower polling candidates so i think everyone will have to go forth with the pledge if they want to get on the stage. it is -- the debate is critical for him. that is where he can really have this moment to speak and if he doesn't, i don't see where his campaign goals but the debate is important for him. i expect to see trump and others on the stage. nikki haley and tim scott have not set for sure whether they qualified.

getting the 40,000 unique donors won't be a huge challenge for most of these candidates. most of them are hitting 1% of the polls now. we will see most of the field and maybe some of the lower-level people want make it but most of the field will be on the stage. host: speaki of the field and we have pictures of all the different candidates. miami mayor juarez is the latest candidate. what can you tell us about him and what does he hope to bring to -- what does he present that perhaps other candidate don't -- candidates don't? guest: it is an interesting candidacy because now we have read people who have residencies in florida and two elected in florida to represent florida. we have former president trump all competing and florida is an

important primary state and general election state. one piece i find interesting. his candidacy was the following two people -- was befuddling to people. he was running in contrast to joe biden and kristi and -- chris christie and showing that joe biden is older and chris christie was overweight in a pointed way and there has been chatter about whether he is helping trump. i think he said on a radio show in new hampshire last week or whenever he got in, that he would be more inclined to support donald trump over desantis. there is chatter about whether this will be a spoiler candidate. i talked to someone i know who has worked with them and somewhat close to him and told

me, no, he wants to get in. he thinks he has a shot. it is kinda strange to get in this late and not have a path. host: last, before i left -- let you go, we talked about president biden in california and he spoke about climate change yesterday but he also had a series of fundraisers in california and more planned. what do we know about how his campaign is ramping up? guest: it was dormant for a well and -- for a wild and he has a number of big issues behind them, the debt ceiling. he is ramping up his campaign. he is touring california where former elected -- i think he is leaving nothing to chance. he is not ahead in every poll. donald trump is a potent force.

i think joe biden knows there are questions about his age. all that to say, leaving nothing to chance. he wants to raise more than he did last time and put himself in a strong position going into the general election. i think he is opening his eventual republican opponent will be bloodied from the primary? host: thank you. guest: thank you. host: we are going to go to the phone lines. as a reminder, we are in open forum and the numbers for you call, (202) 748-8001, that is for republicans. democrats, your line is (202) 748-8000 and independents, you can call us at (202) 748-8002.

our first caller is kathy in kansas on the democratic line. caller: hi. i want to know why donald trump -- how far is he going to go before people start realizing him for what he is? [laughter] he is misogynistic. he sexually abused women. you try to overthrow the will of the people and the government. i think he is guilty of treason. he has taken classified documents and kept them there. and yet, i hear people that call into this joke saying, " he is such a wonderful man. i love him." i want to ask some women, if that was your daughter or your sister that he molested, is it ok?

are you really ok with this man? doing these things and he is leading in polls. i don't understand and him saying he was rated --raided of the fbi, how many chances did he have to turn those documents him and he knew they were coming. don't say it was a raid where they showed up in the middle of the nights and helicopters and spotlights and dropping on his roof. he knew they were coming. i am elderly and i would like to live out the rest of my life on this america who i always thought was the greatest country, --i always thought it was the greatest country that he is trying to turn into russia or something. step up and see to it that this man is taken down. host: our next caller is on the

republican line, kim calling from florida. >> -- caller: i agree with everything she said. as a republican, i am ready to leave the party because he has done nothing but terrorist out. -- but tear us down. as far as i'm concerned, he doesn't even need to be breathing air on this earth. host: let's go to catherine calling from washington on the independent line. caller: thank you for the time. i don't really want to touch on donald trump or that. host: that is fine. we are in open forum. caller: i want to talk about the

corruption in america, period. it is clear our country is divided. you are entitled to your opinion. what i want to talk about is our broken public school system. there are times, and i am an american, and we know our history that people of color were not even able to attend school it is amazing because this system seems to change for the better in some areas. but things still go on behind closed doors. what is going on in the public school system is bad. what i want to bring out is our u.s. constitution clearly says we all as americans have a right to be educated. that is clear.

i want to know why children of color are still being failed and why are we being forced -- they are forcing our children, diagnosing them with mental health illnesses that do not exist. we have these folks operating throughout our school systems. they are in there to do these things to diagnose them because if you can diagnose them as you cannot comprehend or think, you cannot learn. i am hoping this is something that will not continue to be ignored. there is so much going on. host: we got your point about the education system. we are good to go to athens, tennessee. ruth is on the republican line. caller: good morning.

what i want to talk about is being american. i am not this kind of american or that kind of an american, i am an american. i believe in the constitution. i am 88 years old. our justice system has gone. people should not be political, they should abide by the laws. i get so upset when i find out all of this stuff and they get a lie started and they keep it going. let's get back to the

constitution and equal justice under the law, equal investigation under the law, and get away from this political -- host: let's go to the democratic line. john is calling from california. caller: i am recalled -- calling in regards to this list and i meant by trump. it seems so sad that politics are being played with us. trump got caught. he broke the law. he has a chance to defend himself in court, but how many times has he broken the law, whether it is his organization, trump university come on and on. he can't accept that he made a mistake. his defenders are using politics to defend him.

they look for loopholes. it is like this story about -- on his deathbed, his friends i him reading a bible and said bill, i didn't know you are religious. he said i'm looking for loopholes. they are looking for loopholes. he can't be man enough to accept what he did and we are being played for. it is bigger than republican or democrat, is about our country. unfortunately, they are trying to hold onto the way it was in the past. the people running this country are the corporations and the powerful and a certain race does not want to let go and accept the kind of people that build and run this country, it is all of us. host: got your point.

we are going to move on to our next caller, jones. jones is in scranton, pennsylvania. caller: this is jones. host: go ahead. caller: i am confused with some of these opinions. obviously they don't do their homework. they don't read, they don't listen. i don't know what life they're living, but the best time of my life was when president trump was president in the white house. how about the guy we have now? how about all of the stuff he has stashed all over the place, including delaware and chinatown? the democrats just don't see that. they don't see any goodness in this man, but they like the prices at the grocery store and everything else that was better. this country is a mess because

of this administration. this country has never been as bad as it is now. host: we are going to go to florida now. john is calling on the republican line. caller: good morning. the lady that first called during the open forum, she was talking about trump being misogynistic. i would like to know if the people out there, the democrats, know that president biden -- also showering with his daughters. that is weird. host: let's go to oklahoma. anne is calling on the democratic line. are you with us? caller: yes.

host: go ahead. caller: i don't see how the republicans can't see it is a reality that trump made fun of -- people and i don't understand, is that right? i don't think so. trump is just a person and he deserves to go to jail just like anybody else. host: we are still in open forum, but i want to mention that later on, already underway is the special counsel john durham testifying to the house tomorrow, wednesday. tomorrow at 9:00 a.m. the

justice department's former special counsejohn durham be testifying on the probe over links between the 2012 trump is a digital camign and russian operatives. he released a final report with his findings last month, t you can watch that house judiciary hearing tomorrow at 9:00 a.m. eastern on c-span3 and c-span now and online at c-span.org. the hill has an argument -- has an article because john durham is testifying behind doors to the house intelligence committee. that would be justified -- that want to be sure today. "john durham is expected to testify on capitol hill this week one month after he released a scathing report on the investigation into former president trump's alleged ties

to russia. john durham who was appointed to this ticket how the fbi watched a probe into trump's 2016 campaign and possible contact with russia is set to appear before the house intelligence committee and the house judiciary committee." that meeting will be tomorrow at 9:00 a.m. eastern. we are still in open forum. let's get to more of your calls. next up is surely in florida on the independent line. caller: good morning, thank you for taking my call. i voted for democrats and republicans. i try to use my informed decisions as to who might be the best person to run our country, period. i am not looking at personality because i'm not looking to date someone were to like someone, i am looking for a leader who can run our country and be respected

by the rest of the world. i will say right now, i have lived a long time and never seen our country in the shape it is in right now. anybody out there, democrat, republican, independent, thinks that joe biden is making the decisions, they are very wrong. they need to think again. joe biden holding that office should be close to senior abuse. he should be out at home enjoying the rest of his years. i don't want to see it continue. whether you like trump or don't like him, he gave us some of the best years we have had. i don't care if he is does -- if he has two heads, he is purple, or is unable chair, he makes our country better. i caution you, all of these things he has been accused of,

think back. all of these accusations, how many have been proven to be correct? he proves them wrong time and time again. let's take time, let's listen, let's don't indict and convict somebody because somebody else said something. that is not the american way. host: frank is calling from michigan on the republican line. frank? frank in michigan? alright, we are going to move on to cynthia. cynthia is in new york on the democratic line. go ahead, cynthia in albany. caller: i am not impressed with either candidate.

trump is just as old as biden. there are very few years difference in their age. i wish there was another democratic candidate to run. i wish andrew cuomo would run. he would make a great president. trump has no integrity. everybody keeps talking about how their life was so much better. my life was better 20 years ago and it has gotten increasingly worse over the years. i don't think trump being in office made my life any better. in fact, he made it worse for poor people. they will month before us said she wasn't devoting because they are popular, but a lot of people don't do anything for their interests. my last thing, what was he going to do with those records, sell them? was that what he was going to do?

he is a shyster. i was wondering what he is going to do because he is not a brilliant guy. what the hell was he going to do with them? host: our next caller is eric. eric is calling from canton, michigan. independent line. caller: i am not impressed with either one of these two guys. i have not voted for a major party candidate since 2008. i am hoping that the labour party comes up with two candidates. i think the best thing that could happen for america, because we are so divided, is fine a unity ticket, one democrat and one republican. i have talked about this idea for the longest time. it needs to happen. there is no way the best we can do is a rematch between number 44 and number 45. america does not need that.

they were both bad presidents. i find it amazing how people -- if you look at 1988, 2008 and the candidacy of president biden, how he became a great candidate in 2020, he was never a good candidate. he ran an underground campaign in 2020. people are seeing him. the polls show -- my hope is that the third party comes to fruition. we have to do better. the dealership in america cannot be this bad -- of the leadership in america cannot be this bad. we have to do better. host: we are going to take a quick break. today, veterans affairs apartment officials will testify on the agency's efforts to

upgrade technology and improve financial management. you can watch this subcommittee hearing live today at three clock p.m. eastern on c-span3, our free video on c-span now, or online at c-span.org. we are going to take a quick break. next is annie e. casey foundation president and ceo, lisa hamilton. we will be discussing childcare and how the lack of childcare affects the economy. >> be up-to-date in the latest publishing with the book tv's podcast about books with current nonfiction book releases, blessed -- plus bestseller lists and trends through insider interviews. you can find it on c-span now, our free mobile app, or wherever you get your podcasts.

>> c-span shop -- he spents -- c-spanshop.org c-span's online store. shop books, -- and home to court. shop now for a time at c-spanshop.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 on how issues are debated and decided with no commentary, no interruption, and completely unfiltered.

c-span commodore unfiltered view of government -- c-span, your unfiltered view of government. >> watch video on demand anytime online at c-span.org and try our points of interest feature, a tool that uses markers to guide you to newsworthy highlights. use points of interest anytime online at c-span.org. >> listening to programs on c-span through c-span radio just got easier. tell your smart speaker places been radio and listen to washington journal daily, important congressional hearings and other public affairs events throughout the day and weekdays at 5:00 p.m. catch "washington today" for a fast-paced report of the stores of the day. listen to c-span anytime. tell your smart speaker to places been radio. c-span, powered by cable. >> "washington journal"

continues. host: we are back now with lisa hamilton. she is the president and ceo of the annie e. casey foundation. good morning, lisa. guest: good morning. host: welcome to "washington journal." let's start off by talking about the annie e. casey foundation. what is the mission? tell us more about your organization. guest: the annie e. casey foundation is based in baltimore, we were started by jim casey, the founder of ups, and his mother was any we are focused on helping all children have a brighter future. we focus on trying to make sure kids were up in strong families, that their families have the economic stability to provide for them and that they can all live in strong, healthy community. host: you say the founder of ups

is also who founded this condition. is that how you are funded privately or are there other funding sources? guest: we have an endowment greeted by jim casey. we are -- created by jim casey. we are self-funded. host: your organization released the 2023 kids count data book. can you tell me about this document? what does it entail? guest: for 34 years, the foundation has created a databook to provide policymakers and the public with accurate information about children's well-being. we identify 16 key indicators of child well-being in four demands -- four domains, health, communication, community, and economic well-being and every year provide information at the national level and the state

level so that we all know how children are very in this country are faring -- are faring in this country. we rank the states to see whether they are doing well and take inspiration from other jurisdictions on how they can improve the lives of the children in their communities. this is our 34th databook. we also take the opportunity to highlight a particular issue each year and this year we highlighted the issue of childcare. host: speaking of childcare, what are some of the findings? how would you describe the current state of childcare in the u.s.? guest: we have a broken childcare system in this country which is troubling because childcare is important for many reasons. it is important for children. there are 23 million children in this country under the age of five. about 12 million of them will

exit our childcare system at some point during their childhood. we want others children to get off so that they are prepared for kindergarten when they start school. it is important for children that we have a strong childcare system. it is also important for parents. parents need childcare in order to go to work and to care for their families about that more than 50% of people are working parents. they need the childcare support to enable them to go to work. childcare is important for our economy. want to make sure we have workers available to meet the talent needs of this country. we estimate $122 billion is lost in this country, that is the economic impact of not having a strong childcare system.

we know there are charges in this system from access to affordability to locate childcare workers. we wanted to bring attention to this issue so i policymakers can make sure we have the right childcare infrastructure for our country. host: we are talking again with lisa hamilton who is the president and ceo of the annie e. casey foundation. we are going to get to some of your calls in a moment. we want to get the phone lines because they are different than normal. if you are in the eastern or central time zones, call us at 202-748-8000. if you are in the mountain or pacific time zones, call us at 202-748-8001. we have a special phone line for parents or caregivers of children. that number is 202-748-8002. if you are a childcare worker,

we want you to call us at 202-748-8003. you can use those phone lines to start calling in now if you have any questions or if you want to share your thoughts or experiences in childcare or obtaining childcare. go ahead, start calling in now. while we wait for calls to come in, lisa, you talked about the childcare system in your words being broken. what are some of those big challenges that lead to this broken system? guest: it is certainly a capacity issue. in this country, there are not enough slots for the children who need care. we have a capacity issue. there are issues with affordability. the average cost of childcare in this country is about $10,600 for toddler care.

more expensive for infant care. if you think about the rising costs of everything from rented to food, to housing, having this significant expense and a rising expense puts a strain on any house -- household budget. for single parents, it approaches 30% of their budget. affordability is a tremendous challenge. accessibility, a lot of childcare is not on public transportation where low income parents might need to access it and the issue is challenging for rural parents and childcare is many miles away from their homes. those are issues for those try to access childcare. there are also issues for those who are providing the childcare. one out of every 100 workers in this country are in childcare industry, but they are among the lowest paid workers in our economy.

that certainly puts a strain on their household, but also has ripple effects in their communities. nearly all childcare workers are women and a large portion of them are women of color. when you think about the impacts to their families and their community, there are tremendous ripple effects from the located jobs in the childcare -- the low-paid jobs in childcare industry. it is unaffordable, and accessible, we don't have the capacity we need and there are challenges for those providing care in this industry. host: before we get to the phone lines, i want to bring up this article. it's is the average cost of childcare, and these are 2021 statistics, the average cost was $10,600 annually for a toddler in a center-based care.

there is also this map that shows in some places, including here in washington, d.c., that average cost was $24,400. the lowest state was mississippi. 4000 -- $24,400 a year for childcare. when you mention the costs being prohibitive, what does that mean for who is most affected by the lack of childcare access? guest: thank you for bringing up that data. it is an shorter cost on any household budget and has a tremendous impact on certain demographics, certainly low income parents are challenged to access care. families of color, immigrant families, all of these communities, women accessing childcare, it is very expensive and often prohibitive. one of the data points we

provide in databook at the national level and by state is how many parents are not working or have declined jobs because they simply cannot find the care in order to go to work. when we talk about why this is an important issue, it is absolutely important for our economy. without a strong childcare system, working parents are not able to enter the workforce or to have the stability they need to be as productive as possible. i will also note that infant care, childcare, and in some places it is more than in-state college tuition. it really does put into perspective the effect that for our youngest children, we have made care and accessible -- care and accessible -- inaccessible.

host: we are going to open up the performance. if you are in the eastern or social time zones, 202-748-8001. if you are in the mountain or -- eastern or central time zones, 202-748-8000. mountain or pacific time zones, 202-748-8001. if you are a parent, call 202-748-8002. if you are a child care worker, call 202-748-8003. our first caller is doug from las vegas. caller: i did a very confused on how this country gets so screwed up that when all of our politicians and everybody are talking about we have to find a way for somebody else to be paid to raise your children, i don't understand why people think it is all right for someone else to raise their child. people have got to get back to you get married, you stay married, you raise your child.

you give up your life to raise your child. the government always was to find a way to pay somebody else to do what you should be doing yourself. why do we need to pay people to stay home and take care of their child instead of someone else raising their child? that is silly. host: lisa, can you respond to that? that is a different way than a lot of families are set up. caller: -- guest: childcare is important for parents who need to work to care for their families, to have their children cared for. while many families make lots of choices about how to manage childcare, there are parents who stay home today take care of children. given the rising cost, is often that both parents need to work

in order to provide financially for their children which is extremely important. to be able to go to work, we have an early chucker system that enables those parents to go to work and to get their children off on a good start. there are 23 million children in the country, half of them access the childcare system. we have families making a wide variety of choices. for us to have a strong economy, it is important to have a strong childcare system. that is why we need a public-public -- public-private chucker system. -- childcare system. host: i'm next caller is mary, both a parent and a caregiver. caller: i would like to shout out grandparents because the childcare issue is not just on the young people. there are plenty of grandparents who have had to take in grandchildren and they are still working.

our parents are not able to give these kids and they have to move in with us and we have to work, have daycare, supply everything. there are services, but they do not cover even infraction of what grandparents have to pay. for all the older people who are out there listening thinking this is just a young kid thing, it is not. their operative old people caring for their grandkids who have to accept the same burden. that is my comment. host: lisa, your response? caller: thank you for that comment about what we call family friend and neighbor care that children are in a wide variety of settings. there are many families who helped care for children. that is important for shift

workers. many workers are working nontraditional hours where centers are not open to provide that childcare. we know there are many family members or neighbors who are helping to provide care so those parents can go to work shift jobs that don't have consistent hours or 9:00 to 5:00 hours. host: let's go to washington, d.c.. em is a parent. caller: yes, good morning. i have an eight-month-old and when i was searching for childcare, the lowest was 360 -- three hunters exceed five dollars a week. i am at the middle at about $450 a week.

-- it has not gone up to $520 a week. i only got to $450 because i got a discount because of my job. this is more than what i am paying in rent. it is very much unaffordable. i have to work a weekend job and childcare centers aren't open so i depend on my family. it is unsustainable for individuals who don't have a skill set, really depending on an hourly wage job. you sometimes have to go on a --

and if you make a certain, that money -- a certain amount of money, you can't get that. it is hard out here for parents. host: go ahead, lisa. caller: thank you for that personal story. that is why we want to lift up this issue because there are so many parents struggling to live and eat. infant care is the most expensive because of the caregiver-child ratio required in regulations. in terms of trying to get support to meet these rising costs, we list in the reported that at the child of element grant is the federal government's primary funding for childcare support for low income families. only one out of six families eligible for this are able to access it.

it is important our policymakers and sure there is adequate funding and appropriations some more parents can access those supports. we certainly know there are many families, just like the last caller, who are having a hard time making ends meet and being able to afford infant care. host: let's go to massachusetts. carl is on the line. caller: good morning. thank you so much for coming on. what i wanted to say is that i don't think people my age understand that most of these parents would love to stay home and raise their kids. unfortunately, our whole system is upside down and we cannot do that. when i was raising our kids, my wife could stay home.

i could pay the bills. now, all the young people both have to work. some people are working two and three jobs. if there is anything i want our society to do, it is to take care of each other. there is money for everything. it would be nice to see these millionaires and billionaires pay some taxes. maybe these corporations stop getting money back. we could do some really beautiful things for each other. i do want to say it is a shame, ups, it would be nice if they took care of their workers and put some air-conditioning in. host: any thoughts? caller: i appreciate that caller's understanding of how important childcare is to the economy and the financial stability of the households. parents are working and that is why we need this childcare. they need to provide for their families and childcare is the

mechanism to enable them to do that. in this country, we invest $500 per child in early childcare compared to other wealthy nations that invest $14,000 per child. we are far behind what other countries are doing to support families, prepare children for the future. we cannot afford to not invest in our children getting a good start. host: our next caller is a parent calling from boston, massachusetts. tracy is on the line. caller: i want to say thank you to the annie e. casey foundation for highlighting this. other colors have highlighted that childcare is company broken in our country. my husband and i were both workers. when we had our first child, we made the decision that we would continue to work.

in essence, i had to work in order to pay for our child to be able to be in daycare because of infant care costing so high. i think that maybe that is what a lot of families face. in order for one parents to not lose complete traction in the workforce and to be able to stay in the workforce, one salary must go towards childcare. i don't think that is completely and a anomaly that completely an anomaly -- that is completely an anomaly. we need parents to stay in the workforce and in order to not lose traction i have to lose five years of my salary or any parent's salary. we were a two working households but we only had to live on one income. it is a complete struggle in a

metropolitan area or even a rule area. thank you. i hope our lawmakers really understand that parents want to learn but we simply cannot afford it. host: lisa? caller: that is exactly right. childcare is on average about $10,600 per child, .1% of a merry couple -- 10% of a married couple's income. these numbers are often unsustainable and contribute to one salary of a family going towards childcare. it is an expensive proposition for many families. host: let's go to detroit. leanne is a teacher in detroit. caller: when i pull up around

6:30's in the morning, it is dark outside. i have to make a choice between my child's standing outside by themselves and having to go to work. we are on the cusp of being a title i school and we have different programs. my question for lisa is, how do you get parents to feel that the paperwork? we sent the paperwork home and we could be a prelunch school, but to get them to fill out the paperwork and say we have this program where they can stay after school with extra reading and things like that, but they want -- they want even -- won't even. we do have free afterschool programs, whether it is sports, academic. they want to come in and fill out the paperwork. what can i do as an educator?

it only takes five minutes, but if this is what you need and we are offering it, why is it so hard for the parents to fill out the paperwork and sign them up? they don't even have to pay for the afterschool we have. caller: -- guest: thank you for all you are doing to try to make services and support available for families. i can't answer why specific parents aren't filling out the paperwork, but parents who are low income in particular are trying to beat a variety of different eligibility requirements for all kinds of programs, whether it is food, afterschool, or housing. very often, those rules force them to cycle on and off of programs. they are often challenged to figure out what program i am trying to get eligibility for, how am i not eligible for

something at this moment when i could have been other jubal a couple of months before -- i could have been eligible a couple of months before? i don't know the reason for specific parents. overall, many low income parents are really trying to care for their families while also trying to figure out what paperwork and rules they need to comply with to access the various support for need which were not all the same and have different income and eligibility requirements. that can be challenging for them. host: let's hear from sylvia, she is a caregiver. caller: my grandchild is sleeping right now, that we take care of him between two grandmothers. i realize that is passe, but i called out for grandmothers and aunts to fill in, especially

when parents cannot afford childcare places. they are safer with a family. in 1985, i used to take care of teachers' children and only charged seven dollars a week. that is passe, but the government needs to step in and help with free childcare. thank you. caller: thank you guest: -- thank you. much appreciation for the grandparents that are caring for children when their parents cannot. you are right that they provide so much love and care and support and fill an important gap. i appreciate your encouragement to our policymakers to do more to support families. host: that caller mentioned the

government stepping in to lower the cost of childcare, the annie e. casey foundation did have some recommendations. i will bring them up on my screen. one is that federal, state, and local governments should invest more money in childcare. the other is that public and private leaders should work together to improve infrastructure for home-based childcare and to help young parents, congress should expand legislation. can you talk more about the second recommendation which the caller also referenced, home-based childcare? why do you think it is important to improve infrastructure for home-based childcare? caller: -- guest: that is a great question. many students are in center-based care but there are many children's served in homes

through home-based childcare. as a baby, i went to a home-based childcare center. my mother was a teacher and a lady named ms. mckinley was the one who cared for me when my mother went to work. home-based care is externally important for lots of families -- externally important for the families. those caregivers don't always have the capital, the resources they need to expand their capacity or those might be interested in opening home-based childcare services don't have the resources they need. one of our recommendations is that we make sure there is adequate capital to start and expand home-based centers. they are really important for many families that work outside of traditional work hours. there are many parents working night shifts or multiple jobs in order to make ends meet.

those home-based care centers which are often more flexible in hours and closer to families so that they don't have to make long drives or ride public transportation to drop their children off our in their neighborhood. those are really important resources and part of our overall childcare ecosystem. host: let's hear from sharon in powder springs, georgia. caller: good morning. the gentleman from nevada had excellent points. childcare should be a concern of the father and the mother and the father and the mother should be married and provide the care for their children. this government assistance is unreal. basically, in certain respects,

it is socialistic. children are the responsibility of the father and the mother. if they grandparents want to involve themselves, that would be good. the government should not be expected to provide all of that care and a lot of other programs , food assistance and so on. host: lisa, do you find a disparity between there are some government assistance programs that are very popular, particularly for the elderly, social security, medicare, but when it comes to children, the government has not provided that same level of assistance for younger americans. why is there that disparity? caller: there is a declining share in the federal budget that supports children and family

issues while we have an increasing portion of our federal budget that supports seniors. we don't think that needs to be a trade-off between generations. it is important we invest in children in this country. they are our future workers and leaders. we think it is important that they support young families as they are starting out. we also know how important it is for families to work and provide financially for their children. no one disputes that it is important for parents to provide for their children and the only way they can do that is by going to work. we invest in many other public goods in this country, whether it is support for the elderly or public transportation, childcare is no less an important introductory issue -- any important infrastructure issue -- an important infrastructure

issue. this is not unusual in developed countries and our country does far less than many other wealthy countries. $500 a child in this country compared to $14,000 in others. there is more we can do to support shogun and countries -- to support children and families. caller: why would you put your child in care of people you don't know how they are raised? there is so much physical and sexual abuse in these places, sometimes giving them thc gum is so they can sleep. how many people want to take care of children? maybe they have a hidden agenda. people don't think about that. the children cannot tell you someone touched me or someone shook me unless they are told

this is something that should not happen to you. i know a woman lives in the neighborhood, a baby's femur was broken. i agree. i raise my kids and they lived without furniture. to this day, my kids will sit on the floor and my husband is a physician. we did not get started until later in life and we wanted to put money away for the kids' education. when you have children, you cannot be selfish. you need to stay home. your husband can go to work and you can live without. you don't have to have a house. you can live in an apartment. if the government would ever be responsible for childcare, they need to have cameras in every single room in the house, especially in a house and day care center. how many people are good to sign up when they say they are cameras everywhere you go. you are not going to get very many people employed in that

institution. i am concerned about the well-being of children and indoctrinating them. they are already doing it in third-graders. host: we got your point. any response, lisa? guest: we know that quality childcare is extremely important. this report does not delve into the quality issues advocates are focused on, but that focuses on everything from safety in child care settings to the training of the professionals that provide care. families make lots of different choices about how to care for their children and no one choice is better than another. we all know that parents love their children and want to make sure they are safe and well taken care of and want to provide financially for their children. childcare is a support to ensure those parents who have to work have the support they need in order to do so and can make sure

their children are safe and getting off on a great educational start so they are ready to start school in kindergarten. host: jay in tennessee is calling as a parent. what is your question or comment? caller: i would like to say that the only thing i agree with is that it is a really big problem. it is not a problem that can be solved -- that can be solved. it is solved if people take responsibility for themselves. a man and a woman taken responsibility for the child they brought into this world. we can make all the excuses we want as to why it is so difficult to raise a kid,

however, if we don't really come back down to the basics that a child is the responsibility of the two people who brought them into this world, joe biden and a lot of democrats want to say that child is not yours, it is ours. it is the state's. host: lisa, i know we have a lot of similar colors. -- callers. if you want to make a comment, you can. otherwise i can move on. guest: this conversation is about parents who want to be responsibility. in order to do that, they need to work. it makes sense that we work to have infrastructure parents need to do that, they are providing for their children and this is

just one support they need. host: jodie on twitter writes, "arkansas has a minimum wage at $7.25 per hour. how can working people make enough to pay for childcare when both parents have to work? taking care of my mom, i quit work because we could not afford nursing homes. we pay with our time to take care of her." caller: it is a terrible -- guest: it is a terrible catch-22 families are in that they are working as hard as they can to afford this care and it is still often out of reach. we want people to appreciate how hard families are working, yet with the rising cost of everything from rent and food and clothes, it is challenging for them to make ends meet. host: let's talk to jerry in

california, with a grandparent and a caregiver -- both a grandparent and a caregiver. caller: i have a question that seems to be the best kept secret, where can we find where the guidelines are for income for eligibility for some of these services? guest: the federal government has lots of information about eligibility for various programs. even childcare providers have lots of information for families. -- for families about the various programs. acf.gov is a way to find out what those resources are. part of the way we make sure families know what they qualify for is making sure the care

providers themselves are helping families access in these programs. thank you for that question. host says -- host: how can parents find quality childcare? we have had questions about making sure it is a safe environment where the employees are properly trained. are there resources to help parents in that way? guest: every state has a quality system that enables parents to find out what highest rate is -- highest rated childcare programs are and there are a variety of websites. . in your state, you search for the quality ratings system or service. you will find all kinds of information about center-based care and the quality dimensions of all of those providers.

that is an important resource for parents. host: ronald in maryland, a parent on the line. go ahead. caller: good morning and thank you, lisa, for your service. we appreciate the work you do. listening to the conversation and i have a couple of comments. and a question. the number of colors that have called in saying parents are completely responsible for their children. if parents don't want to take care of their children for our in a position to do that effectively and affordably. you have spoken to those issues. i want to ask you, who is lobbying on behalf of the children as there are lobbyists

for elderly in this country, for -- host: ronald, it is starting to go out. go ahead, lisa, lobbying for kids. guest: there are many advocates, many of them parents, trying to lift their voices and make sure their legislators know that the issues they are facing in their households and lift up the importance of childcare not just for the children and for the economy overall. many of our partners are working on this issue. also, parents, advocacy groups themselves are lifting their voices to make sure legislators know just how real and important these issues are. host: