♪ host: good morning, it is tuesday, august 1, 2023. we will chat about the state of the economy. as we take you through the

latest on the expanding congressional inquiry into the joe biden family -- the biting --biden family business practice -- if you say yes, (202) 748-8000 is the number to call, if you say no (202) 748-8001. you can also call in if you are unsure. that number is (202) 748-8002. you can send us a text (202) 748-8003. if you do, include your name and where you are from. catch us -- up with us on social media. a good tuesday morning to you. here are the two lead paragraphs of the wall street journal story on that hearing yesterday on capitol hill. a former business associate of hunter biden testified monday to

correctional leaders that president biden and his son were in elite communications and the younger biden would put his father on speakerphone on business dinners. the associate said joe biden and his son never discussed business on his calls and only discussed casual conversation but the testimony paints a detailed picture on how hunter biden may have -- and raises fresh questions about how much joe biden was aware that his -- of his son's overseas business practices. we will take you to the reaction to that hearing. we will talk about that in the first hour of the washington journal but the expanding congressional inquiry into the biden family brings the question this morning, should there be a code of conduct for family,

children of presidents? we have lines for those who say yes and those who say no and if you are unsure. it was chuck todd who brought up this specific question. he was talking to chris coons. this was their back and forth. >> you had hunter biden who is profiting off his last name and gerace -- and jared kushner and members of trump's family profiting. should there be a code of conduct? sons and dollars -- daughters of sitting presidents, should they have a code of conduct? >> we have been engaging on trying to get the supreme court to adopt a code of ethics. they are the only members of the entire federal judiciary not covered by a code of ethics and members of congress have to

fully disclose their assets -- >> for presidents of family members be -- come under additional scrutiny? >> jared kushner worked in the white house. >> if you are outraged by hunter biden, you should be outraged by jared kushner. you cannot pick and choose. host: yesterday on the capitol hill, there was a close door hearing. we heard about it -- he is the front-page headline from the washington times this morning. biden played a powerful role in his son's deal. the lead story in today's washington times. james comer is the chairman of the house oversight committee

leading this probe and he is the chairman of that committee where that closed door hearing happened. this was his tweet yesterday, saying -- that tweet from james connor. he was on sean hannity show last night. he has addressed this issue on finding some way to add more scrutiny to children of the family members of the president and vice president and he talked about it in may at a press hearing of the oversight committee. this is what he had to say. [video clip] >> chinese nationals affiliated with the bidens -- transfer their interest to a chinese company that sent money to the biting --bidens.

this is not normal. hunter biden and his associate accorded business with countries that correlate directly with joe biden's work as president. it is not ethical. this is why we need legislative solutions. our purpose here is to provide solutions to prevent this unethical behavior from happening again. this is about investigating allegations of corruption and fraud at the highest levels of the government. this should be eberhard -- a bipartisan issue. specifically the committee is crafting legislation solutions to aim at -- for immediate family members of vice president and the president. these deficiencies place american national security and american interest at risk. the committee is considering legislation that would

strengthen reporting requirements -- involving senior elector -- elected official family members. host: house oversight -- chair james connor. that was back on may 10. here is a little bit more from that press briefing. [video clip] >> we will look at everything when we get ready to introduce the legislation. if you go back to jimmy carter's brother, billy carter receiving money from lydia, this has been a pattern for a long time. republicans and democrats have complained about president's families receiving money but the way that the bidens set this up,

there is no business, president carter's brother got the money from lydia and joe biden was on the committee that investigated president carter's brother when that took place. the former president trump's son-in-law had business deals. i am not saying whether i agree with what he did or not but i know what his businesses are. what are the biden businesses? what business is what we read in the press that these were legitimate businesses when joe biden was president -- what business are they in? host: that was back in may. this closed-door hearing took place yesterday on capitol hill and we are talking about it this morning on the washington journal asking you if there should be all code of conduct.

if you say yes, (202) 748-8000. if you say no (202) 748-8001. and if you are unsure, that is ok. (202) 748-8002. good morning, what do you think on this question? caller: there is no question about that. this is power and corruption. when i see jared kushner in the white house, and now i see the biden family. it is not good for the country. we need to have legislation. you are the president's son. this is money. i dino know about jimmy carter son -- jimmy carter's son. the bush family --

[indiscernible] we need to have a bipartisan legislation. when i see ukraine, joe biden's son comes to my mind. it is sad that the president might be directly -- might not be directly involved but he is naming the brand. this is human nature. he should have legislation -- we should have legislation. host: devon archer was who testified yesterday. this testimony covered that

period when he and hunter biden served for the board of directors of the energy company in ukraine and that is a lot of what was being discussed yesterday on capitol hill. asking you if there should be a code of conduct for family members, children of presidents. this is joss -- josh in illinois. caller: there should be for presidents. light president trump's son who has top-secret, slapdash top-secret, classify security and the first day, hip -- him and others leave the white house and go to saudi arabia and collect $2 billion when he has classified, top-secret clearance? host: you are talking about a senior advisor for the president and there is code of conduct for those who are official members of the white house staff. the question is, if you don't

have a official position in the white house and if your position as child of the president and if you are not elected and serving in government, should there be a legal code of conduct that covers you just because you are the child of a president or vice president? caller: this has been happening for years and years and years. why does it have to be a code of contact now. one was joe biden, vice president eight years ago so they have been bringing this up for over eight years? ivanka truck --trump went to the white house -- went to china on a business trip and got patents for herself. he did not pay taxes.

they have pictures up on them on the c-span hearing. i think they have messed with trump for so long, they want to try to biden biden bring -- right to bring biden -- they want to try to bring biden down. host: questions about his connections, let me get back into the c-span archives. this is from august from 1980, questions for jimmy carter about the business connections for his brother. [video clip] >> i am concerned that billy has received funds from lydia. he may be under obligations to lydia.

billy has had no influence on u.s. policies or actions concerning lydia in the past and he will have no influence in the future. our political history is full of stories about presidential families and relatives. other people have tried to use them to gain pay their -- gain favor with incumbent demonstrations. -- i administrations -- incumbent administrations. to keep this problem from recurring, i have asked my counsel to draft a rule that will have any employee of the federal -- that will bar any employee of the federal branch from dealing with any member of the president's family under any circumstances that creates the reality or appearance of improper favor or influence. host: jimmy carter back in 1980,

this picture with his brother. these questions about family members and influence on capitol hill, family members of presidents of the first family. it has been a repeating theme. here is 10 years later in 1990. this is the house banking committee with neil bush, the son of former president george h. w. bush testifying about the business he was involved in. silverado sadie -- savings and loans and how we got positions -- how he got a position with that company. [video clip] >> mr. bush, did you ever use your position on silverado's board for personal gain? >> never. i didn't have an ownership interest in silverado and i did not benefit in any way.

>> why do you think you were asked to be a board director? >> i was in the oil and gas business at the time and still am. mr. kennedy's family is in that business and denver's economy is dependent on the oil and gas economy. at the time, they didn't have anybody with that kind of expands on the board. the board was aging. two gentlemen that aren't here today that i have a great deal of respect for, they were both well respected businessmen who had been on the board for many years and served on many boards and were happily -- highly regarded. i think they wanted to dilute that with youngblood and i was invited to participate or my unique vantage point in business. there might be speculation that

because i was the son of the vice president and that is why you are smiling, that might be true. they never asked me to use influence. host: neil bush in 1990 and a pusher -- a picture there with the former president h w bush. these questions about family members, children of presidents and whether they have influence on people -- influence, unequal influence and whether they benefit on the influence. if you say yes, (202) 748-8000. if you say no (202) 748-8001. if you are unsure (202) 748-8002 . this is jeffrey from south carolina on the line who say no. why? caller: there is no management

in control. you use the word legally. in my profession, we have a code of ethics. if a family member is on the payroll, getting paid by the government, there should be a code of ethical conduct because the taxpayer money should be accountable to the public. however, if they are not getting any money from a position with the government, i don't think there should be a code of ethics because we cannot manage and control someone else's behavior. you don't know what the heck they are doing out there so i don't think there should be a code unless they will sign something saying they will abide by some code of conduct within -- it is not legally binding anyway so what will we do with people who do not have command in control? host: the other side is, yes, they are not getting a paycheck

but they are getting access to power and access it comes valuable for people -- and access becomes valuable for people. caller: absolutely and there is nothing we can do about that. if that person does have that access, if the family independent of the government, they are not getting a paycheck and the family wants to sit down with them and have a code of ethical behavior, that is fine but when it steps up to influence, there's nothing you can do about that. if your mom and dad are in government, benefit from that. if that person is not getting any financial gain from the taxpayer, i don't know why they would be scrutinized if they did not sign anything saying this is the conduct they will follow. host: jim in new york. you are next. caller: good morning. as always, you are way off

target. this is not a question about hunter biden. the general public could care less. this is a question about joe biden, who is corrupt, who set up llcs and took money and was involved in money laundering and bribery. the offenses he has done would make clinton and nixon and others who were impeached look like nothing. you are trying to move off the real reason the hearings are and that is how how corrupt joe biden and not about his son and i see move off the main point. we have a president who is compromised, who has put our security at reach because he has taken money from these different countries. china and stuff and you are talking about his son? the discussion should be we have

a president who should be impeached and is corrupt. host: jim in new york and it was james corner, we show you the tweet asking what else is joe biden hiding when it comes to the biden family this is practices. more reaction from committee members. they have a goldman, the democrat on the committee. this was his take on what that hunter biden associate told the committee yesterday. [video clip] >> this witness has no information connecting joe biden to any of hunter biden's business dealings as a private citizen or otherwise. it was abundantly clear in the witness stated unequivocally that there is no evidence in his position or his knowledge that joe biden ever discussed business with hunter biden.

joe biden ever did anything on behalf of hunter biden's this is interest -- business interests or otherwise. the only evidence we have it to the contrary which is even though it was perceived by the witness that they had the prosecutor general under control, quote unquote, that joe biden advocated for his firing, which was not coveted or desired by burisma. i want to be clear about one thing. he did describe that there were approximately 20 occasions over the course of their nearly decade-long business relationship, where when one of them called the other, that hunter biden would ask his father to say hello to whomever he was at dinner.

he said there were sometimes when it was friends and sometimes when it was potential business partners or business partners but the witness was unequivocal and stated clearly that they never discussed any business on that phone conversation. there were niceties. there was a hello and they talk about the weather or whatever it was but there was never business. host: you here congressman dan holt -- dan goldman. james comer saying -- james comer, his tweet yesterday. we will share more reaction after the closed-door hearing. asking you should there be a code of conduct for children of family members of presidents.

linda says no. why is that? are you with us? caller: good morning. earning a paycheck as a ivanka trump and jared kushner were. they should have ethics. jerks cannot get security clearance -- jared could not get security clearance. you will always have influence in the family if you are a member of the family and your family is close. hunter biden is another hillary email. two beat joe biden across the head. republicans can do what they are doing now. hailing to the cheap -- to the chief. the comment before me, there were talking about who joe biden was. he cannot see the fact.

trump -- you cannot deflect from someone. if it is important, if the family number is working in the government, they should be scrutinized but hunter biden, he never worked in the government. he never earned a paycheck. you ivanka trump and jared kushner -- host: got your point, window. this is sherry in florida. you are next. caller: you are talking about codes of conduct for the family members of presidents. i believe there should be some kind of code of conduct for anybody who takes political office. you have insider trading that goes on from congressional

members of senators. they reaped financial rewards in terms of the access they have to be information and let me remind the general population how martha stewart, who actually single-handedly invested her life into improving our economy, in all different ways and she was sent to jail for an shattered jury -- for insider trading. it is interesting that every other administration seems to point fingers. i think that mr. coomer --comer, if he would have put the energy in regards to the biden family and directed to helping the general population and all the ills that are existing in this country, he would be better serving for the money that they

are paying him. these people are being paid by the general population from texas. --taxes. they need to behave better. why don't they do something about campaign financing? they would never do that because they are reaping rewards from major corporations. they get funded after -- astronomical amounts of money. look at what is happening in terms of monetizing campaigns. host: when it comes to campaign financing and a code of conduct, members of congress to operate under a code of conduct if you want to read the house version of code of conduct. you can do so through the ethics committee website. it was rule 23 on the official rules package that was passed in the beginning of the 118th

congress. when it comes to campaign-finance, here are -- here is rule six. members and delegates and officials shall keep campaign funds separate from personal funds. they may not convert -- for legitimate and verified campaign expenditures and so on down the line. it is a rules package in 22 parts and pretty long if you want to read through it. it is on the official -- it is the official code of conduct for the congress. this is elizabeth in louisiana. you are next. caller: i am a little shocked that we have to even discuss this. also, if you start electing leaders and our president and vice president, who are younger than methuselah.

they can have children who are at an age better in elementary school and we don't have to worry about this bullet certainly stop electing leaders who have raised children who are complete gender -- degenerate like hunter biden. i had never seen such a horrible situation in the family -- a family like the biden family but this is not about hunter biden. it is about joe biden, he is dirty, filthy and corrupt. clearly and thank god for james comer and the other republicans for shining the light of day on this so american voters are aware that this level of corruption, money laundering, foreign agent registration act has been taking place. a lot of us have known about this since 2018. some people are still not waking up to it. i cannot believe it.

i truly cannot believe it. we need to focus on joe biden. this is not about hunter biden. hunter biden is a bad man come up for of a foreign government such as russia, china, romania and even mexican oligarchs are involved in this. focus on joe and all of this -- his corruption and we can institute policy that prevents this from happening in the future. our country cannot last in the situation if we allow this to continue. host: there is melissa, lake charles. the editorial board of the washington times today with the suggestion that they can fix this problem, the suggestion is not a code of conduct of family members up presidents but term limits for those in congress and those in power. they write an extensive read

editorial. -- lead editorial. they write -- "hunter was raised on the rewards of opposing democratic household. he round up -- wound up -- if not politically. he was eager to please his father. he had steady employment based -- make -- employment as a based bank. it followed with hunter advancing and using the biden family name. leveraging political patter -- power for self enrichment is washington at his -- its dirtiest. hunterdon has known little but the advantages of proximity for

political power for most of its -- is 53 years -- for most of his 53 years. the supreme court in 1995 made clear in that u.s. term limits versus birthing case that only an amendment to the constitution to limit correctional terms. republicans proposed a constitutional 11 -- amendment in january that would limit u.s. senators to 26-year year terms and members of the house up representatives to 32 year terms --three two year terms. in that case, americans would likely have been spared ever knowing the details of the hunter biden's -- of the younger biden's expert -- escapades."

caller: you shouldn't be talking about a code of conduct. what you should be talking about is the biden family, crime family, i would say. joe biden, where did he make all of his money? everyone knew he was not a millionaire before. all, he makes millions. remember, the fbi form that stated that he got $5 million for going to ukraine and telling them to fire the prosecutor, or they would not get $1 billion. that shows what kind of business they were in. host: this is brent in louisiana. what do you think?

caller: i don't think they should stop it. it started with andrew jackson, a real estate agent for the kind fields down south onto john mccain. it will never stop. that is all i will say, enjoy it and watch it. host: maria in washington dc. you are next. caller: yes, there should be one in the family members hold a government position. i can't believe what you told the caller that brought up -- they got the positions only because of their influence for being daughter and son-in-law and got personal business deals out of it. so, seriously. and the generation, we are talking about hunter biden, addiction is not a generation, it is a sickness.

host: this. is denise -- this is denise. caller: i agree with several of the callers who called and if you look at what biden has done to the country, he let a chinese spy balloon go across the u.s. and he did not shoot it down but he got paid by china. we are in a war with ukraine where we are putting the american people -- where the american people are putting billions of dollars into ukraine and he got paid by ukraine. the person in russia who he gave -- who gave him money was also those who he was going to sanction. you cannot say he did not what -- he did not benefit on what hunter -- the second point is, what did hunter do for that money?

you ivanka trump and jared kushner --e ivanka trump and jared kushner -- host: family members are presidents, one person saying a code of ethics must be such that your behavior and must not create even an appearance of impropriety. catherine kane says of course not, they are private citizens. one person saying mark -- why should the family -- president family member -- matter if you are not a official? one person saying we need a code of ethics for supreme court justices. period. host: you talk about hypocrisy

-- caller: you talk about hypocrisy, you have republican hypocrisy on exhibit. clarence thomas, the supreme court, the ethics for these people, everybody should have a code of ethics. the republicans are 100 times worse than the democrats and i don't like the democrats but there is no question, when you talk about hypocrisy, the republicans are 10 times worse. these people must be graduates of trump university. you phonies. you talk about biden's family, trump is the worst. this is double standard, hypocrisy, republicans -- host: i got your point. this is anthony in greektown, pennsylvania. -- green town, pennsylvania.

caller: the question should be whether or not the ethics of the vice president should allow his son to go into business dealings with foreign governments begging on business peddling. there is no money without joe biden's voice in it. there has to be some way to understand that joe biden let his voice out as a brand so his son could make money. there was no other business except for his peddling. even dimwitted democrats should be able to understand -- host: this was from the white house briefing room last week. the press secretary was asked about hunter biden's legal per settings -- legal pre-sightings --precidings.

[video clip] >> i am not going to say anything more than what i shared yesterday. this is a personal matter for hunter biden. this is a personal issue and as you know, this has been done in a independent way by the department of justice and has been led by a trump appointed prosecutor and i will not, beyond what i said yesterday and we have said this multiple times, the president and first lady love their son and they support him as he is working to rebuild his life. i will not say anything beyond that. host: taking your phone calls and ask this question, should there be a code of conduct for children and family members of presidents? if you say yes, (202) 748-8000. if you say no (202) 748-8001. if you are unsure (202) 748-8002

. tina. good morning. caller: the question should be, would trump crime family has done over the years. he had a daughter who went to china to get the patent. where were the republicans? the republicans said nothing. same with jared kushner. all, they have ethics -- all of the sudden, they have ethics? american people, we pay their taxes. they get a check because of us and we look for you to tell the truth and to be equally balanced and we are not getting it today. the most crime family is the trump family. we see you republicans and we are not buying it. host: it was last month that jamie raskin, a member of the

house oversight and accountability committee talking about -- the house oversight accountability committee was talking about jared kushner. this was some of his statements [video clip] -- some of his statements. [video clip] >> the day after the trump administration ended, the president's son-in-law, who was working for the administration file to create a new corporation which collected a cool $2 billion from the saudi government after he was in charge of middle east policy for the administration. that is jared kushner. that is based on fact. they are not denying that he collected $2 million. -- $2 billion and we know about

millions of dollars in other payments that were received by president trump during the course of the administration from foreign governments to his hotels, to his golf courses and other ventures. that raises a problem, we are not talking about people who are related to the president but are private citizens who allegedly did something. we are talking about the president himself and members of president's family who had positions in government and that is a serious issue that we need to be addressing because there are two basic philosophies in a government in america and one philosophy of government is there should be -- is the government should be eight instrument of commonood and the other is the government is an instrument of -- this is ventures -- business ventures. host: asking you should there be

a code of conduct for family members and children of presidents. caller: i would like to respond to one of your callers talking about the trumps did this. the department of justice would be mailing them to across if they did anything -- would be nailing them to a cross if they did anything wrong. they have really straight and the -- they have real estate and the bidens have no business. i don't think a code of conduct is enforceable. these people investigate themselves and find an -- everything is fine. what should be done and will never be done is that the bill they passed that hired 86,000 irs employees should be embraced

by the american people. the list of their investigation should start with the top. the president, the vice president, the whole executive branch should be the first. the congress, the senate, they should be second. every government employee afterwards, chronological, by age so the statute of limitations doesn't run out. when they hired these 86,000 agents, their list of priority should begin with government employees. that is all i have to say because, the question that you asked, should the code of conduct -- they have all kinds of ethics rules they don't follow. daybreak loss -- they break laws

with regularities as far as insider trading. nothing gets done. host: that is joe in illinois. this is jerry in new jersey. caller: good morning. i believe there should be a code of ethics especially for the president of the united states. i want to go back to the beginning when the debate between trump and joe biden took hold and they were talking about the -- they denied it. they denied that and it turned out that was a lie. trump talked about the never had a conversation with his son. he said he never talked to his son about the business dealings he was in. it turns out he has been calling 20 times and business dinners with these corrupt people. it is amazing and c-span, i have

to tell you, it is bad enough watching cnn and msnbc cover it up. you have participated in this too and it is the same -- it is a shame and you did this to bash trump. i don't get the two. why are we talking about trump when the hearing was about biden ? host: you might be interested in a column in today's wall street journal which speaks to exactly what you're talking about, previous announcement comes to joe biden talking about hunter biden and asking the question, joe biden's announce are disproven. what will he say in debates? the real ginger -- danger for

mr. biden if -- is that the republican candidate asked him, we have learned since 2020 that everything you claim over your son's business overseas was untrue. why should people believe what you are saying to now -- saying now? this is john in ventura, california. caller: good morning and thank you for this program. i don't think they should have to change any laws but they have to obey the laws. i think the families of the politicians need to be transparent and jared kushner, you heard jamie raskin say trump was out of office when jared kushner made that deal. it was made in public, it was a transparent deal, you look at hunter biden's deal, they are covered up. my point today is why aren't the

democrats, if you are innocent, why would not the democrats defend you and say you are innocent? why are the democrats sweeping this under the rug especially before an election and this is nothing more than campaign and election fraud. the democrats, and they believe hunter is innocent, they should claim he is innocent but they are not and that is the deal. they are not claiming innocence. they are covering it up. this means they are all accomplices. the lady from missouri, what an 80. --idiot. host: this is from -- someone from twitter saying there should be a code of conduct. president carter said it all, we cannot have the appearance of influence. this from joe in south carolina, the current -- however, it would

be difficult to punish a person because -- who doesn't actually hold a position of public trust. should there be a code of ethics for children and family members of presidents? this is alan, north carolina. caller: how are you doing? i can answer the last caller's question? you know why the democrats are not saying anything? we are laughing at you clowns. fax matter and you have none. --facts matter and you have none. you have nothing. if this -- is this what you all are waiting on? good luck with that. you got nothing. absolutely nothing. host: this is fred.

caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. to answer your question about ethics in the family, now we have to vet more people and if we vetted everyone's family, no one would be elected. everyone talks about the epoxy. it is true that more than one person can be corrupt. to be honest with you, we don' know. they couh be corrupt and they probably my last point is about the white house and hunter. all i hear is he is a private citizen, he is on his own. my question is why did the secret service accompany him to his court date? why did the secret service accompany him if he is a private citizen? i don't get that.

host: christine, burton, west virginia. caller: i believe there should be an ethics for -- not just the president and the family but also people in congress that is corrupt also with the one, insider trading or whatever, ethics, they need ethics brought back. when i hear the republican talking about hunter biden, why doesn't congressman comer release the transcript from devon archer that they had yesterday? why doesn't he release the hold transferred -- the whole transcript? they run to fox and they like. --lie.

he was just talking about, saying hello and talking to hunter. at they want to know about hunter writing -- if they want to know about hunter biden, read his book. tell them to read his book. host: this is from the new york times today, the conversation gail collins and brad stevens back-and-forth on a topic on -- of the day. this is what stevens writes and says -- this is what brett stevens writes and says. "what is in the public about him, -- to make his living from dubious foreign sources to his reluctance to acknowledge his paternity of one of his daughters to not pay taxes and almost getting all with what seemed like a wrist slap doesn't seem to brighten the family name and while republicans are

jumping to conclusions without rocksolid evidence, i am not entirely confident that joe biden had no inkling on what his son was up to or the larger biden family did not benefit from hunter's shenanigans. the news media left no term -- no snow -- no stone unturned. -- especially since a federal judge wasn't keen on hunter's plea deal. agents are alleging political interference in the case." caller: i think there should be some form of an ethical standard set up. it's difficult.

kids go off to set up their business and who governs it. it also goes to the congress, nancy pelosi was not concerned about the fact she may have been involved in insider trading and made a fortune. it seems to happen with a lot of congresspeople so just a standard of ethics who people who get into congress and put assets into blind trusts and are looked at by a particular agency to make sure that untoward stuff is not going on. host: in congress, there is an ethics committee that enforces the code of official conduct of members of congress, that code of conduct passed at the beginning of east -- of each congress. you can read it at ethics.hou se.gov. it is enforceable through congress itself. they police their own members and they -- we read about the

ethics investigations. the question here is if it is a child or someone not involved in government but may benefit from access to power to those channels of power in washington dc, should they be subject to some sort of code of conduct? if so, who runs that and how do you enforce that? caller: that is a difficult one to answer because they will be selling access. that is what hunter did. there is no reason to call his dad and talk to his business partners and others accept access. it has to be the justice department that has to be able to look at how the kids might be involved. a pox on both their houses, trump and biden. it seems to me that if there is going to be something set up, it should be clearly across-the-board. to respond to your thing about the congress, having people

police their own people is a difficult proposition and i am not sure what kind of deals get cut from that but that is my submission -- but that is my suspicious nature. there should be a code and it should be governed by the justice department. i think that is the only way to go at it. host: if there were that code and someone broke the code, do they fall on the elected official? do they fall on the family member? civil versus critical? caller: it falls on the individual but if it is a member -- matter of selling access, it should fall on the politician as well. host: another ed in bowie,

maryland. caller: i agree there should be a code of ethics and it should be up -- across-the-board including the supreme court. the other thing i am looking at, there is a higher bar for german tribes -- for democrats. everyone knows that hunter is the weakest link in his family. the republicans couldn't find anything on joe so they said, let's go after hunter. they were looking for a crime and they found some influence but they cannot tie joe biden to it. they are trying to use propaganda in the media to say we know it is there. it is not there. trump, as jamie raskin mentioned, the day after trump was out of office, you had his son-in-law filing a brand-new

business and without any performance methods, he gets $2 billion from the saudis. jared is dealing with them and when the bidens are dealing with them, we have the 9/11 families. he was beheaded and cut into pieces. we have a double standard in terms of how we deal with people and how it is not just presidents but people in general. host: your first point about the supreme court ethics code, this is the cnn story out yesterday. the justices were at a stalemate on adopting a formal ethics code. chief justice john roberts has been -- according to cnn and their reporting. with -- such agreement has alluded him. it is not clear what standards a

majority might be considering and the reasoning of the holdouts. justice samuel alito's -- related to ethics. he expressed distain for congressional efforts to serve -- to persuade the justices to adopt an ethics rule. i am going to say, he says no provision in the constitution gives them the authority to regulate the supreme court. period. this is from mark westwood -- market, westwood, new jersey -- mark, westwood, new jersey. caller: i don't think there should be any kind of ethics standards for family of politicians except for the law. the law should be looked at in this whole thing with hunter biden, it is redirection.

the republicans know that trump is a criminal. he has been convicted so it is a fact and jared kushner and ivanka did dirty deals wall -- why they were in office. -- dirty deals while they were in office. instead of investigating two children of a president who were in office, they will go after hunter biden who was not in office. it is a nothing burger. i read fox said hunter biden 161 times yesterday. we have a guy who was running for president and he is a convicted felon and he is a convicted felon. and he will keep running. how about no criminals in the white house?

host: stick around, plenty more to talk about this morning, including later today when we will talk about the federal health programs facing expiration at the end of september if congress does not come up with a larger spending deal. we will have that conversation. but next, despite recent good news on the economic front, some polls show that joe biden's economics are not connecting with some voters. we will talk with karen petrou from federal financial analytics . take a look at the most recent comments from joe biden, and how he thinks biden-nomics are benefiting the country. [video clip] president biden: i want to talk about building from the bottom

up, not the top down. yesterday we learned of the economy grew faster than expected in the last quarter, and we have seen data that inflation continues to decline. so inflation is at its most point in two years. wages are up after being adjusted for inflation. when i came to office i was determined to end the trickle down economy. well, i need to make sure i do not trip on this. i came to office determined, determined to move from trickle-down economics that everyone from the financial times and wall street journal, what they have called biden-nom ics, and the plan is working, building from the bottom out. all that trickle down stuff, my dad was an honorable man.

he worked like the devil, a real gentleman, but not a lot of it trickled down to our kitchen table. according to morgan stanley and goldman sachs, it is leading to a boom in manufacturing. we have created over 13 million new jobs, more than before the pandemic. nearly 28700 and -- nearly 28,700 here in maine. [applause] 800,000 new manufacturing jobs nationwide. that's half $1 trillion in outside private investment to grow the economy because they know it is available now. more jobs in two years they created by any president in a four year term. [applause] an employment -- and

unemployment at only 4%, the longest stretch in 50 years. and we have recovered all the jobs we lost in the pandemic, except now we have more jobs than we did before the pandemic, because unemployment has been so low for so long, workers are finding better jobs with higher pay. and it is no wonder that job satisfaction, according to the measures, is at a 36 year high. the working age is as high as it has been 20 years, including during every single day my predecessor was president. remember that infrastructure? anyway, long story. people are coming off of the sidelines. unemployment is down, but so is inflation. the experts told me to get inflation under control. i love this, we had lower wages

and higher unemployment. the only way to get inflation down. maybe get corporate america's profits down we lower it. [applause] but i never thought that the working people were making too much money. we no a reason for inflation was the pandemic, the war in ukraine, a broken supply chain and excess profits. all getting pocketbooks hard wh ile padding corporate profits. i am not against corporations. i come from the corporate capital of the world, delaware. more corporations incorporated in like state than every other state in the union combined. the ship either fair sharey. -- should pay their fair share. [applause] announcer: a healthy democracy does not just look like this. it looks like this.

where americans can see democracy at work. and citizens are truly influenced and a republic thrives. get informed from the source, on c-span, unfiltered, unbiased, word for word, from the nation's o to where you are. to get the opinion that matters the most, your own. c-span, powered by cable. announcer: "washington journal" continues. host: karen petrou is joining us for a conversation on the economy, a member of the consulting firm, federal financial analytics, the author of "engine of inequality." she also penned "biden-nomics is an insult to those living paycheck to paycheck." the biden administration embracing that term on the campaign trail.

so define that term right now as you see it. guest: that was not my headline. i do not think it is an insult, i think it is a mistake. bidenomics is what the president wants to portray where the middle class is doing better. and i think that we do have a better economy than we feared we might after covid, but for most americans, the majority of americans, it is far from comfortable. it's very frightening. host: eugene robinson talks about biden nomex, -- bidenomics citing, some recent good economic news that the president has been talking. bidenomics appears to be working. inflation, a poison for any incoming president, down to 3% in june. that is a dramatic decline from

the peak rate at 9.1% last year. unemployment at a near 50 year low. the economy grew at a healthy 2.4% in the second quarter despite the federal reserve's interest rate hikes. why is that not good news? guest: there is another statistic in the new york times this morning that shows the president running barely neck and with donald trump. and one of the reasons for that is despite the aggregate numbers, and those are all great numbers -- i do not contest those numbers -- this is an unequal economy and averages, such as the unemployment rate and inflation, do not represent the way that most people live. two thirds of americans skip purchases they want to because of inflation. 58% of americans are living paycheck-to-paycheck. and even with inflation slowing,

remember it is not down, it is slowing -- it costs $122 today to buy what cost $100 at the end of 2019. and pay has not kept up. so, american families are still having a lot of trouble. and all the financial anxiety shows that. people are worried. host: if the perception of the economy was the lagging indicator, that with the good numbers, that that confidence in the economy will be going up, is that how we usually read economic numbers? guest: these numbers are averages. and they are aggregates. they really do not represent america as a whole. they are helpful to understanding the economy. they are not great guides to politics. and that is my concern. not that the economy is going to

slide into a recession, although we have significant recession risk. we are not out of harm's way. that could be a danger. the lagging indicator is monetary policy. we have not seen the full effect of the tightening. and we are not far from the potential for significant slowdown, if not recession, so there are a lot of booby-traps. host: there is more concern about a looming or almost certain recession -- was more concern about a looming or almost certain recession last year, but it seems to be cooling. guest: because of the numbers, but we have warnings. the monetary policy takes a wild to work. there is concern the fed's policy, they raised rates again last week, have yet to cool off the economy because it takes time to happen. when it does, when the high rates do what they are intended,

the economy will slow. and we are seeing a lot of struggle in the data. yet, there is no room for error here. and you have that many people living paycheck-to-paycheck. americans took out $5.5 trillion of their excess savings, many people put in the bank after covid with all the government support, that is gone. now we have to repay student loans, that is $100 billion a year out of households. my concern is we are not out of the woods. the more the president says look how good you have it, and most americans do not have it that good, they will do what they did in 2016 -- voters stayed home and the lower income households voted for donald trump. host: karen petrou is our guest. bidenomics is our topic, and public opinion about bidenomics.

you have heard it the president talk about it on the campaign trail. you are reading about the term more. one more headline from the wall street journal, "i would not bet the farm on bidenomics." blake hearst is the author. a soybean farmer. we want to hear your thoughts on bidenomics, is the economy working for you? the president has been embracing the term. republicans at 202-748-8001. it democrats at 202-748-8000. independents at 202-748-8002. karen petrou from federal financial analytics, the cofounder and managing partner there. what is your mission? guest: it has nothing to do with any of this. we are a financial services company with complicated rules and regulations. this is just me talking, because

i am so worried about the next election and how these kinds of numbers, like bidenomics they, leave so many americans behind. host: how would you advise the white house, if you are invited, on how to talk about the economy? guest: you cannot just say my program is for the middle class, he has to talk about the great things. it will take time, but the infrastructure spending, rebuilding america's manufacturing base, that is great news for low-wage workers. there is a lot to talk about there. he is doing some of that but people are not feeling it in their pocketbooks. he shouldn't say how good people have it, but how well the economy is working as a platform for growth. try to persuade people he really cares about those who are having a tough time. host: how did you think about

make america great again as an economic message for people you are talking about, the lower income workers, middle wage workers? guest: i have no idea what that means anymore. it doesn't -- does it mean anti-immigration, an economic method? from an economic perspective, i think what donald trump actually did was make america more equal because of the tax cuts in 2017 which gave more to the wealthy, but he persuaded people he cares about them. i do not know if his record has evident of any fact he does. his problem is he is not the greatest orator. he has difficulty persuading people that he feels how they feel, the current president. host: loretta out of cleveland, ohio on the line free democrats. good morning. caller: good morning. good morning, karen.

i understand your point of view, but i think that it is a bit misrepresented. [coughing] excuse me. my coffee went the wrong way. host: how do you think it is misrepresented? caller: because jay powell gave donald trump four years of dear percent interest rates and then we find out that -- eight person -- 0% interest rate and he spent $8 billion. then he gave tax cuts on top of that. he gave farmers $20 billion. and donald trump gave away so much money, that steven mnuchin got out the door with $555 billion.

see? and they want to talk about biden spending money. build back better was cheaper than what trump ended up spending. and he had spent that $8 billion before covid struck. guest: you are right about the 0% interest rates. that was toward the end of obama , most of the trump period, and president biden until march of last year. very low rates have helped to make america far more unequal, because when you have zero rates, and negative, you are still losing 2% when you put money in the bank. and most americans have never been able to save. and most, when they have extra

money, they put it in the bank, so they have been losing out while the wealthy have put it in the stock market and they have done quite well. it has made america unequal and unproductive. host: mark is an independent. good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. bidenomics, it is not working for me. i look at things like gas prices, they are on the rise now. we are quickly approaching $4 a gallon in missouri and it is expected to go above $5. the prices at the grocery store are through the roof. and bidenomics is not helping me. the interest rates, they continue to climb, which makes it harder for me to buy a car, house or use my credit. to get the things i need.

quite frankly, part of the problem is the mainstream media. it seems as though they are in the pocket of the democrats, or in other words of democrats control the media and what the american people see and hear, or in other cases the control what they do not hear. if people would report on it, straight up, i think it would be so much better. and biden never holds press conferences. why won't he address the american people and take questions? not from somebody or just where they have the people chosen and he knows what the questions will be, but take questions from the american people and let's hear the answers. i would love to hear your response. guest: i think that you put your finger on what i am trying to say, the way americans feel or experience in the economy is the

american economy the president should be talking about. and the media, i think the problem is the economists. they get the data. this is traditional data. depending on the index, but the index that the administration prefers, it shows food and energy prices s ito does not always reflect your life, mark, or those watching. the traditional way that we look at the economy doesn't work in an economy as unequal as ours. and the politics is you have to speak to the majority, when the majority of people are not experiencing the economy that they are talking about. host: let me show a chart from gasbuddy.com, from the past two years, the average retail of a gallon of gas in the country. 14 months ago it was over $5 a gallon on average.

you can see the sharp decline after, through december, then has started creeping back up, especially in the past month, at $3.64 on average nationally. what does that tell you? guest: that it can -- you have to be careful when you take credit for an economy that is suffering from inflation due to factors outside of the resident's control. -- president's control. we are in a time of geopolitical risk. the ukraine grain agreement, russia destroying ukraine's infrastructure. that can have an adverse impact on food prices. and we are not going to stop, like in sub-sahara, but it does not help. gas prices responded geopolitical risk.

there are a lot of hazards. host: our next caller from kentucky, what do you think about bidenomics? caller: i have a different opinion from what karen has. i agree that she is knowledgeable about what is going on, but she made one comment, and i have heard it from many people, that the economy is doing good, but there's two thirds of the country still living from paycheck to paycheck. that isn't something that just happened under president biden. i mean, there are people who have been living that way for decades. and as prices went up over decades, wages did not. but i have to say about under president biden, it seems more people are working better jobs for more wages than they have

ever. and there are more people working. so, that tells me that what he is trying to do, it's working. but as far as prices, like groceries, i have noticed in my area in kentucky, that they have gone down. they are still higher than they were before covid. but they have gone down. and i think where they are at, they are going to stay there. i do not see groceries coming back down the way that they were before. this is a trend that has happened over the years. prices have continued to go up over the years. this is not new. once they raise those prices, they seldom bring them back down. guest: that is true. this is going to be sticky inflation. and i do not disagree with you, patty, none of this is new.

i wrote a book published in 2021 but i wrote it before this, about the inequality in america, because this has been going on for a while. and i think that president biden is trying harder to fix it and i give him credit for that. but there -- the problem with bidenomics is he is launching bidenomic balloons over an economy, that i am glad to hear you find is working better for you, but you have half of america millennials showing that they are underemployed or unemployed. and people, particularly women, are sitting out of the workforce because the cost of childcare has gone up so much and they

cannot find it jobs that make it worthwhile to leave home. so families are struggling. it's better, and the data on aggregate is good, but that is not a happy -- it's not a good place that the fed likes to describe the economy, except for maybe the top 5%. most americans are having a tough time. host: we have heard about the supply chain impact on inflation. big news from yesterday, yellow corps is shutting down filing for bankruptcy. the company's collapse comes three years after it received a $700 million in pandemic era loans from the federal government. the 99 year old company with 33,000 employees throughout the country will be closing this week. and we have another employment report on friday. guest: that is the story.

private equity ownership -- we will see more of it because many companies took on debt at zero interest rates and that is starting to roll over now. as loans come due, those that were 0%, those are going to cost about 7% or 8%, and these speculative companies cannot afford to make payments. so, we will see more corporate bankruptcies. it could be a slow burn, not a catastrophe, but it will not be good. host: this is matt on the line for republicans. good morning. caller: good morning. yeah, bidenomics -- that's a real joke. i cannot believe he is even doing that, but then again he does not know where he is at half the time. first of all, the low unemployment rates he's bragging about, we seem to forget that

during covid a whole lot of baby boomers retired early and got out of the workforce, so they are not counting that as unemployment. where i work, we had three people who could have worked more years, but they retired early. and that is why there is such a demand for all of these jobs. and these people that worked for about 30 years, they left the workforce permanently. and, of course command the companies have to pay more money to get people, but the people they are getting are not that experienced. so we are having that problem where we work. and as far as the inflation and wages going up, when you adjust the real wage growth, with inflation, it has actually gone down.

and as far as the tax breaks, y ou know, biden is bringing back jobs. he brags about creating 20 million jobs. these jobs were ones affected during covid and people are coming back to work. it's not anything he created. host: there are a lot of issues there. guest: i think that you bring up a lot of issues. data is difficult to parse, and it is one of the reasons i go back to how many people feel about their jobs, where are they -- in the workforce or out of the workforce? the participation reaches about two thirds of people who want to work, so you have people who want to work not being able to find jobs where they are paid enough. real wages have finally gone up

in the last year or two, but you are right, matt, in general this has been stagnant since the year 2000, and that is a problem. host: coming back to the jobs report, we had a july report of 209,000 jobs added in june. the unemployment rate did not change much at 3.6%. what is your expectation for friday? guest: i do not have a comment. i am a financial analyst. i just care about this because i really care about how the economy functions for the majority of americans. it just bothers me so much, the inequality. i think we will still have a strong report. the weekly numbers are useful but there is no snapshot here for the trends. and the risk, again, is the fed

is squeezing into her just starting to see some of the air come out of the balloon. we are going to see more. you will see slowing, then potential problematic job numbers. host: when the book came out, not a big fan of the fed? guest: no, i am not. i respect people there, i know it well, but like i said before, if you ask an economist what the economy looks like they will say -- there's an economy where the majority of americans, you have a middle class. we used to have a middle-class. the theory the fed uses is premised on an american middle-class with a bell curve, 20% of americans not making much, 20% making lots of money, and about 70% doing fine.

now we have an economy where the top 1%'s wages and income are larger than the bottom 50%. $39,000 a year for the bottom of america. so the economy functions differently for 90% of americans who do not have anything extra. host: michael in north carolina on the line for republicans. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for having me on. i have a wonderful appreciation of the lady speaking. i have questions for her. in the -- administration there was a balanced budget, now we have a generation of children that do not want to work. and they demand high wages, when

they have not even done an apprenticeship. and you have corporate people of that know how to move the money to get richer and richer. so, does the rich oppress the poor or not? i would like to hear on the. -- that. guest: thank you for your views. you make a good point about the balanced budget. we have a deficit, but covid was a close call. and we as a country, both president trump -- if you remember the cares act, that was a huge amount of money, including that bailout for the trucking company, that was from president trump. and now we have far better structured infrastructure spending programs. bu we have a huge problemt -- but we have a huge problem with

biomedical research. you have the research triangle in north carolina and i know that there are biomedical research companies there. and because the market is in -- with interest rates going up it is hard to find money for those companies, and they are struggling. the moore the company can do to support biomedical research, the better it will be to get people back into the workforce with jobs that they want. host: on twitter, "does congress care about real wage growth?" is it time to raise the minimum wage? guest: it's really minimum. i do not know any part of the country in which somebody could work 40 or 50 hours a week and be able to support children in any kind of a humane way of life

at seven dollars an hour. host: on the line for democrats. good morning. caller: how are you doing? guest: fine, thanks. caller: i appreciate listening to you. i have a couple things on jay powell. it's kind of funny because it seems he is using the 1970's economics to run today's day and age. let's lay people off, this and that. when you still have 12 million people out of the workforce, the climate is basically -- yes, unemployment is low, but all he is doing is putting a hardship on the american people by raising interest rates. granted inflation has come down a little bit, but overall the economy is still really hurting. he needs to rethink how he is doing it. i have a comment on the yellow trucking. that is a union thing.

i'm not a big prounion guy. but the unions are pushing yellow trucking out of the industry. they are asking for outrageous things in an industry that we really need, trucking. and we are 80,000 down and we will turn around and cut that company. i just want to hear your feedback on that. guest: you know more about trucking, so i am listening to your feedback on that. but let me go back to what you said about jay powell. he means well. he is a truly honorable person. the problem is institutional. the fed has a long standing view that if financial markets do well, it will trickle down into the economy and do well for people. and that is a really 1970's view. we have seen in the past 15 years, and this is not on president biden, he didn't do

it. it is the fed. we have seen the financial markets going up, up, and away, and that is one of the reasons wealthy people are so which -- are so rich. the financial economy is not the real economy. once it was, but now it is not. host: karen petrou here. the fed last week with a revised economic forecast. this is about a minute and a half of jerome powell. [video clip] >> it has been my view that we will be able to achieve inflation moving back down to our target without the significant downturn that results in high levels of job losses at that we have seen in some past instances. that has been my view that that is still -- and that is still my

view. and i think it is consistent with what i see today. so, we are a long way from assured. we have a lot left to see that happen. so, the staff has a notable slow down in growth in the forecast starting later this year, but given the resilience of the economy they are no longer forecasting a recession. i want to note that our staff produces a forecast independent from what we produce. having an independent staff forecast is really a strength of our process. there's a lot of constructive diversity of opinion that helps us -- helps us make better decisions. >> is the reason for optimism that confliction has come down and you still have a strong labor market?

does that add to the optimism? >> i would not use the term optimism about this yet. i would say that there is a pathway. ys, that is a good way to -- yes, that is a good way to think about it. we have seen the beginning of disinflation without any real costs in the labor market, and at that is a really good thing. host: that is jerome powell from last wednesday. a lot of economic jargon, as always in those perfec -- in those press conferences, but we did you take away from it? guest: that the fed does not forecast the recession. there's a lot of them. they also did not forecast inflation in 2021. they said it was transitory. it really wasn't. and i know you could have called that. i had an op-ed in the papers

saying it would not be transitory. and i do not have 300 economists working for me, so i know that the fed can call things better. they do not want to say they are optimistic, but if they say there is not going to be a recession and they are optimistic. i hope they are right. but they are mostly not. host: this is karn from reno -- karen from reno, nevada. caller: good morning. i noticed when covid was getting over with, it was in the newspapers and it was put out by the oil and gas companies, and they said that during covid and had not made money. and they said that they were going to press gasoline at $5.25 a gallon. now, i saw after that that people were buying -- when they

increased it to $5.25, that brought up groceries. everybody has to use, you know, the truckers and everything else, to get their items on the market, the groceries and everything. and i think that struck a lot of the inflation. when they had to put five dollars or six dollars of a gallon and. a lot of people did not see it but it was in the newspaper. guest: petroleum prices are a problem for everyday living. they are not set by the white house, not even said to buy the oil companies, they are set by opec, saudi arabia, russia and oil-producing nations, as well as by oil and gas producers in the united states. the big companies here have a role, but it is a global pricing. host: a caller from richmond,

kentucky. good morning. go ahead. you are on with karen petrou. caller: i have a few questions for you, karen. how people are making it, that pay raises are going up. i'm telling you from a poor family, we can barely get two bags of groceries and it will be $100. guest: i know it. caller: my family does work. we are not on food stamps. we could not get them if we wanted. but at some point we will have to make a move. biden does not know who he is. he has somebody else doing the work. if somebody is doing the work. let donald trump back in.

he's not having people do the work for him. guest: i have to say that i think donald trump has many people working for him. lawyers mostly. host: democrats on capitol hill, during last year and as inflation has creeped up, often pointed to corporations gouging their prices to create record profits. how much of an impact do you think that had on the inflation problem? guest: there's some instances in which companies are sustaining profitability, even as business has gone down, but in general, and i have seen surveys on this, the data support essentially companies that their cost of raw materials went way up, particularly in the worst of the ukraine crisis with energy and

the global food market disruption. those continue. they are a little bit out of the news and less dramatic, at least in the word until a couple weeks ago. but prices have come down a little bit, yes. is it a major cause of inflation? i do not think so. host: good morning. caller: good morning. i called because karen said she is not an economist. you should bring an economist on. i do not look at the back and forth, with republicans and democrats, which is what i am hearing a lot about here. much of the inflation going on now started under the previous administration when they raised tariffs on china. and in the mediterranean, when that ship was blocked.

it caused a ripple effect and impacted services. what we are seeing is when mr. biden took office, it's the lag effective what happened in the previous administration. it's coming due. karen stated earlier that we are looking at aggregate averages. that's always the case. but whatever level of economics, we always use averages and aggregates. so that is nothing new. host: karen, how would you respond? guest: i did not say it is new, i said it is an academic way of thinking about the economy that does not speak to the way on how people will vote. host: on the line for republicans in florida. caller: thank you. taking michael. -- for taking my

call. i'm trying to interview my member of congress now. they republicans. most of them are complaining about debt, that they are not taking steps to reduce taxpayer spending. now, virginia foxx is not as bad, she understands inflation and she admitted to me that she was considering the student loan bankruptcy bill. ron desantis has come out with student -- host: do you have questions for karen petrou? caller: she agree or disagree with mike. the only one student can have bankruptcy return and stop spending responsibly? just lake credit card users -- like credit card users. agree or disagree?

guest: in general i disagree. i think that for the most part student debt is essential for economic advancement. i think that we can make reforms with economic repayment and i am in favor of income and eligibility, because we see wealthy students getting a great deal. the leg problem is not so much the student debt but the cost of education, which has skyrocketed. host: karen petrou is the cofounder of federal financial analytics, author of the book "engine of any quality, the future of wealth in america." you can see her columns in "the hill" and other newspapers. guest: it has been a pleasure. host: coming up and a half hour, we will return her attention to health care and the upcoming deadlines on capitol hill.

but first, it is time for our open forum. a new political issue you want to talk about, the phone lines are yours. they are on your screen. we will get to your calls right after the break. announcer: on sunday, best-selling author f.c. gwynn will take calls about native american history, the civil war and more. he has published several books, including "rebel yell." his latest, about a british blimp that went up in flames, killing more people than the hindenburg did seven years

later. join in the conversation. "in depth," live on sunday at noon on c-span2. announcer: a healthy democracy does not just look like this. it looks like this. where americans can see democracy at work. where the republic thrives. get informed straight from the source on c-span, unfiltered, unbiased, word for word, from the nation's capital to wherever you are. you will get the opinion that matters the most, your own. this is what democracy looks like. c-span, powered by cable. announcer: the c-span bookshelf podcast makes it easy for you to listen to all of c-span's podcasts in one place. so you can discover new authors

and ideas. we make it convenient for you to listen to multiple episodes with critically acclaimed authors discussing history, current events and culture. from signature programs about books, book notes plus, and q&a. listen today. you can find the bookshelf podcast feed on the free mobile video app or wherever you get your podcasts. and on our website, c-span.org/podcasts. announcer: order your copy of the 118 congressional directory now available at the c-span shop. it gives you access to the federal government with contact information for every house and senate member, with important information on congressional committees, federal agencies and state governors. scan the code to order your copy today oo c-spanshop.org.

it is $29.95 and every purchase supports our nonprofit operation. announcer: listening to programs on c-span or c-span radio just got easier. tell your smart speaker to listen to c-span radio app. listen to important congressional hearings and public affairs events throughout the day. text washington today for a report on the stories of the day. listen to c-span any time, just tell your smart speaker to play c-span radio. c-span, powered by cable. announcer: "washington journal" continues. host: open forum, any public policy or political issue you want to talk about, this is the time where we let you lead the discussion. republicans can call at 202-748-8001. democrats at 202-748-8000.

independents at 202-748-8002. just some notes from the latest new york times poll, out today. it is taking a look at president biden's reelection chances and donald trump's chances to win the republican nomination. "the president has recovered significantly from last summer. at that time democratic grumbling about his reelection bid had mounted and at times he had to pull back. 64% of democrats said they did not want to the party to renominate him. now, only half of all democrats said they did not want him to be the nominee. mr. biden is leading mr. trump among the groups that helped solidify his victory in the last election. he is showing early signs of

vulnerability with hispanic voters, which i shifted toward republicans. the 39% approval rating is poor for an incumbent seeking reelection but it has gone up from 33% last july." and on donald trump's numbers, looking at his primary bid, they write in the half-century of primaries, no candidate has ever lost a party nomination when leading at this stage. his lead over ron desantis is 37 points. that's from the latest new york times poll. open forum, letting you lead the discussion. a democrat from florida. good morning. caller: good morning. i was calling about the complaints on the justice system and their two tiered system.

there's a difference on how they treat republicans and democrats. you have had two, high prominent republicans with very sensitive material and neither one of them saw the inside of jail. if a democrat had in, they withrow -- they withrow them in jail. host: good morning. what is on your mind? caller: thank you for taking my call. my concern is illegal immigration in new york state. it has become a major problem i new york cityn. and what makes us -- when you think about voting for donald trump, president biden does not seem to want to take action. host: what action would you like to see him take? caller: to shut down the border and put back in what they made

in mexico, they remain in mexico. that would be the number one thing he could do. host: this is sandra in phoenix, arizona. an independent. caller: yes. i'm calling about how the democrats, what they are saying about equalization. starting today, the people who have been waiting to enter the u.s., you know, link it to come in certain -- they get to come in certain countries only. columbia, guatemala, el salvador. all those countries, they are able to come to the u.s. and the

day they get here they are allowed to get a work permit. and it is only for those south american countries under the guise of reunification. i think it is unfair for other countries that have been waiting a long time. and i have no problem with the other south american countries, but i think they should go for whichever country has been waiting the longest. those are the ones that should gain permission to come and. -- in. host: from washington, d.c. on the line for democrat. s. caller: i want to make a statement. i have been thinking about magic johnson, he just became the owner of the washington football team. the deal is when he had hiv

and aids, he had the courage to say it but other players did not want to play with him. it was courageous. and my point is telling the truth, telling the truth about america. and going through it and getting through it. it will be a better america if you tell the truth about america, slavery, and the role it played in making america great. and this is just a question. telling the truth. donald trump did not tell the truth about the covid situation, he did not tell the truth about he took the shot and all that. and anybody can make a class-action lawsuit against anybody who is incompetent?

that is the question. host: that is charles on the aids issue. of note, president biden is seeking to reauthorize the emergency plan for aids relief. some notes on that plan. the history of the plan, aids really began in 2003, has spent eess of $100 billion fighting aids a has distributed millions. of course, data that shed on the virus's spread and foraging partnerships with different countries and organizations around the world. it is up for reauthorization right now. neil in florida, good morning. caller: how are you? host: doing well. what is on your mind? caller: there was a survey that

was -- anyways, the survey indicated that 53%, 53% of viewers of cnn and msnbc are unaware of anything that is wrong or negative with the biden family. and that's truly indicated, because last week when the suppose it there indictment of former president trump came out, those two camped out outside the courthouse like it was going to be a frat party. when the indictment did not come down, they went nuts.

they must have been showing reruns of bugs bunny movies. the hosts were scrambling to find it to talk about. when hunter biden's plea deal fell apart, there was nothing. there was absolutely nothing on either one of those channels. believe me, i would click back and forth between the two channels and nothing. it was never even spoken about. yesterday, devon archer -- what do we get? recipes for potato salad and -- i really, i really wish that either americans would wake up

and realize that they are being lied to and propagandized. or that these suppose it networks -- supposed networks actually report the news. host: devon archer is a former business associate of hunter biden, who testified yesterday on capitol hill, coming out after that meeting, after he answered questions from the house oversight committee, he spoke to reporters about it. and of course he was photographed on capitol hill as well. plunk the more on capitol hill and -- plenty more on capitol hill and around capitol hill today, you can watch it here. along with other health priorities for the armed forces. we will be showing that at 10:00 a.m. eastern here on c-span.

you can also watch on c-span now, our free video app. at 11:00 a.m. today, jeff merkley will talk about russia, ukraine, climate change and other topics with the washington post. you can watch that on c-span, c-span.org, and the free c-span video app. today, members of congress away on the august about 15 minutes left in this open forum. any public policy, political issue or state issue you want to talk about. the line for republicans is (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. from new york, sean, democrat. good morning. caller: good morning. host: what is on your mind? caller: all this propaganda was

brought up about biden. the people know biden was pushing buttons. he was standing up for what is good and right, standing up for the people, standing up -- he is the people's president. when they step on toes, they are going to try and nail him anyway they can. bring out anything and anyone to nail you. that is what they are doing with biden right now. if biden stood up for the people, they are doing everything in every possible way to slam joe biden and now hunter biden. they use the bidens as constant nail joe biden, president joe biden. that is what is on my mind. we knew what was going to happen. we knew biden was going after big toes and making rich people pay their share.

we know people are going to go after him. everybody knows that. host: sean in new york. staying in new york, in buffalo, this is james. caller: thank you, sir, for having me on your show. there are so many things that are so wrong with the democratic party. one thing, they vote, but want to complain about their condition, living standards, it's so sad that they have no clue what the heck they are talking about. nothing. it's amazing. the one guy with the report -- that guy does not know what he is talking about. that had nothing to do with anything. it's just a sad scenario. if they want to go on with the press, let them, but i think we should divide the united dates up in the middle. republicans on one side, democrats on the other. if you want to do trade, you

better have some gold. you can run up the debt as high as you want on their side, do whatever you want on their side, but i want to live a better life. thank you and have a nice day. bye. host: omar in california, independent. good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. i want to let people know that this country is pretty much lost at this particular point in time. what i have been seeing is an absolute debacle. congress is holding hearings on ufos, there is a war in ukraine, homelessness, crime has risen and our politicians that are being paid over $100,000 a year by the taxpayers are holding hearings on ufos and bringing every crackpot known out of the woodwork to come up and testify as to who is seeing lights in the sky.

host: what should congress be holding hearings about? caller: they are holding hearings on the sightings of ufos. host: what would you like to see them hold hearings about, omar? caller: they should be focusing on the war in ukraine, the homelessness and crime issue, focusing on what is happening to our cities, the infrastructure in our cities. they should be focusing on governors that are banning gas powered vehicles and gas stoves in our homes for homeowners. that's what they should be focusing on and not ufos and lights in the sky and aliens from star wars. it's a debacle and it is sickening to be. i worked 40 years for the united states governo -- government and it is absolutely sickening what i am seeing. host: what did you do for the u.s. government, omar? caller: i work for the

united states border patrol for 27 years. the immigration problem, that is what they should be focused on now, which they are to an extent, but nothing seems to be done about it. host: were you a border patrol officer? caller: yes i was. host: do you think there was a point in time where u.s. border policy was working? caller: yes, there is a time when it was working. that was during the 1980's, 1980's, 1990's, up to the early 2000's. host: when did it all change? caller: it all changed when president biden took office and opened up the borders and changed all the border policies. there were already laws in place that had been in place for at least 40 years for people to come here and immigrate illegally. host: did you think it was working during the obama administration? caller: obama actually -- people

do not know this, deportations increased under the obama administration. i know that is really not going to go well over with a lot of republicans for sure, but i can tell you under the obama administrations -- we have the statistics to prove it -- the facts to prove it. under obama, deportations increased from president bush, from when he was in office. yes. [laughter] host: omar in san diego. this is kent in houston, texas, a democrat. good morning. caller: hi, john? how are you? host: doing well. what's on your mind? caller: i want to talk about a legend that moved hearts, impacted lives, and change the trajectory of our country. paul rubens, pee-wee hermann. host: what's on your mind about

pee-wee hermann today? he passed away yesterday at age 70? caller: i thought that maybe this morning, at 9:06 eastern time, we could take 10 seconds to think about paul "pee-wee hermann," right now. host: kent in houston, paul rubin, 1952-2023, gets a obituary in today's new york times. this is done in paradise, pennsylvania, a republican. good morning. caller: good morning, how are you? host: doing well. caller: i just wanted to make a comment -- this is for democrats. if you think your life is better today than it was three years ago, i would like you to show me how that is possible, because it

is not. i also want to say this -- joe biden has been incompetent in politics for 50 years. he has done nothing positive, but if he proves to me one positive thing he has done to help this country as senator, vice president or president, i would like to know what positive thing he has done. i would also like to know what negative thing has trumped done -- trump done in the four years they put him through hell. if you can prove to me either one of those things and they can ask your viewers, how are they better today than they were three years ago -- how is that possible? if we believe that the cocaine found in the white house is not hunter biden's and joe had nothing to do with the business dealings, they are all stupid, ok? it's ridiculous. host: do you think your life is worse today in paradise,

pennsylvania than in august of 2020? caller: yes. host: how so? caller: i am paying more and i have less money. everything is going up. i am on a fixed income and cannot afford it. there are a lot of people who feel the same way i do. host: this is kim in canton, south dakota. good morning. caller: good morning, sir. first time caller, thanks for taking my call. i believe that if biden and trump, supposing trump are the best two candidates for president in this country, it's in serious trouble. they ought to have a retirement age for congress, senators, representatives and the president. 90 years old for a president, if

biden wins, is way too old. i think they ought to have a retirement age. that's all i have to say. thank you. host: joe biden at 80, donald trump at 77. which of the retirement age be? caller: no more than 68. we need younger people running this country, not 90, 80, whatever-year-old in a wheelchair that cannot remember what day of the week it is. host: do you mind if i ask how old you are? caller: i am 69. i worked for the federal government for 35 years. host: and you think someone your age should not be president? caller: i do not think someone my age should be president. host: well, a democrat. good morning. caller: yes sir, good morning. my concern is tariff reform.

the tariffs that were forced upon us during the trump administration, unless united states consumers, i believe those tariffs -- i do not know the exact number, but i believe between 30% and 35% where the highest. where does this money go? the tariff money, money from the tariffs benefits the employees of the country. these tariffs were enforced upon us by the previous administration. former president trump. when i was living in south carolina -- i live in virginia now -- i got in touch with the officers at joe wilson, representative joe wilson, jim clyburn, and lindsey graham. all i got back was a letter saying, you need to contact the representative for your

district, ok? no one wants to talk about this issue. not in virginia. i met bob good in person, shook his hand and told him about tariff reform. he says it is the policies of joe biden. tariffs are nothing but attacks. just a different name. now we are paying for that. when secretary ellen went -- i believe she took a trip to japan , talking about the economy -- nobody said anything. nobody spoke anything about tariff reform. i know we did some negotiations with canada and mexico to get it reduced, but with china and japan, the other european countries or whatever, the previous administration also made several issues, saying that covid was a chinese virus and things like that.

host: a story you might be interested in from earlier this summer from npr, biden kept trump tariffs on chinese imports , and this is who pays the price. speaking exactly to what you are talking about. a few more calls, fred in burlington, north carolina, republican. good morning. host: -- caller: hey, jon. you used to fact check donald trump every time he had a speech. you never fact-check biden. could you fact-check some stuff for me? host: what do you want to fact-check, fred? it is hard to do on the fly, but we will see. caller: in california, they want to hire illegals for police officers.

and mexico has put out travel advisories for new york. people in new york are saying that illegals is raven, robin -- raping, robbing, and killing people. you know illegals don't do that stuff. host: where do you get your news, fred? caller: all kinds of different places. host: for these stories you are talking about, where do you get your news? caller: i heard this on -- it was on fox news. host: i can give you this -- cbs news, there fact on this story, illinois legislation would allow non-us citizens to become police officers. this is what cvs writes in their piece from -- coming out

yesterday, a bill would allow non-us citizens to become police officers in illinois is now in governor jb pritzker's desk. law states that only u.s. citizens could serve as police officers, but it would now change to those who could become authorized underederalaw. a u.s. citizen -- cbs news with that story. william next in strasburg, ohio. independent. good morning. caller: good morning, good morning. i am here to talk about -- when biden was in pennsylvania, what did trump do wrong? a lot wrong. what did biden do right? a lot. health care, i see new

construction everywhere, better infrastructure. build back better, that's working out fine for me. i got a great job in the biden administration and i am doing fine for myself. host: what kind of work do you do? caller: oh, i work in a factory. i work as an operator. i'm doing great and they have healthy ssi ratings from biden and between the three of us, we did very well. clients are putting back money and i am putting back money. what trump did, he is a crook who is trying to overthrow the government and a traitor to the country. and he's never going to become president again because he is going to try to become addict tater. -- a dictator. host: one last call, on the

republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. i have been looking back over the history of the past few years. the 51 intelligence officers that signed off on the hunter biden laptop, the crossfire hurricane operation that involved the fbi paying $1 million to steal -- i wonder where the press is in all of these stories? we do not see these stories on cnn or msnbc or even cbs, abc, and if the press does not do their job, we are never going to know the truth. the press is part of the deep state, and i think it's time that somebody step up other than fox and start doing some investigative reporting. i lived through watergate. i have watched every minute of

the hearings of watergate and the press was all over these stories. if they can't do their job, we are doomed. they are the watchdogs. host: in today's wall street journal, the 54 national intelligence officers that biden invoked to suggest the laptop could have information. we now know that the laptop was hunter's. joe biden denials about hunter have been disproven and what will he say in debates in the election to come in 2024? that is our last call in this open forum, about 40 minutes left this morning in washington journal. we will talk about health care deadlines and spending bills, coming up on capitol hill. we will be joined by julie rovner of kaiser health news for

that discussion. she will be with us right after the break. ♪ >> since 1979, in partnership with the cable industry, c-span has provided complete coverage of the halls of congress, from the house and congress, senate floors, party briefings and committee meetings. c-span gives you a front row seat of how these issues are debated and decided with no commentary, no interruptions and completely unfiltered. c-span -- your unfiltered view of government. ♪

>> c-span's campaign 2024 coverage is your front row seat to the presidential election. watch our coverage of the candidates on the campaign trail with announcements, meet and greets, speeches and more to make up your own mind. campaign 2024 on the c-span networks, c-span now, our free mobile video app, or any time at c-span.org. c-span, your unfiltered view of politics. >> if you ever miss any of c-span's coverage, you can find it anytime online at c-span.org, videos of key hearings, debates, and other events feature markers that guide you to interesting and newsworthy highlights. these points of interest markers appear on the right-hand side of your screen when you hit play on select videos. this timeline makes it easy to get an idea of what was debated and decided in washington. scroll through and to spend a few minutes on c-span's point of interest.

>> c-spanshop.org is our online store. browse through our collection of online products, books, the core, and accessories. every purchase helps support our nonprofit operation. shop now or anytime on c-span shop.org. "washington journal" continues. host: julie rovner back at our desk, a correspondent for kaiser health news and host of the podcast "what the health?" can you walk us through the big tidbit items we should be watching in the next few months? guest: what has to be done before october 1 is the appropriations, the spending

bill for health and human services. food and drug administration is in the agriculture appropriations bill, for reasons i have never quite understood. host: we will do that on american history tv. guest: if there is not a continuing resolution or something, they will come to deal on the spending bill, parts of health and human services will stop to -- stop functioning until they figure out how to fund them. but this usually continues in the absence of appropriations because so much of the spending is mandatory spending, and that is not affected by the appropriations bill fund. host: what is in this, to help people understand these 12 big bills moving through and what they should be watching for? guest: the big pieces are the national institutes of health, centers for disease control and prevention, all of the mental

health organizations, organizations and parts of it that provide medical care through community health centers and other places. there are a lot of what we call discretionary spending that runs through that bill. it would be impacted if congress does not come to some sort of funding agreement by the end of september. host: this might be time to do some 101 between the difference of mandatory spending and congressional -- discretionary spending. guest: mandatory spending continues unless congress changes it. they go until congress affirmatively stops the funding. medicare and medicaid, social security, the obamacare subsidies, most of the chip program, the children's health insurance program, those are mandatory and would continue

even if there is a spending impasse, which it looks conceivable that there will be. host: is congress trying to it affirmatively -- to affirmatively stop funding for any of these programs? guest: not in the next two months. they might end up there at some point, but we are talking mostly -- the fight currently is about spending bills, mostly, and about some of these authorizations for some of the spending programs that are going to expire at the end of september. important difference, the authorizations are not finished at the end of september. that does not mean that funding stops for those programs. my favorite factoid, the federal family planning title x has not been were the authorized -- reauthorized since 1984. they had never managed to agree since the 1980's on how the federal family planning phone

-- program should be authorized. host: can we do a 101 about authorizations versus appropriations? guest: authorizations is putting money in the checking account and appropriations is spending the money from the checking account. the authorizations set the outline for what things, what federal funds should be spent for what types of things. policy is supposed to go in the authorization bills, and that's often why they get bogged down. there are fights about policy. the spending bills are supposed to be just for the money, but there are ways to put policy writers into spending bills, and that's what gums up the works, when spending bills do not get done in time. caller: what policies are you tracking that could be gumming up the works? guest: the main one is the hyde amendment, which has been in the bill since the 1970's, but thereby delaying henry hyde, a

republican of illinois, a famous antiabortion member of congress, barring federal funding for abortion. it has been amended sometimes to allow exceptions for rape and incest, sometimes not, so there have been various iterations where the bill has carried the hyde amendment since the 1970's, since neither side has had the votes to change it. there have been efforts to make it stronger and weaker, take it out, but you would need 60 votes in the senate to do that and there have never been 60 votes on either side of this issue. host: another issue we have talked about is efforts to stop federal funding for transgender care. where does that stand right now? caller: that's -- guest: that's one of the writers this year. there are hyde amendment languages in several different appropriations bills. gender affirming bands in

several different appropriations bills, because you can see how some of the spending bills go to other departments, but they are giving health care adjacent services or actual health care services that are sometimes funded through the defense bill or the veterans affairs bill that had their own health care program. there are things being attached to some of these other bills, not just the hhs bill. host: how big is the hhs bill? guest: i have not looked, many billions of dollars, but it is a small segment of hhs spending. so much is mandatory. host: defense spending is the biggest discretionary part of the bill. what are you tracking at kaiser health news? guest: we are tracking this for not just the spending bill, but change in policy by the biden administration to allow servicewomen and family members

stationed in states where abortion is barred, they would be allowed to pay for the travel and time off to get that care. senate -- senator tommy tuberville is holding up every promotion coming through the senate, so i expect that authorization bill will come through the house and the senate and tie up the defense spending authorization bill. what host: your read on the standoff host:? guest: i don't know. this is a new issue, because this is the first year we have had abortion band in many states . that had not been an issue. there had been an issue with some overseas spending about and women -- servicewomen in countries where abortion was banned, this will obviously affect many more

people who will be seeking those services because there are now so many states where members of the military and people do not have any choice about where they are sent. host: a lot going on on the health care front in two months when congress returns ahead of the some timber 30th deadline ahead of the fiscal year. helping us breaking it all down is julie rovner. if you have questions on federal health care policy -- i'm sorry, we are splitting the lines regionally in this segment, central and eastern time zones is (202) 748-8000. if you are in the mountain or pacific time zones, it's (202) 748-8001. she is with us for the next half-hour this morning, so go ahead and start calling in for "what the health?" viewers who have not picked up that podcast yet, what will they find? guest: i have about a dozen and a half female health reporters

from around d.c. and around the country. we get together every thursday and talk about's health policy news. it's fun and a good listen. host: what are you talking about this week? guest: much of what we are talking about here, where congress stands on health issues that need to get done or congress would like to get done. there is a lot of effort on drug prices right now, and a number of congressional committees in the house and the senate are working on this issue, something they would like to get finished before this session of congress was done host: and where would you suggest viewers and listeners to go? guest: anywhere they get their podcasts. host: 127.3 billion dollars was what hhs asked for on the discretionary side, but $1.7 trillion in mandatory spending.

explain what the much smaller number is and the bigger number is? guest: the big number is mostly medicare and the federal part of medicaid. the discretionary part, again, national institutes of health, centers for disease control and prevention, the fda, which is in the hhs budget request because the fda is still part of the department of health and human services, but gets -- funded through the food and drug -- agriculture appropriation. host: so they see that number and get surprised by it -- do you break it down by mandatory and discretionary? guest: right. host: valerie in saginaw, michigan, you are on with julie rovner. good morning. caller: good morning. i hope i am not off-topic, but i

think it is almost criminal to expect women to keep themselves in good condition to fight for our country when we are taking their right to get paid for travel -- not for the abortion, but for travel. to be reimbursed for their travel. i would like to know how much money is being diverted out of medicare into medicare advantage, if she knows anything about that. because that is a program that needs investigating. it has nothing to do with medicaid. it is private insurance companies. can you answer that for me please? host: two different issues there. guest: two different issues. a good description of the fight going on in the military over abortion and health care.

it's not just abortion bands, but different kinds of health care that women cannot get because doctors have left the state, or pregnancies have gone wrong and it is difficult, doctors do not know if they could be prosecuted for care other than abortion. that is a big issue. and that is being thought out in several different menus in congress. the medicare advantage issue, that is a private alternative to medicare, not to medicaid. there is medicare and medicaid, but it medicare advantage is increasingly popular because medicare people are used to being in managed care plans, and medicare advantage offers extra benefits to people, like vision care and dental care. a lot of people want to join it, although we at kfs health news have investigated this a lot.

companies are making profits off of basically a government program -- they are not just giving extra benefits to the beneficiaries, they are keeping some for themselves. guest: about houck -- host: about how big is medicare advantage versus medicare? guest: it's about half. creeping right up in terms of what is spent. there was a big fight in the late 1990's and early 2000's because there was so much payment going on -- overpayment going on, congress cut it back and the plan started leaving the program because they were going to lose money. the republicans in 2003 when they did the medicare prescription drug bill started to give them enticements, but started overpaying them. there has been an overpayment-underpayment, trying to get it right, really the past 25 to 30 years. host: is that how long medicare advantage has been around?

guest: it has been around in some way, shape and form since the 1980's. host: why did they create it? guest: republicans created it in the 1980's, hoping managed care could provide better care at a lower cost. in some cases it can, but in many cases it hasn't. the idea that we should let these companies see if they can originally -- they were paying 95% of what patients would have spent in a regular medicare program. companies were saying, we can make the care so efficient that we can make a profit and save medicare money. that has not always happened, but that is the origin of the program. host: in kentucky, this is sandra. good morning. caller: good morning. i don't know if she knows about this, but i would like to ask her about prescription costs, anything has been done, or are

they doing anything at all in congress about prescription costs? i am on xarelto, i am 78 years old, and it's costing me over $400 for sir -- for a blood thinner to keep me from getting blood clots. i don't make that much penn sion or social security, and it is costly for me. i am not -- sure it is not just me, but other people in my shoes. they talk a good story but never do anything about it. thank you. guest: the caller is exactly correct. this is a big issue, prescription drug prices. this is always near the top, talking about health care. we have seen some action this year from a number of committees

, mostly looking at the pbm system, the pharmacy benefit managers. again, they were created because they said they could negotiate with the drug companies and get a better deal for insurance companies, but everything pbm do , it is opaque. nobody knows how much money they keep, whether they are encouraging insurance companies to find more expensive drugs because they get a cut. there is a lot of pbm transparency like deletion -- transparency legislation that is bipartisan moving through, and i think it is one thing congress would like to get done when they come back in the fall. pbm reform is a bipartisan issue and there are still pieces that the pbm industry does not like and the drug industry may not like, so they are still powerful. whether these things make it across the finish line is not a

sure thing. host: when did we start having pbm's, pharmacy benefit managers , and when was it created? guest: i think it was in the 1990's. we were aware of them in the 1990's. as they said, they said to insurance companies, we can negotiate separately with drug companies and will get you a better deal. very much like what medicare advantage said, we can save you money and it is a win-win for everybody and it has not always been that way. guest: -- host: when the pbm executives were on capitol hill earlier this year and sitting alongside the drug company execs, which way were the fingers being pointed? guest: always at each other. it's a big problem and somebody else's fault, all of these problems. host: who did the members seem to agree with? guest: the members were maybe a

bit confused. it's hard to tell, and that is why they are working on transparency legislation. it's hard to figure out these business relationships and what we have seen over the years, the insurance companies have bought the pbm's, so they are no longer independent. many of them belong to insurance companies. the largest one belong to insurance companies, so they have capped it there and it is hard to know what is going on. members of congress in both parties are frustrated about this because they are getting calls like we just heard, people who have drugs that they have to take to stay alive in some cases and they are costing them more money than they have. host: on the disagreement side, we talked about abortion, transgender care, but on the agreements side, anything else falling into that category when we talk about health care issues? host: congress is -- guest: congress is working to

reauthorize a program to train doctors for primary care, which there is a shortage of primary care doctors. host: what is community health center, for folks who don't know? guest: it's a popular partisan medical program that offers medical care in underserved areas, places where there are not a lot of health facilities. they are primary care centers. host: and they do it through medicaid? guest: no, the community health center, which is one of the discretionary programs in congress. again, if the authorization ends at the end of september, it doesn't cease to exist and cease to be funded, assuming there is hhs funding, but congress is working on this as a policy issue and there is a bipartisan bill in the house. there is a partisan bill in the senate, oddly enough, which is an issue going on with health

, education, labor, where bernie sanders is taking these bipartisan issues and trying to push them farther than moderate republicans in the senate want to go. host: our next caller, this is terry. you are on with julie rovner. caller: i have a question about prescription drugs and i am a little confused about it. i have heard the president talk about new legislation that has been enacted to limit out-of-pocket expenses. what i have heard, those out-of-pocket expenses will not exceed $2000 a year. could you tell me a little bit about that? it sounds great, i am very cynical about it, but my out-of-pocket expenses well exceed $2000 a year on a drug that i must have and i would like to know what the horizon is

on the meal cap of out-of-pocket prescription drugs expenses. guest: the bill passed last year, the bipartisan bill had the first serious limitations on drug prices that we have seen in a couple of decades because of the power of the drug industry. but there are small steps. there is going to be some negotiating between the government and drugmakers over some of the most expensive drugs. we are expected to see -- there is a list of 10 drugs by september 1. that's part of this. host: why only 10? guest: they are starting slow. it's 10, 10, and 25. some of the drugs, it will not be hard to find drugs people take that are very expensive. the first 10 will be significant blockbuster drugs from everything that we can tell.

there is also an out-of-pocket limit on insulin for $35 a month -- this is just for medicare at the moment. the caller did not say if they were on medicare or not, and there is an out-of-pocket cap under part. there is supposed to be a cap, and the way the program is set up, patients pay 5% of their remaining drugs after they hit what is supposed to be the out-of-pocket cap for the year. now there are so many drugs that are so expensive, thigh percent -- 5% can be thousands and thousands of dollars. i believe that takes effect in 2025, but i'm not sure about that. host: can you name the 10 drugs that are on that list? guest: [laughter] i am waiting to see. xarelto, the blood thinner mentioned earlier, is likely on there and a couple more will come.

host: take your time. we have agnes on southeastern massachusetts, you're on with julie. guest: my question is, how do we get all the financial for-profit middlemen out of health care, so not just the pv -- pbm's, but the for-profit venture capital firms that are buying up hospitals -- it's everywhere. guest: yes. we have a big project on private equity and health care. there are differences between parts of the health-care system that are intended to make a profit -- for-profit hospitals, for-profit pieces of the health care system, and the drug industry is a for-profit piece of the health care system. but there are private equity companies coming in not so much because they want to deliver health care, but because there is a lot of money and health care and they would like to share in some of that money.

there are issues going on in private equity, buying up places in pennsylvania and they closed it down because the real estate was worth more than the hospital. that is a separate issue going on in health care, but it is an age-old problem -- how do you get the profit out of health care? people argue if we take the profit motive out, you will be suppressing innovation. host: about 15 minutes left in our program. julie rovner with us. if you have a question, it's (202) 748-8000 if you live in the central or eastern time zones, (202) 748-8001 for mountain or pacific time zones. you can go on the website to see her story, and her colleagues asking questions -- you were

asking questions of previous hhs secretaries about what that job is like earlier. three who spilled the beans talked to you. what did they say? guest: one was javier becerra. we had javier becerra, and alex azar, the most recent hhs secretary under president trump. even though they were from different parties, what they said was very similar. it is a big job, you are overseeing a budget of trillions of dollars, and there is a lot of moving parts. but it was interesting to see how they tried to zero in on small things that they could get changed. hhs is a gigantic battleship. it's very hard to turn it, but you might be able to tinker with some of the things that are on deck. that's what the hhs secretary tries to do. host: what is their role during

this appropriations process? is there such thing as a bully pulpit for the hhs secretary ako guest: there is. there are also people on capitol hill who work closely with people in the department. i have seen hhs secretaries, particularly when the government gets shut down, hhs secretaries get up and say, here are the things that are not happening. community health centers would shut down if there is no funding. host: would they like to see more of the funding on the discretionary side or the mandatory side? do they feel like their hands are tied on the mandatory spending side? >> there are a lot of changes in those mandatory programs for regulation. they have more impact on the mandatory side, many, many more. sometimes they go too far and it

gets challenged in court, sometimes they win and sometimes they lose. there is a lot of discretion in those mandatory spending programs. host: are there cases in the next term of the supreme court you are watching yet? guest: not yet, but i am sure they will come up, assuredly. host: our caller from north carolina, you're next. caller: i get mine free. my wife and i, we are on social security, and she, her medicine costs about $400 a month. i get $1000 a month and she gets 920 dollars a month to live off of. i can pay for my medicine but

she has to pay for her medicine. host: back to the cost of medicine. guest: and it depends on what kind of insurance you have how much you have to pay for these drugs. not just whether you are on medicare or medicaid, or you get medicine through the v.a. or have private insurance, it is all different. that's one of the frustrating things. every time you go to the pharmacy, people are surprised. i have think everyone has gone to the pharmacy counter to pick up a prescription and walked away because it is too expensive and they do not have the money. host: renee in youngstown, ohio. speaking along the lines of prescription drugs, can we talk about why meds like biologics are never included in price reduction? guest: biologics are different than many other drugs. they are harder to make and you cannot copy them more equally. there have been generic copies of biologic drugs the way there

have been of other drugs, we have seen when generic competition comes in, drug prices generally go down. there has been some playing around with some of those, which congress is also looking at. when there is enough generic competition for the prices to go down, you cannot make copies of biological drugs. there would be not generic copies, but other types of the same drug that do the same thing that biologics do. we know they are extremely expensive -- you mayor is probably the one most people have heard of, for remit -- rheumatoid arthritis. people are about to see the first bio-similar of humira. host: how long have biologics been around? guest: also since the 1900s, 1980's or 1990's. we see more in the last 10 or 20 years. it's a sophisticated way of

making medication. host: mike, you're on with julie rovner. caller: i appreciate you taking the time. i have a couple of questions, so i will be quick. do you think the added amount of legal and illegal immigration, along with the way it be economy and inflation is, has added an extra strain on the medicare and medicaid and even the prescription drug industry? if you go to the hospital and you are uninsured and get a couple thousand dollar bill or a $10,000 bill and you are lower income like i am, eventually prices go up or somebody picks up the bill, so i am wondering if this all together is adding strain on the system. i would love to here what you had to say. guest: probably not financially. people who are not here legally are not eligible for federal health insurance.

people who are here legally have a waiting period before they are eligible. people think if you go to the emergency room, you will get treated and everything will get taken care of. the emergency room law from 1980 six only requires that true emergencies be dealt with. you need to be stabilized. they don't have to admit you to the hospital and pay for you. if you have no health insurance, you can only go to the emergency and get care if it is an emergency. or if you are a pregnant person in labor. those are the two things that are covered. people who have no insurance who are diagnosed with cancer, that is not -- not considered life-threatening care. host: our children treated differently than adults in that case? guest: there is a children's health insurance program. it's easier for children to get government health insurance.

community health centers do treat people without insurance and treat people who are not here legally, many of them, but places where there is a large strain of immigrants or people here not without papers, that constrain the health care system for free clinics and other places, and possibly emergency rooms when they have emergencies. but it's not like they are going to emergency rooms, getting care and the cost is being passed along to everyone else. host: cape cod, massachusetts, this is tara. caller: i know three things have been in the health care programs all my life. why is it that congress can't get the same health care as the american citizens? why do they have to have a cadillac plan? why are these 10 drugs that are so non-disclosed from president

biden when he gives his ps about doing wonderful work about drug prices lower, when it is only 10 drugs involved, and a lot of things like even insulin, it doesn't affect the average citizen. if it does, you have to be on medicare. the third thing is, how come pharmaceutical companies and try to sell the drugs, and expensive drug to a doctors practice by giving all of these great tricks and launches, and it is still going on? thank you. host: i try to write them all down, but go ahead. guest: the first one was about congress -- this is not true anymore, that congress has the same health insurance everybody else. congress no longer has the same federal health insurance that most workers had, because

when they passed the affordable health care act, they have to get their health care through exchanges. you can say that they have less good health insurance than most other people, because they are employed but they don't have employer health insurance anymore. they have to go through the exchanges. that is still little-known, although it has been very confusing for a lot of people. not just the members of congress, but their staff who have to navigate other ways to get health insurance. the second question was about drug prices, i think. yes, it's only 10 drugs now, but that was as they could get through congress. that's been very difficult to get anything through congress. there was an effort to make that insulin cap on all people who need insulin, not just people on

medicare, but that was taken out at the last minute because they could not get the last vote they needed in the senate to have that in their effort to pass that separately. this is basically hand-to-hand combat in congress to get every last vote to get these things you need passed. there have not been the votes in congress to do this until very recently. what president biden got past or what congress passed last year's on one hand very minimal in many ways. it will not lower drug costs for everybody, but it is almost congress has done -- it is the most congress has done in many years. host: the numbers of american impacted -- americans impacted by insulin drug pricing from the university of south carolina. 30 million americans with diabetes approximately seven point 4 million rely on insulin to manage their care.

guest: it's not a huge number, but for the people that it's for -- we have seen so many cases of people trying to ration or cut back on their insulin and dying. it is a drug that keeps you alive. that is a big issue and has been for quite a while. the last issue was drug company incentives for doctors, which the caller is right, were supposed to have gone away, but haven't in every case. that is something that keeps health reporters very busy, looking at that, but there is a limit to what drug companies can do. they used to fly the doctors to hawaii and they would go to a two hour briefing and could spend the rest of the time in hawaii -- that doesn't happen anymore. host: julie rovner, joining us now. we will be waiting for a briefing on military readiness that is taking place at the air

and space forces later today. we will be taking our viewers there when it begins, but julie rovner is with us until it begins. sue in michigan, good morning. caller: good morning, hello, julie. you are very informative. three quick questions -- canadian prescription medicine is a lot cheaper than the united states? that's number one. and what is congress doing about health care coverage for psychiatric patients. is that improving? are they addressing that? third, my husband is 62 and pays $500 a month for his health care, with a $6,000 deductible. he is south employed. is anything going to lower that price and the future? guest: canadian prescription drugs -- they cost less because canada has limits on how much

drugmakers can charge, almost every other country except the united states regulates or caps drug prices, and if they can't make money in the united states, we are being limited in what we can make overseas, so again, back to that innovation argument -- we will be able to make these drugs anymore. we have to make the profits that we can in the united states. that has been the fight going on for 30 some years that i have been watching. the united states is practically alone in not having price controls on drugs, and people can and duco across the border, particularly if you live in a northern state or if a southern state, you live in a state near mexico, you can get a personal supply for yourself, but there is a concern about people getting black-market drugs or selling mail-order drugs that are canadian but aren't, so it can be

problematic. that's the general rule, they are cheaper in canada and other countries too. host: health care for psychiatric patients? guest: this is something congress is working on. the biden administration put out new rules on mental health parity, something congress has been working on for a long time, since the late 1990's. they passed a couple of laws and we have not seen mental health treated the same as many other medical ailments, and that's something the administration is working on because it is supposed to be law. congress is also working more on mental health care. this is a known issue and it is hard to know how much the federal government can do. by on the mental health parity issue. host: and the $6,000 deductible, looking for ways to lower that. guest:

-- we had deductible and co-pays. if everything was free, people would overuse it. the problem is the skin in the game's arm and a leg. -- the game is a arm and a leg. that is another issue that is being looked at and that is where the idea for a public option comes in. if you think there is agreement on some of these things, that is a bigger thing to be an agreement on. host: the podcast is what the health. you can find it on twitter. it is kffhealthnews.org. that will do it for us program and we will take a