♪ ♪ host: good morning on this wednesday, august 16. in our first hour this morning, we will begin with a new poll on

should presidents provide moral leadership? how would you answer that question? if you say yes, dial in at (202) 748-8000 and if you say no, (202) 748-8001. you can answer the question in a text as well, (202) 748-8003 or post your answer on facebook.com/c-span and on x. the news out of utah conducted this poll at the beginning of the month. they asked americans -- do presidents have a responsibility to provide moral leadership? 94% said yes. 6% said no. that's the question you are answering this morning in our

first hour. we also want you to define moral leadership when you call in this morning. this is what the poll found when they broke it down by party and the definitions of moral leadership. when democrats answer the question, 53% said it's defined by honesty and trust. you can see the breakdown when it comes to diversity, equity and inclusion and fair treatment of others. when republicans answer the question, 61% said it's honesty and trust and then you can see the breakdown after that. when it comes to independents, 27% -- 55% answered honesty and trust and then you see the breakdown after that as well. this morning, should presidents provide moral leadership, yes or no? and to find more leadership for is this morning in our first

hour. from the story about this poll --

house republicans are investing in the link between president joe biden and his son hunter biden and his business dealings and criminal charges. a business associate of hunter biden came forward to say hunter biden engaged in influence peddling. this morning, should presidents provide moral leadership, yes or no? on the hunter biden plea deal, this is from the wall street journal this morning --

that's the latest on the hunter biden plea deal. the papers, the national newspapers this morning on the front pages, dominating the headlines are that georgia indictment that came down monday night.

this is the washington post this morning along with pictures of the former president and 18 others that were indicted. and then you have the washington times with their headline on this, trump indictment targets his tweets and his phone calls. this morning, should presidents provide moral leadership? romney in pueblo, colorado, you say yes, good morning, go ahead.

caller: yes. host: we are listening, how do you answer that question? caller: yes, we all look up to the presidents and all top leadership to guide us through the balance of everything and those that need the help the most. and to grow and help and love and kindness. host: how do you define moral leadership? caller: moral leadership is done by example. an example done by those who hold the most power than everybody else and everybody else wants to do exactly with

leaders are doing. not that what they are doing is wrong but what they are doing is right. host: he says yes, should presidents provide moral leadership? that is our discussion this morning. yesterday at the white house, the special counsel came up at the briefing with the president's press secretary. listen to this exchange. [video clip] >> the presidents personal reaction as a father of the special counsel being appointed? >> you heard me say this before that this case was handled independently by the justice department under leadership of a trump appointed u.s. attorney as you all know. this is consistent with what the

president has said for a long while, going back to his campaign days that he would restore the department of justice as independent from political influence and we want to make sure we continue that. the white house is not been involved and certainly i would refer you to any questions about this specifically to the department of justice and certainly to hunter biden's personal representative. you've heard this from the president, he loves his son and he is proud of him overcoming his addiction and how he is continuing to build his life but i don't have anything else to add to that. host: that was monday's briefing at the white house. from facebook --

you need to define moral leadership with you -- with us if you can. should presidents provide it? caller: good morning. when i saw your first poll at 94% that say yes, i was thinking to myself that this is a no-brainer question. of course a leader has to provide leadership. one part of moral leadership is not lighting. that's an important factor in being a leader and trump even lied before his campaign, saying that obama was not born in the united states and the second time he said with the inauguration, my crowd was the biggest crowd for an

inauguration and anyone who wasn't blind could see that obama's crowd was much larger. then there was the big lie that he sensed cheating on the election. this man has had a pernicious effect on all of america which is a lack of moral leadership. host: alan says you can't lie, that's more leadership for a president. when the harris posters broke at parties, honesty and trust ranks the highest on that question. after that, it goes different directions depending which party

you go to. we are asking you this morning to answer this question. president trump asked over the weekend about whether he would take a plea deal in the 2020 inter--- interference case and here is that exchange from saturday. [video clip] >> is there any chance you would take a plea deal? in georgia? >> we did nothing wrong and we never take a plea deal. you're a wise guy to ask that question. i did nothing wrong, is called election interference. these indictments were brought out by biden. this is joe biden to win the election by himself. he can't win the election on votes. you can see how stupid they acted yesterday.

when they appointed a special counsel. what a crazy thing that was. he's being laughed at all over the world. we have a country that's in major decline, i don't mean decline but i mean major decline. a lot of people dislike this administration and we will straighten it out and make america great again, wiseguy, thank you very much. host: that was the former president in iowa saturday. from facebook --

william and florida is up next. caller: good morning. host: go ahead. caller: it's a no-brainer, yeah. moral leadership is very important. host: how do you define it? caller: i defined it by actions, by taking action. for example, they was that really bad fire in maui and our current president is in lake tahoe vacationing. that's how he takes action. that's not moral leadership in my opinion. host: the president said yesterday he would travel there soon, that there is still a response in a rescue effort happening there. caller: yeah, i don't look at that. there is lots of things i could say about him. i noticed that the callers are

just using this platform to bash president trump and i just don't think that's a good idea. he is a very moral person. what you are portraying in the media, not you, but what the media portrays is not reality. people should not pay attention to that. they should pay attention to the facts. host: what would you point to when it comes to the former president moral leadership? give us some examples. caller: he has always been for the military police and he has also been a strong christian. he has always backed america.

he has always made it america first. that's what maga, make america great again and that's how he's always been. i don't understand. these indictments, by the way, that's all they are is election interference, each one of them. they are timed perfectly to interrupt this election. and he's going to court six weeks before the iowa caucus. in my opinion, that is definitely election interference. host: lawrence on facebook --

rebecca in california, good morning. caller: good morning, everyone. yes, absolutely, there needs to be more leadership. nobody is perfect. everyone has their faults but moral leadership is part of the gig of being president. regarding donald trump -- host: can you first answer and defined moral leadership? caller: setting a good example, being upstanding, acting in a correct manner, following the rules, following the laws, being

a good representation of what people need and can look up to. it's extremely important, extremely. regarding donald trump, the man will be 102 years old. he is like the dog with the bone. he really needs to bury that bone and move on. host: tom, los angeles, welcome to the conversation. caller: good morning. you have to define what leadership is. i would like to see i would get into free speech on that. i hear so many things from both parties that are not correct. [indiscernible]

i sort of pay attention and you just mentioned something you guys might consider the hunter biden request to the court was for immunity for past actions, not actions of the future. nobody's going to grant that. i have no idea why the attorneys even bothered with it. it seems to be a special treatment for certain parties. we had that here in california. we have a majority of democratic leadership because of gerrymandering. honestly, this country [indiscernible] that works really good for me. host: jacksonville, florida, should the president provide

moral leadership and defined it for us this morning. caller: yes, i think the president should portray moral leadership. moral leadership is just doing the right thing and whenever you have a president such as donald trump who was recently found liable for sexual assault in a civil case in new york, that would go against my ideas more leadership. whenever you hear him in the past, he did bash john mccain who was a pow and that's not being a moral leader. he was making fun of him for being captured.

he would rather have soldiers that are not captured. meanwhile, he was dodging the draft, claiming he had a bone spur. obviously, that would not be the case for somebody like myself if i had a bone spur in the late 1960's and the war was raging, i was certainly probably be in the jungle. i just think donald trump is not a moral leader. on the other hand, biden has his problems, too. whenever it comes to the thing with hunter, i think they need to look into that. host: did you -- who did you vote for in 2020? caller: i voted for biden. host: but ud some -- but you do see some moral faults with the

current president and the financial businesses of his son? caller: oh, absolutely. i read about the laptop from hell in the new york post. there is obviously a lot going on there that's not good. on the other hand, we all have families in every family is probably a crackhead in its. if you have a son, regardless if they are criminal or whatever. host: i want to share a piece from jim gerrity.

that is from an opinion piece written in the washington post back in may, saying the investigation into hunter bidens financial dealings matter and democrats shouldn't pretend it does not. democrats out there joining in the conversation -- should the president provide moral leadership, how do you define it, and does this investigation and hunter biden's is in his deals fall into the category or is it part of this discussion about more leadership? on facebook --

jamestown, north carolina, good morning area caller: good morning and good morning to the c-span audience. it's an easy question for me and i would like to compare and contrast the morality of president jimmy carter versus the immorality of donald trump. the morality of jimmy carter, he predicated his whole presidency when he told the populace that i will never lie to you. basically, he did that. you look at his administration, there was no corruption with the one exception of bert lance who did not go to jail. you compare president carter and his administration to the trump administration were many have gone to jail. you look at president carter's

christian faith, he never shied away from his faith which was his moral compass. whether it was the negotiations for peace in the middle east and other times where he spoke with leaders of other nations, he always brought his faith into the picture. look at what he did for the carter center, monitoring elections. and look at what he did in terms of once again, not lying and the comparison to the over 30,000 lives that have been documented to the former president. this is a quantum disparity. it's easy for me to model for morality in leadership is president jimmy carter and the model for immorality as donald trump and look at how many in

his administration have been brought to jail. now we have 4 indictments and adjust speaks to itself. host: bradley from marietta, georgia. caller: yes, hello. i probably would've said years ago that it didn't matter but i think it's critical nowadays. i am a democrat but a lot of this is caused because of us tolerating bill clinton behavior. it's to allow the republicans to feel guilt free. i cannot understand republicans, please, how can you put your faith in this guide? you say biden is a liberal? i have to swallow my tongue over hillary and vote for biden. they are so conservative and i

don't understand republicans, i just can't. i'm flabbergasted. host: let's go back to what you said about democrats defending former president bill clinton over the monica lewinsky affair? caller: but the difference now is hunter biden he's got issues. i don't think he's a very good person actually. if he did something wrong, prosecute him or put him in jail. they are defending trump to the point -- host: should that them vice president joe biden, if he

wasn't completely aware of what was going on, should he have be en clued in or curious or says something about what was happening? caller: he's his father, he's blinded by -- he wants to love his son and his son is a mess. he had a son that passed away. he's blinded by his son. plus, he's not in the government. if you want to compare siblings, the trump kids are monsters. they are talking that a million dollars but that's nothing compared to what jared kushner is using. host: is that what about-ism? what about defending the president?

caller: if my guys on my team did something wrong, prosecute them. if they did something wrong, prosecute them. i'm in atlanta right now and you get this feeling building up. this trial is a once-in-a-lifetime thing. if he is found -- if he is -- if he is found not guilty, god help us. if he can get away with that, having to defend the fbi and a never thought ice -- -- i would see a world like this. if he is found not guilty, our country is in serious trouble. host: bradley mentioning former president bill clinton. if you are interested in morals and what has happened over the years in politics, you can go into the c-span archives to find

certain moments and one of them is a press conference from january of 1990 when then president bill clinton denied his sexual relationship with monica lewinsky. [video clip] >> i want to say one thing -- i want you to listen to me and i will say this again. i did not have sexual relations with that woman, ms. lewinsky. i never told anybody to light, not a single time, never. these allegations are false and i need to go back to work for the american people. [applause] host: from the c-span archives, bill clinton denying his sexual relationship with monica lewinsky. this morning, we are talking about more leadership and should presidents provided. from california, hi, chris. caller: yes, my answer is yes,

president should provide moral leadership. how do i define it? that's a good question. i have a catholic background.. it's not moral i think to provide the jurisdiction of morality from the latin church for people who are not members of it. i think wisdom is a considerable part of morality and the role of not just the president of the united states but any leader of any sovereign nation. i think it's been moral of president biden to avoid entanglements with russia involving ukraine, to keep the role of the united states in support of nato and advancing the interests in the united states of the united states government through nato. but i also think it's immoral

that we are supplying so much in the way of armaments, short-term and long-term for ukraine. i think that's a wise thing for the united states and the position in the context of relationships between russia and china and the interest with the belt road initiative. host: thanks for calling in and now on x - frank in poughkeepsie, new york, defined moral leadership. caller: ok, could you tell me

which president in the history of this country was moral? because there was none. as far as leadership, the nation would have to be moral. this nation is not a moral nation. this nation has all types of disgusting, immoral acts. host: mac in summerville, south carolina, what do you think? caller: absolutely it matters. for instance, president trump talks about making america great again. i think morals go along with

honor and president trump had an opportunity to serve his country and put the uniform on and take his licks. he would have shown a little bit of honor way back then and then he would -- we would have more respect for him now. have a good morning. host: richard on x, echoing a previous caller -- earl in aurora, indiana, hi, earl. caller: thank you for taking my call.

whatever people can say is morality, they say trump is not a christian. a christian is someone that helps his neighbors and loves his country that will do whatever he can do to help us and that's what trump promised and he did it. look at the democrats. it's mostly -- chuck schumer, talking about the judges. morality is love your country and help your neighbor. that's the way i was raised. i'm 86 years old and i love this country and as far as trump, now we can't have religion in government, it's stupid. host: jim in louisville, kentucky, how do you define

leadership -- moral leadership by a president? caller: it's when you have a train wreck in ohio and you say you want are going to go but you don't go. he said he would go to the border but he didn't go. the wildfire in hawaii, he will not go. there are 13 dead soldiers and he is looking at his watch saying when is this thing going to be over. that's more leadership. host: all right. a couple of callers criticizing president biden's moral leadership and pointing to what jim said, where has he gone? another person mentioned the hawaii fires. yesterday, president biden was in wisconsin touting what he is now claimed with a few words about the wildfires in maui. take a listen. [video clip] >> let me address the

devastating wildfire some of which is still burning in hawaii. it claimed the lives of 99 people so far. they haven't cleaned things up yet. it's the deadliest wildfire in more than 100 years with whole cities destroyed and generations of native hawaiian history turned to derouen. i spoken to the governor couple of times and assured him the state will have everything in these from the federal government. i immediately approve the governor's request for expedited major disaster exploration. whatever he needs he will get in that will get aid into the hands of people who desperately needed, who have lost their loved ones, their homes, their livelihoods. think about this -- all that area they have to plow up, they can't do it now because they don't know how many bodies they don't know what's left. imagine being a mom or dad and wondering where your child is.

imagine being a husband or wife or mother or father. over 500 federal personnel have been deployed to maui. it's to help them get back on their feet. fema and search and rescue teams are searching through the ashes in that five mile area you see on television. his painstaking work and it takes time and it's nerve-racking. most of the debris cannot be removed until is done. my wife and i will travel to hawaii as soon as we can. i don't want to get in the way. i've been to too many disaster areas but i want to go and make sure they have everything they need. i want to be sure we don't disrupt the ongoing recovery efforts. host: that was president biden yesterday in wisconsin. auburn, new york, no is your answer to whether the president should provide moral leadership, tell us why. caller: i say you would have to define morality and there is a

lot of different moralities. you can argue that into infinity. an example would be if you want more leadership, the jimmy carter thing comes up is a great leader but as a presidential leader, no. we ended up with huge inflation and lots of other problems. here we are now, trying to figure this out. they should stick to the basic idea of personal responsibility and low taxes, those of the things that will make this country come back. arguing over who is the best and who is the most moral, you will not get there. leave that question out of this discussion of who should be president. host: david in new york says no to our question this morning. in the most recent survey of

historians, when asked which presidents over history have moral authority, look at the rankings the caller mentioned jimmy carter. he is pretty high up on the list but it begins with abraham lincoln, george washington, franklin roosevelt, dwight eisenhower, barack obama and then jimmy carter. you can find that list on c-span.org. the caller also mentioned what presidents should be focusing on and the morals shouldn't necessarily be what they put their attention on. going back to the news poll, when they asked the president what should lawmakers focus more on, 55% said more leadership, 45% said practical outcomes.

65% said bread-and-butter issues, 35% said cultural issues. gary and fletcher, north carolina, good morning. should presidents provide moral leadership? caller: yeah, i'm a prejudice caller. do you remember me from a long time ago? host: i don't. caller: morality is a -- it's not part of religion or anything. morality is what you do when nobody is looking. trump does not have a chance to be immoral because the cameras are on him constantly. it seems the media is teaching is what morality is. we will watch something happen and the media will come in and

follow politicians. they say that's immoral nuts wrong and we sit there and not airheads. we don't understand all the rules. we just get led along and let other people interpret morals for us. i know people that are not religious and they have more morals than religious peaches -- people. being honest and truthful, people are finding lots of bank accounts and things, i think it would be morally responsible for a leader to explain what is happening and not talk about it. donald trump on the one hand, he never took pay. he donates all his money to veterans causes. host: all of his money? caller: not all of his money, the money he earned, his

earnings as a president. he never accepted them. that's a little different to someone not only taking their pay but taking pay from other countries. host: can i have you respond -- how do you respond to that viewer? caller: violence against minorities? there has always been incidences like that in all directions. it's whatever you choose to highlight. the caller that made that remark can definitely be truthful. anybody can do that so it's kind of a cheap shot to go back and forth. host: what about the insurrection part of it on

january 6? caller: the big word was fight. a lot of politicians like to use the word fight. it just rolls off their time naturally. but people will be more scrutinized when he says fight. he did say go on, do your duty and march peacefully. some people neglect to hear that or repeat that. they will have that agenda. i choose to hear it because he said it. i've got to give him credit for saying it that he meant it. host: for those that are interested, you can find the president's remarks on that day in their entirety and listen for yourself if you go to our archives, c-span.org. kevin, in maryland, hi, kevin.

caller: how are you doing? morning. you are talking about moral leadership. it sets examples as far as personal views and reaching out to the people. i think the big problem we have here is media painting the picture. going after one individual, there is too much and if people look back, and they said they were going to do what they're going to do a make this country better, as far as building trust and creating things in meaning and development in helping the united states and bring it back, jobs and whatever else. people fall for this trap of what you are hearing. i put on different channels of

media any day of the week and it's entrapment of blah, blah, blah and then you turn another channel and the big thing is entrapment. and another channel, entrapment it is. it kind of blows my mind where i'm tired of watching any kind of tv, would rather watch a movie. you have all this stuff on hunter and biden. how come everybody else is getting locked up on the trump people and nothing is being done on the upper -- on the others? it's a double standard here. host: kevin and marilyn, on facebook -- les in texas, you say no to this question?

caller:caller: that's correct. as far as the past presidents come i'm 62 years old and retired and i haven't seen much morality in any of them. i want to mention transparency. transparency is something you don't see. even with the news programs and even such as your program. i've been watching you this morning and you have asked one of the callers, did you vote for a democrat? did you vote for joe biden? as i hear this and watch c-span, i wonder to myself if you are going to answer that same question so we as american people know who you voted for and who we are talking to. host: that's not the role of the person who sits in his chair and

hosts the program. we are facilitating a conversation between you and the other viewers who call in, between you and our guests who join us to answer your questions and respond to your comments. whoever sits in this chair has likely voted but in this capacity, it doesn't matter how we voted. our job is to be neutral and facilitate this conversation. tony on facebook -- roger in kansas, hi, roger. caller: hello. i've been listening to the show here and it kind of covered a lot. i believe morality matters but

like everyone has said, morality means different things to different people. what does it mean to you? caller: morality means doing what you say in saying what you mean. i do believe that moral people have done great things in this world like you mentioned. carter was probably the most moral one but i felt like he was probably the worst president. our great john f. kennedy, i wouldn't call him a moral person but he did great things. if you look through the bible, biblically, god has used flawed people all throughout the bible. that's my opinion. host: jack in maryland, good

morning. caller: hi, how are you doing? i would rather talk to you than artificial intelligence anyway. they don't have to have morals. they have to be un moral to protect this country like our southern border no matter what they have to do protect this border. that's their job. i don't care about their morals and i don't care what they think as long as they do their job. i will tell you one thing about joe biden, the way he thinks, he was talking about maui. he says you can't is in there and plow because there is dead bodies in the rubble. you know where his mind is? he wants to plow it all away and forget about it. this guy doesn't care about nobody and he. is compromised i told you that two years ago and let's get on with getting him out of there. kamala harris at least is not compromised.

thank you. host: mary in chapel hill, north carolina. caller: hi there, i just want to say that there have been moral presidents like eisenhower and lincoln. i was always an independent and i always thought that lincoln had morals. i'm telling you, donald trump has divided this country. he has been nothing but an immoral person since the time he was young. he cheated on every single one of his wives and i just don't understand why these maga people can worship him like that. he is the most immoral person we have ever had as president. i think we really need to get him out of politics and get our country back on a moral ground. thank you. host: a gallup poll --

there is also this -- betty in pennsylvania, your turn this morning, you say yes, president should provide more leadership? caller: good morning, yes.

i think a little compassion should be added to that as well. right now, the united states is going crazy. when trump was president, did you ever see him go to comfort people when there was a school shooting, when there were tornadoes, when there were hurricanes? did he ever try and make these people feel good and say we are here for you and we will take care of you, we will help you? he was on a golf course somewhere. the republicans recently have criticized president biden for not going to maui. he will go. right now there is so much going on, he doesn't want to have attention put on him. it doesn't want to have to worry about people looking out for him. he wants people to do their job and when things settle down where he can go and be there for

people, he will. president obama, when the sandy hook shootings happened, he was so comforting to people. we need this in our country. we need somebody who will be there for us and comfort us and say yes, i understand. what did trump do when the hurricane hit puerto rico? he threw papal taras -- he threw paper towels to people. we need moral leadership. this country needs more leadership. look where we are going without it. host: the former president yesterday on his truth social platform wrote --

republican governor brian kemp responded in a tweet -- chris in spring texas, good morning to you. caller: good morning, how are you? host: doing well, how do you answer this question, yes or no? caller: i guess the real question is, are people familiar

with fdr? he executed order 9066 and put americans in those camps and about 2000 of them died? do we talk about that in schools? thank you. host: tommy and brooke meal virginia, good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call and the answer is yes. it says they should establish justice and tranquility and provide for the general welfare. you cannot have a president like former president who is disruptive and uncooperative and unreasonable. to parrot with the previous caller said, they need to just to the need their president to be neutral and not partisan in times of emergency like this immigration issue.

the last thing i want to say is i cannot understand how trump supporters can disqualify hillary clinton for unsecured emails they almost disqualified obama because they thought he was a muslim. yes, morals obviously are important. that's all i have to say, thanks for taking my call. host: jim in winter park, texas today -- wendy in millville, new jersey, you say no? caller: i actually believe it's not about morals. i think is about honesty, knowing right from wrong. host: isn't that morality? caller: in a way it is but that's an interpretation. each person is different as far as religion and beliefs.

there is a strong right from wrong line. i think the parties have gotten so carried away with wanting to win the we are not even the focus anymore. they charged trump with racketeering. isn't that what the politicians did to us in the election? they withheld information. you had your social media, all your major networks. they withheld information about hunter biden that -- and that could've changed people's minds and that's wrong. host: built in new york --

let's go to alex in d.c. who says yes. good morning. caller: hi, good morning. . what your previous caller had to say is similar. some people are getting confused with what moral and ethics are. we all have what morals and ethics i. we all have our own idea of what is right and what is wrong. i think everybody who runs for office believes that they are doing the right thing. i think they all believe that their ideas of right and wrong are the ideas of right and wrong that will save the country or whatever. what we need to talk about is ethics. you know, traditionally, religion has been the first event. every religion has a lot of the

same principles, giving to the poor, being a voice for the voiceless, being humble, something for the greater good. i do not think a lot of politicians are looking at ethics right now. host: would you say that honesty and trust is morality? caller: i think. you can get a lot of things done in politics by lying. we have a lot of examples of that. host: next, we will continue our week long look at the inflation

reduction. after the break, we will be joined by madison wisconsin -- madison, wisconsin mayor about how local governments are using funds to combat climate change. later, barbara discusses the future of the republican party and regulating big tax. >> a group of academics discuss the 2020 for four campaign of donald trump. means for a potential rematch against president biden. american university hosted this event. c-span now, free mobile video at

or you can find it online at c-span.org. >> healthy democracy does not just look like this, it looks like this, where americans can see democracy at work. get informed straight from the sources on c-span, unfiltered, unbiased, word for word, from the nation's capital to wherever you are to get -- this is what democracy looks like. c-span, powered by cable. >> this week, 2024 coverage from the iowa state fair. tonight, a debate. the u.s. ambassador to the u.n.,

nikki haley and on friday night, ron desantis with a chat with candidates from the iowa state fair. this week at 9:00 p.m. eastern on c-span and online at c-span.org. >> campaign 24 coverage is your frontmost to the presidential election. watch our coverage with me and greets, speeches and events. to make up your own mind, campaign 2024 anytime online span.org. c-span, your unfiltered view of politics. >> washington journal continues. host: president biden find the

reduction inflation act into law a year ago today. looking at different provisions and their impact. joining us today about the inflation reduction act funding for local government is the mayor of madison, wisconsin. thank you for being with us this morning. we appreciate it. you are the chair. what is the group? >> -- guest: they work on the issue of climate. we formed when the federal government was threatening to take us out of the paris climate agreement and mayors said, no, we are still in. we believe we need to be working on climate change. since then, we have mobilized more than 750 mayors across this

country, and we have mayors in 45 states, in washington dc, and we do all sorts of work and some of it is very practical. we have a purchasing collaborative. we have worked on policies like the inflation reduction act, both in terms of getting it passed and implemented, but also in supporting cities across the country to take advantage of the provisions in this landmark legislation. host: when the u.s. withdrew, what can you do at that city level to impact globally? guest: climate change is a huge global problem, but it will only be mitigated or impacted by the

actions that each and every one of us take at the local level. yes, we need the federal government to be taking action, yes, we need the international agreements, but we also need every city, every person, every household to work on reducing their emissions. when we said we are still into the paris climate accords, the importance is not that we are putting our names on a piece of paper, it is that we are working on greenhouse gas reduction goals, and we do that through any number of ways. it might be focusing on transit or helping people put solar in their homes. you go down the list and there is a ton of work in all places to make a difference. host: what have you been

successful at your city? give me examples of this group and what is happening in other parts of the country. guest: we have a goal to make our city operations carbon neutral by 2030. 100% renewable. we are about 75% of the way there, and we have done a lot of that by putting solar panels on our buildings. one of the things i am most proud of in madison is that we have a program called green power, training folks who may have traditionally not had access. switching out lights to leds, to install ev charging facilities. they get great experience. they get a good paying job and a

pathway into the trade. we can all of the energy efficiency work that they are doing. we are helping our community choose solar. those buses are going to be all electric, and we are electrifying our fleet. there is also its of work that we are doing. you see that mirrored as well with people doing similar work in energy efficiency that also resiliency and building the tree canopy to increase resiliency against heat waves. we want to create green solutions. a lot of work happening across the country. host: i want to share with -- share how we are sharing the lines. if they have any questions or comments for you, as well.

if you live in an urban area, call in at (202) 748-8000. suburban area, call (202) 748-8001. myrtle can call (202) 748-8002 -- rural areas can call (202) 748-8002. look at the numbers on your screen. it is broken down by urban, suburban and rural. you just minute -- you just mentioned tree canopy. why is that important? guest: first and foremost, they do help. more importantly, in cities, they provide shade that can make

our buildings more energy efficient. they help us to be more resilient to changes that we are seeing. they have the ability to mitigate rain at ground level. a lot of benefits that we get from the natural world and from green infrastructure. host: the one-year anniversary of signing the act into law this afternoon. we will have coverage of that. how have you and others leveraged the reduction act to get closer to your goals that all of you outlined after we withdrew from the paris climate agreement?

guest: it has really been landmark. it is the biggest action that the federal government has taken . it is absolutely groundbreaking and it will make our jobs easier at the local level. some of the things that we are doing in madison, i talked about our ev fleet purchases. we continue to transform our fleet and each one of those purchases will be eligible for a pay credit under the inflation reduction act. when we install solar, when we start experimenting with geothermal, i talked recently to a mayor who is putting five of their city buildings on

geothermal. if they are also going to extend that system to the private sector buildings that are nearby. it is find the project. it is just a game changer. over the course of our capital improvement plan, we will probably get between 10 and $13 million back from the federal government, for this renewable efficiency. host: one of the challenges for whatever you have to do to get money from the federal government. are there ways to improve that?

guest: it is a fairly straightforward system. the way they have it set up is actually pretty efficient. for the first time, they have allowed the kinds of tax credits and rebates that normally people get to be applicable to local government and nonprofit. this is an important thing because the kind of tax credits that you could get were not available to local governments or nonprofits, and now they are. it has really opened up who can take advantage of this work and get those incentives. that is a key thing here. one potential barrier is that you do have to spend the money up front.

you have to do the work, install the system and apply for the credit on the back end. they may have issues. that is one thing i would like to see them do a set up systems where people can borrow that front capital and pay it back partially with the credit. i'm sure we will see that. that is the only thing that might be difficult for smaller places, but in general, it is brilliant that we can take advantage. host: we have divided them by size of the cities.

we want to hear from you this morning, from all of you about what you are seeing in our communities, what you would like to see your cities with climate proposals, if any at all. the mayor of madison, wisconsin in that city. we have divided the lines, as we said, by size of city. he mentioned some challenges for a smaller city, but are they all eligible? guest: absolutely. there are a set of funds and some of those will be

competitive. believe me, i love grant money. we have been very successful. i think what is maybe more powerful are the credits and rebates that will come automatically. it is not a grant application. it is not a lot of paperwork involved. this is true whether we are talking about local government, nonprofit, private businesses or anything individual. not too long ago, there was no hot water and it was really a bummer. we called the plumber in and he taught us about an option which

is much more efficient. it is not all natural gas. it will be a lever carbon option and i will be able to get a credit for that on my taxes next year. that is amazing and it makes it more possible for me to invest in this technology that is better for the planet. households can access benefits as well and it applies to businesses, apartment buildings, any side of local government that wants to do this work. caller: on the matter of global warming, the guidelines they are setting up for people to purchase these appliances and

stuff, i think it is a waste of time because i do not want to be rude, but we have passed the global warming deadline for saving the planet. we should have done this work 40 years ago. host: we will to -- guest: if you did not start yesterday, when is the best time to start? it is today. we do it according to the best estimates and we have six or seven more years to make a difference in reducing our emissions.

honestly, i'm not sure what the alternative is. we see this massive problem looming. how can we not try to make the future better? i really do think that we have to at least try to mitigate the impact for our grandchildren and their grandchildren. there are simple things that people can do right now. going back, you can get a credit for purchasing an electric vehicle, which is a huge impact. you can decide to fly less. you can eat less meat and you can put in led light bulbs in your home. every day, there are choices that we are making that can make a difference and reduce our greenhouse gas footprint.

we let ourselves and future generations to try our best. the production of creates an enormous amount of greenhouse gases. one of the choices that we can make is to just eat less meat on a daily basis because that creates a lot of emissions. host: we are listening. it is your turn. caller: i have one question. host: i do not think the mayor understood that. larry and vermont.

good morning. caller: i'm calling and because i live off grid. my whole street is off. . the issue that i have with all of these stipends that are given to people in my state is that all the people that live in the grade are getting great advantages but when it comes to me and vermont, off grade, i am totally told, you do not qualify because the power company is giving out the grades. say you do not get anything. i called my state representatives and i talked about doing an item on the state

income tax because nobody knows how many people are living off grid and vermont. there is a substantial group of people who will not get stipends for anything because they live off grid and is unfair. guest: congratulations for being off grid. quite an accomplishment. i cannot speak to the specifics of vermont incentives. it does make sense but you're saying, but i can tell you that the inflation reduction act credit are not coming from the utilities. if you are doing energy efficiency work in your home, if you are adding geothermal or you want to buy an electric vehicle,

you should be eligible for the credits because they come through your taxes. hopefully that is good news for you. you should explore those credits. for others who are on grade, not many of us have the ability to be on grade. there are state based incentives were first solar installation who come through your state or local utility. one of the features of the inflation reduction act is that you can actually stack those credits. we can actually use federal grant money and still get some of the federal credit back, which i think is fantastic. we need.

host: here is one of our viewers posting. there are very few places where we could not do this. guest: in madison, we are switching all of our streetlight to led. we want to make it more efficient and try to switch over to renewable energy, whether that is solar or some other source. but yes, the caller is absolutely right. you will see, particularly out on our highway system that a lot of the signage and lights are powered by solar panels, which is great to see. it is not quite free but after

that, it is a great source of energy. host: do they go into the garbage? how do you deal with that? also, plastic in your waterway. guest: plastic is such a huge problem across the country and around the world. we have a series of plastics that we accept for recycling and we pass on to recycling plants, but we do not accept all types of plastic. it is difficult. the real impact that we can have is in buying less plastic so

that we have less plastic to get rid of at the end of the day. it is important. it is something that i hope we will work on in the future. but also to start shifting away in general and to use other materials, whenever we can. it is a little bit less of an issue at the local level, but plastic and water is a huge problem in our oceans. it is a little bit on all of us to do what we can on a daily basis, but i also look to the private sector to better

regulate. that requirement for a company to take back. host: imagine recycling those plastic products. guest: it has been up and down financially. some years there is a demand for recycled products and we can actually sell those to make a little bit of money. it is really dependent on the global economy, whether or not somebody is wanting to buy that and it is a significant challenge for a local government to deal with recyclables. we want to keep as much as we can out of our landfills, which is important, but it is very difficult.

how can we reduce at the source? how can we reuse things, if at all possible? another thing in the waste stream is organic waste. we are experimenting with this as well. we know that organic waste, food waste creates a lot of greenhouse gas emissions and if we can reduce that and compost that waste, we can reduce the greenhouse gas footprint but also use it for positive things like fertilizer. this is what you see in cities. there are others who have been doing this for some years in a very exciting way to help our

climate. host: south carolina. caller: i'm going to give a bit of a more libertarian question. i want to ask the mayor why she thinks it is ok. why do we have to, your electric car? why can't you buy those things on your own? guest: if we can reduce our footprint anywhere, it benefits the whole world and the impacts of climate change are being felt first and worse by folks who are low income, by communities of calder and by the global south.

so we know it is very important for single moms and inner-city for us to reduce the greenhouse gas footprint of our community and improve air quality. make sure her kid has the better future that will not be as impacted by climate change. we know big storms have flood low income communities disproportionately. we know heat impacts from climate change are felt proportionately in communities of color so it is important for all of us to do the work to reduce greenhouse gases and mitigate the damages from climate change. host: what is the cause of solar panels and installation minus the tax credits? guest: the answer to that is completely dependent on where you are. i cannot answer that with

numbers but i can say, in many places, there are local organizations that will help you figure that out exactly. what the cost would be for your roof and and what the benefits would be available locally, whether through the inflation reduction act or utility or state or local government in madison we have a program where we support homeowners to put solar on their home by doing what is called a bulk buy program so we educate homeowners interested, we group them together, we go out and we bid to solar installers to get the best price possible. to install those solar panels and when we find the best price, everybody who signed out for the group by gets the price, all the incentives available from local utilities, inflation reduction act, and solar panels.

the way we talk about the price of solar is in the payback times so how many years will it take for the panels to pay for themselves or what you are saving. what we see is payback times between seven and 15 years depending on where you're at so for some it is going to be a no-brainer to do this, and for others you might think about whether you are going to have your home for that long or whether having solar panels will increase the value of your home and increase how much you are able to resell that home for. there is a lot of nuance locally, but again, there is folks in every place they'll be happy to support you -- when i say folks to support you, i am talking the private sector. the for-profit solar installers that are out there making their living off of this solar

economy. host: mattis's is our guest this morning satya rhodes-conway -- madison mayor is our guest this morning satya rhodes-conway joining us. caller: we have to find ways to solve some of these problems. making money from them, one is in -- they're putting our cities with the smoke causing deaths. we had old ways to do it with fire towers to check and catch them when they were small. we have drums today. -- dones today. we cannot afford the lives getting lost from this. let brush go up in the trees and have loggers go and log the trees out.

it pollutes our cities with all the smoke besides the lives it calls. we have to do a better job. it is something we can solve right now if we get better trees, they will clean our air. will not pollute the streams. it is a job we can do today. guest: thank you, rich. we did see very bad impacts from the poor air quality and smoke from the canadian wildfires. this is something, those of us on the east and midwest are not used dealt with, but our friends in the u.s. and pacific northwest -- in the west and pacific northwest deal with on a daily basis. wildfires are a consequence of global warming. we see rising temperatures and drought increases the chance of wildfire and the caller's right, our history of forest mismanagement

where we suppress fires rather than let the natural fire cycle happen in our forest lands has put us into a dangerous situation where we now have too much fuel in our forest and we do get a fire, it comes much worse, it is a global problem because the impact most recently were from canadian wildfires. we are starting to have to cross borders and think about international solutions here. we can do a better job of managing fire in our wildlands, but we also have to be prepared for the fact that the climate is changing and we are seeing the catastrophic effects of that and we need to be prepared in our cities. host: john in oakland, california. hi. caller: hey, good morning. i live in oakland, california

where upward 20% of our city is homeless. i'm wondering if there are any benefits the homeless will see and if so, how we can leverage them. guest: thank you for your call. we really do want to be able to support our house less community as much as possible. i do not think there are direct impacts from the inflation reduction act for those experiencing homelessness but i think we will see across the country and perhaps in oakland, it will make it easier for facilities whether there is a shelter facility or campground, tammy house villages or affordable housing complexes to be sustainable, to be on renewable energy and off of fossil fuels which will help to

make those living situations more healthy as well. one of the things we have done in medicine is use our funds, the american rescue plan act funds, to install solar panels at a tiny house village that serves homeless folks and we wanted to reduce the utility bill so it will be easier for them to be financials that -- financially stable as a village and help them get into renewable energy so that it is a small investment but it is helping them move towards solar. that is something we want to replicate. we want to make sure as we build affordable housing in the community, we voted in sustainable way, whether that is public housing or private folks, affordable housing developers doing the work. i think it is important everyone reap the benefits of renewable energy so i think you see that

across the country, particularly in the affordable housing space that folks are trying to make affordable housing much more sustainable and much healthier, particularly in indoor air quality. host: bill in alabama. caller: thank you for taking my call. mayor conway, what is the science or, since that backs up all of your claims about -- common sense that backs up all of your claims about putting solar panels on houses that may pay off in 15 years? are you aware of the average roof of an house, single roof -- shingle roof, that is a lifetime of a single roof?

i find it ironic that you keep talking about the government doing this, the government doing that. we do not even have drinkable water. so many areas and where i live, there clement you boil -- they recommend you boil the water and i think the most important thing you government people, you officials, should do is make sure the screws are educating the kids to read and write, learn history, learn a little science, and control crime. host: ok. we will have the mayor respond to you. guest:? say, i agree when the most important things local government can do is provide clean water and am awfully sorry to hear you are under a boil

water order. it is unfortunate. it is one of the most basic responsibilities to provide clean water for the people and it is something we take seriously here. i also agree education is fundamental to our communities. that is something that is critical. i think it is super important that our young people learn of the science behind climate change and understand the impacts happening around our planet today because we have done with the burning fossil fuels and the impact of the climate and our day-to-day lives. and what we can do about it. i first learned about climate change in high school. i'm not going to say how long ago that was but it was really impactful for me. it impacted my career trajectory. i got trained in science, have a massive in ecology and bachelors in biology -- masters in ecology and bachelors in biology because i was concerned about global

warming and climate change and i think it is important for young people to learn that science. in part because we need more innovation and we need more and better solutions to climate change. that is going to come from young people learning about it and understanding the science and being creative. i think educational piece is absolutely critical for the future of our planet. host: we go to stratford, connecticut, nancy. caller: hello. thank you for all that you do create i recall 30 years ago when al gore talked about climate change and we had a certain party that was say it is a hoax, it is a hoax on and on. it is heartbreaking to know that we could have started to do something way back then but ask american people to please vote for people that care about our environment and again i thank you so much for what you do. guest: thank you, nancy.

it is so important folks get involved and certainly we want everyone to vote in every election and i would agree, i think it is important for us to vote for folks who understand climate change and understand how to combat it. something climate mayors believe in strongly. we obviously are all elected officials and we care about the climate and we are a nonpartisan group. we really think that elected officials need to pay attention to issues around climate change and take action and that is why we exist. host: donna in wisconsin. caller: yes, i have three points i would like to see. one, we put in a solar plant by my house. they cut off 1200 acres of forest. all the animals were displace. all the trees are gone.

solar panels make hot spots plus we pay china a lot of money for the panels. number two, i do not like people to limit what i can eat. the government is becoming our leaders who tell us what we can eat and inflation reduction act is a joke. this is a slush fund of money that is being wasted. millions of dollars, taxpayer dollars comes because a few people want us to do what they want us to do. guest: donna, thank you for coming in. it's great to hear from some from wisconsin and i have to say, i disagree with you. i think the and patient reduction act -- inflation reduction act, the projects i've seen, the money is well used and is being used to create good jobs, right here in wisconsin. it is being used to encourage

domestic manufacturing so we do not have to pay chinese companies for solar panels. we have seen across this country that these funds are being invested in cities, in the united states come in domestic manufacturing employing our friends and neighbors and i think it is one of the most important facets of the inflation reduction act is the fact that it encourages domestic content, it encourages using local labor. it encourages energy efficiency and i think that is really important. we know that we have to reduce our greenhouse gas footprint but we also need to do it in a way that invest in our communities, that creates good jobs right here in our community, whether that is wisconsin or across this great. country it's really important and i think it is something the president is talking a lot about these days. he was just here in wisconsin at

a local manufacturing company in milwaukee talking about the investments from the inflation reduction act and how they have been able to benefit in milwaukee from those investments. i think that domestic manufacturing piece is really important. host: michael, troy, new york. caller: hello. i am america disability. i got confused. you are the mayor of wisconsin. guest: madison, in wisconsin. caller: listen, you are talking -- my father worked for the utilities in the 60's. i got my degree probably the same time you got yours. there is no reason why we -- were not polluting pre-at 97% of

the stuff in the ozone has come from other people. in the 1980's, -- [ indiscernible] electric is going to be unreliable. utilities in wisconsin -- you cannot put different bulbs in the street lights the bulbs have to be low temperature and high temperature. we cannot swap them. the electricity is seven times more expensive than natural gas. host: will have the mayor respond to the critiques. guest: thank you, michael. i grew up in upstate new york not too far from where you're at. thankfully, the industry has

advanced quite a bit since you and i got our education and one of the things that have been very successful here in madison is switching out our streetlights to leds. not a problem at all. we are getting a better light quality out of them. we are working closely with utility to do that. there is no doubt that natural gas is a contribution to global warming. methane which is natural gas is one of the most potent greenhouse gases that it's warming our planet and it is important to switch off of natural gas and generally to electricity but of course you need the electricity to be generated in renewable and clean way. this is a work in progress. we are working to let you fight our systems at the same time we are working to -- where working

to electrify the systems the same time so we are working to make it renewable and it will take us a well where we are 100 percent renewable but it is work that is worth doing and it is going to make a difference in long-term in terms of the impact we see of global warming. i think it is important for us to do everything we can individually and collectively to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions to have any hope of having a livable planet in the future. host: mayor satya rhodes-conway of madison, wisconsin and the chair of climate mayors and claremore this group if you go to climate mayors.org or at twitter at climate mayors. thank you very much for the conversation this morning. guest: thank you. it has great. really appreciate the opportunity. host: when we come back we returned to our question we asked you earlier but moral leadership in the presidency but later on in the program, there

are the lines on the screen to start dialing, later on in the last hour of former republican congresswoman barbara cost that joins us to discuss the future of the republican party and efforts by the by the administration in congress to regulate big tech. will be right back. ♪ >> dirty 2022-2020 three supreme court term justices announced decisions on some of the most consequential oral argument cases, in next weeks he spent will examine some of the cases involving voting rights, affirmative action. antidiscrimination and religious liberty from executive power and election laws. monday, august 21 look at the case of allen versus milliken involving alabama congressional map and voting rights. the court will in favor of black voters saying the resisting map violates the voting rights act

. starting monday, august anyone at 9 p.m. eastern. >> if you ever miss in his he spends coverage, you can find it anytime online on c-span.org, videos of key hearings come debates and other events future markers that guide you to newsworthy highlights. these points of interest markers appear in the right hand side of the screen we had play a slight videos. the toll makes it easy to get an idea of what was debated and decided in washington. scroll through and spend a few minutes on c-span points of interest. >> listening to programs on c-span through c-span radio just got easier. tell your smart speaker play c-span radio and listen to “washington journal” daily at 7:00 a.m. eastern., important congressional hearings, and other public affairs events

throughout the day. weekdays at 5:00 p.m. and 9:00 p.m. eastern catch “washington today” for a fast paced report on the top stories of the day. listen to c-span anytime. tell your smart speaker, “play c-span radio.” c-span powered by cable. >> c-spanshop.org c-span's online store. possibly this collection of c-span products, apparel, books, home decor, and accessories. there's something for every c-span fan and every purchase help support our nonprofit operations. shop now or anytime at c-spanshop.org. >> "washington journal" continues. host: a conversation until 9:15 eastern time this morning is about a survey that was done for

-- out of utah about presidents and moral leadership. they asked those they surveyed should presidents provide moral leadership? 94% said yes to that question. 6% said no. it is our question to you this morning as well. we also want you to tell us what is moral leadership. how do you define it? when they asked that the democrats, 50% said it is honesty and trust -- the 3% said it is honesty and trust. republicans also put honesty and transfers, 61% at his honesty and trust. independence also ratings honesty and trust as the most important with 55 percent as well. how do you define moral leadership? should a president provided?

keith in ohio. good morning to you. welcome to the conversation. caller: good morning. i think it is very important not just for a president, but for all of the people of this country to be moral to some degree. we have great differences on many issues, but i think in our conscience we know when we do something wrong for the most part. it is very important to be moral. i do not think the people in our country are trying to do that very well. i think our country has a real problem. compared to our past. i'm an older guy. from what i have noticed, i see a decline in morality in our whole social structure. i'm not going to pinpoint anything because we have difference opinions on all sorts of things. that is fine but we are becoming terrible.

host: on facebook, perry says yes, president should provide a good moral example of leadership. in a healthy and moral society. president and all of the good leaders are more or less a compass indicator or mirror to the people's morals and values till critical times people put up with some moral imperfections if honest competency is present in abundance. you can join us on facebook as well if you go to facebook .com/c-span. you post on next if you include the handle@cspanwj. you can also text us 202-748-8003. steve in anderson indiana. hi. caller: hi. i believe it comes down to your character.

how you relate to things like, it seems like our current president does not really have any interviews. at least donald trump did communicate with the people in u.s. and know what was going on. our president seems to be, the party is just not being honest with the people and we need -- he needs to have more communication with the american people. host: from the newspaper, who

does voter say he was a moral leader among the 2024 residential's? most americans say it is the president's response ability to provide moral leadership to the people they represent. in a new poll conducted, american voters were asked whether it is the responsibility of the president to provide moral leadership to the people. a strong majority 94% across a vertical spectrum said yes. voters were also asked which of the presidential candidates for 2024 would do a good job providing moral leadership as president. roughly 2/5 of voters said former president trump would do a good job while nearly have said he is doing a poor job. 11% said they did not know. i'll gop voters seven out of 10 approved of his moral leadership while only 14 of democrats at the same appreciate roughly 36%

of independent voters said he did a good job. the survey coincided with the news of trump's third indictment and since then a fourth indictment has come out out of georgia earlier this week. when it comes to the current president come with the following candidates do a good or poor job of providing moral leadership to the country as president? 38% said president joe biden would do a good job. 50% said poor job. 11% said do not know. as the vice president numbers and the former vice president numbers, my expense and the pole goes through the roster of hopefuls for the presidency in 2024. ron desantis, nikki haley, etc. and you can find that in this poll. steve -- gina in mississippi, you say no to this question.

they do not need to provide moral responsibility. how come? caller: i said no because i called in on the no line because you can come at this at a different angle. the think of it is, what is priority in the government right now. of course, i wish everybody in the world -- i wish there was no such thing as lies and manipulation and propaganda. but at this point in -- because of the conditions of our country i did not think it should be top priority. i am a christian and i do believe everyone be moral but we also in this country, there is freedom of religion, and people do not believe -- religion is

not supposed to be included in our government. so, it comes with different -- it all depends on how you say it. host: kathleen in ohio. what do you say? caller: first i want to say again c-span and "washington journal" are national treasures. it is so great to hear what people think and feel about our country and other issues. i do believe our president need to be moral and how we defined that there is a lot of definitions but i also want to say none of us know what it is like to be those individuals who decide to run for president and the drive you have to have, the intellect you have to have come the charisma, the drive for power.

how do they handle the power? are they going after corporate entities to make billions of more dollars? look at the piece, we are all fallible. it is the degree of the mistakes that a president makes. clinton, you played the clip of clinton, serious, and big moral mistakes. he got called out for it and he had to testify under oath. he apologized early for his mistakes. you don't play the clip of trump where he is talking about women, the degree of severity in regard to their mistakes is huge. we really need to look at the cumulative numbers of mistakes or intentional mistakes,

intentional issues trump has made so moral issues are important and i want to ask c-span to do a second on before international reports having to do with israel and apartheid. host: pam on facebook, their leadership should follow the rule of law and up promote criminal behavior or impose religious beliefs on the industry. they need to work on the people and not to enrich themselves at the expense of their country. cat in phoenix. caller: mark -- good morning. can you hear me? host: we can and you say no. caller: it depends what you are looking at and who is making the judgment because right now, we are having the media telling us what these people have done and

we need to judge them for ourselves and not listen to what media does because there are some groups that are going to say, that guy never gave -- his entire life. that is the situation with joe biden when that is the problem. she is a drug addict. she has sexual issues. what about biting --biden's sons? you have to read and make a judgment of yourself and there is a church and state where you shouldn't have that builds in. everyone should have morals but your own morals. host: ralph and abc -- in d.c. caller: i think they should. i see the complete lack of

morals in politicians these days. it doesn't get them elected. for example, we have a governor in california that says we are going to advocate sex change for kids under 18 years old, they can't make up their minds to vote. they are able to decide that it is morally appropriate to do this because they have of feeling, that is a saint -- insanity and that is kowtowing to the extreme left and gavin just wants to get elected. you have abortion issues. the left is like, late-term abortion, where the -- up to the point where the baby is frowning, that is all right that it doesn't come out of the womb,

it is fine. my ex-wife was a nurse -- these guys, there is something lacking, they would do anything to get elected. host: heat is next in pueblo -- keith is next in pueblo, colorado and you say no. caller: i don't see anything coming out of the white house right now. that is all i wanted to say. host: melvin in fort lauderdale, florida. caller: it is essential to have moral leadership and you can see right now, why the country is how it is going that we don't have anything and i want to point out a few things that people, i keep hearing them talking about things trump has done. they elected he -- him when he had 3000 plus lawsuits against

him when he came into office and when they had the people from china negotiating with terrorists, he had his daughter sit down at that meeting. they found out she got 35 patents from the chinese for the products -- their products. you could not clean the swamp because he is the swamp. even his own work and his own company, they went to jail messing around with donald trump. and his son-in-law, he gets to negotiate something overseas with the saudis. he comes back with $2 billion and trump -- he gives contracts for golfing. that is a moral. --immoral. they took the money he did when

he ran against the debates, he would give it to the veterans, they had to run that down. they could not find that, using money, scholarships for school, he used that for pay. host: offered on facebook, the more full -- immoral compass -- the moral for elected officials -- immoral compass 40 -- the moral compass of -- of elected officials is something that still very much part of the evaluation when boating or at least it should be. -- when boating or at least it should be. --when voting or at least it

should be. caller: they can do experience -- experiments with adult and five-year-olds and you can see whether they know if they are lying. our leaders are pretty immoral on all sides and it is said and it is -- i want to call in with the previous mayor because in my city, they are breakneck building and increasing on fossil fuels and it seems like they are getting to a point where we will be in big trouble. i am not sure about the renewables but i think moral leadership is shown have -- by how you treat your opponents. host we get more in our country and i said a prayer up for all the american people.

-- i hope we get more people in our country and i sent a prayer up for all the american people. host: it tells us about ourselves as well. jack in richardson, texas. good morning. caller: hi. there is no way to argue against reality, it is needed in every way of life. it is very hard to measure morality in president biden because you never hear him talk. you hear him read. he is rating the propaganda of professional speechwriters and professional public relations people. we don't know what his morality is because he never speaks contemporaneously. host: how do you answer the question, jackie? caller: i think morality comes

down to one word for me and that is a quality. -- that is equality. we have one party that mocks immigrants and black lives matter and women and i don't think it is moral and it is causing trouble. host: we will take a short break. coming up next, former republican congresswoman barbara comstock joins us to discuss the future of the above can party an effort by the biden administration congress to regulate big tech. -- feature of the republican party and the effort by the biden administration and congress to regulate big tech. >> book tv marks 25 years on shining a spotlight on leading nonfiction offers and their books. but -- tv is -- has provided --

but tv has provided viewers a front row seat -- on politics and so much more. you can watch but tv every sunday on c-span two or online at c-span.org. >> the c-span bookshelves podcast speed -- bob -- podcast feed -- each week, we are making it convenient for you to listen to multiple episodes with critically acclaimed officers -- authors discussing current events and culture. book notes plus an q&a, listen to c-span bookshelf podcast feed today. you can find this on the free c-span now mobile video app or wherever you get your podcasts and on our website

c-span.org/podcasts. ♪ >> this fall, watch c-span's new series books that shaped america. the 10 books featured in our series have won awards and they are still talked about today. hear from featured renowned experts. and virtual journeys through significant locations across the country intimately tied to be celebrated authors and their celebrated books stop on long the celebrated books, common sense by thomas paine, their eyes were watching god by zora

near hurston --neale hurston. ♪ >> american history tv, saturdays on c-span two, exploring the people and events that tell the american story, at 6 p.m. eastern, carla haynes closed a conversation marking president truman's executive order 9981, prohibiting discrimination in the u.s. military. at 9:30 p.m. eastern, on the presidency, historian h w grant looked at general ford in the

context of the 1970's when he served as house minority leader, vice president and president, exploring the american story, watch american history tv saturdays on c-span2 and find a full schedule on your program guide or watch online anytime at c-span.org/history. >> "washington journal" continues. host: joining us at our table is the former congresswoman barbara construct -- barbara comstock. she is here to talk about efforts to regulate big tech and i want to get to that conversation. first, your take on the indictment coming out of georgia against the over president -- former president. guest: i do think this different because georgia is, was a very republican state. it is still represented by a

conservative governor, governor kemp, who was imposed bite demo -- by donald trump. governor kemp opposed him and opposed waffles greater -- roethlisberger. if you read the indictment, there are a lot of people who are attacking the indictment and haven't read them but they involve conversations where donald trump called governor kemp, tried to get him to take action and without attacking him, and we are familiar with the one called because that was taped and he would shake him down and was attacking him but there was calls to the attorney general to -- that is detailed

in this indictment so i think the georgia indictment is different because georgia is a republican state represented by conservative republicans yet georgia has rejected donald trump, rejected trump candidates again and again. they have elected republican -- governor kemp himself and others came out with strong statements. i think there is going to be a little bit different long-term response and i think -- even though you see in the primary,

electorate, they are hanging in there. you see from congress, what you see from congress but longer term, there will be an impact on this and kudos to brian camp -- brian kemp and brad raffensberger and others for the honest testimony and i hope people will look at this indictment and i encourage people to read that detailed indictment and all of the testimony will be from conservative republicans. in that indictment, there is testimony from people, it appears, who are in the white house at meetings with donald trump, who apparently may have turned on the president -- former president. host: politico article back in march says -- has a picture of

you there. where does that effort stand and what are the products -- the prospects for another candidate for president on the republican ticket? guest: you look at new hampshire and chris christie is now eclipsed ron desantis, who i think is fading fast and that was the hope for someone who didn't want donald trump and he is in second place. the race is going to change. we will see. i do think, unfortunately, primary voters seem to want to continue to lose with trump. donald trump lost the house and the senate, lost senate seats in georgia again and again. governor kemp is trying to won -- to warn the company --

already. strong statements from governor kemp may be a warning sign for the party to take a second look. people like governor sununu in new hampshire are trying to do the same party. you have a chance to win, if you want something other than president biden, there is a chance. [laughter] host: let's turn our attention to regulating big tech and efforts to regulate big tech. that was something you focused on when you were in congress. since leaving, you are an advisor for a group called net choice. what are your goals? >> it is an association that works with a lot of the companies, all of the technology companies that drive our economy. you look at, we are coming out

of the pendant -- pandemic and companies that got us through the pandemic, the companies that drive our company -- economy and the companies that keep us competitive internationally and against china. the companies that keep our economy going, the companies that make our lives easier. before i was in congress, i was in the state legislator so i was chairman, chairwoman of the technology committee in the state legislature. i was privileged when i was in congress to be the chairwoman on the technology subcommittee in congress so is very bipartisan and you look back when i was a staffer in congress, these are very bipartisan issues in congress.

what net choice focuses on is the december welfare standard and that is something that is very bipartisan because it was an issue, we wanted the consumer welfare standard look at technology and said we want to have companies, what drives the economy, what makes technology work is you don't want to regulate technology. when you regulate it, it is what what -- makes technology work. we don't want to regulate it unless it is hurting consumers so what makes it competitive, you want lower prices and to have things more competitive and innovation and make sure it is making things work for the consumer. you have democrat and republican

industry -- administrations alike, we establish an objective. it worked during the clinton administration when i was a staffer in congress, we have the technology boom. the companies came to the fore and we have the technology have the competition and the consumer welfare standard be the objective standard. that is when it boomed and it worked and that is what made the technology companies come to the fore and work. -- host: what companies are with netchoice? >> we have google, apple, facebook, amazon and when i was in the state house and congress, the bills i passed were opening the state house and in congress. usually they were overwhelmingly bipartisan so that was exciting

to work from these issues in the state house and congress and -- because we have that bipartisan consensus. host: some in congress have said these companies are two big --t oo big. your response? guest: they aren't. they are competitive and compete against each other and unfortunately, you have with lena khan, she came in with the agenda and she was a staffer on the house judiciary committee and she does not support the consumer welfare standard. she wants to have a more subjective partisan standard where you go after these companies and ripped them apart. -- and rip them apart and she

was to say they are not working. she wants to go up after amazon prime. this is a perfect example of how somebody who is not in touch with everything america -- every day americans. i am fortunate to have my parents who are still with me, they use their amazon prime accounts every day. my mom can go on her phone and order things and it is easy to get things and price points, very easy. she can set things up to come every three months and six months and they tell her, when she looks forward, whether it is one thing that is easier or cheaper, she can get it every three months, every two months. if i want to get something for my grandkids, i can get it overnight. it can come in three weeks or

however i can get it, my kids can get things much easier than i could when i was a parents, when i was working and had to go to the store. host: the argument is not about the ease, the possible -- but about the possible antitrust lawsuit. the ftc chair was asked about amazon and i want to show her response and have you respond. [video clip] >> i wanted to touch on another issue called dark patterns. amazon prime has reached a point where it is practically impossible to avoid an ftc took amazon to task that were using tricks to enroll people in prime without consent or prevent people from canceling their suspicion and this is what i hear from my constituents.

how common is it for online companies to use these dark patterns? >> through our work, we have seen it is too common, we see companies using these tricks, our staff published a report going into detail about the different types of dark patterns we see which trick or manipulate people into making choices they are not seeking to make it so we want to make sure we are grasping how these dark patterns are working. we have been bringing on board people who will dig deep and figure out what is going on so it will be an area of focus for us. >> something you said there struck me, it is about taking away people's choice, when you are not transparent about the ways in which consumers are being entrapped into signing some -- signing up for something

or not being able to cancel something, that is taking away their ability to vote with their dollars which is something we have been hearing about in the hearing. >> w -- effect does this is -- what effect does this have on innovation? >> we want to make sure companies are competing on honesty and we don't want honest businesses to lose out on firms engaging in dark patterns. there is a consumer protection dimension but a competition dimension as well. guest: 168 million people use prime. their satisfaction is in baha'i 80's or 90's -- in the high 80's or 90's. when i was in congress, people were not complaining about prime . people vote and use prime.

i never heard complaints about that and this is something, the chairwoman is -- this is not something that people are complaining about and she is saying it is difficult to get out of prime. if you want to make a complete to the ftc, it is seven cliques --clicks to go to the ftc website and make an appointment -- a complaint. it is not easy to do. on amazon, i go online and it is easy. every day, we go on and make it easy to order things and to go on and cancel those orders. to order dog food. if i don't want to order it, i can get out of it. if you want to get your prime video or not, these are easy

things to use and this is a case where washington is out of touch and chairwoman khan. it is important to understand she came in here with the bias and one of the concerns in the same hearing, i am not sure if it is that hearing, she is not listening to her own staff. she is amassing power within her own office and not using the economic analysts that are there. the career employees who are represented, who are the career employees who look at the economic analysis of companies. she is coming in with her own preconceived notions, and given she came in there with that, it is more important that she listens to career employees. one of the things the chairman of the judiciary pointed out his -- it is the employee morale

has ever been so low as it is now because she is not listening to employees and she is coming in there with the preconceived notion of these companies because she has that bias against these companies given that these companies are -- these are the stars that compete against china. we have a committee right now that is looking at how we will compete against china and these companies, amazon, facebook, google, these are companies that enable us to compete against china in the international competition right now. this is what you have people like larry summers, a democrat, who is speaking out against chairwoman khan and her concerns about she is hurting the economy, whether merger guidelines or other things.

host: we are talking about efforts to regulate tech with the former congresswoman barbara comstock. she served in congress from 2015 to 2019 and now an adviser for the big companies you heard, google, apple, facebook, it is called netchoice and she is an advisor to them. kaylee in kirkland, washington. independent. caller: hello. technology is proving to be a key asset -- disrupt or promote the technological innovation. what is one way these regulatory measures imposed on these tech companies will impact property -- poverty? guest: technology has been great in democratizing, helping people have more access to products.

we can all with one click get access to education, information, and people can build businesses online. amazon allows people to build small businesses but whether it is pinterest or all kinds of country -- companies, people can build small businesses. anyone can get online and build a business all over the world. people can do that now because of the island -- online world. the innovation that the world allows now is something -- because of these companies. the large companies enable this whole other ecosystem that has been created i these large companies. -- by these large companies. if it is broken up, it will hurt those small businesses is -- which is why you see the small

business community speaking out. you have heard that, you see the small business community speak to capitol hill about, please don't do this because it will also hurt my business because there are many small businesses -- if you call hunt to amazon, you will see you can also buy small business products on amazon. when you go on, you can see, you have that choice to buy things on prime but also small business products also. host: joseph, new jersey, republican. caller: how are you? i have two points to make and i hope you will make -- let me make my two point. i am not a fan of the congresswoman. i think they should be reigned in. facebook and twitter are too big and you sound like you are a protect -- a progressive republican and your hero is

teddy roosevelt and he broke up a lot of these companies in the early part of the 20th century so facebook and twitter, if it was not for them, president trump would probably be in the white house. earlier in the interview, you said something about conspiracy. president trump asked for illegal votes to be found. why wasn't anyone arrested for the conspiracy they did to president trump in the white house -- no one went to jail for that and that was a conspiracy used by my own government. trump was on the phone talking to governor kemp, kemp wanted to be endorsed by trump in 2018. if the rules were so great, everything was up and up, why did not keep -- why didn't he go against the rules -- host: barbara comstock?

guest: i encourage you to read the document, and 98 pages as it is full of facts. host: independent. caller: good morning. i agree with breaking of the big companies and bringing them down to a smaller level. we have to understand in the country, a small town america and the small businesses, -- to the guy who sells sandwiches on the corner, they are the next drivers in the country and everyone has been ignoring them is going to big tech because it is easier to find what you want to buy. there are problems with this. i words in a company owned by a chinese firm. there are worldwide. it was in the plastic industries.

i go to numerous places looking for work in my area and they are owned by the communist chinese. some of them are and it is blatant because they fly the flag in the offices. if you're going to bring america back to a so net --sole net income where it drives the government and people to sit -- and find intellectual entrepreneurialism. it is being destroyed day by day because the competition that everyone is forwarding on a government level. host: let's get a response to your comments. guest: unfortunately, what lina khan want to do is amass more control within her agency and have her control and make the choices, have the government make the choices instead of under traditional republican

free market principles, have the market make those choices so that is the concern as a republican, as a traditional publican, have the market make the choices and have the businesses make their choices, not have lina khan pick the winners and losers and that was the beauty, the consumer welfare standard, during the obama and clinton administration as well as the bush administration and reagan administration, those decisions were made by the market and that worked out well so the companies in the market were making those decisions very well and i think it worked better than bringing it in house . that is what you have people like larry summers, a democrat, as well as republicans of agreeing that those decisions

should be made in the market, not brought in house by an ftc liberal like lina khan controlling and deciding the winners. host: we will hear from morgan in pennsylvania, democratic caller. caller: ms. comstock, i wanted to ask you do you think big tech should be held accountable on how they allow white nationalist groups to radicalize young men on social media which leads them to do violence? do you think big tech should be accountable to radicalize young men -- host: understood. guest: i am very concerned with the white nationalism and the concern that fbi director, who

i am a friend with, who has identified as a serious concern. the justice department and the homeland security and how we address that needs to be addressed on many fronts know-how that is addressed needs to be a comprehensive front so i think congress needs to address that. a needs to be addressed by leaders -- it needs to be addressed by leaders. how it is addressed, donald trump has been a problem on that front. it is the leaders and how they talk about it. if he is saying it and people are repeating it, that is a problem. when people are speaking it, that is a problem so that is something that needs to be addressed. and that is why things were taken down.

people were taking it down. it was a problem and you have the companies themselves take it down. it has been a threat. the companies were being attacked by leaders on both sides. it has been -- i don't think anyone has been able to address it satisfactory because leaders don't have it right. host: there is a debate in congress on whether or not you hold these tech companies accountable on what is said on their platform. guest: the bigger problem is the leaders themselves haven't owned up to their own role in it. host: this is troy in barrington, new jersey. a republican. caller: i want to say i appreciate your clear eyed view

on the indictment in georgia and you are not just defending trump. i feel like twitter, instagram, facebook, all of them are one of the main causes for the divide in the country and in 2010, they began -- became popular in the algorithm and everyone has their own special facts in -- due to the algorithms. they complain about -- the marinas, all of the. guest: you are a what driver? caller: ups. one of the big things we deal with amazon is how terrible they treat their workers. they are terrible when it comes to labor and everything they put on those workers. we got a brand-new contract. amazon shuts down -- they are

unionbusting left and right. my major points are about the algorithms and xavier becerra the countries in the labor practices of amazon -- and xavier becerra affecting the country and the labor practices of amazon -- and how they are affecting the country and the labor practices of amazon. guest: we had a caller earlier that was talking about they feel like facebook -- they gave the election to trump -- i always hear people saying trump won the election because of facebook and our -- facebook or hillary lost

because of facebook. each side sticks with that. everyone comes up with that. i think hillary lost because of hillary and trump lost because of trump. i don't think a company through that -- i find that argument ridiculous. from doesn't say i lost because of facebook or because they did not put the hunter biden story out there. the idea that companies are throwing elections is just -- we all get out there as candidates. i want to address that issue in general because it has come up through a number of these questions. we live in a 50-50 time. everyone goes out there and gives it their all and everybody puts out all kinds of fights on

different fronts and you cannot say you lost because of facebook or you won because of facebook or lost because the fbi did this on any front. in 2016, trump won. in 2020, trump lost. [laughter] we live in a 50-50 country. i work with the group called the national center for election integrity. our elections are fair and they are close. this is the time we live in and we have close elections and we have to respect these elections and that is why it is so important, but governor kemp did yesterday. we are going to have close elections again this year and

that is why to blame the tech companies on this and bring them into it, it is so unfair because they are just like every other company. people use blame the oil companies. people used to blame coke. you will blame all these companies for elections and everything else. it is the people who decide. i encourage people, get engaged. if you care about these elections, if you are in one of those swing states, it will be close again. don't blame the company or the fbi. elections are close. if you live in one of the swing states, if you live in a close election area, get engaged. register people in your state, in your district. you will matter. don't get involved in the

conspiracy theories. what matters if you -- is you getting involved in it is going to be close. host: there is bipartisan effort on capitol hill to, as one caller put it, rain in tech companies. this is from senators warren and graham. big teccompanies have far too much unrestrained power over our economy, our society and our democracy. these massive businesses post profits while they suppress competition. big tech companies pray on ordinary urs, they vacuum up personal data, often with little re on whether their practices are responsible our legal. our protection act would create a independent bipartisan regulator charged with licensing and pocing the nation's biggest ch companies to prevent online harm, promote

free speech and competition, guard american privacy and protect national security. no company, industry or c should be above the law -- or ceos should be above the law. does your group netchoice support or oppose this digital consumer protection commission at? --act? guest: this is elizabeth warren? host: this is elizabeth warren in lindsey graham. guest: no. the paternalistic attitude that elizabeth warren is taking to this is assuming that consumers cannot police these for ourselves and people don't -- we cannot deal with technology for ourselves. our technology has enabled us to do things for ourselves, to

improve our lives and congress -- these things have improved our lives where congress has not. our phones, our computers, they have gotten us through the pandemic in ways that congress did not. take away our phones and computers, our lives would not be what they are today and as of four generation family, these other things that improve our lives and start new businesses and be able to keep in touch with families. i have a daughter living in australia. we are able to stay in touch and she had a birthday and we are altogether and can have a little birthday party online. my parents who live in massachusetts, we stay in touch.

we have online health care. we saw online health care improve during the pandemic and mental health care improved and that is what susan collins talks about, we saw mental health care , during the pandemic, people who would not get mental health now realize online mental health , people who would not get it before now, it is improved. if they would not leave the house, now they will do it. the online systems that have improved our lives accelerated during the pandemic because we realized, this has improved our lives and people know that this has made our life better. we need to understand these are the systems that enable us to work better. these are the companies -- look

at the markets, we want to be leaders in the world. we don't want china -- you look at ai. china is going to eclipse as if we don't embrace these companies, if we don't work with these companies and make these public-private partnerships and make sure we are the leaders. look at the committee on the hill that is working in the most bipartisan way. it is a china committee because they understand that we have to be the leaders and we cannot let china eclipse us on this. kudos to the china committee. if we are not the leaders on this, if we don't allow these companies to be the leaders, we will fall behind. host: michael, hagerstown, maryland, democratic caller.

caller: how are you doing? i will ask if you don't cut me off because your guest set a lot of stuff i want to enter to. she talked about online health, did you know that the dea had to put a stop on the amount of ritalin that went on the market. the amount of ritalin being prescribed shot of after telehealth came out. they were telling them they needed heavy amounts of ritalin. the other things you said about mental health, a company called better health, they are people out there who are not trained as licensed therapists. they are doing group therapy for people who want to talk to someone. you have people that have serious life problems and they are in the same group. that is not good therapy. they charge people and some

people they have our volunteers. what are they taking the money for? your guest was talking about facebook and how people are able to go about it their own ways. you cannot do that. these companies have billions of dollars and that is the reason why we don't have any regulation on them now. facebook was fined $1 billion because they were violating regular rights people have. there are countries that have consumer protections for their online data. they don't get their data mined. who is doing it, facebook. guest: congress still needs to do oversight so you want to have oversight of these things so if you are going to have -- we saw good things that happened on having online health care and we want to expand that.

we know there is always going to be fraud in health care in general. that is an area where you have to have oversight. if you expand an area, you have to have oversight. you see wherever the money flows, bear will be oversight. you have to have oversight to a degree. yes, do oversight because there are going to be fraud actors in any area. opioids are a problem. ritalin is a problem. when you have a, particular actors, you can usually -- when you have fraud, particular actors, you can usually track those actors. caller: good morning. it is good to discuss real issues from the republican side.

i have to say, even though you are a former u.s. representative. there has to be some checks and balances in everything we do. period. the big tech, they cannot be allowed to go too far and there have been many incidences like the caller before me, where it is getting out of hand. there will be a.com bubble --a d ot com bubble. not too many people went to jail behind that one. host: she says you cannot let them go too far. what regulations would be a good idea for these big tech companies? guest: there is going to be, if there is fraud, you have to look at fraud. you want to have budgets for fraud. there has been fraud that needs to be investigated -- host: fraud by these big tech

companies? guest: fraud in general, where there is fraud in any area. the ftc is seeing increase in fraud by companies so any company engaged in fraud, there needs to be an investigation. there are numbers increasing in fraud that haven't been investigated. host: what about regulating big tech? where would you agree to regulation for these big tech companies? guest: if there is fraud in an area where somebody -- host: beyond fraud. guest: you don't want to regulate for the sake of regulating. they are talking -- talking about putting new merger guidelines and their -- they are putting out new mergers in general.

the new merger guidelines are trying to crack in general for mergers and we are coming out of a pandemic where we have a volatile economy where different companies -- we know we have very dynamic economy where we want to have an economy growing and companies are changing. you want to have companies merge. she is discouraging mergers. she is suing companies for merging and saying she wants -- the guidelines i came out generally are saying, -- guidelines that came out generally are saying we don't want mergers at all. there has been criticism of the merger guidelines because she is saying she wants to discourage mergers at all. we want to -- why do we want to discourage mergers at all? is that a good thing because,

that is why you have larry summers saying why would we want to discourage mergers? why is that bad? host: maverick sends been -- sends in this post on x. " there is a growing concern about how the data is being utilized, shared and potentially exploited. should this be a concern for our political leaders? " guest: that as -- has been a area where they are trying to work on privacy legislation. that is something that the companies have said let's look at, privacy legislation. host: dylan, an independent. caller: good morning. i wanted to say all the technology that is being attributed to these companies like phones and computers, this

was developed with public research money, either in universities or through the military. i wanted to say the corporate and lobbyist job is to get congress to vote for call -- for policies that go against the will of the peeper -- people. if these policies were popular, these lobbyists wouldn't have a job. host: let's take that point. guest: both as a representative and before, you want to have legislation and policies that serve the people. it is certainly what you want. host: is that choice a lobby group? guest: is -- it is a trade association that works with companies and you are working with policies, you want to have policies that work -- these are companies that help businesses

thrive. these are companies that help us all work with businesses that help us every day in our everyday lives. host: joe, cambridge, massachusetts. democratic caller. caller: can you hear me? host: we got you, we are listening. caller: i was calling in regards to some of the comments about the technology and mental health. i think that can be one example where we see how the technology can open names of and make things more available to a wider variety of people who however, there is really no overall control.

sometimes, we do need control and that is one example. host: would you agree? guest: that is where technology could put in more control. it could help you control to that in somewhere when i was in the statehouse, the technology was helpful for morale and technology could be used to get to rural health where they did not have as much access and that's another area you can get some of these good health services to people. again, how do you control it? technology can be used solve those problems in a way every time you find a problem, you

want to correct it. your technology can help correct the problem you identify. host, jessica, connecticut. color cold i have a question about oversight in congress. most of the time and i have watched many hearings. republicans are not willing to regulate facebook, x, anything else. they find it every time. when you see there needs to be oversight there needs to be bipartisan oversight in i don't see it happening. thank you. guest: do you want government controlling your speech? during the republican administration do you want republicans controlling a company and during democrat do you want a democrat controlling it?

that would be the issue. if donald trump do you want him controlling all companies? when you have a democratic administration do you want them controlling it? that is what i would offer to people that think that is a good idea. inc. about what you are asking for. if donald trump were president would you want him controlling these companies again? that might wake you up to. whether you think this would be a good idea. host, barbara comstock thank you for the conversation we appreciate it. happening right now a group of academics discussing donald trump's campaign and his participation means for potential rematches with president biden. five coverage, right here on c-span. >> during