house speaker's want to complicate men -- matters considering the funding deadline in november? caller: of course it is want to be in trouble. they are going to stop government. host: would you consider than a containing resolution a short-term fix? caller: no. that is why they are voting negative, the continuous resolution. they are ok with $2 trillion deficit spending each year. that is the problem. that is why they are so negative. host: this is from gary, democrats line. caller: republicans want to fight culture wars, the assault weapons ban, which is the

response ability is the safety -- that has killed how many people because of these assault weapons? host: let's stick to the topic of the speaker election. caller: this criminal donald trump what they do not want to denounce him. they refused january 6 subpoenas. a lot of them were in on it with that cri>> "washington journal" continues. host: joining us now, stef kight of axios to talk about the house speaker race, what to expect today. what are rep. johnson: -- representative johnson chances? guest: at this point, it does seem that he has some important momentum right now after he was voted the nominee last night. we did not see as many

republicans come out saying they were going to vote against him as we have seen with some other candidates. so it looks like things are going well at this point. it is early in the day. we expect a vote in the early afternoon. johnson is well-liked in the caucus and seems to be someone who threads the needle where he is someone who is supported by the far conservatives. he has been a defender of former president trump, but he is also known as your kind of typical conservative. he was a lawyer. host: according to reporting in the secret vote, 20 people were not present. four or five emerge that could sink the nomination. guest: that is the group we are looking for as members return to congress today. we are going to look for any of those people who were not present to decide to vote against johnson.

there has not been anyone again -- a handful of people have refused to vote for johnson but did not say they would vote against him. there could be a handful who decide they are not going to fall in line here, but one important thing to note about where we are now is that republicans are frustrated. it has been three weeks without a speaker of the house. there are big things that need to get done in congress. we are close to a government shutdown situation again. there is the emergency funding package the white house has sent to congress that they have to deal with in some way. we are seeing republicans grow tired of the fight, so there would have to be some real reason, some real tension, big issue for enough republicans to again say we do not want johnson and risk their being some kind of a deal with democrats to get someone in the speaker position. host: democrats will probably support their candidate, but how

do they view johnson as a potential speaker generally? guest: there is definitely concerns there, especially given the fact that johnson was one of the leaders who attempted to overturn the 2020 election results. that is something we are certain to see democrats pounce on. we have seen some raise that point again, reminding people johnson was one of those members to vote to decertify the election results but also present this argument for why republicans could do so beyond the more extreme claims being made by former president trump at the time. so we will expect democrats to support hakeem jeffries. some have said they would be willing to work with republicans for some kind of temporary situation with mchenry staying on a speaker, but we do not expect them to be excited about johnson in the speaker position. host: our guest is with us until 8:00.

if you want to ask her questions, (202) 748-8001 for republicans. (202) 748-8000 for democrats. independents, (202) 748-8002. you can text us at (202) 748-8003. if he does receive the nomination today met what are the next steps? what is congress prepared to do in light of the three weeks of inactivity? guest: first, they have to talk about how to avoid a government shutdown again. that is what led us to this position in the first place. mccarthy's efforts to avoid the last government shutdown is what sparked the effort, successful efforts, to oust him from the speakership, so johnson will have to deal with the situation, make sure they can get some kind of appropriation bill through, likely have to come up with some kind of short-term funding measure to push the deadline back. johnson does not have the kind

of staff others have. he will have to beef up his own staff to respond to some of these issues. he will be thrown in with mcconnell and jeffries and senator schumer as well and they will have to start working on affording a government shutdown and dealing with the funding package the white house has sent them and figuring out how congress will support israel as we see the situation unfold there. host: now the possibility of another cr to keep the government funded. is there appetite within congress to allow that in the short term? guest: we will have to see. there are conservatives who are not happy about the idea of kicking the can down the road again. they want to see actual appropriations bills passed that allow them to cut funding for particular agencies, like the departed of justice.

the fbi was in that. we will see whether having johnson changes the dynamic at all, whether we again see a fight over any kind of stopgap measure but also given how much time has been wasted trying to come up with the right speaker there is not quite to be a lot of time to get these kinds of complicated appropriations bills done in the house, whether they try to do so anyways is something we are watching. host: what faces rep. johnson: -- representative johnson in the day-to-day job a speaker? host: there are -- guest: there are procedural things he will be responsible for, deciding what the conference will vote on. the most difficult dynamic now is managing his own party, which has been so fracture us. that was the biggest issue mccarthy faced through these past few months. he may have won the speakership,

but he still had to contend with this divide within the party. that is not going to go away, no matter who is speaker of the house. johnson will have to wrangle the far right conservatives who have flexed their strength now that they have such small margins to deal with but also keep moderates happy and allow them to vote in ways they feel they need to as we head into another election year. everyone is already thinking about 2024. members are acting as if they are heading into the 2024 election and that adds another political dynamic that johnson will have to navigate. host: this is axios's stef kight joining us. this is from lewis, the mike ross line. -- democrats line. caller: top of the morning to you. i have a comment and question but we do know that we had a feeling this may happen with the republican party.

i call the republican party the pink bouquet party. that stands for proud boys, insurrectionists, and oath keepers. here is my question. you have republicans calling in. they wonder why the democrats do not vote and help the republicans to elect a speaker. we tried to deal with a speaker named mccarthy, but he lied and it a lot of things -- would you please tell the people why we would not vote on a republican congressman that is maga? guest: i think the caller raises an important point, that democrats were already hesitant to work with mccarthy and republicans while mccarthy was speaker and now you arguably have a more controversial speaker candidate who is looking likely that he might be able to

pull this off. that will not do much to help with any bipartisan efforts here. we will have to see. johnson is no jim jordan. he has not been as outspoken in his defense of former president trump. he is a little more measured and his lawyer experience comes out for sure, but given his experience and involvement in the 2020 election questioning, that is going to make it difficult for some democrats want to work with him and reach across the aisle and if there was going to be any kind of bipartisan solution to the speaker situation, that was going to be, a moderate republican and only in a temporary way. host: for tom amer -- emmer, how close was he to the former president? guest: he characterize the relationship as a good

relationship. trump took to truth social, kind of blasting him yesterday, saying he was just not the kind of republican that they need. trump ultimately took credit for his ultimate failure to get the speakership. there's is definitely some tension there and potentially one of the reasons why emmer did not go as far as expected given that he is well-liked within the party overall, but there are just some of this more conservative trump supporters who felt he was not going to do enough for them. host: this is from sheila in florida, republican line. caller: i think what is going on with congress is the people are sick of the party. the younger people who came into congress came into be more fiscally responsible and to see the cuts that are needed to bring our debt down. and mccarthy made that backdoor

deal to have a cr with no amendments. that is what got the ball going here. what is going on is healthy for our party. we are sick of seeing the party continuing the cr that rolls downhill and just collects more and more pork, more and more foreign spending, more and more garbage. we the taxpayers are seeing nothing. it is going to foreign countries. it is going to progressive, green energy stuff that is failing right and left. we need it to clean up our party and get back to fiscal responsibility, and that is what is going on now. guest: the caller did explain why many of these republicans are doing what they are doing. there is a divide in the republican party.

we all know this. we are seeing it plainly. we have seen it over the past several years. trump's election was a key moment there. we have seen more and more members enter congress who feel similarly to the former president. we are seeing that tension play out here. it is why the speaker nomination and election has taken so long as republicans are trying to figure out who they are as a party and some factions drill down on financial issues, on making sure spending is not what it has been over the past few years. spending was huge under former president trump as well. this is not the rise in federal government spending, something that only democrat in mensuration still, but what the caller is talking about is a real concern and we are seeing voters vote in a way that shows it is something they care about. there also is a divide in the republican party and they will have to figure out a way forward or we will see things fall apart

as long as we have margins this slim in the house. host: jim in missouri, democrats line. go ahead. caller: i am going to say this as a statement versus a question. it goes like this. there are many of us out here that do not believe for a moment that the republicans are frustrated at all. we believe that this is the exact opposite. we think this is scripted. we believe this is a ploy instituted by not just donald trump -- donald trump after all is just sort of face of this. this comes from people, individuals like steve bannon and institutions and policies -- think tanks like the claremont institute. this is the deconstruction of

the administrative state. these people do not believe in our experiment in self-governance. they are ready to burn the house down. this johnson, although he spoke eloquently yesterday, i believe he is much the same. that is all i have. host: can i ask what you base were believe on specifically? caller: i am borrowing from the presser we had yesterday when we saw lauren boebert of all people shouting down the reporter who asked a legitimate question. mr. johnson was either not -- i believe he was prepared for that question. i believe the answer he was going to give before he was

relieved of that responsibility by this fox woman and the rest of those gathered around for the photo op, i think they -- i believe they are actually -- i am sorry. host: we got your point. guest: you look at the past few years, months, weeks, it is hard to see this level of unprecedented chaos in the house and not think this has to be intentional. in many ways, there are many republicans who are tired of this. they do not want to keep having to change speaker nominees and huddle in closed-door meetings every day and go to the floor only to have a speaker nominee fail. that is not the way many republicans, who want to get things done, want to keep going with this, but this has been a

chaotic time in the house, for republicans. there are political actors like matt gaetz and others who have led the charge to oust mccarthy and those are intentional actions on their part. we cannot get at what their motives are, how much of it is political versus something they truly believe was the right thing to do. those are things the caller was touching on, but it is important to recognize american voters are watching and frustrated and there is a political risk as we go into 2024. host: to what degree did matt gaetz and those republicans influence perhaps mike johnson, should he become speaker, and how he does things in the house? guest: they are supportive of johnson as a nominee. that could be a good thing for the house getting things done if they are willing to follow. johnson and mccarthy from the

beginning had personal feuding going on, which led to tension in that relationship. matt gaetz was often obstructing efforts by mccarthy and republicans to move forward on various issues. potentially a different speaker would have a better chance at navigating those dynamics, but he is still going to have to contend with moderates who have made it clear they also are not going to go along with the flow. they are going to make sure their priorities are met as well. host: david joins us from massachusetts. caller: first, i thank god every day that nancy pelosi is no longer the speaker. the caller that just spoke about intentions -- i think both parties have intentions and everything they are doing. i do not understand why the democrats are picking on the republicans will they have the right to vote somebody in and

start getting things done. i blame them even more because they are just sitting around watching all of this. it is not a question, but i guess that is a statement. guest: i would only add not only have democrats not set -- stepped forward to support any republican speaker nominees, but republicans also have not made any real effort across the aisle to get democrats on their side. republicans are equally concerned about the optics of teaming up with democrats. that is not something many think is a politically viable option, so of course democrats have the ability to step in and help republicans elect a speaker and avoid these weeks of nothing getting done. pub's also have the ability to make more intentional efforts across the aisle as the majority party. they have the ability to try to reach a bipartisan solution. we have seen very little public

effort there. there have been some discussion, some offers, but nothing has come of those so far. we are nearing the deadline for when we might see actual action like that, but this is a both parties issue. neither party feels that there is much political upside to working in a bipartisan manner on issues like this. host: if representative johnson does not secure the votes, what options are left? guest: i think we would see real movement to empower patrick mchenry to ensure he can bring legislation to the floor to allow him to act in a speaker -- with all the powers of a speaker at least for a temporary period to get us through the end of the year, potentially a little longer. there has been reporting this is a plan that has been discussed between moderate republicans,

moderate democrats, but this is a plan that would require bipartisanship, and that will be difficult to get done, but i think if his nominee bid fails we will see more serious conversation around some kind of plan like that. host: noon is when that vote is scheduled. let's hear from rick in north carolina, republican line. caller: trump is going to need somebody he can work with. it is going to take him several months to get the ship turned around on not only our economy and the border but now what is going on in the world, he is going to need somebody he can work with. i think johnson is the person. guest: johnson has been a defender of the former president. if trump finds himself in the white house again, we have a long election season ahead of us, but if that is the case, if

republicans are able to hold onto the house there is the possibility that johnson and trump could work together on that. there is a lot up in the air. it is unclear if republicans will be able to hold onto the house majority next year. that seems look a big question mark. all signs point to trump being the gop nominee for the presidential race next year, but that is went to be a close election if it does conduct trump and biden. it is not clear who would ultimately win a race like that and we still need to wait out the rest of the primary season. host: one of the responsibilities of the job is fundraising. do we know representative johnson's history with fundraising? guest: this is a weak point for johnson. he does not have experience raising the money that mccarthy or any speaker would be expected to raise for the party. that is something he will have to figure out and start making more of an effort on. he is a relatively -- he was a lesser-known republican for a long time.

he does not have big fundraising abilities. being speaker would probably change that slightly automatically, but that is an area where people are watching closely and a key point of criticism for his nomination. host: this is albert in florida, democrat line. go ahead. caller: i believe the republicans should elect their own leader. i really do. host: anything else to add to that? caller: i believe the republicans should elect their own leader, not depend on another party to assist that and go forward with that. i really have a problem with the republicans because they had a

president -- they elected a president that demonstrated that he was autocratic or desired to be autocratic. he even said he would do away with the constitution. what american supports a guy wants to do away with the constitution? host: that is albert. guest: that is a good example some of the tension within the republican party and the tension within republican voters where they on one hand do not want republicans versus democrats they want republicans to work together with a are not always thrilled with the leader republicans end up voting for so they have concerns about trump or whether they disliked mccarthy. again, the divide we are seeing with the republican leaders does seem to mirror and divide we see in republican voters as well who are uncertain what their priorities are, whether they are

wholeheartedly in support of the former president or want to see a new direction, whether they want to see more moderate policies in the forefront. host: if johnson wins and steve scalise hold onto his position come it is up to louisiana. guest: louisiana will be holding a lot of power. host: let's go to mark in maryland, republican line. caller: the last caller that called and was saying republicans should vote in their own speaker. i agree with that. i do not fault the democrats for voting mccarthy out or not cooperating with republicans. i think the whole idea of the two parties collaborate with each other is kind of silly. the main reason i called in is because i wanted to point out at the beginning of this

conversation you were prefacing the narrative of talking about johnson and mentioning he was somebody who crushed in the 2020 election. i wanted to point out it seems like in the last 2.5 years every time a republican is talked about on c-span or any other media outlet the first thing that is mentioned is whether the questions the election. do you mean like all the democrats in the 2000 election or 2004 election or the 2015 election? hillary clinton went on a book tour talking but how the election was stolen from her and they even came up with a russia hoax that they put the american people threw for three years. yet every time you guys talk about a republican, it is always prefaced by this person is an election denier. why hasn't jamie raskin been referred to as an election

denier? he questioned the 2016 election. host: he is not a house speaker candidate. as a house speaker candidate, should that be considered? caller: let me ask you a question. why is it president that somebody questioned the 2020 election? i realize the first six months after biden was put into office every elected republican who came on c-span, the first thing you all latched on was do you believe biden was president -- elected in a fair and secure election? host: in this case, we are talking about the house speaker election. don't you think that is pertinent to know? yes or no? caller: you guys never asked a single democrat that question after the 2016 election. guest: i would add in response to the caller's concerns that

2020 was different from past years were there have been embers who have questioned result or voted against results, absolutely, but in the but in the past, the loser of the presidential election would still concede. the fact that trump took so long to concede is loss in 2020 key point in one of the reasons why the media in general continues to talk about this issue. we've also seen people continue to this day to be careful about their words and not formally recognized the 2020 election results to both sustain power from those efforts in 2020. january 6 was obviously a key moment and another reason why it continues to come up. those of us who were there or who had friends in the capitol dome, that very personally and also the fact that trump himself did not concede until after that vote was taken are all the reasons why these particular

republican members continue to be known for their election denial that comes up in a way that is different from the past. post: walk us through the mechanics of what to expect at noon. >> we will once again go through the rollcall. we will be watching to see whether johnson can get that 217 votes needed to be speaker. we've seen this quite a few times now, 15 times in january and for five times over the past three weeks. we will be keeping an eye on the moderates and the republicans who maybe were not present last night during the internal nominations. host: you can see the work of ne program we will be taking your calls on either what is going on with the house your vote today or also issues concerning israel and hamas. you can call the lines, imposed

on our social media site, and you can text if you wish. you can start calling during the course of the program. members of congress will be stopping by to give the various thoughts on these topics including -- who joined us right now, democrat from california. representative, thanks for giving us your time. as far as the speaker vote today, you've heard as much as i. what do you think the end result might be? >> we are going to do the same thing over and over. i seriously doubt the republicans will be able to get their act together. they are very, very badly split. we've seen that over the last few weeks. host: what gives you pause specifically? >> yesterday, the day before, the day before that and the day before that. the split in the republican is

extremely deep, visceral, and very personal. it came down to almost fisticuffs in their caucus, and that is not going to go away easily. but they have settled on is a very right wing, very conservative republican and the more moderate republicans have refused to go along, jim jordan being the case in point. maybe they will get their act together. we really need a coalition congress. even if they choose a speaker, the chaos in their caucus isn't going to end and we will be faced with the kind of uncertainty and chaos that we've seen over this last year. it will continue for the next 14 months through the next election. but the democrats have put up the votes necessary to deal with

the debt as well as the continuing resolution. we are prepared to work with republicans in a coalition to deal with the very important issues at hand, some of which is ukraine, the border wall, all of those things. host: as far as that coalition that you talk about, how does that work practically? what would it look like day today? >> keep in mind that within hours of the hamas attack on israel, -- which was in a terrible, bitter fight came together and formed a war cabinet and that has been operating since the hamas invasion of israel. we could do the same here. we certainly have critical issues that have to be dealt with. he can be a combination of democrats and republicans. take the rules committee, make it 50-50, share power.

have a clear understanding of what it is we need to accomplish. fight it out in air districts with the state and the in the house elections and the presidency, and run the government, fund the government which we have not yet done. take care of ukraine, take care of the necessary spending for israel, the border wall. let those priorities come to an agreement that that is what we are going to do. take those and run with it. host: if the vote comes down today and there are not enough votes, what about this idea of further empowering the speaker pro tem and could democrats support >> that? >> it all depends upon what is involved in that. it may or may not end the chaos

and we need to decide what it is we are going to do here in the next three months. we know we are going to have to fund government. we have long-term appropriations by selling -- sending funding for ukraine, the border wall, the femur coverage. those things must be done. if that is part of the deal, that is what the speaker will accomplish, go with it. but if it is the kind of cast why have seen, why bother? host: are you a member of the progressive caucus when it comes to the funding requests from the president? what do you think of the figures involved, are they appropriate? >> it was the responsibility of the congress to take the