>> coming up on c-span's "washington journal," we'll take your calls and comments live. then we take a look at the first medicare progress room -- prescription drug price negotiations with politico's lauren gardner. also, professor john paul lederach discusses solutions to overcome political polarization and the threat of civil war. "washington journal" starts now. ♪ host: this is "washington journal" for saturday, august 17th. multiple polls and surveys show the economy tops issues most

important to voters in an election now just 80 days away. presidential and its -- candidates kamala harris and donald trump talked about their economic policy plans and how they would approach the issue if they win the white house paired for this first hour, we want to hear your thoughts. which candidate do you trust on the economy? here are the phone lines. if you say vice president harris, the number (202) 748-8000. if you say former president trump, (202) 748-8001. if you say neither, (202) 748-8002. and if you say other or are unsure, your line (202) 748-8003 . you can text us a question or comment at (202) 748-8003. be sure to include your name and city. you can also chime in on facebook at facebook.com/cspan. or on x at @cspanwj.

both candidates had events this week focusing on that issue, the economy, and from this morning's wall street journal, this article headlined the harris and trump diverging -- a presidential campaign light on policies that took a sudden turn this last week into the details of governing of both donald trump and kamala harris, sought to show they have credible proposals for inflation, a top proposal for voters. their plans were lacking in detail but nonetheless revealing. harris, the democratic vice president, and trump, the republican former president, showed far different views of the role of government in the economy. harris, who will formally accept her party's nomination at the coming week's democratic

national convention in chicago, called for new tax policies to achieve financial goals, in many cases going further than president biden. the vice president proposed new federal authorities to ban price gouging in food and groceries, and new laws to deter corporations from buying up single-family homes and raising rents. those were some of the things vice president kamala harris spoke about in north carolina. here are some of her remarks. [video clip] >> when i am elected president, i will make it a top priority to bring down costs and increase economic security for all americans. as president, i will take on the high costs that matter most to most americans, like the cost of food. we all know that prices went up

during the pandemic when the supply chains shut down and failed. but our supply chains have now improved. and prices are still too high. a loaf of bread cost 50% more today than it did before the pandemic. ground beef is up almost 50%. many of the big food companies are seeing their highest profits in two decades. and while many grocery chains pass along these savings, others still aren't. look, i know most businesses are creating jobs, contribute into our economy, and playing by the rules. but some are not. that is just not right. we need to take action when that is the case. [applause]

host: that same wall street journal article also talking about former president donald trump's approach, saying trump, by contrast, said he would reduce prices by diminishing the government's role in the economy by rolling back regulations on energy and other unspecified industries, and by cutting taxes, including on social security benefits. inflation was also something he spoke about while in north carolina this week. here are some of his remarks from that event. [video clip] >> he said, if they get in, you're going to have a 1929 style crash. he has been very strong on it. others have said that. we do not want that to happen to our country. that would be devastating for you, for everybody. my first day back in the oval office, i will sign a executive

order telling every head to use every tool at their order to bring consumer prices rapidly down. we will do it very rapidly. [cheers] when you look at the cost of groceries, the cost of bacon went up four or five times. bcaon. i don't order bacon anymore, it's too expensive. it will be a whole of government effort to raise the standard of living and making american life portable again. it will be really important. it is not affordable. even if you're doing a little bit better, you have lost all of your money because of inflation. it has been out of control for a long time. don't forget, now, maybe it is starting to get under control, but you are already up 50%, 60%, 70% in so many items. you look at car insurance -- i couldn't believe when i looked at those numbers. i was studying the numbers, and i looked at the car insurance,

it was incredible. that is just one of many. by the groceries, to put it in simple terms, people go to the grocery store, and they have less than half a deal. in fact, i have something here -- i did have something i would show you -- wait a minute. i do not know if you have seen it. i used it once. i have it, i do have it. look at this. look at this. so this is tictacs, right? i don't know if i like the company, i've never met -- they are so lucky. look at all the television. this is the greatest commercial they have had to but look what happened to this is tictacs. this is inflation for this is what has happened. i just happen to have -- somebody gave me this one today. i think we will put it up as an example of inflation. but you know what, inflation is destroying our country. it is destroying our families. we will target everything from

car affordability to housing a fort ability to insurance costs to supply chain issues. we have the worst supply chain we have ever had in the history of the country. to the price of prescription drugs. i will instruct my cabinet i expect result within the first 100 days, or much sooner than that. i would say the first seven days. car insurance is up 70% to 100%, and you can't get it. you can't even get it, they tell me. insurance is up 50% or higher. the whole industry is out of control. the insurance industry -- we have never been in a situation with insurance like it is right now. you can't get it, no matter what you pay. but prices will come down. you just watch. they will come down and come down fast, not only with insurance, with everything. at the center of our effort to

bring the cost of living under control will be the all-out push to end the biden-harris war on anything called energy. host: both vice president kamala harris and former president donald trump talking about their approach to the economy, we will be hearing from you. the question which candidate do you trust on the economy. first up, linda in mississippi says harris. good morning. caller: good morning. i trust ms. harris, because she is looking forward. she laid out her plan specifically, what she is going to do. all trump is doing his grievances, looking back where he was. the speech he just made, said he will have his cabinet lower inflation. inflation is going down.

what is he going to do? he never answers that question. he stands up there like a doo fus. even when he did the little thing with the food on the side. he don't know what a gallon of milk costs. the only thing he did was try to demean ms. harris. he hates women, especially strong, black women. i'm for harris. host: joe in calirn on the trump line. good morning. caller: thank you. i got a couple pois. one,ama harris, one of the reasons i am for trump, she wants to give illegal aliens free health care, courtesy of the u.s. taxpayer. also, you know, when it comes to answers for all the issues, if you notice, the democrats, their

answer for everything is more government, more bureaucrats, higher taxes, and more regulations. never anything in the free enterprise. never. that is a really key point. then, people need to realize, when you vote democratic, you are really voting for the elite liberal media's values, because they are on the same team. the elite liberal media serves as offense and defense to the left. also, trump also says he will eliminate taxes for all social security recipients. harris has no answer for that. and he will eliminate taxes on tips for everybody, which he helped with and she just chimed in said she would do that, which she is not going to do. trump -- harris is just very, very radical. she admits that herself. between her open border

policies, which will continue and kill the economy, to all the benefits for illegals, to just across the board, she is ridiculous. host: herbert in michigan on the neither line. good morning. caller: yeah, honestly, i think harris is the best option here, if you look at these prices out there. i think harris is what did this. these prices are not going down. even if you took the tariffs off. corporations do not lower prices, they only take process -- if you look at tax cuts for rich people and corporations, why not invest in the working class and retired people and veterans, like the biden administration has done? i think that is a better option. let's try that for a long.

the american working is what makes the economy going around. host: the question, which candidate do you trust on the economy, you are on the neither line, but you are saying, of the two, you would trust vice president harris more? caller: absolutely. tariffs are getting is nothing but higher prices, tax cuts get is nothing. but the little guy paying for the tax cuts are that is all we are getting there. host: let's hear from carl, also from michigan, on the other line. good morning. caller: hi. i want to tell you a few things here. supply chains -- diesel under $4 a gallon, tariffs still on, and labor up, health care up. this is what a roast will never be $4 a pound again.

let me play grandpa carl and say, when i was a boy, candy bars were $.30. prices don't go down, they generally go up. bread was $.59 a loaf and they were a kid. people need to understand that, once the pandemic ended and people had to pay labor, ok -- people making $7, $8, $9 an hour are now making $15, $17 an hour. prices do not go down when companies have to pay for labor. prices do not go down when companies are paying health care for their employees are that is the future. this is where we are at right now. inflation basically is tamed. it's hit 3%. everyone, pay attention to the math. it's generational -- host: you are calling on the

other line. when it comes to the issue of the economy, where does it rank in terms of issues of importance to you? caller: i don't know. i think the economy has actually been pretty good. i do not have a problem during covid. but i kept working. i was an essential worker. the economy, to me, is looking fine. i work in retail, wholesale, i watch people spending money. there are certain categories that may be slow or fast at different times, but that is normal. if you look at appliances, durable goods, that sort of thing, clothing or things like that --tariffs are not helping the project. tariffs are looming alone. the -- spread through other aspects of the economy and manufacturing.

everybody is making more money than they made three 2008. does anybody remer the fight for 15 -- remember the fight for $15? bernie does. remember -- we have people in coffee shops making $18 an hour. good for them. where i live, the dream is a couple in their mid-20's, one works at a brewery, one was at a bakery. they live in town. they do not own cars. they use public transportation, they walk, ride bikes, and they have an apartment that looks over the beautiful bay. that is the dream. and it costs money, ok -- host: we will hear from john in hampton, virginia, calling on the harris line. good morning. caller: good morning, how are you? host: doing well. caller: glad to hear it. i trust harris. i think we need to stop wining about the economy -- whining

about the economy. the economy is going to shift a little back-and-forth because of the fact that companies are starting to pay people, and they are starting to look out for people's health benefits. so that situation is going to switch back and forth. what we really need to pay attention to is the fact that project 2025 -- that is what we really need to pay attention. host: that is john. we will hear from david in indiana. he says former president trump. good morning. caller: morning. i think trump would do a better job. harris, just watching her economic speech prior to your show today, was talking about all these giveaways, these $25,000, first down payment for new homebuyers. who is going to pay for that? it is very similar to the student loan debacle. it is all bribery.

i didn't need her to tell me ground beef is up 50%. if that's the case and she is aware of that, why didn't they do anything about it? the tariffs are on still, if the tariffs are bad, why didn't biden take them off? trump himself said it is too much money for the government, that is why they do not take them off. she has no experience in this. blaming high prices on gouging -- when did all the major industries get together and decide that they were going to couch the american people? i would like to know when that day was. her lack of experience, the fact she will not sit down, even to a friendly interview, is remarkable to me. it has been about 30 days. go ahead and vote for her, i

mean, obviously that is your choice. they say inflation is down, it is down to 2.9%. that means the growth is still 2.9% a year. the fed likes 2.0 percent. that is an arbitrary number. but food prices are still as high, just the growth of it has slowed down, which is great. but what did they do to do that? i want to know what biden-harr is' plan was that reduced that. host: let's hear from otis in florida on the harris line. good morning. caller: good morning. i've been listening to a lot of people -- two people said trump was better. kamala harris also is better. i would like to explain something. one trump took over in 2017, he was riding on the obamacare

hotels. it took about two years before it got better. i think trump, after two years, going through what obama left him. now covid-19 hit. the supply chain crashed. it took about a year, year and a half to get the supply chain under control. but when you talk about placing tariffs on the american people, you are raising taxes on us. when you talk about kamala harris don't have no experience, donald trump don't have no experience. donald trump went bankrupt six times. she is better at what she is doing, she has better character, and i think she has a better track record, because she never filed for bankruptcy. that is just like having a robber closing the bank, this is what will happen.

--they are going to raise the price of the products. we are not going down to where we were. that is never going to happen. but what we are going to do is being able to better manage our money. if you look at the travel, all the special cases over the year, they have overwhelming travel. you can't tell me all those people, those multimillionaires, they were struggling working these jobs. they save enough money to go on trips, save enough money to make these trips. supply, we are facing, -- i am a retired veteran. i worked in 2019 and 2020. understandable -- i understand a lot of people lost their jobs. income tax was cut a little so people could sustain themselves.

joe biden did it, then trump did it. trump did it first, but what is it we always complain when you want to give the little people a little bit of change and we cut taxes for the billionaires and millionaires? where the concern about the taxes being cut for the riches of the rich? host: let's hear from jack in pennsylvania on the trump line. good morning. caller: yeah, i will be more than happy to talk about the policies she described yesterday on her speech, and they are horrible. you start out with pay for family leave, paid for child care, rent controls -- that drives up the prices of housing. she wants to control drug prices, but only on specific drugs. what happens as those specific drugs are lower, but there are thousands of other drugs that aren't covered that they are going to praise the -- raise

their price on, that is happening. paid medical leave, $25,000 for a first-time homebuyer, $6,000 per child born? then you talk about the student loans or the gender blunder ideas for having men compete with women because they cannot get trophies when they compete against their own sex, it's a di sgrace -- host: that's jack. a couple callers mentioning vice president harris and her proposals on housing and homeownership. here are some of her comments on that from yesterday. [video clip] >> and during the foreclosure crisis, i took on the big banks for predatory lending, with many of my colleagues, including roy cooper, and won $20 billion for california families when i was attorney general. [applause] [cheers] so i know how to fight for people who are being exploited in the housing market.

and i know what homeownership means. it's more than a financial transaction. it is so much more than that. it is more than a house. homeownership and what that means, it is a symbol of the pride that comes with hard work. it's financial security. it represents what you will be able to do for your children. [cheers] [applause] and, sadly, right now, it is out of reach for far too many american families. there is a serious housing shortage. in many places, it is too difficult to build, and it is driving prices up. as president, i will work in

partnership with industry to build the house and we need, both to rent and to buy. we will take down barriers and cut red tape, including at the state and local level. [cheers] [applause] and by the end of my first term, we will end america's housing shortage by building 3 million new homes and rentals that are affordable for the middle class. [applause] host: let's hear from elaine in michigan. she says vice president harris. good morning. caller: good morning. yes, i am calling because, you know, it is typical trump showman to bring out his background of props and to show

tictacs -- it's so showman. it's typical circus. we have seen this before. he likes to do this. he likes to have as little props after everything he does, so he can be this absolute bark of the political world. it is ridiculous, but he does that. he had a chance. he had his four years. we all gave him a chance. what did he do? he cut taxes for billionaires and their yachts. he gave tax breaks for their airplanes. we know what he does, we have seen it with our own lives -- eyes. we lived it. we don't need to wonder who did the best job. we have seen what trump does. he cannot even land in montana because he owes the state for his rallies. this man is no good with money. you think he will do good in the economy for us? he doesn't care.

he doesn't know. he thinks you need an id to buy bread. this is a man who has a gold toilet. unless you have a gold toilet, you know what you're talking about. it is harris all the way. host: let's hear from kevin in ohio calling on the other line. good morning. caller: hi. i think a lot of people do not understand a lot of things in the economy are not in any way controlled by the president. our economy is a great engine. when it has certainty, it runs well, it makes wealth for everyone. when it is uncertainty, due to covid, or uncertainty due to some economic bubble, some crisis that is created, it does not do well. people need to understand that. tax cuts for the rich, i think if you look at the graph, what the rich paid in the golden eras

of the americas back in the 1950's and 1960's was much higher, so that does not seem to be working. on the other hand, when ms. harris says things like "we will control this," you cannot control prices. we live in a market economym paid you cannot do that. you can try to -- and i you can try to influence prices, but you cannot control prices. and if you inflate things to offensive, do not buy that. that is a market economy. people have this concept they have to have so many things. they do not have to have those things -- host: you are calling on the other or unsure line. is there somebody you would trust with more of the economy? caller: i cannot single out a person. i think the candidates we have are taking their best efforts for the parties with which they represent, but offhand, i cannot think of anyone. an economist would be great, frankly. host: that was kevin in ohio.

nicole in maryland on the trump line. good morning. looks like we lost nicole. we will go to paul in idaho, also on the trump line. good morning. caller: morning. i am a trump supporter. i think the soft landing that we were talking about -- host: go ahead. caller: ok, i didn't know you could hear me. i think the soft landing they were talking about, as far as the biden-harris administration, is it going to be socialism or all out marxism? i see a lot of things pointing to all-out mark schism cousin. anytime you bring 20 million people to a country with no way to make a living, nothing except

the shirts and pants enters on their feet, you will run into a lot of problems. it has just begun. i do not know how trump will be able to put 20 million people on trains willingly, to take them down to south america, but i guess if that is what he thinks he is going to do, then i will support that, too. i don't necessarily agree with it, but we do not have the jobs, we do not have the places to live. we are filling the finest hotels and motels in new york city with migrants. everything is full, completely full. there's -- they're saying about building the home for the middle class. people in the middle class can kind of build their own, if they are able to keep their jobs, that is what we need to do, keep their jobs. i think trump knows how to keep and make jobs. as far as the 60 million jobs

that harris just quoted just a few moments ago on what you are playing, it does not add up. most of these jobs were civil service type jobs, irs, 87,000, eta, another 46,000. people getting a second job, which is actually a part-time job, which only counts for half a job, if they give it a full count. these numbers add up -- do not add up. host: let's hear from eddie in texas on the harris line. good morning. caller: good morning. host: go ahead, you are on. caller: yes, i am voting for m.s harris. we will be great with her with an economy, jobs, housing. she has done a very good job of

being vice president, from what i've seen. she just has my vote. she is an outstanding woman. host: that was eddie. let's hear from sarah, south carolina. she is calling on the line for other. good morning. caller: good morning. i'm basically calling because i am just concerned about the lack of knowledge that most callers are calling in, the lack of background on history and economics. inflation is when the prices of goods and services increase over time, which can be caused by a number of factors. in the case we are living in right now, we had an unprecedented pandemic in 2020 that cost all of what you see from 21 to 2023, so you cannot necessarily blame -- whoever would have been in office, whether it would have been a

republican or a democrat, we still would have seen the effects of this unprecedented pandemic, because of supply chains, etc. now you have many corporations increasing prices, because they are saying, we cannot get supplies, so unfortunately, you, the homeowner or whoever, have to foot the bill. the last thing i want to say is i want people to think -- i am an educator. would you put someone in a position or an office that has many, many, many past failed businesses, to trust the economy? thank you. host: let's hear from nehemiah in florida on the line for vice president harris. good morning.

caller: yes, how are you? i just wanted to say that president harris -- she is going to be president -- they call trump president, so i will call her president harris. when she gets in office, she is going to make sure that she takes care of the poor people, people on social security. and what about this? she got caught trying, ok? she can get her foot in the door, ok? don't -- she's never been president before. give this lady a shot. i'm telly -- telling you. she's like a beautiful half-and-half person. i am the same race and color she is. i cling to that lady, because it shows me, even in the black race, we are not terminating on

our light-skinned people, on our indian people, or any other. i'm just telling you. watch. she's trying. she got caught trying, how about that? host: let's hear from lucy from west virginia, calling on the line for neither. good morning. caller: i am calling to let you know that people can vote the way they want to, but harris and them have been in office for four years. what has she done? people can vote for who they want to, but when they vote for harris, they are really going to go under. she is telling lies. that's just all i have to say -- host: lucy, the question we are asking people today is which entity do you trust on the economy. it does not sound like you support vice president harris. you called on the neither line. do support former president trump when it comes to the economy? caller: trump did well when he

was in. harris and biden will take him under. they can vote for who they want to. host: that's lucy. let's hear from frank in virginia, calling on the line for vice president harris. good morning. caller: good morning. i support vice president harris on the economy. i think we forget that donald trump was handed a really good economy from the barack obama and biden administration. host: go ahead, frank. caller: oh, sure. and donald trump took that economy and ran it into the ground. i think the way he handled covid was one of the reasons why we are in the position we are today . we have, a long way with biden -- we have come a long way with biden and harris. inflation is one of those key issues when it comes to the

economy. former president trump at his news conference thursday spoke about vice president harris' and the biden administration's efforts in that area. here are some of those comments. [video clip] >> harris just declared tackling inflation will be a day one priority for her. it will be day one. but day one really, for kamala, was three and half years ago. where has she been and why hasn't she done it? why hasn't she done it? she was the borders are but did not do anything. the worst borders are in history. there has never been a borders are so bad. she has been unbelievable in terms of her badness to some of our allies, our great allies. you know who i am talking about. here is the record of economic calamity that kamala is desperate for voters to ignore. she cast the tie-breaking votes

that caused record inflation. she cast the votes. she is trying to blame biden, as you know. so it was biden, but i am going to do a better job here but it was her. if she wants to do a better job, she is still got five months left, right? but she can't do a better job, because she does not know how to. she is of a place in life where she wouldn't know what a better job is. she will destroy our country. as a result of kamala's inflation -- host: we have just about 20 minutes left in this segment, hearing from you on which candidate you trust on the economy. we are hearing from callers and there is also reaction on social media. a couple tweets coming in. janet in florida says i trust harris to consider the american people when making decisions regarding economic policies.

i expect trump to consider his rich friends when making decisionrerding economic policies. deon says the u.s. economy i the proverbial big vote. once an action is taken, it takes time for results to be felt. trump rode obama's economy for the first couple years and biden rode trump's economy which, with covid, brought high inflation. back to our phones. we will hear from michael in new york, calling on the other line. good morning. caller: good morning. i am having a very hard time understanding the people that are calling. i drive a tractor trailer. first of all, i need to say this -- this is a fact. a fact. and i'm african-american. under president trump, we have the lowest level of unemployment among african-americans, hispanics, everybody. what he did to stimulate the economy was he cut the corporate

tax rate, which was at 31%. it is the highest tax rate of any industrial country in the world. so people who have capital, you're not going to invest when you get taxed at 31%. you will probably invest in switzerland, where it is only 11%. when he cut the corporate tax rate, $6 trillion came back to the united states. the key thing with inflation, because i drive a tractor trailer, is diesel. it is oil. with the biden administration did was they cut the keystone pipeline, gas prices went through the roof -- i am driving a tractor-trailer, an independent trucker. what i was paying for gas, it had to be passed on to the consumer. the harris administration is against fracking, it is against natural gases for this new greenville which will exempt india and china and force the

united states to pay trillions upon trillions of dollars. then we talk about covid. this is a fact by every news agency. they got that vaccine out and operational warp speed, faster than every -- host: let me ask you this, because you are calling on the other line. it sounds like you support former president trump over harris, is that accurate? caller: no, no. what i am supporting is the facts. i am supporting the facts here. on the economy here, the biden administration blew it. that's just a fact. people are talking about how the biden-harris -- where's our policies? she wants to have price controls or that does not work. he did not work in the soviet union, it did not work when president nixon was president, it does not work. you cut the corporate tax rate, but the democrats always want to say everybody needs to pay their fair share. i believe everybody needs to pay

their fair share, but when you tax people at a rate that you do not stimulate economic growth. fact. host: that is michael in new york. from today's wall street journal, an opinion piece from the board there, the headline, kamala harris endorses nixononmics, talking about her economic proposals. in part, it says, we wrote friday kamala harris was likely to promote biden's build back better agenda, but it turns out we were far too optimistic. the policy priorities the vice president laid out were much worse, including a plan to impose national price controls on food and groceries. ms. harris' political problems is the biden-harris economic policies have delivered inflation and declining incomes. the high price of food is a particular sore point, and the vice president's responses to make it worse by resorting to

venezuelan-style left-wing populism. that's no exaggeration. that is from the wall street journal's opinion section. let's hear from ronald in louisiana. he is calling on the line for former president trump. good morning. caller: good morning. i need to give history to the american people. roosevelt was a socialist. he ran the government as a socialist. he gave, he gave, he gave. then we got to world war ii, and he had to go to the macon people to rebuild everything. then carter. carter's the worst president of all time. carter only needed four years. you know why? remember this. the embargo. prices went up, prices went up,

because there was no oil and gas. they do nothing in america. ford tried it, nixon tried. now, here we go. let's go back to obama. obama, the economy will up. people were having a hard time. that is why trump got in. trump started working it down, brought everything down. america was working, america was making money. he didn't have to make people pay $15 an hour. they were able to pay that $15 an hour, because everything was going. he loses the election, they put over $2 trillion into the economy, but all you hear is some of that money disappears. they did not give it back to the american people, they gave it back to wall street. look at how high wall street is. trump can bring down the economy

in a year to year and half if he gets back in. it is a simple process. like he said, drill, baby, d rill. host: former president trump and vice president kamala harris on the campaign trail this week, talking about economic policy. former president donald trump will be speakingga today. this afternoon , he will speak to supporters at a ray in e city o wilkes-barre and pennsylvania, a state heonn 2016 but lost in 2022 president biden. you can watch that live starting at 4:00 p.m. eastern on c-span, c-span now, and online at c-span.org. also want to let you know that vice presidential nominee -- democratic vice presidential nominee governor tim walz will be campaigng today. he will be in omaha, nebraska.

liveoverage of that event will be at 2:00 p.m. eastern. you can also find that event on sp, c-span now, and online at c-span.org. let's hear from thomas in florida. he says neither. good morning. caller: good morning, how are you? host: doing well. caller: good, good. i made a mistake. it's not neither, it is more to the right. when trump was in, when trump became president -- i am a blue-collar worker -- i was a blue-collar worker. i got laid off last monday. but when trump was president and he did the tax cuts -- i am a lower middle income, and i gained more money in my pocket, which made my spending a little bit better, made my life a little bit easier. when biden got into office and started going with the green new

deal, people do not realize that the fuel prices, in my opinion, is what controls a lot of the market. i noticed that when the fuel prices went up, food prices went up also. my main question is why is it when biden and harris -- i shouldn't say that, i should say why did they overturn a lot of the policies trump already in place when the country was doing fine? the bottom line is they just did not like trumpcare this goes back to hillary. they just do not like him -- host: when it comes to those policies, is there anything specific you would have liked to have seen them keep? caller: absolutely paid i would have liked them to keep the border. the border program trump had going. i would have liked them to keep the oil, because gas prices, like everybody said -- i think $1.86 was the lowest.

in 2020, it was at $2.45, which made everything else fall into place. yes, there pandemic was a terrible, terrible issue, and i know biden got caught with it, but just leave things alone that were working and work on top of what trump did. don't cancel everything he did, because what he did had this country rolling paid i saw in the news where i think john deere is moving out of the united states and going overseas. it is ridiculous. why anybody would vote for a person because they are either black or because they're white or because they're a woman or because you don't like their personality -- you need to throw all that stuff aside and vote on what they can do, what they did, and what you think they are going to do. and harris is not going to bring this country back. people that vote for harris, i pray and i pray you can live

with what you do, because it will be a horrible, horrible another 4 years. host: let's hear from frederick in texas. he says vice president harris. good morning. caller: good morning, good morning. i got a couple things to say. people never did take civics in high school. these callers do not know how the system works. i am a project of the home assistance. i am also a product of health care. i am 60 years old, my wife is 65. we have a 13-year-old. if it were not for those things, we would not able to give our daughter a better place for it on the down payment system, it is not free money. you have to pay that money back

when you are buying a home. that's get this straight. the down payment assistance, you have to pay that money back with your mortgage. so we are all informed with what the situation is, i am a tractor truck driver myself. i am the owner operator. i had to resign as the owner operator and become a company driver, because it did not make sense to run my truck with the fuel prices the way they are and what they are paying -- host: when you're talking about the fuel prices, what kind of changes did you see, what kind of jump? caller: ok. for instance, let's say you're driving 750 mile -- 750,000 miles. the price jumped up and they got greedy, they cut the rates. when they cut they rates, you

suffer. ou can't run your business. covid opened up a lot of things for this economy. they opened up a bunch of things. people don't understand the supply and demand. yes, i understand the tractor-trailer guy called earlier about fuel the most important thing about driving trucks is you will. if you do not get a good price on fuel and do not get a good price on the rate, you do not make money. so america, it is not about -- it is about money and about giving a person a chance paid since i moved to this area, my daughter's grades went up. i thank god somebody gave me a chance to buy a home and gave me a chance to have health insurance. host: that was frederick in

texas. there is a guest opinion essay in the new york times last month , the headline, the enormous risks of a second trump term poses to our economy. the piece written by robert reubens and kenneth schnapp. reubens is a former u.s. -- part of the article says, in part, at a time when our country was already an increasingly risky debt trajectory, mr. trump tax and spending initiatives during his presidency added an estimated seven point $8 trillion to the national debt, according to the manhattan institute. mainstream analysts conclude the results of mr. trump's tax cuts increasing demand in an already

full employment economy while having a negligible effect on business investment added very little benefit in their short-term and virtually nothing in the long term. and mr. trump's second term agenda would further harm our fiscal picture. a committee for a responsible federal budget report says the spending in the 2017 tax cuts alone would add another three point $9 trillion to the federal debt and increase our debt to gdp ratio by approximately 10%. this would lead to higher interest rates and greater inflation while undermining business confidence and would reduce our resilience in the face of future national security and economic risk. just a few minutes left in this first segment this morning. let's hear from lloyd in new york. he is on the neither line. good morning. caller: good morning.

i didn't realize it was just about economics that the calls were for. because my thing with both candidates is i don't see either one of them talking about the unaccompanied minors that come into this country and how many of them -- the use of a nice word, traffic, like they are just moving them from one area to the other. but they are actually selling them into the sex trade -- host: let me ask you now that you are on the line and you know we are asking about which candidate you trust on the economy, do you have a preference? would it be vice president harris? or former president trump, someone else? ? caller: yeah, if it was the economy, i definitely would have to go with trump. harris is -- again, it does not

work. you cannot take an american company and tell them how much they can charge. first of all, if they lowered the gas prices and did more -- i mean, we are pumping a lot now, but if you lowered that, you lower all the costs for everybody. you lower the cost for the drivers, you lower the cost for the companies making the products, you lower the cost for the supermarkets to run their electric and everything else, and you lower the cost for the person going to the store. that's where they really got to start. all of the rest of the -- it isn't going to do anything. if you lower their price of fuel, you lower everything in the economy. nothing in this country runs without fuel. host: let's hear from cecille

from virginia. caller: cheers and greetings. as the gentleman prior to me indicated, fuel plays a key role . when covid hit, most people were off the streets, they were not driving, so that drove down the cost of fuel. but there must be some type of counterbalance between the soul and the spirits versus the economy. -- on economic destruction. yeah, we produce a lot of oil and nuclear power, by that is leveling the communities. nature will not be able to support life -- i strongly support more so the

harris way than the donald, who had his insatiate -- they're projecting that, soon, we'll reach the state where there'll be one person who has $1 trillion, and that is coming soon. host: let's hear from joe in baltimore, also on the line for vice president harris. good morning. caller: good morning. i think harris will do better on the economy, because donald trump increased the national debt by almost a trillion dollars. the ppp loans, they call it a loan, if you look at the bill, they were always just a grant for businesses. it was a wealth transfer from taxpayers to corporations to the tune of almost $1 billion there.

sorry, almost $1 trillion there. it was like $800 billion or $900 billion. the abraham accords, the dismantling of the iran deal, all of these things were instigations to middle east instability, which all comes back and affects the economy as well. the handling of covid was an odd mess that needed decisive action one way or another, but what we got was a hodgepodge that kept people from being able to effectively work while, at the same time, not providing an effective solution for clamping down on the virus when it was actually just starting out. the economy now, we have a great economy for generating wealth

for america, but none of that comes back to individual people. i would like to say, also, a little bit of an aside, i agree with the caller who called for neither and was concerned about the trafficking of migrant children and other children as well. to their point about the word trafficking, that is a technical term for all the awful stuff we do to people, but i would like to see that addressed by either candidate as well. i don't always necessarily agree with the particular spin on it, but any promotion of the series issue of one of the most horrible things we could do to a human being is always good to have in the public this course, i think. host: we will let it go there because i want to get in one more call in this hour.

caleb from mississippi, calling on the other line. good morning. are you there? caleb, mississippi? caller: i'm here. host: caller: the other caller spoke on the border. how much money are we paying to store those items we are not using to build the wall? we have to do something about that. host: that will do it for this first hour. coming up, politico fda politics reporter lauren gardner. we will discuss the results of the first medicare prescription drug pricing negotiation. later author and professor john paul lederach will discuss

solutions to overcoming political polarization and the threat of civil war. we will be right back. >> i am susan swain. campaign 2024 has evolved in unexpected ways. until election day c-span promises unfiltered coverage of the candidates as they battle to win the white house and congress. you may not know that c-span is a private company that operates without government money and we have been impacted by cutting. we are asking for your support for our political coverage with a donation. 100% of your contribution supports c-span operations. an anonymous donor has pledged to match your donation dollar

for dollar up to 24,000 dollars. find out more at c-span.org/donate. help ensure that c-span's coverage of collect -- coverage of politics stays. thank you for watching and thank you for your support >> american history tv exploring the people and events that tell the american story. rebecca roberts author of "suffragists," talks about the decade leading up to the passage of the 19th moment and how women gain the right to vote through persistence. august 15 is the anniversary of the 1940 five surrender of japan during world war ii and american will mark the occasion with

several programs on the war in the pacific. we will feature the 1945 u.s. office of war information film "japan surrenders." then, world war ii veterans. stephen ellis and former air force navigator rob slane talk about their experiences during the war. paul hendrickson author of "fighting the night," discusses his father's service as a fighter pilot during iwo jima. watch historic convention speeches featuring notable remarks by presidential nominees and other political figures from the past several decades. this week u.s. illinois democratic senate candidate barack obama gives the keynote speech at the 2004 democratic national convention in boston. former massachusetts governor

mitt romney spoke at the 2008 republican national convention in minnesota. exploring the american story. watch american history tv every weekend and find a full schedule on the program guide and watch online anytime at c-span.org/history. >> washington journal continues. host: welcome back. joining us is lauren gardner, an fda politics reporter for politico. thank you for joining us. here is your headline. we will put it on the screen. medicare has set prices for 10 drugs, saving billions. let's talk about that. who will be impacted by the negotiation's? guest: the biden administration is saying that everyone on medicare will be impacted by this.

when they made the announcement on thursday, they said they expect the initial negotiations to save $6 billion to the medicare program and that $1.5 billion of savings will be realized by anyone on medicare with prescription drug coverage. that would be because they the expectation that if prescription drug plans are saving money on these 10 drugs, they will pass at least some of those savings onto beneficiaries. host: you mentioned 10 drugs. what types of medications were included and why did they select those? guest: the first 10 drugs had to be selected because they are among the drugs that medicare pays the most money for. there were lots of other factors at play and we expect more from medicare about how and why they made this decision.

we can expect these were the drugs they were paying the most money for. these drugs cover everything from diabetes, blood clotting drugs and some that treat cancer. host: you mentioned the top line number, a pretty big amount. how much will the average beneficiary save and what factors will impact the amount? guest: good question. what we still have yet to find out is how this will trickle down because the prices announced on thursday were related to the listed price of the drugs. the list price is not what someone phase -- someone pays at the counter. you are not just paying $1500. i pulled that out of thin air.

there are negotiations behind the scenes. this is proprietary information. this is not open to the public. on top of the list price discounts that the administration announced, there will be more negotiations with pharmacy benefit managers that will happen behind the scenes between drug manufacturers and medicare prescription drug plans. that will ultimately affect what beneficiaries pay for their drugs at the pharmacy. host: when can we see those know prices go into effect? guest: january 1, 2026. we still have a ways to go for them to be implanted. the administration announced this before the democratic national convention and they want to highlight this going into the fall campaign season. the big hurdle for them will be

publicizing this and trying to make voters understand how this will affect them and remember that at the polls in november even though this will not kick in right away. host: we have lauren gardner joining us for the next 40 minutes, talking about the medicare prescription drug price negotiations. if you have a question, start calling now. in the eastern or central time zones, (202) 748-8000. mountain or pacific, (202) 748-8001. a special line if you are a medicare bill yeary -- medicare beneficiary, (202) 748-8003. let's talk about the negotiations. what don't we know and when can we find out more information

about -- what information are we still expecting? guest: when it comes to this round of negotiations, what we are still waiting to hear, like i mentioned earlier, medicare is legally obligated to publish by march 1 an explanation of how they got to the prices they got to that were just announced. there will still be details they cannot divulge because of the proprietary nature of a lot of this. i am personally very interested to see how they and to what extent they explain how they were able to reach, for example, some of these drugs they got 66% discounts on and others it was more in the range of 30%. how did that differential come into play? that is something people are

curious about. host: these are the first 10 medications. tell us about the schedule of their timeline for the next set of drugs. guest: medicare this fall will be putting out more guidance about how they are administering this program because there has been a little bit of building the plane as it flies. the laws that gave medicare this power did not give them a lot of time to get this going so there was a lot of hiring as we go and trying to figure this out. there is even more guidance coming about how they will approach this next round of negotiations and february 1 is when we will get the next list of drugs and that is expected to be up to 15 part d drugs. not anything that is administered in a doctor's office or hospital but drugs at the pharmacy counter. host: these new prices, this

announcement came and it was something that president biden and vice president harris were both touting. i want to play this of president biden talking about it and get your reaction. [video clip] >> i gave medicare the power to negotiate lower drug prices just like the department of veterans affairs. in fact, one of the first major bills i worked on was in 1973. i cosponsored legislation led by senator frank church, to negotiate the cost of drugs. 1973 this fight has been going on. the v.a. pays 50% less because the v.a. can negotiate the prices, as they should. for years, they formed a block on negotiating drug prices and they have been able to maintain exorbitant pricing that is

uncalled for. this time we have finally beat big pharma. [applause] host: that was president biden talking about his longtime effort to reduce the price of prescription drugs. remind our audience why they were not able to previously negotiate and what changed. guest: when medicare part d was first introduced in the early 2000, that was part of the haggling that went on on capitol hill was that they would not have the power to negotiate prescription drug prices. this is something the pharmaceutical industry has fought for decades. their argument is that if you introduce this power to a program like medicare, the medicare and medicaid drug market covers about half the country. it is pretty large. if that power exists, then they

will not make enough money for research and development, innovating on new drugs. that will not necessarily impact beneficiaries in the way in which the administration hopes. their argument is also that the pharmacy benefit manager, the insurance plans, they are the ones who have more of an impact on how much people are paying for the drugs rather than the drug companies themselves. it has been a very intense effort. i think a lot of people were surprised two years ago when this ended up passing congress because it has been a pretty steady opposition for a very long time. the political winds just shifted against the pharmaceutical industry. host: let's bring our audience into the conversation. we will start with ted in seattle on the line for medicare beneficiaries. good morning. caller: good morning.

i would like to ask lauren if any president who is elected in 2024 will receive this benefit in 2026. guest: whether the next president continues this, we can definitely expect vice president harris to continue this. she has already said she wants to expand the benefits of this program beyond medicare to anyone with health insurance. that would take legislation and would be a very tall order. the expectation is she would continue this program for speed ahead. when it comes to president trump , that is a bigger question mark. he also had some interesting rhetoric regarding prescription drug prices in the

pharmaceutical industry that does not track with his party and is much more interested in trying to lower those prices. whether he would continue the program or try to leave his mark on it is more of an open question. host: pauline in pennsylvania. good morning. caller: i would like to ask her one question. most people on medicare have advantage plans and some of them cover drugs completely. you do not even have a co-pay. some of us have a co-pay. therefore, let's say one drug is reduced by $500. we are not saving. it is the federal government that is saving. they would have been better if they got the doughnut hole where people have to pay a higher price. it seems to me a lot of rhetoric

when people on medicare already have these plans that cover all of their medications. how does that really benefit us when you say the price of the drug would be cut in half when knowingly we do not pay that? if you did not take medicare, i would help you but medicare already has drug coverage. if you take. one of the advantage plans which a lot of people do not even have to pay for, that covers your drugs. host: let's get a response. guest: that is a great point. there are other factors that play into what beneficiaries are actually paying when they have to pick up these drugs. when it comes to the doughnut hole, starting in 2025 the insurance are picking up the cost of that gap, that coverage

gap. that was also part of the law that gave medicare the power to also negotiate drugs. to your point on co-pays, yes. that is an open question. how will that impact anything like that? based on how my health insurance works, my co-pay is my co-pay. how these effects will trickle down to beneficiaries is still very much an open question. you are right, it saves the plan money and how that translates to the individual beneficiary is what we do not know beyond the estimated $1.5 billion of savings the administration has been touting. host: let's hear from jb in arkansas on the medicare line. good morning. caller: good morning. i was just curious. who actually handles these

negotiations with big pharma? is it the biden administration, congress? who is it that negotiates these prices? guest: medicare hired several people to work on these negotiations. the folks who work at medicare, pharmacists, actuaries, you have policy folks who have been steeped in prescription drug policy for years. many different people have been involved in these negotiations. it happens at the administration level. it is the executive branch, not members of congress. host: one of your articles notes that nine manufacturers of the drugs selected also opted into the process to negotiate under the law but also say they did not have a choice. guest: yes. that has been a very common refrain from these companies.

one of the lawsuits i believe termed it as a gun to the head, that they did not have a choice because if they did not often, if they did not -- if they did not opt in, they would pay an excise tax that would be absorbed and -- exorbitant. or they could pull all of the drug from the market. not just the drugs on the negotiation list but all of the companies drugs covered by medicare, they would have to pull them from the market and all the companies said, we cannot do that. whether it is financially. also they argue it would be a disservice to americans. that's why they say this is not much of a negotiation from their point of view. host: michael in new jersey also on the medicare line. good morning. caller: good morning. several questions that have not

been touched on. any price controls impact people , you will see you shortly with kamala harris. let's talk about drug prices. what will happen to research, i will not ask you but this is what will happen. drug companies will develop drugs that will be basically focused on a non-medicare market , if they have a choice. for example, these weight reduction drugs which are used for weight reduction and diabetes, diabetes is a medicare market. weight reduction is a youth market. the emphasis by the drug company will be on essentially weight reduction and out of essentially diabetes. that basically means the people who have diabetes will have to wait. the second issue is basically

the cancer drugs. cancer drugs are developed over a period of 10 years. essentially they start out, let's just say lung cancer, then brain cancer. what lauren has not mentioned is the restriction on protection for drug companies going out. what is the short answer to this? later stage indications for cancer patients will not happen because companies will be faced with price negotiations for later stage indications in oncology, in other tertiary areas other than the principal indication. i think people say they will get a free lunch with this but realize essentially when it comes out to research, this will have a dramatic impact on people looking for --

guest: on your second point, that is something that pharmaceutical companies and their allies have been talking about. this could discourage them from both innovating on drugs that already exist. often times when a cancer drug is approved, that is not the end of the line. they usually continue to conduct clinical trials to see what other types of cancer that drug could potentially treat. there is concern that this program could have a dampening effect on that. when it comes to diabetes and weight loss drugs, first off, when it comes to the drugs that everyone knows like olympic -- ozempic, there are different brand names and ingredients, but the diabetes drugs could come up

for negotiation in the next round. it remains to be seen. it definitely could be a contender. the weight loss drugs too. obesity is a problem across age groups in the united states. once those separately branded drugs get into the time period of which they could be eligible for negotiation, they could get lumped into this program in later years. host: there has been reaction from the pharmaceutical industry. they put out a statement yesterday, a couple of days ago, "the administration is using the iras price setting scheme to drive political headlines patients will be disappointed when they find out what it means for them. there is no ace f lower out-of-pocketts bause there is nothing to rein in insurance cpanies who ultimately decide what medicines are covered and what patients pay at the pharmacy.

as a result of the ira, there are fewer part d plansoose from and premiums are going up. meanwhile insure covering fewer med and the say they intend to impose further restrictions as the pricin scheme is intimated. more than 3 million beneficiaries take medicine with government set pricing." i know we talked about this a little bit. your reaction to that statement? guest: we do not know where on the formulary which is when you have your insurance and you find out what drugs are fully covered , what drugs you might have to pay co-pay or coinsurance on. there are different tiers. typically brand-name drugs that are more expensive, you might get some coverage of but you still pay more money because they are on a certain tier of your formulary. we don't know where these

negotiated drugs will fall on the formularies of party plans -- part d plans. the medicare program says they will be assessing where these end up and make sure that they conduct due diligence to make sure there are not any access issues for beneficiaries. we do not know how this will pan out when it comes to this manifestation of how beneficiaries are able to pay for the drugs. that still remains to be seen. host: let's hear from ken in pennsylvania. good morning. caller: i'll just say that i started taking insulin one month ago. i went to get the needles to inject the insulin and my co-pay

was $55. i don't know where you are saving money at. i don't know what you pay if you don't have good hospitalization. thank you. guest: insulin, that is a big ticket item. there were insulin products included in the first negotiation round. several products made by nova nordisk. there is the $35 insulin cap that has already come into play. we have not talked about the $2000 out-of-pocket cap that will go into effect next year for medicare beneficiaries. a lot of things outside of the negotiation program that will be or are already affecting what beneficiaries pay at the counter or over a period of time. host: to that point, this text coming in from lee, the

part the medicare pnsan change their formularies at any time. if out-of-pocket costs are capped at 2000, what will stop the companies from dropping these drugs from their formularies? guest: the drugs are required to be covered on the formularies. what we don't know is where on the formularies. formularies at least in the private market typically change twice per year in january or july. we will not see the effects of this until 2026 so we still have a ways to go. where they are on the formularies, we will see. host: theresa in florida on the line for medicare beneficiaries. good morning. caller: hello c-span. thank you for taking my call. i am a medicare recipient on part d medicare. i am currently taking eloquence

-- eliguis, the blood thinner. my husband works. he is 73. i'm in my 70's. he works to pay for our prescriptions and food on the table which is not very easy these days. i just want to say that i think it is unacceptable that our government has to wait so long to stop these pharmaceutical companies from their prices being so high and to have to wait another year and a half for my eliquis to go down to be affordable. i will be paying several thousand dollars to take my eliquis. i truly believe if trump gets into office, he will get things done and make this go a lot faster. guest: i think you are touching

on a point that democrats are thinking a lot about right now which is how do we emphasize the benefit of this to beneficiaries but also take into account that this is not kicking in right away and that beneficiaries have to wait another year and a half to see the benefits of this program. in terms of what former president trump could do, that would require an act of congress to speed up the timeline. this got through congress on party-line vote. i do not anticipate that if there would be any appetite to reopen this. host: cliff in oklahoma. good morning. caller: here we go again talking about cost per pill. it is too complicated for most seniors like myself. i am 65. my wife is almost 70.

i opted out of part d because i can pay for my drugs cheaper by myself but she has one drug that is $20 per pill. we know for a fact it costs them $.50 per pill to make it. i have a supplement plan for her that keeps us out-of-pocket almost. the whole things needs to be renegotiated. i have friends in europe who laugh at what we pay for prescription drugs. i have friends in canada who think we are the laughingstock of the world. you go to mexico, you pay less for prescription drugs. it is almost like dollars for your pills instead of $20 or $30 like in america. we have tummy lobbyists -- too many lobbyists. we need to take it back to free enterprise because it has not been free enterprise for 56 years now in the drug market.

guest: this is definitely a point that many democrats and even some republicans like former president trump, a point that they have to hear. you hear how much patients pay for prescription drugs in europe and it is significantly less. these drugs tend to go to the american market first. they can start recouping costs more quickly whether there are other programs in place to lower prices for citizens. host: the new list of the 15 drugs that will be selected for the next round is expected early next year, february 1. do we know what drugs may be included on that list? guest: we do not know exactly

yet. there have been some analyses from analysts and researchers have -- there was a study last year of the drugs that experts expect could come for negotiation between 2026 and 2028. there are a few dozen drugs that people expect to be swept up into this. the big question would be there are a handful of drugs in that universe where generics or bio -similars are expected to come into play. when the generic is on the market, the drug is no longer eligible. once you have the generic of eliquis, for example, eliquis is no longer part of this program.

there are a couple of drugs on the initial list of 10 where we are expecting some generic competition in the next couple of years. there is a little bit of a runway. say a generic comes online next fall in 2025 for one of the drugs that just had their prices announced. it has to be on the market for at least nine months before the brand name can come off of the list. you will still get the negotiated price for that first year but once the generic has been on the market for that nine month period, it is no longer there. some of these other drugs that could end up on the list, if generics come to market quicker, they might not get wrapped up into this after all. host: the pharmaceutical care management association, pcma, which has to do with pharmacy benefit managers, quickly remind

people what that is. guest: they are the go-between between drug manufacturers and insurance plans. they negotiate prices that plans pay for drugs. they work with the manufacturers. they offer rebates and various other discounts. that is why it is hard to understand how much of a discount the administration got because they are comparing to the list price. they are not comparing to the net price because that is a black box. we don't know how many rebates and discounts have historically been around for these listed drugs behind the scenes other than that they do exist. they are kind of part of this aspect of the drug pricing train that contributes a little bit of mystery to the process.

they argue that we are here to help extract benefits for patients and that's what we do. host: that pharmaceutical care management association put this statement out in response to the price negotiation announcement, "while we share the administration's goal to reduce prescription drug costs for american seniors and push back against the high prices by administration drug manufas adnistration, the administration has missed the mark for choosing researching drugs for which pdm's are already negotiating discounts. our analysis shows that negotiation by pdm's already curediscounts on six of the 10 drugs cy these centers for dire and medicaid services. the key to reducing drug crossed -- drug cost is to increase

competition among manufacturers. encourage the meditation to focus on those drugs and allow pdm and negotiators to continue to deliver value and savings for medicare." guest: this touches on a critique of that initial list which is that a lot of those drugs do get heavily discounted behind the scenes. like i said, we only know so much about those discounts because we know what the list price is. all the discounting behind the scenes is opaque. also to their point, one of the interesting things about this list was there is a cancer drug on the list and cancer drugs tend to not have these steep rebates and discounts compared to drugs that treat other conditions. i believe it was a 38% discount compared to the list price. that was the smallest discount

of all the drugs on the list. to their point, we saw bigger discounts with some of these other drugs that may be had steeper rebates before this program came into play. there was a little bit of a lesser one for this drug. still, it is a discount and that is what the administration will be focusing on going forward. host: jim in maryland on the medicare line. good morning. caller: good morning. you said you do not know where some of these drugs will end up on the different tiers. i forgot the word that you used. you do not know where they will end up yet. depending on where that drug ends up on these different

levels, i forget the word that you used. what is the direct effect to medicare part d patients depending on which tier? if i'm taking eliquis and it is tier three, how does it affect me? host: we have difficulty hearing you but we will get a response. guest: that remains to be seen. everyone's benefits are slightly different whether you are covered under part d or you have a medicare advantage plan. people are going to see this beginning next year as plans start to publicize ahead of 2026 where these drugs are going to fall. host: jeremy in illinois. go ahead. caller: i am in indiana.

you must have a different jeremy. host: go ahead, jeremy. caller: i am from indiana. i did not know if you had the wrong call. i wanted to touch on the fast track that pushed the chemicals and big pharma drugs at a faster rate without taking long-term effects or research and development. all the chemicals that actually goes into our food and stuff, close to 200 that i know of. there are different patents on listeria. host: a little off topic. anything you can share with jeremy? guest: no. host: that's fine. we will go to chris in pittsburgh on the medicare line. caller: good morning. this came out of the blue. i really was not following it. but i'm excited.

the primary thing is the cap. i'm trying to figure out these different plans and how they apply to me, it's very complicated. if i know the cap i'm responsible for, it makes my decision-making easier. the other thing is you say it was hard to get through congress. i am wondering if it had anything to do with the oxycontin scandal with purdue pharma pushing all of this oxycontin in all of these little pharmacies that might have finally overcome all the money that was put the lobbyists in congress. guest: good question. when it comes to how this got through, this has been a debate that has happened behind the scenes for 20 plus years. this was the timing where

everything seemed to click. 2022, we were in the biden administration but even during the trump administration there was a lot of discussion and policymaking around prescription drug prices and a big focus on the sustainability, the questionable sustainability of what older americans pay for their drugs. that discussion happening over the course of several years preceding congress passing this law is what helped greece the skids for this to move forward -- grease the skids for this to move forward. host: the inflation reduction act coming out, how much of that could a administration change impact medication prices going

forward? guest: that is a great question. this is pretty baked into law. absent any of the lawsuits challenging this, and there are several, absent any of them having success, it is a bit of an open question about how a future administration could change things. every administration comes in and they can write rules and regulations and pieces of guidance that tweak programs around the edges until they can perhaps do more to completely overturn something or take a program in a different direction. in other cases it is easy for them to pull something off the books. this will be much more complicated. a future administration that perhaps does not have the same viewpoint as the biden administration and as vice president harris has on this, they could make their mark around the edges.

in terms of looking ahead to this election season and the trump administration, the past trump administration and what a theoretically future trump administration would look like, he was very interested in lowering prescription drug prices for seniors. could try to find a way to put a stamp on it. this is the law as of right now. host: you brought up lawsuits a few times. what have those lawsuits been focused on and would have the results been? guest: there are several lawsuits. the count is nine right now. all of them focus on constitutional arguments, that this program violates the constitution in one or multiple ways. so far most of the companies that have drugs on this list have sued. there are also two trade

associations, a major one and the u.s. chamber of commerce. so far none of them have succeeded. these lawsuits are filed in federal district court, then they can get appealed to an appellate court. the ultimate goal for these folks is the supreme court to have them weigh in on whether this is constitutional. some argue this violates the first amendment right to free speech by making didn't say it is a maximum fair price and they do not think this is fair. others are focusing on a clause that says this is the government taking their private property without just compensation. others are saying that this violates different other various aspects of the constitution. none of these have succeeded in court yet but it is still early. only some of them have gotten to the appeals process so far. host: we have time for one more

call. john in pennsylvania. good morning. caller: good morning. my comment is that one of the arguments by the pharmaceutical companies is if you lower the price is it will affect research and development. that argument is phony because a vaccine was produced by jonas salk. all of the universities in this country have research departments. the argument about the research and development by pharmaceuticals is really a phony argument. trump was in office for four years and never mentioned lowering prices for drugs as far as i can remember. no matter what the president proposes, congress disposes.

we hope that congress comes in hopefully is more democratic, more liberal than the one we have now in the house. guest: you made one of my favorite points which is that a president can do what they want to do but at the end of the day congress is really who writes the laws. yes, that is definitely a fair point. on research and development, there is a lot of skepticism among various folks who are skeptical that this will have much of an effect on r&d. i will say that based on some of the earnings calls that drug company ceos have participated in in the last several weeks, while they are certainly not happy with the negotiation program, most of them have noted

that the company is going to weather the first round just fine. the point they like to make is that they don't know how this will impact decisions in future years. they are still doing ok when it comes to their shareholders. host: lauren gardner with politico. find her reporting at politico .com. find her at x. later on the program we will be joined by author and professor john paul lederach. he will discuss solutions to overcoming political polarization and threats of civil war. first we will hear from more view during open forum. you can start calling now. here is the line. republicans, (202) 748-8001.

democrats, (202) 748-8000. independent, (202) 748-8002. we will be right back. >> saturday american history tv features convention speeches with notable remarks by presidential nominees and other figures from the past decades. today illinois senate candidate barack obama emerges on the national stage and gives the keynote speech supporting john kerry for president at the 2004 democratic convention. >> this year in this election we are called to reaffirm our values and our commitments, to hold them against a hard reality and see how we are measuring up to the legacy of our forbearers and the promise of future generations and fellow americans, democrats, republicans, independents, i thank you tonight. we have more work to do. >> former governor mitt romney

speaks to republican convention delegates after a strong showing against senator john mccain for the nomination. >> we strengthen our people and our economy when we preserve and promote opportunity, opportunity is what let's hope become reality. opportunity expands when there is choice and education, when taxes are lowered, when every citizen has affordable health insurance and when the constitutional freomare preserved. >> watch this to work convention speech surdays on american history tv -- htoc convention speeches saturday on air, -- american history tv. you can watch the republican national convention anytime on our website. sunday on q&a actor george takei offer -- author of a children's

book recounts the day he and his family were sent to an internment camp following the japanese attack on pearl harbor in 1941. >> my father answered the door and one of the soldiers pointed his bayonet at our father. henry and i were petrified. the other soldier said, get your family out of this house. we followed him out, stood on the driveway waiting for our mother to come out. when she finally come out, escorted by the soldier who pointed the bayonet at our father, she had our baby sister in one arm, a huge duffel bag in the other and tears were streaming down her cheeks. that memory is seared into my brain. >> actor and author george decay

on c-span's q&a. listen to all of our podcasts on the free c-span now app. >> washington journal continues. host: welcome back. open forum for the next 25 minutes. any public policy issue you would like to discuss, call now. we will start with andrew in oklahoma city on the line for democrats. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you so much. i wanted to weigh in on, i didn't think we got a good amount of information from the woman who was on from politico on the medications and the pharmacies. i encourage everyone on medication, look up the united kingdom which is britain formulary and their prices that they pay, or france or canada

and look how much we are getting ripped off. it is ridiculous. those pdm's are owned by the insurance companies. your insurance company kicks you off the formulary and then they turn around and safe we have a discount for you. you still pay more than you used to so your insurance company saves money and you lose money. it is quite scamming -- scammy. no republicans voted for those drug reductions. not one republican in the senate. vote democrat. save yourself. host: rick on the republican line. good morning. caller: yes. a big part missing from this discussion was how is this going

to be paid for and how does it affect medicare's stability over the long-term? as good as it sounds to give increased benefits, it has effects on budget, spending and money. spending has a direct effect on inflation. giving these things that appear to be benefits can lead to increased inflation everywhere else. it does not help you overall in the cost-of-living. host: are you a medicare beneficiary? caller: i have quite a few expensive medicines. for instance, the eliquis that was mentioned. i had a co-pay for a three month supply which was $800.

i am directly affected by this but i also think in terms of everything. i say, ok. if i get a better cost, what does it mean? will there be higher premiums for the medicare parts? where is the money going to come from? we have $35 trillion in debt. host: that was rick in denver. joseph in ohio on the democrats line. good morning. caller: good morning. finally retired new york city detective -- hello?

host: go ahead. caller: i saw your mouth moving. host: there is a delay on the television. just focus on your call. caller: ok. anyway, my union, i have medicare and i also have blue cross blue shield. when the union negotiated, i was diagnosed with prostate cancer. i am taking a drug called lomposa.

this drug is costing me for one pill $180 for one pill. i am unable to pay and they tell me -- now i do not have any more money to take this drug at $180 per pill for 30 days. host: joseph, that cancer drugs that you are on, is that on the list for 2026? caller: i do not have any idea.

host: ken on the democrats line. caller: hi. why don't the democrats or republicans come up with a solution for taxes for senior citizens after they retire? you pay taxes all of your working life. when you retire, there should be a way to bake a discount for seniors on real estate. here in florida, on a four bedroom home, your taxes would still be $700 per month and you are only living off of retirement. it is like a reverse mortgage. you pay for the house all of your life and then you have to move out of it on retirement. why does not someone come up with a way to give senior citizens a discount at retirement which would help them

with their prescriptions? that is just something i thought of. host: that was can in florida -- ken in florida. i wanted to show you this headline in the washington post, "u.s. and allies see hope for a gaza cease-fire. the latest plan has closed some gaps but escalation remains a key concern." yesterday president biden after a meeting in the oval office was asked about the state of the cease-fire. here are his comments. [video clip] >> one of the reasons why was laid was i was dealing with the cease-fire. we are closer than we have ever been. i do not want to jinx anything. as my grandfather says, the grace of god equals a good

amount of luck. we are not there yet but we are much closer than we were a few days ago. host: another headline on the topic from the new york times this morning, "no breakthrough in those cease-fire talks but the meetings are moving to cairo. the announcement came after a top israeli egyptian and officials ended two days of talks in doha, aimed at trying to resolve remaining disagreements between israel and hamas and u.s. regional officials hoped that movement at the negotiations would stop iranian lead retaliations for the killing of leaders of militant groups backed by iran. u.s., iranian and israeli officials said on friday that iran decided to delay the

reprisal against israel to allow mediators to continue working toward a cease-fire in gaza." the article also says senior officials will convene next week in the egyptian capital of cairo in hopes of finalizing a deal based on terms laid out in qatar . the joint statement said lower ranking officials will continue to hammer out technical details on how the cease-fire proposal will be carried out. egypt, qatar and the united states said details of the proposal are not immediately known. let's go back to the phones. wanda in virginia on the republican line. good morning. caller: yes. what i am calling for his on the drug problem you are discussing.

tried to get in earlier. is the fact that. what is this going to do to rural area pharmacies when these changes are made? they're having a hard time as it is now to offer prices like and the reason i know this is i changed over to mail order for part d. and did this because rural area pharmacy couldn't offer the lower prices that i get with my mail order. and so it was just a question and if that could, think about that. is what this is going to do to the small rural pharmacies that try to stay in business. host: are you in an area that's

rural. caller: i am. and the pharmacy i was using was just 15 minutes away from my home. that's why i went because the closest pharmacy would be an hour's drive every time i had to pick up or needed a prescription. host: wanda in virginia. antonio in texas on the independent line. . caller: good morning. the guy talking about the taxes, the way to fix this is get a flat tax and tax churches. they need to be taxed. they make too much money. thank you. host: marvin on the democratic line. good morning, marvin. . caller: good morning. host: you're on. . caller: i would like to call for

city flyer in the united states for this great divide that we have now. as we're treating each other as human beings. try to for our grandkids, i would like to call a cease fire in the united states. can i get any rebuttal on that? any open forum. host: when you say a cease fire, what issues specifically. caller: politics. host: it's your lucky day our next guest will be talking about that, about the threats of civil war and how we can possibly tamp down those threats and prevent it from happening. john paul lederach will be joining us 9:15. stay tuned. . caller: sounds great. host: mark in pennsylvania on the republican line. good morning, mark. . caller: good morning. how are you? . host: well. . caller: i have a question for you.

i'm in northeast pennsylvania. pike county. and biden gave kamala harris one job. to correct the border crisis and she had four years to do it and did nothing except rip down what trump had a pretty well set up. and now she's going to correct. now she had four years. she didn't do nothing. in four years. so what's she going to do now? that was a one job she had from biden. her first job. and she didn't do nothing. host: mark from pennsylvania, on the issue of immigration and illegal border crossings this headline from this morning's "washington post" illegal border crossings hit four-year low in july. the article says border agents tallied 56,408 illegal crossings in julying, 32% decline from june and the fifth straight

month a figure fallen, u.s. can you say symptoms and border data shows, attribute change to executive actions biden announced this spring that effectively shut access to the u.s. asylum system for migrants who enter illegally. the article goes on to say in early june, biden announced new measures to block migrants access to the u.s. asylum system. when illegal border crossings are at emergency levels. above and average of 2500 a day. and the restrictions took immediate effect immediately. since then, federal agents have deported more than 92,000 people to more than 130 countries and sharply reduced the number of people who are released pending a court hearing. officials say the declines spanned all demographics including families unaccompanied minors and adult travelers on their own. the article notes border

crossings historically declined during summer months. but in recent years, migrant trends have been tied more closely to changes in u.s. enforcement policies. some of the busiest months at the border during biden's term have occurred during peak summer heat. cd p data shows. patrick in florida on the independent line. good morning, patrick. . caller: thanks for letting me call in today. i just noticed recently about the topic of trump giving the medal of honor recipient to the tycoon billionaire and he gave it to his wife and was comparing that and saying this was better than what our troops have died and killed for this country. i listened to this show several times and watch a lot of military. my dad was former green beret. i've seen a lot of people call in and respect trump and respect his ways of viewing of the military.

i can't put these two together about how he compared it to a billionaire's wife. host: darryl in kentucky on the republican line. good morning, darryl. . caller: i heard about a minute ago about the border patrol. for the immigrants -- that's wrong. the news in the newspaper called fake news. people don't talk about the people got hurt or killed. killing thousands of people. immigrants in new york getting kill there. if president trump was in office today. he'd have it all within 24 hours. nobody talk about that but the guy got killed in georgia. host: darryl, it was in the

"washington post" and you said it's fake news. that data is coming from the u.s. customs and border protection. the outlet "washington post" is just sharing numbers in its reporting. caller: might be true but nobody mention that woman's name. age 22. migrant. was arrested 21 times. let him go. anybody convict him? no, sir. people in texas right there when president trump was out there in texas. the boy about and her son was killed, murdered out there. anybody arrest them? no, sir. host: rita in north carolina on the democratic line. good morning, rita. . caller: thank you for having me. i'm glad that c-span is covering the facts.

and not rhetoric. i also letting you know that the question that i have concerning the medicare and medicaid program i noticed that according to the project, 2025. it mentions how it slashes and actually going to tear it all up. and that concerns me. especially when i see lot of republicans or especially trump saying that he had no part of it when we filed questions coming from him. so in this election it's the main focus and the healthcare of america.

i'm a retired nurse. and i know how important that is for the of this country to survive. i know about the cost r makings are going up because of the corporate increases and really has nothing to do with the presidential. has a whole lot to do with congress. so my thought to for voters is to concentrate on congress getting the right people and for congress will be able to have the presidential candidates, whoever it be, makes it easier on them. i like for people to remember don't forget about congress. because they are the foundation

of whether they can block a president or receive a president. host: that was rita in north carolina. tom in rochester, washington. calling on the independent line. good morning, time. caller: i'd like to hit three issues quick. one on the border, the numbers that are reported aren't accurate because they don't count the ones that flown in and all of this. the current administration does that with also the economy. i'm leaving the border to the economy. the economy, they've manipulated what numbers they showed to create the numbers they want. that's the way this administration has worked all the way through. and then on israel and gaza. we got to remember that the palestinians elected hamas as their leadership and currently they're helping them hide in schools and hospitals, you know, they get warnings before they

bomb. but those people stay there because those are the wife's and children of hamas. and they're you know, propaganda program to stay there and die to make it help them. so the best thing to end gaza is give israel the weapons they need to finish this in a couple weeks. and then less people would die. host: jerry in hillsville virginia on the democrat line. good morning, jerry. caller: we had republican presidential didn't fix the border and put the blame on the democrats for not fixing the border. just like the guy, when you kill 40,000 innocent people in gaza, my father said there's a right an wrong. and two wrongs don't make a right. so when you kill 40,000 and 20,000 children, that's the

americans have stood by and watched war crimes be committed by israel. and just because they control most, a lot of our government. and have lobbyist that? lots of money for congressmen and senators. that's the reason. if we hold up the weapons from israel, they will go to the peace -- they want the land in palestine to build high-rise so they can make billions of dollars as a tourist attraction. that's the reason they're --. host: danny in new york on the independent line. good morning danny. . caller: good morning. thank you for letting me talk. so many things to cover. it comes down to mismanagement by the government, by the two parties really just care about themselves. that's why we have all these different crisis in different areas, because basically all our agencies are dysfunctional, fbi is corrupt.

we have a military that can't win a war. we have to manage resources because you know, we only have a certain amount of resources and when you can't win a war, you spend a trillion dollar a year on a military that can't win a war and can't afford to have prescriptions for people like the poor gentleman ex-detective in new york city, something terribly wrong. and so yes, you have to look at -- and that's why the management in this country and basically we have more independents because we all know that our government. is all screwed up. thank you. host: danny in new york. we are 80 days away from the general primary, presidential primary in november. and we have coverage of campaign events today. today at 2:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. you can watch 2024 democtic

vice presidential e-mail governor tim walz as he campaigns in omaha nebraska. you can find the event live on c-span on our free mobile app. c-span now and online at c-span.org. later in the afternoon, former president trump will speak to supporters at a rally in wilkes-barre pennsylvania. starts 4:00 p.m. eastern. also on c-span our app online. and also wanted to le you know the democric national convention will betarting on monday. we have a preview tomorrow of the convention at 2:00 p.m. eastern. it's going to be live from chicago. we're going to be joineby dnc senior communications director matt hill for an inside look at the convention hall, the convention themes andxpected

speakers will also talkith chicago washington bureau chief. is she'll provide political and historicalontext to the coming events this week live on sunday at 2:00 p.m. find it online on c-span and also online at c-span.org. that does it for open forum. we still have another guest joining us today. we are going to be joined by author and professor john paul lederach next and we're going to discuss solutions to overcoming political polarization and the threat of civil war.

in her book art of power. 8:00 p.m. eastern time. supreme court associate justice questions whether americans are overburdened bylaws regulating time aspects of their lives point they infringe on our freedoms. watch every sunday on c-span 2 and find the full schedule on your program guide or watch online any time at book tv.org. ♪ ♪. saturday august 24th, book tv takes you to the washington convention center for annual coverage of the library of

congress national book festival. since 2001, we featured hundreds of in-depth uninterrupted author talks. this year's guest including library of congress carla haden. doris good win and conwin, and more. the library of congress national book festival live saturday august 24th beginning at 9:00 a.m. eastern on c-span 2. >> for c-span coverage of the political party convention, we head to chicago for the democratic national convention. watch live beginning monday august 19th as the party puts forth their presidential nominee. their democratic leader. talk about the administration's track record and their vision for the next four years. as they fight to retain the white house. the democratic national convention live august 19th

through the 22nd on c-span. c-span live or online at c-span.org. don't miss a moment. watch full coverage of the 2024 republican national convention. you can catch up on past conventions at c-span.org/campaigning or by scanning the code. c-span provided complete coverage of the halls of congress. congressional hearings party briefings and committee meetings. c-span gives you a front row seat how issue as debated and decided. no commentary, no interruptions and completely unfiltered. c-span your unfiltered view of

government. >> washington journey continues. host: joining us from colorado is john paul lederach to discuss over coming political polarization. john paul welcome to the program. . guest: thank you. great to be with you this morning. host: john paul, you're a professor amertis of international peace building. explain your background. . guest: all of my professional career i've worked primarily in the areas that are more widely known as conflict resolution, dealing with people having differences from inner personal to international. vast majority of my work the last four and a half decades have been in settings outside our country experiencing long-term protracted and often open violent conflicts. we might refer to them as wars or civil wars.

it's not always a language people use locally. a lot of that work has been with local communities mostly impacted by the violence. but i've also had extensive direct work with national negotiations. peace building is kind of a wide swarth of work we do that works both at understanding the immediate issues but also the long-term process of rebuilding and restitching relationships that have been deeply torn and working towards healing. and better understanding and obviously in forms of negotiations with key actors involved. my work often has been in support of dialogue processes. i've worked in places like my earliest were ame. in the 1980s. nicaragua, in particular. columbia probably the longest

standing place i've work since 1988. ireland, east and west africa, these are napoll i worked in the civil war 14 years. it's an extensive experience international. i'm involved in knees things directly. my scholarship is mostly around reflecting what i see, heard and researched. host: you're also the expert for pocket guide in facing down civil war. you have an opt ed based on that book a recipe for cooling down american politics. the question you ask, you say that you get asked a lot, is are we headed toward a civil war

here in the united states? >> what do you tell people. . guest: the question has been coming with greater frequency the last years. it's been a topic at times gets mentioned in the national news media and it has been growing with prominence. it's a comparative question. i am somebody who does comparative work. and what i find is that first people will always tell you no matter where they live, our connection is different. at the same time, people have what we might call a comparative curiosity. they're curious to know what happened in other places with similar characteristics. my answer to this question here in the u.s., which i elaborate a bit in the book you just mentioned. is that the image that for most

of us in the united states when we hear the word civil war. especially when talking about our context goes back to, you know, the 1860's, civil war that was such a devastation in that time period. from which, in many ways, we never fully recovered. that is not what i think is likely to be the scenario. that was a state versus state region versus region kind of a battle. what i focus on more is not so much the question and not locking down on the term civil war which itself is contested in a lot of places. but i ask the question, what are the dynamics, what are the things that repeat over and again that we can take note of and begin to notice when they occur with more frequency. and when those dynamics are in particular connected to rising and toxic, poisoning, toxic plea

bargains. when that toxic polarization leads to sporadic violence and more sustained forms of violence, what are the dynamics we should pay attention to. particularly the work they don't have done and in response to that. especially looking my primary focus in this particular booklet, my primary focus is on what people did in local communities where they lived that had to respond to repeating cycles of violence but also that deep division and polarization. and try to lift forward examples and draw from that and some leads to what we might think about. because it is from my experience, i have worked in a lot of places where people are trying to climb back from and end a civil war. an armed conflict.

it's very difficult. on average, they last more than ten years. and what my basic understanding has come to be is the best way to end a civil war is to stop it before it happens. how do we take note of even the smallest of dynamics? how do we respond more constructively where we live. where we have access and make davis. that's the primary points i've been after in the opt ed and some ways laid out a few ideas in those directions drawing from those examples. host: we're talking about american politics, you have experience globally and some of these other places that have seen conflict. where would you say the u.s. is right now and what can we do to turn it around? . guest: first and foremost we're

in an electoral period and one of things we know about election periods anywhere in the world. they create the circumstances under which that polarization sharpens. candidates are making their case for themselves, making a case against others. and often they're drawing on their own constituency and where they think they can gain the greatest traction, polarization not only sharpens toxicity can increase significantly. but an election period does not in itself in my experience, ever resolve the deeper issues that people need to have capacity to talk about more directly. and those often relate to elements that have to do in the broadest scope of things around who are we? how are we going to be together? belonging, historic sense of inclusion and exclusion. deep concerns about the

well-being of our families, our communities and our grandchildren. and if those things are under pinning, they're under the surface of much of this that gets exacerbated with these periods. and those patterns and dynamics in the u.s. i think we have seen increasing signs of that toxic polarization driven by two core dynamics, one being falling back to a language an perspective of dehumanizing the other. less connect, less connection to people who are different. much more you know, moving to our zones of safety. and that dehumanization combined with toxicity is often the way people begin to say that violence may be the only remaining option. typically, it's a very few people. so there is i don't know if you would refer to it properly as

turny of the few, because when they ask, it affects everyone. and they're acts are often spectacular or performative. but there's an increased level of normalization that violence either is or is coming. i think the signs we're seeing here in the u.s. is there has been an increased level of separation, of deep division. there is a lot more focus on ways in which that toxicity is starting to normalize both dehumansation, and there certainly is among the surveys and polls and research an increased level of expectation that there will be more political violence in the period that's coming. there is within that research an interesting elementary that i think gives us a went of opportunity, which is that we across the partisan divides we tend to overestimate the

willingness of the other side to employ violence. which means we're not fully in a conversation deep enough to understand what's maybe happening within their perspectives and their communities. i think that overestimation is often leading us to a more exaggerated form of fear and expectation of something coming. if i could add one piece to that. i think it's a useful can we go to ask because we experience this both personally and in our communities, what is the actual outcome? what's the impact of the product of toxic polarization? and certainly when you add violence to that it becomes more exaggerated. i think there are two or three things fairly common and we're noticing here in the united states. i certainly notice it even in my own ambit of relationships and conversations. the first is that it produces fear. fear of what might be coming and

that fear often then is combined with paralysis. one of the products of toxic polarization is paralysis, not knowing what to do, not knowing what to say. being more cautious about saying something for fear of a reaction from someone else. not know putting to predict how their viewig be. so walking away and back from conversation, and then experiencing this extreme pressure quite often to either declare yourself one side or another so that the kind of relationships that are cross cutting come under duress to move in directions that is kind of that us and them mentality and that we are under threat of survival from them and we need to regroup only with us. so those dynamics of fear and paralysis are always the very

things that we have a find ways to face better in moving toward what i would you know, make an appeal toward more constructive and more meaningful conversations across our differences. host: we're talking with john paul lederach about efforts to overcome political polarization. if you have a question or comment for him. start calling in now. the lines for in his segment are broken down regionally. if you're in the eastern or central time zone, live 202-748-8,000. john paul. i wanted to ask you something that you an example you highlight from your work in the piece that you wrote for the "washington post" talks about the improbable dialogues. explain what that is and the outcomes.

. guest: sure. improbable dialogue is an effort that i seen happen a number of places. actual naming of it came from columbia where we engaged in a very direct process and spanish (nonenglish) the idea behind it is essentially that let's put it in the easiest and most direct language. when you're in a highly polarized setting we send tend to listen with our eyes. what do i mean? we look first who is saying something and ask who are they associated with? then we agree or disagree based on how we have perceived their alignment in the polarization. and one of the hard things to do is to get to a conversation that actually listens on a deeper level to what it is that people are concerned about.

more importantly, listen into their lived experience. what is it that brought them to where they're at now? and how they understand the world they navigate? one of the ways that you shock that system of listening with your eyes. you have to create opportunity for people to take a second look, to look again, to consider in a new way who this person is and what might be happening. the work we did with the improbable dialogues was that we found ways slowly but surely starting small, bringing together people in a particular region, particular community who others knew were from different sides of their long history, not only of deep differences but of armed conflict. when they were able to engage in a place and a format where they

could agree to certain ways of holding their dialogue over time, not a one-time event, but over years, and when they appeared in pairs or in small groups, and people saw the figures, the two very different viewpoints, historical divided people or groups proposing something together, and typically that proposal was focused on a singular common commitment, that it is possible for us to have politics without violence. that when two or more people appeared publically with that common proposal, people had to stop, creates what i would call a pause of curiosity. people have to stop and look again and they have to listen at a new level to what is being said.

because they no longer can simply pinpoint that person, oh, that person is with that group or that group. the joint proposal even in its simplicity and focused on things local and understood by people create an opportunity an possibility of a transformation of a shift in the dynamics that polarization keeps us in a conversation but deeply settling or not very meaningful so improbable emphasizes this is not likely. it would not normally happen without a concerted effort to reach out beyond your bubble of safety. to engage in a slow but sure preparation with other people who are different than you, to come to concrete ideas that together can be proposed. and that that dialogue sustained over time create as capacity for

people to take a deeper look at who we are, what we really want to do. and in particular i think this deep commitment to the social contract that we can do politics without violence. and that has proven in a lot of different places to be an effort things like this is merits that people across the country are attempting to do. host: we have callers waiting to talk with you about this topic. we'll start with edward. key port, new jersey. good morning. caller: in my opinion i believe motorist civil conflicts are promoted by upper class or upper class business interests. they use the lower classes. how do you cut out these upper classes that are manipulating

the lower classes to fight against each other? i guess another comment i would believe i'm more of an opt mist where the u.k. disgruntle to do people will go out and make, and you have more people coming out and wanting to be together. how do you cut out the upper classes from civil conflict? thank you. . guest: do i respond? . host: go ahead, john paul. . guest: no, i appreciate the question. i think it's a great one. the reason that i use the word pocket guide. obviously, many of us probably purchased a little pocket guide for bird watching or whatever else we might do as hobbies. it's not so much for the shortness. which it does have. it's a short book list of but not so much focused on the word pocket. what i was after is that in the

very opening of this. in my experience, armed conflicts that repeat over time that have sip cal capacity to resiliently reappear over time do not miraculously happen from the top down. they are much more often imbedded in local pockets. it happens in places where power and control is exerted locally. violence is unleashed in various forms or performatively present. and that creates fear and often paralysis. and the work of people who move to counter that eventually come to places, i believe, that focus on pocket imagination. the simple starting steps are often sitting together with an

unusual mix and asking who and what do we know? and what do we know needs to change here where we live? and that kind of response is i think in my experience again, it goes in hand with finding better ways to have national figures and our leading politicians and you were referencing an elite class. it's not always connected exclusively to elite classes. it is often connected to ways in which people through polarization gain greater prominence by increasing that polarization. and often then open up processes that first followers begin to legitimate things they're doing. i think the real key for holding the capacity to retain those

dynamics from gaining powerful and impactful wider, you know, forms of violence is that where we live, we have to engage in creating a web of relationships that commits across our differences to not having a politics with violence and doing very simple things with each other and for each other. to have the respect to listen to understand, not just listen to prepare my defense. to not blame but take responsibility for what it is that i can do to reach out to very specifically notice when you become really defensive sive and choose reflection about the defensiveness over reaction, i think it's really key when we feel and see and hear the humanizing language, wherever it is we live and work, that we find ways to speak to that,

especially when it comes from a group that we're prox imate to. that does not diminish at all. two things, it does not diminish your capacity to speak from your own truth and conviction as deeply as you can. but it is possible for you to speak to that truth and conviction without blame, retreat or demonation. that's a commitment we can make to be true to ourselves but open and curious about the lived experience of others. the second is i think that from that we can begin to create the platforms that speak to the political world that may be far more property about what it means to be a leader who has the capacity to speak what the most

and at the same time not demonetize others. that kind of commitment is precisely what we need. it has to go hand-in-hand. but i will give you my prediction, two things are common, violence will emerge pockets in local areas and stitching together things not fully visible. and secondly there will be efforts to create spectacular moments. sometimes we refer to those as the lone wolf. sometimes the events nobody expected but there's often a strategy behind the spectacular. that is attempting to create a moment that things get unleashed. it's not a singular moment. it's a process. that process is what we have to look at more carefully. we have to understand how we are responsible to be engaged better and differently where we live as part of a bigger picture of how

a country can prevent the more extreme forms of toxicity normalizing into violence that are often initially, done by own a few. host: let's hear from tom in wood bridge virginia on the republican line. good morning, tom. . caller: good morning. this is tom special ali i have a master degree in conflict resolution. i would add i've been in the military 30 years the senior collection strategist at the director intelligence office for domestic terrorism in the united states. so i speak with a level of authority that very, very few in the united states can speak. and i'm telling you now, that there's a, this is a whole lot of sociological language about violence that happens in maybe the third world. i wrote a report called inside an fbi's domestic terrorism

strategy. reason i wrote that report and it's published the available on amazon. the reason i wrote the report is because there are three primary causes for the extremism that has been created in the united states today. the number one cause is we have government officials who have demonstrated lack of true faith and allegiance to the u.s. constitution. that has been proven over and over again with regard to the carter page investigation, the donald trump cross fire hurricane, the michael flynn situation. the hunter biden laptop cover up, et cetera. in addition we have a second cause, we don't have a gun violence problem in the united states that's been, we actually have a mental health crisis in the united states. and that mental health crisis is basically being ignored. that's why we have the massive suicide rate. massive opioid overdose rate. these are problems mental health crisis that people on left in the united states tend to label

gun violence when in reality they're mixing in suicides by guns with homicides. most homicides in the united states about 90's % occur in neighborhoods in the united states. and third thing is a lack of government transparency. a lack of government transparency. and the director of the dni and director of fbi have come out the last several years have said a lack of government transparency is leading to extremism in the united states. and so essentially, that's where all the conspiracy there's come from, et cetera, because of this lack of government transparency but finally i think this place into what your guests is talking about more importantly than anything is the hyper bollic political rhetoric of our political officials, which they do because of social media the way social media works. because that's how they drive

donations. is the more extremist the voice is, whether on the left or the right, i blame both equally, the extremist political rhetoric is driven by the social media algorithms which are pipelined directly into people's brains, because people are too lazy or two to do the deep research to understand that they are basically being fed a load of garbage in order to try and drive a political division in order to drive political donations for one candidate or another. host: that's a lot for john paul to respond to. we'll get a response from him. . guest: i appreciate. listing what i want to make sure to emphasize. that is much of what i'm suggesting is from experiences i've had. the questions that i receive

most often from every day people around the country that i interact with or that i get e-mails from. and that is what can i do? what you've listed forward is that my proposal is aimed at that particular question. what i'm proposing is one piece of a wider complex puzzle. just to note the complexity of what you listed forward. which i believe is absolutely significant. mental health, loneliness, the question and challenge of gun violence and accessibility of gun laws and is the way they are. u.s. currently. how we engage in politics by way of toxic polarization. what you described precisely in part of that driving of

rhetoric. it in leashes particular sets of people that would do things that would otherwise be totally ununacceptable. sometimes we end up with leadership leading in the wake. they unleash things they don't know how to fully entertain. issues of governance and transparency, you're touching on such a wide swarth that is absolutely significant about the complexity of what we're facing. my small piece of that puzzle goes to the question of like the person that called me from a location they were working in hospitals. that said, this division has now affected our workplace. what do -- what do we do so that we can come together to provide better healthcare where we live when we have these divisions that don't even make it possible for us to work well in the settings we're in? and so what i'm after here is

that a very significant and in my estimation, the reason why i have been a part of a comparative study of more than 35 comprehensive of the largest peace agreements ending armed conflicts across the world for the last 30 years. the reason why negotiations and peace agreements fail is not exclusively due to bad faith of before actors or in ability of high level people to do what they do. it's because there is not a wider swarth of support and a web of relationships that begin to engage that work in conjunction with those things. and i think that the keys to much of what we see for the enduring and lasting ability has to do with this basic

understanding of a social contract. not differences that we have on our constitution or how far we've gone from our constitution. that will continue to be a very significant pound for generations of conversation. but the social contract which i don't think is hard to understand in the phrase that we in a democracy need to know how best to do politics without violence, where we live. that's an essential part of creating the very fabric that not only holds us together but that mit gates against the extremist use that pushes against that and maybe toward very different kinds of ways of governing and modelling that. so i appreciate the overview because i think what you've touched on is clearly the complexity we're facing. i'm trying to bring forward a

way that i've seen it happen in many locations. against the odds. and surprisingly so of people who found ways to face down those cycles of deep toxicity and violence. host: try to get in a couple more calls. rob in fairfax virginia. go ahead. . caller: i'm still digesting everything that was just said by the caller, who seemed like he's identifying a lot of top down problems and the guest who's identifying a lot of bottom up solutions. and there was really -- i'm still kind of processing and thinking through my question now, you said something earlier that was three words, something about don't blame, retreat i forget the other . guest: demonetize.

. caller: thank you. i'm i've been working with children and adults in some capacity since i was 16 years school teacher, therapist, cam counselor, et cetera. and i'm noticing the overall attention span of the children becoming shorter and shorter. and that a lot of reasons for that. and i'm also noticing the attention span of adults is becoming shorter and shorter as a consequence. and when we have these large complex ideas, that people can't follow let alone fit in a state of comfort and not get triggered into a panic by a flight response because we're all also dealing with the post traumatic stress of a global pandemic. whether you think it was real or not, like a conspiracy like it was shared trauma. i guess my question is how, in a climate where everybody's attention span is so short, everybody is dealing with the

shared stress of like surviving a trauma, and we're in and out of states of fear and panic, where everybody is afraid of the other side doing to them what, like, democrats and republicans are doing the same thing that republicans are seeing democrats doing when you come to like taking advantage and lying and all of that. i guess my question is given this like context, how do we have short meaningful things to pull people in and also my advice to you as a teacher. if you can somehow get some young kid to do research and get the three words that you shared into the social media algorithm, i think that would be amazing impactful. and i'll take my response. host: john paul. guest: thank you. i wish i was a bit of a -- i

don't know that i can help with getting under the algorithms. but my sense is that what you've pinpointed is precisely a good bit of what i'm after. that what we're trying to -- what i'm proposing is that where i have experienced people finding ways to come back from those cycles of violence and engage with people that were not only when is violence is unleashed. essentially finding ways to stay with it and to humanize the face of conflict. and we can learn to practice more humanizing habits and those i think are highly accessible and teach you believe but they also common sensical. nobody wants to be humiliated. nobody wants to feel belittled.

so commit yourself to not humiliate or belittle. find ways to practice and learn sitting with someone. the experience i've had when people start these initiatives, they start small and they start local and they reach one step beyond. they take what i would call the imagination of one small risk at a time. not the huge leap. i don't have to leap clear across to somebody who is completely foreign to your experience. but you reach to a place where it's possible to be in conversation maybe once a week, whatever it is, where you practice listening into and being curious about the lived experience of a person who is different than you. where you practice the ability to speak to your conviction but taking note you're not doing the

by blaming somebody. by demonetizing somebody or by retreating and not sharing what you actually believe. these are things we cannot only nurture in rising generations but these are the practices we need to create the web that reinstate the toxicity of polarization. polarization will exist. i'm not arguing against having partisan divides and discussions. i'm arguing for paying attention to when it translates into normalizing poisonous behavior that leads to normalizing the option of violence. and so i would very much agree. i think what i found pretty much is probably the single most important thing if you can learn to do it is that whatever conversation you're in have is the responsibility to protect

the dignity of the person you're talking to. i learned that from hard places. i'll give you a story. if you're familiar with northern ireland you know about the prison that held all the various para militaries which colleagues and in particular brent brendan mcallister i did a number of times with. we spend time listening to engaging leaders of organizations in that prison and one of those experiences, which i will never forget, was with a person who had committed atrocious criminal act at a funeral against the other side, which happened in this case to be the side that brendan was from. now, we're sitting in this conversation of somebody who was

completely unrepentant, difficulties of just trying to better understand how it is that this came to be and why this person could influence so many others to follow this horrific pathway. when we came out, i was a person who was not imbedded within the back and forth of protestant and catholic histories. but brendan was and he spent two hours listening to somebody who had deeply affronted his community. i asked him a simple question, brendan how do you do it? he said i cannot, responsible for what other people do. i can only be responsible for what i choose to do. and what i choose to do and i made this commitment i will choose to protect the dignity of the person that is across from me even if i am affronted and

completely 100% disagree. that simple notion is so hard to practice. so the question is how do you gain small steps of habits of humanizing? the conflict the other and the faith of what it is that's become polarizing. so i would very much encourage and agree where you are situated with access to rising generations is precisely where i think host: we will have to leave it there. we are out of time. our guest john paul lederach, thank you so much for being with us today. that does it for today's washington journal. we appreciate you for joining us. we will be back tomorrow at 7:00 eastern for another edition of

washington journal. enjoy the rest of your day. ♪ >> washington journal, our live forum involving you to discuss politics and public policy. coming up sunday morning, a preview of the start to the democratic national convention with the chief political reporter with the chicago tribune. then the author of "super politics," washington journal, join the