good morning.

saturday, september 14th, 2020. for a hour. washington journalist ahead. we'll talk about the latest election polling and also mental health care and how it's covered insurance. but we begin focusing on the issue of immigration. and to do that today, we're asking for immigrants only to call in. let us know your views on campaign 2024 and how the candidates have handled this issue of immigration. phone lines in this first hour are split a bit differently this morning. if you're an immigrant who has been in the united states less than five years, the. of 202748 8000 to call in if you're an immigrant who's been in the united states 5 to 20 years, it's 202748 8001. if you're an immigrant who's been in the united states over 20 years, it's 202748 8002 and a line for undocumented immigrants. if you want to join the discussion, the number to go to 748 8003. you can also catch up with us on social media on exits at c-span,

w.j. on facebook. at facebook.com. c-span and a very good saturday morning to you. you can go ahead and start calling in now about headlines from today's papers on this issue of immigration. this from the wall street journal. claim that immigrants are eating pets stirs chaos. springfield, ohio as the city grapples with fallout after donald trump repeated that internet rumor to the inside of the new york times this morning, the headline. they're facing, quote, hateful to immigration. a mayor says enough is enough and rob roo, the mayor of springfield, there's the headline there. reporters yesterday questioned former president donald trump about the impact of immigration rhetoric on cities like springfield, ohio, and others. here's what he had to say yesterday from los angeles. the mayor of springfield, ohio, the police chief, the republican

governor of ohio, have all debunked this story about people leaving pets. and now there are bomb threats at schools and kids being evacuated. why do you still. no, no, no. the real threat is what's happening at our border. because you have thousands of people being by illegal migrants coming in and also dying. you have women dying as they come up. they're coming up in large groups. we call it a caravan. i think i came up with that name, but it's really it is 10,000, 15,000, 20,000 people. and you have large of women being killed in those coming up to this country. and then when they get here, they can go into the country and they end up being sex slaves and everything else. those are your real problems, not the problem that you're talking. former president donald trump, that was yesterday from los angeles. it was also yesterday in the white house briefing room that white house press.

karine jean-pierre, a haitian immigrant herself, addressed the claims that former president trump made during the debate on. here's part of that exchange. the springfield, ohio department has debunked this very bizarre and very hateful smear out there. it is what is happening here is an attempt to tear apart communities and disrespect. let's not also disrespecting law enforcement. and that is the opposite of what our country deserves. it is undignified and an insult to all of us as americans, not just one community, but to all of us as americans. and it is spreading filth that makes the lives of the communities that are being smeared here. it puts their lives in danger and and it is just it is just hateful speech. that's what it is. and some of your news, some of

the news organizations here have reported that some haitians, haitians, american haitian immigrants fearing, fearing for their safety right now because of result of conspiracy theory. this is what this is. so instead of leaders trying to bring us together around our shared values, which is something that the president believes in and says all the time, as i just stated and you know, the president and the vice president, that's what they want to see. they want to see us come together in our shared values in a respectful way. and i will say one more thing. and i and i think if you guys can hear me out for one second, like maybe we should not have leaders who fall for fake internet conspiracy theories. we should thin conspiracy theorists. we should think about that. maybe we should not have leaders who do that. host: the white house press

secretary yesterday from the white house briefing room in this first hour of the washington journal. we want to hear your immigration stories. we are immigrants only. we want to know your view of immigration and campaign 2024. if you have been in the u.s. for under five years, (202) 748-8000 . in the united states five to 20 years, (202) 748-8001. in the united states over 20 years, (202) 748-8002. a line for undocumented immigrants come you can join the discussion, (202) 748-8003. folks are also sharing their immigration stories and views via social media. mo saying that it's k this secret that one part of america doesn't want any immigrants in this country, including even legal ones. saying i've been in the u.s. for more than 27 y

the group that doesn't want immigrants found their idol june of 2015. i don't know how many times i have nothing to do in the usa and i was taking the job of an american. i am an american now and every time i vote i think about my life hd all of my accomplishments. immigrants only. dolly yet in miami -- dhalia on the line for folks of been in the united states for more than 20 years. caller: i came from cuba when i was 14 years old with my parents in 1960. all that time i have been here i have worked for the united states government for 34 years. i am now retired. my husband also came from cuba in 1961.

he is a vietnam veteran with disability. we are both very proud to be american. however, what is going on now is scary because we had to leave our country when we were at a younger age. we didn't come here because things were bad and we were poor. we were high middle class in cuba. we came here because the government came in one day and took over my father's business. we came here to find freedom. now, it is really scary. we don't want socialism. we see that the democrats are becoming socialist. my grandfather was born in

barcelona, spain. my sister tells me we might have to use it. my grandkids are scared to death they will have to do what we did. have to leave our country because of the government. that's why we are all voting for donald trump. host: what do you think about the issue of immigration? 60 days from the election? caller: we came here legally. we went to the american embassy and got visas. when we came we were given indefinite leave. that is why we stayed. the people just coming through,

i worked for ice. i retired from ice. what other country would allow millions, millions of people in? we don't know who they are, where they are coming from, from jail. the people from venezuela. what maduro did is the same thing that castro did. he took out everyone in jail, every bad one, put them on boats, and sent them here. host: that is dhalia in miami. the wall street journal points out that the vast majority of the haitian community in springfield, ohio who are immigrants have been here since about 2020. many using a program that temporarily protects them from deportation.

they are here legally. the program was created in 1990 to give immigration officials the authority to provide legal protections for immigrants from countries deemed too dangerous to return to. that is from the wall street journal. the line for those who have been in the country for more than 20 years, julian? caller: good morning, john. how are you? host: doing well. caller: my father, my mother, my brothers immigrated from italy in 1968. of course, we came here legally. i sympathize with people who want to come here. i understand. this is the greatest country in the world. we had my family had a great life here. but to inject 20,000 people in a 60,000 people time is a bit much, don't you agree? we did not receive anything from the government. we all went to work. we worked hard.

we made a great life, like i said. so, 20,000 people in a 60,000 people town, just think what it does to that town. it is going to change the whole thing. i think that is with the democrats are looking for. they want to make life hard for existing americans in these little towns. they could care less about people getting killed, being raped, young girls being raped, they don't care about that. all you hear about is these poor immigrants being harassed. that is all i have to say. thank you. host: germantown, maryland, the line for those who have been in the u.s. five to 20 years. caller: good morning. i have been here close to 20 years. i came here legally through the lottery visa. host: what country did you come from?

caller: i come from a french-speaking country in west africa. host: what do you think about how immigration is being an issue in 2024? how it is being talked about? caller: it is terrible. i want to take a minute to bring back a discussion. the lady who worked in the dairy industry says specifically this. if we have illegal immigrants working for us, we will not sustain. that is the power of the illegal immigrant. i work for the federal government. i have seen how illegal immigrants are working in work

that even myself, coming into this country with my green card in my hand, would not have accepted the job that illegal immigrants are doing in this country. look at the industry. the apple that comes to the plate you are eating from illegal immigrants. are you eating meat? go to the meat industry. look at how those people are working. ask yourself, am i able to do it? if the illegal immigrants stop working today, in two weeks we have not seen anything.

the supply chain will be dry. the jobs that the illegal immigrants are doing, no american, no american will do it. that's what i want to bring in. we need to treat them with love. we need to treat them with care. that contributes to the economy of this country. host: thank you for the call from germantown. thomas in mooresville, north carolina. caller: good morning. i hope you are all well, thank you for taking my call. i immigrated here from checklist of noki -- i'm 62 years old. i live in charlotte.

my father served with general eisenhower in world war ii doing military intelligence. he picked out all of the targets in east germany. he was eisenhower's right-hand man. i'm going to set up a 5014 c monday. i wish to support kamala, who is indian and black. i will do everything in my power and am probably signing my own death warrant, but i want to drain 30 7 million votes from all of the uneducated, unintelligent, redneck,

threatening, murdering, cheating, uneducated and educated people blindly behind a man who lies every day. he basically makes up stories. he basically went into his casinos six times. he walked out of there with bags of money, went bankrupt, called deutsche bank that day. he is the greatest con man who has ever lived in the world. pt barnum said that there is a sucker born every minute. there are 60 million suckers in the united states of america that vote for him. they don't realize that hitler's mein kampf published in 1927 and the 922 pages using basically the assumption of 1000 words per page, may be 800 or 900 but i will round it off to

the back of the envelope math to 1000 words per page. 922,000 words. that is what that little nazi scumbag wrote on -- host: got it. you mentioned eisenhower and his administration coming up in victory from the wall street journal on emigration and comparisons between efforts in the 1950's and potential efforts in a second trump administration to remove immigrants from this country. looking back to the 1950's, the story knows that hundreds of thousands of mexicans and u.s. citizens of mexican descent were swept up in operation wetback named after an ethnic slur, and at the time -- slur common at the time. they coordinate raids on cities and borderlands with many immigrants not getting time to

pack their belongings before being loaded into buses, airplanes, and trains. they uprooted about half a million people. before the launch of the eisenhower deportation operation he writes, government officials issued a report claiming immigrants in the country illegally for many of the economic woes at the time. describing illegal immigration as an invasion, a description used in more recent years by conservative media outlets and right-leaning politicians. the effort was a public campaign to the's plan to pressure immigrants to flee rather than having their families captured in surprise raids. if you want to read more about the history of the family that was impacted, it is the front page story in today's wall street journal. we are talking with only immigrants this morning, asking

you your view of campaign 2024, how the issue of immigration is being talked about today. phone lines if you have been in the united states for under five years, five to 20 years, over 20 years, and if you are undocumented. we want tohear your story as well . rob has been in this country for more than 20 years out of florida. good morning. caller: hi, good morning. so, yes. i have been in this country since i was 2 years old. an orphan in mexico brought to this country. i am americanized. i am a white boy with a good tan . what is going on now in the united states, the operation

wetback, that is going to happen on a massive scale. if i ever meet trump, if i ever meet jd vance, my question would be what do i have to wear on my clothing so that the immigration police do not ask me for my green card or freedom papers? i know that jewish people had to wear a star. what do we have to wear to say that we are not terrorists, rapists, killers, not what trump and jd vance and maga, the extreme nationalist maga cultist regime part of the republican party now is claiming these people are. are there some? yes. to use a paintbrush over every ethnic person coming over is

wrong. should we have a reform of the immigration process? yes, of course. we had band-aids to this massive wound going on, but they are just band-aids. you want immigration to slow down or be reformed, don't put the pressure on the people coming over. put the pressure on the corporation. 600 illegals get hired, ice or immigration departs them, the next day 600 more are hired. same process, same process, day after day, week after week. let's penalize the businesses, ok? let's penalize the businesses so they don't hire the immigrants, so that they hire more americans. but you have to pay the americans. there is a lot that has to go on, but all we are doing is putting band-aids. i don't believe the band-aids

are working. it is frustrating a lot of americans, a lot of taxpayers. just because of the maga, the band-aids are not working. that's all. . the line for -- host: the line for undocumented immigrants, benjamin from brooklyn. what country did you come from? how did you get into the u.s.? caller: i came from panama city, panama. i came through jfk international.

and then overstayed my visa. 1985. i got married. i am working. paying taxes. trying to get a visa, a green card. i don't know how to go about it. host: is it something that you think about every day? caller: when i have to go take any kind of job on the books.

host: what are those kinds of jobs, benjamin? caller: i work in a gas station. i worked as a cashier. i worked security. i worked in restaurant kitchens. host: you came from panama. have you made that trip again? caller: i haven't left this country since i came here in 1985. i tried with so many immigration lawyers, i paid so much money with no result. host: what do you think about how illegal immigrants are talked about in this campaign? caller: i try to ignore all

these people who talk negatively about immigrants. we are here because we are looking for a better opportunity, because our country, the government and our country is not doing the right thing for the poor. everybody come here, they get what they want, they rob, they steal, it is not like people come in to sell drugs or do the wrong thing. people come to work and make a better living like every other immigrants. sometimes they let immigrants feel so bad. we are scared to go out and ask many questions because we don't know if we are going to get deported. host: has there been a time when you were worried you would be deported or caught? caller: yes, because sometimes we are scared to talk to other

people and let people know what is going on with our private life because we don't want to get in trouble. host: you talk less about your private life to people? caller: not really. i don't know who is who. i can't trust nobody. host: benjamin, is there anything else you wanted to add? caller: no, i just love you guys, c-span. i have been watching it for over 10 years now. every morning i get up to watch you guys. i love c-span. host: thank you for the call out of brooklyn and sharing your story. georgia, the line for those who have been in this country for 20 plus years. am i saying that correctly? caller: domo. thank you for taking my call. i have been here for about 21

years. i came from singapore. i got my masters degree. i am from nigeria. i want to tell the people who have been accusing immigrants, that most to come here we are highly educated. i got my masters degree in singapore and i came here. i had to start all over. i came by marriage. i had children. my husband died in an accident. i had to start all over. i became a cna, worked my way through with no husband. immigrants are not lazy. most are educated. when we come here the system

bring us back to square one. they don't start us where we ended in our country. we started from the scratch. i worked as a cna, caregiver, to put my kids in college. i had to drop going back to school just to put food on the table when my husband passed away. he was a citizen and he got me here. i had to go back to law school. now i'm working towards getting my license. so, stop vilifying immigrants. we are not lazy. jesus was an immigrant. he went to egypt. please respect us. we are not lazy. like someone set on this line, without immigrants we will not

eat, we will not have an apple. everyone is an immigrant except for the indians. stop the republicans. don't follow this rednecked man, please. leave him alone and let america breathe. trump, let america breathe once more. you are not better than immigrants. like i said, i am working myself towards getting my license.thank you . host: this is the editorial page of the washington post this morning. one of the editorial cartoons having to deal with the issue of immigration. the tribune cartoonist who wrote this, it is a man saying to the woman carrying a baby, let's

abandon our families, blow our money, risk our lives, sneak into the united states, and then commit a crime that will get us sent back home. the diabolical illegal immigrant scheme eliciting question marks from those around him. on the line for those who have been in the country for more than 20 years. caller: i have been in the u.s. for 32 years. kudos to c-span. this is a great show. everyone who has spoken before me, the woman from my thank you but up to this nigerian attorney lady, everyone has their own proof. having gone through the immigration process myself, i can see that. there are two layers. everyone can see how they overlap. what i think should happen, which would throw light on this

for everybody, is instead of having a one-on-one debate between one person and the other, why not have a forum on immigration so you have one side with four experts and the other side with four experts explained to the american people exactly what is involved. that way at least people come away from that discussion with a better understanding. it is a complex problem. nobody wants to see people run into the country, but then again, like i said it is complex. the only thing that i can add is, you know, kudos to you at c-span for putting on this forum. that suggestion, instead of a one-on-one debate, let's deal with subjects like inflation and immigration. host: there are events around washington, d.c., think tanks, not just in d.c. but around the

country, we cover events on not just immigration but all of these topics and often air them. if you want to find some, they are easy enough to find at c-span.org. all of our videos at the c-span video library search bars at the top of the page. i guarantee that you can find discussions like what you talked about. caller: i'm not referring to you, i don't mean you, c-span, personally. i mean you, america, generally. instead of discussing these things, let's have a serious debate on immigration, on inflation. that way everybody gets to what's going on. host: thank you for the call from tampa,rida. lupe and ransom,llinois. good morning. caller: good morning. host: what is your immigration story? caller: i came from cuba in 1967. i was a little girl who lived in cuba well off.

with the russian consulate and the canadian consulate in my building. i was a little girl who was starving to death and we didn't have no food. we were thrown out of my country and i was blessed to come to the united states of america. the democrat party that used to be in the 1950's and 1960's is not the democrat party we have today. today we have the democrat party that started in cuba when fidel castro took office. it started with brainwashing the little kids in school, telling them that if you pray to god god will bring you candy and god will bring you food. god did not bring us candy or food because we didn't have no candy or food. fidel castro brainwashed us telling us that he would give us the candy and food. that is what we believed inand that's what we got . we believed in the communism. my parents realized the

communism was not what we wanted. we wanted freedom. freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom to think for ourselves. not to have someone tell us where to go, what to eat, where to go. i am a 63-year-old woman who is proud to be an american. i was born in a communist country where we left everything. my grandparents, everybody and our family left our wealth to come to this free country. when i see the democratic party now is what i saw when i was a little girl. my father sat me in front of the tv when we came to this country and showed me that we needed to be free to speak, free of religion, and free of all of this going on now. host: thank you for the call from illinois. the line for undocumented immigrants, angelica, good morning. when did you come into the country and how did you get here? caller: right now i am looking

at the campaign and -- host: angelica, it works better if you turned on your television and just listen through your phone. when did you come to the country and what was your route in? caller: um -- it's weird. host: mute your television and talk through your phone. otherwise you will hear the delay. go ahead with what you were saying. caller: i really don't know about the campaign, but i wanted to say that it's unfair we do get undocumented. i choose undocumented because i feel like a lot of us are -- i am rambling on.

for some reason i feel like i should be speaking. i just need a question. host: what country did you come from? caller: i came from the united states, texas. host: you are not an undocumented immigrant? caller: no. host: we are setting aside that line for undocumented immigrants. in florida, good morning. you have been in this country five to 20 years? caller: yeah. host: what country did you come from and what was your immigration story? caller: i am from jamaica. i came over undocumented. host: you came over undocumented or legally? caller: legally. i am here legally. host: what was that experience like for you, berna?

tell your story, berna. caller: i am just here -- have a better life here, you know? you know? host: that is berna in florida. this is juan in miami. caller: i have been in the country legally for 60 years. i am a peter pan who immigrated from cuba by myself without my parents. that is the atrocity and fear they had of communism, where they sent a seven-year-old child by himself.

basically what i see from the democratic party is what i saw as a child in cuba. attacking the opposition. basically, it is an image of kamala. host: i am listening to you. caller: my parents came legally. through the catholic church on special visa by myself. my parents had to wait another nine years for me to see them because they went through the legal channel. why? if they did it like that back then why can't it be done now? they had a background check, vaccines. we came here the proper way. within four to five years my parents were successful. host: you used the term i am a

peter pan. what does that mean? explain what that means for cuban immigrants. caller: kids under 14 years of age that once they turned 15 they were obligated to get re-educated. like i said, communism. they want to change things from cuba to one of the far in democratic in the united states. as a young child i remember the same thing the democrats are doing is what is happening in cuba. jailing political opponents. newspaper articles against political opponents. it is banana republic style. host: the smithsonian institute with a piece on the peter pan,

pedro pan program that led to an exit is -- a children's exodus from cuba. it was an agreement between the state department and catholic charities after fidel castro rose to power for parents fighting against him underground but expanded to all cuban families who wanted to flee out of fear of their future under the new regime from december 1960 through the end of 1962. more than 14,000 unaccompanied children were sent by their parents from cuba to miami. the age range was ages four to 16. solomon in richmond, virginia. caller: good morning. host: good morning. caller: a washing machine scenario. like a washing scenario.

first cycle that will wet the clothes. then the water will come and wash the clothes detergent. host: i'm not following the analogy and you are going in and out. caller: if people want to stop the immigrations in this country they can stop it -- and then you can work in that space until yo ur --. like a lot of these politicians -- or family members, they can have their green card and become a citizen later on. that is no problem.

when it comes to regular people, they -- host: you're going in and out again, but i think that i get your point. this is manuel in houston, texas. in the country for 20 plus years. caller: i have been in this country for 56 years. in 1965 he brought our family from colombia, south america in 1968 on a visa. we overstayed our visa. for nine years we lived under the radar. as a child i cannot play little league ball or anything like that. i found out at the age of 15 that i was illegal. we had family meetings about it. in 1977, we went back to columbia. our father got all of the documentation done and we came

back to america as residents. in 1997i became a citizen. to the caller from connecticut who said that he also came in 1968 and that they never got no assistance, that he was illegal, the reason he didn't get assistance is because he was living under the radar. if you are illegal and apply for assistance of any kind you are exposing yourself.what trump is doing is scraping the bottom of the barrel on immigration because he knows that he is losing the selection. he is going back to the 2016 playbook. i'm offended by the things he says. there are plenty of good people here. immigrants don't come here to steal and rape and all that. there are far and few that do commit crimes but it is not the vast majority. these are honest working people.

it blows my mind how they play on racism, hate. this immigration issue has been in this country since -- 50 years or so we've had this issue. reagan, what did he do? he made 4 million illegals, gave them asylum. the republicans have handled this issue by giving them asylum. host: you said that there was a family meeting that you found out you were illegal. do you remember that meeting and what your parents told you? caller: oh, yes. i remember like it was yesterday. we were a big family of nine. seven and our parents. my dad would hold family meetings. it did make me feel a little

different knowing that i had a stigma on me. armor for the first time i was called a wetback. i had never heard that word before. i didn't know what it meant until later. 12 years old, someone who didn't even know me. getting back to the issue, we need to take care of this. donald trump killed the last immigration reform. i'm just disappointed in our politics. we need to make sure this wannabe dictator never stepped foot in the white house again. not even in washington, d.c. host: you mentioned ronald reagan in 1986, that sweeping immigration reform bill into law. it made immigrants who entered

before 1982 eligible for amnesty, 3 million given amnesty under that program. in madison, wisconsin, how long have you been in the united states? caller: i came here in 2019, from a west african nation. host: what was that process like for you? caller: i came as a student. so, yeah. as i am watching the 2024 campaign and how some candidates address immigration reform, it is concerning. i came as a student and have been working very hard for the american dream. i knew many people -- including

myself. proposing something like expanding the daca program and programs for undocumented immigrants. they gave me hope that the u.s. would continue to be a country of opportunity. equally worried about the candidate that advocates for deportation. so, immigration policies -- also providing opportunities for people and recognizing the contributions of immigrants. host: what are you studying as a student? caller: i am in gender and women's studies at uw madison. host: you came in 2019.

is it your intention to stay and work in the u.s. when you graduate? caller: i -- however, yes. currently i am doing my doctorate program. my second year. host: for folks who might wonder, why stay in the united states and why not take those skills back to your country of birth? caller: for want to be able to contribute value to the life of people, and that can be done in every part of the world. you can give your best to the community, to the society, to the nation. i think that is the whole essence where you are. your knowledge, contribute in

the humanity. contribution, through your knowledge, your research, it can be done a different way. i think at the end of the day it worth it. host: thank you for the call from madison, wisconsin. 10 minutes left in the first hour of "the washington journal." we have been talking with immigrants only. phone lines are split by how long you've been in this country or if you are an undocumented immigrant. we want to hear your story as well. that line is jose out of north carolina. how long have you been in the united states, where did you come from, what was your route in? caller: i came here in 1982. when i came here in 1982, i came into queens. i went to queens. i lived in forest hills near

where the former president's father lived. some of my friends tried to rent property. mr. trump's father, with all due respect to that fine gentlemen, was put in jail for two years. i heard someone talking earlier about mein kampf. i looked up mein kampf. mein kampf on wikipedia. it says it was my struggle, an autobiography/manifesto by nazi party leader adolf hitler. i am reading this from wikipedia. the book outlines hitler's beliefs and was edited -- host: i think we are familiar with what mein kampf is. what country did you come from? caller: i came from slovakia.

i went to england, then canada, and then i came here. host: are you still undocumented, jose? caller: i am definitely here illegally. i have a totally fake passport. everything behind me, i found a professional. i am here illegally, and i have made about $800 million in a technology company. host: north carolina on the line for those who have been in this country 20 plus years. good morning. caller: good morning. i came here as a boy from vietnam. we actually escaped by boat. me and my family, my parents. host: what year was that? caller: 1980. yes, sir. first time caller.

1980. my parents were pretty well off. we owned a manufacturing company. so, we escaped so my -- i guess my -- us can have an education. my brothers both graduated from college. both have professional jobs. what trump says is pretty crazy. it doesn't make sense that people would vote for him or the republican party. host: max, what do you think about this discussion about the haitian community in springfield and what has come up this week? caller: i think it is pretty dumb. they are not eating dogs.

they are making stuff up. i feel bad for those people living in springfield, ohio. they just, they don't deserve it. host: max in north carolina. from the history channel, this on those who came to this country after the vietnam war. how the end of the vietnam war led to a refugee crisis from april 1975 until 1995. some 3 million refugees out of vietnam, laos, and cambodia. that story is from the history channel's website. timmy in ellicott city, maryland. caller: good morning. host: go ahead, sir. caller: i want to say first of all that i'm so grateful to be in this country. very grateful. before i go any further, i want

to express my sincere gratitude to those descendants of african slaves who came here way before, centuries ago, against their own will. as an african they give me cover in this country. i got cover from them. i am so grateful. until you open your mouth, that is when they know you are an immigrant. but they gave us cover. i want to say to every african who come to this country. every african who come to this country -- thank you, brother, thank you, sister. when i came here they extended so much help towards me. if i can give them the moon, the stars, whatever, i would do that.. i want to say another thing.

when people say that the immigration system is broken, it' it has too many things and they can just apply it. it is being overwhelmed. there is no other place in the world you can put that many people to come through something that is not meant for that. it is not upon them to accept everybody. when they accept you, you come in here, you humble yourself and do what you have to do. they don't have to open the gates to you. i'm tired of when people say this, that, the other. they don't have to. when they open the gate for you, just be grateful, be thankful. there is no other place in the world you can go in like that.

virginia, what country did you come from? caller: the middle east in the 70's. but at that time, si -- it was easier. the job sponsor them to become a legal immigrant and then we all came. and if you want to get a family, it gets 10 to 20 years now. so that is part of why we have immigration issues, illegal or undocumented. plus i do not think we have open borders. we have $16,000 -- 16,000 border patrol doing nothing?

but maybe we should change that. i do not think we can do that. something must be done, but people, do not forget, we used to call these countries banana republic and they stole their resources and everybody came here because we stole from the government and even though they are corrupt we have used their people and people start coming here. and do not tell me that people who walk thousands of miles and do not speak english and risk their lives and everything come here to vote for a democrat. it is crazy. and then you commit a crime and be deported back to the country. this is not right. what we are doing is not right. cuba has a right that if they touch the water in miami, they

have the right to become legal. that is why they vote republican. because the companies love immigrants, they push the wages down. and they compete with the native americans. i mean, we do not find any except for managers, they control the companies working these jobs. i do not want to hear about this. even trump, he hired hundreds of dawn undocumented immigrants before he became president's. -- became president. but it is unfair to pick people against each other. host: evan in north carolina. what country did you come over from? caller: good morning. i -- host: what country did you

immigrate from? caller: haiti. i came here in about 1995, and likely i was able to come here because of a decision my mother had made early on in 1980 -- 1981. are you hearing me? host: i am. how do you feel about haitians being discussed and campaign 2024? caller: it is hurtful because coming here by way of my mother making a decision to come here looking for a better life back in the 80's. she worked two jobs, as a room attendant for years. she left me in haiti when i was five months old with my grandmother. she could not come back to haiti until she got her papers.

that was seven years later. i did not know my mother for seven years. she did all of these sacrifices because she wanted us to have a better life. when she finally got her green card, she had to work harder to become legal. apart from my father who came here in 1988. i have two sisters who were born here and i want to make this point that we are hard-working people looking for better lives. today i have a masters. my sister has a masters and is in social work. my other sister just graduated with a doctorate in nursing anesthesia as well. it is really hurtful to see that people have made such sacrifices to get here and to do the things we are able to do and for opportunities but then to hear people like trump talking the

way that he was talking about haitians, it is hurtful because the majority of us do not come here to do that or do anything that he has talked about. we come here for a better life and doing it the right way. now today, it is hard to eliminate the bad apples because there are plenty of people doing the -- not doing the right thing but the majority of us are coming to do the right thing. i can sit here and say that i am living the american dream because of the sacrifices that my parents made in the early years. host: thank you for sharing your story. the last caller in the first segment of washington journal. a lot more to talk about including we will dive into campaign 2024 polling with chris young of ipsos, and later we will be joined by hannah wesolowski of the national alliance on mental illness to discuss the new federal efforts

to expand access to mental health care in this country. stick around, we will be right back. ♪ >> american history tv, exploring the people and events that tell the american story. history professor john mccurdy and the author of "vicious and immoral" talks about the buggary trial and lgbt during the american revolution. and also historic presidential elections and exploring what made them important and the lasting importance of the nation. now coming up the election of 1860 abraham lincoln became the first republican elected

president before he took office several states pulled out of the union leading to the civil war. at 9:30 p.m. eastern the presidency, lindsay chervinsky how warmaking powers evolved from the time of george washington to the modern era. exploring the american history -- the american story, watch american history tv. find a full schedulen ur program guide or watch online anytime at c-span.org/history. >> nonfiction book lovers, c-span has a number of podcasts for you. listen to best-selling authors and influential interviewers on the afterwards podcast and q and a. hear wide-ranging conversations from nonfiction authors and others who are making rings happen. booknotes+ episodes regularly feature fascinating authors of nonfiction books on a wide

variety of topics and the about books podcasts take you behind the scenes of the nonfiction book publishing and -- industry with interviews, updates and best sellers lists. find all of our podcasts by downloading the c-span now app now or wherever you get your podcasts as well as c-span.org/podcasts. >> the book is called "behind closed doors: in the room with reagan and nixon." it is the title of a memoir of a man who worked closely with both. the author was a speechwriter and a confidant you former presidents nixon and reagan in the 60's, 70's, and 80's. he writes "i spent a decade and a half and close confidential contact with these two presidents."

in 1991 president reagan and nixon were together talking about history, he kept notes of their conversation which he reveals in his memoir. >> the book "behindd doors: in throom with reagan and nixon" on this episode a bookotes + which is available on the c-span now app or wherever you get your podcasts. >> washington journal continues. host: it is a season to keep a close eye on polling and one of the biggest names in public opinion polling is ipsos, and chris young is the president to polling and societal trends. everybody wondering if the debate between vice president kemal harris and former president polling? guest: we know specifically who had done better. there's is been a lot of work done by ipsos and others that

suggest that harris outperformed trump on a variety of dimensions. whether that actually impacts the polls or the whole -- or the horse race we are not sure. the signals are mixed. some of them came out and suggested a surge in the harris numbers and other suggest not. i will say it will be at least another week before we have a full picture as to the impact. host: what did they find specifically on the polling numbers on the horse race right now? guest: specifically, we are status quo. she improved by a point. she was at four points over trump on the national level and now she has five. that is basically the trend. at least it is status quo. maybe slight improvement. host: specifically digging into the debate. what were you looking for from the debate in the polling numbers and afterword? guest: the first thing is we

have to think of it as a metaphor for the campaign so i often look at it as to what extent does each side perform well or not? are they focused and on message. i was looking at two things. especially on the harris side because she is less known, was she able to come across as presidential and a states person and someone who could handle the position. the second point was basically was trump on message when it comes to specific issues at hand, inflation which he is strongest on and american things -- and americans think it is the most important issue. was he effective at painting harris as the extension of biden? those were the big points. host: so appeared more dignified was one of the questions. who appeared more dignified at the debate. the chart that you have, kamala harris with 56% saying it was

the vice president. 26% saying donald trump. guest: presidential writ large. which -- which one looks more statesmanlike. it was much more important for harris to do that than for trump because she was less known. she is not as a familiar quantity as trump. host: the other question in terms of just straight up who won the debate. 53% saying it is kemal harris to 24% saying donald trump. guest: that is consensus and the market in general is adjusting that. the advantage on key issues and the debate was all about moving through various issues. what are the most important issues to people right now? guest: inflation or the cost of living and that has been over the last two years. it was the outcome of covid and that is what people or the

average american are worried about, making ends meet and making sure they can put food on the table and have a reasonable sort of and affordable sort of existence. trump is stronger on that issue. republicans are typically stronger on that issue. harris has redeemed that lead but it is still a republican issue. host: we just spent an hour talking about immigration, where does that stand in the term of ranking issues? guest: top three. inflation, and the economy in first place. you have threats to democracy in second place by our national polling. that is a democratic and harris issue, something that she and biden have emphasized. immigration is in third place, important but especially important for the republican base and this is something that trump won on.

it is very important for him in terms of mobilizing and energizing. host: what about abortion? that was one very much talked about during the debate earlier this week. guest: it is important, but not the primary issue. it is especially important for democrats and it reinforces harris' credibility because she has strong on that issue. i think that maybe it is not the central issue that drives people and is and their decision-making calculus. we might have half a point or a quarter of a point. it is an important issue if not the main issue. host: performance on key issues is one of the slides that you can show viewers. these are the issues we are talking about. what is important to know when looking at this chart full of numbers? guest: broad brush strokes. donald trump is stronger on the economy and economic related

issues on average. cost-of-living like i was saying. harris is stronger on social issues, threat to democracy and those related issues. and then some things in the middle. when we think economy, the economy right now in a general abstract trend it is a time. but when we look at the main issue, donald trump is stronger on inflation. host: will decrease taxes for me and my family, donald trump up by 6, 40 1% to 45 -- 35%. the candidate that will lower every day prices, trump is up by seven. up 10 points that will foster a climate for business. the social issues that you are talking about, the candidate that will work to decrease gun violence, kamala harris up 21 points on that topic over donald trump. 48 percent to 27%.

make it possible for my family to receive affordable good quality health care, kamala harris up 15 points. the methodology is important to talk about. these numbers that you put out since the debate, what are they based on? guest: a national sample representative of the general population, specifically at registered voters, those who will vote specifically. we use a variety of methodology, sometimes we do it by telephone or snail mail. in this case it is online and we actually go out and knock on the door and recruit people into the panel. it is a robust and gold standard approach and that is what we use specifically. host: what should we be looking for right now in polling registered voters versus likely voters, what is important? especially as we get within 50 days of the election? guest: at the beginning of the

year we should look at all adults. as of late the market has been looking at registered voters as a solid base. we know what it is. from this point on after the convention and second debate we should all be really looking at likely voters, and ultimately that is what really matters in an election, the people who go out and vote. that should be our target audience. host: the overall polling for donald trump and kamala harris, it looks to be different this year than previous years because there is a break from where joe biden withdraws. what are you reading from the trendlines since july 21 through today where kamala harris in an aggregate, the real clear politics average has kamala harris up 1.5 points? caller: what we are -- guest: what we are looking at is discontinuity. the election was set and they

knew who the choices were and there is a clear contrast and with biden stepping down and harris stepping in that change the calculus. people paused and are reflecting. the focus group suggest that the american populace is still reflecting. more specifically, harris brought more energy. the base is more mobilize. it is a different camp and -- campaign and election season. host: what should be reading into the state specific goals. you highlight the numbers that you have put out at georgia, michigan and pennsylvania, specifically georgia on the left, michigan in the middle and pennsylvania on the right. the squiggly lines coming together is what i say. -- i see. guest: it is very important, we know it is not a national election. in the united states it is 50 separate state elections and the electoral college. there are six swing states.

there might be another one if you throw in north carolina. all we wanted to show is that we selected three and to show that the game has changed just like at the national level. it changed at the swing state level which is important. the entry of harris into the race has made it a new race and new game. host: is north carolina coming on the board? guest: she has opened the map more than biden and that is the hope she has. the polling is suggestive of that. she is better in those other states like north carolina. we will see. i think the huge question for us right now is to what extent is this bump temporary or is it long-lasting? and that is still a question. host: the reaclearpolitics

section has the poles that are happening every day. and that this point it is pretty much every day. in north carolina trump is up by two according to a trafalgar group poll. this place will tell you who put out the pole what the numbers are and then you can dig into each one. all states that have gone off of the board in recent weeks or do you think might come on the board as we get closer to election day? guest: north carolina is a state we should look for. it was essential on the democratic side to take those three midwestern states, the three rust belt states that i mentioned. there is much more possibility from the polling for those other swing states, arizona, nevada and georgia, i would keep focus on those six plus north carolina. those are key. host: so, why do we care about the national polls?

a national poll of registered are likely voters across the country if it really comes down to the electoral college and these six swing states. why should we be paying attention to any kind of national poll that has everybody else? guest: that is a great question and i would say we should use it for directionality, and for context and a better understanding for the issues. it is faster and cheaper for us to do that so we can do it much more quickly. we usually use a culmination of the two. up until very recently the national polls and the swing states converge. only as of 2016 that we have had the divergence between the two, especially because california and new york are so large and democratic. i would use them in combination. host: chris young is our guest. he has been on with us before and happy to answer questions about polling, picture or how it is done.

if you ever had a question about why some people are pulled and why others are not, he is your guy. 202-748-8000 free democrats. republicans, 202-748-8001. independents, 202-748-8002. we have him for about another half hour if you want to call in. alex and delaware the line for republicans. alex, go ahead. caller: yes. i am just wondering you guys are supposed to be fair on c-span. you never fact-check harris. and during the debate they were fact checking trump, the commentators and it was like three against one like everybody says. and they had somebody fact-check harris and she told 26 lies and no one is talking about that. and everybody says we are fair. we are really fair. you know, it ain't nothing but a

bunch of corruption. that is all i have to say. host: how do we know that the polls are fair? guest: that is a great question. i think it goes to specifically the firm and the profession of polling or the pollster. host: what does ipsos do? guest: we are transparent, open and nonpartisan. we tried to peel away the onion. we think that is the only way to gain credibility in terms of what we do. it is difficult in this environment today. the caller makes an interesting point. there is a widespread belief by all americans that the system is broken and no longer works for the average person and that parties and politicians do not care about that person. and the system is rigged. a lot of distrust. i can understand the position they are coming from looking at the establishment. and the establishment not having

the credibility that it used to. it makes everything more difficult. at ipsos we try to be as transparent as possible and we believe that transparency is what we can control. host: on twitter, they want you to dig into the methodology. "i am curious about the polling, do you separate female for disciplines or naturalized citizens and are their primary drivers for their votes different from other people that you poll? " guest: two questions. how do we sample it and how do we analyze it and what is the outcome of the analysis on the other. we are a representative sample of the american adult population. we sort of stratify. we organize the sample by key demographics including whether you are female or male as an example and all of these other sort of characteristics.

if done correctly it comes out in the right distribution on average. there is a margin of error. we use the profile from the census to prove that we have a representative profile. all pollsters do that. from analysis standpoint, very interesting because we are finding interesting trends between the males and the females. they are increasingly divergent in their political outlooks, not just in the united states but around the world. in the united states specifically women are leaning more progressive, men are leaning more conservative. we think that is a significant trend not just in this cycle but generally towards the future. obviously when we talk about native born versus foreign-born, immigrants versus non-immigrants that is the central cleavage in america and what defines politics. it defines what side of the political fence you are on. we look at that specifically

from a substantive perspective. host: when you are doing a polling sample, you say we need 50% registered republicans and 50% registered democrats and that is going to be the most accurate? who do you know how to pick? caller: the sample -- guest: the sample is based on known characteristics that come from the census which is a neutral body and the gold

standard to what the profile of america is. host: mary in vermont. democrat. good morning. caller: good morning and thank you for c-span. i am calling to ask about the business model, the polling industry is operating under in the current political climate. it seems as though the last eight to 10 years the predictions are not nearly as accurate as they used to be. the politics is very tight and margins are thin. i heard your guest say that the national polling model is easier operationally which makes sense, but what pivot is your industry making the deal with the current climate, a very tight margin. thank you. guest: there is a lot to unpack. and so, where do i start, that is a great question.

politics itself, both in the united states and around the world is wreaking havoc on the pollsters' methods. some of the problems and i do not that necessarily suggests that we are getting worse is that there are major calls and major elections that at times the industry has been on the wrong side and we have to understand that. and when that happens they have out waited impact -- outweighted impact. and we get about as right now as we did a decade ago. and what do i remain -- what do i mean by wreaking havoc? we have the rise of an antiestablishment movement and sentiment around the world. you can understand donald trump and that context -- in that context. these are unique political brands that are attracting and visuals who never participated in politics do not typically

participate in a lot of different things. and it is a problem for the polling industry because we never had to pull on those individuals. -- poll on those individuals, they are difficult to find. and now they are critical. that has been our challenge, how do we tweak the method so that we can find these and visuals and make sure that you're in the same -- they are in the samples, as individuals who up to now have not been participating in much of anything. host: when we talk about military issues the military prepares for the last war as proposed to the next war that they will fight. it is the lessons of the last war that influences what is happening now. it is at the same for the polling industry that it prepares for the last campaign as opposed to what is happening in this campaign? you find yourself overcompensating for mistakes that you found in monday morning

quarterback after the last election? guest: that is a fair thing. that is a human behavior. we can only use the past to prepare for the future and sometimes we have the future wrong. this electoral cycle i would not say every pollster is using a given method. many are using a new method which is weighting based on past elections and taking into consideration their behavior in past elections. this is a typical correction in europe and some latin american countries. it seems like this corrects for the understatement of the right. i think we are in a better place as an industry because maybe not. because some of our experience in brazil in 2022 and turkiye. this method overcorrected for the right.

could we have a market set is to trumpy? that is a good question. we do not know if that is a question but we think we have a correct approach based on the evidence at hand but you are right. we could have a blind spot and we have to be humble enough to at least be open to assess different approaches. host: we will find out together in about 50 days or so. george in virginia. independent. good morning. caller: my first question is actually towards you. i was listening in the last hour when you are speaking to immigrants and there was one question that i wish you had asked and that was for people who have been here over five years, if they were now citizens or if they were in the process of becoming citizens and if not, why not? i do have a question for mr. young. i am a member of ipsos, and i

have been waiting to get some questions about the election and i have not gotten any. my question was going to be why haven't i? i have been a member for quite a while now, over 10 years, but you sort of answer that question for me while i was sitting on the phone. so i guess, my question has been answered. host: what does it mean to be a member of ipsos? guest: i am not quite sure but maybe that means he is a panelist, but he who has been recruited in one of the panels to respond to surveys. what i can say is the following and i do not know his case we have different sorts of panels that are very fit for purpose like they are intended for different sorts of usages. a lot of what we do is actually market research and helping the private sector make decisions. is it important or not a port and. host: is that what pays the bills? guest: a lot of it it does.

but when we do election polling we need a more precise instrument in hand so we have a very specific panel called the knowledge panel which is recruiting people and knocking on their door and going into the panel. perhaps the gentleman on the phone is not in that panel. host: what is the business model of doing election polls? do you make money putting out a poll that says this candidate is up and this candidate is not up? guest: this is not our business. the business around by agreement has always been we work for the government and ngo's and private sector companies, anyone with the public -- the public good in mind in one way or another. 11 election work -- election work is us providing a public good for american society because we are bringing a voice

to people and obviously it is a branding push. the more accurate the better. but, perhaps more important than that, we are part of the ongoing debate about american society. host: does it cost more money to do an election than business poll? guest: probably less because it is easier to get at the general population or a large swath of the general population than it is to get out a very specific segment like dog owners in the southeast. host: jesse in the southeast, florida. republican, good morning. caller: i would like to comment on your guest's order of what people should be interested in. i know the economy is very high. but me the character, when you

have a guy that everything he says, you cannot trust and the lies yet more and more outrageous you have to consider the american people will wake up to that. you can only lie to people so long before they realize that this guy is bull. the guy i'm talking about is donald trump. i am a republican and i voted republican for the first part of my life. donald trump is not a republican and i do not know how to describe the guy. he is unrealistic and has lost touch with reality. host: how do you pull the character p --oll the character issue? guest: we were talking about policy issues that voters take into consideration a lot of other factors including character and whether the individual is presidential or

not. we do both and measurable factors. policy on the one hand and personality on the others. in character is always important and it is a constant in terms of what people look for in a president. we usually call it being presidential which captures all of that together. and how we write the question harris is beating out trump on that attribute. host: sophia out of new york city. independent, good morning. caller: good morning john. host: go ahead. caller: yes i am so excited you never work on saturdays. i was surprised. thinking for being there for us. i wanted to mention to mr. young, i almost cried last week, but today i am not going to. if you do not look at them

straight in the eyes when you talk, whether good or bad, you are not a leader. i wonder where are his children, his wife? what is this? and two things he did. one is he does not want another debate, i do not name him. he cannot handle it. as to gold. he has been a democrat all of his life. wherever he is going for i have no clue. but please, the people need to stop him. host: got your point and the feeling of the idea of the debate. sophia does not think donald trump will another -- will be another debate. do americans want to see another debate? guest: the answers are mixed. some say yes and some say no.

if you push people on it they will want to know and they will always want more information. she made an interesting point about nonverbal communication. there is a lot of that going on and a huge contrast between the two. it goes to credibility. that is the ring about the debate about credibility. it was about harris trying to establish your credibility and undermine trump's and vice versa. and we have to understand it is not just the spoken word but the visuals as well. but at least for the caller, she thought that harris did a better job than trump. host: mark, an independent in indiana. go ahead. hello. it works better if you turn your tv down, so go ahead. caller: i wanted to ask the

guest, everybody is talking about the security of the election and making sure there is no voter fraud and this that and the other. and donald trump continues to perpetuate the lie of the election being stolen. when we put all the focus on the integrity of the election, which by the way nothing has been proven. it has been falsified of any evidence, aren't we feeding into the fuel of that fire? and, you know, giving that some unwarranted attention, just because someone is saying the election was stolen and i had this that and the other? it is just highly frustrating to listen to that went before him we never had any problems. guest: once again just a broad backdrop. there is this belief that the system is broken so these sorts of narratives are very sticky

right now in america. that said, our own polling suggests that most americans would accept the results. now, specifically republicans are the most likely to believe that the results will not be fair and that obviously is reinforced with trump's messages and discourse and we have to put that in the context of a widespread belief of a system being broken. host: sonja uses the term poll spin when you are talking about how we phrase the question. and then you can have poll spin. how do you avoid it? guest: you have to be careful. do not want tobias answers but we have to be cognizant that slight tweaks can produce slightly different results. for the most part, independent

of how you phrase the question, the thing about the economy or inflation. there might be different ways to phrase it. but the central tendency and directionality is the same. trump is stronger on it than harris and we can have confidence there. but we do need to be careful because if we are not we can create statistical artifacts. we can create facts that are not real facts. and so for the most part the industry does a good job. there is a standard to go about asking questions like the horse race question. we do not put in extraneous words or phrases because that could bias it. once again there is variability of meaning depending on how you write a question. host: so why ask the questions in the post debate polling that ipsos did about which candidate stumbled and did not appear sharp. donald trump lost that 52-21%.

or the question the candidate that gave the impression of having higher moral integrity, kamala harris won that 52-29%. or the candidate that seem more like someone i would like to have a casual conversation with? guest: why did we select those questions? the broader concept was who was more presidential or not and we are trying to get at that specific construct and concept using different phraseology. part of that comes from what we have done in the past so some of those questions are some stuff that we applied in the past or took from the debate. we watched the debate and leaned so -- gleaned some key contrasts and then we wanted to see if the american population that watched the debate thought the same things as we did. host: diane in desoto. republican.

good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. i am a senior citizen and of late, almost everybody that i know of my age is very concerned about scams. to the point where i myself in a whole bunch of people will not answer our phone unless the person is in the contact list or there is an identifier as to who is calling other than just a number. i never have been polled in a presidential election. not once. i have been for local elections in the state. i wonder how this affects your polling of senior citizens. thank you. guest: that is a great question and a wonderful question. never before have there been such a diverse set of methodologies employed. it is hard to get out people

because there are all of these different ways we communicate. think about back in the day before the cell phone, before the landline was widespread, we had to interview face-to-face. and then came along widespread landline usage. we were involved online and now in a moment where we are mixing methodologies. certain methodologies allow us to capture certain populations and other populations in the industry itself is extremely heterogeneous. we take that seriously because we do not have a robust sample and also what i would say to this caller is it is a country of 330 million people. it is a very large country. that suggest that you will not necessarily be found in a poll, specifically. but what we are doing is an industry is working hard to have the right methodology to get at those targets.

host: maybe i am dating myself but i remember when i was covering campaigns for congress back in the late 00's and early 2010s online polls were seen as not serious. they had to be telephonic. when did that change that we accepted online as accurate as a landline poll or the cell phone polling? guest: that has been relatively recent. probably the end of the00's and the beginning of the teens. it did not become preeminent but it became accepted. it was just because of the past performance, it was performing well will attempt to the other methodologies that were driven animals as pollsters will look at the results of the election and see how the different methodologies performed and those were performing fairly well. i would say the distinction between what ipsos does and what

other online pollsters do. the typical methodology is capturing people sort of off a river sampling. you go to a website and there is a pop up and you respond to that. you might find an advertisement that invites you into a poll and that is what is used widespread in the markets. it is more common. and at ipsos and some other pollsters, it is different. we go off-line to your house. we usually use mail we do not knock on your door. we send snail mail which is more effective at getting it all sorts of people and then recruit you into the panel and then we interview you at multiple times over the course of an electoral season. both are online because we are capturing the data online but the recruitment methodology is different. that said -- host: you are talking to a real

person. guest: we know we are talking to a real person. both of them have had pretty good performance over the last little bit. host: mary, independent. thank you for waiting. caller: yes. good morning. so, i am finding this conversation to be a little bit trivial given the circumstances that i am feeling in a world which is rapidly descending into so much violence. internationally we just heard that israel has attacked syria and president zelenskyy wants to use our missiles inside russia to attack russia. people, we need to wake up and president trump's i think trying to wake us up. you all should really do that because we are being threatened into aerial -- interiorly with

20 million people coming in on validated and with a hijacked government that is representing zionist leadership. host: got your point and we are talking polling and we will have open forum next where we can certainly talk about those issues. although it brings up the question of how americans feel about their political leaders, the two presidents in this -- candidates in this election and he would be better on foreign-policy policy and national defense issues. how close is the polling on that? guest: it is donald trump and that is more a republican versus democrat issue than donald trump versus harris. republicans always outperform on foreign policy related issues. but i would make another point. you know, when it comes to foreign policy, and when it comes to this election it is very distant for individuals and

not the primary factor to take the boat into consideration. not to say it is not wharton's but from a public opinion perspective it is not as important. that said, the gaza issue is important when it comes to the swing states, especially michigan. you have a large palestinian and muslim population that set out during the primaries and is a concern for the administration to at least not be controversial or frictional when it comes to that issue. host: david in new york. line for independents, good morning. caller: hello. good morning, everyone. i am finding this conversation interesting and i have been listening to you guys. what i am pondering in my head is that we have also been talking about protecting the vote, right? and part of that has to also be

protecting our polling because it is something that could actually be used to manipulate at the same time. it could give you a pulse of what the country is thinking, the majority. but just recently and especially with donald trump, i notice the polls got it wrong the first time. and he actually won the election. so, we have so much technology. our banking is pretty much secure, with two factor identification to get into many websites that have nothing to do with money sometimes. so, i just wonder what your thoughts are on that. host: we will take the question. protecting the integrity of the polls? guest: when it comes to online

market is using the same sort of technology that every entity dealing online those as well. two factor authentication and etc.. what i see more generally speaking is that many countries legislate and regulate elections and election polls. they have to do certain things and be transparent on certain issues and register with government agencies and etc.. that is not our style and culture. we are a small government for the most part. host: what is one of those countries? guest: brazil, for example or argentina where you actually have a window where you do not publish up to election day. there is a certain blackout period. in brazil where you have to register the pole and the size and the statistician that designed it and the specifics of it. that has to be done and if you are not done you are fined or you can go to jail. we are not like that.

we believe in the marketplace of ideas. what i would say to the caller is never look at one, take the average of all. that is the best thing ultimately to do. when it comes to the integrity specifically of the data, we use the same sort of technology as other entities use. host: cliff young is the president of political and societal trends on ipsos and ipsos.com. thank you for coming in on a saturday. host: thank you so much. coming up we will be joined by hannah wesolowski of the national alliance on mental illness and discuss efforts to expand access to mental health care. first for about the next half hour it is our open forum. any public policy or political issue now is your time to call in. start calling and we will get to those right after the break. ♪

>> as the 2024 presidential campaign continues, american history tv presents a new nine part series, historic presidential elections. learn about the pivotal issues of different eras and learn about what made these historic and lasting impact on the nation. today at 7:00 p.m. eastern, the election of a -- of 1850, -- 1860 where abraham lincoln beat many other candidates to become the first republican. before his inauguration many other states pulled out leading to the civil war. this is saturday, 7:00 p.m. eastern on c-span2. booktv every sunday on c-span2

features leading authors discussing their latest nonfiction books. at 5:15 p.m. the former commerce secretary wilbur ross shares his book "risks and returns" where he talks about his career on wall street and his experiences in washington during the trump administration. 6:15, the cnn chief political respondents looks at louisiana's reconstruction era election of 1872 and the political and racial violence that occurred in "america's deadliest election." at 10:00 p.m. eastern, law professor kim wahle author of " pardon power" los at the pardon system. she is interviewed by richard lempert. watch booktv every sunday on c-span2 or find a full

schedule on your program guide or watch at any time at booktv.org. c-span now is a free mobile app featuring your unfiltered view of what is happening in washington, live and on-demand. keep up with the biggest events with live streams of floor proceedings and hearings on the u.s. congress, white house events, the courts, campaigns, and more. all at your fingertips. you can stay current with the latest episodes of washington journal and find scheduling information for the tv networks and c-span radio plus a variety of compelling podcasts. c-span now is available on the apple store and google play. scan the qr code to download it for free or visit c-span.org/ c-spannow. c-span now, your front row seat to washington, anytime, anywhere. >> washington journal continues. host: it is time for the open

forums letting you lead the discussions, with the phone line split by democrats, republicans and independents. call in as we give you a few programming notes f saturday on the c-span networks includin an encore presentation of the abc news presidential deba we will ing that at 6:30 p.m. easte td you can also watch at c-span.org and the free c-span now video app. tonight president biden and vice president harris will deliver remarks at the presidential -- the congressional black caucus foundations dinner. it is at 8:30 m. eastern on c-span, c-span.org and c-span now. with that turning over the program to you. jason is in oregon. independent. good morning. open forum. what is on your mind? caller: basically, i am just

confirmed about a lot of the divisiveness in the future and concerned with ai coming in stronger and stronger by the day that it is going to mess a lot of stuff up in the election. also, as far as the divisiveness is concerned. i had an idea that what if we changed our system, not to change our country to not be america, but to change the system so where we have two presidents both with equal powers, no more vice president and we make a rule that whoever wins the presidency has to pick the president of the opposite party. and maybe they can work together better that way. i do not know if that would ever be possible now. but maybe in the future. i do not know.

and i also wanted to comment on i am pretty sure like everybody knows that in congress and the senate, both sides are committing crimes with insider trading. and they are privy to information that the public is not privy to and the small traders are not privy to. so it is not fair. like nancy pelosi, i believe that she has benefited immensely. but, she is not the only one. i believe that dianne feinstein was doing it before she died. host: that is jason. this is lewis, colorado. republican. what is on your mind? caller: c-span is the worst except for the rest. journalism is dead. i like that guy coming out and he will not last too long.

that being said. the constitution was written for the last caller. the person with the most votes got the presidency and the second most votes got the vice presidency. so i applaud c-span for exposing the ignorance of americans. it is just frightening. that is about it. have a fabulous day. host: troy, west babylon, new york. democrat. good morning. caller: i would would like -- that man should be in jail. host: ok. janice. north carolina, independent. that morning. what's on your mind? caller: as an independent voter,

african-american and i vote for both and i was going to make a comment about your previous guest. the body language of both your people, trump and kamala harris, i do not know if i am pronouncing her name right. i have a problem with that one big time. host: i know that she pronounces it come-all-a. caller: body language both refine. substance, trump had it by far. i am sorry and i was saying i was going to hope that kamala came out with better issues but she did not. and if she did have an edge which i do not think she could have only because the moderators were down on trump big time. they were. they allowed her to get away with a lot of answers that were

wrong. and she did not finish them. they were sort of lies, especially when the good people in charlottesville, that was a lie. the bloodbath was a lie. she did not have any pertinent answers and that is what troubled me. i cannot vote for her. host: that is janet in north carolina. this is peggy noonan in the op-ed pages of "the wall street journal." her declaration about the debate. "a decisive but shallow debate win for kamala harris. " peggy noonan says "at first she showed that she was tough enough and bright enough and quick enough during the debate. and the debate showed the incapacity of mr. trump. he was famously unable to portray her as outside the mainstream. but the news is that he did not seem to try.

he could not prosecute his case because his sentence collapse. he will refer to he, them and your. his mind always pin bald but tuesday night the pinball machine seemed broken."' this is patricia in the lone star state. republican. good morning. caller: the last time we had a presidential candidate that has never even run in a primary up for election? how long or has there ever been a president that has never won a primary? that is up for election. how long has it been? and that is all. host: patricia in texas. tim in kentucky. democrat. good morning. caller: how are you doing? i would just like to make a

suggestion about c-span. i like the show and i listen to it almost every morning. i wish that during this special time, that you all could extend the open forum to at least three hours. and i would like to hear a little feedback from some of these people who are so misinformed that it is ridiculous. if you could extend that time and sort of clear these people up. host:open forum is your favoritt of this program? caller: yes. host: in the past, we would do open forum, but we changed it to where we do it near every day at least half an hour or so. we will certainly bring up that you would like more. i would guess it would not be three hours of open forum, but

they're usually some topic that we need to talk about or at least that congress is talking about that we should highlight. i appreciate the feedback. caller: well, i agree with that. because if you had three hours, you could have a little bit better feedback between some of these callers that absolutely do not know what they are talking about. and you will get feedback from them and maybe correct some of this misinformation that is going on. host: that is tim in the loo grass state. to the buckeye state, westchester, deborah, republican. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. it was an excellent program on immigration this morning, and i usually watch c-span almost every day. one thing i would like to recommend to the c-span audience because i believe they are an audience listening to both sides. we do not agree, but they are

both at least listening. there is a book and author i follow your the book is called "blood money," and the author is peter spicer. i started reading his first book , but this book about how our elected officials trade stocks unethically and protect themselves from prosecution became the basis for the stock act in 2012. so his books are not republican, not democratic. he is the current president of a think tank, the government accountability institute. his latest book "blood money" is critical for the american people to read today because it is how china, in particular, is involved in our nation. their goal is to divide us and destroy us from within. it is an ancient chinese

approach to destroyer enemy without ever firing a bullet. he goes into the specifics at rallies, there are people in china organizations, and he gives you dates and times, and he goes into the origin of covid in one of his chapters. matter of fact, c-span picked up the head of health alliance back in september -- i do not remember the date, i turned in the book to the library, but in that time period, he picked up the origin of covid because peter was talking about inserting the covid virus in the spike protein and getting a killer virus. this is a book that everybody should be reading now. because we should be putting our country first. host: got your point, deborah. this is bernie in pennsylvania,

independent. caller: how you doing? i have not spoke to you for a long time. i need time to plant two basic premises here. one, i was appalled and every american should be appalled watching the presidential debate. both of them acted as if they were studio wrestlers in the world wrestling federation, where all they did is they took the microphones and did personal attacks on each other, and neither one of them ever gave us an approved congressional policy that could be implemented to resolve and improve the american way of life. and the other nonsense is, why do we have paid propagandists from the major networks when their job is giving millions of

dollars every night to brainwash the american public on how to view the news to be the moderators? this should be a very objective, unbiased moderator that will present the presidential debates. my conclusion is, how could the american voter decipher who is best for the country? you cannot just base it on political ideology. both candidates were very shallow and personally attacking each other. host: if there was a second debate between donald trump and kamala harris, would you watch? caller: not if they are going to promote the same format. the format did not give anybody any information on how they are going to turn america for the better. host: ernie, not to go too far

down this road, but how do you change the format? longer answers, less interruptions, more rebuttals? what are you looking for? caller: first of all, they have to present to us what they are bringing to the table. you cannot do superlatives where i am going to save the nation, save middle-class people. how are you going to do it? nobody is informing the american public on how they're going to take the steering wheel of the presidency and take us to a better future. host: how do you get a politician not to say empty platitudes? caller: you get the moderators to step in and say explain this, explain that. we don't just talk about this is what i like to do -- prove it,

and then we will give you a loan . they have no proof, they are just giving us empty platitudes. and the narrator just goes back and forth like a studio wrestling -- what do you call it -- referee. host: got your point. this is johnny in daytona beach, florida, democrat. good morning, open forum. caller: i will be quick. dealing with the debate and what-not in the presidency, now i fell can run for president. a black man can be a felon and have to go through life like that and we have to prove ourselves. you cannot get a passport,

cannot work for government. on the debate, m trump had not said some of that stuff, they would not have had to fact-check him. people come on c-span with they thought they already cut in their head, in a debate, you cannot explain your whole platform, you say what you're going to try to do. i think everyone needs to read up on their policies and find out how they are going to do it. the voting blocks, let's be real, the white people are losing the voting blocks, that is why we allow someone like trump to get into office and do the things he is doing. there has been chaos in his own life and in the presidency. people say he knows what he thinks, no, he don't know. he tell you he is going to do this or do that, that is what he thinks.

do not just say he is letting off at the mouth. host: this is nicki in new york, independent. caller: good morning, john. i wait to call because you interact with your callers, and that is what i like about you. i have to say that i live my whole life, everybody has body parts, like they have an opinion. ok? i trust that no matter what the supreme court says, no matter what donald trump says, i am going to be me. one side hates and the other side is hope. one site is cold as ice, and the other is warm. i was taught as a child to believe in truth, not lies. everybody lies. you can lie to me once, in timmy twice -- and you lie to me

twice, give me a good explanation. but i have no reason to trust you. if you are going to screw me out of $20, why wouldn't you screw me out of $2000? small things say a lot about people. the little things that they do give you an indication, a clear indication for me. politics aside, i know the difference between hate and hope. i know the difference between heat and ice. host: this is mike in north carolina, republican. good morning. caller: good morning, john. thanks for taking my call. i would like to do a favor first off, people, if y'all will mute your phones, john don't have to tell you to mute your phone. host: thanks. caller: thing is, john, donald

trump is wanting to lower inflation and turn america around. the democrats' main thing is female reproductive rights. i mean, john, i do not know if anybody goes to the grocery store, but the prices are outrageous. i mean, i paid $12 for a bottle of ranch that before biden got in, it was like maybe six dollars. it is not right, john. i do not see this as being right. one man wants to turn around the country and the other party wants to murder babies. host: annette in portland, oregon, democrat. caller: good morning, thank you for taking my call. i am going to start out by saying i am a supporter of kamala harris. i agree with the people saying it is between right and wrong, good and evil, smart and insane.

anyway, one of the things that happened over the last week that bothers me to no end is seeing trump parade around at the 9/11 memorial service. a woman who is a 911 denier, thinks it is some conspiracy, and he brings her there and sits there next to the president and vice president of the united states? i do not even know what he was allowed to sit in the same row. and then to see marjorie taylor greene come out jealous of trump's new girl. host: do you read the "wall street journal" much? caller: i have read it. i do not read it every day. host: the lead editorial in the usually conservative editorial

board of the "wall street journal," this is how they lead it today, headline, donald trump and loomer-tunes, donald trump likes to call his political opponent nuts, as in crazy nancy pelosi, so why is he hanging with a 911 conspiracists? is he trying to lose the election? we cannot even believe we have to write this about a candidate. she is a provocatuer. he says the problem here is a growing segment of the american right is populated by an susceptible to conspiracy myths -- conspiracists. it now elevates a pseudo-historian who blames winston churchill for world war ii and media personalities, triumph for free speech, it is not an intellectual or political movement that will win anything.

" wall street journal" today. caller: i agree with them. i do believe this is another thing that will have more republicans saying i could not vote for him, i am going to vote for harris. you see them coming out every day. it is just no wonder. host: running short on time and have a couple more folks calling in. dennis has been waiting in ohio, republican. go ahead. it will work better if you mute your phone, like the previous caller said. we will go to vicki in houston, texas, democrat. thanks for waiting. caller: thank you, and good morning to the world. a few points. a lot of people calling in at about different things. it is ok to admit that you who have voted for this person who gets on national tv talking

about people killing babies at nine months, it is ok to say that you made a mistake. we understand that grocery prices are high, but grocery prices are being manipulated by the people who own those companies. but my main point is anyone that is ok with someone talking about people's nationality, to get on national tv and speak to millions of people about haiti and talking about them eating dogs and cats and it is supposedly funny, it is not funny. and you people, it is just sick. one other thing, the children, remember, all you adults that are so caught up in all this venom, those children that are coming up behind you, they will have to deal with the mess.

one other thing, sir, you know, at first i was like a lot of the other democrats. i was like, president biden, he got out of the race, now she is running? i knew she was the vice president. thinking that -- i was going to vote for her based on president biden's reference because i trust them, but after that debate, i saw her. she was the first person i ever seen stand up to that bully. that woman, whether you want to say she does not have politics, this or that, when think she got, she has boldness, his professional, and i am -- is professional, and i am voting on her based on her accordance and not biden. host: that was our last caller in this open forum. about 45 minutes left in our program, and we will be joined by hannah wesolowski of the

national alliance on mental illness to talk about a new federal effort to expand access to mental health care. stick around for that discussion. we will be right back. ♪ ♪ >> american history tv in exploring the people and events that tell the american story. history professor john mccurdy and author of "vicious and immoral" talks about the trial of a british chaplain during the american revolution. watch the series "historic presidential elections" and find out what made the elections historic, the pivotal issues, and the lasting impact. this week, the election of 1860 when abraham lincoln defeated several other candidates, including senator stephen douglas, to become the first

republican elected president. several states pulled out of the union, leading to the civil war. 9:30 p.m. eastern on the presidency, a presidential historian on how presidential ford policy and warmaking powers evolved from the time of george washington and the modern era. explore the american story, watch american history tv every weekend and find a full schedule on your program guide or watch online anytimet c-span.org/ history. >> c-span now is a free mobile app featuring your unfiltered view of what is happening in washington, live and on-demand. keep up with the day's biggest events with live streams of floor proceedings and hearings from u.s. congress, white house events, the courts, campaigns, and more from the world of politics. all at your fingertips. you can stay current with the latest episodes of "washington

journal" and find scheduling information for c-span's tv network at c-span radio and find a variety of podcasts. c-span now is on the apple store and google play. scan the qr code to downloaded for free visit our website, c-span.org/c-spannow. your front row seat to washington, anytime, anywhere. book tv, every sunday on c-span2, with leading others discussing their latest nonfiction books. at 5:15 p.m. eastern, the former commerce secretary, wilbur ross, shares his book "risks and returns," talking about his career on wall street, his experience in washington during the trump administration. then the scene in political correspondent danna basch looks at louise an end -- louisiana's reconstruction era and the

political and racial violence that occurred, her book "america's deadlit election." on afterwords, a former assistant u.s. attorney and law professor, author of "pardon power," looks at e history of the partum system -- pardon system. she is interviewed by richard limburg. watch booktv every sunday on c-span2. and find a full schedule on your program guide or watch online anytime at booktv.org. >> "washington journal" continues. host: hannah wesolowski joins us now, chief advocacy officer at the national alliance on mental illness. the topic is summed up int this headline, the biden administration to require mental health coverage parody. hannah wesolowski, explain what

mental health coverage parody -- parity means. guest: it is something anyone seeking mental health care probably struggles with, and they do not even know it. one in three americans living with a mental health condition, only about half the people with a mental health condition get treatment every year. there are barriers in insurance coverage, commercial insurance coverage. they might not be able to find a mental health provider in network, may not be able to get an appointment and a quick turnaround. onerous to get mental health care and insurance. parity is this concept that as an insurer provides middle health benefits, they have to be provided with no more restrictive air -- barriers and other health care benefits. but we have seen that there are a lot more barriers to get mental health care. not enough providers, having to go out-of-network, more stringent management.

this is meant to tighten the loopholes and make it easier for americans with insurance coverage to get the mental health care they need. host: how does the biden administration propose doing this? guest: the mental health parity and addiction equity act of 2008 kind of set the tone for what parity should be enclosed a lot of the loopholes that were easy to identify, like you cannot charge an annual them it for mental health care when you do not have it further types of care. there are things more obvious but a lot of the barriers are hard to enforce spirits are now insurers will be required to look at this parity between mental health and substance abuse care and other types of health care, and when they do not comply with the law, putting additional barriers into place, they will have to

institute a corrective action plan and actually act on it. our hope is that that improves access for the 170 5 million people covered under these plans. host: it is the national alliance on mental illness, who is the alliance? guest: thank you for that. we are the nation's largest mental health organization with chapters in over 650 communities across the country. and we're the people who live with mental health conditions and their loved ones. we provide support, education, awareness, and advocacy to help every person affected by mental health conditions live better lives. host: sounds like you are in support of the action this week by the biden administration? guest: very much so, it is a huge step forward to getting the people the care they deserve and often have not been able to receive. host: this was put out by a group of major health insurers. let me read it and get your thoughts. this rule that goes into effect this week or that was signed are

going into effect? guest: the new rules were released. host: this rule will have severe unintended csequences, they say, that will raise costs and jeopardizeatient access to safe, effective, and medically necessary meal health suppo nearly 50 million americans experiencing mental illness, no question that thea shortage of mental health provers and that must be a top priority. there will be improved access to middle health, substance abuse disorder care, including available providers, expanding telehealth, more training for primary care providers. but they say this will promote none of theions. instead ofxtending workforce or meaningfully improvinss to mental health, it will cate compliance so much that it will b impossible to operationalize this whole thing, and worst patient outcomes.

why do you have such a different take on this from the mental health insurers? guest: what we see is burdensome is that people cannot afford to get well. it should not be about affording to get well when you have insurance. right now, too many people have to pay out of and go out-of-network for mental health care. recent data shows for mental health care, you have to go out-of-network 3.5 times more frequently than other types of medical vertical care. it is not as if insurers do not have a role in supporting the number of providers that are providing this care. the same data shows that psychiatrists, psychologists, all mental health providers are paid significantly less than other health care providers, even though they go through the same education, the same schooling, have the same type of debt. they are paid far less, so many choose not to engage in the insurance networks. then we had this system and it is really have sent have-nots.

mental health care becomes a luxury good, which it should not be. so providers are addressing reimbursement rates for mental health clinicians, if they are reducing some of the administrative burdens, at times they have to submit paperwork and have to spend hours on the phone appealing a denial of care for their patients. if we remove those barriers, we are going to have more providers taking insurance. so this is a problem they can play a big role in addressing. host: you mentioned this is a problem that was legally supposed to be some 16 years ago. in the wake of what happened this week, how much more time do you think it will take before this problem is solved? guest: this is a big step, but there is still more to the. some of the requirements or plans will take effect in 2025 plan year and the rest of them in 2026 plan year.

but we know plans will look at how much can you get away with, so enforcement will be key. one element of enforcement is being able to hit insurers where it really counts, and that is financially. right now, the department of labor does not have the statutory ability to impose fines on insurance companies. and we have seen commissions under the obama administration and the trump administration, fervently support -- in fact, chris christie was the chair of the trump administration commission and said it is absolutely necessary to fix this problem and impose fines on insurance. but there's still some things we need. but this is a huge step in the right direction. host: who is the cop on the street right now? guest: they are, the department of labor, but the change is, not only are plans required to look at how they are providing mental health care versus other types of care, which they have been

very delinquent about the past, now they have 45 days to present an action plan to the department of labor. the department of labor feels that is not sufficient. the plan will require to send out a letter to all enrollees or participants saying they are not under compliance under the act. so there will be more public shaming and accountability. 2022 analysis of a handful of plans show that none of them have done the requirements of the law in looking at whether they were providing comparative benefits, because there were no repercussions. so now we have a step in the right direction with repercussions and having an action plan in place, which was not required before. host: mental health coverage parity is a topic, and we are having this conversation during suicide prevention month in this country.

our guest's hannah wesolowski of the national alliance on mental illness. phone lines split this morning regionally. eastern or central time zone, (202) 748-8000. mountain or pacific time zones, (202) 748-8001. hannah wesolowski with us until the end of our program, 10:00 a.m. eastern, as always. carol is first out of new york, good morning. caller: good morning. do not cut me off. i think the more you keep bleeding just on this rabbit hole that everyone has mental health issues and you show kids on tv with their hands saying, oh, they are depressed, you are just exacerbating the problem. i do not believe there is a middle health issue. i do not know if you read rahm emanuel's article about aging, they do become depressed because they are looking at the end of their life.

they do not have mental health issues. at 75, one might decide they do not want to continue after that. that is not a mental health issue, that is an educated decision. before you keep taking us down another rabbit hole with how everyone has mental health issues, even suicide, people may not want to live anymore, it does not mean they have a mental health issue. host: carol in new york. i will give you a chance to respond. guest: carol, i respect that everyone has their own views, but the data shows us that many more people to have mental health conditions. i think there are multiple factors. one, changing environment. there is a lot in the last few years that have impacted mental health, particularly young adults. we have also taken away the stigma around little health, so people are no longer struggling in silence. it is really important that

anyone struggling is able to access the care and support that they need. host: some statistics on the issue of suicide. suicide is the second leading cause of death for people ages 10 to 14 in this country, 12th leading cause of death overall in the united states, although more women than men attempt suicide, men are more likely to die by suicide. youth four times more likely to attempt suicide. statistics and numbers go on from there. september 10 was suicide prevention day, it is suicide prevention month. guest: yes, and i would point out that if anyone is struggling and needs help or support, they should contact the 988 suicide and crisis lifeline, and nationwide 24/7 line available to call, text, or chat. for suicide prevention day and

suicide prevention month, we want everyone to be aware of that. host: like 911 but 988. what happens if someone calls the line? guest: 988 has been available for two years this past july, and more than 10 million people have contact it it already. you are connected with a trained crisis counselor. you call 911 and they get services, but for 988 they can de-escalate a lot of people from over the phone and they connect you with mental health support in the community. they want people to get well and stay well, so they connect with health providers, support programs, and other things that can benefit them. host: what is it staffed with? guest: volunteers and staff with clinical oversight. clinicians are overseeing the crisis counselors who go through rigorous training. a lot of them are survivors themselves, people who have lived long-term with a mental

illness or who have survived suicide or a loved one of either of those groups. they come with compassion and also have extensive training. host: call or text 988. guest: yes. host: ava in mississippi, good morning. caller: infant baby is born physically healthy, how old does it have to be before you know it's mental capacity is a defect? we hear a lot about autism. is it more autism or is it just being diagnosed more? and does the home environment and modern technology, such as computers and cell phones, have an effect on mental illness? i know they do not cause it, but do they have an effect and to what degree? thank you. guest: thank you for those questions, really good questions. we know that 50% of mental

illnesses first present by age 14 and 75% by age 24. so those symptoms are starting in childhood. that is why we need to be vigilant, and we all need training and awareness to know what to look for. the earlier we intervene and provide support to children, the better their outcomes. i would also say social environmental factors, we know social media has an impact. it could be both good and bad. a lot of people find supportive communities via social media. but a lot of people face bullying and see in their algorithm things that promote eating disorders or unhealthy habits. so there needs to be more research to figure out how we manage that. it is definitely both a benefit but also a huge concern, especially for our young people. host: how did you get involved in this? guest: i am a longtime advocate government relations professional but someone whose family benefit from 988.

having that support has meant a lot, and i have been with nami for seven years now. it is exciting to see this issue get more headlines, more notice, and more action because so many people need help. host: national alliance on mental illness, nami.org. this is judith and the mountaineer state, good morning. caller: good morning. how are you? host: doing well. caller: my son has just been involved for the last three years with someone who has severe depression, suicide tendency, adhd. and over the last three years, he has had to put out $30,000 because his insurance company would not pay because there was no in-house rehabilitation for

his diseases. host: are you talking in-network? caller: yes. so the only place he could go was in ohio. of course, he took out his 401(k) to get the help he needed. because he has even cut his arm with a razor blade, and he went to the hospital. after that, they looked to get him into the rehab center in ohio, in which case he stayed there for about three months to undergo testing, to have group therapy, and to interact with the other people that were there. and there were doctors on staff

and nurses and therapists. even though he has had insurance, because my son is 55 years old, he has had insurance all his life, and he could not find anything for his son because he was 16 when this all started. host: how is he doing today? caller: he is doing much better. he is at home, and he is still on medication. but he has not cut himself anymore, and he is trying to work his way into society. he has social issues, too. difficult trying to get him a job, and people do not like to hire someone who has had social issues. it has been difficult, but he is better. he is getting better. he is 20 now, so this has been

going on for four years. host: thanks for sharing that story, judith. i am going to let hannah wesolowski jump in here. guest: judith, thank you for sharing your story, and i'm so sorry your family has had to go through these hurdles. thank goodness that your grandson had your son to fight for him. but no family should have to bankrupt it self to get the child. that is a story we hear far too often, and it is heartbreaking every single time you hear it. first, i encourage you, your son, your grandson to hopefully be able to connect to a local nami, go to nami.org/local, for support. we should have more options in states and thereby. we should not have to send our 16-year-old to another state for

help. also, your son should not have to cash out his 401(k) to get care when he is already paying those insurance premiums. and foraging -- unfortunately, with mental health parity, the onus has been on the beneficiary, the one with the insurance, to fight and fight and fight. the insurance companies, their tendency is to deny, deny, tonight, and hope people give up or do not know their rights and do not know they have the option to even fight back. we hear these stories far too often. we know care needs to be much better, and every person should have the dignity of recovery and hope and support. i'm just so glad to hear that your grandson is doing better and i am wishing the best for your family. host: pro public has done several articles on these issues, one is a headline about someone who needed care being

trapped in his insurers ghost network. propublica has done several articles. what is a ghost network? guest: for any type of provider, you go on your insurance website and look for the provider directory. for middle health, we find the mental health providers list include people no longer in business, wrong numbers, people no longer accepting insurance, people who do not have capacity to take additional patients. and if you actually find a middle health provider is accepting patients, often what you see is up to nine months waiting time for an appointment. if you're struggling with mental health today, you cannot afford to wait nine months to see someone. it might work on paper. there are a lot of providers in the network, but when you make those calls, does not exist. host: do you think insurance agencies are doing this on purpose in terms of having ghost networks out there?

is it just a matter of not paying attention to the white pages for providers? guest: they could do a lot more to make sure those are accurate and that they have enough providers accepting patients in network. i think there should be more resources allocated to making sure those are up-to-date. for a number of medicaid plans, a rule that came out earlier this year that would require some of that was in medicaid plans. it is not uncommon for us at nami to hear stories of someone who has called dozens of people supposedly in their network before they find anyone who might be taking patients. it was like winning the lottery if they could get in quickly. host: a call from sturgis, thanks for the call. caller: good morning. i am a disabled vet from vietnam, and i have been dealing with ptsd since 1970.

i have been through programs. and then they send me to a counselor, so i went to a facility in seattle, a last chance program. but a lot of these colleagues have not been exposed to mental health, like that one lady saying suicide was not a mental health problem. well, being suicidal is not normal either. i just think god that there are people like this lady here that are doing something about it. i go out to the v.a., and i have been in groups and stuff. i appreciate everything that you folks are doing, c-span. thank you so much. guest: yeah, dylan, first, thank you for your service, and i am

sorry that you have had to pay such a price throughout your life because of that service. we hear that so often from our veterans, these hidden wounds they have to deal with for decades. you know, i would say that somebody who has not been exposed to middle health or substance use in their life probably has somebody in their life who is struggling and they just do not know about it. one in two people will experience a mental health condition at some point in their lifetime. so i think it is fair to say that everyone listening here is or will have experience with a mental health condition, either personally or with a loved one, coworker, neighbor, somebody else that they are close to at some point. so it is really important that we have this not just for ourselves who need support and services, but for our future

selves or our loved ones who might need us here. while we have done a lot with stigma, too many people are still struggling in silence. we need to make sure this care is available for everyone. host: the caller is a vietnam war vet. this is from the "new york times," about mark jury who died at 80, army photographer who captured were death. a photographer whose searing intimate images from the battlefield in vietnam and the deathbed of his coalminer grandfather, filled the pages of two critically acclaimed books in 1970, died in august at 80 years old. the first photo collection, the vietnam photo book, 1971 was one of the earliest altars of the visually unblinking view of what is called the first and only rock 'n' roll war, in which he meant the conflict on the american side marked by not ideology or interest but

debauchery and pure desperation to survive. it ends with these two paragraphs, by the early 1990's, he was beginning to experience what his psychiatrist called late onset posttraumatic stress disorder, memories of the war came screaming back. used alcohol and his work declined and he considered suicide. he struggled to right himself but eventually did in late 2010. he said vietnam caught up with me. if you want to read about mark jury and his life and work, the obituary is in the pages of today's "new york times." guest: such important work to memorialize this, and how could it not have an impact? this is what we hear from so many people who are in war zones, and we know those war zones exist today and there will be a long-term impact on so many people. you know, it is something we hear all too often from our

veterans and their loved ones, the price that they pay is not short-term, it often lasts the rest of their lives. host: about 15 minutes left in the program. this is judy in phoenix. caller: hi, i wanted to say hello to a fellow wesolowski. i am 72 years old, my substance abuse and my emotional issues started at around 35 years old, and i tried over the years different medications and there was one that seemed to be like a miracle drug for me, that was an maoi, and it would work for about 18 months but i gained a tremendous amount of weight. and as the years kept going by and i continued, i finally just kind of gave up. i kept trying different other kinds of medicines, and i finally just stopped.

my body is deteriorating and i am giving up trying to help me with my mental health issues. i only have anti-anxiety medicine now just to get me through every day. it just -- the mental health people tried to give me the help with the medicines, different medicines, just i hit a sweet spot once but it had really bad side effects. i just kind of gave up. but i am ok. i always tell people i am depressed and i have anxiety, but i am not despondent. but i just want to live out my life however it proceeds. but i wanted to say hello to you, thank you for what you do. and i think i'm just too late in my life to try to do anything because i am just physically --

i am a very old suddenly 72-year-old woman. but i am ok. so thank you for hearing me. guest: yeah, great to hear another wesolowski out there, i do not know many others outside my immediate family. i am sorry you lost support at getting better, and i hope you can find that again. i would encourage you, there are support groups through nami to talk to other people, and a lot of times it helps just knowing there are others out there. and i also congratulate you on sharing your experience with others because that is so important. a lot of people are struggling in silence, and knowing others are going through the same thing. i will say that those side effects are really common with a lot of psychiatric medications, and it makes it really hard for a lot of people. whether it impacts their sleep, weight gain, unfortunately,

there's a lot of bad side effects that make these medications hard. so we continue to push for new treatments, the treatment of tomorrow, that continued to help people and really target their symptoms and hail -- and help make their lives better. but i'm setting my best for you and hope you can find that hope again. host: this is susan in casper, good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. i am a retired mental professional. my degree is in psychology. and i am in my 70's, and what i have seen since getting my degree in my 20's is the change that has happened. number one, we never should have combined substance abuse with mental health. that is just wrong. i have experience it here within the state of wyoming, and when

the state combined those two issues, it completely diluted the mental health. people with schizophrenia, they cannot stand up for themselves, as an alcoholic can. they lost so much of what they were dealing with, the progress they were making as a group. i was a member of nami, and i have seen the studies. number two, there are no more long-term treatment programs. if you have a mental health issue in your suicidal, you are lucky to get five days in a mental health treatment center. it used to be, in the 1970's, you could go for 30 days just for codependency. number three, white is not medicare and medicaid cover 30 days, 60 days, 90-day treatment programs for the mentally ill? i do not understand. and all of this gobbly

goop we are discussing today does not discuss the true issues of how we are failing in this country. thank you. host: thank you, three big issues. where do you want to start? guest: you know, susan, thanks for your lifetime of service. i respectfully disagree on a few points. we know a lot of people with mental illness self medicate with substance use, and there is a very high rate of coy occurring until and substance abuse disorders -- high rate of co-occurring disorders. that is why it makes it so important to look at it holistically to treat both challenges at once and help people get well. i cannot agree more about the long-term programs. we need a range of treatment options for people, right? just like with any other type of condition, sometimes you need outpatient care from your

provider, sometimes you may need inpatient care. too often that inpatient care is denied. that is one of the things these rules are looking to address, to make sure we are not putting extra barriers on things like inpatient care that we would not put on other things. only half the people with mental health conditions get treatment every year. we would never accept that rate for any other type of health condition. we would never say it is ok for only half the people with cancer to get treatment every year. and a lot of that is denying that inpatient care, having arbitrary limits certainly harm people. if they need more intensive care, let's provided. the best thing is to always try and have people get well and stay well. but we know sometimes conditions get work and you -- get worse and you need more types of treatment. on medicaid and medicare, there are a lot of challenges. medicare still has the 180-day lifetime limit on inpatient

care. we do not have that anywhere else, why would we think that that is acceptable for mental health care? host: why was a put on there in the first place? guest: it was part of the movement against institutionalization, which, that is not a good thing for people with mental health conditions, and a cost saving measure. but some people's conditions are more severe, and having an arbitrary limit is discriminatory, but it is still on the books. a number of things in the medicare program are discriminatory against people with mental illness. there are institutions for mental disease, ind, but cms, centers for medicare and medicaid services, do not cover care in facilities with more than 16 inpatient beds for mental health care. again, to try to move away from institutionalization, where you would have facilities where

people would go and never come out. that is not good. we do not want that. but it also cut the number of inpatient beds available within the program. with commercial insurance, it is a different issue. but there are a number of mechanisms that make it hard for people to get the care they need. host: the next call is from florida, thanks for waiting. caller: good morning. thanks, c-span, and thank you to your guest. i was just calling because i just feel that the crisis that we have in this country and actually worldwide, but we are focusing on our country, with mental health and the lack of understanding, it should be first and foremost a political subject that is addressed by these people who want to be our

leaders. for me, it just seems like not enough emphasis is on it. it is an absolute national crisis. our youth coming up, you got these kids in schools shooting guns and doing all this stuff, and i just do nothing enough emphasis is put on it. host: thank you. i do not think enough emphasis is put on it either. i will say that the emphasis has increased a lot and has a lot of bipartisan support. that being said, this is not a topic i heard come up in the presidential debate this week, and i think that shows that we still have a lot more work to do. host: mark in lynnfield, massachusetts, good morning. go ahead. caller: first, i think if someone is having a crisis, they should definitely seek help. however, this is a ploy to take

firearms. they want young people to call so they can deny them the firearm when they turn 18. they want all the people to talk so they can take our firearms. i think that has something to do with it. thank you. host: hannah wesolowski, red flag loss, to place, but the viewer is saying. can you explain? guest: as far as i am aware, no one is trying to take away anyone's firearms just because they called for help. we do not want to discourage people from speaking up. there are red flag laws, these are opportunities in many states where, whether it is law enforcement or a loved one, clinician, can petition the court to say we are worried about this individual, and for a short period of time they can ask for a court order to limit their access to firearms. the person still has rights and

can represent themselves and fight back on it, and it is a short period of time, no permanent action. the focus on that is really suicide death. this is suicide prevention month, and more than half of all suicides are done by firearms. more than half of all firearm deaths or suicides. so we have a huge challenge there protecting people and giving them the tools. unfortunately, these red flag laws are very underutilized. but no one is aiming, just because you called for help, to take firearms away. that is not the goal here, and i do not want anyone to think that. host: last call, susie out of chicago. caller: hi, i am so glad to hear the topic, and i have a lot to say. i was a nami parent for many years, two decades. i just left my group and everything. i found some fraud in my

insurance company. i worked in media. boy, they like weaponized the word mental illness. and all of my attempts to get help and resolve these claims, i was treated like -- i mean, people are just allowed to treat people getting mental wellness as if it is the last thing that -- it is the last thing you want to weaponize. rather than talking to the legal department, i have 80 emails to try and get help for extreme metal illness. having sadness or needing counseling is not the same as being mentally ill. you know? i think we need to get the terminology correct. like, let's talk about mental wellness and mental health as a normal part of self-care. i was a caregiver and sad.

that does not discredit my -- it is just really sad. we are in such a, you know, a bad place with the terminology and the weaponization of this. and locking people up. we are treated like verbiage just for taking care of basic mental health. host: thanks foyour story. only about a minute and a half left and i want to get hannah wesolowski to respond. guest: susie, i agree with you. first of all, thank you for helping so many other families as a nami program leader. it is about building community that cares. yes, mental illness should not be a derogatory statement, but we need to make sure that people are getting the support they need. let's call it what it is, it is discrimination. unfortunately, we are seeing

discrimination far too often for people with mental health conditions. mental wellness is important, and a lot of times those mental wellness programs help people experiencing those early symptoms of more severe mental illness. but how we talk about it matters in the words matter. and we are hearing from every direction using terminology that is derogatory towards people with mental illness, particularly during this campaign season. and it has a huge impact and is something we need to be cognizant of and thoughtful about. host: hannah wesolowski is weak -- with the national alliance on mental illness, nami.org.always appreciate your time. that is it for us this morning. we will be back here tomorrow morning at 7:00 a.m. eastern. meantime, have a great saturday. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2024] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute,

which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] ♪