host: good morning on this thursday, september 19.

we begin with immigration policy and a conversation on a new poll that found a majority supports mass deportation of undocumented immigrants. here is how you can join the conversation. if you support the idea of mass deportation. (202) 748-8000. if you oppose (202) 748-8001. if you are not sure (202) 748-8002. you can also join the conversation in a text. include your thoughts at (202) 748-8003 or on facebook.com/c-span and also on x with the handle @cspanwj. a new poll done by ipsos. "majority supports mass deportation of undocumented immigrants."

here is how it broke down by party. 86% of republicans said they do support mass deportation of undocumented immigrants. 58% of independents support this policy, and 25% of democrats. according tnumbers of the legal status of immigrants in this country from 2022, this is from pew research, 70% of immigrants are here illegally. 24% were lawful permanent resints. for legal temporary residence. yesterday before the congressional hispanic caucus

vice president harris spoke about immigration policy at this idea of mass deportation. there what she had to say. [video clip] >> we must also reform our broken immigration system and protect our dreamers and understand we can do both create an earned pathway to citizenship and ensure our border is secure. we can do both and we must do both. [applause] while we fight to move our nation forward to a brighter future, donald trump and his extremist allies will keep trying to pull us backwards. we all remember what they did to tear families apart. now they have pledged to carry out the largest deportation, a mass deportation, in american history. imagine what that would look like and what that would be.

how will that happen? massive raids? massive detention camps? what are they talking about? host: that was the vice president yesterday. the former president in new york holding a rally last night had this to say. guest: [video clip] -- >> for every new yorker being terrorized by this migrant crime, and i've been talking about it for five years. i said if you let them it it will be hell. there are vicious criminals being let into our country. there countries do not want them . that is why all over the world, a lot of people coming from jails out of the congo in africa. where you come from? we come from jail. what did you do? we will not tell you. they are coming from africa, the

middle east, asia, a lot of it coming from asia and what is happening to our country's we are destroying the fabric of life in our country and we will not take it any longer and you have to get rid of these people. give me a shot. you will have a safe new york within three months. host: the former president in new york yesterday. let's get your thoughts on this idea of mass deportation for undocumented immigrants. steve in california supports the idea. caller: i live in california and it is out of control. harris supports open borders and she will keep the borders open. as far as the media goes, it is embarrassing how supportive they are of paris over trump.

nobody -- they are supportive of harris over trump. the media is the enemy of this country. host: tie that back to immigration. tie what you're saying about the media to immigration. you don't think they are covering it in a fair way? caller: they are totally one-sided toward harris. they are not talking about where she stands on the issues in terms of her extremism. she once blanket amnesty. she wants to give free medical care. she is against offshore drilling. he said she wants to give free sex change operations to minors. host: we will stick to immigration. daniel from tennessee. opposed. caller: thank you for taking my call. i will discuss the immigration

issue in a minute. i would like to address the fact that sedition nist -- that seditionist jesse waters attacked john mcardle on his show. he was accusing john of a caller that threatened violence. fox cherry picks, not putting into context the fact that you're taking calls 365 days a week, the fact that you are not afraid to take calls from any and all collars, the fact that you are personally -- that john is personally so composed and scholarly. host: generally moved immigration? -- can we move to immigration? caller: if we were to deport millions of people our inflation rate would skyrocket. there are 70 lazy americans that do not know how to roof.

how to prepare meals. they do not know how to take care of our infirm in our nursing homes. they are too lazy. last time i saw anyone roofing they did not stop them from doing the roofing job. host: daniel on why he opposes this idea. do you support it? caller: i do support it. part of the reason why so many people do support it is once these illegals get into the country, depending on the leadership in the white house and the administration, they trigger certain benefits that

are doled out by the state. i will tell you what i mean. you look at new york city. i discovered this on youtube. they are housing them in these sanctuary cities. these sanctuary cities are turning into magnets. these are massive magnets. they are bringing all of this crime. i do not have a problem with people coming. i hire some of them to do day jobs. what is happening on the scale that it is happening today screams for massive deportation. if nothing else it projects a signal to those who are considering coming to the united states, don't do it. it is not worth it. they grab their own country before you mess up hours. host: let me show you more from this poll. about one third of americans say securing the u.s.-mexico border

is the top immigration priority, followed by a pathway to citizenship for those who qualify, that is 20%. deporting those here illegally comes in third at 18% as well as ensuring opportunities remain for those who are trying to legally enter the country. 18% said that is also a priority. would you rank these immigration policies in that same order of priority? caller: i never thought of it, i've never seen this list that you have. the problem is they trigger benefits. these are benefits i do not want americans that are unemployed to get. i do not want to have people here illegally doing it. all we are doing, regardless of how we prioritize it on this list that the freebies will continue, the taxes will

continue, and the social fabric of our society will continue to fall apart. i would not separate them. if you are here illegally get out. host: to manual in it d.c. opposing this idea. caller: good morning. the sense of deportation -- think about the costs. if you think about the cost and you think about what are these people doing here? these immigrants came here to help us do the job. you're talking about illegal deportation. think about the cost. host: the cost to actually

deport these people or the cost to our economy? caller: the cost to deport. why wouldn't you use that money to make sure these people engage in working here and help to solve the problem. host: i will go on to dennis in iowa who supports the mass deportation for undocumented immigrants. caller: i cannot -- host: i do not hear you anymore. start over. caller: the first people i think they should deport is trump's ex-wife's that are all bimbos. host: we go to joe in oklahoma, opposing. caller: i oppose mass

deportation. i find immigrants to be very good citizens trying to get -- trying to be good citizens. i live in a very mixed neighborhood and i have a lot of hispanic people in this neighborhood and i find them to be very good neighbors and very hard workers. they do jobs american people do not want to do. they are putting back into the economy. i see they are doing that other than taking away from the economy. host: up on capitol hill yesterday evening, the continuing resolution, six months continuing resolution proposed by house speaker mike johnson failed as expected on the floor yesterday evening. this would have funded the government for six months. congress is facing a september 30 deadline to fund most of the

government agencies. if this would have avoided a partial government shutdown. now they have to go back to the drawing board and come up with a different type of resolution if they can. both chambers have to agree to it to keep the government open past september 30. former president trump had this to say yesrday on his truth social platform. "if republicans do not get the save act, which was included in this resolution, a every ounce of it, they should not aee to a continuing resolution in any way, spe, or form. democratare registering illegal voters by the tens of thousands as we speak and they will be voting in the 24 presidential election and they should not be allowed to." the president putting his finger on the scale to say any continuing resolution put forth by this congress must include the save act, which would make

it legal -- which would make it illegal for undocumented immigrants to vote in elections. opponents say it is already illegal. immigration policy as part of the debate on capitol hill and the remaining days they have left of their schedule here in washington to fund the federal government. congress slated to go back to their home states and their districts at the end of this month ahead of the november election. sam in san diego, you are unsure about this idea. caller: i am unsure because i support legal entry into the country. the rhetoric he is using is very similar to hitler's rhetoric. -- hitler's rhetoric about jewish people. instead of jewish people it is about immigrants. that is what is frightening to

me. on the flipside, vice president harris has not distinguished herself from her boss and she is endorsing massive war crimes and potentially genocide. i don't see how this works. i don't like being in this predicament of choosing the lesser of two evils in every election cycle. host: to drill down a little bit on this ipsos poll, they did ask which presidential candidate do you believe will do a better job handling immigration? the national general populations they polled, 44% said the former president do a better job. you agree? caller: that sound split right down the middle. from my understanding there was

a bipartisan immigration bill that the president called his buddies in congress and said kill the thing because i don't want it to happen unless i am the one implementing it, just like he did say about the war crimes and potential genocide in israel. he wants to be the savior. that to me is ridiculous because let's solve problems now. why wait for him to get into office? that is what i don't like. it should be the idea. host: let's go to caroline in atlanta. you support mass deportation of undocumented immigrants? caller: yes i do. my reason is this. first of all, the caller said

about the bill they had in the congressman did not pass it. when the former president told them to kill it they did that. this was a start. with this have been a start to work on immigration? i support it because the former president is a felon. give us a break. host: what do you support? caller: i support them to stay here. host: the question is do you support or oppose mass deportation of undocumented immigrants. it sounds like you oppose mass deportation. caller: yes. i oppose it. i oppose that. i am sorry.

host: in stratford, connecticut. opposing. caller: i oppose mass deportation because it sounds like the rhetoric hitler's did. it sounds like these people are ignorant on what immigration is. they do not know we are all immigrants to this country. everybody comes here to make their lives better. they are not coming to harm anybody. you are an immigrant, i am an immigrant, we have not harmed anybody. we come here to work hard and make a better life for our families and become americans. you have to work your turn money to pay for the process -- you have to work here to earn money to pay for the process. our country is supposed to be able to devise laws to help

these people make that process easier. i believe congress was shut down from such a law to try to pass to make immigration better at the border. it is not just the southern border, it is coming from all over. we had immigrants from kosovo when they were in a war-torn country and those people came over and they also took advantage of our advantages to be able to get back on their feet and make a life for their country, for themselves and their families. i believe this rhetoric about sending people back to where they came from and the immigrants are criminals and insane people is coming only from the republican and especially from trump and he is manipulating these people's mind into thinking immigration is bad when he himself has married an

immigrant and brought all of her family over here. i think they have to understand immigration is not a bad thing, immigrants are not bad people. he is trying to demonize them. we should turn a blind eye and ear to him and stop looking at people like they are something other than human. host: the washington monthly magazine inmate had a piece by robert schapiro, the headline is "trump's plans for mass deportation would be an economic disaster." " besides being kroll supporting 11 million -- deporting 11 million immigrants could trigger a recession and reigniting inflation." to have concerns about that or agree or disagree with that argument joseph in florida. unsure about this idea. caller: i am not sure.

eisenhower did it. fdr did it. trump declined this new bill the demoats put out because it included catch and release. catch and release is no good for us. legal immigration -- trump wives came here illegally. legal immigration is great but illegal immigration is costing us to do their medical care, to house them, to feed them, it is costing us billion's of dollars and we do not know who these people are. these billions of people are unvented. that is very dangerous. that is why i am not sure. i saw eisenhower did it come fdr did it. i'm not sure. i like immigrants but illegal immigrants, invented immigrants. -- vetted immigrants. caller: nbc news -- host: nbc

news wrote a piece about this. nbc news asked asking ice director about what would be required to deport millions of people. he was docked commenting on the republican convention platform but said deportation is complicated and requires an enormous meant of logistics. it is not only putting on planes and flying them, we have to of airplanes, we have to do all of logistics involved in that. for some people not into tension the path to deportation can take years and that is resource intensive. -- for people not in detention the path to deportation can take years and that is resource intensive. host: lisa, you support? caller: i support deportation. the main reason is they are here illegally. no other country would let us come to their country illegally

without documentation. like i said, the simple fact that they are illegal. even these dreamers, they say we cannot send them back, they do not any -- they do not know anybody from where they came, they are contributing to society , doctors and lawyers or whatever. there illegal parents probably know someone from where they came. why are there parents still illegal? on top of that, the government could give them a deal where they go back to your country for five years, do whatever you do here, and then they can make your country better and then put in papers to come back to the united states. some kind of effort like that.

host: got it. alyssa in tennessee on why she supports the idea of mass deportation of undocumented immigrants. that is our conversation this morning following a poll conducted by ipsos on immigration. they found a majority support this idea, something the former president has called for. yesterday on capitol hill the republican-controlled house -- in the republican-controlled house there was a hearing before the house homeland security about president biden's immigration policy. here is ranking member bennet thompson speaking about the results of current efforts by the administration on border security. [video clip] >> you probably will not hear it from those on the others. border encounters are at their lowest level in years. since the president's proclamation on june 4,

encounters along the border in ports of entry have decreased by 55%, with border patrol recording the lowest number of border encounters since september 2020. the biden-harrison ministration has also removed more than 92,000 individuals to more than 130 countries and conducted over 300 international repatriation flights. total removals and returns over the last year exceed the total removals and returns for any year since 2010. the administration has also decreased the number of people released from detention pending their immigration removal proceedings by 70%. meanwhile, customs and border protection has seized more fennel than the last five years -- more fentanyl than the last

five years combined, keeping the dangerous drugs from reaching our streets. none of these actions are a substitute for congressional actions to fix our immigration system and provide reasons source was -- provide resources to law enforcement on the border. only congress can do that and it is our responsibility to act. unfortunately my colleagues on the others have refused to move legitimate border security legislation all congress. at the direction of former president trump, republicans blocked the senate bipartisan border deal and they are refusing to move necessary border security funding. republicans do not want border security solutions, they want a political issue. host: mississippi democrat bennie thompson at a hearing yesterday before the house homeland security committee. we covered it on c-span. a little bit more from the panel discussion.

they also heard from a republican witness and retired chief patrol agent for u.s. customs and border patrol. he spoke about his experience with enforcement under the biden administration. [video clip] >> out the first three plus years of this administration i saw a decrease in the countries we could send people back to. for the first time in my 25 years, i saw a large-scale lapse in our ability to return people to their country of origin. the inability to send people home meant most people being arrested for illegal entry would have to be detained or released. the current administration made a point of decreasing the amount of detention space available nationwide. immigration and customs enforcement funding for detention has been cut and private detention eliminated. the fact that so many illegal aliens are being released into the united states spreads worldwide very quickly. as this happens the numbers encountered illegally crossing

the border increased exponentially. the impact to me and my agents were significant. groups of hundreds of thousands coming into the united states. these numbers pulled 80% or 90% of agents away from the border. border patrol zones had no agent presence for weeks or months at a time. those who did not want to be caught could simply walk in. we have no idea who and what entered our country over this time. throughout 2022 and 2023i sent agents to texas and arizona. those areas do not put enough agents in the field to see what they have missed. in san diego we had annexed financial increase in aliens with significant ties to terrorism. prior to this administration, the san diego sector averaged 10 to 15 arrests per year. once word was out the border was far easier to cross, san diego

went to over 100 sia's in 2022, over that in 2023, and more than that this year. these are only the ones we caught. host: from capitol hill, c-span's coverage of the house homeland security hearing on the biden administration's immigration policies. if you missed it and want to see the key moments from yesterday's hearing, go to our website. when you hit the player on the video on our website, goldstar's will appear to note the key moment from the hearing say do not have to watch hours of it if you do not have time. carol in -- let's go to dave in san diego. you are unsure. caller: good morning. i am unsure because legally a

lot of things would have to happen to deport people. that being said, i support legal immigration just as sam said in san diego. he should know better. there is a lot going on in the rest of the country. right now the places where they gather the migrants is empty and there is trash all over the place. the reason why they are doing that is because they are now legally going to a legal port of entry to preserve themselves versus going out all over the border and sneaking in or presenting themselves. it all boils down to doing

things the right way. you have to enter correctly. a lot of these problems will solve themselves. we get it all watered down from both sides that are demonizing everything. we need immigrants. they need to come in legally. i have many great hispanic neighbors and friends and they are good people and hard-working. there is a certain element is a criminal element that do cause problems and we don't need or want that. it all boils down to doing it correctly. host: dave's thoughts in san diego. mike in new jersey. caller: good morning. hope you are well. the thing once again is legal and illegal.

everyone seems to be happy with legal. they do not want illegal. can i go into harris's house and help myself to her refrigerator or television? that is illegal. illegals are attacking our system. i would like to be more out to a stick but unless someone -- i would like to be more altuistic but unless someone can answer the lifeboat theory i am for deportations. host: keith in denver, opposing the idea of mass deportation for undocumented immigrants. your turn. caller: i oppose it because it sounds to me -- the methodology. most people do not know what mass deportation is or what it would take logistically. imagine going door-to-door looking for only certain types of people, brown, hispanic,

asian, and others. logistically that would be a humanitarian nightmare. a nightmare. , obama was deport or in chief -- remember, obama was deporter in chief. he deported more people than any u.s. president. democrats do not brag about it. he deported criminals and violators, he prioritized that. there were several million. logistically, the humanitarian aspects -- and i am for deportation. i am not for mass deportation. how would you include white illegal immigrants, which there

are many of? they fly in, they come through the southern border, the northern border. you would be picking based on race and skin color. it would be a travesty. just last night trump said he was going to springfield and then coming here to aurora, colorado. he is harassing legal immigrants. those haitian people are under bomb threats. the schools are closed. hospitals have been closed because of lies and threats and the governor, the mayor, the city manager said these legal immigrants in springfield have been a great boon to the community. of course they have stretch resources. these are law-abiding, hard-working, good people being

threatened by one political party. host: we will leave it at that. the wall street journal front page this morning. "told pet eatin was untrue the team spread it anyway." now the town is in chaos. wall street journal front page. usa today and many of the newspapers. front page news about the federal reserve move. cut rates for the first time in four years. with inflation easing, the half a point drop. inside usa today, the related headline. experts say the fed rate cut not life-changing for some. consumers will not see an immediate difference. consumers should not expect to see much immediate difference.

financial institutes are low to -- are slow to lower the rates they charge but are quick to slice the rates they pay on savings vehicles like certificates of deposit and savings account. that is usa today. the fed reserve chair jerome powell valley news conference as he does after the meeting when he talked about his decision to cut rates. he also spoke about the influx across the border as one factor causing unemployment to rise. there is that exchange. [video clip] >> we have only been running a little bit above 100,000 jobs a month. do you view that level of job creation as alarming or would you be content if we were to stick at that level? one of the trends of the last couple of years has been labor market steam coming out through job openings following rather than job losses. you think that trend has further to run reduce the risk for their labor market cooling comes through job losses? >> job creation, it depends on

the inflow. if you're having millions of people come into the labor force and creating 100,000 jobs you will see unemployment go up. it depends on what is the trend underlying the volatility of people coming into the country. we understand there has been quite an influx across the borders and that has been one of the things that has allowed the unemployment rate to rise. the other thing is the slower hiring rate which we also watch carefully. it does depend on what is happening on the supply side. host: jerome powell making news in washington. on capitol hill the house republicans making news when the continuing resolution proposed by their speaker failed. "three democrats and 14 republicans cross the aisle on the funding bi vote. three democrats voted with republicans on the speakers

continuing resolution to fund the government for six months and include the save act immigration policy. three democrats voted with them. 14 republicans opposed to the move by the speaker and sit failed." the speaker said they will go back to the playbook. they have to come up with the way to fund the governmenthere there would be a partial shutdown by the end of this month. jim in chevy chase maryland. you are unsure about this idea of mass deportation. caller: i used to look at immigration. to do a mass deportation is not something you can logistically do. it targets the worst ones first and then it works backwards. i think people have to understand that. other people have said we accept everyone. what people fail to realize is that is legal. we have two elite except legal

immigration. if you look at what is happened since the kamala presidency. these people, they want to give them amnesty. what we have to do is limit the people coming in. i am not sure about the deportation, the mass deportation. i think we have to do it in stages. the last thing i wanted to mention as they talk about how trump denied the bill that would allow -- that would stop immigration. if you look at the bill it still allowed 5000 illegals into the country. i don't think trump wanted that to happen. i don't think him not being in power can stop something like that if they wanted to pass it. host: that is james in chevy chase, maryland. we noted in the it so spall --

in the ipsos poll they asked which presidential candidate do you believe would do a better job handling immigration. from the general population, 40 4% responded saying the former president would do a better job while 34% said the vice president would. 12% said neither. 8% said they did not know. here is another headline from the new york sun. "harris expands her lead in rust belt states, catching up to trump on issues like the economy and immigration." deborah in new jersey opposing. caller: good morning. i like so many who oppose feel this is not a genuine thing, it is just about getting rid of certain groups. people come into this country from everywhere, not just south.

every time we hear republicans talk about this, primarily the ex-president, it is all about people that will not vote for him. he is caring about immigrants coming here and how they are being treated. when these people come in they try to do work most people do not want to do. by the way, they pay into the system just likes everybody who works here does. it is a shame he is trying to make things worse instead of trying to make things better. if we want to send immigrants back we need to go all the way back to the indians and sent everybody back except when. you will talk about who is on the side of who. a to decide who is legal and who is not?

it is somebody's opinion. host: deborah in new jersey. patrick in pennsylvania. you support the idea. tell us your thoughts. caller: good morning and thank you for c-span. i love watching you. it amazes me how ill-informed most of the masses are. i support deportation. eisenhower did, he called it operation wetback, it was mass deportation. this is not just brown people, it is everybody who has crossed the border illegally. there are millions other than mexicans. it is very simple. if you are in this country illegally you broke the law. you need to go back where you come from and apply legally. we are not all immigrants. most of us were born here.

our ancestors were immigrants who came here legally through ellis island. they are overwhelming the system. i live outside of philadelphia. if you live in a big city you can see the damage that has been done and you can see the crime rates. look at the bodies dropping everywhere. it has to be done orderly. publicans did pass a bill, hr-2 was an immigration bill. the so-called bipartisan bill which only had three republicans in the senate that voted for it was an amnesty bill. it allowed 1.5 million illegals to enter the country every year. we cannot have immigration this way. it has to be orderly. we cannot put our vets -- we have vets living on the streets. host: i am curious about the headline i shared on the impact

of immigration on the economy. some believing it would trigger a recession -- that there would be an economic disaster -- this is from washington monthly. caller: robert schapiro, that is interesting. but now it costs $3 billion this year for new york to handle the illegals in new york city. $3 billion out of their budget. if these people were going to enrich the country they could have been rich to they came from. they are coming here because we have the best form of living in the world. most of them are here because they would do better but a lot are not. more people die every year because of fentanyl then died in

vietnam. host: patrick in pennsylvania, supporting this idea of mass deportation for undocumented immigrants. that is our conversation this morning. based off of the new ipsos survey. they also asked to what extent you support or oppose the following? 69% of support restrictions that mit the number of migrants that can claimsym. 68% support giving a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants who came to the u.s. as children, the dreamers. they also found a 62% support local law enforcement having the ility to detain mignts and 54% support the mass deportation of undocumented immigrants. when they broke that down by party, as we showed you earlier today, when they break it down by party they found 86% of

republicans support this idea of mass deportation. 50% of independents and 25% of democrats. al in oregon, let's go to you. opposing. caller: i oppose illegal immigration and i support legal ports of entry for people coming here. one thing that is not being addressed is the diseases that are coming into our country such as tuberculosis and other bad diseases that are coming in all over the country. we are having strange outbreaks. host: how are you tracking that? caller: i've just been following the news and leading the epic times -- and reading the epoch

times. i also believe we need to not allow one political party to gain and grow its base of voters with noncitizen voting. it is wrong. as a citizen, it is what i would call a disloyal, treasonous act that one political party would allow. i think america can do better. i do support people ordering these people that are here because of the strain is putting on our social services for american citizens. host: al referencing a debate on capitol hill in the house. the save act. safeguard american voter eligibility a it requires proof of citizenship

toegter to vote in a federal election. it is already illegal for undocumented immras to cast a ballot. it passed the house in july, all voted in favor. five democrats no senate vote has been taken. it was introduced by representative chip roy of texas. this is included in speaker johnson six-month continuing resolution to fund the government until march. that failed on the house floor last night. 14 republicans blocked their leadership and voted against that six-month plan and how does back to the drawing board for republicans to avoid a partial government shutdown at the end of the month. let's hear from jill and virginia. you are unsure. caller: thanks for taking my call. let me make two observations on the same topic. i know the media likes to portray donald trump as against

immigration but most people understand he is not against legal immigration. he is against illegal immigration. i think trump plans on decreasing illegal immigration but increasing legal immigration. the second thing on the immigration issue is i believe what is happening in springfield, ohio, where they have an influx of 20,000 immigrants to a population of 60,000, i think that is completely wrong and i do not think is racist to say so. it is almost like a form of ethnic cleansing because they are changing that city culturally and ethnically very fast. i do not believe that is fair to the local population. i want to make those points. host: we will move on to allen in virginia. supporting mass deportation for immigrants. caller: thanks for taking my

call and i think the last three callers made excellent points. i would like to mention immigration. i don't believe anyone is against legal immigration. this bill you keep talking about that they turned down, that is 5000 people a day which is 1.5 million who wants that. i noticed the comments, you mentioned the word undocumented. what is the difference between not documented and illegal immigration? i support legal immigration and i do not support illegal immigration. if you look at any cities having these experiences and what the government is doing to bring these people in, people cannot get their social security. american people cannot get their own services and we keep bringing people in illegally and some criminals is a lot of good

people. when they used common sense and i do not see that then or now. even the callers that have a totally different opinion of what i have. if you apply common sense we should be able to work this out. legal immigration is fine. illegal immigration i do not support. these criminals and these gang should be deported. all of them as far as i am concerned. thanks for taking my call. host: let's go to new mexico. gail is there and unsure. caller: good morning. thank you for having me on. host: tell us why you are unsure. caller: i am unsure because i do not believe in mass deportation. i believe in selective deportation.

whether an immigrant is documented or undocumented, if they commit a serious crime they need to be deported. i am not talking about a traffic ticket. i am talking about a serious crime. we need to keep the crime rate down. especially with drugs, any kind of trafficking with drugs or people, there needs to be deportation in those circumstances. host: joe in maryland. oppose. good morning. caller: america has a moral responsibility for the monroe doctrine and the interference of a lot of these countries in the cold war, knocking over

democratically elected government to clean up our mess and taken some of the people whose regions have been destabilized because of our actions, similar to how a lot of european countries are primarily taking and people who were part of their former colonial empires. i think i see a very interesting take on the border situation and possible solution. someone told me to make a large field of solar panels, a lot of investment in that region. a great place for energy development on the american and mexican side. people wanting to go there, not necessarily to the american side , to go to the border and stay at the border and get a good job in a booming energy industry. it would also provide a platform for bipartisan support for border patrol to be down there

protecting financially profitable u.s. assets and provide cooperation between the u.s. and mexico. host: bobby in alabama. good morning. tell us what you think. caller: good morning. i am not sure. i am not sure because we live in a rural community that got buses with illegals on it and they just let them out. i am unsure about all of this stuff because i see it happening in rural communities and it is kind of scary because you have so many people coming in we cannot house them or feed them.

that is just my opinion. i love everybody. i am concerned about it now. host: bobby in alabama. scott in maryland. also unsure. caller: how are you doing? i am unsure because a lot of these so-called immigrants, like in springfield, these companies are hiring them, silver people to say illegal immigration is a problem when companies are hiring them never looked at the companies. some of the call say when people are coming in because they do not have the standards of living on home, what about the impact u.s. sanctions have had on countries like venezuela where it makes it hard for people to exist in their own country. you want them to die their own country from something this government has done? it is tough to say because everyone thinks they are illegal and yet companies are hiring them and no one wants the

government to control the companies. where you really stand? those are just my thoughts. host: you mentioned springfield. there is a piece on cnn.com. "why springfield? did a government program sent them there for resettlement? no. immigrants have chosen to live in springfield due to its government programs and low cost of work." that is why springfield. according to the city website, which notes "no government entity is responsible for the influx of haitians into clark county. any system is going to struggle with rapid population growth we have seen, the clerk county health commissioner told springfield council in july, to stress the importance of getting more resources and funding to help. how did they end up there? officials and residents who have

spoken with cnn say employment opportunities and word-of-mouth true and influx to the city. economic opportunities, job opportunities in that county. josie in pennsylvania. opposing. caller: thank you for taking my call. i am listening to this. i am against mass deportation. i do not know how that would be done or what the cost would be to our economy. i live in a rural area of western pennsylvania. we have relied for our christmas tree industry and our agricultural industry undocumented, possibly undocumented workers. i recently watched a farmer from florida say with mass deportations what will happen to all of the food products that are supplied to the american people? who will pick them.

he said it would have a drastic effect on the economy concerning food prices and the importation of food. i am for documented documentation for immigrants. i am surprised at the many people who have said there was a chance to have a strict law -- the first in 30 years -- concerning immigration and documentation. it was defeated because a political candidate did not want that to happen during this election. that is not right. we need to address the situation absolutely. we also need to understand mass deportation is not as easy as it sounds and how would we determine who would go and where they would go? that is what i feel about mass deportation. host: josie in pennsylvania.

we go to robert in north carolina. unsure. caller: i am unsure but i am sure the lady who just spoke before me is a wonderful person, a thoughtful person. i thanked her for her comments. for me, i am not sure because like her, there are so many complications. there is one thing i would like to say. if all europeans would go back to europe, that would solve all of our immigration problems. thank you very much. host: that was robert. we will leave the conversation there for now. for now. coming up on the washington journal, brookings institution william galston joins us to discuss how vice president harris and former president trump are avoiding addressing the issue of national debt. later, congressman glenn grothman, republican from

wisconsin, member of the budget and oversight committee will discuss federal spending. the deadline we have been mentioning this morning. and other congressional news of the day. we will be right back. >> american history tv, saturdays on c-span2, exploring people and events that tell the american story. at 7:00 p.m. eastern watch historic presidential elections, exploring what made these elections historic, pivotal issues of different eras, and the lasting impact on the nation. the election of 18 76. despite losing the popular vote, republican rutherford hayes defeated democratic governor samuel tilden. it was a contentious election that had to be decided by convention made up of the house, senate, and supreme court. at 8:00 p.m. eastern in lectures in history, university of north carolina pembroke professor discussing the bohemian culture

in the early 19th and 20th centuries that rejected invention all societal restraints and embrace the arts. on the presidency, the university of arkansas historian randall woods on president john quincy adams, sharing his decade of research and biography of the first chief executive to follow his father into office. exploring the american story. watch american history tv saturdays on c-span two. a full programyour program guide or watch anytime on c-span.org/history. >> attention, middle and heisel students across america. it is time to make your voice heard. the studentcam documentary contest 2025 is here. your chance to create a documentary that can inspire change, raise awareness, and make an impact. your documentary should answer this question, your message to

the president. what issue is most important to you or your community? whether you are passionate about politics, the environment, or community stories, studentcam is your platform to share your message with the world. with $100,000 in prizes, including a grand prize of 5000 dollars, this is your opportunity to not only make an impact, but also be rewarded for your creativity and hardork. enter your submissions today. scan the code or visit stud.orgor all of the details on how to enter. the deadline is january 20, 2025. >> "washington journal" continues. host: joining us is william galston, here to talk about campaign 2024 and the national debt. mr. galston, you wrote this piece in the national journal.

debt crisis is coming. trump and harris are determined to ignore the problem at the country's peril. what is the crisis coming? guest: for your younger viewers, greta, a bit of history may help. at the end of the previous entry, we had four straight years of budget surpluses. we were actually paying down the national debt, which stood at one third of our gross domestic product. since then, we have been piling up deficit and debt annually. we have added $25 trillion to the national debt over the past two decades. the next decade alone, we are on track to add another $22 trillion for a grand total of $50 trillion. that is not free money, because we have to pay interest on it.

by the end of the next 10 years, the interest payments on the national debt will be almost twice what we are spending on national defense, domestic programs, and we will be in effect borrowing money to pay interest on the debt. that is not a sustainable situation. it's not a crisis that overwhelms the system all at once. it is like slow-motion bleeding that weakens the patient and ultimately leads to death. it is very difficult to make this a front burner issue, but at some point we are going to have to start talking about it. host: what has led us to this point? what major policies over the years you are talking about has led to this situation? guest: well, starting early in the current century, we have had tax cuts that we didn't pay for.

we have had spending increases that we didn't pay for. we have had two major economic crises where we had to throw money at the problems. in addition, we have an aging society. an aging society is an expensive society, because it costs for programs such as social security and medicare tend to rise more rapidly than the gross thomistic product of the united -- gross domestic product of the united states. we have ignored all of those problems. on the tax side, spending side, on the financial emergency side, and the problems created by an aging society. at some point we are going to have to reckon with them. host: why at some point? you alluded to it earlier. what could happen?

guest: the number one risk, as far as i'm concerned, is eventually the debt will get so large that lenders, domestic and foreign, will begin to wonder and worry about our capacity to repay it. as a result, they will require significantly higher interest rates in order to compensate them for what they see as the risk of default. at that point we will have a financial crisis. we had a big problem when interest rates rose as high as 7%. what will happen if they rise to twice that? which they have been in my lifetime? we have i think a serious problem for the future. everything depends on the willingness of both domestic

lenders and foreign lenders to keep lending us money at affordable interest rates as the deficit miles -- deficit piles ever higher. host: you said these two candidates are ignoring the issue. they aren't talking about it. they are, though, putting forth policies that would impact deficit. what is the difference between deficit and debt and what do make of their policy? guest: well, a deficit is what happens every fiscal year. you spend $6 trillion, take in $4 trillion, you have a deficit of $2 trillion. what is the difference between those two? it is financed by borrowing and borrowing adds to the debt. a deficit accrues every year. debt is permanent unless you pay it. both candidates, it is fair to

say, have ignore the problem. donald trump has proposals that would make the problem even worse. kamala harris has also proposed policies that would do nothing to reduce the long-term debt and would add a little to it. it is not a perfect symmetry. various analyses, including one performed by the wall street journal yesterday and by the washington post today, confirm that the trump proposals would be even more expensive than the harris proposals. what i can say safely is that neither candidate would do anything to stop the bleeding. the issue of the deficit was barely touched upon in the presidential debate last week. that is a real sign that neither

the candidates nor the journalistic community is particularly interested in talking about this. host: latasha agrees with you. she is a professor at the yale university law school and economist. writing that the big deficit candidate by the numbers. during the first presidential debate in the 1992 election deficit came up 13 times. each candidate was pressed on their substantive plan to bring the u.s. fiscal health into order. the victor, bill clinton, is the only president to have achieved budget surplus in the last half-century. this week the deficit was referenced twice. why is that? guest: candidates have a hard time getting concerned about issues the american people aren't focused on. i remember the 1992 presidential debates very clearly. among other things, you had a third-party candidate, ross

perot, who was barnstorming around the country on that issue. it was one of only two issues that he talked about in his presidential campaign. that forced both of the other candidates to respond. when bill clinton took office, he was very aware of the fact that 19% of the voters had voted for ross perot, reflecting public concern about the budget deficit and accumulating debt. we haven't seen any dynamic like that this year, or for quite some time. it is an easy issue to avoid because it is a problem that accumulates in slow motion over a great deal of time. it is not something that hits you all at once, like a pandemic or a financial crisis. in my judgment, that makes it a particularly dangerous problem, because it is easy to ignore it

until you have a real crisis on your hands. host: he remembers the 1992 debate because he serves as a former policy advisor to president clinton from 1993-1995. democratic caller, you are up first in this conversation. caller: good morning, guys. thank you for taking my call. i tend to agree with a lot of the callers and the sentiment that has been pervasive in that conversation this morning. i don't feel like the government, no matter who is in there, democrat or republican, cares to represent the country or represent the issues we are facing everyday. the cost of living is impossible nowadays. i think the american people deserve so much better. i think where we are now is like being stuck between -- host: bill galston, what is the

solution to address the nation's debt? guest: the caller i think brought our attention to the fact that there are urgent everyday problems that are top of mind for most americans. high prices being first and foremost. i think it's appropriate and inevitable that political leaders and candidates for office respond to those urgent concerns. they must. at the same time, political leadership means telling people what they need to know. not just what they want to hear. it is going to take bipartisan leadership on the deficit and

debt issue to bring it to the attention of the american people in a way that makes it impossible to ignore. this will not happen by itself. the american people i think are unlikely to rise up spontaneously and say "we must do something about this." they need to be persuaded we must do something about this. that is where political leadership is crucial. host: vin frida. wh the baby boomer generation passes away, will the social security and debt self-correct? guest: the answer is no, it will not. don't take my word for it. every year the actuaries of the social security system who are responsible for running it and reporting to the american people on how it's doing have made it very clear that based on our

current path we are going to need significant revenue increases or cuts to benefits in order to stabilize the system over time. the gap between the two is about 20%, which means if we don't do anything in the next decade that social security payments will abruptly decline by about 20%, which i think would come as a big shock to a lot of people who are relying on the system. at some point in the next 10 years, whatever we do about the broader deficit and debt situation, we are going to have to address a much more immediate and urgent crisis in the social security system. by the way, medicare as well. social security will run out of money in about 2033. medicare will run out of money in about 2036.

those are problems we can't ignore whatever else we may do with the whole budget. host: john, north carolina, republican. caller: yes, good morning. thank you for taking my call. you've probably heard that the government should be able to eliminate a lot of the problems with paying out for social benefits, what you were talking about. it is the baby boomers' decline. the number of payouts goes way down. the number that has been floated around is something like $70 trillion over the next 20, 25, 30 years. i wonder how much validity there is in that statement?

and how you feel about it? guest: well, like i suspected just about everybody else listening to this program, i am not a world-class expert on the social security system, but i do read carefully what world-class experts have to say about it. the people who are responsible for managing the system do not agree with the idea that as the baby boomers die off that the program will stabilize itself. it is true the baby boomers are dying off, but as we -- i am a boomer -- die off, other people will join. the number of people on social security will not go down. it will continue to rise for the

next 10 years and then stabilize and rise more slowly, but it will not go down. our population is increasing. we are still an aging society. people who are now 50 are going to start retiring in large numbers within the next decade. i know it would be nice to believe when people like me are dead the system will take care of itself, but nothing i've read suggests that is true. host: your reaction to the news out of the fed yesterday? goes big with a half cut is the headline. what impact does that have on the conversation were having? guest: first of all, as interest rates the -- interest rates decline, they will decline not just for private borrowers trying to get a mortgage, but

also for the federal government. that's good news in the short term, but i should also say that the 50 basis point cut, one half of 1%, suggests that the federal reserve board is quite worried about the signs of weakening in the labor market. what we know about a recession, if it were to come, is that it sharply reduces revenues going into the government and tends to produce higher deficits, which will translate into higher debt. the fed, by moving as strongly as it did yesterday, is trying to ward off excessive weakness in the labor market and prevent that weakness from triggering a recession. everybody hopes that they got it right. host: william in ohio,

democratic caller, your next for mr. galston. caller: greta, thank you for taking the call. this is the old 89-year-old true hillbilly. mr. galston, i have been a firm believer that the national debt -- host: william, you are listening to your tv and getting confused. can you mute that television? caller: i can turn it off. host: there you go. ask your question. caller: i am an old dumb 89-year-old hillbilly. i am not educated like these politicians. about the national debt, i have said for years and years that it can't sustain this. i started paying into social security when i was 14. i paid into it until i was 77. i think i am entitled to it, but

these corrupt politicians say that that's an entitlement. if the corrupt politicians had kept their hands out of it, the social security would have never went broke. they keep talking about more taxes. we can't withstand another $8 trillion deficit like the great donald put us in. host: let's take the last point on taxes. you were talking about the candidates' plans, were you referring to their tax agenda? guest: in part i was. let me just explain the situation as i see it. we had a big tax cut in 2017, the first year that donald trump was president. in order to make it possible to

cut taxes that significantly while complying with the budget rules that govern the united states government, most of the tax cuts were scheduled to expire in 2025, next year. so, we are going to have a very big debate about whether those tax cuts should be allowed to expire, which would bring more revenue into the federal government, or whether they should be continued or expanded. both candidates have made proposals that would expand the tax cuts. donald trump has been much more aggressive in that way. there are estimates that his tax proposals would expand the

deficit and debt by an additional $5 trillion over the next decade. kamala harris' proposals are more modest and would expand the deficit and debt by half $1 trillion over the next 10 years. but the tax debate next year will be the most important opportunity that the american people and u.s. government are going to have to begin to change our fiscal course. we haven't had enough conversation about that debate, which i think will dominate 2025. i don't think that there will be a lot of legislation other than the tax debate. that debate will be an

opportunity to surface the issues that i talked about in my op ed that other people are beginning to talk about, that auditory awards are beginning to talk about, and we will see what happens. caller: good morning. i have a question. if the social security is going bankrupt eventually, why do we keep getting increases? that is taking more that away. i would be happy to say that i don't need that race. i know they can't do it because they don't have the paperwork or people to do it, but when i worked, if my company did not have enough money, we wouldn't get a raise that year. i was fine with that. why can't they do that with social security? host: let's take that question. thanks.

guest: that is a very interesting question. here's the answer as i see it. there are a lot of people who have worked all of their lives. they didn't make much money. perhaps they had low-wage jobs. they retired and became totally dependent on social security. it was and is their only source of income. suppose that as prices have risen above 20% over the past 3.5 years there social security payments remained where they were. many of these lower income people would not be able to afford their rent, their heating bills, or grocery bills. for them, it's not something

that they could have afforded to do without. it was an absolute necessity. that raises the question of whether everybody should get the same cost-of-living increase regardless of where they are on the income scale. i think the idea that people who don't need the increase might be asked to do without it is one that is worth considering. but as an across-the-board proposal i think that it would lead to a great deal of hardship and a fierce political reaction. host: carol in maryland, democratic caller. caller: it is tyrell from owings mills, maryland. do you know which administration had the largest cost of living increase? guest: well, i can tell you that inflation reached its peak early

in ronald reagan's administration. if you forced me to guess, i would say as a percentage basis it was probably in the early 1980's. but i am probably wrong about that. what is the answer? host: are you still there? caller: yes. it was richard nixon's administration. they got 13%. i got this one a couple of years ago under joe biden, 8.9%. do you -- what do you think it would probably be this year? guest: well, look, every year is the same -- caller: sorry, next year. 25? host: what is your point? caller: i called about, does he agree with david stockman's book

donald trump's more on capitalism? you know, inflation, there was a lot of inflation over donald trump's tenure. we had $8 trillion. according to david stockman, donald trump was responsible for a lot of that inflation, but they tried to blame joe biden for all of this. i just wanted to know his point on that. host: mr. galston? guest: well, i have not read mr. stockton's book. i would distinguish between the rate of inflation, which was pretty low during the trump administration, a bit under 2% on an annual basis as i recall, and the rate of that accumulation, which -- rate of debt accumulation, which was very high under donald trump.

donald trump was not interested in a balanced budget. he said several times, and i quote, "i love debt." which is something he learned as a real estate broker that is not as appropriate for the government of the united states as for someone building massive buildings in the middle of manhattan. that's about all i can say about that. host: we will hear from mark next in massachusetts. independent. caller: good morning. mr. galston, back to the debt issue real quick. isn't it true that japan owns more debt than china? i haven't looked at it recently, but don't we owe it to ourselves and social security, like the number one debtor, or whatever? host: we will take those questions. guest: this is where it gets technical. the debt figures i was citing

are what is known as the debt held by the public. the social security system is part of the different category, debt held by the government or debt that is an and kernel transaction between one part of the government and another part of the government. with regard to the public debt, last time i checked 30% was owned by foreign creditors. i honestly don't know whether japan outranks china or vice versa. two. host: ed, tennessee, independent. caller: good morning. talking about immigrant earlier,

the cbo just reported this year that the immigrants add $7 trillion to the economy, and trump's own irs die, $1 trillion is going uncollected in taxes and also we spent 4.3 trillion dollars a year on health care as warren buffett and charlie said. it health care that is swallowing the profits in the united states. our health care is tied to employment. we have a lot of money that is never talked about and 25% of all the money and health is wasted. can you verify and back me up on any of this? guest: you know, i'm asked to be an expert in many areas. i'm an expert in very few of

them. what i can say is that the caller is probably right. we have by far the most expensive health care system in the world. it is swallowing up an increasing share of our economy every year. it's also a health care that generates miracle cures, great advances in medicine and drugs, etc. unfortunately, americans pay the full price of that and because of price regulations in other countries around the world, the fruits of our medical research innovation are available to them at a much lower cost than it is to us. so yeah, we do have a very broad system problem with health care.

various things have been tried over the past few decades to rein in the rate of increase in health care. those efforts have had some success, but it is still continuing to grow every year as a share of our economy, and yes, the caller is probably correct. it is swallowing up a large share of the increase production, the gross domestic product of the country every year, and unless and until there is a fundamental change in the way health care is delivered and paid for in this country, we're not going to be able to resolve the problem. host: thank you, as always, for the conversation. guest: my pleasure. host: when we come back, later on we are going to talk with congressman glenn grothman, republican of wisconsin, a member of the budget and oversight committee on the federal spending debate

happening on capitol hill, ending the will also talk with a member of the appropriations committee on that same debate. but first after this break, we will be in open forum. those are the lines, start dilating now. we will be right back. >> dr. martyn carrie is a johns hopkins school of medicine professor. he's published more than 300 scientific research articles. his book is called blind spots, when medicine gets it wrong and what it means to our health. he says he realizes much about the public is told about health is medical dogma, an ideal or

practice given incontrovertible authority because someone decreed it to be true based on a gut feeling. he writes this book may change your life, it did mine. >>blind spots: when medicine gets it wrong and what it means health" on this of the soda of book+. booknotes+ is available wherever you get your podcastss. >> book tv every sunday on c-span 2 features leading authors discussing their latest nonfiction books. cat four: 35 eastern, university of edinburgh philosophy professor argue that artificial intelligence reflects humanities flaws because it is based on human data. and the son of former french president nicholas >> is a and author of napoleons library

talks about the books in the polian bonaparte library and the impact they have on his thinking . and a dartmouth college profesr examines the world of offshore finance, how it works and its impact. she's interviewed by wall street journal u.s. tax policy reporter richard rubin. watch every sunday on c-span 2 and find a full schedule on the ogm guide anytime at book tv.org. washington journal continues. host: welcome back to open forum for the next 30 minutes. any public policy or political issue begin discussed this morning. the front page of the new york times, their headline about the rate cuts. they rate cuts show optimism is how they portrayed this morning.

they also note mr. powell says that the fed does not yet ready to declare mission accomplished, taming inflation. he added that officials were encouraged by the progress they had seen. at the new york times reporting this morning. we cover the federal reserve news conference yesterday. the former president saying that this rate cut is politics with 47 days to go before election day. the federal reserve chair was asked about that yesterday, here is what he had to say. >> how do you respond to the criticism that a deeper recap now before the election has political motivation? >> this is my fourth presidential election at the fed, and it's always the same, we are always going into this meeting in particular and asking

what the right thing to do is for the people we serve. and we do that and we make a decision as a group, and then we announce it. it is never about anything else, nothing else is discussed. i would point out that the things we do for the effect economic conditions with a lag. nonetheless, this is what we do. our job is to support the economy on behalf of the american people and if we get it right, this will benefit the american people significantly. this really concentrates the mind, it is something we all take very seriously. we don't put any other filters. i think if you start doing that, i don't really stop, so we just don't do that. >> the federal reserve decision to cut interest rates making the headlines, the front pages of the newspaper this morning. this is usa today inside the newspaper money section.

experts say the federal rate cut not life-changing for some, but it will take a while before zoomers will see any impact. financial institutions are usually slow to lower the rates they charge borrowers when the federal reserve begins to cut its own rates. you can talk about that this morning, the economy, the federal reserve decision here on the washington journal in open form. you can also document what happened up on capitol hill yesterday when 14 house republicans tank this biggest short-term funding plan and of the vote. former president donald trump rehabbed his demand that republicans use a government shutdown threat to get democrats on proof of citizenship registered voters. colorado springs, democratic color. what is on your mind?

caller: i'm glad i got in today, you're one of my favorite posts. i was wondering if i could just talk about three topics. first is a common. if i had a son and he stood up in the middle of class and said i hate susie, i would have a little problem with that, these five years old, but a president of the united states saying i hate taylor swift, let's sit back and think about that. sometimes the littlest things let you know which person is. my second point is a question for you and c-span. since trump is not willing to do any debates on other networks, can c-span reach out and see if they can have a debate? i think you would be a great moderator. i would really like to see c-span hold a debate.

the last thing i want is kind of a concern. your episode tuesday, december 3, a gentleman called in and said he was for donald trump, which is fine, but he wanted to know if he could repeat the lord's prayer and the host let him, which i thought was kind of offensive to other religions or other people. if i said i was a member of the satanic temple, could i list off the seven tenants? i just that was kind of not thoughtful to other groups. host: pet eating was untrue, trump team spread it anyway. ohio officials informed vance staff premieres were baseless. it didn't matter, and now the town is in chaos. tucson, arizona, republican. good morning. >> i just want to address c-span

for a moment. everybody tries to snuggle up to you when they are talking and there was a time years ago when you guys were truly, truly bipartisan in your coverage. but you used a term this morning, ex-president had his finger on the scale. and you comnly allow some of these folks to call the -president hitler. and you just let them go on like that last guy, he was offended because somebody read the prayer. who cares? this is what is wrong with our country. this is the part that is fundamentally wrong, that they just hate each other. when is this going to stop? i heard boebert say yesterday that it is on both sides.

she is a denier, because it is on both sides and it's got to stop. this part is fixing to boil over and dangerous. we have got to stop this foolishness. that's all i host: have to say. ok. buffalo, new york. caller: i want to thank you for putting up the headline about springfield, ohio just a minute ago because that was my plan for a call for the last couple days. i have a friend from haiti, and he is a noble guy, he is a supervisor here in new york state. he gave a horrible story about going to haiti to save his mother who lives between two games. -- gangs. she drove across the country and got to the dominican republic. so these people have suffered

since the 2010 earthquake when the nation was decimated. then they have hurricane after hurricane. these people need help. people claim to be christian, but they want to get rid of people in springfield ohio claiming that they are eating their neighbors pets? and the trump and vance team are saying we can say what we want because we want to raise the issue of immigration? they are about immigration and nukes. you ask any question, they turn it around to immigration in third world war. lord save us if trump gets in, because this is a horrible, heartless team that was on the republican side. host: michigan, independent.

caller: i just wanted to say that trump really isn't that bad. i don't get it. i don't understand why so many people are so against him. i think that the media has kind of painted him in a bad way and put a black hat on him. he stands for issues that really the people of this country should be concerned with. for instance, immigration. all these people have come into this country and they have been contributed to the social programs of this country, but they are getting billions and billions of dollars to put them up in hotels, to furnish their

way of life. and in turn, it's ridiculous the things that they are getting. >> how do you track the federal programs that you say undocumented immigrants are getting? how do you track that, what news do you follow? caller: well, i follow fox news, and it's biased, but they are very honest. as far as in new york, for instance, all the hotels are booked up. i mean, immigrants are in the city, in new york city, and taxpayers should have that money. host: i will leave it on that point. another news through the you can

respond to today, this is the washington times. seeking 100 million dollars over that baltimore bridge collapsed that happened. this is also from the wall street journal, that same story this morning in the newspaper, a ship owner is sued over the bridge collapsed. the government filed the case against two singapore corporations. we allege that the owner and operator recklessly cut corners in ways that risked lives and the economic well-being of the nation. in addition to recovering costs, the justice department is making a claim for punitive damages. a counterclaim against the owner and operator which went to maryland federal court in a bid for exoneration or to limit their liability. the department's claim doesn't include any damages for the reconstruction of the key bridge

which was built and owned and maintained by maryland's dance, its own claim. there is an update for you this morning on that bridge collapsed. massachusetts, independent. caller: how are you doing today? host: go ahead, i'm good. caller: i am an 80-year-old screaming liberal and i have only two questions. i've been sick for a while, so i missed some things. the tax five trump, back when it was only for the top 2%, do you know what i'm talking about? host: the tax bill that was passed during his administration? caller: i don't understand why that has not been repealed. if that was repealed, a lot of

our problems would be taken care of financially. and one other question. if we want no immigrants in here, and by the way, i am a first-generation immigrant in this country, if we don't want immigrants here, who is going to wait on all these people who don't have to do a damn thing? the people who never worked for the people who have that tax break. and it was a big one. host: understood. massachusetts, open form. clarksville, tennessee, democratic caller. caller: i enjoy the show quite a bit, and i think legal immigration is the best, but we've got to figure out how we are going to do it. it upsets me so much that donald trump didn't pass that bill or

he kind of didn't let that go through. host: why did that upset you? caller: for 30 years we didn't have no kind of anything in congress getting done on immigration, then i was so excited that we was getting something done and it was bipartisan. it just upsets me that they called the ex-president president. it just gets on my nerves. i've had my heart broken on more presidential elections and then kind of a nervous wreck on this one coming up. host: seven weeks to go before election day. on that bipartisan senate bill, the bill included a new emergency authority that will allow the department of homeland security to shutdown the border if there are too many migrants trying to cross.

water patrol encountered 4000 or more migrants on average over seven days. the border would have to be shut down. congress reaches 70 average of 5000 or exceeded 8500 in a single day. the border could be shutdown under this authority for more than 270 days in the first year, and the bill would've given the president power to suspend the border closure on an emergency basis for up to 45 days if it is in the national interest. brad, international falls, republican. good morning to you. caller: good morning, greta. there's two issues here with me. the first one is when you had powell on. if you listen to him close, his words do matter. but if he says if it works, well, that is saying i am tipping the scales, and man city is doing. the real problem is that we got way too much money coming in

supporting our economy today. that's foreign money that is keeping the stock market where it's at. secondly, what you're talking about just now about immigration. my father was in the immigration service for over 40 years, ok, and when you are telling these people about this bipartisan bill that came from the senate, why don't you tell them that there was a bill that was there for a year before that and it started and the house was supposed to, like all standing bills, are to start in the house, not the senate. in that hr-2 has not been moved off his desk. that is what should have been passed. and now for people to start standing there, even you saying that the senate that was a bipartisan dadada, that's wrong of you. but you should be saying is that

there was a bill that should have been passed. the rest of this is just nonsense and noise that you're putting out. host: hr-2 passed in the republican-controlled house along party lines. people called the senate proposal bipartisan because it did have some republicans who endorsed the bill. also want to talk this morning about former wall street journal global economics editor neil king, who passed away from cancer this week. he was a frequent guest on a network, some of our longtime viewers may remember him including back in 2023 to talk about his book "american ramble" where he talked about his three and a 30 mile walk from washington, d.c. to new york city. he talks to us about why he did it. >> i wanted to go out at very difficult time after

experiencing the january 6 events at the capital and what we've seen in 2020, and the experience if they stretch of america, between washington, my house and new york city. and meet some people along the way and kind of meditate on the history and the past and the story. >> and we can show you what that route look like, a bit of a roundabout path through washington, d.c. and maryland and pennsylvania into new jersey and into new york. the book is called american ramble: a walk that memory and renewal. what was the memory, what with the renewal? >> it was a little bit of my renewal. i had had a cancer battle, we all have our own personal struggles.

much of it was really investigating our national memories, things that we build statues for, who it is that we recognize, some of the heroes that we've forgotten and overlooked and also the prospect of there being some national renewal at the time with all the challenges and they really wanted to go out to get people to give me some hints about those things. host: neil king passing away from cancer this week. we are an open form this morning. any public policy or political issue on your mind. also want to note for our programming here on c-span today, 10:00 a.m. eastern time on c-span3, we will have live coverage of the house oversight and accountability committee hearing on biden administration policies. they range across the federal government and you can watch that on c-span 3 or on our free video mobile app or online at

c-span.org. and then close to 1:00 p.m. eastern time, preside biden will deliver remarks at th economic cluhe in d.c.. watches remarks live on the c-span now, our free video mobile app or online at c-span.org. 1:00 p.m. eastern time, army officials are testifying on the oversight of training policies meant to combat extremist activities among army personnel. the house armed services subcommittee hearing live at 1:00 p.m. eastern on c-span3, c-span now, or online at c-span.org. barbara in oklahoma city, independent. caller: i just needed to call in, and please don't hang up on me in the middle of a sentence like you usually do, i hear. let me finish what i'm saying.

letting people get up here and tell a feather social security is a tax at a burden. the recent social security collapses because the republicans, ever since reagan, have taken a trillion dollars out of it every time for those tax cuts for the wealthy. and you keep saying to them like it is a burden, we are going to really have to do something about social security. but we have to do is stop the republicans from stealing from it. and also on the issue of abortion, i'm one of those ladies who when roe v. wade first passed, they didn't mind. i was put in the hospital, i was given drugs every four hours, i was knocked out, basically. it was over a week and a half that i laid there and finally a

nurse came in and told me why i was laying there. that the owner of the hospital -- anyway. she made where i had to lay there until i was --. i had a 105 temperature and they finally let my doctor do it. and this happens all over the country and this is wrong and people need to listen to this. and please stop letting them say they are social security. host: mart in minneapolis, democratic caller. caller: i had a very quick question for the american public who are listening. this goes out to everyone. when does one individual who is not elected have so much power

over decisions being made in washington by the house and senate? i look at donald trump controlling the republican caucus on the immigration issue and defeating a bill that everyone seemed to be bipartisan with, and now again declaring war against everyone on the continuation of the deficit, budget balancing issue coming up at the end of the month. whether or not the government will continue to run. i think it is wrong to have one individual have so much power over everyone. when has ever a former president been able to have this much power? i leave that with the american public and thank you so much for c-span. host: we believe that they are for open forum. when we come back, republican of wisconsin, a member of the budget inn oversight committee will talk about that spending debate you were just talking about. and later, a democrat of maine,

she will also join us and give us a response on this spending deadline in this debate happening on capitol hill. stay with us. >> american history tv saturdays on c-span two exploring the american story. at 7:00 p.m. watch historic presidential elections. explore what made them historic, the pivotal issues and their impact on the nation. the election of 1876 is this week. republican governor weatherford haze defeated samuel tildon. it was a contentious election that had to be decided by a special commission of members of the it was how -- u.s., senate and supreme court.

pembroke professor brian anderson discusses the rise of a bohemian culture in the early 19th and 20th centuries that rejected societal constraints and embraced the arts. at 9:30 p.m. eastern historian randall woods on president john quincy adams, sharing his decade of research and biography of the first chief executive to follow his father at the office. exploring the american story. watch american history tv saturdays on c-span 2 and find a full schedule on your program guide or watch online anytime at c-span.org/history. >> as the 2024 presidential campaign continues, history tv presents historic presidential elections. learn about the issues of different eras, uncover what made these elections historic

and explore their impact on the nation. saturday, the election of 1876. despite losing the popular vote, weatherford haze -- rutherford hayes defeated governor samuel tildon. the result remains controversial and impacts the country till this day. watch historic presidential elections saturday at 7:00 p.m. eastn american history tv on c-span 2. >> 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 from u.s. congress. white house events, the courts, campaigns and more from the world of politics all at your fingertips. stay current with the latest episodes of washington journal

and scheduling information for c-span's tv networks and c-span radio, plus a variety of podcasts. c-span now is available at the apple store and google play. scan the qr code to download it for free today or visit our website. c-span now, your front row seat to washington, anytime, anywhere. >> "washington journal" continues. host: joining us from capitol hill is congressman glenn grothman from wisconsin. he serves on the budget committee as well as education workforce committee and oversight accountability subcommittee. let's begin with the debate over funding the government, the continuing resolution. the speaker put a six-month continuing resolution on the floor yesterday. how did you vote? guest: i voted with the speaker. . i thought it was a good idea.

the public realizes there is a crisis that has to be dealt with and we tried to take care of the problem we have with illegal voting. all three democrats voted against the requirement that voters showed that they are citizens. that is an extreme position. the bill did not get out of the house. 16 rime ice county refused to vote with the speaker -- 16 in my county refused to vote with the speaker. they do not even want to require that people who vote our citizens. host: 14 republicans crossed the aisle and opposed the speaker's plants. -- the speaker's plans. what should they do now? guest: if these people are not going to vote for something connected with the elections, maybe they can bring back a

provision regarding the border which is still out of control. we will run out of time by the end of the month. i think he will just extend funding the government for another three or four months. i like that. we ought to be getting more than that. we are in a crisis in this country like never before. people are flowing across the border and the democrat party is not stepping up to the plate. host: how do you respond to your colleague, the republican of arizona. the house will vote on the bloated spending bill, he said on x, the house has already passed the safe act and there is no need to plunge our country deeper into debt for talking points. guest: a continuing resolution means funding the government at the same level we did a year ago. if we could do that for four or five years and not increase the amount of spending, we would not

be in bad shape at all. andy has to know that with a democrat senate and democrat president, ultimately this budget is probably going to have spending increases. if we can hold things even, i would consider that a victory. host: what do you say to the former president who yesterday on his truth social page said that republicans should not approve any continuing resolution unless it includes that act, even if it means a government shutdown? guest: right now, that is the way i would vote. i would like to demand something there. the problem we have is, 14 or 16 republicans refused to vote for the plan. if we will get a requirement that you are a citizen to vote, if we are going to get that, we need to have a vote in which all

the republicans are united in the house first and right now we don't have that. host: because of that, congressman, would you support a so-called clean continuing resolution that does not have this policy attached to it and would fund the government only until december, three months instead of six months at the speaker proposed? guest: if it was today, i would not do that because this is a crisis for the nation. the idea that some people think we can vote around here without proving that you are a citizen is a crisis. the biggest crisis in our country right now is still the border. we are expected to use whatever leverage we can to do something on one of those two issues. host: critics of the safe act that you were referring to say it is unnecessary and that it is already illegal to vote if you are an undocumented immigrant in federal elections and there is

little evidence this is happening so this legislation is unnecessary. how do you respond? guest: of course it is necessary. who is making sure that somebody shows up with a random name and says they are a citizen. who is checking that they are a citizen? nobody is checking. so you have an opportunity for cheating and that is why this bill has to pass. ask yourself why do all the three democrats voted against a provision yesterday that you have to prove that you are a citizen? that is sadly where the democrat is right now. they cannot wait a few years until some of these new immigrants become citizens. the democrat party is so radical right now that they want these people voting immediately. if they don't want them to vote, find. have them show they are citizens. host: what is the evidence

that his happening? guest: i have not seen it but we know it is happening. we know right now there are certain states, maryland, california, in which people who are not citizens are voting in local elections which shows the lack of caring for the integrity of the elections. look at the democratic party. it is outlandish to somebody who is not a citizen 44 a school board or mayor -- who is not a citizen voting for a school board or mayor. you can guess that the local bureaucracy will not be that particular about determining whether people are voting in national elections are citizens. host: joy in philadelphia, democratic caller. caller: hello. i want to explain to the congressman, like you stated, it

is already illegal for noncitizens to vote. why are they taking orders from donald trump, a criminal? in some states he could not even vote. why don't they have a backbone and stop putting these senseless attachments on the budget? why are you taking orders from donald trump? guest: i have never talked to donald trump about this issue so i don't have to take orders from donald trump. there is suspicion that some cities, historically, that there may be cheating going on and if there is cheating going on, one way to do that would be to have people vote who are not citizens. unless they prove they are citizens, how do you know they are? this is a bigger problem every two years because we have more people flooding across the southern border. more people who may prepend -- pretend that they are citizens when they sign up to vote. host: let's listen to

congressman paul tonko. this is what he said on republican efforts to try to attach this state act to the spending bill -- save act to the spending bill. >> it is redundancy. we already know it is illegal to vote if you are not a citizen. it is punishable up to five years in prison. i think we should just move forward. this is clutter. this is responding to political needs that candidates have. we should avoid that clutter and go back to the agreement where we set the levels for 2024 and 2025. [end video clip] host: two issues. he calls it redundant. also going back to the deal that was made with kevin mccarthy and the biden administration. guest: that deal was a while ago. we have a crisis. the election is two months away. yes, you should be a citizen before you vote in a federal

election. but we have no way to show that. when you have probably tens of millions of people in this country who are not citizens, common sense would say that some of these people are going to try to vote. local officials or party activist will try to get these people to vote. it is not clutter. we want the american public to know in november that we have elections that are fair elections. we are really not going to know that if we are not checking that the voters are american citizens. it makes one wonder, if it's no big deal, why doesn't congressman tomko just let it go through? it is unnecessary but we will require citizens to prove they are citizens. i don't know why he won't do that? the reason he won't do it is we are very concerned is there will be people who are voting for noncitizens. host: charlie in massachusetts,

republican. caller: hey. thank you. yes, you are absolutely right. the democrats say it is already illegal for them to vote. so what? let's pass it. my question is on the spending bills. if you guys cannot get it done, don't go home. stay there until you get it figured out. you guys take so much time off. you are never there. why don't you guys do your job, for god sake? answer me that. guest: in most months we are in washington three weeks and back home one week. every august we spend in the district taking care of international research. in an election year in october, people campaign. the whole purpose of one of these continuing resolutions is

to make sure the government stays funded which is why i believe we should attach something to it and pass a continuing resolution in the next few weeks. by the way, i want to point out something for your listeners. our budget year begins on october 1. a goal of the republicans all along is to get that budget done by september 30. we have already passed five of 12 bills. the budget is made up of 12 separate parts. the senate run by the democrats has passed no bills. in other words, it looks like chuck schumer on behalf of the senate expects us to pass sometime in december one of these 3000 page behemoths and people do not have time to read the whole thing.

if the republican party has already passed five of the 12 bills, and if the senate would make any movement at all, mike johnson would bring more bills to the floor. this is something to pass the budget and appropriation bill but you need both sides to do it. the republicans have tried and the democrats have not. host: kevin in san antonio. independent. caller: yes, i wanted to ask the congressman a yes or no question of do you support war criminal vladimir putin and back in 2021 and 2022 there was a border bill passed and 197 of you republican congressman voted against it. i believe the bill passed but why are your sitters -- why aren't short senators -- why

aren't your senators passing the bill? in 2021 and 2022, the border funding and price gouging and all of you republicans voted against it. i believe it passed. host: we will get a response. guest: that was a while ago. i will address the larger topics. i am not sure exactly which bills he is talking about. with regard to ukraine, there has always been bipartisan support. i am very disappointed that the biden administration is not doing anything to try to end this war. every war ends eventually but for whatever motivation it seems as though the biden administration wants it to continue. i have voted for funding for ukraine only because i thought it was important to give the biden administration, put them in a strong negotiating position with the russians.

the last bill i voted against funding because it was apparent the biden administration was not going to end this war. it was not a matter of being for russia or against ukraine, it was a matter of wanting a stable country and a stable world. host: allen in maryland, democratic. i will move on to david in los angeles, independent. caller: i had a correction to make. the congressman made an error. he said illegal immigrants are voting in california. i have actual proof that is not the case. in california in order to vote, you have to be registered. when you register to vote, they ask you for a valid social security number. you actually have to be a citizen in order to register to vote.

i found this out when i was registering my mother. she was an immigrant and had been here for 40 years. she finally had her citizenship. we went to register her to vote and i typo'd one of the characters on her social security number and it rejected the application. in other words, you absolutely have to be a citizen, otherwise you cannot vote because you cannot register to vote. there is a difference between registering to vote and actually voting. you cannot vote unless you are registered. in order to register, you need a social security number. guest: there are municipalities that allow people to vote in things like school board elections, even if you are not a citizen. that is not true all over california. it is only true in some municipalities as it is true in some municipalities in maryland. host: how would the save act

address that issue? guest: right. the save act will require you to show you are a citizen before you vote in federal elections. there is a concern particularly in areas in which you already can vote if you are not a citizen in local elections that people will not adequately make sure that we don't have people who are not citizens voting in the federal elections. i will also point out that right now it is well-known that people who are not citizens get social security numbers. i think it is well known that people who are here illegally do get phony social security numbers. host: mary is in california, republican. caller: hello. i have a question for the congressman. i lived in washington state for 30 years with my husband and i raised a family. our vote never counted because

king county sways the whole state. we moved to a place in arizona just north of maricopa county. in maricopa county which is in phoenix, people are allowed to vote in state and local elections who are not citizens. also, tucson is 50 miles from the border of mexico in arizona. i am wondering why people think they can vote, these people can vote, yet they will not vote in our federal elections? i don't believe that. guest: it shows that the local officials and i am sure they have an answer for that. what it shows is that the local officials in arizona do not think being a citizen is that important. otherwise you would not let them

vote in local elections, right? if they have that attitude, if they carry that attitude toward other things they are supposed to be doing on the job, common sense would say that if people are not citizens try to vote, that may not be the priority for the election officials as it should be. host: the associated press has a story about this. they say there is not any indication that noncitizens vote in certificate number in federal elections or that they will in the future. it is already a crime for them to do so. they know it is not a danger because various states have examined their role and found very few noncitizen voters. they say there have been cases of noncitizens casting ballots, but they are extremely rare. congressman? guest: what is rare? we have had some close elections. the last time in wisconsin president trump lost by only 20,000 votes. it does not take a lot of inaccurate ballots or people

casting ballots who should not be casting ballots to sway an election that clubs. things were even closer in georgia. host: robert in north carolina, independent. your comment for the congressman? caller: my comment is with all the gerrymandering and voter suppression the republicans are doing, they are worried about us. it is not president trump, it is former president trump. mr. trump, is he allowed to vote? is it to convicted of charges? aren't you ashamed -- guest: i think most people feel that the current court cases president trump is going through are politically motivated. you had some other comment to lead your question with. host: we will move on, he is not on the call anymore. candy in california, republican. caller: hi.

i had a question regarding this budget. it seems like it occurs every year. they know it is going to happen by a certain date. why don't they start on it earlier? can you explain that? i am a republican, yes. but i will not vote republican due to the fact that i see only a few republicans who stand on their own two feet without being pushed by other individuals. it is very embarrassing to be a republican right now. if you could respond on the why you guys don't start earlier. guest: as i tried to explain, we did start earlier. the house republicans have passed five of the 12 parts of the budget waiting for the senate which is controlled by the democrats to follow suit. the senate has passed none of the 12 parts of the budget which is why we will not get the budget done by october 1.

i would suggest to your caller if that is a major issue, make sure you vote republican this time around. if you don't vote republican, you are encouraging democrats to continue down the path they have been the past of not getting around to passing their version of the budget until two and a half or three months into the fiscal year. we consider and realize republicans are trying to get this thing done on time but we cannot do so without the senate moving as well. host: congressman, what is it like to live in wisconsin with only 47 days to go before the election? guest: we have more commercials than california or massachusetts. host: is it hard to watch television? guest: i am not a big tv person. the candidates all come through wisconsin. it is kind of like iowa earlier in the year. i have seen president trump

three times in the last three months. i am sure plenty of my colleagues in other states have not seen him in a long time. host: carl in michigan, democratic caller. caller: thank you. under the heading of show your papers, i would first comment that yes it is illegal for illegals to vote in a federal election. secondary, it is a states right issue, is it not? don't the state's control how they want to run their elections? if they want to let people vote, isn't that up to them? i would say, can you help me understand that you would contend that they would be looking at a ballot and if they are allowed to vote in state and local issues, they would be able to check the boxes that pertain to them but you are saying that they would also check federal boxes for president and vice president. also, what does wisconsin

require, what do you get that is proof of citizenship? could you show that when we come us are -- could you show that to me, sir? i would like to see your citizenship, what documents are used and how to get them. show your papers, sir. guest: i would show a birth certificate showing i was born in milwaukee, wisconsin, which should not be that difficult. host: what about his argument that states control how they run their elections? guest: it should be federal law that when we are voting for who represents us as president of the united states, that that be determined by citizens. the idea that some states for partisan reasons, may say anybody can vote here, you believe no longer having -- you really no longer have american citizens controlling the government.

your caller evidently believes that they should allow a democrat state like nevada, a state like nevada could say we don't care whether we are restricting our elections to citizens. we will allow these people who are crossing our border to vote for president or congress. that is preposterous. your caller laid out the democratic position. he does not seem to have a problem with that. people who are not citizens have different priorities than people who are citizens. host: go to mike in missouri, independent. caller: good morning. i saw your guest. you asked him what proof and he said what he had seen.

he said none, they just believe it is going on, which leads us to believe and it shows evidence that the republican party has become nothing but liars and conspiracy planners. in the 2020 election, all of the recounts they did. the only cheating they found was in donald trump's favor. they found several cases of cheating in donald trump's favor. i say that the republican party of ronald reagan which 17 of his cabinet members -- host: we will get a response. guest: i have talked to people in wisconsin who participated in a recount. they felt that they found ballots that appear to be also

by the same person, several pallets in a row. i talk to some of the same month who claimed to be a landlord. he said that the tenant who no longer lived there voted. these people have chosen to come forward and make their observations public. but it does not surprise me. host: would there be enough to change the outcome? guest: it would take 10,000 inaccurate ballots or 20,000 ballots to turn things around. no, we do not have evidence of that. if we find a little bit of cheating, who knows if you have the resources to look for more. who knows what you will find. host: congressman grothman, thank you very much. caller: --

guest: thank you. host: we will take a break. when we come congresswoman chellie pingree. we will talk to her about the spending debate on capitol hill. stay with us. ♪ >> dr. marty mcgarry is a john hopkins school of medicine professor. his book is called "blind spot: when medicine gets it wrong, and what it means to our health." dr. makary says much of what

we are told about health is dogma, because someone decreed it to be true based on a gut feeling. he writes "this book may change your life. it did mine." dr. makary with his book "blind spots" in our program "book notes plus," free wherever you get your podcasts. facebook book tv come every sunday on c-span2, features leading authors discussing their latest nonfiction books. at 4:35 p.m. eastern, the university of edinburgh philosophy professor argued that artificial intelligence reflects humanities flaws because it is based on human data in her book "the ai mirror."

and the author of "napoleons library" talks about the books in napoleons library and thinking. and a dartmouth professor discusses the impact on the u.s. and globally in her book "off well." she is interviewed by tax policy professor richard ruben. watch anytime online for at book tv.org. >> as the 2024 presidential campaign continues, american history tv prevents -- presents its series "historic presidential elections."

uncover what made these elections historic and explore the lasting impact on the election. saturday, 1870 six. despite losing the popular vote, ohio governor rutherford hayes defeated new york governor. a special commission made up of the u.s. house, senate, and supreme court. the result remains controversi and in fact the country to this day. watch historic presidential elections saturday on american history tv on c-span2. >> "washington journal continues. host: backup on capitol hill, democratic chellie pingree is joining us. let's start with the spending bill proposed by the speaker of the house, defund the government for six months, and it included

the safe act. how did you vote? guest: i voted against that. i don't think this save act was necessary, and obviously we need to have what is called a clean cr to move this forward. that was a bill put on the floor for political reasons yet the speaker did not even have the vote to pass it. this is one of the things where we all kind of know how the story is going to end. we need to agree with the senate, we need to have the president past the cr. we could have done that last week and gotten on with imported business, but that is kind of how this particular congress has evolved from a a lot of back-and-forth and potential "gotchas." republicans don't have the votes on their own side to pass the measures they propose. we are back at ground zero again. perhaps what will happen next of

this and it proposes a bill, what we call a clean cr, a continuing resolution that just moves us forward, so we can continue negotiating the appropriation bills. host: congresswoman, three of you are democratic colleagues did vote for the six-month continuing resolution, including your colleague from maine, derek golden, and he posted on x that he voted for this, for two principles, first, keeping the government funded a basic obligation of congress, plus awesome responsibility for exclusive rights, including exclusive rights to vote in american elections. these principles, he's i, are noncontroversial. how do you respond to your colleague? guest: look, we don't always agree. welcome to politics can we can all disagree a certain times. noncitizens do not have the

right to vote, and i worry that things like the s.a.f.e. act are a way to repress the vote in a very important election. we have built up the stigma about the immigrants come of the asylum-seekers in our country right now, there's very little evidence about fraud and noncitizens voting. i don't think we needed to add that to the bill. let's face it, in the practical work of politics here, that was never going to move probably to the house and certainly not in the senate. i'm on the appropriations committee. i've got to work through every detail of every bill, and i know what a serious negotiation is, and i know what a political gotcha is, and i'm not going to waste my vote on that. host: so why not come without them if it is unnecessary, you said, what evidence is it that

it could repress the vote? guest: i worry it is another way to sanction the voting rules, which might take a lot of people off of the voting rolls. i think it is asking people to bring unnecessary things to their polling place. every state has very specific election laws, to know who should be on the voting rules, who should be removed, what it takes to prove you are a voter in that district, and i trust the system we have. i think "the voting is read," you know, the former president saying no election is fair in this country gives the wrong idea. voting has worked very well for us and voting has been very secure with very little fraud. host: if a continuing resolution is not passed, what will happen? guest: then we will have a

government shutdown. i know from talking to my republican colleagues they don't want a shutdown. the idea that we would shut it down again come in this important time, is ludicrous. i know in my state, we've been through government shutdowns before. it's not good for anybody. it shuts down vital services of the government. it is complicated. we know where we are going here. we all know we have to have a continuing resolution. we know we have to come up with an appropriations bill that serves both sides. i've been in the republican house for a while, i've been an appropriator, and i know republicans have to propose really ridiculous budgets with dramatic cuts that no one will agree to, not even their own side, and then we have to go through the whole cycle, we go back to the drawing board, and then we move forward an appropriations bill. that's what we did last year, and that's what we will do

again. a continuing resolution to get us through this election cycle, as much as anything else, is what we need to do. i can't see why they can't move ahead with it. we took our, you know, symbolic vote yesterday. they did not get a lot of their own side. that is, republicans did not get a lot of the members on their own side to vote for it today could not pass. host: how many legislative days are there to resolve this? guest: that is a good question. i think we are scheduled for five days next week. this is thursday july think we have one more day. probably 5, 6 days, maybe seven. host: let's go to joyce in new york, democratic caller. caller: yes, good morning. i have a question about the save act. -- the s.a.f.e. act. host: yes, we are listening. caller: i think it is dangerous because women, because if a

woman has a birth certificate and social security number under her single name and she gets married, if she's trying to vote in a red state, that would greatly affect things, because it would take a very long time for her to get everything legally changed. most women, once they get married, they don't bother to do this legally. so this is really a vote against women. it is very subtle, but the men aren't worried, because the main net -- the name never changes. how you feel about that, congresswoman? guest: joyce, great point. i'm going to get that argument in mind. maybe you should be sitting on the side of the camera and making that argument. i think it is a good point, whether they do change their name or do not come of do you have access your birth certificate has come up before, and some people have never

received a birth certificate. this whole idea is very complex, so, joyce, thank you for making that point did we know this is a very important election for women. we know already there is a gender gap in polling, so the last thing we want to do is prevent women going to the polls, speaking as a democrat. host: david in new jersey, good morning. caller: hi, good morning. i think is vote passed by 23-16, and education choice bill similar to school choice. so to my community, we mostly have private schools here, and i wanted to hear your opinion on that and why, please. guest: thanks for bringing up that bill. i don't think i'm aware of it. i think you just that it came out of the committee, but i'm not sure i've seen the bill. i think what you're asking about

is generally the idea of federally funded or state-funded funded school choice. in limited ways, i've been supportive of school choice, particularly the public school system, some states have magnet schools or other specialized schools that become part of school choice. i'm a strong advocate of public education. i come from the state of maine where we have a lot of rural communities, and school struggle to have the services the kids need. i think the public education is the best thing we've done in this country. it's where i've got my education, my kids got their education, my grandkids are getting their education. it is an important thing we do. it's another thing to remind ourselves, we are all in this together, and my next-door neighbors education is just as important as my education. we want every community to have the same opportunities, and i don't like this idea of giving

certain money in certain communities a different school. i think it is best when we are all invested in public education. host: you are a member of the agricultural committee. there's another deadline for the fall bill -- farm bill. what is the guest: deadline? guest:-- what is the deadline? guest: yeah. i think they deadline is the end of this month. we are almost good until the end of the year. it's pretty clear that we will get a farm bill past and the next six days. there are a lot of negotiations going on, and i think it's a good likelihood we will pick it up in the lame-duck. debbie stabenow of michigan, a democratic member, is in charge of the committee, and then in the house, where republicans, like townsend from pennsylvania, have written a bill. we do have a lot of bipartisan agreement, the farm bill generally something we do in an

extremely bipartisan way. some of these thinking points this year are similar to what we had another years, around the nutrition program, s.n.a.p. benefits, basically. that because it is about 80% of funding in the farm bill. how we feed americans, making sure people get enough to eat, is critically important. . and that extends to not only children and poor families but also our senior citizens, veterans, sometimes active personnel also qualify for s.n.a.p. benefits. but anyway, we have a disagreement about the food plan, updating the cost of food today could on the democratic side, we think it is really important to update that, to make sure that s.n.a.p. recipients get enough money to pay their bills. the other issues we are having around climate change, the latest policy. so a lot the farm bill is housed

in conservation programs. these are programs that farmers all across the country take advantage of, and they are a great boost to the investment farmers need to make, sometimes in new practices, that help with sequestering carbon in the soil, which is important to do for climate change and getting rid of carbon in the atmosphere. those are things like no-till agriculture, and a lot of things farmers are already using today to deal with increasing their yield. it's a vast array of those problems. we have some differences about how much of that money will be put in and what the requirements will be to use those programs. lastly is a little bit obscure, but it is a discretionary fund that the secretary of agriculture is allowed to use that helps us with trade adjustment payments, with disaster relief, with supply chain issues we had during the pandemic.

and it also can help with some of the work we are doing to allow more farmers to invest in practices that are helpful to the farm but also in our climate change agenda. it basically comes down to three things in the house. i'm sure there's always a few more than that, but i think what it comes down to is, you know, we will have a better idea of where we stand. elections have consequences that will change the dynamic around here. who's going to be the majority party in the future? will anything change. what will allow us to proceed and go forward? there's a lot of good will come honestly come on the farm bill, but it can be a difficult year when the freedom caucus in the house will over certain things in it. host: you are listening to

democrat chellie pingree of maine. she serves on the appropriations in the house. you are next. caller: thank you for taking my call. good morning. i'm looking on the social security website, and it states noncitizens, authorized to work in the united states by the department of homeland security can get a social security number. now, these, how many millions, 15 million, 20 million noncitizens who have entered our country, they are authorized to work, and they do get social security numbers. i go back to how our elections are being protected, how they read out the security numbers, how do they read out from voting in our elections? can you answer that for me? guest: i have to admit to you, i'm not familiar with how that

part of the system works, but i have to remind people if a noncitizen has a social security number, they are paying into the system that all of us benefit from if they don't collect. some of us talk about asylum-seekers, illegally present immigrants, not paying their fair share in this country. i want to remind people when they are working on a job, they are paying into the social security system, billions of dollars accrued because of that. we all benefit from it. they are not allowed to collect for it. i do not know that your social security number is valid to show that you are a citizen, so i cannot answer that question, but i do want people to know we benefit from what they pay into our social security system. host: will in bridgerton -- victoria. caller: my question for

congresswoman pingree is, do members of congress get paid if a budget is not passed before its expiration date or after its expiration date, and if they do get paid, continue to get paid if their budget is not passed, can we put in a flood of bills to put in a 90 day prior to the expiration? guest: it's an excellent question, and congress has often attempted to put in legislation to stop a when there is no appropriations bill to pass. and i think you make a very good point, and i think the bills make a very good point. congressional pay is mandated through the united states constitution, and every time it has been attempted, is not allowable under the constitution. if you try to use pay as a way

to create certain actions in congress, you might have a way of skewing the work of congress. that might not make much sense if you say look, you're not doing your job, don't get your paycheck, especially if congress is denying others their paycheck, which is what happens during a government shutdown. many federal employees are required to work, but they don't get their pay until after the government opens again. they do get their backpay, but we know what it is like if the government is shut for five days, 10 days, 20 days. people have bills to pay, mortgages, although sorts of things. it's a travesty when congress cannot come together and do something as basic as filing a continuing resolution which is, you know, understanding we've got differences, at least keeps us operating. my understanding is, every time this is attempted, and many members of congress attempt to pass the bill you are suggesting, so good idea. good on you. but the constitution does not

allow it and would immediately strike it down. host: congresswoman, if the deadline is missed to keep the government open at the end of the month, it has been reported as a partial government shutdown. can you explain? guest: ask me that question again? host: this would be a partial government shutdown at the end of the month. guest: i think that most referred to as having passed a few of the appropriations bills, but i can't tell you off the top of my head what would shut down and what would not. that is just a reflection, if we got some of our work done but not all of our work done, so i think that is why it is a partial government shutdown. i wish i knew off the top of my head, but i cannot tell you what would shut and what would not. it is never a good idea. you can say oh, partial government shutdown, i guess they are not as bad, but come on, all we have to do is

continue the resolution. it's not that we have to come to an agreement on all these sticky issues, we just have to say yes, it is our job to upgrade to government, keep it open at the current levels we already have, and let people do their job. host: betting you are next in chico, california, republican. caller: i have an analogy about that voting. we have laws against speeding, but what good would it be if we did not check for speeders and arrest speeders? that is light in voting, you have laws against illegals voting, but you don't want to check for illegal voters , so what good is that? people do what they want to do. and also, greta, you should do away with your independent line, because they are all democrats. you have two lines, the democrat line and in line, which they

abuse daily. thank you. guest: i come from a state where there are more independent voters than democrats or republicans, so i think you would find people who would not want to call in on either of those two lines. that is your housekeeping issues are fix, not my. interesting question you brought up about speeders, but i will say, every state has their own system for voting. every state is everything they can to make sure voting is secure. the concern is that individual states could have excessive requirements, things like birth certificates, which are not always available to people, states have ways to purge their own voter rolls, to determine if you are a registered voter, that you have a residence in that town, that you are going to school in that community. it has worked overtime, and it is an erroneous argument. it is against the law to vote if you are a noncitizen, and it is

my understanding that it rarely ever occurs. host: we will go to bill in delaware, independent. caller: yes, as an independent, in many states, i have no say into what candidates come forward, because only republicans and democrats can decide who are the candidates. that being set aside, i would like to point out that if massive deportation is undertaken, there are so many categories of people who are here without documents. we have people who are over stays who came for vacation, there are people who came here for school and never left, we have people who are spouses or relatives of people who they came to visit, and they never left. we also have people who are asylum-seekers who cannot be processed because we don't have a mechanism to do it.

we have not an adequate system to provide a judgeship and hearing and decisions regarding, are you and asylum-seekers are, legally? i believe that the current system is still broken, and it has been broken for 40, 50 years. prior to that, most of our immigration system was, i would say, discriminate rate, because it focused only on white europeans coming, and we eliminated integration from almost every other country. guest: you've made a lot of good points. thank you for that. first up, as i'm sure everyone knows, the senate worked through a potential first step on immigration reform. it's true. as a broken system. i think everyone agrees on that. it does not have the resources,

the judges, does not have a lot of things we currently need. the senate bipartisan plan was scuttled by candidate donald them and i think we are all suffering from that. we would have made a lot of good moves forward on immigration reform if that had been allowed to go through the sedan and could have come to the house. i think we would have had a good chance passing it, and we would be having a whole different conversations right now. i'm afraid some of the opposition to that comes from the desire to make this a continuing election issue, and most people who are in the country illegally and are now being singled out as if they are not. i represent maine. we have the oldest population in the nation. we have a declining workforce and haven't really struggling with filling the jobs in our state. we are a state who has accepted numerous asylum-seekers. many come on the bus from texas,

sent from the texas governor or someone else, and my state has been very welcoming, allowing people to stay in our state while barris asylum cases are processed. sometimes it can take many, many years to get this done, because we don't have enough judges, but people are legally allowed to go to work, or they can legally apply for a permit six months after they apply for silent. i have a bill to shorten that period, because we are interested in people going to work as soon as possible. we know we don't have enough workers, health-care workers, service people, we don't have enough engineers, and people who come to our state are highly trained, vague worked in meta-store before -- they worked in medicine before, they can drive a truck. it is a travesty both at the system does not have enough to process and fast enough, we have a huge amount of time they have to wait.

not only do they have to wait six months to apply for it, it might take a year before they can get a work permit. so they are they are sitting in shelters, saying please, let us go to work. we want to feed our own families. we want to be on our own. we have a system that does not allow them to do that. they are legally in our country. i think there is a travesty that there is all this start up opposition to the people we really need to make our economy work. my grandparents were all immigrants. i feel very fortunate that they have that right to come to our country, and i benefited from that. so i think this trash talking of immigrants is one of the worst things we could possibly do. it's very un-american. it's very unpatriotic. host: elmira and birmingham, alabama, republican. you are talking with the congresswoman. go ahead. caller: i had intended to talk

about the continuing resolution, but before i do, i want to talk about the immigration issues we have right now get in the 1940's, late 1940's and early 1950's, european jews were not allowed to come into the united states unless they had a sponsor who was wanting to make sure they had jobs. i know that is a fact, because i've talked to some survivors. now, for the continuing resolution, madam congresswoman, you've been in congress since 2009, is that correct? guest: yes. caller: in that time, how many continuing resolutions has the united states congress passed? host: i will have the congresswoman respond, and the house is about to gavel in. congresswoman, go ahead. guest: i do not know that number, but i'm sure we had to use the continuing resolution more than i would like.

i am an appropriator, and i am very much in favor of getting these bills negotiated on time, pastor of the house. we are going to come to an agreement on some point, so dragging them out, using erroneous numbers i will never pass is not a good way to run the process. i hope the democrats take over the house, and we can make a more sensible process going into the future. host: congresswoman chellie pingree, democrat of maine, thank you very much. guest: appreciate it. host: the house is about to gavel into it we will bring you up to the capital, live coverage here on c-span. [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]

sp