♪ host: this it "washington journal" person day, september 22. with a month and a half until election day, vice president

harris and former president trump are ramping up their time on the campaign trail making the case for why voters should elect them. today on the program, we are asking you which candidates should the -- which topics to the candidates talk more or less? for democrats, (202) 748-8000. for republicans, (202) 748-8001. and independents, (202) 748-8002 . you can text your comments to (202) 748-8003. be sure to include your name and city. you can post a question or comment on facebook at facebook.com/c-span or on x @cspanwj. thank you for joining us this morning. we will get to your calls and comments in just a few moments, but first i want to show you this headline from this morning's new york times front page. it sets harris and trump and everybody in between, undecided

voters are tired of chaos and are not sold on joy, the message that vice president harris often mentioned during her speeches. desmond howard is not feeling the joy. the 25 your old airport technician has no use for vice president kamala harris's displays of optimism, and he doubts whether either candidate can fix what he sees as a country headed in the wrong direction. like other voters in las vegas, mr. howard is fed up with the cost of gas and rent and his paycheck seems to cover less and less of his regular expenses. it goes on to say mr. howard has not decided who he will vote for or whether he will vote at all. he has grown frustrated by how much former president trump has divided the country, although he voted for mr. trump in 2020. he has been unimpressed by ms. harris. ms. harris quickly gained in the polls after she announced her candidacy, drawing back

democrats who were unhappy with biden, she is still viewed skeptically by many undecided voters. polling shows these voters care more about the economy than any other issue. they have lower income than the electorate overall, and they are pessimistic about the country's future. they are highly transactional. they want to know above all else, what will you do for me? vice president harris spoke about the economy earlier this week in philadelphia. here is some of her remarks. [video clip] >> in your opportunity economy, a child tax credit, but that is just one part of the ecosystem. please tell us what plans you propose to guarantee families can actually afford childcare and eldercare? >> to your point, it is sadly the state of affairs in our country that working people often have to decide to either be able to work or be able to

afford childcare. they cannot afford childcare and do the work they want to do because it is too expensive and it does not level out in terms of the expense versus the income. my plan is that no working for blue should pay more than 7% of their income in childcare because i know that when you talk about the return on that investment, allowing people to work, allowing people to pursue their dreams in terms of how they want to work, where they want to work benefits us all. it strengthens the entire economy. we saw for example during the pandemic would happened. and it sadly has dissipated as a competition we need to resuscitate, which is the number of women that have to leave the workforce because of the lack of child care and home health care, and so many of our families, in

particular women end up carrying the responsibility. men do too of course. people in the generation who have young children and are often taking care of their parents. it is too expensive for them to be able to do work and that. my plan is not only about 7% of income for working people for childcare, but also we need to do better for our childcare providers and our health care providers in terms of ensuring that they receive the wages they deserve based on the dignity of their work. host: we are hearing from you this morning, asking what issues should the candidates talk more or less about? first up is cindy in mississippi on the republican line. good morning, cindy. caller: good morning. i would like to see more about judicial reforms. because we have already had a

judicial chaotic system in the first place. it is not right. it needs to be reformed. and i don't hear a lot about reforming it. host: cindy, have you heard either of the candidates talk about that issue? caller: not a whole lot. kamala is a prosecutor. she talked about her record and stuff. i know the united states incarcerates more of its own citizens than china and russia combined. host: john in easton, pennsylvania, on the democrats line. good morning, john. caller: yeah. no one is talking about the deficit. i don't get it, how they can not, sitting there like $30 trillion, $40 trillion, and no one is talking about how they will cut the deficit. and another one is how trump can

borrow $1 trillion from the treasury without senate and congressional approval and give it to the rich. that to me is illegal because you cannot appropriate money unless it goes through the congress and the senate, period. it is not the president's job. nobody ever brings that up. thank you. host: john in new york, an independent. good morning, john. caller: good morning, tammy. good morning, tammy. thank you for taking my call. the big issue i have is basically security, national security. i am seeing -- i don't think kamala harris actually knows what she is doing with regard to the office. her performance down at the border and the wall and allowing so many immigrants to come in unvented. you have sleeper cells. you are embracing criminal gang

activity to the next level. but one thing that really bothers me is her selection of vice president tim walz and the reason i say this is because i am almost 80 years old. and very quickly, walz being from the midwest, my impression of midwestern values has always been respect for the country, for authority, for the family, and tim walz kind of defies that. i don't know what happened to him. he is supposed to be from the midwest. he is a coach. as a teacher, i have to really wonder, did he indoctrinate his kids or did he instruct them? because a midwesterner doing what he did and leaving the state, going to minnesota, performing like he did as governor, allowing the city to burn and totally defying

conservative midwestern traditional values, i have to really wonder where we are going. is this country heading to another california? is that what the rest of the states want to be? host: that was john in new york. in louisiana on the republican line, good morning, ronald. caller: yes. can you hear me? host: yes. go ahead, ronald. caller: ok. good morning. my point is that there are too many interest people or organizations in government. i heard people talk about trump gave the rich $1 trillion. that is false, ok? that is why they don't want trump in office. because he does not bow down to the rich. he wants to help everybody in america. host: ronald, are you there? caller: yes. host: is that the issue you want

to hear people talking about, the candidates talking about? caller: all the people that got so much interest in government. all the interest groups, the rich wall street people that want to control us little people. ok. they want to tell us how to live or what to do, and they are going to live their own lives. host: that was ronald in the louisiana. roger in kansas on the line for democrats. good morning, roger. caller: yes. i have -- my main issue, i am going to close my eyes and i am going to vote for closed borders. i am going to vote for less taxes. i am going to vote for more reasonable energy costs. if you vote -- close your eyes

and vote that way, it is a pretty easy choice because both candidates have a history. you just vote on that and i don't tell you who i am voting for -- i don't have to tell you who i am voting for. host:.that was roger roger -- that was roger. roger mentioning immigration. according to a pew poll, after the economy, immigration comes in second for republican voters and former president trump spoke about immigration during a rally in new york earlier this week. we will bring you that clip in just a moment. but first, we will go to nick in atlanta, georgia, on the independent line. good morning, nick. caller: good morning, ma'am. i would just like to pass on a message for ms. harris. the message is publicly refuse

immunity. thank you. host: steve in anaheim, new york, on the republican line. good morning, steve. caller: good morning. my major issue is corruption in government.i think it is an issue everyone is ignoring. we will not be able to change until you get the money out of politics. i mean, we need to go to public financing and soft and hard money. host: have you heard either candidate talking about that? caller: no. none of them have addressed this at all. the abortion issue is harris's issue and immigration is trump's issue.

everything else gets drowned out by the media and their, i don't know, president i guess. i would love people to get together like independents and non-deciders myself and pick a candidate they are not putting in. right in bernie sanders or connie walsh or jill stein. get on social media and pick one. we are running out of time. host: you are undecided? you don't know who you will vote for? caller: i definitely don't like either of them. i have gone through trump, and i know what motivates him. and harris, she had to know that biden was completely out of it. her word salad every time she gets on tv just turns me off right away. she never directly says what she is going to do or how she is going to do it or how she is going to pay for it.

alright, i will get off the call. thank you. host: that was steve in anaheim, california. here is that clip of former president donald trump talking about immigration during a rally earlier this week. [video clip] >> for every new yorker being terrorized by this wave of migrant crime, and i have been talking about migrant crime for five years, i said if you let them in, it will be hell. they are vicious, violent criminals being led into our country. they are people that their countries who are very smart, they don't want them. that is why all over the world a lot of people coming from jails out of the congo in africa. where do you come from? the congo. where in the congo? we come from jail. what did you do? we will not tell you. they are coming from the congo, africa or the middle east, all over the world, asia. a lot of them are coming from asia. and what is happening to our country is we are destroying the

fabric of life in our country, and we are not going to 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. three months. host: and we are hearing your calls, but we are also getting messages on social media. this from gabriel. on facebook, he says gun violence. we are having mass shootings in america almost every day and no one is addressing it. less about immigration, ortion, inflection, economy. darren on facebook says with $1 trillion of interest being paid out to other governments, the money the u.s. borrowed, they need to talk authe deficit. connie on facebook says the economy. yes, harris has great ideas like about homeownership at all, but the daily living of regular folks and their money imo important. like almost erelection, someone says the economy is too

big and climate change, health care, and how to end the wars. nay says more talk about housing, climate change, and campaign-finance, finance reform, less about personal grievances. and one more, susan says less guns, less shootings. back to your calls. charles in livingston, tennessee, on the line for democrats. good morning, charles. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. my number one issue is, let me tell you this. you see what happened down in georgia and stuff. this is going to happen all over the place. i would just like to say may you stop wives, daughters going through what that poor woman had to go through. that right there is captivating. women's lives matter.

we are talking about voting for a convicted man who assaulted a woman and stuff. i am so disappointed in them having a convicted rapist basically. that is a disappointing thing. the other thing today, look around. if that was your wife or daughter, would you be voting this way? women's rights, women will take a beating. if he comes back in there, social security is gone. people need to look into this project 2025 because this is going to slaughter poor people, working people out here because if you are doing away with obamacare, you are doing away with pre-existing illnesses. how many people out there have a pre-existing illness? you are voting against your daughter, your wife. host: how would you like to see the candidates? what do you want to hear from

them when it comes to women's rights? caller: i would like to see, you know, women have to have some protection. they say leave it up to the states. you can see what changes the women have in these states because they do not have any. you see what happened down in georgia to that woman and stuff. i am in tennessee. they basically passed the same law. you are going to see more and more people dropping out of delivering babies. you will see people dropping out of the medical field because they are afraid they will get sued. host: that was charles in tennessee. danny in west virginia on the independent line. good morning, danny. caller: yes. host: hi, danny. caller: hi.

host: go ahead. you are on. we got some problems with daddy, but we have another danny in arizona on the republican line. good morning, danny. caller: good morning, tammy. you know something? what is she talking about? she makes no sense. if you watched and listened to the whole rally president trump did, he outlines everything that he is going to do. and i look down here at the border, and we have a big problem with our hospitals being overrun. we have to either go to san diego or phoenix for operations because the hospitals are overrun with illegal immigrants. of course, inflation and whatnot. again, if people would take the time and listen to president

trump's rally, it is all outlined, tammy. host: that was danny. danny talking about rallies that former president trump holds. wanted to show you this headline from this morning's "washington post." trump avoids talking about mark robinson at north carolina valley. donald trump made no mention of the gubernatorial candidate mark robinson at a rally on saturday as republicans worry about the pivotal state slipping away amid the scrutiny of old comments at a site user leaked to robinson -- linked to robinson. during trump's speech in which he repeatedly claimed jobs will -- the former president stressed the importance of the tar heel

state and reclaiming -- in his path to read claiming the oval office. he said michael whatley could be looking for a job if they lost north carolina. we showed that rally yesterday live on c-span. if you would like to go back and watch it in its entirety, you can find it on our website, c-span.org. we will hear next from ron in maryland on the line for democrats. good morning, ron. caller: good morning. thanks for c-span. i am voting for kamala harris. i think the trump administration had no idea what they were going to do when they were in power the last time. january 6, they tried to overthrow the government. i am a veteran. the way he talks about veterans, i just don't understand how no

veteran can vote for him. host: is that what you want to hear the candidates talk more about, veteran issues? caller: well, you know, i have never seen a person running for president and talks about veterans the way donald trump talks about veterans. and he is supposed to be the commander-in-chief. you know, it is a disgrace for every veteran to back this man. the things that he said, all you have to do is watch the things that he said. he was talking about he was going to help americans. and people don't understand how he raised the deficit so much. all they have to do is look at the things he did what he was in power. he had to pay the farmers in the midwest i think. the about he gave them was $30 million.

he had to give another $37 billion. that is why the deficit went up so much. he did not do nothing for the little people. i had a trucking company. when he gave the people a tax break, he just held payroll taxes up for a year. when it was time for them to pay the taxes at the end of the year, my drivers were calling and asking me why they had to pay money. he did not give a tax break. he just let the people that did not have to pay withheld the payroll tax on the little man for 12 months. and at the end of the year when they had to file their taxes, they had to put that money back so they had enough money to cover their taxes. these people calling in supporting donald trump, they don't know. i don't think most of them know what they are talking about. host: that was ron in maryland.

ron mentioning former president trump and his tax proposals and what he has done. here is a closer look at the candidate's current prosals for former president trump, he would like to extend or expand the 2017 tax cuts, lower the corporate tarate from 21% to 15%, eliminate federal income tax on tips and on social serity income, and eliminate taxes on overtime pay. for vice president kamala harris, her plan includes ensure no tax hikes on individuals making less than $400,000, eliminate federaincome tax on tips, raise the corporate tax rate from 21% to 28%, raise top capital gain rate from 20% to 20%, and realize gains from those making $100 million

or more. bradley in texas on the republican line, good morning, bradley. caller: good morning, everybody. hope you are having a great day. it is very simple. it is the economy and mainly it is the border. you cannot let 3 million people come in and change your culture with our government. the democrats bringing them in from all over the world. they will continue. they will have 60 million people. i don't it is a big number but the democrats charged for the 12 of the last 16 years, and this is their plan. they want tierney. they want to take over. they just want to tax you and spend the money and rob you. host: bradley, you are saying you want to hear the candidates talk more about immigration? caller: yes. see, you will not get anything come of the facts come out

because the democrats are in charge. they are hiding the numbers. they are flying people in the dark. they tell lies about everything that has to do with their plan about taking over with pure votes from illegals. host: carolyn in hawaii on the independent line. good morning, carolyn. caller: hi. i'm independent because these last few years have just been just crazy. and i just don't understand how we can look and take trump serious. i cannot take him serious between all of these felonies, between all of the impeachments from before. i just don't get it. just like the guy was talking earlier. the level of division is crazy. we need to be talking about how

we will get back on track. when i listen to kamala, she's got direction. she's got something she is trying to put into place, and i keep hearing about what has she done in three and a half years? three and a half years, she is not the president. she is the vice president. she does not have control over that, you know? i am so disappointed in the fact that we cannot fact-check nothing. i don't get how we have two candidates to say whatever they want to say and we cannot simply fact-check it. that project 2025 is a disaster. nobody talks about that. i want to know if in fact the project 2025 is in fact in place and a plan of action because it makes no sense for them to say i know nothing about it when 209i

think of your administration were the ones who wrote it. this was what you were going to do in your second term before you were even impeached. these kinds of things need to be addressed. i am sick and tired of not having the fact checking, and the lies, just lies on top of lies on top of lies. other countries are laughing at us. they think we have lost our natural minds. embarrassing. aren't you tired of being embarrassed? host: what are the candidates talking about too much instead of what you are asking them to talk about? caller: say that one more time. host: what are you hearing the candidates talk about instead of the issues you want to hear them address? caller: they are just talking. they are back about each other, personal stuff.

you know, it should not even be in here. we should not be -- as a government, we should not be telling women what to do. that should be off the table. that should be something that is between that woman and her body and her doctor. i don't think government should be in that. we should be talking about gun control. i am sick and tired of sitting up here worrying about children coming home or not, if they are going to be shot or not. you know, the gun control, that is important. i don't understand why we are not trying to get to the bottom of that because that is innocent little children that are dying. it is just funny how all of a sudden people can think about, oh, transgender this and that. i get it. but guess what. what were you saying when you

had all of these confused children killing themselves with suicide prior to that? you know? it is like what they say six or one half-dozen, one or the other. it comes down to how children perceive themselves, how they see themselves. that is not for the government to be a part of. that is for the parents to be part of. it is not for teachers telling kids what they can or cannot do. it should not be this way. i just don't understand how we got this far off track where we cannot even respect one another. we can't even have a decent debate without talking about each other's physical attributes or whatever. it is disgusting. host: i got your point, carolyn. we will go to melissa and indiana on the line for democrats. good morning, melissa. caller: good morning.

how are you today? host: doing well. 3 great -- caller: great. what i would like to hear more about his women's rights and i would like to hear about this more from the trump advanced side. they talk but they talk out of them out sideways. i believe project 2025 has a voter id requirement where your voter id, maybe your drivers license has to match your birth certificate name. for a married woman such as myself, that will never happen. so does that mean they do not want us to vote? they want to take away our voting rights as well. that is concerning to me. also they had an immigration bill created by langford from oklahoma, very conservative, and trump put the kill switch on that. so they need to start answering for that. i think we need to bring that up a lot. the democrat side needs to bring that back up.

heck yeah. so women's rights. they are trashing women. i don't see how any woman republican would vote for this. there side needs to discuss it. host: that was melissa in indiana. this opinion showing up -- this opinion column showing up in today's new york times. the political cost of not answering direct questions by todd. he is a former white house correspondent and los angeles bureau chief for the times. he says when kamala harris sat down for just a second major television interview of her campaign this month with a philadelphia abc affiliate, the anchor asked her to outline one or two specific things she would do to fulfill her pledge of bringing down the places and making life more difficult for people. she recalled how she was a middle-class kid who grew up in a community of construction workers and nurses and teachers who were very proud of their lawn.

she recounted her mother's savings to buy her family's first house and paid tribute to a neighbor who became a surrogate parent to her. she praised the beautiful character of the american people. only then after nearly two minutes did ms. harris outline her plan for a $50,000 tax credit for startups, small businesses, private sector tax breaks to spark construction for 3 million housing units over four years, and $25,000 in federal down payment assistance for first-time homebuyers. it is a modern political strategy. the candidate should answer the questions they want to, not the ones that are asked. he goes on to say but in a campaign in which donald trump fills our days with errant nonsense and dominates the national discussion and polls show a tight race where ms. harris is running behind joe biden's level of support in 2020 with some groups, the vice president cannot afford to only

stick to rehearsed answers and speeches that may not persuade voters or shape what america is talking about. we will go back to your calls. doug in houston, texas, on the republican line. good morning, doug. caller: good morning. how are you doing? host: doing well. caller: i got a question. how many people are on social security right now? which we need to talk about. for example, how many people have lost a spouse? and here is what i suggest. i don't know if trump watches this show with the millions of viewers you have. my take is anybody married more than 30 years should never lose part of their social security that they worked all their life for. i think that it is crazy.like my mother , she passed away way after my dad. the day my dad passed away, they

told her you only get one social security. i know people years later now going back to work in their 70's. i am pretty sure there are people on this show right now that know exactly what i'm talking about. it is sad to hear that these people have to go to work when they have social security already and it is taken away from them. you come in and it is a one dollar difference. you have to go in with the one dollar difference. and then like my mom, she finally passed away 18 years later. but it was sad to see that how hard my parents worked their whole life. i wish trump would get this message. somehow if you can get this message. not only that, but the young generation. these people that get married and get divorced and all this,

think about it. if they get to 30 years, they contribute to social security. it is not meant to be lived on, but it is not meant to be taken away. to me, it is being taken away. it is appalling to.see that -- appalling see that. there are people watching right now that are in the same situation. they don't talk about it. but you know what? somebody needs to talk about it and help these people that only have one social security. it is just said. it is just sad. can you get this message to trump? i don't have his cell number. can you call him and ask him to say something about this? do something. host: have you heard vice president harris talk about the issue? caller: no.

she talked about nothing. she talked about, oh my god. look at oprah the other day. she had to step in and finish it. the faces. i have to vote for trump because i cannot lose any more money. i guarantee you she will vote for trump. host: that was doug in texas. sue in michigan on the independent line. sue, i am sorry, i probably said that wrong. caller: no. my husband and i are small business owners. i have concerns about both parties really. the number 1 -- not number one, but immigration. i can see that is a problem. but we cannot find help where we live. there are no immigrants to speak of here. if we can get this immigration under control, i think that would help us out a lot.

i am a moderate. i am not a hero span. -- i am not a harris fan. trump is over the top as far as i am concerned. he has demonized immigrants. if we can get some kind of a legislation that has to go through congress, i think that would help. for immigrants to come to fill jobs that people do not want to fill. host: when you have heard the candidates talk about the issue of immigration, are they addressing the specific concerns you have? are they going deep enough? caller: trump has demonized to whole thing and harris isn't. she is not addressing it, no. that is the problem for areas where we have tourists. if we could get some kind of legal immigration in here for seasonal workers or whatever, i think that would really help us.

you know, i am a moderate and i am not a harris fan. trump, he is way over the top. i don't agree with half of what he says. we have a race coming with senator is going right now with mike rogers. i will have to tell you about that, about the prescription drugs. i think that she is more reasonable than what he is when it comes to prescription drugs. i am a senior. i think that they are not doing enough to lower the costs. however, since biden came in office, i don't have to pay anything for my prescription drugs, and i am on medicare with a supplement, so i have to say he is doing a better job for seniors as far as i am concerned. other than that, i don't think

-- i don't care for either candidate, but i have to go with harris. she is more reasonable. i think trump, he is putting all of these things income of these tax cuts, and i think it is just to get an office -- in office. host: that is sue in michigan. su talking aboute -- sue talking about the issue of migration. vice president harris talked about that speaking before the hispanic congress institute. there are some of her comments from wednesday. [video clip] >> together, we must also reform our broken immigration system. and protect our dreamers and understand we could do both create an earned pathway to citizenship and ensure our border is secure. we can do both and we must do both.

and 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. and 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 is that going to happen? massive raids? massive detention camps? what are they talking about? host: we have about 20 minutes left, hearing from you on what issues should the candidates talk more or less about. next from richard in maryland on the line for democrats. good morning, richard. caller: good morning. i hope everybody stays happy. my issue is corporate influence

in government. that seems to be the base of every main concern for people. i could -- there is hundreds of top issues. but that one covers quite a few. host: is that something you have heard the candidates, vice president harris and former president trump, talk about at all? caller: i have heard, i don't think from her mouth, but from the democrat party. and certainly not from donald trump. that is a big, major in his camp, campaign, the corporate donations. that should be removed from government entirely. because that very much increases

the gun violence, very much increases medication, and many, many other things. host: richard, you may be interested in the guest we will have joining us at 9:00. it is author tevi troy. he will be talking about his new book that looks at the relationship between ceos and presidents. we will go to keith in new jersey on the republican line. good morning, keith. caller: hi. good morning. so, you know, i sit and i listen to all sides, but i just -- i am being the most reported issues here are the economy with what transpired in the last three and a half years with the prices of everything. and then obviously the border. on all of these issues, it is a very simple selection. it is very simple.

when you have no border, you have no country. it is that simple. illegal immigrants are coming into the country, and what are they doing? they are taking jobs. they are taking lower level pay jobs. that kills the economy. we have americans that are not working because the illegals get first choice on everything. harris wants to let everybody in, give them all our jobs, give them medicare, social security. it kills the country. when you have no border, you have no country. the other thing they blame -- it is funny. it is price gouging. she hates corporations, hates corporate america. they don't price gouge. host: that was keith in new jersey.

keith talking about the economy, saying it was the number one issue, and that is something that former president trump spoke about last week in uniondale, new york. here he is talking about trade and economic policies. [video clip] >> but under the trump economic plan, we will cut your energy prices in half within 12 months. half. because we have more we go to places like venezuela one we have more than russia. we have more than saudi arabia. if you remember, i got and were approved in alaska, the biggest site in any rodema probably bigger than saudi arabia, bigger than russia. what did they do? the first week in office, ronald reagan tried so hard. he could not get it. i got the biggest site in the world about alaska. the first week in office, they terminated it.

we will have it back very quickly. i promise you that. we will rapidly defeat inflation. we will bring your prices down. all the are doing as they have cut it but you are a 55% or 60%. people that used to live a nice life four use ago they cannot afford an apple. they showed a picture of a woman and i said that is sad, that should not happen. she went to the cashier, the . she had apples. do not have enough money for the apples. that should not be happening in our country. that should not be happening in our country. we will cut interest rates, cut insurance costs, and the insurance is horrible, and massively we will cut your taxes again. i gave you the largest tax cut in the history of our country.

and we have something else. kamala harris as you look at her plans would give you very simply the largest tax hike in american history. she is going to lift your taxes. this is the only person i have ever seen, and biden too. they announced they will raise your taxes and it this supposed to be good politically. i don't think so. host: the vice presidential candidate also on the campaign trail heading into the election talking about the issues. this headline from this morning's "washington post." vance puts new health plans. speaking in north carolina on wednesday, vance floated an idea to group chronically ill patients together based on their elevated risk. that would reverse the shift driven by the affordable care act which largely ended the practice of sending chronically

ill patients into what is known as high risk pools and provide new protections for patients with pre-existing conditions. experts said the idea sketched out by vance threatened consumer protections enshrined by the 2010 health law such as rules that guaranteed health coverage to tens of millions of americans with pre-existing conditions. vance's comments were quickly amplified by the harris campaign, which has sought to draw a distention between vice presidentkamala harris's promised to build -- vice president kamala harris's promise to build on their fertile care act and former president trump. in this month's presidential debate, he said he has a concept of a plan to replace the affordable care act, and they pledge the democrats have been eager to fill in with vance's help last week. back to your calls.

thomas and fresno, california, on the line. good morning, thomas. caller: good morning. i noticed the subject matter was more or less what should candidates be talking about. i have an idea. i think that -- and i have not heard -- basically kamala harris, me being an african-american male. skill training. coming out of high school, that is a large pool of young people that coming out of high school they don't really have any skills. and in every community, i think there is a chamber of commerce. and when you have heard some of the callers say about the border and some small businesses cannot fail positions, i don't

understand why communities do not gleam from the high school students coming out. train them, tell them what jobs pay, allow them an opportunity to become nurses, air conditioners, plumbers, carpenters. and then maybe we would not need migrants to come across anymore because we would be employing our children, the next generation, so that they can take those positions. and we would need -- social security would be solvent because they would be the new tax base. host: thomas, you are an independent. do you know who you are going to be voting for in november? caller: i will keep that to myself because in my mind, until

someone has a solution to the problems and not create problems , it is kind of hard for me to pick or choose from either candidate because they are not really concerned about the american citizen. kamala harris talks about the middle class. what about poverty? what about the poor? what about an individual who does not have a job skill? they cannot shop. they cannot compete with someone who comes from a country where they have that skill. we do not teach americans a skill so that on their resume they can say, i have done this for the last year and a half. i have learned how to do this or not do this. i don't really see trump concerned about the poor or teaching our young people how to

climb that ladder for success. kamala harris wanted comes to african-american males, she feels uncomfortable wanted comes to that conversation because as a prosecutor in california where i live, she locked up more of us then she did by helping us. and so i am on the fence. i just would like to hear the candidates speak more about the little guy. you know, it is the little guy that needs help. it is not corporations or the middle class. we have a crime problem. have an immigration problem. we have a drug problem. we have a myriad of problems, but we need someone to shine a light and guide that individual up that ladder. host: thomas in california.

joe in virginia on the democrats line. good morning, joe. caller: good morning. thank you. my point is i think the mexicans are getting a raw deal. not a raw deal, but an aspect. they come here and just like the previous caller, they come here on a visa and they come here legally. everybody that comes in the united states, because they speak spanish, they are not from mexico. those people come in illegally. i am tired of these politicians saying mexico, mexico. i got a neighbor from venezuela, from guatemala.

he was here years before i came here in my area, young lady. and then i got -- host: joe in virginia. bob in massachusetts on the republican line. good morning, bob. caller: good morning. boy, it has been real interesting honestly. host: go ahead, bob. caller: it is real interesting so far. i am sorry. i think i will vote democrat across the board now. you know what? not because i hate my country. it is completely lost. if you watch any videos on youtube where they asked college kids, kids that are in college today, they cannot answer basic questions. they don't know basic anything.

mathematics, for god sakes. these people cannot do three times three or nine times three. so our education is completely gone. the leaders that we have in education systems are teaching our children nothing but what sex and gender they ought to be in. our children are growing up super uneducated, super stupid. our military is being gayed down. have a nice day. host: from decatur, georgia, on the independent length of a good garth. caller: good morning. happy first day of fall. host: you are right, it is. caller:caller: my thing is character. character should be a big issue. we have a person who has 34 felonies. his family, fred trump the third said he is voting for kamala harris.

maryann trump said he is cruel, cruel, and open to bulls and cannot be trusted. character. that is the issue. and another thing is that we have more gun violence than anybody in the world. we talked about gaza, gaza, gaza. we have 32,000 gun deaths here every year. most gun deaths are suicide but we put it like it is defense. 67% of all gun deaths are suicide. americans are killing themselves. why are americans killing themselves at a high rate? that is an issue we should be talking about too. host: that was garth. some more messages coming in on social media. joe on facebook says less about what they are going to do and a lot re about how. rupert says talk more abortion

and the threat to our american democracy. talkesimmigration. and diana says they need to talk more about their own accomplishments during their time in office, not slandering each other. it also needs to be a fa debate where both get to defend themselves without any interruptions from anyone. diana talking about the debate. this headline in this morning's new york times, harris agrees to debate trump again. he declined. it says vice president harris said on saturday that she had accepted a petition from cnn -- an invitation from cnn to participate in a second debate next month but pressure is on donald trump to join her. harris seemed to win the first debate with polling and her campaign has been seeking a second debate almost since the first one ended, but mr. trump

has repeatedly ruled out a second face-off with the vice president, and on saturday he said it was too late for a second debate because early voting had already begun in a few states. time for just a couple more calls. albert in mississippi on the democrats line. good morning, albert. caller: good morning. good morning. i want to talk about abortion and the dobbs decision. i have read through the constitution on that decision and in dobbs versus jackson women health carrier, the court maintained the regulation of abortion to the people and their representatives. if people have to make a decision on regulating abortion and this has to be put into law

by their representatives who the justices overrules in my point of view all abortion restrictions because all of them are six weeks, no weeks, all of that is restricting abortion, so if you overrule one restriction then you overrule all the restrictions. host: kevin in connecticut on the independent line. good morning, kevin. caller: yeah, good morning. they should call the abortion death sentence for women in this country. that is what it is, a death sentence for women. my second thing they should talk about is the immunity with the president now. now there will be no checks and balances on future presidents because of this immunity.

i know we have a lot were issues but this abortion death sentence for women, that is no good. that is no good at all. and immunity. we have to defend democracy. that is all i have to say. i hope everyone has a good weekend. host: roseann in california on the republican line. good morning, roseann. caller: good morning. i think that donald trump is the -- i don't think carmella knows what she's talking about. she never answers the question -- kamala knows what she's talking about. she never answers the question. it's ridiculous. host: what do you want to hear her talk more about? caller: i would like her to talk about what she's going to do when she says she's going to do

the border. she never talks about how. donald trump does know what he's going to do. he is the best for this job because he has done it before and he did a wonderful job and now he should be doing it again. host: that was roseann in california. our last call for this first hour. next on washington journal, washington post opinion columnist daily -- dana milbank will sit down and discuss with us his latest book "fools on the hill." later, tevi troy will discuss his latest book, "the power and the money." the epic clashes between commanders in chief and titans of the industry. we will be right back. ♪

>> weekends bring you book tv, featuring leading authors discussing their latest nonfiction books. university of edinburgh philosophy professor argues that artificial intelligence reflex humanities flaws because it is based on human data. louis, the son of a former french president and author of napoleon's library talks about the books in napoleon bonaparte's library. and then on afterwards, dartmouth college professor brooke harrington examines the world of onshore finance and how it impacts the u.s. in her book onshore. she's interviewed by richard rubin. watch book tv every weekend on

c-span two and find the full schedule on your program line or watch any time at book tv.org. >> this week on the c-span network, the house and senate are in. both chambers are working to pass a government funding bill before the september 30 deadline to avoid a shutdown. on tuesday, lars jorgensen testifies before the senate health committee for his high prices on ozempic and wegovy. -- on the global impact of crowdstrike. and on friday, the attempted assassination of former president donald trump holds its first hearing on the investigation of secret security

failures. watch this week, live on the c-span network or on c-span now, our free mobile video app. also, head over to c-span.org for scheduling information or to watch live or on-demand anytime. c-span, your unfiltered view of government. >> washington journal continues. host: joining us now is dana milbank. he is a washington post opinion columnist and author of the book coming out tuesday, ". the hil -- "fools on the hill." good morning. guest: thank you for having me. host: quite a title. i had to make sure i was reading it right. the title gives us a good idea of what it's about but tell us what you focus on and the time period you're looking at. guest: it tells you where i

stand, totally with an open mind on how these guys have done. i've been a columnist for the washington post for more than 15 years. i covered congress in the 1990's as an actual beat. i was working for the wall street journal back then. i had not been there on a daily basis. it was october of 2022, i did a piece on just the lineup of really unusual characters, particularly on the republican side, who were running for the house and i said this is going to be interesting. i covered capitol hill for all of 2023 and the early part of this year. i wrote my weekly column about the things that happened there and then i assembled it and built upon it into the book. host: you alluded to the fact that people should know where you stand. but how did you approach writing this book when it comes to the

subject of house republicans? guest: i tried -- i'm a journalist. so it is all reporting based. i pride myself on shoe leather journalism, being there at news conferences or the stake outs or in the committee room. although i have to say, c-span was indispensable for doing this book. you cannot be in all places at once. your viewers are perhaps better informed than anybody else in the country. i tried to do a lot of shoe leather reporting. i imagine your viewers on the right will disagree with some of the things i write about. the policy or the ideology. we can talk about those things as well. but on the other, there are things that, just sort of the measures of confidence. maybe at some point i have a whole list of the republican members of the house themselves saying we are a bunch of losers when it comes to outputs. we can go through all of this.

i think you can look at it objectively and say political scientists have run the numbers. this congress has, at this point, passed fewer laws and is on course to be the least productive congress since 1860. that is a long period of time. even if you say we are not paying attention to what the actual policies are, it is historically incompetent. yes, there is a democratic senate. but again, nothing can happen in that democratic senate without the buy-in of at least 10 republicans. defective republicans -- de facto, republicans control this congress. it's really historically inept. that was the essence of the book. i thought it could be questionable whether they get their act together.

they exceeded my expectations, shall we say. host: you been watching and following congress since the 1990's. fast forward to when you wrote this book, how did we get here? guest: that was my last book. i wrote something called the destructionist. the 25 year crackup of the republican party. there, i traced, starting with the revolution of 1994 with newt gingrich, what had been happening in terms of disinformation and sort of sabotaging the wheels of government. i wrote about how that happened over the decades and trump has now been with us for a decade or so. he didn't create this situation that we are in. he was following the lead of those who came before him. playing on the disinformation. sort of the great replacement

theory if you will, underlying current white nationalism, christian nationalism. trump sort of stepped into this and the whole notion of this information, the whole notion of governing by conspiracy theories, these things have always existed. it's just relatively new when the leaders of a party would accept that and govern based on that. that book was about how we got to this moment. and then this one is about describing what does this moment really look like? and that's -- i tried to be encyclopedic about all the weird stuff that has happened over these 18 months. -- those 18 months. host: we will talk about that in a minute. your book comes out on tuesday. when people get a chance to read it, what do you want them to

take away? guest: a couple of things. i want them to laugh as well as cry. if i can ask for those two emotions. on the one hand, what they've been doing in the house, we've all seen parts of it, is pretty comic. 15 ballots to get kevin mccarthy elected. matt gaetz, first he leaves his motion to vacate in the men's room. that's how we know it's coming out. they toss the speaker. this is the first time in american history where they've done such a thing. shut down the house for 22 days as they come up with mike johnson. he goes through the same thing that kevin mccarthy did and is only saved by the democrats who said enough of the chaos. i go through all of the zany

things. the fisticuffs, people literally getting into fist fights. evan mccarthy punching -- kevin mccarthy punching tim burchett in the kidneys in the house basement. many people lunging at matt gaetz for what he's done, screaming barnyard obscenities on the floor of the house during the state of the union. lauren boebert in a committee room, demanding to know more about public urination in d.c. where does the stuff come from? investigating the notion the deep state is hiding something involving space aliens, a conspiracy theory that goes back to mussolini and the vatican. that's a good one. we could go on to many of these things if the viewers want to. i want to pair the crazy, funny things we can laugh at with what the consequences are.

this is where it is more ideological. saying the vast majority of house republicans are on record voting to abolish the education department, to support a nationwide ban on abortion. to protect the names of confederate generals on military bases. there were long delays getting aid to ukraine which benefited russia. there were serious consequences. my argument is we don't know how this election is going to turn out. if donald trump is the president and mike johnson is the speaker, many signs look like they will control the senate. then a lot of these things that seem like they are poison pills, they are sort of throwaway votes , they become real possibilities. that's where i get a little laughter through the tears. host: we are talking with dana

milbank, opinion columnist for the washington post about his upcoming book,. the hill, the hooligans, saboteurs, conspiracy theorists and dunces who burned down the house. you can call him. democrats, (202) 748-8000. republicans (202) 748-8001. independents (202) 748-8002. you mentioned speaker mccarthy. i want to talk about this quote from your book. it says t one thing mccarthy didn't try, negotiating with democrats. he could easily have genim the votes he needed to become speaker in exchange for ncsions. bipartisanship was a nonstarter in mccarthy's caucus, which left him perpetually at the mercy of a few publicans -- republicans.

you need 218, assuming full attendance, votes to either pass the bill because mccarthy had ruled t the possibility of bipartanship, that meant he could le no more than four of the22 republicans on any vote. all of us are powerful observed marjorie taylor greene and dozens of them were willing to use that power to extort their leader on a daily basis. it was a challenge. i'm sure several people remember that challenge mccarthy had getting that position. talk about what he was walking into for that vote even happened. where the house republicans were. guest: this certainly didn't begin with kevin mccarthy. you go back to john boehner, who

talked about the crazy caucus. he was basically driven out or at least he was fed up and said this place is not governable. of course, it's gotten worse with each iteration. this is not because of the inherent nature of republicans but it's a basic thing about republican primaries. there are twice as many conservatives, give or take, in republican primaries as there are liberals in democratic primaries. tom massey, a member of the house republicans, has a great quote about how he realized the people are trying to elect the craziest son of a b in the republican primary. the vast majority of the seats are safe. 435 in the house, maybe a couple dozen are in play. the rest of them, if you want to

keep your job, you have to be the craziest sob in the race to win a primary, which involves tens of thousands of people in a district of what could be a million people. so, they are being perfectly rational in being crazy. so, we are basically, election after election, bringing in more and more people of the old guards who have retired. that's where poor kevin mccarthy steps into this. in order to get the speakership, he's forced to accept the motion to vacate, which means any one of those can call for a vote of no-confidence. all you need is three or four or five to kick him out. he into it. -- he bought into it and had to

live and die by it. i don't think anybody could really govern under the circumstances. you are seeing the same thing happened to mike johnson. a quote says same clown car, different driver. jesus christ could not govern this caucus. i think it is true, the way it is structured. they are going to have to rethink how this is done. you can't have one single backbencher -- host: we will start with tyrone in illinois on the republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. nice to talk to you guys. dana, i see a lot of corruption in our government. i think there should be, i'm 50 years old and grew up in iowa.

chuck grassley, when i was in ninth grade, he was in. he's in today. i think there should be term limits. i think lobbyist really means bribe. we talk about our supreme court, about checking to see what they are doing. i'm not picking on nancy pelosi but insider stock trading is huge, whether democrat or republican. i think all of that stuff needs to be looked at. i think when we look at a bill, it should be one bill, not throwing all of these other things into a bill. and i'm tired of seeing democrats and republicans voting on issues as a group and not doing what's best for their state. i think they are elected in

there by the state for the people, to do the best for their state. and i understand that if they don't vote for some of the else's bill, they don't get their bill passed. but they really need to take a hard look at why they are there and for the american people. and get something done for the american people to make our lives better. host: tyrone, let's get a response. guest: yeah, i'm with you, tyrone. the problem right now is the government is not functioning for the people and it's because of that structure we were talking about. a moment ago. because, it's a little bit of gerrymandering but also how urban districts and rural districts, because there are no competitive seats. if you are just appealing to 12,000 people out of one million and they happen to be the most dedicated ideologues in your

district, it's perfectly rational, you are not working for the american people, you are working for that extremely small and nonrepresentative slice of it. the structure of the party of the electorate is very different. i understand the concerns about corruption, lobbying. there are plenty of things we can do to make our government function better. we can't do it because it's not good will and buy-in on both sides. there is no such thing as compromise. i think that's why we are winding up with what tyrone was saying with bills that have everything thrown into it. that's what's happening right now. we are facing a government shutdown deadline. and of course, nobody has been

able to pass their appropriations bills and they have been loaded up with poison pills. we are motioning everything together in a cr, a continuing resolution. trying to attach what trump demanded, a poison pill about voting legislation. that didn't go anywhere. it looks like they will have to kick the can for a few months to get this into december. democrats will have to bailout mike johnson in the house again. the house freedom caucus will be furious at mike johnson again. we have seen this movie before and it just keeps happening. host: something that you mentioned and something that you also talked about in the book is that it's not democrats attacking republicans, it's often republicans attacking republicans. why are we seeing this? guest: if you don't mind, i will read a few -- what i say in the

book is don't take it from me. we will get marjorie taylor greene, our republican house majority has failed completely, chip from texas. i want my republican colleagues to give me one thing i can campaign on and say we did. he says we are a party that can't govern. the amount of damage they have done to this party is insurmountable. we are a ship without a rudder. you keep running lunatics designed to be in this position. we need to get our heads out of our rear ends, this is embarrassing for the republican party. it's embarrassing for the nation. we put sharp knives in the hands of children and they use them. this is the worst team i've ever been on. this is house republicans talking about house republicans, during the time things fell apart with the 22 day shutdown. they are not happy with the situation the way it is now.

i think if a lot of them could speak their mind, they would restructure things and do it differently. the problem is you get one mean tweet from donald trump, you step out of line and your career is probably over. we have seen mike gallagher, the young congressman from wisconsin, ken buck, a staunch conservative, both of them driven out for not towing the party line. i don't think it is a critical mass anymore. but i look at the congress, a third of the house republicans i think really are there for the absolute right reason and don't like the way things are going. but they are just scared. liz cheney, adam kinzinger, they will lose their job if they get up and say something.

host: aaron on the democrats line, good morning. caller: did you say karen or aaron? host: aaron. caller: i say that all the time, republican on republican crime. that's funny. what makes me really mad is just the republicans constantly saying what has she done in the past 3.5, four years? nothing on the border. we created a border bill perfectly bipartisan seven months ago. and then donnie contacted his fools on the hill and said do not vote for this bill so i can use it for my campaign. which they all bowed to him and said yes, we will reject this border bill which would have helped and made better laws.

why the world knows this but ma ga republicans don't know this is beyond me. media has nothing to do with what we vote for. watch donnie brown and what comes out and the harris campaign and what comes out and then you can make your decision. inc. you for your time. -- thank you for your time. guest: a lot of what i have written in the book is about the influence trump has on this party. particularly the house republican party. when he was down and out, kevin mccarthy flew to mar-a-lago and they revived him and they rallied after his various indictments. he has had a huge influence over the party. the caller was talking about the border security bill and that is one example where the house was moving toward consensus, the

senate in particular, and trump stepped in and said don't do it. you see it with the current spending showdown. he got up there and said you should shut the government down, unless you get this, what they call the save act. a bit of election legislation in there. which they attempted to do. you've seen again and again on impeachment. he said they did it to me, it's only fair, do it to them. the house went on this 18 month crusade to impeach joe biden. they didn't have anything in terms of impeachable offenses. they wound up with their star witnesses and whistleblowers, one defected to russia and another was tied up to russian intelligence and one was involved with the chinese. it even got panned by republican

commentators for coming empty. -- coming up empty. but that's because trump demanded it. trump also disrupted the bill on eavesdropping and of course, his opposition to funding for ukraine led to this months long delay in the house, that was very costly to ukraine. trump has an absolute stranglehold over this house. that's why i say if he were president, speaker mike johnson, it becomes an entirely different -- speaker mike johnson becomes an entirely different proposition than the one you see at the moment. host: conservatives may have to create a new party after the gop because -- after the gop became corrupted. so much of the republican party today has allowed itself to become a tool for this unstable

man a former top house republicans has. your reaction. guest: more power to liz cheney. i don't see that sort of thing happening right now. we have a long history of third parties. they can be influential and push major parties in one direction but the deck is stacked in favor of the two major parties. we need a strong, healthy republican in this country. for better or worse, it's a two party system and we need two healthy parties who are both coming to the table, representing their own interests and negotiating together. we don't have that now. i don't think the republican party is going to be replaced by anything else. we don't know how the election is going to turn out

but if donald trump loses again, it will be nine of the last 10 presidential elections that republicans will have lost the popular vote. they are more powerful in the congress and the senate because of the way the constitution structures it. a lot of gerrymandering, which is less about the supreme court and not getting the majority of the american people. hopefully there'll be some sort of a corrective. there have been attempt at a corrective in the past. the autopsy, they called it. i guess it was after mitt romney's 2012 seat. there was an autopsy and a couple of years later, we had donald trump. host: let's hear from james in mississippi on the independent line.

good morning. caller: good morning. how are you all doing today? guest: good. caller: ok, sir. i'm looking at the topic of house republicans and campaign 24. sir, there is no leadership from the republican party. let's get that understood. because maga has taken over the republican party. if republicans don't listen to the maga and maga has the support from fox news. maga has control over the republicans who know the truth. maga has control over the ones that testify. every one of those people who

testified against january 6 were republicans. for some reason, you all don't want to talk about the seriousness of the maga party. it's over for the republicans. stop using the word republican. i know, i'm an independent, i was a democrat. so i know about -- that's why i left the democratic party. and became an independent. so, don't give me that about the republicans. it's not republicans. this is a maga. any republican that turned against the maga will be a rhino. stop talking about republicans. host: we will get a response. guest: you make a good point.

the republican party, this is donald trump's republican party and it is unrecognizable from as recently as a decade ago. -- from as recently as a decade ago, the republican party i grew up with. limited government, a respect for individual rights and foreign policy. all of those things are gone and have been flipped on its head. i don't make a distinction between the maga and republican party. trump's support of the party is so complete that -- think about how bizarre we are in this moment where dick cheney has endorsed the democratic nominee for president.

you would have to think that he is probably in the same view now. george w. bush would be a rhino in this party. and dick cheney is a rhino in this party. ronald reagan would be a rhino in this party. i agree, the maga takeover is complete. there is no home for the never trumper's. they are people without a country right now. they don't know what to do. host: talking about former president trump's control of the gop party, this qstion coming in from dana. she says don't you think president obama has the same slate over the democrats? guest: interesting. i don't think so.

he is certainly not exercising excessive control, if you did have such power -- if he did have such power. i do not see a similar demagogic influence in the democratic party today. i was out in chicago watching the democratic convention and the obamas had their night, and biden, and the current nominee and vice presidential nominee. as i mentioned earlier, part of this is structural. there are, in this country, far more conservatives than liberals so the democratic party by definition, they have to be more of a big 10th party -- big tent

party if they want to win. there is no equivalent on the democratic side. there is the squad. it is a much smaller group. it appears at the moment to be shrinking because busch lost in the primary and bowman austin the primary. i think that is because of the way it is shaped and moderates have more influence. host: let's hear from doug in new jersey on the republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. you were talking earlier about conspiracies. the biggest was before the

election about hunter biden that was said to be rushing this information. now we know it was not rushing this information. it was used to slay the -- sway the election a month before the election. it seems they are colluding with the democrats. who said kamala harris will be the nominee for the democrats? nobody got to vote on that. host: your response? guest: i guess i will take the last point first. you often hear this at donald trump's rally that she did not get any votes or he refers to her campaign in 2020. the people who choose the

democratic nominee or the delegates to the convention, they did indeed vote overwhelmingly for harris, so she did receive those votes. it was not a contested primary really on either side. hunter biden's laptop, i do not know what to say. it has replaced hillary clinton's emails i guess. yes, there were some security experts who cast some doubt on this. suppose you could say it is involving a conspiracy theory. i do not believe any of them are in government so i do not know how the administrative state or deep state plays into that. to talk about conspiracy theories, we are talking on one hand about an election being stolen and this leading to an insurrection and attack on the

capitol of the united states played on the other hand, we are talking about whether the sum of the presidential candidate -- the son of the presidential candidate's laptop was left to repairs and turned over, are these things really equivalent? ice meant a lot of time in the book talking impeachments proceedings. hunter biden's laptop kept figuring into it. merger he taylor green had pictures of biden engaging in sex acts. hunter biden clearly had some issues. he was in drug addiction. he has already been convicted in one trial and worked out a plea

and the other. but he is not the president of the united states. over and over, they came up with nothing that tied joe biden to anything hunter biden was doing or doing anything illegal of any sort. host: let's hear from andrew in new york on the democratic line. good morning. caller: good morning. congratulations on the title of your book. i have the same place as you on the laptop, nothing came out of it. if you go back to newt gingrich, fox news, what role do you think they play in creating these fools? do we get to this point if we go

back to the 1990's without fox news? guest: that is an important question. i rode about that in the previous book. fox news is important in the story. with this have happened without fox news? probably not, but something else would have filled that void. there has been a campaign to discredit the dispersion called mainstream media. it has been going on for decades. it has largely worked where it created a sideload media system -- siloed media system. you are within that silo

amplified by social media so you are not seeing anything challenging that point of view. righting for the washington post, and i began righting my column -- writing my calling, i was hearing from people on both sides of the issue. you really don't now. it is completely bifurcated. you cannot really reach people. c-span is one of the last few places where you can hear from or bring together people from different parts of the political spectrum. host: let's hear from don in st. louis on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. so far, your book sounds pretty honest. i might just read it. two things, during trump'first

year in office, he got billions in tax cuts for the rich, more than enough. this year, the democrats and republican senators had enough votes to pass a very tough partisan bill and he told mcconnell and speaker johnson i do not want you to bring this up for a vote because it is probably going to pass and i will lose the election because i will not have this issue to blab about. rich people do not really want it. they like cheap illegal immigrant workers. kamala harris said she would vote for it or sign it and i believe her because trump is the biggest player president we have ever had. he talks about a violent, vicious criminals, he is one! he used the internet to get his violent supporters to d.c. to

overturn the legitimate election and they tortured and killed policemen, and many of those criminals are in prison where trump should be but he stack the supreme court -- stacked the supreme court. a lot of people that may vote for trump would not have voted had we gotten that trial. trump will say anything now because he is worried his you know what will be in prison after the election all the things he did in connection -- that is not something that is official business to try to overtake a legitimate election. host: donna, we will get a response. guest: thanks. there is a lot there. the border has come up.

there is pretty broad consensus in the united states that we need to improve border security. that is why you have the lines where republicans and democrats could agree on border security. ideally, there is also support for comprehensive immigration reform. we cannot seem to get there because of the way our politics is structured at the moment it part of that is the simple dysfunction that week cannot get anything past, we cannot even name post offices anymore. there is a darker undercurrent. donald trump is making people fear migrant crime. this has never happened before, sort of stoking the fears of americans, that people will come into the country and take our jobs and kill us and drape us --

rape us, spread drugs, and disease. in the book, i talk a good bit about the great replacement, the racist conspiracy theory voiced by mike johnson and others that there is a conspiracy that they want open borders so they can bring in these people and make them vote. it is such a cockamamie idea that has become mainstream. that is where we are. that is the problem. conspiracy theories dominate the way we govern and the way people think in washington. you have obvious solutions to a problem on one hand and blackened doodle -- wackadoodle replacement theory.

host: your book looks at the fact they have not passed a lot of legislation. i want to play a clip from a house oversight hearing this week. it does include an exchange between the chair, the representative from kentucky. we will talk about it on the other side. [video clip] >> i love the title of today's hearing, "a legacy of competence -- incompetence." i made a couple of edits to the title today. all we have had in this committee for two years is failure, failed impeachment, failure on the gas stove nonsense, on all of the chinese covid stuff.

they did nothing with the covid committee. it is all failure. the whole congress is failure. they removed the speaker and tried to remove a second speaker. that is really great for the american people. then they impeached the cabinet secretary. that had not happened in 150 years. they have had multiple c.r.'s fail. they cannot even keep the house open without both speakers crawling to the democrats like the adults in the room to keep it open. we should look at what we have done over the last few years. literally, two weeks ago, all we heard was about what the haitian people were doing in springfield. the chairman wanted to top that. he literally brought a witness that proffered the haitian people would have been better off if they had stayed in slavery for a few more decades. you should strike his words from

the record! no, you stand by his comment the haitian people would have been better off in slavery for 30 more years? i just want to spare you that embarrassment. >> your time has expired. i would love to be a fly on the wall when you find out joe biden dropped out of the presidential election and his son pled guilty. >> where is the impeachment vote? when is the impeachment vote? we have a 300-page book report on tens of millions of dollars. failed impeachment! >> hunter biden is going to be sentenced december 16. >> you need to take your medication! >> mr. chairman, your several decades older than me. you know is taking more medication. host: that is a mild exchange compared to others you highlight in your book.

it does show this pattern of the inability to govern. what long-term impacts could this have and where do we go from here? guest: that chair has a history. at one point, he called him a smurf because he was wearing a blue jacket and tie. moskowitz loves to mix it up with comer who is easily riled. at some point, i had to cut it off for the book. there will be something this week. part of what is happening is everybody wants to go viral. decision your chance in a committee hearing to do that -- this is your chance in a committee hearing to do that. it has less to do with politics

and more to do with social media culture. his comments on the impeachment, they were fairly spot on. you had even republican witnesses coming forward and saying you do not have something here. you do not have impeachable offenses. they definitely tried. they had three or four committees working on this, came up empty. there was reference to the gas stoves act. they did pass the refrigerator freedom act, the gas stove protection and freedom act, and the stop unaffordable dishwasher standards act or "suds." yes, while it is true there are constant failures to pass even the most a sick legislation, your -- most base hit

legislation -- basic legislation, your dishwashers are safe. host: let's talk to james. caller: good morning. i used to be a republican back in the 1980's, ragen, i voted for the bushes. they were pretty much the same. the republican party and democratic party, he really could not tell them apart. and then, obama gets elected and all of a sudden, the t party is created. that is the first time i have really seen racism in our politics in congress. now, both t parties -- tea parties are the freedom caucus and they don't want to do anything. everyone knows when biden came in office, he tried to pass a

bill, it got shot down so the democrats and republicans came up with a bill in donald trump shut it down. nobody talks about 2018 where one of donald trump's secretaries put a sanction on venezuela, on their oil. now, venezuela, they are not making any money. the average person in that country has lost 19 pounds. they are starving. people are leaving that area. guess where they are coming, here. if there is an action, there is always a reaction. that is one of the reasons the borders are being overran. haiti, civil war.

host: what would you like dana to address? caller: how do you get the republican party back on track with donald trump still having his claws into them? guest: boy, if i had the answer to that, that is the central problem we are facing right now. as we were discussing earlier, if donald trump loses, will there be some sort of a new version of an autopsy to say, where do we go from here? i do not think so. inevitably, donald trump will be saying if he does lose the election it will be because it was stolen. there are only two possibilities, he wins or it was stolen. as i was saying earlier, there really are no grown-ups like

john boehner or even paul ryan. the lunatics are running the asylum, as they say. there is nobody to push back against donald trump in the house republican leadership. depending on how the senate republican leadership shakes out, it could be the same. the party structures of the states have been thoroughly taken over by maga republicans. state legislatures, the local level. i do not see how to get out of this. over time, it will prove there will be a certain amount of equilibrium. i do not think it is sustainable. a lot of damage can be done as we wait for another decade or two for the poison to work its way out of the system. host: you point out in your book that the median tenure for house

republican members is just 10 years and a lot of the old guard has left because of what has happened. if former president trump were to win in november, could we see more exits from those members who have stayed so far? guest: yeah. you are seeing it throughout. just a huge number of committee chairmen have departed, anybody in leadership. we talk about these turnover statistics. very few people remember a time before donald trump dominated the party. we have lost the institutional memory of that or how to function. yes, of course, it would continue if trump is elected. i think it is pretty well complete at this point. there are a few of the old guards hanging on. they are sort of cowed into silence. they realize if they speak up

against it, i will turn out like liz cheney or others, i am out of here. this has happened over and over again. at some point, maybe trump is no longer on the scene and they may have more courage to stand up. it is hard to see as long as trump is on the scene how that happens. host: robert in florida on the republican line, good morning. caller: good morning. a lot covered today. i would just like to say they moved biden out and put kamala in. in other words, they traded a headache for an upset stomach. that is all we did. that it's what keeps happening.

i do not think good people run for office. january 6, only one person died. that was a lady who has had military experience walking around, and this black guy, officer, got excited when three officers left his side, and he got excited and pulled a gun out and killed her, murdered her. they had the courtroom about it, they change everything, they change it around. when they are talking, they are lying. it is a shame. years ago, there were penalties for lying. about half of them should be in jail for not doing their job.

guest: what you say about ashley bennett is 100% wrong. your description of the shooting does not match what actually happened. i'm sorry you have been the victim of such things. i think in the end, six or seven people died on january 6. ashley babbet for one. the officers who died in the aftermath, suicides or people who died of heart attack or what have you, the basic description is wrong. i agree with the point about disinformation. this is a prime example of that.

it is absolutely poisoning our politics. we are never going to be able to sit down and discuss policies if people cannot have the same shared set of facts as senator moynahan famously said. we need to get to where we can actually agree on a shared set of facts again. host: we have time for one more call, michael from virginia on the line for democrats. good morning. caller: good morning, everyone. i love the title of your book, "fools." it reminds me of "birth of a nation," how they did a characterization of the south carolina legislature mocking them, showing them putting their feet on tables. now you speed up to this particular congress, house republicans especially are

basically acting that same way in real life. that characterization of us, especially blacks in congress during reconstruction, interesting how art now is imitating life. but my question is, do you really feel that there is a false equivalency being put out all the time when it comes to policies of democrats? you see the numbers out there. and there's a false equivalency preached by republicans about what is not being done, like the border. we know there are not just mexicans coming across. they do not pay attention to the russians, the chinese. maybe they are model citizens, so to speak.

host: michael, we are running short on time so we will have dana respond. guest: a false equivalence is often brought up. i have fallen victim of that sort of thing. the parties are structured differently. if you are liberals in the democratic party, there are conservatives in the republican party. there is all sorts of political and social science that shows the democratic party in congress has not moved as far left at the republican party has moved to the right. we were earlier comparing the squad. it does not compare at all to the disruption of the house freedom bukauskas. -- caucus. i'm glad he likes the title. i had the beatles in mind when

we put that together. barry who does the terrific covers for "the new yorker" did the cover. host: you have been showing the cover throughout this segment. it is out on tuesday. dana milbank, thank you for being with us. next, we have another author joining us. we are going to learn about how ceos and presidents of the united states have influenced each other. we will be joined by tevi troy, the author of "the power and the money." we will be right back. >> ♪

>> in 1980, a teenager at the time murdered tony so best or during aome robbery in las vegas. tonight, he recalls the day his burdick was read in court, the 26 years he spent in prison, and what he has done to turn his life around since his release in 2008. >> they said guilty, the courtroom erupts. my mom, that is a sound, mmm. the judge shook his head. guilty, guilty of first grade murder -- first-degree murder, and then turn around and the same drury gave me the death penalty -- jury gave me the death penalty.

it makes so much sense today. i am 64 now. it makes so much sense to me now today that after 30 years of being confined and living in some parts of a failed community that i have persevered and made it through. there is some reason for my story to be out here. >> tonight at 8:00 eastern. you can listen to all of our podcasts on our free app. >> browse through our latest collection of c-span products, apparel, books, home decor, and accessories. there is something for every

c-span fan. every purchase helps support our nonprofit operation. shop now or anytime online. >> "washington journal" continues. host: joining us is tevi troy, author of the new book, "the power and the money." welcome to the program. guest: thanks for having me. i really appreciate it. host: tell us about your new book, what you focus on, and why you chose to write it. guest: first, i will take people behind the curtain at c-span. you were talking about what a fun book this is. it is a fun but important book about the history of clashes between big-name ceo's and

presidents of the united states. the interesting thing is all of these ceo's had longer tenures than presidents so you can compare and contrast how they dealt with democrat and republican presidents. i found all of these great stories about how ceo's have interacted with presidents but i also tell a larger story about how you had no interaction with big government or big business. today, big business is part of everything we do from the phones in our pockets and the cars that we drive. government also subsidizes and regulates our schools, food, and roads.

government and business are intertwined with our lives and each other. that is the story behind the book. host: you looked at 18 different ceo's. how did you decide on those and also the stories you were going to tell? guest: good question. it was not easy. there is literally an infinite number of ceo's. i had some help. i talked to my friend who is a former senator and historian. i had to find a way to cabin the ceo's because you could talk about an endless number. . they had to be ceo's who dealt with multiple presidents who represented iconic industries who fit the model of dealt with presidents frequently. somebody like jeff bezos is a big-name ceo but i did not find that many interactions with

presidents. i put them all on index cards, my daughter helped, i had the name of the ceo, the industry, the era, and how many presidents they interacted with. i moved them around until i found a workable model so i could tell the story. host: how old is your daughter? guest: she is 19 and now a freshman in college but she was probably 17 when she helped me. host: you talk about it a little bit. but when people read your book, what do you want them to take away from it? guest: in all of my books, i try to get people to look at the question of how the presidency influences america. i want them to get a sense of how it developed but also to have fun.

that is why i have all sorts of jokes ceo's have told to presidents or have been told about ceo's. i also want to have a bunch of aha moments of things people never thought of. john d rockefeller created standard oil but you may not realize he called it standard oil because oil at the time was unreliable and unsafe rate he was saying my oil is of a certain standard. he would tell people it is ok to buy my product. that is how he was able to dominate the oil industry, in addition to what people learn in schools about his sharp elbows and monopolistic tactics. host: we are speaking with tevi troy. if you have a question or comment for him, you can start calling in now.

you are talking about how they influence each other, i wanted to read this from your book. you are g about henry ford here. no invention changed t landscape of the economy in america rehan the automobile. car gave individual americans mobility unimagined in previous generations. no one wasinstrumental in the rise of the en henry ford. ford took the internal combustion engine andadit available to the masses. ford was not content with just reshaping american culture and economic life, he also sout influence america's politics. in his last effort, he found

influencing american presidents was more challenging and elusive than all the manufacturing processes he revolutionized in the production of the automobiles. talk about those challenges he had influencing presidents and also that other ceo's have had. guest: i like that passage. i think it holds up well. when you hear it read on tv, you cringe a little hoping it will be good. it talks about a lot, the unification of america based on the automobile. in the 19th century, lewis and clark made their way across the nation played we still know their names. today, people are driving that every day. the automobile had to you -- had a lot to do with unification.

the government built the road system played the fbi would get involved in crimes that crossed state lines. suddenly, the government has a lot more to do with individuals because of the ability of people to travel from state to state. with henry ford, he tried to influence government. he had a more mixed record with government. in 1915, he goes to the white house to visit woodrow wilson and he wants to convince wilson not to enter world war i. he was famously a pacifist and wanted no government involvement in wars. he considered soldiers murderers. he tries to warm up wilson with a henry ford joke. wilson laughed at the joke but he is not a receptive to ford's

message. eventually, he was escorted off the white house grounds because he was nagging the president . he basically threatened that he would go join this piece ship in new york. ford does that, he carries out the threat. he takes the ship with well-known people and they cross the ocean. it is a disaster played people are making fun of them. they think these activists will stop world war i. it will never work. ford's wife even wires him and says get off the boat. it is a disaster. he leaves eventually but it cost him a lot of money and hurt his reputation. host: there are obviously successful ceo's who have been able to influence presidents. what about those who failed to do that?

have you come across examples where a ceo was not able to interact or build a relationship with a president? guest: a good example in this is henry luc. in 1923, he creates "time" magazine. before that, we don't really have a national news source. he creates "time" magazine. he has a feature that will highlight what the president ate or movies he saw, so he makes the president more of a personality in american life. but he hates franklin roosevelt and tries multiple times to get franklin defeated. obviously, roosevelt runs for president four times and wins all four times so all of his efforts are not successful. luce hates roosevelt to the end.

after he died, he said it is my duty to go on hating him. that is a guy that can carry a grudge. host: i want to read another passage from your book. riod of recovery from the was a w.a.r. and the outbreak that preceded the dedeffered new hope for starting innovative business endeavors and opportunities for innovators to befriend pridents and celebrate them. these friendly engts demonstrated a new kind of presidential-ceo interaction, genu relationships based on

friendship and mutual benet. idents learned they could also provide political opportunities. explain what you meant. what opportunities were there when it came to this usually beneficial relationship? guest: there are a bunch of examples in the book played henry ford becomes part of this group called the vagabonds. thomas edison was among them. they go on these well-documented vacations that had a ford cameramen there to document what happened. harding and coolidge both go on the vagabond vacations and it is good p.r. for them. the warner bros. befriend franklin roosevelt and start to use their studio to propagandize in favor of roosevelt's administration. in the 1930's, it is more in

favor of the new deal. as world war ii approaches, they engage in anti-nazi propaganda. i think we should have more of it. the fact is they are trying to get america ready for world war ii as they are using their studios as a kind of current event lands on which to show the roosevelt administration as they would like. host: i'm going to bring our audience into the discussion. we will start with david in new york calling on the independent line. good morning. caller: can you hear me? host: yes. caller: i am calling, it is very interesting to me this conversation on the ceo's and their influence and how they shape this country going back to the railroads and ford, it is very interesting.

i was wondering what you thought about current ceo's, for instance, zuckerberg recently admitted in congress how he regrets following government's lead, so it is a flip, government influencing the ceo. they block stories on facebook like about hunter biden. he admitted that was a mistake. i'm wondering your thoughts on the flipside of that. guest: thank you for that. thank you for listening carefully. you gave a nice summary of what i have been saying. i would like to say the book talks about some of the older ceo's but also talks about current ceo's. there's a bunch of current ceo's. when i read the headlines today, every day, there is something

related to the stories in "the power and the money." the story you talked about with mark zuckerberg's letter apologizing, almost trying to set things up in case trump wins so he can be in his good graces. ceo's have to be careful. henry luce was all in against roosevelt and eisenhower later. that is a dangerous strategy. that is what elon musk is doing now. he is all in for trump. washington is so important to their businesses and what they are trying to accomplish. if they lower the partisanship, they reduce the risk of being in trouble when the other party comes to town. host: something that you do highlight or mention in your book is that ceo's often serve much longer than presidents do

so they span multiple generations. modern corporations have big lobbying teams. why do presidents become involved or try to build personal relationships? guest: good question. that is something i look at in the book. let's say there is a big conflict in washington between two companies or industries. i cite research. we found these companies or industries in a big fight will spend themselves to a draw. it is kind of a wash. but ceo's can be a decider. what's a company a -- let's say

that company a spends all this money. that can be a decisive factor in company b winning the lobbying war over company a. i think the ceo's get listened to more than the lobbyists. i think the ceo's have more stature. for that reason, they get listened to more. they can have a direct relationship with presidents. in the book, i talk about the loneliness of leadership where ceo's and presidents have no peers and they feel there is no one in their organizations they can talk to sometimes so they find someone at their stature level. they are often at the same stature level and they can relate to one another. host: let's hear from lynn on

the line for democrats. caller: thank you very much. i cannot wait to read your book. i have a question. maybe you can help me because i have been hearing this more lately. henry ford did a series of articles. i believe now there is a book. about his anti-semitism. i wondered if there was anything in your book or you had any resources you could recommend as a way for me to counter that because he did retract his statements as far as i know. he said he did not believe the things he had written and apologized, if i'm correct. guest: a couple of things on that. thank you for calling from silver spring, maryland, where i happen to be as well. the henry ford pitcher is a complicated one. i do talk about it in the book and talk about it in a letter to the wall street journal last week. he definitely sponsored an anti-semitic newspaper that put out vile anti-semitic stuff.

he was the only american mentioned in "mein kampf." however, he did have jewish friends. a jewish architect designed many of his factories. he hired jews in his factories. in some ways, he was kind of politically or theoretically anti-semitic but not personally anti-semitic. later in life, he did retract some of the anti-semitism and was horrified when he found out the details of the holocaust. there is a story in the book about how he saw films from the concentration camps and was so mortified that he shortly after had a stroke from which he never recovered. i think there is some kind of attempt to expiate his sense. at the same time, you cannot overlook the fact there was an anti-semitic period in his life. host: good morning, ron, on the line for democrats.

caller: good morning. ford route the protocols of elder which helped nazi germany create the genocide of the jews. he got letters from hitler. he was part of the attempt to coup d'état f.d.r. he was an antiunion member. he had to be forced to turn his factories into arsenals of war by f.d.r. who threatened to nationalize his companies. ford later apologized. he was one of the most anti-semitic fascists. he built nazi equipment during

robe or two got payments for it. henry ford was an industrialist but also a fascist. if he got his way, this country would be a hitlerite place. guest: there is a mixed pitcher on henry ford pretty did build the largest armament factory and toured it was franklin roosevelt. he did not write the protocols of zion but he did publish it in his newspaper. i think it was a product of rushing propaganda. it should not have been published. henry ford did a lot of bad things. he was antiunion, against the new deal. he was also a great inventor. the idea of history is you do not say i have good guys and bad guys, but you have complicated

people. i think henry ford is the closest thing i have to a villain in the book. i try not to have corrupt ceo's who went to jail. i try to have ceo's who were trying their best to both shake their business in shape america. that is why i think there is a nuanced pitcher on all of these people. that is why i think it is a compelling read. it is not just here are the good guys and the bad guys. host: patrick texts a question from nashville. he sayshe ceo's will not support trump. do you think he has commenced other ceo's to abandon trump? guest: i cannot really speak to who he has commenced or not. i think the rex tillerson

example is an instructive one. i argue it does not end well. tillerson had an unfortunate end and when he was fired i tweet. i think some ceo's recognize working in washington is not necessarily the best strategy. i tell a couple of stories in the book. number one about jack welch who knew 10 different presidents. i think that was the largest number i chronicled. welch was multiple times asked to join the cabinet and always said no. his thought was as ceo, i can do what i want, i can tell people what to do, i can fire people, i can get rid of divisions. if you are a cabinet member, you do not have the capacity to do that. he recognized it would not be a good fit for him. one of the most fascinating characters in the book is

friendly with l.b.j. before the landslide victory, as an advisor, he says i want to ask a favor. johnson kind of bristles expecting he is going to ask something that will be difficult to give. he says i want you to promise me i will never have to serve in government. johnson relaxed at that moment recognizing he was not going to ask anything of him and could be a straight up advisor who is not looking to get something. host: i want to ask you about a couple of headlines. this one from the "new york times." corporate executives complain about some of president biden's policies along with his rhetoric, but so far have not abandoned him en masse. also from cnbc, the headline at corporate leaders endorse harris in a new letter.

when it comes to the relationship presidents have with ceo's, how have ceo's handled the change from administration to administration? does your book give examples of ceo's who have fared better or worse under different administrations? guest: absolutely. sometimes you are in, sometimes you are out. lou wasserman was very close with johnson. when nixon wins in 1968, he wants nothing to do with him and has to have a subordinate who is a republican do the interactions with the government and white house. yes, you have this phenomenon of ceo's, if they are not careful and too partisan, in one

administration and out in another. i went through the letter carefully. this is the issue i'm talking about these days. 40 of them were former business leaders, so they are not currently heading companies, in large part because it is risky if you are the head of a company to say i am for this candidate. larry summers is not really a business leader. others, a lot of them were from hollywood and silicon valley. in those places, it is an advantage to come out in favor of the democrats, in large part because your workforces are liberal. your workforces can rebel against you. we have seen evidence of that. i talk about that in "the power and the money" as well. host: we have a few minutes left with tevi troy. if you have a question or

comment, the lines are open. democrats, 202-748-8000. republicans, 202-748-8001. independents, 202-748-8002. i want to read another quote from yourook and get your thoughts on it. this is the incongruity of clinton and bill gates appearing together at the sa time in which the government was targeting gates company was not lost on the white house press corps. at a press briefing that day, reporter asked the economic advisor, is it unusual to have bill gatese white house conferen days after the justice department applauded a decision which accuses his company or found his company engaged in illegal business practices? he responded with an example of compartmentalization in the

modern era. he said the uth is any administration is engaged with a variety of companies at any time. the majority of companies have some form of issue in front of the government a some point. the only way the administration can function properly in that settinis to do what we do which is to not comment on independent or enforcement proceedings as they are going on. talk about the impact a ruling or regulation for better or worse for a company can have on the relationship between ceo's and presidents. guest: i spent a lot of time thinking through the incident and chapter. i thought compartmentalization was the right word to describe what was happening.

the clinton administration went after microsoft hard in the 1990's looking to break up the company and make it new standard oil. you had to that. at the same time, bill gates is a phenomenon in the 1990's, this harvard dropout who builds this multimillion dollar company. clinton has him to this text ceo summit at the white house where sperling had belonged on answer to the question you raised -- they long -- the long non-answer. gates is recalcitrant, angry, and stubborn in the trial. he does not come off well.

in my book, i argue when teddy roosevelt is going after rockefeller's company, he is in late-night meetings where they are strategizing how to go after standard oil and rockefeller. he does not have that. he has a justice department he can direct to do these things so he can stay out of the fray and still be friends with bill gates. they compartmentalization is really interesting. -- the compartmentalization is really interesting. host: what impact it have on bill gates? guest: the president of the company now was asked about how he would change things at microsoft. there was a lot of speculation it was because of his hardheaded approach to dealing with the government and not trying to make peace.

it had a big impact on microsoft. down the road, microsoft loses its monopoly in different areas. microsoft is still a very valuable company and successful but it has had to move into different and new areas. host: a question coming in on x for you. it says, did any venture capitalist make your list? guest: no, i did not have any venture capitalists. they did not fit the model of ceo's of fortune 500 companies with thousands of people working for them. no, i did not have them. talking to people in the business world, they say venture capitalists are incredibly important, in some ways more influential than ceo's because they help determine stock prices and who gets investment. you have given me an idea. maybe that is a future article

or book about venture capitalists and presidents. thank you. host: this might be another idea for you. any women ceo's in the book? guest: absolutely. you've got to consider women in the equation. the first one i will talk about, you can read the book for the other one, the ceo of "the washington post." catherine graham inherits the paper after her husband commits suicide. there are people telling her to give up the paper, sell the paper, but she insists she will be in charge of the paper. she runs it at a very tumultuous time. she is critical of lyndon johnson. johnson would have her over to the white house and berate her. she famously had terrible relations with the nixon administration and publishes the pentagon papers.

there were legal threats about that. she does watergate. other newspapers were not paying as much attention to it. she has a huge influence. she is very powerful and stubborn. she also is kind of the social leader of washington and has precedence over to her house including ronald reagan and tries to maintain ties with both sides of the i.l.. -- both sides of the aisle. the only president she really did not have interactions with was nixon. i think she has a really interesting story to tell. host: let's hear from joan in georgia calling on the line for democrats. caller: yes, good morning. i would like to know why people are constantly talking about how

the president has so much control over pricing because we do live in a free enterprise system and i do know that there is some influence that comes from the government. i'm really concerned people are saying the prices are so high because of the president. i do not really see how much influence the presidency has on controlling prices, especially when it comes to food and other commodities. guest: that is a really good question. i think you are talking about when government spends too much money, that does lead to inflation. it cheapens the value of the dollar. on the other side, there is the question of whether the government can control prices which is different from the overall level of inflation. when you have governments try to impose price controls, that often leads to disasters. a famous story in the nixon

administration where someone is meeting with president nixon and george schultz, the labor secretary an old friend of friedman, and nixon trying to be nice says, do not blame george for the wage and price controls. he says i do not blame george, mr. president, i blame you. that was the last time he was able to visit the nixon white house. the issue of wage and price controls has gone back for decades. in general, i think it is something presidents can avoid. the government does not control prices but they can have an influence on the overall level of inflation. host: tom in ohio calling on the republican line. good morning. caller: i wondered how long it would be before you brought trump into the pitcher. did they check warren buffett

and people like that who do not believe the united states is in such bad shape? they want to do away with people and stuff like that. warren buffett thought he paid more texas than he should. he urged more people to pay more tax as they mourn buffett does. he said that himself. i do not understand where you people get your information. guest: i am not sure about the last part of the question. warren buffett is a fascinating figure. relatively late in his career, after he becomes a billionaire, the ragen administration, and he plays golf with ragen and pals around with bush. he is not a venture capitalist but maybe the closest to someone in that field. the thing about warren buffett is he is not looking for any

benefits for his specific company. he is pursuing policies he thinks are best for america. you mentioned the thing about the texas. he complained he pays a lower tax rate than his secretary. i think buffett is an interesting model of a different type of approach from ceo's who is not trying to represent his company but does have a vision of what policies he wants to see implemented in america and pushes them. he also has a bipartisan approach. he says he usually does not reach out to the president first. he waits for the president to come to him. he is generally bullish on america. interesting stuff on warren buffett in "the power and the

money." host: can you about sourcing for book and how it came together? guest: it's a multi-year effort. i have been building research files on the possible ceos for years. i am a phd trained historian so i look at presidential libraries, books, memoirs, i love the miller center, university of virginia that has oral histories from different lighthouses, of various ceos -- from different white houses, of various ceos, trying to bring everything together to build a complete picture of these ceos with various presidents. host: you also served as a

senior white house aide. what did you take away from the presidential-ceo relationship from your time at the white house? guest: i am one of the rare presidential historians who has phd training but also served at the senior level of the white house, the george w. bush administration. i found these interactions fascinating. president bush was trying to encourage people to eat healthier so he brought in the snack and fast food ceos, coke, pepsi, mcdonald's and he tried to talk to them about how to try and get america healthier. i was involved with flu planning, president bush brought in the ceos of the pharmaceutical companies to see where the impediments were to

working together. we tried to smooth that out so on pandemic preparedness, they could work together. my time in the white house really helped inform how i think about the history. host: you talked about henry luce, ceo of time. this quote from your book "time had the potential for enormous political impact from the start. they elevated the office of the presidency regardless of occupation by reporting the most minute and non-policy related actions, blocks in rain, vacations, time had a popular section, the president's week. it was time's initial inclination to take a respectful

view toward the nation's leaders. all this makes sense of luce himself, even checking with a lawyer to see if he was eligible, despite his chinese birth to american parents, he was." we have come along way since that time magazine was the first outlet reporting on a national level. we are now in the age of social media. can you talk about what's happened between now and then when it comes to media ceos? guest: luce was groundbreaking in the way he covered the presidency. now every outlet has a white house reporter. you were a white house reporter for bloomberg. they give little details on the president's life. how did he play golf that day? who did he meet with? all that stuff comes from henry

luce and time magazine. they were groundbreaking in the way they covered the presidency. people didn't think about the president in the same way before then. he had what he called the breakfast technique. they would have breakfast and report what they had for breakfast as a way to humanize people. luce fact alf landon. he had a reporter meet with the governor of kansas who ran against roosevelt in 1936, and reported what he had for breakfast, which was kidneys. no one ever forgot that. today, you have white house correspondence at every outlet. you cannot see anything that happens without twitter reporting on it. all kinds of leaks come from the white house. we know so much more about the

daily goings-on at the white house than we ever did before. there has been a trajectory ever since with the development of print media, now social media. jfk had all these affairs in the white house and nobody talked about it. you could not have those today. host: while you were researching, did you come across anything surprising as a historian and what stood out the most? guest: the degree to which you have multiple ceos, smart people, who thought they could outgrow government. they wouldn't have to worry about government. bill gates was a problem here. he said government is three times slower than the private sector and the tech sector is three times faster than the private sector. he calculated the tech sector is

nine times faster than government. that's true but the government is a behemoth. it is not letting go. the degree to which mark people including rockefeller thought they could not have to deal with government was surprising to me in the way it recurred. you cannot outgrow government. government has so many lovers and ways it can be looking into you. you have to be on the ball. host: when it comes to information, this question from chlein harvard, massachu here a way ceos can help administrations counter governments and other sources? it would seem clarity and truth would serve all americans which is an essential function of government.

guest: great question. it is a dangerous question. i'm not sure i want a text ceo deciding what is true. how do we know what they are saying is accurate? one of the earlier callers talked about the zuckerberg letter. zuckerberg was saying we went too far in one direction. we would not let people publish the hunter biden story, which happens to be true. we need more in terms of getting accurate information from the media and not sure big ceos are the ways to come at the answer. i am a big fan of transparency and sunlight, the best disinfectant. more information, the less censorship, the better off we are but we have to recognize there are foreign actors trying to do ill, trying to put out stories that divide us.

i like to think of reagan, he said liberty binds us together. it is such an important message. we should stop thinking about various ethnic, racial, sexual and gender groups and think about what brings us together as americans. we can live together freely, have an entrepreneurial spirit, a free market that allows us to fulfill our dreams and live freely and be a beacon to the world. i am inspired by that message of ronald reagan. i don't like some of the negative use foreign countries are trying to purvey but i don't think we should enable them and give that negative perception of america. host: bruce, somerville, indiana on the independent line. caller: a question.

the speaker was talking about ceos and the power they have. i worked for chrysler 28 years. around the 2000, mercedes-benz bought us out supposedly. was supposed to be a merger of equals. after it was done, couple years later we found out our ceo had been paid $300 million to do this merger. i don't think anything ever happened with that but this is the type of thing i believe ceos and the government, if they

didn't know about it, they should have. shouldn't have been allowed to go through. just like i learned the other day, if this is right, china owns 40% of disney, which also owns abc. i haven't heard reporters on the news -- they all put their slant on things. before a politician talks and especially after, correcting things they say, a lot of times taking stuff out of context just to alter the view of what is being said. host: a response. guest: interesting stuff.

in terms of the auto industry, i talked about lee iacocca. he was a huge phenomenon. he had the best-selling book in america in 1984 and 1985. same book. remarkable achievement. people talked about him running for president. he has an interesting evil lucian. -- evolution. in the early 1970's, he was visiting the nixon white house as a foreign executive arguing against ralph nader regulations, pushing the white house to stop the dot to pursue those. premarket type. as the 1970's go on, creating international competition hitting the american car companies including chrysler where he is ceo, suddenly he sees government intervention is a positive thing. he is for the bailout of

chrysler in the 1970's. he becomes a fan of tariffs and criticizing and warning about the dangers of japanese competition. right now we are talking about chinese competition. we talked about japan in the same way in the 1980's. in terms of your talk about media and chinese control, i'm concerned about the way movies are shaped. there's a great book called red carpet by a wall street journal reporter that talks about all the ways chinese government puts their thumb on the scale, in terms of what messages can be in american movies. if they don't like the message and one american movie, they won't let any movie from that studio be shown in china. china is a huge market. it has an effect on what movies we see. a lot of interesting points. a lot of it is covered in the power of money. host: robert, newark, ohio,

democrats line. caller: good morning thank you. i was going to watch meet the press with george stephanopoulos. he was a member of the clinton administration. i don't know if he was a democrat member, a cabinet or aid or maybe a speechwriter. i think god -- thank god for c-span and the power of money, with monica and the clinton administration, george stephanopoulos worked under him. i think you that i turned on c-span this morning, instead of watching nbc meet the press or whatever. thank you goodbye. guest: i have a great george stephanopoulos story from the

book. he was a senior clinton white house aide. not on the cabinet. he was a communications aide and counselor to clinton. he's looking to leave the white house. he's with abc now, not nbc. he's looking to go to various networks. one of the networks is nbc. at the time nbc is owned by general electric and the head of ge at the time is jack welch, a republican. he does not want george stephanopoulos to go there. he sketches a picture of a middle finger, on top of a story about george stephanopoulos going to nbc and he faxes it to the head of nbc. i'm glad you gave me the opportunity to tell that story. there's a lot more like it in the power of money. host: michelle, witter, california, republican line. caller: morning.

i was wondering if your book explored leveling the playing field between private-sector unions and public sector unions. private-sector, you cannot draw your pension and still work your trade. does your book explore leveling the playing field between labor? guest: my book talks about unions in the henry ford chapter but not about the government unions. i'm dealing with private-sector ceos. they don't have as much to do with the public sector unions. i have a background in labor. i worked at the department of labor. i got my undergraduate from cornell. i follow the issue carefully. it used to be private-sector employees or unions were about

half of the workforce and that has steadily diminished over time. now it is 7% of the workforce. an increasing percentage of the workforce, the public sector is unionized. franklin roosevelt warned about it. there is a conflict of interest, politicians often deal with the public sector unions, then they are in the position to get them raises and favorable benefits. there is a great book by philip howard about the problems of public sector unions. it is something to think about. host: you mentioned a section you included in your book. the ceo job file. you have a favorite joke? guest: mark zuckerberg is walking down the street. a kid says hey zuckerberg, my father says you don't respect people's privacy. zuckerberg says he is not your daddy.

host: that and more in the power and the money, the epic clash between commanders in chief and titans of industry. thank you so much for joining us. guest: thank you for having me. host: that does it for today. we will be back tomorrow morning at 7 a.m. eastern, 4 a.m. pacific. enjoy the rest of your day. ♪ announcer: washington journal, discussing the latest issues in government, politics and policy, from washington and across the country.

coming up monday morning, nbc news scott wong previews the week ahead in congress, then the latest campaign 2024 news. also the book, land rich, cash poor on the challenges facing u.s. farmers and how policymakers should respond. c-span's washington journal. join the conversation live at 7:00 eastern monday morning on c-span, c-span now or online at www.c-span.org. announcer: this week on the c-span networks, the house and senate are in. on tuesday, the ceo of novo nordisk testifies.

adam myers, senior vice president for counter adversary operations at crowdstrike testifies before a subcommittee on the global impact of the crowdstrike software update. thursday, the task force on the attempted assassination of former president trump holds its first hearing into the security failures and its reliance on state and local law enforcement. watch this week live on the c-span networks or on c-span now, our free mobile vid application. www.c-span.org, for scheduling information or to watch live or on-demand anytime. c-span, your unfiltered view of government. announcer: c-span is your unfiltered view of government, funded by these tv companies and more including media,. >> 30 years ago mediacomm was

founded on a powerful idea. from coast-to-coast we connected 850,000 miles of fiber. mediacomm, decades of delivery, decades ahead. >>ediacomm support c-span, giving you a front row seat to democracy. host: this it "washington journal" person day, september 22. with a month and a half until election day, vice president harris and former president trump are ramping up their time on the campaign trail making the case for why voters should elect them. today on the program, we are