and we're just getting started, building 100,000 miles of new infrastructure to reach those who need it most. >> charter communications supports c-span as a public service, along with these other television providers, giving you a front row seat to democracy. >> coming up on "washington journal," we will take your calls and comments live. then andrew desiderio of punchbowl news previews this week's confirmation hearings for president-elect trump's cabinet picks. also, ben freeman of the quincy institute discusses a new report on how so-called think tanks are funded. "washington journal" starts now, join the conversation. ♪ host: good morning. it is monday, january 13, 2025. the house is in at noon eastern,

senate in at 3:00 p.m. today purely begin on the deadly wildfires in and around los angeles. fire fighters bracing for several days of winds that could hang hamper efforts. early estimates expect ongoing wildfires to be the costliest in modern history. we are hearing from you about natural daz asked her's and your experience with federal, state, and local governments during d after those emergencies -- we are hearing from you abo natural disasters. gi ua call if you are paed by the current california wildfires, (202) 748-8002. eastern or central time zones, (202) 748-8000. mountain or pacific time zones (202) 748001. ,you can also catch up with us on social media. facebook.com/c-span or on x with handle @cspanwj. a very good monday morning. go ahead and start calling in.

this is the front page of the los angeles times, residents are waking up to this and looking at it this morning, bracing for a long fight and recovery, high winds expected to return. investigators look back and officials look at one of the blazes in and around los angeles. it was yesterday on nbc that democratic senator alex padilla talked about the response by leaders in los angeles and in the state and his confidence in that leadership. [video clip] >> look, i do have faith in our leaders, not just as individuals but especially because after disaster, after disaster, after disaster, we have gotten really good at working together. not just elected officials but first responders, emergency response personnel, police officers, firefighters you have federal agencies, state, county,

and city agencies all collaborating to work effectively and efficiently. that is how we are able to protect lives and save lives and protect properties and respond to, whether it is fires in this case, could be atmospheric rivers and floods and other disasters we have had here in california. most importantly, we sent a message to all the families, more than 100,000 families displaced, families who have perished in these fires, our thoughts are with you, and the perspective of these families are driving the urgency and effort to put these fires out and begin the planning process of providing temporary assistance, shelter, and otherwise to impacted families and the planning we know will happen in the recovery and rebuilding of these neighborhoods. i have had a chance to tour these communities, and every house is a home, every home is a family.

host: senator alex padilla yesterday on nbc's meet the press. two more national papers here, new york times focusing on the fires today. their lead story, as l.a.'s inferno began, its mayor was not in town, mounting criticism of mayor carrie bass threatens her grip upon leadership. that is the lead story in the new york times today. front page of the wall street journal, ellie officials race to fight rumors and conspiracy theories -- l.a. officials race to fight rumors and conspiracy theories. duties include knocking down the wave of lies and conspiracy theories, some wild, some believable, that have become part of every major public emergency from hurricane to the recent tesla explosion in las

vegas. governor gavin newsom yesterday launched a california fire facts page in an attempt to combat some of those rumors, some of those conspiracy theories, and some of the issues he takes on is the idea that california cut its firefighting budget. said it is a ridiculous lie, the number of california prior -- fire personnel has nearly doubled since 2019 and the budget doubled since 2019. other topics he takes on, including the wildfires being caused by california's mismanagement of forest lands, saying the budget for managing the forest is now 10 times larger than it was when governor newsom took office. it was 200 million dollars annually in 2018, and the state has now invested some $2 billion -- $2 billion. this morning, we're simply

asking you about your experience with the federal government during natural disasters, if you have been impacted by this latest one in california, it is (202) 748-8002. otherwise, we split the numbers regionally. eastern or central time zones, (202) 748-8000. mountain or pacific time zones, (202) 748-8001. we will also put the numbers on the screen for you. taking your calls in this first hour of the "washington journal" today. we want to hear from you throughout the morning. also want to let you know about an event we're covering later today on c-span, and address on foreign policy. president biden set to give that address from the state department today at 2:00 p.m. eastern.

we will be covering that on the c-span networks. that address by president biden ahead of his wednesday address, his more formal farewell to the nation. that set for wednesday night at 8:00 p.m. eastern. a busy week here on capitol hill with plenty of confirmation hearings, some 14 hearings taking place over the course of three days this week. we're going to dive into it a little bit later this morning. setting aside this first hour to hear about your experience with the government during natural disasters. go ahead and call in. one more member of congress, julie chu, congresswoman from california, part of her district impacted by one of those fires in california. she was talking about the availability of water and some of these rumors that have taken place amidst these fires. she was on face the nation yesterday. [video clip] >> i understand that there were

water pressure issues in the altadena area. there was no local police or fire department. you all rely on the county for that kind of resource. do you think, going forward, does this need to change? have you talked to the governor? >> we have been in touch with the governor. what i want to assure people that there is enough water. in fact, the fire department agencies have assured me that there is enough. but when the fires first happened, there was a combination of drastic winds and the fire. and as a result, they were overwhelmed. this is not an ordinary incident. many fire hydrants were going on at the same time. and also, the electricity used to pump the water had been turned off so that it would not

spark any more fires so that happened at that point, but i believe we are in a good place right now. host: julie chu on face the nation yesterday. federal officials on the sunday shows, we will show more of them throughout this first hour. we hear from you about your experience with the government during natural disasters, want to hear your stories. does not have to just be wildfires. hurricanes, floods, other times when you have been connected with state, local, and federal government during natural disasters. first call from fairfield, california. good morning, dwight. caller: good morning, "washington journal." i am in northern california, john, and i'm going to tell a little story here. 2018, we had the paradise fire, which at that time was the largest wildfire in the california. the cause was lack of maintenance from our utility

provider, which was pacific gas and electricity. property destroyed and a lot of people left without homes. everything burned down, kind of like what is going on in southern california. the response in northern california compared to the palisades and the eaton fire, totally different, john. palisades, you are talking about homes that are from $4 million to probably $100 million, and those people are up there for a reason. they are getting away from people. there is limited access to their properties up there, and they are responsible for trimming and mitigating their properties around there. with them saying not enough water in the hydrants, the congresswoman just said something about not enough water, she is talking fire department. fire department is not responsible for water in the hydrants.

that is the los angeles department of water and power, they are responsible for that. and when you start getting up in those hills, there is less and less public service. that is why they are there, there is no access. this is going to be a money grab, because we have conflicting regulations between environmental protection agency federal and state of california. we go through this every time there is a fire in the state of california. they start pointing fingers at each other. republicans are saying, hey, it is the states problem. state's saying, hey, it is the federal government's problem you would we go through it all the time. those people in the palisades, they don't have no problem like they did in paradise. paradise were people in college, and these people are probably in their second or third home.

totally different response because of the power and the money. those people up there are popping bottles and clicking glasses. yes, they lost a lot. don't follow the hype is all i am trying to say. thanks for taking my call. host: asking for your experience with government during natural disasters. one more front page, usa today, wildfires ravage all parts of l.a. society. dwight talking about some of those multimillion dollar homes that have been impacted. one story from the wall street journal noting celebrities playing a central role as this tragedy unfolds, paired with the imagery of flames and smoke. influencers made the impact seem more relatable and more surreal. there were paparazzi photos of ben affleck and other stars

stuck in their cars in gridlock. on the tonight show, and tearful jamie lee curtis said where i live is on fire right now and pledged $1 million to relief efforts the next day on social media. tmc offered a slideshow, celebrities who lost their homes in the fires, including jeff bridges, billy crystal, milt gibson, miles teller, spencer pratt. that is the story from the wall street journal. gary in berlin, new hampshire, good morning. your experience with government during natural disasters. caller: good morning, and how are you? host: doing well. caller: i just feel so sorry for those poor people in those california fires. i hope i therace of god that their homes are not destroyed or anything like that, althgh i have seen a lot of them being destroyed. i tched msnbc this morning, and i do n le how all these lies being spread.

these people don't need this. thd government to come together and work with these people and help get these people back on their feet. i hope donald trump does that. speaking of donald trump, i would like to know, have any of you guys reached out to mitch mcconnell and asked him why he did not vote to impeach a donald trump? if he had voted to impeach donald trump, we would not be in the situation we are in. also, have you guys reached out to merrick garland to ask why he took so long to appoint special counsel? it is very obvious donald trump should never have been allowed to run for public office again. he is a convicted felon. host: back to the natural disasters and your concern about rumors and conspiracy theories, why do you think, as the wall street journal points out this

morning, that this is now part of natural disasters, responding, trying to knock down rumors or conspiracy theories? that those who respond as federal agencies, more and more, they now have to make that a major part of what they do in response. caller: i have seen this morning that resources are being taken away because they have to debunk all these false conspiracies. this is donald trump and his maga people. i hope people that voted for him this last election are satisfied. i hope they are satisfied because now they are going to get what they want, a conspiracists, liar, cheat, fraudster, and a felon. host: this is from that wall street journal story on rumor mills, conspiracy theories amid natural disasters. they write, president elect

trump joined a social media fray in this latest disaster on his truth social let form, blaming the fires on governor newsom, claiming the democrat refused to sign a water restoration declaration that would have brought additional water to l.a. elon musk sure that post with more than 12 million x followers. there was a statement that said there was no such document as a water restoration declaration, pure fiction. newsom refuted the rumor that fire trucks sent from oregon were being held in sacramento for emissions testing, this is false, calling it offensive to the brave men and women fighting on the front lines right now. the state launched the fire fax webpage, which we showed you earlier. this is john in fort myers, florida, good morning. your experience with government during natural disasters? caller: good morning, and thanks for c-span.

my point i would like to make is, two years ago, we lost our building and house to a hurricane and then had to go through the process of trying to rebuild. i would suggest that local leaders set up time frames that require their bureaucracy to act. it was impossible to get information. combine that with a shortage of contractors, and i think it could have been done more efficiently. either hire people from outside their jurisdiction to process permits, keep it simple. what constitutes a contractor? the definition. for us, we are two and a half years out and have not even

begun the process yet. so think in term of requiring the administrations to get back with people in a reasonable period of time, a week, two weeks, 30 days, and have a solution. host: before you go, you say you are two and a half years removed and have not begun the process yet. do you intend to rebuild there ? caller: some of the issues we're facing -- we are in our mid-80's, so it would probably take three years just to build an ordinary house because of outside conditions. very expensive, and the permitting period, i would think

, would take a minimum of six months. and that would be fast. so each circumstance is different. host: thanks for the call from fort myers. this is debbie out of keystone state, your experience with government during natural disasters. caller: i have not had any personal experience, but i have been watching the news station on the fires. i was born and raised in california, so i know about the santa ana winds. they used to call them the devil winds. i have been watching the fires and going back and forth through the news stations, and some of these rumors actually started with gavin newsom. on one tv station, i saw that he said that the indians came to him and could not fish and needed water to fish, so gavin told him he would help them, and

gavin said he knocked down three or four reservoirs of water, and it showed the land and it looked like a lake. then another news station, a news person asked him what he thought about the comment about the fish and him wasting the water when they need it now for the fires, and gavin denied it and said he did not know what trump was talking about, that he did not say that, and he did. so some of the rumors are coming straight from, you know, straight from the office. host: that is debbie in pennsylvania. larry in north carolina, good morning. caller: hey, good morning, john. hope you are doing well. this is my first phone call, so happy new year. host: happy new year to you. caller: thank you. we have had a few hurricanes in this area, never really had to deal with the federal government.

but the local government is where i believe many of these things can be squelched. in our area, we are right by the dismal swamp and a lot of lumber lands, international paper used to be right at my back door until it was sold. these places are suspect to fires. but we do controlled burns. and every about two to three, maybe even four times a year, we do controlled burns in the area and the signs are all up, there is a controlled burn in progress, which really helps to keep things under control. and the local government is extremely important in that. where was the local government

in these california areas? the santa ana winds, to my knowledge, have always been the santa ana winds. so to say that climate change is the reason for all this happening is kind of beyond my comprehension. and i wish that the local governments would make a bigger stink in these areas where they need things like water and controlled burns, which would let something, like if a wall fire happened to creep up, would not let it be so devastating. thank you for your time, sir. host: that was lower in north carolina. this is the op-ed pages of the washington times, writing similar things that the caller speaks about, saying the truth is that we have known about the seasonal santa ana winds and

wildfires they cause for millennium. anyone reading will find that the fires predate the industrial revolution and modern limit change policy. historical recurrence from government indicate large wildfires have been a natural part of california'ecosystem fors hundreds of years in the frequency have remained consistent no one should be surprised by the past weeks winds in flames, but the devastation was caused not by cars we drove in our neighborhoods or by cows but by people we elected. everything that just happened in los angeles could have been prevented. politics caused this crisis, not science. that from today's washington times. more for members of congress on the sunday shows and throughout the weekend. it was actually friday that congressman davidson of ohio called for some federal disaster relief to be held in california,

and addresses some of the issues of the heart of these fires. [video clip] >> these california lawmakers will be pushing for states prone to disasters to have money allocated toward this, to push -- >> but california wants the money without changing the policies of making the problem or matter worse, and i do not see how that can be supported. we support the people plagued by disaster, but we have to put pressure on the california government to change course here. >> i see. so has there been discussion already about the federal help that is coming to california? are you saying there is a little bit of pushback on policy changes? >> yeah, i think so. and how you do that. you do not want to send a message to families that we are not going to take care of you or they certainly did not have a problem saying the people in western north carolina, instead, the biden administration says do not worry about it, we will take care of anything. different response when it is out there for the hollywood

elites live. so that is disappointing from the biden administration. help us on the way from president trump and the new administration. when it comes to congressional funding, there will either be an open check book, no matter how bad your policies are, it is crazy. florida is prone to hurricanes, so they do lots of things to mitigate the risk of hurricanes. california is prone to fires, and they do things to make the fires worse instead of responding to make them more resilience. host: ohio republican warren davidson, that is from friday on fox. this warning, more newspapers that the citizens of california are waking up to this morning, the ventura county star, residents try to get news on their homes, and a picture of the blazes. more from california, the san francisco chronicle, a question one couple is asking, will things ever be the same? one more from california, the desert sun, reactive to

proactive, is the headline, showing more pictures of the blazes. from nevada, elko daily, crews try to corral the blazes before the winds return. winds expected to return a little bit later, midweek. michael in sanford, florida, we are asking about your experience with government during natural disasters. go ahead. caller: thank you, good morning. over in the daytona area, there has been a couple of hurricanes that have come through here the last few years. one of them took away all the dunes along the shore. our experience in trying to get permitting and approval from the local county authorities who are so concerned over these turtles, they protect the turtles, the

nesting. the dune was entirely washed away by the storm a year and a half, two years ago. there's nothing left. yet, it still took us months, six, eight, 10 months to get approval from the local authorities to come in and rebuild the seawall to protect the condominiums, buildings, 100 units, and it is just unbelievable to think of what has to be done. and i understand the need to protect nature and everything, but when everything was completely removed by the storm, there were no more turtle nests left because the dune was entirely wiped out. yet, it was like trying to make a miracle happened to get the authorities to approve the permitting so that we could get it repaired before the next storm season hit us. host: when you say the

authorities, are you talking about state government, federal government? caller: this is the local county government. i cannot say -- my sense is, and i was not that close to it, but my sense is that there was also state people involved with the county. host: that is michael in florida. this is steve in anaheim, california. caller: morning. you people need to quit demonizing each other. it is counterproductive. i was in melbourne, florida, when the hurricane hit there, and the hurricane basically destroyed all the beachfront out there. but local authorities, as far as getting electricity and everything back on, they get pretty good, back on within three days, considering all the damage that storm did. out here in california, we have not had any rain in almost an entire year, so everything is dry.

so talking about how you had to clear out brush so the santa ana winds will not burn, most of these trees and stuff are on private property. winds come down the canyons every year. in the 1970's, it burned from the san gabriel fountains all the way to the ocean past pepperdine. the only thing that put it out was it finally hit the ocean. as far as water and stuff goes, we have the helicopters and all this other stuff to put out fires, they work with hand crews on the grounds with hoses. they cannot do it because it is too much fire. when you have too much wind, you cannot use these aircraft, and that is where the fire got out of control. other winds are picking up again, and he had to realize that these sparks can fly anywhere from two to five miles

and start other fires because it is a canyon area. they are going to have to rethink on how we fight fires or how we store water or how we quit building in areas that we should not be building. and overpopulation, they just build everywhere and without regard to safety or topography or acknowledge the weather where the problems we have out here. as long as we have the money on selling taxes and tax revenue, things are going to change. ok, that is about it. have a good day. host: before you go, as a california resident, what do you think about gavin newsom during this current crisis? caller: well, i think he is pretty useless. he has just been a disaster. you look at florida's government

-- governor, which i'm not a fan of him either, but as far as getting stuff done, he is like biden, he will get on the prompter and read it without really stating the facts. it contributes to the problem. if he would just come out and say, hey, it happened, there was nothing we could do, and leave it at that. but no, he has to say, oh, going to investigate this or investigate that. end of the day, you will find out basically the fires were caused by a drought and the winds and it is nobody's fault for whatever happened, it just happened. and this happens all the time. like i said, you build in these areas, this is what you are going to have to put up with. as far as clearing the land and stuff like that, they could cut down every tree in california and you still have grass fires. it is a history of fires in california.

with climate change and the lack of rain, because that is what keeps us from burning all the time, is water, it would stop the fires. now they are planning on building a canal or tunnel in northern california to bring more water down to southern california, but if you do not have any rain, you have a hole in the ground that is useless. there are ways to create water out here, but they just won't do it. host: that is steve in california, talking about gavin newsom. an interview with gavin newsom appearing on meet the press yesterday, gavin newsom responding to some of the criticism from the incoming president about how california has dealt with these fires. [video clip] >> he can come out and take a look for himself. he is the president-elect. eyes -- i respect the office.

we have a president of the united states that within 36 hours provided a major ration -- major disaster declaration. 100% reimbursement and all the resources you can imagine. i do not know what the president elect is referring to when he talks about the delta smelt and reservoirs. the state reservoirs are completely full. that disinformation does not advantage or aid any of us. responding to donald trump's insults, we would spend another month. i am very familiar with them, every elected official he disagrees with her very familiar with him. >> we do know that one reservoir in the pacific palisades was not full. >> and that is what triggered me to start the investigation on what happened. that was not a state reservoir which the president-elect referred to, somehow connecting the delta smelt to this fire, which is inexcusable because it

is an accurate and incomprehensible to anyone that understands water policies. >> my understanding is you have put a call into president-elect trump. has he called back? >> no, that was months ago, that was after his victory. i look forward to him coming out here. >> but you did invite him to come out here. have you had response? >> no. >> president-elect trump has talked about withholding aid for wildfires. are you worried he would actually do that? >> he did it in michigan, puerto rico, did it to california before as governor in 2018, until he found out folks in orange county voted for them. he has been out this for years and years. it transcends states. including, by the way, georgia. that is his style. host: gavin newsom on meet the press yesterday, that interview appearing yesterday. taking your phone calls this morning on the "washington

journal," asking you about your experience with government during natural disasters. if you live in and around l.a. and have been impacted by these current wildfires, (202) 748-8002. eastern or central time zones, (202) 748-8000. mountain or pacific time zones, (202) 748-8001. one op-ed from usa today, the author is bobby scoble, a retired fire chief, author of both sides of the fire line, writing to use to be something called a fire season, but now we have fires year-round. asking what's going on, saying it is complicated, and complicated problems cannot be solved with simple solutions and we need nuanced discussions, not positions based on ideologies. as we watch the fires burn, homes, we need to keep in mind it is not because of inadequate water supply, a particular fire

chief, reduced budget. they are burning because the santa ana winds and high temperatures with low humidity's. you have 60 mile-per-hour winds or greater, there is no fire chief or budget that will put out the fires. the modern complication is the urban growth and wildlands in southern california. we have a growing fire problem throughout the entire united states. bobbie scopa in usa today. in california, this is rhonda. good morning. caller: good morning, thank you. good to speak with you. i have been thinking about this and watching what is going on down there in los angeles. i was in the northern part of california, and over the last few years, in 2022, we had a horrible destructive fire, the camp fire in butte county. then we had the tubbs fire in napa and sonoma.

many more that happened here in california since 2022, and people never recovered. if you think about even what happened over in maui, the devastation there, there are people today who are homeless. and now the subject of that has not even arisen. prior to this disaster in los angeles, we have a homeless crisis. now this just adds to it. you asked the gentleman from anaheim, who i love what his response was, governor newsom, no, they are so ill-prepared here in california. you stated before the two callers before me, we have not had any rain, none at all. here where i live in the sacramento valley going towards nevada, now that is nothing but dry brush.

it is horrible what is going on here in california, and i am telling you, i don't have no faith in our governor. i think he is -- forgive me, but he is a bubbling -- i don't want to say it, not kind to say it, but i feel that bass and newsom, time for them to get out. let's get someone with intelligence on how we can approach this issue that is now starting to become daily. thank you. you know i am a big fan of c-span. thank you, and my heart goes out to los angeles. this is rhonda in sacramento, thank you, goodbye. host: you mentioned karen bass, again, that front-page story of the new york times, as l.a.'s inferno begin, its mayor was not in town, mounting criticism of karen bass threatens her grip on leadership. that is her headline -- that is the headline of that story in the new york times.

when a cascade of deadly wildfires erupted across los angeles region on tuesday, the mayor was on her way home from west africa where she attended the inauguration of a new president, her first trip abroad as mayor. it shows that ms. bass has traveled out of the country at least four other times in recent months before that visit, one to mexico for the inauguration of the president of mexico, three times to france for the 2024 olympic games in paris. the new york times noting that it is in contradiction to what she told the new york times in an interview in october of 2020 1, saying not only what i live in los angeles but also i would not travel internationally, the only places i would go if elected would be to d.c., sacramento, san francisco, and new york, in relation to l.a., the new york times saying that pledge has

been spectacularly broken in her time since becoming mayor. that is the new york times today. taking your calls on your experience with government during national disasters come about 20 minutes left in this segment. if you are in the eastern or central time zones, (202) 748-8000. mountain or pacific time zones, (202) 748-8001. if you have been impacted by these wildfires (202) 748-8002. ,this is elbeth in san fernando, california. you are with us. caller: yes. host: turned on your television first so it is easier to hear you, then go ahead. caller: ok. host: what is your experience with government during natural disasters? caller: i live in san fernando valley, and the closest fire to me is the worst fire.

that is contained. i am in my 80's. i live alone. i am pretty nervous, but i have packed my toothpaste and medication and so on. i hope i do not have to go. it is just absolutely horrific what is going on. i feel for all those who lost their homes. it seems so many volunteers are out there and helping out. and the firefighters, they are amazing. the government, i don't have any experience with them. i just follow what the phone is saying, and i think the

firefighters. that is all i can say. one thing i wanted to say is president carter, his burial in washington, none of the eulogies mentioned that he got the peace prize. nobody mentioned it. that is all i have to say. thank you for taking my call. host: stay safe. thanks for calling in. how close would you say the nearest fires are to where you are? caller: it is the worst fire, that is very close to me. that is the one i have to watch out for. host: how are you keeping informed? you said watching your phone, are you talking about updates on evacuations? caller: the phone will tell me

to evacuate if i have to evacuate. and also the television gives us news. that is what i -- i can also go to the government page on the internet. host: if you don't mind saying, you said you packed up your medication in a bag in case you have to leave. how do you figure out what you have to take with you if you have to go? caller: that is a big question. i have packed photo albums and my medication. that is about it. there's not much -- i cannot get much in a small suitcase, so just the most important things.

maybe i take a painting with me in the car. the area if everybody is going to take their own cars to evacuate, it will be jammed. the roads will be jammed. but i pray i don't have to evacuate. host: thanks for the call. stay safe out there in california. back to the east coast -- coming back to alabama, the, good morning. chuck. caller: yes, i was involved with the north carolina disaster that happened recently as an assessor for utility company there, the

electrical utility. i know the fema response was very slow there. that is what i have to say about that. but to get back to california's problems, this is a very high-tech state where most people can't hardly afford to live there for that reason. it looks to me like, common sense would tell you, if you spent one quarter of the amount of money on what you spend on the climate change agenda, if you would spend it on trying to learn how to fight a fire, then you would have been in a lot better off situation instead of just trying to come up with a pie in the sky reason for all this stuff happening. you could actually figure out a way to prevent it or stop it when it gets there, it would be a lot better and a lot better use of taxpayer money.

host: in north carolina, where did you go? what did you see? caller: whoa, a lot of roads washed out there and a lot of houses taken off foundations by water. like i say, i think fema got around to everybody eventually. i am a 40 plus year emergency management employee, and probably -- that would probably be the most widespread damage that i have seen in my career. the california fires may top it, looks like it is going to. host: how did you get around in north carolina with all those roads washed out? caller: well, best way you

could. sometimes you were very scared, afraid you were going to fall off a mountain there because the roads could wash out from the inside of you, and he would take the little part of the road still intact and go on up there the best way you could. host: what was the hardest hit town that you saw? caller: asheville, north carolina, and the area around it. we were there for two weeks, and we started off in charlotte. we moved gradually east. the last place we went to was old forge, and their entire downtown area was flooded. the flooding is probably worse than fire damage.

fire damage, you got to start over, and hopefully that is may be the best thing. because flooding you got to rebuild and all that. and never does get back like it should. plus, water damage is actually worse than wind damage. host: this is james out of san marcos, california. good morning. caller: good morning, i hate having to get this call, but this is the issue, natural disasters are natural. many years ago i was on the front page of major newspapers around the country fighting a fire with my garden hose. i live on eight and a half acres of land. yes, we moved away from the city because we do not like the congestion, do not like the crime, do not like other things. so yes, we're on our own.

this is not a fire on its own. that fire, if you do not have any idea of how fires work, all you have to do is throw sand in the year when there is a breeze, and you will see exactly how fires go here and fires go in the direction that the wind goes. in the morning, we have winds from the west, and in the afternoon, we have winds going from the east. i will not say anything about any politician and the issue. it has nothing to do with the amount of water, nothing to do with the amount of fire people. it had to do with the wind and how fast it goes. i watched a house about a mile away from my house go up in flames in a heartbeat when the fire went around my house simply because of the wind.

it saved my house and the other house went up in flames. four houses on my street, but we are all living out in the country. one had 20 acres, one had 10, i have eight and still live there. let's wait until it is all over with and rebuild. i hope that the people can get some kind of coverage from their insurance because many insurance policies were closed down, companies were closed down, like state farm, and did not have any insurance for many families around the state of california because of the fire hazard. host: can i ask you, you said you were on the front page fighting with a garden hose, was that in 2014? caller: it could have been. if you see my picture there, the fire is right behind me.

i am in a blue shirt, about 75 years old. host: you do not have to say it, is your last name harkins? caller: it is. host: i found the picture from getty images, one of the news images website. may 15 of 2014 is the day, james harkins, 72, refusing to evacuate his home there amid the fires. can you explain what we are seeing and what you were doing in that picture? caller: let me say this to you, as i told everybody that i was interviewed by, i have no responsibilities. my family is out there on their own. my dog had just died, so i have only myself. that is why i stayed there, not because of any other reason. from the fire came, it was a rush. when the winds came, they came in the morning, just like i said, then in the afternoon, you

have no control over the winds. all it has to have is a spark to go, and then it is gone. many of these homes, the fire is going to burn by going under the eve's come into the roof, and burn the house down. host: james, i am going to redo the caption that went with the photo from 2014 -- i am going to read you the caption. you noted this appeared in papers all over the country back then. james harkins refused to evacuate his home of more than 20 years and used a garden hose to combat the flames racing up the hillside towards his home. let it go up with smoke? no, no, no, not without a fight. he talked about my memories, my things to pass on, it is mine, if it burns down, i do not have a lot left. what fire was that in 2014? caller: i think it was the

cyprus fire, something like that. i never paid any attention to it. never paid any attention to the date of it. i just know that i was there and i had gotten there just before the sheriff had closed down all the access. and when the sheriff came to tell me i had to leave, i said, no, i do not have to leave, i am here and will stay here to protect my property. but i do not have any responsibilities. i knew the fire could come, i knew the fire could come there, and i knew i could have left or never went there, but that was not the issue. people that know the fire is coming need to get out of the way because, in this case, the case going on right now, you cannot individually fight the fire. i could individually see the fire walking around my property, and it did not burn my house down. thank god. because that is the only thing

that saved it. if you are living in any of the areas and you are told to get out and they are like the area's burning, meaning all those homes that are there, you have no chance. get in your car, get on a bike, whatever it is, and leave, because you are going to be causing other people to have to try and find you. do not stay and try and protect your property, as i was trying to protect my property. my whole issue is totally different than those people being involved in the fire today. host: james, thanks for telling the story and calling in this morning. caller: have a great day, enjoy. host: cason's next come out of maine. we're talking about your experience with government and natural disasters. caller: i would like to thank the fema people that came to me

last december -- actually, they were here in january. we had a storm in december and it took a lot of shingles off the roof of my house, and in maine, we had to be told to go to fema. i did not realize i would qualify. but the people that came to manchester, maine, in december 2024 were the nicest people. they were great, helped me out, stayed here longer than they were supposed to stay here. they traveled from way out of state. i just want to say thanks for this opportunity, so let me thank them. host: to wipe it about five minutes left to call in and talk about your experience with government during natural disasters. as you continue to call in, another op-ed from today's papers, the new york times, patti davis writing in, actress, daughter of ronald and nancy reagan, the dream of california is up in smoke is the headline

on her piece, l.a. seemed like paradise, who could have imagined it would look like this. she writes, i want us to stand up for an earth created with perfect balance, beauty and divine artistry, earth put here not for our conception but for our nourishment, an earth that has so much to teach us and that needs protection now more than ever, we have thrown the entire planet out of balance and we are suffering the consequences. weather patterns so severe we do not know how to combat them and floods, hurricanes, tornadoes more severe than anything we have known. we can grieve and be righteously angry at the same time. we could be nomads wandering across barren acres of land that were there for our sustenance, if only you would have had the sense to know how to protect the earth we were given. patty davis in the new york times today. north fork, california, your

next. caller: hi, i listen to your show a lot and i'm surprised i got through. we were effected by the big fire in 2020. we have a store up there, been up there over 100. years it was on labor day , busiest time of the year, and you are asking about our experience. locally, first of all, we were given no warning about the fire, nothing at all. it was coming up the river canyon, and we were not told about anything. so we had to get our people out, which we had close to 250 people. the only safe place we could take them was down to the lake. and everyone was safe and that was fine. they were great. but the aftereffect is what bothers me.

we still have potential for fire up there. even before 2020, before the greek fire, i had complained that we had a lot of bug infested trees or the beatles, the dead trees, and i was told by forest service that it was not an issue, not an issue. and it did become an issue. the embers and everything burned up, and it had fodder to burn. i was furious, am still furious. it has been five years, six years now, and we are just starting to get our store rebuilt thanks to our insurance. and local help, help from the county, from our local forest service people. the problem as i see it is that there is no money for local services. i do not know where the federal

government, where usda puts their money, but it is not in our local forest service. our local people know what is going on. they know where the danger is, and they know where to go. the higher levels, the regional levels, and the federal levels have no idea. they give no money. when we really need it, when we could have been helped, those people were not to be found because they did not know about us. my biggest aggravation is that the local agencies need to get funded to be able to do what they need to do. our forest has been aimed at, hootie the owl, rather than

smokey the bear. pick up the garbage and make it look nice for people. forgetting the purpose of the forest service in these times. it is dry, yes, but it has always been dry. it just has a lot of fuel for fire. that is how i see it. host: thanks for the call from california. our last caller in this segment. stick around. plenty more to talk about, including focusing on the week ahead in washington with a focus on all of those nominees coming to capitol hill for their congressional hearings. we will be joined by andrew desiderio of punchbowl news. a new report is out on think tanks and their funding. stick around, we will have those conversations this morning on open washington journal."

♪ >> this peek out and senate are both in session. the house continues work on the republican priority list focusing on border security and immigration pocy. the senate continues work on the lake and riley act. also stay tuned for conference of coverage of confirmation hearings for president elect's cabinet nominees. tuesday, pete had seth will testify. wednesday, kristi noem will appear before the senate homeland security committee. marco rubio, nominee for secretary of state heads to the senate foreign relations committee.

also pam bondi nominated for u.s. attorney general will begin her confirmation hearings, testifying before the senate wednesday and thursday. what on c-span now, or c-span.org for scheduling information or to watch live or on-demand anytime. c-span, democracy unfiltered. witness democracy unfiltered c-span. experience history as it unfolds with live coverage this month as republicans to controllable timbers of commerce and a new chapter begin. tune in for live, all they coverage of the presidential inauguration as donald trump takes the oath of office becoming president of the united states. stay with c-span for comprehensive, unfiltered

coverage. c-span, democracy unfiltered. host: every monday when congress is in session we'd like to take a look ahead in washington. we are joined by the senior congressional reporter at punch bowl news. andrew, it is 14 confirmation hearings this week, 13 nominees, 11 committees holding hearings. what is a senior congressional reporter to do? guest: you got to prioritize. in terms of the nominees that are the most controversial, the most difficult time getting confirmed, you got pete hegset h, the nominee to be defense secretary. his nomination is going to be the most important one to focus on this week they couple of others are on the national security side.

republicans want to prioritize national security nominees will not have confirmation hearings this week and will be continuing to meet with senators. this going to be a lot of action both inside and outside those rooms that you don't have hearings this week are of course tulsi gabbard, nominee for director of national intelligence, and cash patel. in patel's case, he probably will not get a confirmation hearing until february at the earliest. tulsi gabbard could get one as soon as next week but the intelligence committee has not yet announced that hearing. host: what is the strategy for having 14 hearings in three days, is there a strategy here of doing that with republicans in the senate and donald trump coming in and these being is nominees? guest: this is what they tried to do every four years, stack

these as close to the inauguration date as they can. the senate cannot vote to confirm until a new president is inaugurated, so who is a candidate for day one nomination? the only one i see who could be a candidate right now is marco rubio, the nominee for secretary of state. he has his confirmation hearing before the foreign relations committee on wednesday of this week, so i think he is the likeliest to get confirmed on inauguration day. it would be the afternoon of january 20 four years ago when president biden first came into office. the nominee he had confirmed was the director of national intelligence. a couple days later he had lloyd austin confirmed and then a few

days after that he had antony blinken, secretary of state confirmed. it is normal to prioritize national security nominees on the floor if you are senate leadership. in the case of trump nominees, they are some of the more controversial ones. after that it will be epicenter democrats in terms of whether they would build time or not because each nominee under regular order if you use the full-time, each nominee will take a few days. host: does marco rubio get to vote on his own nomination? guest: as long as he is still a sitting senator by the time the vote happens. he could technically wait to resign until right before he becomes secretary of state, of course. that could be interesting. i've tried asking to see what his plans are. he doesn't have any specifics to share, but that could be fascinating.

he does not need his own vote. he's going to get 80, 85 plus votes in the senate. host: what senators stick out for confirmation time, who are the senators that tend to make a splash during these confirmation hearings? guest: obviously is dependent on who sits on what committees. on the floor is a lot different because you have the perpetual swing votes. susan collins, lisa murkowski, mitch mcconnell now that he is not in leadership anymore. mitch mcconnell has a singular focus for the remaining two years on his senator which is to continue to advance his national security doctrine, his foreign policy doctrine, how he sees the world, and that involves of course pushing back against what he sees as a more isolationist streak popping up at his party. in one of the ways he is thinking about doing that is on these nominations.

so you have to really consider is mitch mcconnell going to vote for someone like tulsi gabbard or someone like pete hegseth? a lot of it depends on what they say during the confirmation hearings and how they lay out their case in terms of who to watch on the senate floor, i think those three. young that, some senators to have their pet issue they like to focus on when it comes to certain subject matter areas that cabinet nominees could have jurisdiction over. so again, it is nominee-dependent that i would say those three are the ones to focus on. host: c-span collars also have their issues like to focus on. we can talk about any of these confirmation hearings. it is (202) 748-8000 free democrats. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. independent, (202) 748-8002. let me just run through the schedule real quick of when these are taking place. we are covering most of these on

the c-span networks and also online. trying to let you see as many of these as possible. there's a lot this week. tuesday, it is pete hegseth for defense srery, doug collins for veterans affairs secretary and doug burgum for interior seetary. wednesday, kristi noem homeland security secretary, marco rubio secretary of state, pam bondi attorney general, chris wright energy secretary, jon magseth cia director. thursday you've got eric scott turner and scott pheasant for treasury secretary. as you mentioned, tulsa gabbard, d and i director is what she is up for, not among those listed what should viewers know about her and section 702? guest: i reported last week that republican and democratic senators who had met with her

were unclear on her position on that critical national 30 authority which basically allows the federal government to conduct surveillance on foreigners outside of the united states for the purposes of safeguarding national security, rooting out terrorism, things like that. and i presented that information to the trump transition team and said we were going to reported and as a result, tulsi gabbard gave her first public comment since being nominated for the job in which she came out in support of the foreign intelligence surveillance act. host: did you interview her? guest: this was a statement and that was notable for two reasons. number one, she reposed -- propose legislation when she was in congress to get rid of section 702 entirely, and number two she voted against reauthorizing it every time it came up during her tenure in the house of representatives. this is something she has been pressed on it during this private meetings and i was told by senators from both parties who met with her that they came away from those meetings less

than clear in terms of what her position was, so it was notable that she came out in support of section 702 because again, those republicans in particular who were on the fence about her were looking for her to give a full throated endorsement of this authority and that is not just sort of some abstract thing where she just relies on what congress does as it relates to reauthorizing section 702. she actually as director of national intelligence, if confirmed, will have to recertify the program itself as early as april of this year. if she doesn't, the program goes dark. this is not an abstract concept, this is something that lawmakers care a lot about, so i think it helped her confirmation prospect that she came out in support of it publicly. host: and the statement that you received on this from tulsi gabbard, if confirmed, i will uphold american's fourth amendment rights about

maintaining vital national security tools like section 702 to ensure the safety and freedom of the american people. is there more to that statement explaining why the change of heart? guest: number one she probably knew that it would help her confirmation prospects because again, and the intelligence committee in particular there are a lot of really hawkish republicans and hawkish democrats when it comes to national security and just general surveillance. one of her big issues with this program is civil liberties protections. that was one of her arguments against it when she was in congress. she referenced fourth amendment rights in that statement. what she was basically saying was given the reforms that have since been enacted over the last few years as it relates to section 702, she feels comfortable that there are enough civil liberties protections, fourth amendment protections for americans because the concern has been that while this program does target foreigners who are

overseas, the concern is that the data of americans gets swept up incidentally, so that has been all criticism of the program from people like tulsi gabbard over the years, and you've have this push and pull every time this comes up on capitol hill between security and personal freedom. host: we've got andrew for about another 20 minutes, so get your calls in. this is chris in alexandria, virginia, republican. caller: two quick questions. first for your guest, how long typically does it take a president to fill his cabinet, and not just a cabinet, but all the political appointees? i believe there are almost 4000 of them. that's the first question. the second question is do we know where president trump is in filling all of those positions?

i've seen articles from various sources that he has appointed most if not all of his cabinet, but i'm not sure about the minute executive appointees that have large divisions within the federal bureaucracy. thank you. guest: i will take the second one first. over the weekend president trump unveiled a lot of additional sub cabinet nominations, we call them. these are deputy secretaries, positions that do require senate confirmation but depending on the individual nominee, often times get through without any real hiccups. sometimes even getting unanimous consent of the senate floor. and when it comes to how quickly these cabinet nominees in particular could be installed, you look back to the last couple of times a new president came into office, under president biden in 2021 it took the senate a couple of months to fill out

his entire cabinet. i'm engine at the start of the show that the senate focus on national security nominees in the first week, that being the director of national intelligence and secretary of state, and from there it is up to senate leadership to decide which ones to prioritize. we know senate republican leadership this time around once to do the same exact thing, they want to prioritize national security nominees, but in the case of some of these nominations that trump has put forward, the more controversial ones are in the national security realm and therefore they're going to take a longer attempt to get to the process. even if they are ready for floor time, to be put on the senate floor for a confirmation vote as soon as next week, it will be up to democrats to decide if they want to yield back time to get these nominees quickly confirmed. in the case of pete hegseth, i strongly doubt democrats are going to agree to collapse time

on that nomination because they are really focused on exposing who they see as an unqualified and unfit nominee for this position. host: i was trying to remember the last couple of administrations. the partnership for public service i believe is what they are called. they are a political appointee tracker. they don't track all 4000 of those positions, but they track about 800 of them, and it looks like they are going to be doing it again for this next administration. maybe a place for the viewer to go for that specific information. this is george in maryland, independent. caller: aches for taking my call. what i would like to do is just command the cabinet members that are going to be leaving. had happened in admiral kirby

and antony blinken and jack sullivan. their dedication has just been phenomenal. i'm optimistic about some of the characters that trump has nominated. host: who are you worried about in particular? caller: hegseth for one, and tulsi gabbard. i've called a couple times, i'm a john mccain republican converted to independent, but i'd like to remind congress and our representatives that when matt gaetz was still up for nomination, congress decided should be let all this news come out about him or not, i think we need to remind our representatives that it is not a big boys club that they've got going on up there. they are representatives of the united states and me and all the

people that vote for whether it is trump or kamala harris, if there is stuff going around in the background of these people, they need to put that stuff out and not decide whether it should be put out or not because it may be detrimental. that's not a big boys club they've got going up there. it is not a private club. and trump doesn't read the daily briefings. he never did, so i think it's pretty important that the people in the cabinet are focused on just what is best for this country, because trump i don't think his priorities are what is going to happen in china, what is going on in russia and all these other countries that are threats to the united states. host: we will take your comments and let andrew jump in. guest: the caller mentioned the presidential daily briefing. one of the many reasons why it

is so important is because 60% of that presidential daily briefing which is compiled and done by the director of national intelligence, 60% of the information in that briefing is brought in via section 702. that information would not be included in the president's daily briefing every single day. this is a big chunk of the information that the president learns, that is national security team learns, and that is why it is so important especially to those republican senators who are weighing this confirmation vote and whether to support her. host: some of the dates and times of some of these key confirmation hearings that you talked about that you can watch on the c-span networks. tuesday is pete hegseth. this confirmation hearing for defense secretary in front of the senate armed services committee. 9:30 a.m. on c-span three is

when and where you can watch that. wednesday it is marco rubio, his hearing before the senate foreign relations committee. that is 10:00 a.m. wednesday on c-span3. and elise stefanik's hearing for the next ambassador of the united nations if she is confirmed, c-span3, 10:30 a.m. eastern, again thursday, and there will be a lot more as well throughout the week, but those are some of the key ones. we spent 20 minutes focusing on senate and confirmation hearings. what is going on in the house this week? guest: not much to be honest. the house is focused right now on planning for reconciliation, which of the process by which republicans are going to try to pass president trump's agenda. obviously this then this whole debate about one dill or two bills. it seems like an unimportant process disagreement that folks should not be focused on, that i think they should be focused on it because the republicans need

to come to an agreement on how to proceed here before they actually get started on passing elements of president trump's agenda, because they need to pass a budget resolution. this is what lays out for they are going to do as part of the process and this is have a draft the reconciliation instructions and committees. so that has to happen before they can actually even get started on all of this. that is why the process dispute is important here. a budget of hauser publicans were at mar-a-lago this past weekend meeting with president trump. we are told that a lot of the house freedom caucus members were pressing the president on this issue because they ironically enough agree with senate republicans at the two-step strategy is best, the idea of doing border security first as part of a reconciliation bill and then pivoting to tax cuts later in the year. hauser publicans leadership, speaker mike johnson disagree, they think it is better to just do one sort of mega bill, if you

will, so that was a big focus of the discussions this past weekend at mar-a-lago. senate majority leader john thune has quite eloquently laid out the case for the two-step process and he hosted president trump for a meeting at the capital last wednesday, during which senator thune and other senate republicans including lindsey graham, ted cruz, all these more traditional trump allies were making the case directly to him, to the president for the two-step process. president trump is still siding with speaker johnson in terms of one bill, not necessarily because he thinks his ideas are better, but because he think the house is too dysfunctional right be able to pass two separate pieces of legislation on this front ma don't want either of those to go by the wayside. post: this may be very much in the weeds of how these things work, but how do you get two bites at the reconciliation apple, how can you do this in

two vs. one? guest: you have a chance to do this under the procedures and rules of the senate, and if you can do it twice, you have two chances to get this done. and it depends sort of whether those budget resolutions, those vehicles were used in the previous year or not. there are a lot of different rules. they decided to let them up into one year and the next. host: larry in the keystone state, democrat, good morning.

the confirmation hearings concerning tulsa gabbert was nominated by president trump to the position of national intelligence. wasn't she the one that shot her dog because the dog growled or did listen to a command, whether our dog trainers, there are tasers or shot callers. and there were no charges filed. in a similar incident, and going back -- guest: let me just clear that up. i think you might be referring to kristi noem and the dog incident from the book that she wrote. i think that is what you are referring to. caller: i'm sorry, yeah. and i just don't understand the situations like that being her nominated as national intelligence. going back in the to another incident with sarah palin who took office december 4, 2006 as governor, and she was in a

helicopter and she resigned i think july 3, 2009. she was in a helicopter and there was a video of her with an assault rifle and a helicopter chasing a coyote or a wolf running, nowhere to hide in the video showed her shooting the animal. my question is aren't there game laws in alaska? no charges were ever filed with her. and who is paying for all of this? host: the cricket incident, met with name -- met with the name of the dog that she wrote about the got a lot of attention. do you think that is a stumbling block for her in the confirmation hearing? guest: i really don't think so. it was more of a stomach block for her prospects to be chosen as the running mate last year, but in terms of the senate confirmation process, there won't be an issue there. for some of these nominees who are definitely more on the controversial side, the

assumption is they are not going to get any democratic votes. it's republicans have a 53 seat majority so as long as they can keep everyone together for only lose a couple of votes, these folks are going to get confirmed and she is not one who is on my list in terms of ones to watch for potential defeat. host: just run through that list again, who was on that list to watch for potential defeat? guest: i would say pete hegseth, we were discussing that earlier. and then two more, because he gabbert, nominee for director of national intelligence, her hearing can be as soon as next week pending on when the intelligence community actually notices it. and the third one i would say is kash patel, his confirmation hearing likely will not be until february, to the senate judiciary committee this early on prioritizes the attorney general and deputy attorney general nominees. host: and a different list, who

are the nominees on a list of nominees who would likely get a significant number of democratic votes? guest: i would say marco rubio is someone likely to be confirmed the afternoon of the inauguration. it's not just the fact that he is there colleague, obviously they give great deference to their colleagues and their nominated for these positions, but secondly, he is someone who one foreign policy is in the mainstream of republicans. so most democrats will look at him and say i disagree with and philosophically but i don't have an issue within serving as secretary of state under a republican administration. others i would say, for example, sean duffy as transportation secretary nominee, he's already got a bunch of democrats coming out in support of him including his home state democratic senator tim baldwin, and another one i would say is elise stefanik, the nominee for u.s. ambassador to the u.n. he could get a handle of votes. john fetterman of pennsylvania has already said he's going to support her, so i think there are a number of cabinet nominees

who are going to secure democratic support. the question is how many, and will that even be necessary because again, you got 53 republicans in the senate and all of them support this respective nominee whoever you're talking about, you don't need all the democrats. host: tennessee, republican, good morning. caller: thanks for coming on c-span and talking to everybody but i have to take issue with you and everyone else making a big issue at of section 702 to spy on americans for no reason, other than washington wants to start -- spy on them. the border has been wide open for four years, anyone can walk in. suddenly tulsa gabbert is some kind of national security threat? you guys are -- leading us, we are not stupid. this is why everyone in america hates everyone in washington and why we really -- elected a

reality start. host: let me ask you, do you think it was wrong of tulsi gabbard to come out and say that this is a tool that she will continue to use? caller: yeah, i mean honestly she really sold out. i know she's trying to get into power, but it's time that we had leaders with a real spine who said that washington cannot continue to push around the entire world. we are about to cause world war iii. you are a bunch of clouds up there. guest: i will note when it comes to section 702, this is something that republican senators were saying to me was a problem for them in terms of her confirmation prospects. i don't think any of us in the news media are necessarily playing it up as something that is a must-have or super important.

we brothers information to the trump transition team and that is what caused them to issue this statement to us on behalf of tulsa gabbert supporting section 702. again, people who opposed section 702, people who are worried that in the words of the scholar, is being used to spy on americans, they do feel like tulsa gabbert has sold them out on this issue. and when it comes to prospects for confirmation, this was a must do for her. she needed to come out and say this or else are prospects were going to be significantly worse. host: final minute or two, what haven't we gotten to that you're going to be watching for this week in washington that we should know about? guest: descendant is going to be continuing to consider the lake and riley act, a piece of legislation that would make it easier for law enforcement to detain undocumented immigrants suspected of committing crimes.

this is something that senate majority thune is aiming for to be an early legislative wind for his new majority in his republican trifecta in washington. a number of democrats support the bill in its current form. you've got to think about could this get the 60 votes? it probably can in its current form but a lot of the democrats who voted to advance it want amendments, including senate minority leader chuck schumer. they want the chance to amend this piece of legislation. while republicans are saying is that they are open to narrowly tailored amendments on this issue, but they don't want this to become sort of a comprehensive immigration bill. so the next two days will be critical. there is another procedural vote tonight in the senate on this. this one will not be controversial.

over the next couple of days we will see how serious democrats are in terms of wanting to try to amend this legislation. do they have the votes to sort of filibuster this before it can get final passage? i suspect there are enough democrats right now who would vote yes on final passage on the legislation as currently constructed. i will also add that to get the house has passed this, if the stem passes it that mean it goes to the white house. the current president is obviously joe biden, but what we played last week is that republican leaders in the house and senate want to hold that piece of legislation, assuming it passes both chambers. they want to hold that piece of legislation until donald trump comes into office so that he can sign it potentially on day one. and there is discussion of potentially trying to catch joe biden by surprise and put him in an awkward spot by sending this piece of legislation to him on his final day or final couple days in office, but they have

decided that they are likely going to wait until trump comes into office so that he can for sure sign this piece of legislation and they can notch it legislative win on border security that was a very dominant theme in their messaging as part of the election last year. host: if you want to know what is going on under the capitol dome you probably should be following punch bowl news. andrew is a senior congressional reporter. they for starting your week with us. coming up later this morning, the quincy institute for responsible statecraft joined us to talk about how think tanks are funded. but first, more of your phone calls. our open form starts now. any public policy or political issue you want to talk about, the lines are yours to do so. the numbers on your screen. we will get to those calls right after the break.

♪ >> i, franklin delano roosevelt. >> i do solemnly swear i will faithfully execute the office of president of the united states. and both of the best of my ability preserve, protect and defend the constitution of the united states. so help me god. >> congratulations, mr. president. >> watch all day inauguration coverage on monday, january 20 including historic swearing-in as donald trump takes office of the 47th president of the united states. c-span, democracy unfiltered.

>> democracy is always an unfinished creation. >> democracy is worth dying for. >> democracy belongs to us all. >> we are here in the say shuri of democracy. >> right responsibilities fall once again to the great democracies. >> american democracy is bigger than any one person. >> freedom and democracy must be constantly guarded and protected. >> we are still at our core a democracy. >> this is all so a massive victor seat -- victory for democracy and freedom. >> democracy, it is a process shaped by leaders elected to the highest offices and entrusted to a select few with guardians basic principles. it is where debates unfold, decisions are made in the

nation's course is charted. democracy in real-time. this is your government at work. this is c-span, having your democracy unfiltered. washington journal continues. host: here's where we are on this monday morning on capitol hill. the house is in at noon eastern time. the senate comes in at 3:00 p.m. eastern today. also today from the other end of pennsylvania avenue, president biden set to give a foreign policy address that is going to take place at the state department and it is happening at 2:00 p.m. eastern today. look for live coverage on the c-span network, c-span.org, and the c-span now app. other events in and around washington that you cawatch on c-span 2, coming up in just about 25 minutes in the american enterprise institute, a discussion on the relationship

between parental rights and children's safety and well-being. again, not :00 a.m. eastern if you want to flip over to that. one more figure today, a security briefings preparation on the inauguration, d.c. mayor muriel bowser is joined by u.s. catol police chief thomas major and others as well on preparations and security measures for president elect donald trump, january 20 inauguration. that is at 11:00 a.m. eastern here on c-span, c-span.org and the free mobile app. and as we talked about before any previous segment, there will be plenty of confirmation hearings to watch this week. there's some 14 hearings, 13 nominees, 11 committees is where these will take place. here's one that is getting a lot enti. defense secretary nominee p take f -- pete hegseththats

tomorrow at 9:30 a.m. eastern, c-an.org and the free mobile app. wednesday marco rubio is out for his hearing for the senate foreign relacommtee. he has of course been nominated the trumpet ministration.tate elise stefanik has been nominated to be the next ambassador of the united nations. she will be at the senate foreign relations committee as well stay tuned to the c-span networks throughout the week. the place for you to go if you're interested in these confirmation hearings. now it is our open forum, any public policy, any political issue. now is the time and return this program over to you and let you lead the discussion. kelly is in ohio, up first on the line for republicans. go ahead.

caller: hey, i'd just like to say i've got an idea for a great show and a comment. a great show would be how many conspiracy theories in the last eight years have come to be true, and my second, i you guys journalists, or a you just entertainers? host: i see myself as somebody facilitates discussion it is most important job is to do something that other networks don't do, and that is allowing you and the callers to be part of this program. so no, i'm not out there walking the capitol like andrew, and previous guest and stopping members in always for interviews . if they come here to the set and take your calls, i'll start that discussion with an interview, but what andrew does is much more what you are thinking, the classic reporter-journalist mood. caller: a journalist as somebody

who goes after the truth. host: and who are the journalists that you trust, kelly? caller: well, let's say that those guys who were exposing the tax cheat on hunter biden and these guys who got shot down or the fbi agents who have their stuff stolen from them because they were reporting the truth, how about obama when they first started spying on the trump campaign all the way through? there are so many things to be looked at conspiracy-wise that have turned out to be true. host: that is kelly in ohio. this is eugene in kansas, republican as well. good morning. caller: good morning c-span. just want to get my chance to say next monday on the 20th we want to welcome donald trump act of the presidency.

host: i didn't catch the end of your comments, but i think you finished up. it is (202) 748-8000 for democrats to call in. republicans, (202) 748-8001. independents, (202) 748-8002. we spent the first hour of the program talking about natural disasters in the wake of those ongoing fires in los angeles. this is the front page of the l.a. times this morning, bracing for a fight and recovery, high wind expected to return as fire investigators look back and officials look forward. that is what l.a. residents are waking up to this morning. we can talk about that topic or any topic this morning in our open forum. this is steve in cincinnati, ohio, independent. caller: good morning.

i'd like to make a comment about c-span's coverage of president carter's funeral. i always thought that c-span had wonderful reporting of public events. but they had carter's funeral up in the right-hand corner and then congress on the left side and i just thought it was really, really poor judgment whoever decided to do that. and why in the world did congress have a session on the day of the funeral of a former president? weren't a lot of them at the funeral? it seems like they take off for every other reason anyway. they don't have sessions all the time at the drop of a hat. post: so you are talking about will be called a double boxing, having both on at the same time. the reason is when the house is in session, we show you what is

going on in the house on c-span. anytime it is in session, we show you what is going to happen here on c-span. when the senate is in session, we show you what is going to happen on c-span 2. after the reason to keep that commitment but also be able to show you obviously that the state funeral coverage and the various events and the transfers of the casket, whether it was at andrews air force base or outside the capital. all of that streamed online for you to watch and you can go back and watch all of it in its entirety online. c-span.org is where you can go to do that. so it was an attempt to keep that commitment that we had c-span started, but also give you other opportunities to watch as well. caller: well i guess my issue is why in the world do they even have a session of congress -- host: i tell you steve, that is not something we control. the house and senate control

their own schedule. caller: well. they're always making comments on c-span that you can go online. a lot of older people can't go online. it's not as easy as some of you make it sound. post: this is cabin in the land of lincoln, republican. good morning. caller: good morning, sir. first of all, thank you for your show, it is an amazing show to get real opinions from real people. and i say go god and go trump. trump has endured ever since he started the gunshots, the impeachments, on and on and on trying to get him in prison, trying to stop him from voting in states. but god prevailed and i thank the lord that he did and i thank god that trump is going to be in there. and can i pray for our country?

host: it is your time, it is your phone call. caller: our father who art in heaven, hallowed be our name. i will be done on earth as it is in heaven. give us this day our daily bread and forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors. lead us not into temptation but deliver us from evil. i pray that the world that heal itself, i pray they will cure donald trump and that he will take charge and we will be a godly, respectable country again. just god bless you, and thank you for what you do. i don't feel like you're picking sides or trying to push other narratives. and like the other color that called, you can just go from cnn to fox news, and you can see the lies and the difference like daylight and dark. but anyway, keep up the good work. god bless our country and thank you so much from southern illinois. have a great day. host: the baystate, democrat,

good morning. caller: i just wanted to extend my sympathy to jimmy carter's family and friends and i thought he was a great president and they voted for him. host: what do you remember most about jimmy carter? caller: he was like a regular guy and i thought he was a kind person. i don't know, i just was happy with my life during jimmy carter's reign. not reign, that is the wrong word to use. i'm a little bit nervous. host: three surprised that he lost in 1980? color: i was. host: what did you think of reagan? caller: i just wasn't a reagan fan. i liked jimmy carter. that's all i can say about it. i just thought he was a good person. host: this is justin in wisconsin.

independent, good morning. caller: this is my first time calling. i appreciate your nonbiased coverage. i am a regular watcher and listener of c-span, so i appreciate that. i just wanted to make some quick points. i hope that this current process concerning the appointees for donald trump is fair. i tend to be more conservative but i did not vote for either of the major candidates. i have some major moral objections to the incoming president, but i just hope that like last time with trump appointees that they truly see if the person is qualified and make the determination. so i think that is good. and then last thing, i just want

to say that i appreciate chief justice roberts coming out a week or two ago, saying that we are going to continue to be a nonpartisan port, that we are going to continue to just execute justice fairly instead of just saying a lot of people believe that the supreme court is going to do everything for trump, and so i appreciate that they are maintaining their nonpartisanship. thank you for taking my call. host: is there any nominee that you don't think is qualified at this point? i think we lost the caller. justin, if you are still listening, you can call in once a month, every 30 days is when we ask you to call in to give some time for other callers as well, but we welcome you to call in once every 30 days. this is michael in pennsylvania, republican. caller: i'm just calling in regards to the los angeles fires

, definitely a travesty, devastating for those families. i pray to god for those who are affected for sure, but it's definitely a shame that the democrats in california have allowed this to happen with certain bills and laws preventing water to go where it needs to go, protecting small fish can streams and letting freshwater flow out to the ocean as well as the ddi hires for those being passed over for ddi hires who aren't able to properly do the job. there is a chief, i can't remember her name off the top of my head, the deputy chief, i believe her name is christine larson and she is the head of their equity and human resources era. -- bureau. and years ago back in 2019 she was asked the question what if

someone is not physically fit enough to remove someone from a burning building or what if someone was too heavy to be removed from a burning building and her response was well, if they got themselves in the wrong place, that is why i have to carry them out of a fire. blaming the people rather than someone who needs to physically do their job. that is really all that i have on that matter. post: bobby is a retired fire chief and author of both sides of the fire line, and host of the podcast bobby on fire. she writes in today's usa today about these fires, saying we used to have something called a fire season, but now we have fires all year round, asking what is going on saying it is complicated, and complicated problems can be solved with simple solutions. we need more nuanced discussion, not positions based on ideologies.

as we watch the fires burn our neighbors homes, we have to keep in mind that the fires are burning because of inadequate water supply for a particular fire chief or a reduced budget, they are burning because the santa ana winds, high temperatures and low humidity. have 60 mile-per-hour wind or greater, there is no fire cheese, water supply budget that is going to put out the fires. the modern publication in the urban growth into wildlands, and that is southern california. but we have a growing fire problem also throughout the entire united states. a column in usa today if you want to read it. this is kathy out of north carolina, democrat. caller: good morning. i would like to address the man from southern illinois who said the prayer and how he thanks god that trump was elected president, back to the presidency. i'm how someone who claims to be religious say a prayer on national tv could support donald

trump to be our president. this is the most ungodly man we've ever had in the white house. let's compare jimmy carter to trump. trump is divorced 2, 3 times, has children from three different women. there's nothing moral or godly about donald trump. host: do you think jimmy carter was the most moral or the most godly president that we had? caller: i think that he was someone that we could look up to for sure. i don't understand how the people who are voting for trump ace on god and religion think this is the man that they should be looking up to or that we should all be saying that he is our savior for this country. he's a disgrace. he is a felon, a convicted sexual predator. there's nothing admirable about the man. host: who are the other presidents that you think we can

look up to or could look up to in your lifetime? color: in my lifetime, well, i know that trump voters would hate me for saying this, but barack obama is a good man. he had no scandal during his presidency, he took us out of the 2008 great recession, he tried to bring the country together when mitch mcconnell said we would do everything to make him fail. we have some type of affordable health care for people that we never had before. when you have health care for profit, you are going to have issues, but he tried. he tried and he got the furthest i think of anybody in my lifetime to get something on the table and passed. to me he is an admirable man. trump is not.

host: that is kathy in north carolina. catherine is next out of texas, independent. caller: good morning, how are you? host: doing well. caller: you are my favorite commentator here. the caller who said you don't take sides, i'm going to keep this short, hopefully short. there's two issues that i want to bring up today. i pray for the people out in california, but we've got a bigger problem, and i think the guy that said the prayer had the right to pray. and i agree with the other young lady that thought that trump is not a good person. we all have free speech, but my main point is we've been in south korea for 70 years. we've been in germany, mexico and canada came to help us with those fires. the south korean students are

number one in math and science. the united states is ranked 39th. we've got bases all over the world and we didn't have water in the fire hydrants, and that they are going to look at. but my point is to all your viewers and all your callers. stop picking on one president vs. another. i called on the independent line. i'm voting for the people who do things for their constituents. sometimes we go off the rails but if we look at what we do around the world and then see what we have, trump is right. take care of your people first. take care of your people. we are running around and now japan had another earthquake this morning. when katrina happened, we set a whole seven fleets for them to have water, medical help.

we never can have the ability to take care of our own people. and i just want your viewers to understand this very critical point. some of our students graduating from high school, we've got some bigger, bigger issues. we are going to have a doctors and nurses shortage, and people are just in their own narrow mind. where are all those countries that we have bases in? for 70 years now. host: to your point, this is from usa today, canada and mexico sending the united states health, fire crews, aircraft and equipment from canada including prince columbia and quebec among the first on the scene to help battle the fires. meanwhile, mexico's president said friday that the secretary of foreign affairs had spoken with president biden and gavin newsom about sending los angeles

for the national forestry commission and national secretary of defense. we are going to send support because the people of mexico have only been getting that also because there are many mexican people in this zone of the united states. the statement from the mexican president. gavin newsom thinking the and canadian governments. so this is bob in arkansas, republican. caller: i just wanted to make a comment about the fire in california. i used to live in orange county, california, and we had the santa ana winds blowing real hard. i don't know if any water system would be able to control that. one thing i do pride them on is the fact that they didn't have the resources when they should

have. the whole plant is screwed up and newsom is screwed up. we talked about all the money that went to the illegal aliens in california, and then i wonder what about all the people living out on the street in california? especially the areas that got burned down, what happened to them? a comment about the previous caller that said something, he prayed for the president. there's nothing wrong with that. we've had good presidents, we had bad presidents. what you need to do is pray for all of them and hope that they do the right thing. i like richard nixon and he resigned. bill clinton had monica lewinsky in the oval office and he never

resigned. hillary was secretary of state, and we know what happened, we lost a bunch of people overseas because of it, because she made the wrong decision. when she was running for office she said who do you want to answer the phone in the middle of the night and there's a crisis? the trouble is she didn't answer the phone. she was only secretary of state, though. the thing is, when obama was elected, that thing on the comment line, if you succeed, america succeeds. if they don't do the right thing

the next time, don't vote for him. five and, it is too bad, he was just too old for the job. 588 years old, so i know where he is probably at. he's younger than me. but the thing is, some of the things he did work good, and some are bad. the border was bad. the ukraine deal was bad. you go back you find that obama screwed up with join in 2014. host: that is bob in arkansas. this is william virginia. caller: how can when talk our

tax dollars and is him protect them. host: that is all you want to say, william? caller: it is a waste of money. let him spend his money. host: that is william. there is lori out of ohio, independent. caller: good morning, john. it's been a while i understand called. i'm calling about the same thing the two party system is corrupt. it never worked for anyone and the bottom line is people are team blue, team red. the woman earlier stated how evil trump is and great obama was. no, obama was not great.

he bailed out the bankers. none of them is good. jimmy carter was the best from george washington all the way up to bidenment biden -- biden. biden is facilitating and had his dirty hand in ukraine since 2014. people need to wake up and not be sycophants to the two party system. host: why don't we have a third party on par with the democrats and republicans? why has that been so hard? caller: it is the bottom line dollar. declares no money and they are

never going to allow anyone to change the capitalist system and the democrats and republicans support the billionaire class. the third party system doesn't have any chance when bernie was running it 2016 they squashed him. they made sure he was never going to be near the overall office. host: you might be interested about 10 more minutes we will be talking about money behind think tanks in washington from the quincy. stick around. i think you will find that conferring interesting. that is 9:15. this is rodney in miami. you are next.

caller: good morning, the john. the lady that was talking about morality. you go back it look at bill clinton he set a new low. obama divided the races more than any other. joe biden wouldn't recognize that he had a granddaughter. many perfect people did amazing things. i don't think trump is perfect but any president that will make america stronger will always death my vote. you mentioned tom mccollege tock

i was stunned by how good his op-ed was. host: that is rodney. vicky. st. louis democrat. caller: i think there are a few people that are delusional to think that donald trump would be mentioned in the same sense as moral. people don't remember the pandemic when lost 1.2 million people. you never her trump talking about those people dying. they have sat without their loved ones because he said it wasn't real. that hurts my feelings. that is all i have to say.

host: that is vickie this is the op-ed in the "wall street journal" bad performance served for kaefls wildfires. misplaced priorities and previews controlsal played a role. this is mook in michigan. caller: good morning. i have a question rather than a question. is there any way being check these donations given to trump if that is income and he would have to pay taxes and he had quite a few people done monday it him and he transferred it to his lawyers. that should be income. i had friends who had it pay because we had to take up

donations. host: are you talking about political donations? caller: i'm talking about donations to him to pay for his lawyers and political money to pay his lawyers. that should be considered income. host: we do he is money and politics segments and bring in experts whose job is to do that. that would be a better person but i promise we will do more of those it was focused on the flaggal. i believe it is last monday being look that up. wane is next in springfield, missouri, independent. caller: good morning to you. i would say i heard people

talking about judging trump. i don't feel like it is right to point at people but look at their own lives. none -- nobody is perfect. his was just the news and everything. my merchant voted for him before she died. i used to live in new york and i see the floods and i feel sorry for them and i see the force in los angeles. but they had fires before in the past in california, why didn't they preplan? even though it was a week ago but they would have the weather explicit backed up so when they

come on they would have the supplies because a lot of people they are not movie stars, they work hard and they can't afford to rebuild their homes with the economy. host: john is in harrison city, pennsylvania. republican. good morning. john, are you with us? we go it james in ohio democrat. caller: hello. host: go ahead, james. you are on the air. caller: i'm 95 years old and i have lived through 20 some presidents of the united states and i'm a veteran of world war ii and korean veteran. i served in the seventh fleet of the navy and eighth marines and

quite a bit of inspection i would looking to say some of these people that department live through a depression and never had to go hungry. when i was a boy you didn't have a long distance telephone. you got the nba down the street. we had a radio but you can't hardly here anything. up until about 1940 you never heard of a long-distance call and test people i feel sorry for them because they are is stupid it seems sad to listen to these people. if i live out this administration i will be 100 and i pray it god that i will that i can see my 100th birthday and

tell these people a lot of things. it teams that the education has raoupbld the country. i have an i. grid education that i got in a one room school and it was different when i was bornen the republican administration of hoover. i could tell you a lot of things that took place. i served in the marine corps under -- we were segregated in the marine corps and it is hard to say but system of the best days of my life were under segregation. host: why do you si sa that? caller: i like it tell the black people and white people you are black because good made you this

way and i'm white because god made me that way and we have it get along. we don't have reparation to me and they don't know no represent arrest to the blocksment there are so many things that are is disturbing at this time. i listen to games journal every morning and i feel sad for the people that want to divide the country. i was born the democrat because in the depression if you were not a democrat you didn't get anything because i was 21 when i registered to be a democrat. but they took a junior senator from the worst county to be the president i quit the democrat party and i would be they had an

independent and a republican and a democrat party so we could vote as we would look to. i have been unindependent ever since but single still registered as the democrat but end of the democratic pertinent was when obama bam a president. his mother was from -- host: we will take a call it ohio. this is frank in p., independent caller: hey, john. the reason i'm calming is i have a bone to pick with you. i had it boy could it pedro and i think you are on the list now. a few months back pedro allowed somebody to say the lord's

prayer often the air and this blew my mind and now you. the caller asked you may i. i'm not sure why your name is no. this is a political show, not a religious show. i'm not sure if you have weekly meetings between the hostest it -- hosts but in connection meeting that caller he might be right on to something. you are the last true political show with honesty and openness and you are taking that away from us. it is getting out of hadn't home religious callers and you ahad you them to quote bible verses mention god and prisoner of

warment this is not a political she because were the best but if this continues i will boycott the washington journal. i want to know about politics and i'm disappointed that you allowed that today and that the producers are aplowing this to happen and if it continues there's nowhere else to turn true political commentary and discussions that isn't buy why issed. you are the last. if i was you guys i guess i have no more to turn to politics. i hope you discuss this because it is getting out of hand. just for all the other callers that want to send thoughts and precarious there's a famous saying prayer is a way it do

nothing and pretend you are doing. pray before the disaster see if the gadd is real then. thank you for letting me share my voice. host: this is david in akron. caller: good morning. i called you before it has been over a month but i have made observations. the patriotic american but i'm a main strain patriot. i cut my teeth on on the vietnam war and when began it do research i saw the college criminal connection between the west and very many. voom were trying to get their independence from colonialism. people need it remember the united states was born out of a fight against colonial i think

left-hand. what has happened is wall street has become colon ideal power so the practices we objected to from the british we are imposing them on other people. we have special interests it represent other countries that lobby for our congressmen and pretty much because if they do do with they think they get prayered -- host: david, what you brought up just then is a i think topic we will be talking about next. stick around because it is a new report about the funding of think tanks in washington and who is behind it. hope you stick around. that is our last caller. ben freeman is next with the

quincy institute for responsible statecraft. we will be right back. >> kentucky senator mitch mcconnell spent 40 years in the senate. he is the hongest any senator was at the top of the leadership in either party. john thune was hrblgted to head the republican majority in the snot a book of mcconnell is the profiles of power how mitch mcconnell mastered the senate and lost also party. he connected over 50 hours of

interviews and was granted access to never before released oral history. the price of power howitch mcconnell mastered the senate on book not blues. it is valuable on the c-span now fee mobile app. attention middle and high school students it is time for the student cam 2025. your chance it create a documentary to inspire change and mac an impact. it should answer the question your message it the president what issue is most important to you or your community. whether you are passionate about politics, environment or community. it is your platform.

with $100,000 in prizes. this is your opportunity to not only make ran impact but be rewarded for your crty. enter your submissions today. the deadline is january 20, 2025. the c-span bookshelf podcast makes it easy to listen to the podcast to discover new authors. discuss history, biography, current events. bock not plus and q&a. lesson it the book shelled in consist today. it is in all of our pod disaster

casts on the video app and c-span.org/podcast. democracy unfiltered with espn experience history as it unfolds with live coverage as puplgs take control and a new chapter begins about the swearing in of the 47th 3rez of the united states. don't know in for the flag ration as donald trump takes the east becoming president of the united states. stay with stan forren filtered coverage of the 119th congress and nag ration. democracy unfiltered. washington journal continues.

host: a conversation on think tank 23u7bding about ben frequently 10. we should explain what the quincy institute for responsible state craft is. are you a think tank? guest: we are indeed. thank you for having me. it is a think tank and nonprofit nun partisan action tank because we are not just thinking we are trying to get stuff done. our purpose is to reduce the military decision of foreign policy appear critical we try it call out special interests diving foreign policy. host: how are you funded? guest: we have a had the of small donors, big donors, foundation. we are in the funded by foreign governments off u.s. government

and defense contractors. this really frees us it offer a clear unbuy why issed view of the policy. host: is this unusual? are most think tanks taking money from one of those they places? guest: absolutely. we are on unisland we are surrounded by other think tanks had do take money from foreign governments, u.s. government and defense contractors. many think tanks take a considerable amount of funding from those. host: what is the any tank funding tracker? guest: to me it is a labor of love something we have been been working on a website where anybody of your viewers friends in the media and congress can go

to find out how the top think tanks are funded. it provides details about the funding, what year it was received. if a fortune government, which branch of the government and whenever opinion the exact dollar amount. host: what should viewers know in the atlantic council? guest: many things. i think what they can find in about that is they are helpful furnisheded by fern governments. when fond at the received more money from foreign governments. more than dollar 20 million and contractor funding. they get a had the of funding from the top defense

contractors. sort of what we see with the they can council this huge amount of money coming in from some foreign governments and defense contractors and when try to trace it back it what the atlantic council was doing and it was mixing recommendation this is with benefit the funders. host: who are the foreign governments this give the most to american think tanks? guest: by and large it is our democratic friends, friends in nitto and united kingdom capped. you look at the top 10 it is mostly filled with democratic regimes that are allies of the u.s. but at the very top foreign govern is the united arab

emirates. they guy more. they are a authoritarian regime and complicit in war chromosome. and fund the r.s.f. who were tkhreurg genocide so we see them donating millions of dollars every year it the top foreign policy think tanks in the u.s. we also see or they are taren regimes look saudi arabia and third highest fortune government was qatar weisner authoritarian regime in the middle east the human rights issues and qatar and u.a.e. have been cut meddling the u.s. process and can tar is giving mechanicals of dollars it think thanks in the

u.s. so it is important it know that and have a clear vision of the cards on the table when they are looking at analysis in think tanks. host: the unless from your report valuable at quincy inst.org united arab emirate nearly $17 million. united kingdom $15.5. qatar $9 million, canada 8.6 million, germany 8.5 million. how were you able to track this money and how easy was it come up with these numbers? guest: it feels painfully hard. think tanks are not required to disclose their funding and when

found this more than a third of them disclose tock about their funding we call them dark money think tanks. but most of those who disclose we get sort of a partial transparency this they might release the numbers of funders but no dollar amount or release some dollar amounts but you don't relevance know how much funding is coming in. but we had it scour their websites annual reports being the financial documents where we could track it we did. you can see system of the sources for every donation you see the source where we got the information but it was really hard to do and this process took

almost a year to put together. one of the goals is we look or virus it not tack a year or something it found them and just go to or website and if they have a suspicion of somebody with a conflict of interest income go to our website and look it up in a hurry so they don't have to be a nerd like my. host: you mentioned the atlantic council. it has a donor accept temperatures policy. acceptance of any contributions is at the discretion of the council and it is isn't to a condition and anything of $250 that stipulate hits the they can council is accepting it on the condition it retains independence and control over any subscribe consistent with the independence policy.

will do you mac of that? guest: it is nobel of them it put out a disclosure like this. those independence policies are in the we also know a lot of these think tanks that put out these policies, they will allow the owners to preview the research before it is published, to make comments on that research. in some cases to provide this for that research. some of these top think tanks are doing what we call pay for play research. they pay money to get a specific report done that they have created. they are literally paying for the products that some of these think tanks are doing. the atlantic through leaked emails we learned that the uae

ambassador had access to some of the atlantic council reports before they were published. the opportunity to provide his comments to scholars. our concern is that when donors are given that kind of opportunity, it really allows them to play sensor. they come back to scholars and they have unfavorable recommendations, we worry that some of this research might be bent to the winds of these foreign funders. host: it is 9:30 on the east coast. the director of -- director of the foreign policy initiative there. phone lines for you to call in, it is split by political party. democrats, (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001 independents, (202) 748-8002.

he is with us until the end of our program, 10:00 a.m. this morning. the top 10 think tanks that receive funding from the u.s. government include iran corporation at $1.4 billion, the wilson center to the tune of $52 million. the atlantic council, center for new american security, the marshall fund, carnegie endowment, brookings institution, and inter-american dialogue. why is the united states government giving money to think tanks? guest: it is a very good question. in some cases the money is going to think tanks because the federal government needs answers to some very hard questions. the top recipient of that funding, ran is known as a federally funded research center. it is really a fancy way of

saying these are the government nerds who help the government answer these tough questions that they might have. most of the research funded never sees the light of day. these are private reports usually going to the department of defense. they are hoping these scholars could help the department of defense answer some of these questions. behind the scenes, i don't see any conflict of interest or problem with that private front. we do get into some interesting questions when we think about the federal government using taxpayer dollars to fund very public facing think tanks. we identify in the report those think tanks are promoting an agenda that would benefit the agencies that are funding them.

we see this especially with the department of defense funding these hawkish think tanks that unsurprisingly recommend the department of defense. we see this cycle continuing on. host: what are some examples of that, that you would see? guest: more money going to the department of defense and then more money to those think tanks. host: which think tanks are you referring to? guest: we really see this at just about any think tank the department of defense is funding. they have service members who go on staff at these think tanks and publish research. you really see across the board from top organizations like brookings, wilson center, any of those think tanks that are funded. there are questions about whether u.s. taxpayer dollars should be going to think tanks

that are effectively lobbying the federal government. host: the department of defense the agency that gives the most to think tanks. homeland security, and so on down the line. all of this information available if you want to scroll through it yourself or call in with questions about it. this is alex up first in minnesota, independent. you are on. caller: thanks for taking my call. i have two things i was hoping to comment on. you have done a good job commenting on reports. what about action on behalf of the donors. an example would be the marshall fund was on. they were talking about their work citing information. i called and asked if they were

funded by the u.s. government and they said yes, i said don't you think this is a conflict? the person was kind of demure. i wonder if you had examples like that where they are using the cut out to achieve things the government wouldn't be able to do legally. other think tanks using cutouts by foreign government to avoid the impression of foreign government funding. they were a company. they were spreading their money around to the bidens. should they make a law so you can't take money from cutouts in that way? i thank you for answering my questions. guest: those are absolutely excellent questions. i will try to answer in order. this in some ways has been a loophole.

states are not allowed to use their funding to hire lobbyists. they cannot go out like a lot of other firms can and hire a lobbying firm. when you look at the work think tanks are doing, you are absolutely right. it's not just about the reports and the research and of it. it is really just the beginning of what they do. they are testifying before congress. they are outright helping to write legislation. if you believe funding is influencing what think tanks do, you know that think tanks are helping to write legislation you could see a path for the u.s. government giving money to think tanks that are moving on to directly influence legislation on their behalf. there should be some serious questions asked about that u.s. government funding. the second question, this is a

really good point and a pivotal issue that we are seeing more and more foreign governments turning to think tanks. we found out there was $110 million going to think tanks, that amount of money has gone up in the last five years almost every single year. foreign governments are turning to think tanks more and more to influence the u.s.. a big reason they are doing that is think tanks don't have to disclose their funding. they don't have to disclose a nickel that they get from foreign government. if that foreign government hires a lobbying firm or pr firm they will have to register under the foreign agents registration act. there's a lot of filing requirements. everyone has to report how much money they are giving, the firm they higher has to report everything they are doing.

to fund a think tank you don't have to report any of that. we see think tanks doing work that really resembles very closely some of this lobbying just without the disclosure. that is the emphasis of what we were trying to do, to shine a bright light on this dark and not transparent field of think tank. host: renee sends this question via text service. how are aei and heritage funded? they seem to be the most powerful think tanks in washington? guest: i will tackle aei first. we have absolutely no idea how aei is being funded. they are one of those dark money think tanks. they do not publicly disclose donors. i have emailed them on multiple occasions asking them for their

donor information. they rather politely explained they do not make that information publicly available. we do know about aei, they have let slip at public events that they do expect -- except funding from defense contractors. the chairman of their board owns pieces of defense contractors too. that is about all i could tell you. aei is one of the dark money think tanks. the heritage foundation, very recently i have beat up on heritage. just last year they publicly announced that they would sever their ties with defense contractor funders, they are no

longer taking that money. at least on two of our buckets the heritage foundation is not taking money, they are a little bit murky in terms of transparency, a lot of their funding comes from a small donor base that donates to them. they are certainly much more transparent than aei. host: the top pentagon contractor donors to think tanks, here's the top five, northrop grumman, lockheed martin, mitsubishi, rtx and airbus at about $1.7 million. what should we know about pentagon contractors? guest: there's a lot to know,

great question. i think when it comes to that list you mentioned, it is well worth noting, we talk about companies, these are some of the very top defense contractors, these are companies getting tens of billions of dollars every year in pentagon contracts and taxpayer money. what we see with this think tank funding is they are turning around and taking a little piece of that, giving that money back to think tanks, they are making recommendations that would be a financial benefit. this includes things like recommending specific arms sales . recommending other arms sales from places like israel.

we see this over and over again that these think tanks are funded by pentagon contractors are making recommendations that would be financial windfall. you are seeing this -- i would say virtuous, but you are seeing the cycle of taxpayer money going to these entities. those entities donate to think tanks. host: new york, this is cheryl waiting, good morning. caller: you came on the show and you listed all of these think tanks. i would think aipac, pro-israel think tanks would be near the top. i find that hard to believe. you had on think tanks talking about the israel palestinian, i won't call it a war, i will call it a conflict.

you never have anyone on that has the palestinian point of view. it has all been pro-israel think tanks and you let them go on for half an hour. host: what you are saying is not true. i posted segments where we have heard from a variety of viewpoints. if you missed it, it is available at c-span.org. let me let ben freeman jump in on israel and think tanks. guest: aipac is certainly a word we hear all the time. it is the first things on people's heads. for us, it is a really tricky case. aipac is not actually a foreign institute.

this is a domestic organization. it is funded by domestic sources . by our definition, we are looking exclusively at foreign government funding. we could say first sure money that was coming from a foreign government, aipac doesn't meet that threshold. until we hear some sort of smoking gun that aipac is getting funding from the israeli government, i am not aware of that. we will go back and update the database. we will update this database every year. some of these funding dynamics change. if we do learn that aipac is funded by the israeli government we will certainly add that. host: natalie is in texas, independent, thanks for waiting. caller: i have a question, i

want to know -- are you on the air now? host: yes, you are. caller: i wanted to ask you all why are they taking money out of social security of old and disabled? they are taking $400 out of my check every month. i could barely make it. i have to ride the bus to get groceries. host: it is certainly an important topic and one we will certainly come back to but i have been freeman focusing on think tanks right now and want to focus on his report. ben freeman, think tanks that

focus on domestic policy versus foreign policy. do some of these countries that give money to think tanks, do they give it to think tanks that focus on the u.s. to messick policy? guest: we really don't see that as much. part of this is these foreign governments are hoping to get some in return. they are just as much investments as they are donations. we do see less money from foreign governments going to think tanks. that's not to say some of these foreign governments aren't quite generous. we have mentioned the uae and qatar donating to u.s. nonprofits following natural disasters. i know the uae specifically donated following hurricanes here. they make charitable contributions.

when it comes to think tank funding they are very much focused on u.s. foreign policy. host: who are the most transparent think tanks? guest: i can't say this enough. i kind of fell in love with the stinson center's transparency. it was only one of two organizations that got our full five-star rating in transparency. it really does it all. they put out their annual reports and list all of their donors. they don't just list them, they list the exact dollar amount that each of those donors is giving. it is a level of transparency that we just don't see at think tanks. they are hiding behind anonymous donors. we really recommend that when

think tanks are considering how to they improved transparency, look at the stinson center. host: what do they do? guest: they do a little bit of everything. they have a large focus on u.s. foreign policy. they are an action tank. they are making recommendations for proposals in the foreign policy space. again, they are doing it in a transparent way. host: paulette in florida, good morning. caller: good morning. i wanted to say something else that the funding is not relative to the domestic, i think that is a lie. the countries that fund -- the

rich stay rich. i wanted to make a short little joke but it is not a joke to show all of that funding, you have a billionaire and working-class person. they give 100 cookies to all three. it is all about money. people are rising up. trying to figure things out. did you hear that lady crying about the social security check? come on. thank you. guest: i very much hear you.

we are combing through the data. looking to see where that foreign government money is coming from. if we find it going to some of these domestic interests, we will do our best to tell. i will say on a very basic level, the pie that is the u.s. government's budget in one year, we only have so much and we have to figure out how to chop it up every year. foreign governments clamoring for u.s. military bases on their soil clamoring for more money to go to them. at some point that money has to come from somewhere. taxpayers are paying for all of this.

to give more money to some of these money interests that are giving a lot of money to think tanks. host: once a come back to why you didhis research project in the first place saying is this guy trying to make everything seem nefarious? guest: that is a wonderful question. i have worked as think tanks. a variety of think tanks for 15 years. where this started was about two years ago, it said think tank experts were widely distrusting. they were less trusted than just about anybody you could think of. doctors, engineers, lawyers were more trusted than think tanks. even lawyers were trusted more.

we sort of said that is a problem. we want them to be trusted again. realize maybe the public does have some cause for concern. they do have these glaring conflicts of interest. they are hiding this from the american public. what we are hoping for is to get this and have them be more transparent. at the end of the day this will lead to an increase in confidence. so we could have more trust that these think tanks are working for the greater good in u.s. policy. host: the german marshall fund received some $16 million from foreign governments. another $3.2 million from the u.s. government in nearly a million dollars from pentagon contractors, what should we know?

guest: i think the marshall fund is unique. as the name would imply, this is an internationally focused think tank. they get money from foreign governments in europe. because of that gamut, the role that they play, there's a lot of truth in advertising. i personally was a little bit less concerned with the amount of money going to the german marshall fund. i don't remember the specific details, i believe it was overwhelmingly from european allies. to me as an independent researcher i wasn't too worried. host: some $4 million from the

federal foreign office of germany. $3.1 million from the ministry of foreign affairs. 2 million dollars from norway. $2 million from the united states agency for international development. just a few minutes left with ben freeman this morning if you want to get your calls in, the numbers we put on the screen for you. included in this report is recommendations for think tanks for congress, the media, what would you like to see done here to change this process that we have talked about? guest: since we are talking on tv, one of the things we are hoping or is media will use us as a resource. they could quickly look up the funding of that think tank and let the viewers know.

if they are talking about the united arab emirates, an organization that receives funding, we are hoping our friends in the media will let the viewers a or readers know about that potential conflict of interest. as i mentioned, think tanks are working directly with congress and we are hearing from congressional staff that a lot of this came as a surprise to them. they had no idea about the financial ties that they have. we are hoping to make it easier for them to access that information. we really want to encourage congress to sit down some concrete rules. it is really the wild west. they are not required to disclose any of this.

more than one third disclose nothing about their funders. we are hoping congress will require think tanks to disclose funding. there is the think tank transparency act in the senate. it has important improvements about the increasing requirement think tanks to disclose foreign funding. we are hoping one of these bills will pass and think tanks will be required to disclose any funding they get. host: a question, what is your opinion on 501(c)(3) think tanks that have 501(c)(3) or action arms? guest: we are seeing this more and more. the antiquated notion that a think tank is this nonprofit, the ivory tower for the

research. that idea has gone out the window because of these c4's, where they have these explicitly political arms. we are seeing this across the think tank spectrum. they have heritage action. the center for american progress , they have a c4 too. republican or democrat it does not matter. we are seeing think tanks warming up in this political space explicitly. my concern here is it's really hard to disentangle this funding. you see these think tanks that have the 501(c)(3) or 501 c4. they are sitting arm in arm right next to each other. it is really hard to disentangle when you are making a charitable

contribution or the amount of money that you could fund we find its way over. it is an important question to ask they are. on a basic level when you are looking at the work, on some level you have to recognize that even the c3 side could be politically weaponized and be used to influence elections. you have to take that research with a grain of salt and know that at some level it might be political. host: two websites for our viewers. quincyinst.org. and think tank fundingtracker.org. this project that then freeman and his folks have put together. thanks so much for the time this morning. let's talk about it more down the line. guest: thank you. host: that will do it for us

this morning on "washington journal." president biden said to speak this afternoon at 2:00 p.m. eastern about foreign policy issues taking place at the state department. look to the c-span networks for coverage of that. we will be back here tomorrow morning at 7:00 a.m. eastern, four :00 a.m. pacific. have a great monday. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2025] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> the hseeturns for business today at noon eastern orpehes with legislative later in the afternoon. a number of amtrak and disaster relief measures are on the counter.