>> coming up on washington journal, we take your calls and comments. and then francesca chambers has the latest on the trump transition, and brigham mccown and trevor higgins will discuss president trump's energy agenda. "washington journal" starts now.

join the conversation. ♪ host: good morning this friday, january 17. we are days away from the inauguration of president-elect trump and the gop-controlled senate is hurrying to confirm his cabinet. with a flurry of confirmation hearings this week, the wall street journal notes the president-elect moneyman, his picked treasury secretary yesterday, outlining how a second trump administration would steer the economy. this morning, we get your take, will the upcoming trump administration improve the economy? democrats, (202)-748-8000. republicans, (202)-748-8001. independents, (202)-748-8002. you can text if you don't want to call at (202)-748-8003,

include first name, city and state, or post on facebook.com/c-span and on x with the handle @cspanwj. let's start with the confirmation hearing before the senate committee yesterday, the president elects to service secretary -- treasury, testifying. c-span covered it in its entirety. look at this exchange between maggie hassan questioning the nominee on his plans to lower costs. [video clip] >> under president-elect trump's policies, do you believe prices for families will go up or down? >> i believe inflation will be much closer to the federal reserve's target of 2%, and i believe what we have seen the past two years is the bottom two

clean tiles have a very different basket of goods and services, so there are two ways, we can either lower costs or get real wages up, i would hope we were able to do both. >> you believe president trump's policies will further increase ranges and lower inflation? >> i believe they will increase real wages and lower inflation closer to the federal reserve's 2% target as it did during his first administration. >> are there any specific policies proposed by the president-elect that would increase prices for families? >> nothing i can immediately think of. >> so that is a no. if the president-elect were to propose a policy that you believe would raise prices, would you advise against it? >> i would speak to president

trump about it, it is his decision, and i believe if we think that we look back, that it is a complete composite return in terms of aggregate inflation numbers, i think it is very difficult. >> i have limited time, so if you believe a policy that is proposed by president trump would increase prices, would you advise against doing it? yes or no? >> i cannot answer that question because it is a hypothetical. [end video clip] host: scott bessent in the hot seat, testifying befe w senator is on how the trump administration would serhe u.s. economy. this morningdo you belie t second term by president-elect donald trump will improve the ecom th is seated press recently conducted a poll asking folks,

do have confidence in mr. trump's ability to lower food costs in 2025? 21% saidhe arextmely very confident in his ability andis administration's ability and 17% sa moderately confident and 61% said slightly or not at all confident. when they asked about mr. trump's ability to lower cost of housing in 2025, take a look at those numbers, 64% said slightly not at all confident, while 16% said there moderately confident in 19% said extremely very confident. we would like your thoughts on this. will the incoming trump administration improve the u.s. economy? before we get to your thoughts, i'll going president joe biden sat down with msnbc last night with words for donald for an exit interview.

here is what he had to say when questioned about where the u.s. economy is today. >> the only way to deal with inflation is unemployment and another recession. we have to make sure we keep inflation down. guess what, i was convinced, the american people, if they have a shot, they will step up and get the job done. they stepped up in every major endeavor, and i never believed we could not have a soft landing. and inflation is down almost 2%, a lot going on. but the first thing we have to do is look at the advantage and disadvantage. the pandemic was so badly handled that we are still dealing with thousands of people at a diner in america.

first of all, it was the rationale that if we don't spend the money, we take care of that. secondly, when i came along and said in addition to that, we can now change the dynamic and invest more in the things that make us who we are. for example, i remember walking 300 miles a day basically in delaware, and going through the tunnel, the last piece of work done on that tunnel going into the bay, i think it was like 19, 17, 18 or 19 light bulbs hanging down from inside, i mean, that is what we are talking about. and we are going to create jobs immediately. you start building that tunnel, you create thousands of jobs, and generating product ability.

i got a lot of criticism, understandably. we invested more in red states and blue states. >> that is a miss report. >> for two reasons, all, red states really screwed up in terms of the way they handle their economy and manufacturing and access to supply chains. [end video clip] host: from the incoming and outgoing, do you have confidence on the incoming trump administration to improve the economy? as our conversation for the first hour of today's washington journal. we have an update from the guardian on where that cease-fire hostage really steel stands. here is their headline, israel-gaza cease-fire: netanyahu says hostage release to begin on sunday of security cabinet approves the deal. as the cabinet meets right now, the prime minister of office has

said hostages are expected to be released as early as sunday. we will keep an eye on that on the washington journal, as well. andrew, sterling, virginia, democratic caller, good morning. caller: good morning, greta. i hope you give me a couple of minutes to get a couple of things off my chest. i have been wanting to say this, and this is my opportunity. host: is it on the economy and what you think the second trump administration could be? caller: yes ma'am. if you show a little patience please. to all the americans who voted to reelect donald trump, congratulations, you just sold out our country, democracy and constitution. basically, the price of eggs is going to be like gas. we have lost our decency and morale.

we have become a mean, selfish and uncaring nation. it was a sacrilege to call trump our savior, one day we will have to answer. republican controlled congress, thinking they would lower the price of food and housing, think again. all day wanted was your vote at the ballot box. they have shown time and time again -- the only meaningful legislation the past was to have massive cash cuts to the wealthy billionaire donors and corporations. you are only here to make drastic cuts to social security and medicaid. huge tax cuts and isn't it ironic that these 12

billionaires will be sitting at the inauguration, along with elon musk, jeff bezos? my bet is they will all be truly nourished by the time trump leaves office. host: we have other people waiting, so i'm going to jump in. treasury picked scott bessent pressed on tariffs, the choice of president elect trump's choice to be secretary, testified to the finance committee thursday, speaking favorably of higher tariffs and tax cuts. the moneyman on capitol hill yesterday. will the incoming trump administration with the president-elect and mr. scott bessent improve the economy customer ed -- economy? ed, independent. caller: the first need for the economy is guaranteed jobs are

everyone, starting with the people at the bottom of society. i don't have any confidence in either of these two parties to do that. there are at least 800 billion in the bank accounts, and millions in college endowments, the churches have billions of dollars and 17 billionaires similar to give away all the money to help the poor. host: so when you heard the outgoing president biden yesterday or earlier this week in his farewell address talk about an oligarchy taking shape in america, would you agree? caller: it has bn running the country for decades. but the key is a guaranteed job and a place to live for the poor. that is ke host: that is ed, new jersey, independent. let's back to the associated

espoll on creating more jobs in 25. when they asked if they had confidence that the trump administration would create more in 2025, 54% said they are sightly or not at all confident. 27% said they are extremely very confident, so higher numbers on this job question, and then 18% said they are moderately confident. this is from an associated press: recently. on capitol hill yesterday, senator bernie sanders listed elon musk, jeff bezos and mark zuckerberg in a question disagree secretary nominee -- to the scott bessent secretary nominee scott bessent on whether or not he agrees there is an oligarchy taking shape in america. listen to this exchange. [video clip] >> when you have a small number of multimillionaires who have

enormous economic, media, and political power, would you agree with president biden that an oligarchy is taking shape in america? with wealth, influence, the entire democracy, with basic rights and freedoms? that is what president biden said last night. i agree with them, do you? >> senator sanders, i enjoyed our visit -- >> speak a little closer to the microphone. >> i appreciate the question on tariffs and china, the three winners you listed, they have all made the money themselves, mr. elon musk came to the country as an immigrant -- >> i understand that, but what

i'm asking is when you have a handful of people like musk who will soon be part of the trump administration, and others, when you have three people who own more wealth on the bottom half of american society, when they have influence on the media, when they spend huge amounts of money in both political parties to elect candidates, what biden said the sign is very moving toward an oligarchy. i'm asking you that question. forget how they made their money. do you think that when so few people have so much wealth, it forms an oligarchy in society? >> i wouldn't, no, president biden gave the presidential medal of freedom to two who i think were qualified as oligarchs. >> this is not a condemnation of anyone individual, i'm just asking, with so few people

having so much wealth and power, do you think that is an oligarchy form of society? >> senator, i think it depends on the ability to move up and down -- >> even if you had the mobility, a new matter who those individuals might be. [end video clip] host: scott bessent, the nominee by president-elect donald trump to serve as treasury secretary, taking questions on capitol hill yesterday with his son sitting behind him. we covered that hearing and can find it all on c-span.org. we have covered numerous hearings thi, confirmation hearingsyou n find them on a website at c-span.org or oure vio mobile app, c-span now. today, up on capitolill this friday, governor kristi noem of south dakota will be in the hot seat. sete committees, talking about

her nomination t serve as homeland security secretary as president-elect donald trump readies an aggressive immigration push on day one. you can see her bio. tune in right here on c-span at 9:00 a.m. eastern time for coverage of that confirmation hearing. she will be sure to take questions on mass deportation and other immigration policies, you can also watch online at c-span.org or our free video mobile app, c-span now. jim, missouri, republican. let's hear from you. caller: thank you. i really appreciate your program and srs president trump is concerned, i think there is place for him to improve the economy. he has done it before. the fact that we've had this

nightmare was the president elect, he has always been a liar and a cheater, or at least a dishonest and unruly person. host: what policies that you have heard president-elect talk about that you think will improve the economy? caller: well, to start with, the energy sector. that is going to be a boon. we use oil for everything, and people who think we can do without oil is just fooling themselves. host: president-elect donald trump takes to energy secretary and the environmental protection

administrator were on capitol hill this week, as well, and we will dig into their testimony and policies during the next trump administration and our second hour of the washington journal. jack, maryland, democrat. caller: good morning. good morning. so, the question is, what is trump going to improve? we are not talking unemployment, we had a strong labor market for well over two years now. it has never really been over 4%. we had steady gdp quarter after quarter. the stock market has been blazing hot. you cannot get any better than that. if you have a 401(k), which i can attest to, that has been growing out of this world. so what exactly would he be improving? let's talk about what he is proposing, extending the tax

cuts, which would lower gas prices, etc., he's talking about across-the-board tariffs, which everyone around the world would do nothing but increase prices with irish american consumer. mass immigration deportation. again, inflationary. everything he is proposing is inflationary. so, if he is smart, what he will do is nothing and try to maintain what we have been accomplishing the last four years and rebranded as a trump economy, i don't care, but don't mess it up. host: jack, democrat in maryland says he thinks these policies outlined by the incoming president on taxes and tariffs will mess up our current economy. do you agree or disagree? all part of our conversation here this morning on the

washington journal. back to that associated press poll, of these proposed tariffs by the president elect, 29% favor them. 46% oppose, another 24% are not sure or neither. they don't know what to think quite yet. we will see what happens when mr. trump takes over as president of the u.s. monday is inauguration day and coverage begins at 7:00 a.m. eastern time and continues throughout the day here on c-span. we will give you context, along with sights and sounds and history on c-span and c-span2 will give you unfiltered inauguration sights and sounds. you will be able to watch it unfold on c-span networks and

c-span.org and on our free video mobile app c-span now. on taxes and tariffs, here is an exchange from the hearing yesterday with the treasury secretary nominee from the top democrat on the senate finance committee, ron wyden. [video clip] >> it is a tariff. you can call it whatever you would like in terms of trying to gussy it up, they are going to be paid for by workers and small businesses. all through the campaign, we heard foreign country stay we are going to pay it. that is baloney. it is going to be paid by workers and small businesses. your response. >> senator, i respectfully disagree. the history of tariffs and optimal tariff theory does not support what you are saying. traditionally, we see that if we were to use a number that has been thrown around in the press

of 10%, then traditionally, the currency appreciates by 4%, so the 10% is not passed through. then we have various elasticities, consumer preferences may change. finally, foreign manufacturers, especially china, which is trying to export their weight out of their current economic malaise, it will continue cutting prices to maintain market share. [end video clip] host: scott bessent, the president-elect elect stick to serve yesterday on the hill, talking about the impact of tariffs. howell, michigan, democrat. it is your turn to be part of the debate. do you think the incoming trump administration will improve the economy? caller: i think the misses that the economy is bad, and i have

examples here of economic growth the last quarter under the biden administration was externally good economic growth and job creation, stock market at record highs, how would it be at record highs at the economy was doing badly? then i have prices coming down, inflation is almost back to normal. in michigan, gas prices are below three dollars a gallon, so the idea that trump is going to get gas prices down lower i think is unlikely. and then i have the headline to the wall street journal, this is an october, it says the next president will inherit a remarkable economy, the high quality of economic growth should put a wind at the back of any president, so this idea that trump has propagated and fox

news has propagated the economy is bad, no, the economy is quite, quite good. the challenge for the trump administration is can they not screwed up and cause a recession? we are in a good economy. i would love to hear other statistics that say we are in a bad economy. host: bob, republican, tennessee . caller: if anyone don't think joe biden was a disaster, something is wrong with them. and in the first guy said something about biden, when you support killing babies and child mutilation -- hold on -- he's going to straighten out that border. you talk about compassion, have compassion on your own citizens. host: what about the economy?

what will he do to improve it in your opinion? caller: he did not win the election because the economy is great, he can play this how he would like to. host: joe, illinois, independent. caller: good morning and thank you for taking my call. what i think will happen with trump, the reason i like trump now is because he is not a career politician. he actually made things, he built things, and he has elon musk and vivek wish imani looking at the overspending. back in 2005, george bush junior, i don't know if he is w or h w, george bush junior signed a renewable, and that

drove up the price of soybean oil and corn oil because they mandated. suddenly you can use it and it will not be mandated. and biodiesel will be dead. then you will see the price of soybeans and corn oil dropped to the bottom. that alone is one step in reducing the pricing and food and other items since allowing growing and fracking and all the other stuff, you are going to see the price of oil go down. i mean, we saw petroleum down in the 20's when he was in office. host: joe with an outline of the

second incoming administration what they would do in the economy and what he thinks he will do to improve the economy. we are in this conversation for the first hour, so keep calling for it i would like to share other headlines. this is from the hill, the supreme court decision on tiktok could come as early as this morning, this friday morning. the supreme court signad it will release at least one opinion friday and hastily scheduled an announcement that comes as tiktok's divestiture ban deadline approaches sunday. the justices indicate in advance when they hand out opinions, but thursday's update is unusual. it came with short notice and suggest that the court justice will not read opinions allowed as typical. watch for that related headline. the incoming president is wayne in order to keep tiktok online

-- is weighing in order to keep tiktok online. another headline to share related to congress, this is the tallahassee democrat with this headline, the wait is over, governor ron desantis named ashley moody to replace marco rubio in the u.s. senate. ashley moody, the state attorney general, will soon move from the 40 cabinet to the u.s. senate. governor ron desantis thursday announced moody as his pick to replace marco rubio, who is poised to be the next secretary of state for president-elect trump. he made the announcement in a thursday news conference in orlando. when marco rubio testified as secretary of state this week as well, you can find that on c-span.org or our free video mobile app, c-span now.

day-o, republican. good morning. dale, republican. good morning. caller: should that clip of bernie sanders. this is where joe biden's mind is at. anybody out there know who this man is? host: what about the economy? do think the trump administration will improve it? caller: yeah, the economy is great. you have a debit card, these people calling in, this man gave the middle of freedom to george soros. host: jj, maine, independent. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. host: we are listening to you.

caller: i do think the economy will grow under trump. i do hope he can unleash the oil and like they say, drill, baby, drill. i agree with previous callers that the underlying cost that has made everything so expensive , i do believe in any tax cut, whether it is on the wealthy or middle class, and even though there will be a tax cut, i do think tax revenues will increase because the economy will improve that much. host: we will listen to what the treasury secretary nominee had to say about the 2017 tax cuts. he was asked by the finance committee chair about the importance of their argument for

extending those 2017 era trump tax cuts. caller: this is not a tax -- [video clip] >> this is not a tax cut for the wealthy, this is a tax increase for the majority of who are in the low to middle income categories. my question is one of our pivotal tasks is to make sure that this tax increase does not happen. can you give us your perspective on the impact that would occur in this country if we allow this for trillion dollar tax increased to happen? >> senator, thank you for this, and thank you for the meetings over the past few weeks. i've been really working with your staff. this is the single most important economic issue of the day. this is pass fail.

if we do not fix these tax cuts, if we do not renew, then we will be facing an economic calamity. as always, with financial instability, that falls on the middle and working-class people. we will see a gigantic middle-class tax increase. we will see the child tax credit cut, we will see the deductions half, so it will be what we call in economics, it has the potential for a sudden stop. as i said, traditionally with these sudden stops, it falls on working americans. host: scott bessent answering the question from the chair of the senate finance committee there on extending the 2017 trump era tax cuts. you can talk about that,

tariffs, monetary policy, inflation, lowering costs, all of that on the table this morning as you get your thoughts on whether or not the incoming trump administration will improve the u.s. economy steve, democrat, ohio. caller: good morning. two things. two institutions that will make an improvement on the economy. one is the executive branch. trump is inept. he's not able to perform. he did not in the past and will not in the future. the congress has the power of the purse. if they can set a budget and get us out of this 36 trillion dollar deficit, that would be a miracle. the federal reserve controls monetary policy, so they control interest rates. their dual mandate is price stability and full employment, which i think both those

objectives have been relatively met. inflation has been tamped down to 2.6 something and unemployment is 4.1. those numbers are great. this economy is a $27 trillion economy, compare that to russia, china, 17 trillion dollar economy. here is a piece of data for you people out there who might be interested, it is called into, it describes the amount of cash americans have in their bank, savings and whatnot. i believe the numbers $21.7 trillion that americans have in cash, an increase of 1.98% from last year, americans have a lot of cash. the economy is doing great, but here's the other thing, the federal reserve act in 1913, that is how the central bank was created, by an act of congress. can trump make a phone call to

mike johnson and say i would like to put pressure on the fed? so trump is about control pretty will make a move and try to press the fed. read project 2025, their idea is a free banking system, go back to the gold standard. this is kind of unbelievable to think about. anyway -- host: let me move on. randy, republican, texas. caller: thank you for taking my call. you mentioned eggs and bacon earlier in the tv show here, and i would like for people to know that at a commercial egg farm, the price of diesel that it takes to get that egg to the market, they have billions of

birds on these farms, and we have one in north texas that means two tractor loads of grain every day to feed the chickens. well, those trucks, even with the latest technology, they are 6.5 mile -- 6.5 miles to the gallon. it runs on diesel, it has the service fee to make it into the granary, and then once the chicken lays the egg, it has to be transported in a dual tractor-trailer, supplied by diesel. and nowhere in the equation cannot be absorbed. if you take the price down by making us energy independent, you take the price of that down through the whole process, the price of the egg is going to go down. it is the same way with the pork

industry. once you take the price of that diesel, it is going to really make the price of that product come down. host: what do you do for a living? caller: i was a diesel mechanic for 42 years. host: so you are familiar with the price of diesel and how it impacts the economy, etc. caller: yeah, and it has almost doubled in price. nowhere in this can you absorb that price. they are talking about being energy independent. yes, it is going to take a long time to do that, but it is not the actual supply of it because the price will come down before we ever get to it. host: randy staats in texas, a republican. story to share with you as we continue the conversation about whether or not the trump

administration will improve the economy. here is from bloomberg news, mr. trump plans to designate cryptocurrency as a national priority. how will this impact the economy? an executive order is expected to create a crypto advisory council and trump allies are discussing stopping federal crypto litigation. charles, texas, democrat. caller: i don't believe things are going to be promising. was he had to do to get in office, now he's in office with million years and billionaires in his administration, and they are not going to be working for the ordinary people. so all the people who think trump can do something for poor people. he never said one time while he was running what he would do for ordinary people. it was always about him and running. host: as a democrat, what would

you like your party to do in the house and senate when, if legislation that impacts the economy comes to the house and senate floor, what would you like them to do? caller: they don't do anything, they don't control anything now. trump controls the house, senate, supreme court -- host: true, but the majority is thin, so they might likely need democrats to join them. caller: they should not join because they are not going to do anything for ordinary people. the only problem i have with the democratic party is this -- you hear me? when they were doing good on the economy, all you heard was republicans, like in lockstep. to not admit nothing --

host: i will leave it there and share the story in the washington post, house democrats from maine stands alone in supporting trump's tariffs, the house democrats who would like trump to go big on tariff. most democrats are poised to bash trump over any price increases that follow the tariffs in her second administration, especially on inexpensive consumer goods like clothing, but he is embracing trump's vision and saying his own party needs to rethink theirs. that stance reflects one end of the emerging debate among democrats on how to respond to one of trump central economic policies. on thursday, the four term congressman from northern maine will introduce legislation to codify trump's campaign proposal to enact tariffs of 10% on all

goods imported to the u.s. even though legislation reflected his signature policy, not a single house republican has agreed to cosponsor his bill. you can read more in the washington post. also in the washington post, their editorial board on this, there is another way to fight a trade war, is what they write. a 2018, after trump launched his first batch of tariffs on imports from friends and foes, china, oxbow, canada and the european union targeted kentucky bourbon to send a pointed message to them. mitch mcconnell, who hails from that state, also taking aim at work to squeeze senator chuck grassley of iowa. according to one model at the peterson institute for

economics, imposing a 10 percentage point additional tariff on imports from every foreign country and a 60 percentage point tariff on imports from china, as trump threatened, with lower american gross domestic product and employment, regardless of whether other countries retaliated. over the course of trump's next presidency, the higher tariffs on chinese goods would reduce u.s. gdp by just under 165 million. even if china did nothing in return, likewise, the new tariffs on other countries would cut gdp by 160 billion. there would is true that the u.s. economy would suffer more if other countries were to strike back, in doing so, they would hurt themselves. the hit to china's gdp from higher tariffs would rise from 820 billion over the course of trump's presidency with no retaliation to 980 billion if china imposed its own 60% tariff

on american goods. america -- mexico's economy would rise from 36 billion to 67 billion effective strike back. rather than shooting themselves in the foot, countries might instead copy one thing china did when it was hit during the first term, it lowered tariffs on imports from other countries, this disadvantaged american exporters have benefited the chinese economy by attracting cheaper imports from the rest of the world. that is the washington post editorial board this morning. tom, illinois, republican. we are talking economic policies during the second trump administration. willie improve the economy? caller: -- will he improve the economy? caller: yes, he will. when biden came in, he got rid of all of trump's directives,

and he started to peel production back. and brandon recalls a little bit ago was talking about being a diesel mechanic, i was a farmer for 40 years, and there's a lot of time when we don't make any money. a lot of that is because of diesel fuel because it ruins everything. that is the way you cut prices for everything. and this morning, bernie sanders said on tv that we need to give people housing and a salary. we have tried that in the past. we did it with the world poverty and spent $83,000. we completely destroyed the black family in the all projects, and it made drug addiction a lot worse. host: can i jump in and ask about the president-elect split

to service treasury secretary, scott bessent. were you able to watch any of his confirmation hearing yesterday? caller: no, i watched a little bit on what you are showing with the clips on it. he's like janet yellen, he has a lot of ideas. he actually said no because the democrats have been trying to get him to say yes or no, he said no because they don't like to get put into boxes with one question or another, the days to tell the democrats know because every time i think i will get ahead and make a lot of money at the end of the year, it all goes away, and i live in illinois, which is run by democrats, which does not even have a triple classe rating.

state of illinois is in bad shape. it is like california. host: we wanted to let you know that the nominee was asked yesterday about the economic policies, thinking policies specifically, and the impact of them on rural america. the nominee talked about how he enjoys listening to pharma radio on serious on the weekends -- farm radio on sirius radio, your reaction to hearing that. caller: yes, it does. i listen to it all the time. i get my market prices on there, it makes predictions. and most of the market is trying

to be manipulated by the government. these guys get ideas on what they're going to do. host: does it give you comfort this nominee is listening to farm radio? caller: yeah, it does because i will say this one thing, the only free enterprise in this country is disappearing rapidly as the farm economy. we put in the insurance, it has all been subsidized by the government and manipulated. host: front page of the wall street journal calls tom besson -- calls scott bessent the money man. he was testifying yesterday for treasury secretary. c-span cameras were there. you can find it all at c-span.org. lisa, georgia, democrat. good morning. caller: morning. yes.

i don't think trump is going to make the economy any better, he's going to make it worse and that is a fact. now, going back to what the first gentleman said about the diesel fuel, at the end, he contradicted himself because the price of fuel is pretty much based on the stock market, so that is out diesel or the fill rate goes up or down based on the stock market. trump will not do anything. i would like people to have a fear of discernment, analyze and have critical thinking skills, when trump tells you something,

do not just believe it, research it. and democrats are poor messengers. they are such poor messengers. when trump came into office and took credit for the economy that obama gave to him, he experienced a good economy. he was claiming he would turn the economy around the first three months he was in office. it took him all of eight years to pull america out of the ditch, stabilizing in four years, and then lose it in the next four years. donald trump fell into that, he did not create that economy. host: let me go to jerry, georgia, republican. caller: yes, good morning.

i've been farming a little over 50 years now, the last four years have probably been the worst we've ever had with joe biden in. i think he canceled the pipeline the first day he was in, fuel prices started to increase. everything we had to purchase increased. fertilizing went from $500 a ton to $1100 a ton. the fuel price has doubled. and everything equivalent, everything we had to purchase, chemicals, everything went up. not quite as much, but almost. -- host: did you see the price of your crops go up the way you sold? did you get more money? caller: we are bringing around

12 to $14 when he went in, i probably sell the soybeans i have today for nine dollars a bushel. host: why is that? caller: the grain market is worldwide, so the commodity markets control the grain markets, but the problem we have is everything we purchase, due to fuel prices, has almost doubled. host: mike, elmont, new york, democratic caller, hi. caller: good morning. i would like to see maybe you should bring up a wall street journal bringing of the article that says whoever inherits the economy will inherit the remarkable economy. they predicted a recession for a number of years, and it ticked

them off when it did not happen. the thing with the gas price, and to answer the question, he's not going to improve at all. his first time there, i mean, when we had covid, we do not it what happened, we just pumped more oil out of the ground than ever before. there is a pipeline, too. host: for you and others who brought up its impact on the economy, that is focused on a sour of the washington journal, so stay with us. let's go to the lawn of the white house, francesca chambers is joining us, the white house correspondent for usa. to talk about the transition that is going to be happening or is underway there for the incoming trump administration.

let's first talk about the latest on the israel-gaza cease-fire. is that administration confident things are on track? guest: we expect the israeli government to formally improve -- approve the deal later this morning. it has been a long road to get to this point, president biden first unveiled the details of the deal in may and then for months, there were starts to get to what happened this week, which is when the administration said hamas finally agreed to a list of hostages to be released. we expect the deal to go into place beginning sunday. host: there is a flurry of activity from the outgoing administration. what has the president done in recent days and executive orders and other actions he can take from the white house? guest: president biden, the only savior running through the tape, but he is making the most of

every last-minute he has here in the white house. in the last few days, we saw him announce he would like to reverse the cubans being on the state sponsored terror list, that is something the next administration can undo, as he has put other executive orders that the next administration could undo, if they would like to. we saw him commute the sentences of another 205 individuals, and later today, he will give a speech he will talk about his climate and infrastructure investments. host: what is happening behind the scenes as washington prepares for inauguration day? what is happening at the white house logistically? guest: they have already set up for the inauguration, the stands are out there, there is heightened security because there will be a parade that comes through after the inauguration.

we see moving trucks outside of the white house in recent days, as well, because president trump is coming in, there is a short amount of time where they have to change over everything, and furniture and all kinds of things that the white house, so we have started to see that process begin at the white house. host: on monday, what is the activity like inside the white house? guest: here in the past, at the white house, for two changeovers between president obama and trump and president trump to president biden, often what we will see is 18 that is held before the inauguration where presidents are greeted. president trump did not go to president bidens inauguration, and he talked to reporters as he got on marine one for the final time, president biden is going to the inauguration monday, so that

process will be a little different at the white house, but in the afternoon, there is always a flurry of activity where you see new administration officials coming in, they like to check out the press room and introduced themselves sometimes. sometimes in the past and the trump administration, we saw that they started to gather out behind me on the white house lawn. i don't know if we will see that the next trump administration again, but that was an opportunity for reporters to talk to administration officials. host: how else is this transition impact the white house press? guest: some reporters who covered president biden will not be returning. some reporters who will be staying on to cover the next administration personally. so some people will continue to cover them. both will have their switchover at 12:01 p.m., as well. host: what are your thoughts on caroline levitt, the incoming press secretary for the white

house? what have you heard about any changes on how they will brief the press? guest: she was assistant press secretary in the last ministrations, so returning press reporters already know her already. she was the press secretary on the transition during the campaign, as well, so she already know some members of the press corps. it is not clear yet when there will be the first press briefing. there was one held on inauguration four years ago. we don't know if that will take place next week, with the administration said they would like to include, in addition to reporters who traditionally have been in the room, they would like to reach out to more podcasts. the way that would work is reporters can apply to come in through a day pass to the white house, and those who don't have clearance to come in every day, they are able to come into the

white house press briefing room, raised her hand, ask questions. we have seen some ministrations do virtual additions, where they have taken reporters, from whether it be a podcast or from local media, on screens when they can ask questions. i think all of those things are possibilities this administration. host: there is lots of talk on what will happen day one of the second trump administration. what can interviewers expect? guest: we have been told there will be a blizzard of executive orders, a flurry of executive orders. we do not yet know what all of those would be. the incoming president signaled he would like to put tariffs on some countries. we don't know if those will be individual or he will be looking at blanket tariffs. he also said he would undo many of divided administrations not only recent executive orders, but he would like to try to undo some of his signature accomplishes, as well. we don't know all those

executive orders he will plan to unroll on day one, and we also don't know how many will come days later in the administration. there's a lot to do what it incoming president comes into office. host: from c-span's perch at the white house on the lawn, francesca chambers joining us, the white house correspondent with usa, thank you for your time. guest: thank you. host: we will take a short break. when we come back, conversation at the center for american progress about the incoming trump administration's energy and environmental agenda. the conversation coming up next. ♪ >> stay tuned to the c-span networks for comprehensive coverage of confirmation hearings for president-elect trump's cabinet nominees. today chris -- kirsit --

kristi noem appears before the committee. watch now on the c-span networks, c-span now, or c-span.org. >> witness democracy unfiltered with c-span, experience history as it unfolds with c-span's live coverage as the republicans take control of both chambers of congress and a new chapter comes in with the 40 set -- with the swearing in of the 47th president of the united states. tune in for our coverage of the presidential nomination as donald trump takes the oath of office, becoming president of the united states. stay with c-span for comprehensive, live and unfiltered congress -- coverage of the 119th congress and the presidential inauguration. c-span, macro c unfiltered. -- democracy unfiltered. >> since his first interview on book notes in 1993, harold

holzer has appeared close to 200 times. he had written or edited six books on abraham lincoln. since then he has added another 50 books to his name. viewers and listeners have seen -- have had the opportunity to hear him talk about his life from his birth in kentucky to 1807 to his assassination in 1865. the following conversation is meant to be extensive, the center of attention will be mr. lincoln but also the life of harold holzer, a new yorker for the past 75 years. >> harold holzer talks about his life and work on this episode of lamb.otes+ with our host brian booknos+ is available on the c-span now free mobile app or wherever you get your broadcast -- podcasts. >> c-span now is a free mobile app featuring your unfiltered view of what is happening in

washington. live and on-demand. keep up with the day's biggest events with live streams of floor proceedings and hearings from the u.s. congress, white house events, the courts, campaigns and more all at your fingertips. you can also stay current with the latest episodes of washington journal and find scheduling information for c-span's tv networks and radio plus a variety of compelling podcasts. c-span now is available at the apple store google play. scan the qr code to download it for free or visit c-span.org/c-spannow. c-span now, your front row washington anytime, anywhere. >> washington journal continues. host: welcome back to the washington journal, our next hour we focus on environment and energy policies of the next administration. joining us we have trevor

higgins, the senior vice president of energy and environment policy at the center for american progress and brigham mccown who is director and senior fellow at the hudson institute's initiative for american energy and security. what are we expecting during this trump administration the second one, day one when it comes to energy policy? guest: that is a great question and you can look back at round one for an idea of what he will do. it is his view that he needs to unleash american energy independence to make the country stronger and more secure. if we look back at a traditional definition it is about availability and accessibility and it is about cost, affordability. and the president will focus on energy sources that he believes will be cheaper and better for the american economy. host: what will those be? guest: the president is known for liking fossil fuel and

natural gas production has been important, just switching from coal to natural gas has resulted in low prices, a 50% reduction in carbon emissions. he likes nuclear. i think he is in all of the above type person -- type of person which is what america used to be 10 to 20 years ago. host: what impact does that have on the economy? guest: it will be great. next to people and raw materials, energy is the third most expensive component. it will make us more competitive or it will hurt us. energy abundance generally leads to a better economy. host: trevor higgins, your reaction. >> there is an interesting transition that is happening including because of the investments of the biden administration to build new wind and solar manufacturing. that is a diversity of resources that is increasing the amount of energy produced in the united states. it is lowering energy costs and

increasing jobs. i think the real question will be whether that momentum can continue. there is a lot of reason why those investments made sense and will continue to make sense but there will be some headwinds of policy change including if the inflation reduction act investments are repealed by congress. there is a good reason to believe they will survive but that is a subject of debate and a lot is on the line in terms of energy prices, jobs and competitiveness with china. host: explain. >> right now if you have a desire to invest in the united states you can get additional tax incentives. we have seen more than $90 billion in new clean energy manufacturing in the united states that has put us on track to supply enough batteries that are american-made for 13 million ev's by 2028. so the next four years we can be producing a lot of the world's demand for electric vehicles in the united states.

host: your reaction to what you heard about fossil fuel and the production of that, and this trump administration's all of the above strategy nuclear power, etc. >> u.s. oil production is at record levels and the real question is where does that go? in order to try and push that further and the administration has talked about potentially trying to lease more land, which takes time. they have talked about increasing exports of natural gas, actually take some of that gas from the united states and put it overseas. they have talked about repealing the investments in clean energy. it is not clear to me that the total energy supply will increase based on those policies. we will see how they put it together. host: let us get a response. will the energy supply increase as -- as you had concern that it will not. guest: it will.

when we look back in history the world has not used less energy, only more. while we can transition to efficient resources we are still going to need a lot of energy. 2024 coal usage was highest in the planet's history. and the question is how can we responsibly reduce the fuel that -- produce the fuel that we need for ourselves and allies, some of whom do not have the abundance of resources that we do and do it in a protective way. host: do you think the incoming administration retreat -- retains these tax incentives for so-called clean energy? guest: that is a great question and i wish i had a crystal ball to figure it out. host: should they? guest: the ira has been successful for a lot of red as well as blue states. whether we can afford that type of investment given the budget deficit or whether there should be a level playing field, i happen to own and ev, but not

because the government told me to buy one but it works in an urban area not for everyone. i think the free market economy has to be the driver of what people will purchase. host: how does energy apology reduce cost for the american people? we have heard from a couple of farmers already in the first hour talking about diesel, specifically. you bring down the price of diesel, the price of food will go down as well. you are shaking your head. guest: i have spoken about this to somebody on the street just outside before coming in. he said everything cost too much. coffee, my fuel for my car, we have to get inflation under control. a big component of what we purchase, everything we buy comes to us from somewhere around the world. it does not get here for free and it does not get here via teleporter. it gets here on the backbone of energy. that energy cost is a fundamental component of the

expense of everything that we purchase. host: how do you expect trump administration to address that? guest: it wants to lower energy prices. with mixed results with some of the new investment. if you look out to california, some of the highest electorate prices in the world it is not competitive. germany has had a very aggressive decarbonization and deindustrialization strategies because they cannot afford to make what they used to make. so the bottom line is that energy has to cost less and not more. and ideally not because of a subsidy but because of the cost of production. host: do you agree or disagree that you could lower the cost of food in this country and other areas for the american people if you address energy? >> i agree. i think fossil fuel prices are one of the major components of inflation or deflation and one of the many drivers and changes of grocery prices. one of those things that is great about electric vehicles that even for the people that

are not buying them today they still lowered the total demand for gas and take that price pressure off of diesel and gasoline. and they make fuel more affordable for the people who are still needing to use that. and so, there is an approach where you can do investments in building more capacity and manufacturing and more ability for households to afford to do the choices they want to make and that benefits everyone. host: let us get to calls. william in arizona, republican. good morning. we are talking about environment and energy policy in the second trump administration. your question or comment? caller: good morning. listen, the thing, because i do not think a lot -- enough people answer this question. i remember being a high school student and driving to school every morning during the winter time and there was this huge brown cloud that hovered over

the city of tucson. my question this morning is what do we do with those ev batteries when they wear out. nobody seems to answer that question and nobody wants to answer that question and that is maddening because they will wear out. some people when you get rid of flashlight batteries you dump them in the trash and walk away. but the point i make is what will you do with those overly heavy ev batteries when they are gone? host: trevor higgins, you take it first. >> when you throw out your aaa battery it often winds off -- up polluting a landfill. but, the pressure right now for the critical minerals that are in ev batteries is so intense that the supply chains are frankly dominated by china. the ability to try and reclaim those minerals including cobalt and lithium out of the batteries is a huge opportunity. right now there are investments being made to produce critical

minerals and try to process critical minerals and refine them and recycle them. if the united states can build that capacity we are in a position to reshape the way that global supply chains are written and address landfill pollution. host: have you had to replace your battery in your ev car yet? >> -- guest: know it would be about $15,000. the issue is that you lose one to 2% of the battery every year depending on how you drive and charge. you know, i think the car will last 10 to 15 years, but we are also seeing an evolution in battery technology. phosphate ion instead of some of the more rare earth materials. it is an issue and it is something that i do not think we know the total cost of the ev for the entire lifecycle. they are more accent -- expensive to fix in the case of an accident. my insurance rates are up and all of our insurance rates are up.

and that is unfortunate. i think we do not know the full impact yet, but, the technology will continue to evolve over time. host: on capitol hill we heard from the president-elect's p icks to head up the environmental detention -- protection agency, energy and interior department. all of them testifying on the senate side this week and c-span covered those hearings. you can find them if you go to c-span.org or the free video mobile app, c-span now. let us go to lee zeldin's hearing to leave the epa at his confirmation hearing yesterday. he spoke about his views on climate change. [video clip] >> president-elect trump has said that climate change is a hoax. you will be if confirmed, one of the leading spokespeople in this country representing us

throughout the entire world. do you agree with president-elect trump that climate change is a hoax? >> first evolve -- first off it was great to meet with you as well. i believe that climate change is it real, -- israel as i told you. as far as president trump goes, the context i have heard him speak about it was -- was with a criticism of policies that had been enacted because of climate change and i think he is concerned about the economic costs of some policies. where there is a debate and difference of opinion. >> i would respectfully disagree. he has called it a hoax time and time again. [end video clip] host: from the confirmation hearing of lee zeldin to head up epa. brigham mccown is was the -- is with the hudson institute, the director and senior fellow on the initiative of energy secretary along with trevor higgins who is a vice president of energy and environment at the

center for american progress. trevor higgins, what did you make of the answer from the former congressman to head up the epa? >> i am glad that he feels that his -- that it is necessary to say that climate change has -- is happening and i agree with senator sanders that that has not been president trump's position. it is real and the epa has a responsibility to acknowledge that. at another point he talked about whether co2 is a pollutant that contributes to climate change and he acknowledged that the epa has said it is and it is and it is important for the epa to take responsibility for that. host: why? >> because the pollution standards for carbon dioxide pollution is set by the epa. there are no rules that the industry is relying on to guide their investment decisions and if the epa throws them into uncertainty for trying to

rewrite the rules and trying to retract and replace them with very little, it leaves and makes it much more difficult for the united states to plan the future course to industrial investing -- develop and. host: what do you expect on those standards that trevor higgins was talking about? guest: the u.s. leads the world in greenhouse gas emission reduction. we do it cleaner, and better than any other place in the world. what you are going to see as we raise efficiency standards you have wrung most of the efficiency out of the system. to get another 5% or 10% on the mile -- on the mileage requirements it will cost more. we have gotten to the point where people are no longer able to buy new cars. we have looked at new car prices and they are expensive. this is actually a counterintuitive proposal because it keeps older cars, what we call the fleet still operating the u.s. which means

that we will have more older cars remaining in active service which means more pollution. i think it is time to take a pause. host: does the trump administration rolled back -- rollback what is actually in place? guest: i cannot speak for them at the automotive manufacturer owes are tooled for the 2025 and 2026 leads and it will cost billions for them to retool but they will have enforcement discretion in allowing -- the automotive manufacturers. host: i have been there. guest: more leeway in how they approach the regulations. host: jermaine, north charleston, south carolina. democratic caller. caller: how are you doing. good morning. i hear a lot of callers calling in and they speak about the pipeline that biden supposedly shut down. i would like the guests to explain this pipeline and clear it out how it was never operational and it did not do

anything. host: we will talk about that. keystone, i think is what he is talking about. guest: there are a lot of pipeline projects and we have more than any other country because almost two thirds of any of the energy that we use and certainly every drop of fuel that you put in your car that will -- or goes into an airplane or truck goes through a pipeline. it is the most efficient way to move stuff around and it has been that way. keystone xl was a joint u.s. and canadian project. most of it was built and it exists in different phases, but the extension was canceled under the biden administration. it was studied longer during the obama administration and it took to win world war ii. everyone in town admits that it was a political decision and yet here we are. unfortunately that developer sold off and has no plans to do that. but -- host: what did president biden

do on keystone if all of this took place during the obama administration. guest: that is a great question. it started to the obama administration but came to know decision but the trump's -- trump administration decided to start with the permits. lawsuits ensued and it did not get completed, the reviews and legal challenges before president left. on day one bite and said i would cancel the project. host: the company at that point had moved on? guest: it had. you basically kill a project by increasing cost by delaying until the developer throws her hands up in the errands as it is time to move on and i am losing too much money. host: talk about where it was and why was it important. guest: it was important because it did not follow the trajectory of the original keystone but cut through from alberta through north dakota and south dakota.

it would have picked up oil from one region that is desperately needed, american crude oil. host: that is in? guest: the north, south and -- the north and south dakota and wyoming area. it could lower coasts that it did not happen. it is put on railcars and things that are frankly more expensive and less safe. the extension would of gone down to oklahoma and join the rest of the keystone system. it would have gone to refineries in louisiana and texas and some of it would have ended up in export. we import about 4.5 million barrels of oil from canada and along the eastport dust east coast we export to canada. it is an integrated system. host: what about keystone and

your perspective of what happened and the impact of a? -- impact of it? >> the keystone site was an old flight -- fight was an old fight and it was a vision of what the -- it was originally to take tar sands oil from canada. at this point the world is facing a peak for global oil and gas demand over the course of the next few years. at that point prices will not continue to respond that they say it -- that they had the same way. it does not make economic sense to invest infrastructure to connect extremely expensive forms of energy that are unlikely to be needed given where prices will be. host: what do you replace it with? >> we are cutting demand by

investing in electric vehicles in the states and elsewhere and by improving efficiency and there are a lot of different ways. that is contributing to a turnaround. oil and gas demand has grown for decades now, and it will be a new thing when that turns a corner. host: do you agree? guest: in part and not. whether or not private companies should invest billions of dollars of the u.s. economy is their decision. it should not be the government's decision. it is a legal commodity. that is like saying you cannot open a coffee shop. the government should not tell you what you can and cannot do. in our system that does not work out well typically. number two there are many areas of the global south, china and india which we have not gotten into that are leading the pollution around the world. i do not know if fossil fuel is going anywhere in my lifetime. host: going back to that

extension and how it would have brought the oil you are talking about into cushing, y cushing, oklahoma and -- why cushing, oklahoma and has the glut been addressed? guest: it was designed to be the crossroads of the american system. it actually drops it off to the midwest and illinois and affects midwest gas prices. that delta between the bushing price and west texas intermediate, that margin has declined. and the more efficient we can make our transportation system whether it is for cars, oil, gas or electricity the cheaper the prices will be. host: we are talking about energy and environmental policies on the washington journal and our last hour of the

journal. at 9:00 a.m. eastern we will take you up to capitol hill where the governor of south dakota will be testifying in her hearing ld the homeland security department. there it is on your screen. you will be able to watchs at 9:00 a.m. eastern time on sleep span now, -- on c-span now, and online at c-span.org. we are continuing to talk about energy and environmental policy because the president-elect's picks for epa, energy and interior all testified. before we continue on with the conversation, an update on the israel-gaza cease-fire hostage release deal according to ap news. israel's security cabinet has recommended approval of the cease fire for gaza. you can see the prime minister on your screen meeting with that security cabinet. everett in grand junction,

colorado. republican. good morning. caller: i will try to make this quick. it was a big change in the country with electric cars and solar panels and whatnot. there is an article that i called in before a long time about, and that i doubt that either one of your guests are aware of. pardon me. anyway, nasa has invented, and this is an article from december 12, 2022 and was put out by "the daily press" about catalytic converters and using catalytic converters. and the whole reason for changing the economy with energy is because we cannot get the pollution out of the air. so, this article, if either one

of these gentlemen would lookup the gentleman and you just have to type it into google earth or something called nasa's new invention may reduce car pollution. it is about two pages or 1.5 pages and it talks about the existing catalytic converters only work when the vehicle is at operating temperature. this catalytic converter, supposedly, what eliminate the pollution coming out of an internal combustion engine. host: we will take those thoughts. >> one thing it is interesting is the combination of technical innovation and regulatory backstop that pushes it into the world. it was california's regulators trying to deal with terrible smog in l.a. and elsewhere and the epa established fuel economy standards that drove the

adoption of catalytic converters in the united states and has significantly reduced the air pollution that you can see and smell and that affects kids' asthma. it is an interesting thing to look back at the way that technology has evolved and how they get adopted. and to think that is a good thing, we want to have a competent government that can take those technologies up and when they make sense, instead -- set standard so that industry is on a level playing field. host: tom. raleigh, north carolina. republican. caller: my concern was and i am glad that president trump has won is that the government is making us buy electric cars by 2032. the average price the last time i looked was around $60,000. people cannot even afford a $30,000 car. secondly my neighbor has an electric car. he can go to a charging station

and it takes 20 to 25 minutes to charge it. when he charges it out his house , it takes all night long. so look at all of that energy it is going to cost to charge her car at home. and our power bills are out of the roof. i am so glad that we do not have to buy these electric cars by 2032. a majority of americans cannot afford it. guest: i think cost is a big indicator. and expect -- and despite subsidies, electric cars are still more expensive. to be fair, and prices are coming down, the bottom line is this tailpipe emission rule which is meant to reduce emissions is really a de facto ban on the internal combustion engine and a push to drive all-americans towards adopting ev's. i sympathize with the caller i have driven in ev cross-country

and it adds a lot of time. and when you are charging in a commercial station it is four times a cost of charging at home. there are things that need to be worked out. i think a lot of this will occur in time, but we need more time than the biden administration was given. host: your response. >> affordability is a key question which is why the biden administration invested in tax cars to make the person of a new desk purchase of a new, lease or use car more affordable. that is one of the tax credits that the new congress have tried to make -- want to repeal. that is going to make it less affordable for people who want to charge a car. guest: the problem is the costs are repurchase repeated. for it is getting that money back. if you have bought a ford pickup truck you've noticed the prices more expensive. the cost of ev's are being distributed to all of us.

host: president-elect donald trump's picks to steer his energy and environmental policy include doug burgum, the former governor of north dakota, republican, who will -- who is the nominee for interior secretary. his confirmation hearing was held this week. lee zeldin was up yesterday and is the nominee for the environmental protection agency and the administrator of that. he ran for new york governor as well and then chris wright is his pick to serve as energy secretary. trevor higgins, any reaction to these gentlemen and the positions that they might hold if the senate confirms them? >> i was relieved that they acknowledged the reality of climate change and i hope that influences the choices that they make. they do incredibly important work for the american people and you can see it in california with the wildfires. the federal government needs to

be there to support wild firefighting efforts, forest management efforts and disaster relief and recovery efforts. and we do not want politics influencing the decisions of these agencies. guest: i might disagree a little bit. our hearts go out to everyone in california and it is a terrible situation but it is made more difficult by the decisions that california has made over the years. while climate change is real, and the question is if we care about climate change we should be going to china and india and asking them why do you get a free pass until 2030 under the paris climate agreements. china is upscaling on renewables but they are putting coal-fired power plants on every day. we are in a competition with china and china would like nothing more for us to unilaterally disarm the industrial base. there is more at play than simply addressing local

emissions. it is a worldwide issue that has to be addressed. host: you bring up the pirates climate accords. -- paris climate accords. president obama got us into it, president trump got us out. president biden got us back in. now what? >> we expect the president would withdraw from paris again, so we will see. what is interesting is that it was the way that we got to china to come to the table. the very first effort was the kyoto protocol. they worked for years to try and enact a global treaty and it failed. the united states rejected it because it did not require emissions from china. it was a paris agreement that they figured out how to get china to come to the table with promises about their emissions and created a space for the united states and china to compete over who would keep their word and would diminish -- deliver. and when the trump

administration in the first term withdrew from paris it was only four months before biden was able to get back in. and we are lucky that it did because it gave us a chance to step back up to china who had become the world's largest emitter. and the challenge now is how to get them to turn it around. china does not want to admit it that after the paris agreement they have put into place policies and they are now functionally at peak emissions and from here it is all downhill for greenhouse gas -- greenhouse gas issues. what we are fighting for is the influence over which country gets to shape the global keene and -- clean energy economy. paris provides that state -- that space and i believe that the united states will be weakened if they leave the mantle of leadership to china. guest: i think paris climate change as a giveaway to

polluters. china has not peaked and under paris they have to reach peak by 2030. if you look at it it is a rocket trajectory. we could take the entire west and it does not come close to china. we are creating an unfair advantage for china. india is supposed to peak by 2030 and reduce about one third of its emissions from 2005 and they are not on track. the world is not on track to meet any of the paris climate change emissions. the issue is not talking nicely, the issue is how do you really get people to the table. we have now had 29 years of agreements and people getting together. and frankly, this current mechanism does not work. host: pennsylvania. john is a democrat there. your turn. caller: thank you. the two guess you have on are the best that i have seen on the show.

i congratulate you on that. the question is, why is trump going to bring back nuclear power when it has been dead in the ground for 20 years? and, number two, electric cars, now why can't you have an electric car? i think they have done that run on gas and electric. instead of using a battery, why don't you put strips in the road just like on a ride like a bumper card ride where they have those things in the ground and if you pull off to the side when the power stops, coming to the car gas engine kicks on and you get home? host: why don't you take nuclear power? guest: about 18% of our electricity comes to us via nuclear power. we have put a new reactor down

south online, the first one in 20 years. the issue with nuclear power has been that we have an agency that is supposed to permit new designs and they spent their entire lifetime avoiding it and the industry itself has been too complicated. there is bipartisan support for smaller march alert reactors that are a copycat design. you just reproduce so you do not have to go through licensing. it is net zero emissions and we have learned how to use different fuels so we do not have the waste. i think that nuclear's season is far from over. the second question is theoretically it works, but it would be so expensive to put power in every roadway throughout america. host: on nuclear power. >> i actually think all three questions are related to the question of how technology evolves. in the case of nuclear we have nuclear reactors that are

providing clean power. and there are number of opportunities for more advanced designs, eventually all the way to include fusion. they key is to do the investment in science to make sure that they are safe, affordable. so far investment has not been as affordable as other alternatives. the same thing with the plug-in hybrids. if you want to buy a plug-in hybrid that you can drive your first 30 miles which is enough for most people's commutes on electricity and it only needs to turnover beyond that. that could work for a lot of people. in the long run it will be more expensive because you have to have both drive chains in the same car. if it works for you it is available as technology and new manufacturing investments in research will promote it. the road charging situation exists in some places and works for buses because a buses on a fixed route and is a major capital acquisition and you can

put a charging coil underneath it stop. there have been a few demonstration projects to see how it works out. if it is cost affordable it is great. if it turns out that batteries innovate and become more affordable we can go that route. the key is a stable investment in r&d and a willingness to try out new things and to keep investing in our future. host: anthony in new york. independent. welcome to the conversation. caller: the previous caller took one of my questions, and one of the questions about is the trump administration going to be expanding u.s. nuclear power as a cost-effective and reliable alternative to solar and wind as we increase the demand for electricity with ev vehicles. two other questions, after reading alex epstein's books on the moral case for fossil fuels and "fossil future," he contends

that global human flourishing will require more oil, coal and natural gas and he talks about how many people ignore the positives of climate change such as the warming and the green of the planet and asked the questions why does it assume that all of climate change due to human impact? rather than other causes. i will take my answers off of the air. host: trevor higgins. >> so, i think that those -- it is dangerous to neglect how significant climate change is. we can already see its influence on the disasters we are feeling today at a relatively low rate of warming and things will get worse. humans are responsible for more than the amounts of warming we have seen so far because aerosols in the air have depressed the amount and that effective fossil fuels is

abbreviated by that. when you look at the hurricane helene that hit north carolina, 50% of its rainfall can be attributed to climate change that has happened. when you luck in california right now, they just got off the third hottest summer on record which led to much drier vegetation that set the conditions for the santa ana winds gaming over to gusts of 90 miles an hour, it really lit that wildfire, all four of them. and that was made worse, 25%, because of climate change. we are already feeling the effects. the truth is that we need fossil fuels today but we do not need them forever. there are ways to build energy systems that will help people across the world achieve their goals and have lighting and heat and cooling that they need without continuing to pollute our own local communities and the global climate. guest: co2 in the earth's

atmosphere is .004. i do not deny that co2 is an issue. but, i do not know if the sciences totally settled on how much is caused by humans and how much is caused by the planet itself and we have seen wide fluctuations in earth's history. leaving that aside because i am not a climate expert. the bottom line is that we have to be able to have clean air and clean water. this is an area bipartisan support and i think trevor would agree with me on. it is not just co2 but there are other pollutants that we need to tackle and the good news is that we have some of the cleanest air and water on record since president nixon created the epa. there is still work to be done and on nuclear and other things, i think there is bipartisan support for a lot of energy if

both sides tone the rhetoric down and sit down and talk about what we agree on. host: atlanta, georgia. independent caller. good morning. caller: good morning. i was calling because a lot of people are very upset about this pipeline not being billed. a lot of people do not know even why it was argued. the reason why is because the pipeline actually affected native american land mainly in south dakota and montana. and pretty much it affected their land including drinking supplies. and the thing is, it actually impacted their land, and if it was you you would be fighting it. just to get the opinion here today is i am just curious if it affected your land would you actually just take it and sit down and let this pipeline be built or would you actually

fight it if it affected your home? host: we will get an answer. you will go first, trevor? >> i think that pipeline is enough -- is in the past but it applies to infrastructure everywhere. if you have a pipeline putting your community at risk you deserve to know about that and to be able to speak up and have a process that will look at it and decide. in the case of keystone it did not make sense to do, and now it does not make economic sense to push it. there will be future pipeline fights, future oil and natural gas terminal export fights. in each case it is important to make sure that the stakeholders including the communities and people who benefit and the people who will be harmed have a voice and are able to speak up and that is part of the democratic process. guest: i disagree a little bit. one of the things i used to do

is run the federal pipeline and hazardous materials safety administration. i was responsible for safety and i can tell you that pipelines are the safest form of transportation and they transport the lion share of energy products. the fact that they are buried out of ground out of siphon out of mind keeps him safer. most accidents are caused by people, not the pipelines. we try to separate people from the pipelines. you know there was never andy -- any indication of ground route -- groundwater contamination. i think what we often find is if we have the mentality of not my backyard we cannot get anything built in this country. if you live in the midwest will not be able to get your corn to market. a data center in ohio or florida , you will not have internet traffic because i cannot get that built because i cannot build high power lines and transmission line somewhere else. america builds things and we have highways and the

infrastructure system that is the envy of the world. that only happens because of interstate commerce. and not allowing people to say not my backyard. in the cases of a lot of these pipeline projects we find that the local protests are limited. it is the out of towners that shows up and all the local money. it is much bigger than a local issue. host: texas. tomas. independent. caller: good morning, america. one thing, the xl pipeline was never operational. the piece they were talking about, it was never delivering anything, it never happened. second of all, do you remember during covid, all of that drop so far that a lot of refineries were going out of business? guess who saved the oil companies? biden. he made a deal to buy gas at $70 a barrel and it saved big oil.

right now gas is trading at $80 a barrel. if it goes lower most companies will go out of business. if you want gas at $.99, great. you will now lose a lot of jobs. host: let's leave it there. would you agree with what thomas just said? guest: oil did go to negative pricing shortly after covid the way everything got shut down. we have had lots of stimulus which we could argue was a pro or a con, but yes, biden has done some things. he has taken 200 plus separate actions to constrain the oil and gas industry since then and he is doing it on his way out putting 250 million acres of offshore production off limits in the 11th hour. i think it is a mixed message and a mixed bag at best. and i think you will see president trump coming in and reversing that. host: pennsylvania. republican. caller: yes.

this was public five years ago now, but i was talking to a salesman about electric cars. i says what happens if you try to turn your car in. they say take it to a junkyard. nobody is going to buy a seven-year-old battery car. the problem is you go to the junkyard and they do not want it because they cannot handle the batteries, most of them anyhow. host: trevor higgins? >> i think that is really important to find ways to recycle the batteries. and there are companies right now looking to take old batteries at cars to put them where they can use the batteries for on-site power. the real key will be building new recycling facilities in the united states so that we can try to reshape global supply chains by reclaiming the minerals in the batteries and putting them into the new ones that will be coming. host: patricia in pennsylvania. independent.

hello. caller: hello. back to the keystone xl pipeline and pipelines like it, which are going through peoples' lands when they do not want it to. that is a land grab most of the time that these people are left with not much, even though they are paid. but trying to buy a house or later on and something like that it is insufficient money. the xl -- the indigenous folks up there had protests, peaceful protests, and they were violently set upon by the police. this is well known and the governor was part of the problem. another issue is -- and my question is how much oil is exported from the u.s.? and third, what about our alternative energy sources? these are industries that are growing and should be encouraged

to grow. they incurred -- they produce new economies, new moneys and should not be suppressed. thank you. host: let us take her question. guest: i was in north dakota during the height of the issues and people opposing fossil fuel flew in and had plastic tents and cars and everything else. look, that was a nationally staged opposition. the locals just wanted everybody to leave. and so i dispute that. and police from as far away from the midwest were violently attacked by protesters at various times. national truck -- national guard trucks were burned. the answer comes back to we need infrastructure in this country, all types. and frankly permitting reform would be needed to build out new transmission lines and aspects. we have three point 3 million

miles of federally regulated pipelines and probably 5 million miles of pipelines. if you do not want a pipeline you cannot have natural gas in your house. if you do not want a pipeline you cannot buy gasoline. it is a simple fact that we all need these and there are a lot of landowner rights in place and i support more landowner rights. host: trevor higgins? >> there is a right way and a wrong way to build things. and people who have genuine responses to their own homes and interests are acting often in good faith and we do not need to denigrate the people who have spoken up to go to protests to make their voices heard, that is a first amendment right in this country. and we do need to build more transmission and it can be difficult. the biden administration has reformed environmental permitting processes and has stood up the dashboard of the improvement steering council. they have continued to push these and they have revised the

guidelines at cdq and negotiated changes in the law for permitting reform. they pursued additional reform changes. there are ways to try and build things that can get the social license from the communities where they are hosted, the buy in and meet the future that they need to build and meet the current energy needs. and it takes a clarity of vision for how to do that. guest: let me clarify. absolutely and i totally agree with you. local landowners and local people have the absolute right to be a part of the stakeholder decision-making process and we need to encourage that. my beef is with national organizations where people get flown in all over the country for political means are not part of the process. host: point pleasant beach, new jersey. joseph on our line for republicans. good morning. caller: how are you?

host: good morning. question or comment? caller: let me start with a comment. mr. higgins mentioned about the fires in california. i am a retired fireman, 25 years. fires have been around for 4000 or 5000 years. the reason they want to control is at the governor is more worried about his hair. they have access to an ocean and if they had any interest in solving the problem they would use that water. they can put that water and get pipelines put out the fires. second, the marketplace has to solve the problem with this. in 10 years if i want to buy an electric car that is safer and cheaper, i will buy it. i do not want two guys who hang out in washington, d.c. that drive and fly around everywhere telling me what to drive. it did not work that way 130 years ago when they got rid of the horseless carriage.

host: trevor higgins, let the market sorted out. >> you should buy the car you want to buy, i'm not going to tell you which one. it is a good idea for the federal government to help people afford the cars they want to afford and to invest in innovation and to make sure that we have safe and affordable options. and i think that is what these tax credits have enabled. it comes to firefighting, there are a lot of problems involved and climate change has made it worse. when they look at how to rebuild, it is really important that we are mindful of the fact that wildfires in this country are going to triple because of climate change. and -- in these coming decades. and that is a significant problem and it means that the places where we build in the ways we build reservoirs, the amount of training and investment that we do and fire fighters is critical. we have to approach this with eyes wide open because people's lives are at stake.

host: scott in spring hill, florida. democratic caller. caller: good morning. just a comment and observation. the earth sends us messages and unfortunately during covid all around the world they had massive shutdowns. so people were not driving to work and working from home and etc.. to make a long story short they were a bunch of pictures put out where they had before and after where you saw cities that were covered with smog and smoke and then during the period where people were working from home and things were shut down you could see blue skies all over. so, i think the earth is trying to tell us something. that is all i have to say. host: anthony in los angeles. republican. where you personally impacted by the wildfires in los angeles? caller: definitely.

i had several friends who lost their homes and the pollution here was very bad during that time. my comment is that the earth, naturally, does the change in weather and everything. it has been doing that for around thousand years and scientists are improving it. i do not believe that global warming is a real thing, it is more of a money thing because there is nothing that mankind can do for the shift. and i want to know, we have crazy people that think the environment is more important than the people living today. they are worried about 100 years from now. 2035, we do not know what that will happen. the government needs to get out of the people's way and let us live. so, hopefully, after this indication, i believe that the democratic party in california will be wiped out and gone because there are many people

that are upset about this administration not having water in the palisades. that is ridiculous. host: i am going to leave it at that point. you go first. guest: you know, and our previous caller was a firefighter and thank you very much for your service. early explorers back 100 -- hundreds of years ago called it the city of smoke. wildfires are predominant in california and we can look at forestry mismanagement and where we put our power lines and where we put developments. there are a lot of different reasons. i would not latch everything onto climate change with this. but, the fact remains that we need better policies. the last election was a repudiation of some of the biden climate change policies. energy was on the ballot and whether it is true or not, the biden administration has been unable to sell to the american public over the last four years that they were a step forward. host: jerry, somerset, kentucky.

independent. caller: all across kentucky they found old oil wells and they are now emitting -- emitting gases into the air. i spent about 15 years stripping coal and mining. and i know when a company puts up -- when a company gets a permit they have to reclaim the land. and if the -- and if they do not the money goes back to land. are there any plans to put government money out to these -- to fix these oil wells and maybe do something? thank you for your time. host: mr. higgins. >> it is really the oil company's responsibility but if they do bankrupt -- if they go bankrupt it is a liability for everyone. the biden administration past money in the late -- inflation reduction act for cleaning up

abandoned mines that no longer have a solvent company taking care of them. that money has continued. there was only one governor that tried to block it. most governors are happy to try and take that money and address the needs of the areas. i was pleased to see that the nominee for secretary of interior said that was something he wanted to continue to work on. i think there is hope for investing in closing up the old oil wells and it gives jobs to people who would have dribbled the oil wells -- drilled the oil wells and it cuts down on pollution and risk. host: michael in pasadena, republican. caller: i have a positive attitude about pipelines. some years ago enterprise came and put a pipeline across some of the property that we have down in the austin area. recently, kendra morgan installed a pipeline across some

that we have. anyway. these guys did a great job. and you know what? the cows did not get pissed off at all. they just keep going across the pipeline, because it is used for grazing. and i guess the reason that i do have such positive attitudes towards the pipelines is they are the safest that there is. host: host: i am going to leave it there we are going to our guests this morning. we are going to end now and take you up to capitol hill. on capitol hill, the governor of south dakota, the nominee to head the homeland security department, kristi noem, is in the building and in the room, and we have live coverage here on c-span.