spending one hour with us on c-span. judge block: thank you for having me. i hope this was effective. ♪ >> all q&a programs are available on our website, or as a podcast on c-span now.

♪ host: it is monday, february 3, 2025.

we are with you for the next three hours. we begin on president trump's new tariffs on canada, mexico and china. while the president has said foreign companies will pay the cost of the tariffs he also knowledge there could be pain out by americans. critics are worried about an all-out global trade war that will raise prices across the board for u.s. consumers. we want to know about your buying habits. you make it a point to buy american? phone lines are open. republicans (202) 748-8001, democrats (202) 748-8000, independents (202) 748-8002. you can also send us a text (202) 748-8003 please include your name and where you are from. otherwise catch up with us on social media on x @cspanwj and on facebook it is facebook.com/c-span. you can start calling in now. we want to know about your

buying habits amid the tariffs that were announced on saturday by president trump. two headlines from the political media about the new tariff regime, the first from the huffington post, donald trump defending his tariffs saying there'll will be some pain to make america great again. quoting his truth social page. here is red state, trump tariffs may hurt but will all be worth it in the long run. we are asking you about those tariffs. here is one more headline from the editorial pages of the wall street journal. the unit real board has called these tariffs and trade war the "dumbest trade war in history." the fallout begins is what the editorial board writes, noting canada and mexico have valid retaliation amid the ongoing economic uncertainty. president trump was asked last

night about the retaliation from canada. he was on the tarmac at andrews air force base. this is what he said reporters. >> it could happen. canada has been very abusive of the united states for many years. and it is does not allow banks to go in. that is pretty amazing. if we have a u.s. bank they do not allow them to go in. canada has been tough on oil and energy. they do not allow our farm products in. they do not allow a lot of things in and we allow everything. it has been a one-way street. we subsidize canada by about $200 billion a year and for what? what do we get out of it? i love the people of canada. i disagree with leadership of canada. something will happen there. if they want to play the game i do not mind. mexico, we have had very good

talks with them. this is retaliatory. this is retaliatory to a certain extent. the leads of people float into our country through mexico and canada and we will not allow that. we have among the lowest numbers we have ever had of people crossing our border, the lowest number since my administration. host: that was president trump last night. the tariffs much of the talk of the sunday shows yesterday. we will show you some reaction on the sunday shows. this morning we are asking about your buying habits amid what could be a trait war. how much do you make a point to buy american? we have all right gotten some responses from you and social media, including michael from facebook saying i buy as much as i can when it comes to buying american. one more, steve saying it is hard to say but i am on my fourth toyota and caitlin saying

i buy the least expensive. phone lines are open for you to call (202) 748-8001 publicans, democrats (202) 748-8000, and independents (202) 748-8002. derek is up first in virginia. republican line. tell me about your buying habits. caller: hello. host: are you with us? then we go to otis in florida. democrat. caller: good morning. i buy the least expensive, whether it is american or foreign made. to meet that is not the question. we have to say what are we doing to america? the people that have to suffer obey the ones without.

whether you're republican or independent or democrat. whoever you voted for, you get a chance to see whether or not you was right. buying american is good but america has an image of what america should be and it is bad. maybe canada and china might decide to negotiate. these countries can retaliate against united states. you are always strong until you are not. host: it was the president on his truth social page saying "this will be the golden age of america. will there be pain west and mark yes, maybe, or maybe not but we

will make america great again. we are a country now being run with common sense and the results will be spectacular." those promises coming from president trump. a much do you take him at his word? caller: i don't take him at his word. a lot of people throw words justice throw you off your game. everyone in the country knows donald trump has never told the truth. you're giving all of these excuses come all you have to do is turn one page. it is one page to see exactly what this man is doing. everybody has to look at what he is doing until he starts reaching for the fruit that is farther up that you cannot reach and you do not want him to touch that. whereas we look at donald trump saying he tried to put america first but if you think about it he is going after our allies.

a bully always picks on someone smaller than him. he always talks about how tough he is but he will not go after russia and he will not too much smack to the china president. he has a problem. we follow him as if he is a tough guy but this man had five deferrals from going to vietnam because of bone spurs. if you think that is tough, you've to be able to walk the walk instead of talking the talk. he has never done that. host: that is otis in florida. 25% tariffs on mexico and canada. when it comes to energy from canada that number is 10%. chinese tariffs at 10%. these were announced by the white house last week. the executive order was signed by the president on saturday they go into effect on tuesday.

amid all this uncertainty we are asking about your buying habits. william in florida, republican, what do you think? caller: of course we buy american when it is available. but we have a big change over here and things are not going to be perfect in one week. you have to have time because there are a lot of things he will be doing and you have to give him a little time. host: you go out of your way to buy american or you think you will do that more in the weeks or months or however long this tariff regime last? caller: you do your homework. with the cars absolutely i do. they are not assembled over here anyway. you have everybody working at the same time. give marco rubio at the panama canal. that is related to costs.

there will be a lot going on and you have to be patient. i am just as tipped off as everybody else. nobody wants to pay four dollars a gallon for gasoline or more. give the man some time. there a lot of people tipped off in the media is going to make it worse. host: that is william in florida. when it comes to imports and exports from canada and china and mexico the council on foreign relations with a chart on that starting on the import side. nearly half of all u.s. imports come from canada, china, and mexico. analysis by bloomberg economics shows the new tariffs to reduce overall u.s. imports by 15%. the washington dc-based text foundation estimates the tariffs will generate about $100 billion per year in extra federal tax revenue and can also impose significant costs on the broader economy, disrupting supply

chains, raising costs for businesses, illuminating hundreds of thousands of jobs and ultimately driving up consumer prices. the chart showing imports and exports when it comes to canada, mexico, china, and the gray bar is the rest of the world when it comes to u.s. imports and exports. frank is in poughkeepsie, independent. you are next. caller: i am very happy that esau is president because he will bring your destruction. you are an immoral country. you are bad for everybody. you poison your water. you poison your food. you poison your people.

you kill, murder, do anything to stay in power. host: that is frank. this is elaine in pennsylvania. democrat. caller: i feel as though the tariff is one issue -- i feel as though he is not being fair to the american people because he is being selective as far as what type of american person -- can you hear me? host: i am listening. caller: he is hitting us with so many different things so that the american people cannot absorb one thing at a time so they can have the public sentiment about it. i feel as though the tariff will hurt us and at the same time he is trying to do something positive but at the same time he is doing something negative. he is talking about waiting for

a certain amount of time and at the same time he is dismissing all of the federal employees. you have all of these people that will not have money to be able to afford to live in their homes. host: you think tariffs will change your buying habits? caller: i was like to buy american because the quality of the product is so much better. host: how often are you looking for that label? caller: i look at it a lot. i buy from amazon and i look at where things are made. i wish we had more industry in america to make more product so i can have a better selected. host: do you think these tariffs on so products from mexico and canada and china will get more people to do that? caller: i think people will second think things because they

will have to save more money. because of what the other countries are going to charge for it. in the long run it will hurt people. the airplanes. i'm not going to ride after the incident with the plane crashes. i'm hesitant to fly in another plane right now. the management of the administration. it is a lot of things we as americans have to look at when you talk about the tariffs. i appreciate you bringing this on. host: that is elaine in pennsylvania. we are asking you how much you buy american amid the tariffs said to go into effect on tuesday. the council of foreign relations looking at which u.s. imports could be most affected, saying it will likely be cars, crude petroleum, phones, computers, and motor vehicle parts. it when he 5% tariffs on canada

and mexico will raise production costs for u.s. automakers, adding up to $3000 to the price of some of the cars sold in the united states each year. grocery costs put rise as mexico is united states biggest source of fresh produce, supplying more than 60% of u.s. vegetable imports and nearly half of all fruit and not imports. this is bradley in west virginia, republican. good morning. caller: good morning. vietnam veteran from way back. i used to be a democrat and september 10 i changed to republican because the democratic party is lost in space. let me give you some examples. i buy american if i can get it. i bought a pair of sketchers shoes from amazon and i pulled the tongue back and found it was made in vietnam. i will go barefoot before i wear a pair of shoes made in vietnam.

my general electric refrigerator was made in vietnam. i bought a brand-new general motors car, that i was buying american and i should have looked but i did not and i will tell you why. it was made in china. if i'm not mistaking i seen an article that ford took lincoln and your lincoln navigator two april's ago. host: what you do when you find these products you've already bought that were made in other countries? caller: there a few. if i can look at the tags just like i bought a hat at the veterans canteen and i looked at the tag and it said made in vietnam. a friend of mine told me -- i took it back downstairs and i said i want my money back. i will go baldheaded before i wear this thing. a couple of years ago the telecaster on saturday, i cannot think of his name.

we was arguing about this a puppet years ago and i said they need to do away with nafta. he came back to me and said we cannot do away with nafta. below knee. -- baloney. these companies are going over to these foreign countries and getting slave labor prices. these car should be half of what they are in america. people need to wake up. by american if you can. these companies that go over there from the united states, they need to sell it there and do not bring it back here. thank you and have a good day. i appreciate the call. host: that is bradley in west vi. this is sue in new jersey that ghts "buying america and is something near and deay heart. my mom and this me when i was younger and first started working. american mate,trony

believed was of better quality. nowadays i've taken to looking mostlyrifttoreat the rate to find made in the usa because they are hard to find at the big box stores and it is a shame." asking you about your buying habits. do you think habits will change with the tariffs had to go no effect on tuesday. much to buy american? this is bill in newport florida. good morning. caller: i would like to make a comment. i think the tariffs from canada and mexico will definitely heard from an electronic standpoint consumers because a lot of the parts need from these countries as well as you raise costs for computers and other electronic goods. i think the tariffs are bad from that standpoint. also automobiles and a lot of

other things consumers rely upon , even food grown in both those countries. that is what the major problem will be in the future with the tariffs. host: this is france while in maryland, democrat. good morning. caller: years ago i used to run a clothing store. i can tell you 95% of the products were from the u.s. host: 95% of what? caller: 95% of the products -- host: i would love to hear how you restore ran its buying. let me try one more time.

speak into the phone. caller: can you hear me? hello? host: give us a call back we will try to get that line. this is julie in ohio. republican. good morning. caller: good morning, how are you? host: i am doing well. caller: whether we are former democrats who turned republican like me or people in my family who voted democrat again, it doesn't matter. i love you all. i really hope we can find our common ground. host: bring me to this question we are asking in your buying habits and you think they will change with these tariffs? caller: hell no.

i will buy american. host: that is julie in ohio. this is michelle in philly. independent. good morning. caller: good morning. i have a mexican restaurant. i do buy american as a consumer when i can get it. i have a mexican restaurant and this will put us out of business. i want to say that all the restaurants across the country, this will be a hardship of phenomenal proportions. it'll be a hardship for the consumers too. to canada and mexico, our allies , this is not what you do to allies. you do not put tariffs on allies. we had the greatest trade with nafta, which is free-trade and all of the consumers will pay,

all of the canadian consumers, the mexican consumers and the american zoomers will pay for this trade war. i can tell you -- and the american consumers will pay for this trade war. this will put us out of business because we will not be able to get limes. we make our fresh limes. avocados, tomatoes, onions, all this will be impossible to get or at a cost where we will not be able to pass on to our consumer. guest: how long -- host: how long have you run your restaurant? caller: 19 years. host: what are the margins on what you sell? how much of an increase in avocados or tomatoes makes this something you cannot make money on? caller: i will give you an example. a case of avocados would normally cost in regular time period might cost $30 a case. with these tariffs they will go

up to $300 a case. host: you think that much? caller: absolutely. limes that normally cost $20 a case will go up to at least $100 a case. we will not be able to find them. it will be the cost but also the scarcity because even right now we are having the scarcity. even before these tariffs, just the threat of tariffs -- i am in philadelphia, i am not in california where you can easily get things -- more fruit and produce. right now my husband and i have to drive around to a couple different stores and restaurants because they do not have ripe avocados or they do not have limes. host: does this sound about right to you? this is the wall street journal. caller: more than it -- more

than 80% of u.s. avocados come from mexico. mexico provides about half of fresh produce imports and is a particular important supplier in the winter when it comes to avocados. it also goes into cherry tomatoes. canada is a big supplier. mexico grows a lot of produce but tomato production is one that could be impacted by this. caller: that sounds right and it is right. cherry tomatoes do not work for mexican salsa. we will not be able to use those. my son is saying we should switch to a mediterranean restaurant. it is not that easy to switch to a mediterranean restaurant. we are barely scraping by right now. the pandemic has put the restaurant business out of business and it will be impossible. i think we will have to close. host: can you pass this along to your customers? at what point have you found they would be willing to accept

higher prices? caller: right now our guacamole costs $18 and that is the going rate here in new york and philadelphia. we are not in san francisco where i just went to visit a cousin and you can get a decent meal at a restaurant for under $20. here in philadelphia restaurants are charging $40 for an entree. our entrees do not cost $40 but stake is $32. it will put us out of business. i don't know how people will afford groceries. they will have to not eat certain things and with the bird virus going around and causing the egg crisis, your in for big trouble. -- we are in for big trouble. this is tacking on more problems for the american people that are absolutely unnecessary. host: you said you've run this restaurant for 19 years.

would you want to stay in business? are you considering closing? caller: right now it is a tough city to be in. there is a lot of restaurant competition. we have a family business. my son barton's and does the payroll and my other son is the general manager and my husband is the shaft and i do the baking in the bookkeeping. right now i am looking for a job. i have been for a couple of months because the margins are so low. we are four owners and i'm trying to get off of not taking any money from the restaurants so i can pay my mortgage. so my husband can retire, he is 65, he cannot retire until he is 70 because we do not have the money. definitely what trump is doing right now, not to mention the migrant crisis and the raids happening on all businesses. he is essentially destroying the

country. and he will destroy the economy. the economy will tank. host: that is michelle in philadelphia. restaurant owner in philadelphia. we are taking your calls asking how much you buy american and what these tariffs might mean for your buying habits. donald in san antonio is waiting. caller: good morning. i'm trying to figure out where they keep saying by american. if you read your labels when you pick them up you have a lot of products saying it is american but it was made in another country for america. what they don't understand, they say bring all of these factories back here. with these tariffs they come back it will be even higher than that. when we are treading with these other countries we are buying cheap labor.

who will come over here in this country and get paid whatever the pennies they are paying those people to work? this is the whole reason why they went overseas to start getting things made. now trump can come in, he is putting tariffs on all of these people. host: that is donald in san antonio. more of your comments from social media. thisistin in portland, maineaying "i am a small believe in buying american.tely i try to support my local small businesses as much can but i think this adworst part of a smokescreen donald trump rated to bear the headline. on friday evening he gave elon musk access to our treasury and oliver social security. at should worry everyone in the country." this is pat in india. "first of all you have to buy

stuff made in america. kw that most of our goods are made in china. what buy i need and i did not spt me looking at where came from." this is bernice, "i tried to buy something that was made in america so i went home empty-handed. we need to start making things here again." robyn ohio, republican, good morning, you are next. rob, are you with us? go ahead. caller: i think there's more to these tariffs than just trying -- for what they've done to us over the last 40 years, canada and mexico. they have worked with the cartels shipping drugs in. they can get out of it if they

just work and close their borders. host: a thing else you want to add? caller: that is it. host: that is robyn ohio. the secretary of -- that is rob in ohio. kristi noem was on meet the press and asked about these tariffs and with the trump administration was trying to do with them. this is her response. >> how is this move helping president trump fulfill his campaign promise to lower prices? >> you have seen the president take action this week with columbia and you saw columbia react in a very positive way that was good for everyone involved. canada, the opportunity to do exactly the same so we have a strong leader. he has laid down exactly what he will do and what the consequences are. i incurred their leadership team to get on board and make sure they are not pushing up prices.

if prices go up, it's because of other people's reactions to america's laws. that is what president trump is doing. host: kristi noem on "meet the press." mark kelly of arizona was also asked about these tariffs and with the trump administration is trying to do. [video clip] >> we are talking about two different things. arizona is a border state. there are things we can do to strengthen the border. we have demonstrated republicans and democrats can work together to come up with real policy solutions. what the president has raised, tariffs on canada and mexico, will do just one thing. you say it may raise prices. it will raise prices for american consumers. we saw this in the first administration in a trade war, certain things with china, for

cotton producers, pecan farmers. it really hurt their businesses. beyond this, it will hurt american families. they will see prices go up for food, energy, electronics. i think you mentioned autos. this is not the way to handle this. host: senator mark kelly yesterday on "meet the press." we are asking how much you "buy american." phone lines as the day's ahead to what this could mean for u.s. consumers. the wall street journal, from toys to avocados, the pinch will be felt david canada and the u.s. are the only countries that produce maple syrup at a commercial scale. more than 60% of canada's production goes to the united states. the u.s. is the largest market for mexican tequila which has soared in popularity with american drinkers over the past decade. shots and sugary margaritas have

recently given away to higher end tequilas. one of those products that could be impacted. smartphones, u.s. imposed tariffs on a slew of industrial goods from china during president trump's first term, and in the biden administration, to protest so-called unfair trade practices. most were spared to avoid the wrath of american consumers. an across-the-board 10% tariff on goods could cause price increases. the wall street journal looking at those various sectors. darrell and eastpointe, michigan. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking the call. i want people to understand the goal. the goal is to prevent us from being invaded by canada, mexico with fentanyl coming in.

it took the lives of 100,000 americans, even more than the vietnam war. if they do these things, the tariffs will come down. we don't have to buy these things. number two, there is something we can do immediately. congress can pass a law that all internet signals most make the customer aware where the country's manufacturing is, be it amazon or television commercials, so we have the knowledge and opportunity to make a thinking choice about what we want to do, buy or not buy. we have to put the pressure on. we have to stop the killing of these young citizens in our country asap no matter what the

means are. host: the white house says duties will remain in place until mexico and china stop fentanyl smuggling, illegal immigration into the united states. that has been playing out since these tariffs were announced last week. they officially go into effect tomorrow. this is darren in colorado springs. democrat. good morning. caller: hey, john. can you hear me? i think your question is about buying habits. last night, me and my wife stocked up on groceries and everything. we heard for two years, the price of eggs, the price of eggs. now everything is going to go up. what gets me, this is supposed to be about stopping fentanyl flow into the country.

less than 1% of fentanyl comes through canada, one of our best allies. now wants to turn it into a state which is totally embarrassing. i'm a veteran and it makes me disgusted. host: did you see the hockey game the booing during the u.s. national anthem, played in canada? caller: one of our best allies, and it almost brought tears to my eyes. the fentanyl, the compounds are coming from china, so he is putting a 10% tariff on them, 25% on one of our best allies, producers of lumber and other goods? how many years do we hear about eggs? now everything is going to go up. when do we look at ourselves in the mirror and say, why is all of this fentanyl coming in? because we are the drug users of the world.

we have to address that. there will be another drug. stop fentanyl, there will be another drug. we have to address the drug problem in this country. good to talk to you, john. i hope we get out from under this but i don't know for how much longer we can be lied to by this man. it's incredible. host: bennett roger in d. maryland, saying it would be nithe trump administrio set up a manufacturing infrastr here before initiating these tariffs. it was a littly and didn't plan for the repercussions. buy american is so expensive because of the labor costs. also, gm and ford are not made in the u.s. any. asking you about your buying habits, if they will change a mix of these tariffs. this is carol in palm springs. good morning. caller: good morning.

i buy american as much as i can. i search for it. there are good american companies, good american clothing companies. we here in the coachella try to buy all of our produce from right here where it is grown. my take is, american prices are higher because of workers get paid more, and american workers live better than people in other countries. i think when we get into this trump stuff, we need a brand-new party here called the party of america. buy america, everyone. thank you, john. host: fernando in texas.

good morning. republican. caller: good morning, john. my biggest problem is, everyone is talking about buying american products, which is good. i also feel strongly that chinese products -- i buy quite a bit of it, and now i will stop buying, because it doesn't last long. you are supposed to have something that last more than a year. chinese products last maybe six months. host: what kind of products do you buy from china? caller: skill saws, stuff like that, hand tools. you get what you pay for. it has gone to a point where i stop buying. i am 70 years old. i hear a lot of things on your program, which i enjoy

listening. people don't understand, you are lucky to be calling, lucky to be in the united states. i am a latin man, i was born here. at 78, counting my days, but for people to complain? come on. you have to work together as a family unit. i am glad i have three sons and they all have good paying jobs. they don't compare about -- complain about the prices. if they cannot afford it, they don't buy it. my dad taught me, if you cannot afford it, don't buy it. that is the way it goes. drink something else. host: that is fernando in the lone star state. this is kimberly, democrat. caller: this is really so difficult.

it is impossible to buy produce in the land of lincoln from america in the middle of the winter. i go to the groceries. the fish is farmed from chile. the produce is from ecuador, chile, mexico. our grocery prices are going up. i know the vast majority. because we are not tackling avian flu, eggs are going up. this is ridiculous, it is going to hurt us all. i hate that this is what we have to deal with now. in terms of fentanyl, addiction, i agree with the previous caller. we need to have a better control, treat addiction like the illness it is, get people help. we are the ones who can control the flow of fentanyl. for that matter, why are we not

tackling the sacklers? the biggest drug dealers in the country? with elon musk and his allies taking over the treasury department, none of us will be able to afford anything anyways. they are going to bilk us, and they are raiding us. no one elected him, no one voted for him. he doesn't have the security clearances to do what he is doing. congress completely abdicating their responsibility. you have the power of the purse, not some oligarch billionaire who was not elected to anything. he is the president. he is the de facto president, and we are allowing this. host: that is kimberly in illinois. less than 20 minutes left. steve. alexandria, indiana. republican. good morning. caller: i cannot buy anything,

even find anything here in the middle of the country that is not made in anywhere but china. you cannot by no american stuff. we have to buy our meat from the farmers, black market our meat because we cannot buy it in the stores. we go out, these farmers, they are the ones that control it all, these farmers out here. they have plenty of cows and mea t. this problem we have with the fentanyl, the democrats are the ones that opened the borders up. they purposely flooded it in here to kill american people, these democrats. host: why would they want to purposely kill americans, steve? caller: why would they? you tell me why. that is what i want to know.

lie with the democrats open up the border? you tell me why they would open up the border. also the oil. as soon as he shut the oil off in the united states, the biden administration, the pipelines shut everything off. let putin flow all of his own will. let iran flow all of their oil over in iran, collect hundreds of billions of dollars. putin. why would they do that? why with the democrats allow that to happen? trump had them down to where they were almost broke, iran was. they had no money left. the bonded administration, the democrats have always let the iran do whatever they want. host: steve in indiana.

15 minutes left to call him this morning. we are asking about your buying habits. these tariffs signed by president trump on saturday, go into effect on tuesday. whether this will change your buying habits. one quote from the new york post on this topic about whether tariffs could get people to buy american. an analysis from the new york post with gwi, market research firm. they write terrace may incentivize consumers to buy american-made products, especially among older conservative groups who already prioritize domestic manufacturing. but the data suggests affordability will the -- will be the key factor, not patriotism. you're consumers who express less interest in buying domestic products may choose alternative channels to buy or get aund the extra costs for imported goods payment one of the stories about this today.

plenty of stories in today's papers about this. it is the lead story in most of today's papers including the front page of the new york times this morning. the headline there, "trump's tarrifs said to imperil global trading." independent. good morning. caller: good morning. i didn't go to the wharton school of business like our president did, but tariffs are designed to help product or manufacturing made in the united states. so if we are not making these products, what are we going to do? we don't make tv's here anymore. take the tariff plenty to build manufacturing here quickly. i would love to buy a zenith

made in ohio, but those days are over. he is just using this as a ploy to pay for policies that he has no money for. i just don't understand. people don't see this. just do a little research. wiki what tariffs are designed for. the fentanyl issue is a drug problem in the united states, but we keep on taking funding away from medical and helping to solve the crisis. they don't do that. they keep on taking money away from health. thank you very much. host: to oregon. carl is in portland. good morning. caller: thank you, john. i think most of the problems that are occurring are not

exactly by design. there are people who are poor in this country, and they will have a hard time buying anything. people outside the cities also will be feeling the effects first. i am hoping the chinese will still bring products into this country. that would be an even worse situation. if that does happen, if the chinese people decide it is not worth having their equipment or whatever selling here, just to sit in warehouses here in america, i think we will be in even hotter water. this is another knee-jerk reaction from our government to solve problems and it will create problems. what we do from then on is going

to be a national effort payment we are going to either have to pull together or we will keep splitting apart and yelling at each other about it is everybody's fault. let's pull together and try to work it out, see if these tariffs have some benefit of some kind. host: carl in oregon. when it comes to chinese imports in the united states, in 2023, it was about $448 billion worth of chinese imports into the united states compared to $480 billion of imports from mexico, $430 billion of exports from canada. all other countries combined about $2 trillion. you can see how the three countries targeted stock up.

this is eileen. new jersey, republican. good morning. caller: hello, john. i just want to know, why do you keep dissecting everything that he does? this is not about buy america, this is about trump. he is not even in a month. let him see what he can do. after all, biden, you never had that on every day about what he did to our country. you get sick of it. one thing, the man that was in the senate that went to bed with that chinese woman, nothing ever happened to him. they never put him out of the senate. you have so much to say with the democrats about trump. how about something about them? it would be very nice.

host: eileen in new jersey. mark in florida. independent. good morning. caller: good morning. as far as buying things, living in florida, i will buy florida produce. it is not as plentiful as you think. you can get peppers. anything of significance, i do a bunch of research. ultimately i will buy quality along with price. the one thing i would like to say, these tariffs have nothing to do with what trump says they are doing. this is for him to get his big tax cut. this is so the freedom caucus can see money coming in from these tariffs theoretically, then they can vote and have his big tax bill. this is about him and his 1%ers getting their tax cut, not fentanyl.

by the way, the guns are probably a bigger problem with canada because it just drives me crazy. host: mark in florida. sue in wichita. good morning. caller: good morning. host: you are on the air. caller: yes, i'm a democrat. lie about everything that i need, my tv is american. i buy all of my food from black american farmers here. host: so you only buy american? what do you make of these tariffs? caller: well, that is up to the government. they get paid to run the laws.

that is all i can say. host: so you are ok with them? caller: as long as they do their job. host: do you think they are doing their job right now? caller: everything is in an uproar. no one knows where to turn. they are doing the best they can. host: bo in california, republican. the question is, how much do you "buy american?" caller: as much as we can but there is not much that you can buy. we farm out here and even a lot of the equipment is not made here. no other country has the regulation and controls that we have on food. you buy food from mexico, they spray chemicals on the food that we banned 30 years ago.

the same is true for china. there are no regulations on the food. we are really putting ourselves at risk by buying produce from those countries. host: what do you farm in california? caller: pistachios and forage crops for dairy farmers. host: how big of the operation do you have come a in california are you? caller: in the central park, near fresno. small farm, about 600 acres. we face the threat, too, a lot of our crops get exported, a lot of armor milk goes to mexico, cheese products. at the end of the day, we are behind the president. everyone i talked to has hopes that it will drive more manufacturing here and create those jobs everyone used to have. host: with mexico and canada now saying they will have retaliatory tariffs on the

united states, those going into effect within days according to the leaders of those countries, will that hurt your margins? caller: we think it probably will. host: how much? caller: it is hard to tell, it really is. as farmers, we are price takers, not price makers. we will see what happens. about 70 percent of our nuts leave the country, so that is really a concern. but again, the stuff in the grocery store that anybody buys, anything that is frozen and comes from china, you don't know what they are using for fertilizer. that is a big risk that a lot of folks don't know about. if they didn't know, they would seek out the u.s. products. host: justin trudeau yesterday saying we didn't ask for this but we will not back down, warning american jobs in the

auto manufacturing industry in particular could be at risk. a first wave of tariffs according to true to on american-made products are set to take effect on tuesday. they will hit 20 billion dollars of imports from the united states including alcohol, coffee, clothing, shoes, household appliances. on sunday, canada released a list of terrorist targets including products from republican leading states, appliances from south carolina, oranges from florida, and a second wave of goods would include tariffs on trucks, cars, agricultural products, steel, aerospace products. that second phase begins in three weeks. than other tariffs could follow. that is just the canadian response. this is francesca in florida. independent. good morning. caller: good morning. how are you?

i just want to add to the conversation because i feel like people are missing the point. these tariffs will not make it easy for these companies to just move to america. the reason why is simply because they will not move their operations. when we are talking about, we are going to make these products come to america and be made in america. it will not be easily done by these companies. host: the president has said the goal is to get a handle on illegal immigration, fentanyl, illegal drugs coming across the border, to get canada, mexico, and china to crack down on those things coming into the united states. caller: what does that have to do with it, though? host: these tariffs will continue until they do that.

that is what donald trump said. caller: i don't believe that will happen. how does he figure that will happen at all? what does this have to do with drugs and cartels, if we are taxing regular goods. host: what would be a better way to handle the issue that trump campaigned on ,won on, illegal drugs, immigration, which should he be using instead of tariffs as a stick here? caller: i don't know what he can do about the drug situation but putting a tax on everyday goods is not good for any american person. it will not cause any companies to move over here. i don't think it will help the drug situation. people are going to find either different drugs or they are going to make different drugs. i am not quite sure where the connection comes in between

these drugs and goods and taxes. host: this is peyton in denver. democrat. good morning. caller: good morning. i'm a huge c-span fan, i listen every morning on the way to work. i just wanted to call and give my thing about pete hegseth. i knew this was getting out of control when i looked into the hearing. host: we have a segment on open forum coming up for any topic. we have been talking about tariffs in particular in the segment. what are your thoughts about what it will do for everyday prices? caller: i think it is ridiculous and out of control, and we all know it will make everything more expensive. host: that is peyton in colorado. last caller in this first segment of "washington journal."

up next, we are joined by the hill's emily brooks to look ahead at the week in washington. later, george washington university professor casey birgit talks about his new book "we hold these 'truths.'" stick around. we will be right back. ♪ >> in his latest book title "wasteland," author robert kaplan focuses on the importance of technology the term in the world's future. author of 24 books, holds a chair in geopolitics at the foreign policy institute. in chapter three of his book, he claims "civilization is now in flux. the ongoing to clay of the west is manifested not only in racial tensions come up with new barriers to free speech but in the deterioration of dress

codes,roon of grammar, decline in sales of serious books and classical music and so on, all of which have traditionally been signs of civilization. >> robert kaplan talks about a world in permanent crisis on this episode of book notes plus book notes plus is available on the c-span free mobile app or wherever you get your podcasts. >> democracy. it isn't just an idea, it's a process. a process shaped by leaders elected to the highest offices and entrusted to a select few but regarding its basic principles. it is where debates unfold, decisions are made, and the nation's course is chartered. democracy in real-time. this is your government at work. this is c-span, giving you your democracy unfiltered. >> if you ever miss of any

c-span's coverage, you can find it anytime online at c-span.org. videos of key hearings, debates and other events feature markers that guide you to interesting and newsworthy highlights. these points of interest markers appear on the right-hand side of the screen when you hit play on select videos. this timeline tool makes you get an easy idea of what was debated in washington. scroll through and spend a few minutes on c-span's point of interest. >> "washington journal" continues. host: on mondays, congress is in session, we like to look ahead at the week ahead. emily brooks, house reporter with the hill. emily brooks, start on that plane and helicopter crash here in washington, d.c. what is the latest in terms of how congress is reacting, whether there will be a congressional investigation,

whether they are devising legislation in response to this? guest: absolutely, congress will be looking into this. my colleagues have already found that the heads of the transportation committee in the house have all the received briefings about this. certainly something that lawmakers, who fly in and out of reagan national airport all the time, are certainly very concerned about the safety implications there. congress will absolutely play a role. it is a little bit interesting, though, in this congress versus last, now with washington under total republican trifecta control. the republican-controlled house and senate are giving more leeway and room for the trump administration to investigate and provide information, both to congress, and publicly what is

going on. a little bit of a change in the power dynamic from previous investigations we have seen, such as with the assassination attempt with donald trump. that prompted a whole select committee to investigate the matter. we are not quite hearing of anything up to that standard yet but certainly congress will be investigating and playing a role. host: what could a legislative response look like? local members of congress, chris van hollen here in maryland, some of the virginia members, as well, who have talked about too many flights in and out of reagan national airport, that that is a safety issue. is there legislation to limit the number of flights, what could they do? guest: actually congress just approved an increase in the number of lights -- flights in past years, reauthorization bill.

congress green lit five more round-trip flights from reagan to destinations that are usually further than the radius that airplanes go from. that includes places like san antonio, las vegas, i believe one to seattle. those are slated to start in the months ahead. i don't believe those flights have started yet. maybe that is something congress could reconsider. that was a very hotly debated topic at the time with that the faa reauthorization bill. that only comes up every four or five years or so. it would be a pretty heavy lift for congress to limit those flights, but not out of the realm of possibility. another thing they could do is further restrict the air for military flights, maybe prevent any training missions, as this

helicopter was, in that congested area. those are things that lawmakers will be looking at. host: you talk about the months ahead, i want to shift to the house agenda. you sat down at the house republican retreat last week with speaker johnson to talk about his strategy for moving president trump agenda for the 119th congress. what is the strategy? guest: hopefully having everyone together. the very big theme that i saw at that retreat was just how desperate republicans are to have some kind of unity, but at the same time, there are so many fractures and divisions, very slim majority. fiscal hawks demanding really deep cuts on whatever they pass. this bill will encompass the top priorities for the trump administration agenda on taxes,

on the border, on energy policy. also, you have other members in democratic-run states looking at the state and local tax deduction cap. that will have a budgetary impact that will have to be made up. right now, the timeline that was laid out last week, this week, the budget committee was supposed to mark up and advance the legislation that will encompass eventually the trump administration agenda. but we are hearing from our sources that it is not quite clear if that will be able to happen this week because there is still so much jockeying going around about what those deep cuts should be, how deep they should be, what should be included. there are some topline decisions that need to be made before they can go to the next step.

with almost zero margin for error in the house after at least a phonic gets confirmed because democrats will never vote for this. very hard to get all the republicans on the same stage. host: remind us where we are right now in terms of government funding in the debt ceiling issue that continues to raise its head through the years. guest: absolutely. the trump administration bill is not the only thing that congress has to deal with. march 14 is the government funding deadline. congress will have to do either some kind of full-year funding through the end of september 30, or another continuing resolution, which i don't think there is much appetite for that. another looming deadline that republicans may need to go to democrats to help them advance.

like i said, all of those fiscal hawks in the house republican conference chair who really object to something like a really big massive omnibus bill that funds the government. they don't want that. speaker johnson may have to go to democrats for that. at the same time, you have president trump looking at the debt limit deadline which is supposed to be expected to hit around some this summer, when lawmakers must absolutely address that, or risk the nation's credit rating taking a hit. that could have vast economic impacts. when republicans, a couple years ago, had the minority, they use that to extract concessions from the biden administration, negotiated some rescissions in funding from democratic legislation.

president trump absolutely doesn't want democrats who are in the minority to have any leverage on that debt ceiling deadline, so that is putting house republicans, speaker mike johnson and other republican leaders, in a very tricky situation because it will be very tough to raise the debt ceiling with only republican votes. it very may well be attached to something like that regular government funding that expires on march 14 in a bid to get democratic support for it. or it could be potentially attached to something like wildfire aid for california, something that has been floated around. would that get democrats able to vote for that? hakeem jeffries, leader in the house, has said that is a nonstarter. it will be another headache for house republican leadership to

figure out how to meet trump's demand on the debt ceiling. at the same time, trying to prevent a government shutdown, and advance the trump administration's massive legislative agenda. host: if democrats were to try to extract something in one of these negotiations, where would they start? guest: they have not hinted yet but i'm sure there is a lot they could try to extract. the actions the trump administration has taken so far on freezing funding for foreign aid, the now-rescinded omb memo about grant funding, a whole lot going on with usaid seeming to be dismantled over the weekend, put under the state department, a lot of changes that are not

clear. is that something that democrats could try to get restored? would that be a priority for them? there is a lot they could go through. they are probably not in any real mood to help out the republicans, so they will be looking for something. that is exactly what president trump doesn't want. a tough situation for the republican leadership. host: emily brooks with us at the hill newspaper, taking your questions as we look ahead at the week ahead in washington. phone numbers, republicans, (202) 748-8000. democrats, (202) 748-8001. independent, (202) 748-8002. as folks are calling in, we spent the first hour of the program today talking about those new tariffs signed by the president on saturday, set to go into effect on tuesday. what is the most interesting

reaction you have seen to this tariff regiment on mexico, canada, china? guest: of course, speaker johnson, like a lot of the things that president trump is doing, is expressing support for the move. i think this will expose a lot of tensions between both may be the more libertarian-minded members of the republican congress, like rand paul from kentucky, who had a post on x over the last few days saying, i remember when republicans didn't like tariffs because it was considered a tax. now this is like a flagship policy from the trump administration. there could be some tensions there. maybe a little bit quieter, some tensions between agricultural state republicans, those in

agricultural districts whose constituencies and business districts could be affected by escalating tariff or trade war happening with some of the united states' largest trading partners. as the market reacts, as prices get adjusted, however long this lasts, i think, could probably affect how people react here. so far, like a lot of the things that trump is doing, there is not a lot of criticism from the republican side that is vocal. a lot of it is pretty under the radar and may be privately expressed. host: the quote from rand paul, one of the papers today, tariffs are simply taxes. conservative once united against taxes. this will mean higher prices.

we won the last election complaining about high prices. tariffs will be forced to explain the high prices. guest: exactly. there could be some tensions there. rand paul does tend to be more of a libertarian-leading member, may be more willing to express criticism on something like this that a lot of members. but i'm sure there are a lot of republicans in states that will be affected by these tariffs, or retaliatory tariffs, that are getting worried. we will have to see what the impacts of the tariffs are. host: let's go to mike waiting in massachusetts. emily brooks with the hill newspaper that you are chatting with this morning. caller: i have a couple of questions. one on elon musk.

he has total access to social security numbers. that scares me more than the tariffs. having someone not elected having total access to everyone's social security number. secondly, on the tariffs, i bought a handmade guitar, quote unquote, in nebraska, a small family company. when you look at the part list, the wood comes in from canada, brazil, electronics from japan, they assemble in nebraska, so yes, made in america, but the products come in offshore. that company will be destroyed. it is not helping small business in any way. what are your thoughts on that? thank you. have a great one. guest: i don't have the exact information on elon musk and what all he has access to, but certainly the doge apparatus he

has set up is taking a lot of liberties and getting a lot of information. there has been reporting about getting access to sensitive information. of course, like we were talking with democrats, causing alarm on that side about how much access he is getting. this is not a senate-confirmed position, just someone appointed by the president. how fast they are moving, they are reportedly working around the clock. i read another report about beds in the office building where the doge staff members are set up so they can work as much as possible. that is pretty stunning. will democrats be in any mood to get anything across the finish

line with republicans given all they are seeing from doge, concerns about that? maybe they will ask for some kind of safeguards, check on doge in response. that is pure speculation. something that other people have their eye on. to the point about small businesses and the guitar assembled in nebraska, certainly, all of these imports from other countries that will be subject to tariffs. that is definitely what people are worried about, that cost getting passed on to the consumer, raising the cost of the price there. also with the impact on businesses, whether they will be able to pay that upfront cost, or whether customers will be willing to buy their products,

considering potential price increases. host: i know we only have a few minutes left with you. sometime in the next half hour or so we are expecting to hear from secretary of state marco rubio as he leaves panama from that visit to the panama canal. we will take viewers there when he does make his remarks. an article from the hill newspaper noting that marco rubio had been warning panama over the canal, saying the current status is unacceptable. what will you be watching for from the secretary of state's remarks this morning? guest: panama, if there is any progress on negotiations for the united states to try and retake it, if it seems like it is positive, taking a more aggressive stance, probably that major tone is some that i'll be looking for there.

top priority of the trump administration. republicans from across the ideological spectrum have expressed support for the panama canal move. we will see if there is any progress there, any action that congress can even take to empower the trump administration to look into negotiations on the panama canal. there has already been one proposed bill on that from representative dusty johnson of south dakota. whether that is needed, we will see. host: david is waiting in massachusetts. pittsfield, massachusetts. good morning. go ahead. caller: good morning. i just have a sure thing here, as far as his legislative agenda goes. i really believe, and i know -- i don't like to call him a

president because his agenda is about him and him only. he is going to tear this country down if he is not impeached and the republican party disbanded, because they are the ones that put him there. that is all i have to say. have a good day. host: that is david. impeachment. what would it take in a completely republican-controlled house and senate for an impeachment hearing? guest: i think that is incredibly unlikely at this point. of course, president trump has been impeached twice in the past. both times there were democratic majorities, i believe. i don't think that is something republican leadership would be eager to bring up in the house,

certainly. they would have to be some thing i assume catastrophic, in order to bring up impeachment articles. even though there were 10 house republicans who voted to impeach president trump after january 6, that was only 10 house republicans. certainly not eager to capture signal or move against the president in that way. definitely not when a lot of them are eager to advance that kind of legislative agenda that they also kind of agree with, which includes extending the tax cuts from that 2017 bill that president trump signed. that includes changing energy regulations, boosting funding, enforcement on the southern border, and even the northern border. those are all things that

republicans in congress want to fund. as far as impeachment, i don't think anything has happened so far to get any republicans to even think about impeachment. it would be just incredibly unlikely to see a party impeach their own president for something, considering the balance of power, what we have seen. host: brooklyn. independent. you are next. caller: thank you for taking my call. in regard to the tariffs that president trump has put on canada and mexico that are allegedly related to unauthorized crossings at the southern border and fentanyl, what type of publicly available metrics is he looking for in terms of what he wants to achieve, so that he may then reverse the tariffs? my understanding is that crossings at the southern border are at a low in recent years.

canada supplies approximately 1% of the fentanyl in the united states. what numbers does he want to see? anything publicly? guest: i am not sure if there is a metric or something the president is looking to hit. when you are talking about border crossings, though, this is something that republicans have brought up over and over. they are not only looking at the numbers, people who are unauthorized crossing the border, but they are looking at a lot of the ways that it has been legal to come across the border and into the country over the past several years, and to change that. when you are looking at those statistics, numbers of border crossings, you also have to look

at republicans will be looking at asylum cases, looking at whoever is approved to be on humanitarian parole while they wait for their case to go out in front of a judge. those are the kinds of things that are technically legal ways for people to enter the country. it depends on what statistics you are looking at. certainly, republicans and the trump administration want to drastically increase a lot of those other categories, get rid of those other pathways. one of the things the trump administration did was get rid of the cbp one app, which was a way for migrants to schedule hearings, meetings with border officials at the border, in order to expedite, have a more orderly process for getting

people through humanitarian parole, through that process. now that has been taken away. there are fewer pathways to schedule that or you just have to go to the border to do it. when you are looking at that, there are a whole lot of things. i'm not sure as far as tariffs, what exactly the trump administration is looking for to lower those, but it is definitely a negotiation point. may be something canada or mexico could say they could provide but we will have to see. host: speaking of metrics, on, how much could the federal government saved by saving bloat from their workforce, full-time, contractors? have republicans in congress put a number on that yet? guest: i wouldn't know the number off the top of my head, but i know in broad terms, if

you are just looking at the workforce, looking at the kind of steep cuts that a lot of the republicans are looking for, in order to right the federal budget, deficit, steer the ship's away from getting evermore debt, which is what so many are concerned about. looking at the federal workforce alone is not going to be enough in order to do all of that. there will have to be programs that they will look to cut. there is talk about things like medicaid benefits, putting some work requirements, conditions on those being discussed as part of the reconciliation bill, the massive trump administration agenda bill that republicans are working on. i don't have the numbers off the top of my head.

in broad terms, workforce alone will not be enough to address those concerns. host: i know we had to start your day on capitol hill today. what did we get to today that you'll be watching for this week? guest: i think the biggest thing is the trump administration agenda bill, reconciliation bill, as we call it on capitol hill. if that gets a markup. of course, all the senate confirmation hearings, what movement there is on some of the more controversial nominees like robert f. kennedy, jr., tulsi gabbard. that will be interesting to see if the trump administration takes any hits on that, on those two more controversial nominees, or if they are able to convince republican senators to support them and they sail through. i'll be watching that, as well. host: emily brooks covers it all

at the hill newspaper ,thehill.com. we appreciate your time this morning. guest: thank you so much. host: here is where we are this morning on capitol hill. the senate is set to come in at 3:00 p.m. eastern this morning from down in panama, expecting to hear from the secretary of state. marco rubio is getting ready to leave panama, expected to give remarks to the media about his visit to the panama canal. we will take you to that when that happens. in the meantime, it is open forum. any policy or political issue you want to talk about, the phone lines are yours to do so. phone numbers on the screen. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. we will be in open forum for the

next half hour, 40 minutes. go ahead and get your calls in. any public policy, political issue you want to talk about. in the meantime, some other goings-on here in washington that you can watch on the c-span networks. academics and scholars discussingchallenges facing thed states, the progress being made to address them. the brookings institution, american in her present acute, and tulane university hosting that discussion. you can watch that live here at 10:00 a.m. eastern, also on c-span.org and the free c-span now video app. that is where we will go when this program in spirit also today, noon eastern, a discussion on the congressional review act and how it might be used in republicans -- by republicans in congress to overturn regulations issued before president trump took office. that by the federalist society, here on c-span, c-span.org, and the c-span now app. for today, a look at what

independent russian media is saying about russian society and the political sense. that is from george washington university's elliott school of business and international affairs at 4:00 p.m. eastern here on c-span, c-span.org, and of course the free c-span now video app. that's was having today. here's a look from you about what is on your mind. this is because hearing from you. betty, what is on your mind? caller: yes, are you there? host: yes, ma'am, i'm listening. caller: in 1970 three, the first came home, and they came through the philippines, and i wanted to say i appreciate, you are one of my rare -- it was a solemn thing to seek them it was not one way or the other. host: are you talking about

vietnam pow's? caller: yes. host: you were there? caller: yes. host: why. caller: i tell people my husband works for the airlines. he really was cia. if you see the movie coming home from the philippines, the little boy hanging outside the fence was my sons, and i was out there with a sign holding my baby and my daughter. it was rewarding, but it was very sad. it happened february of 1973. host: what did you learn about your husband's job in the years afterwards, betty? caller: well, let's put it this way. the movie "air america" is a true story. i know. i was there. host: for folks to whether or not they are, what is the story? caller: well, it's mel gibson's

movie, what he told was the truth. very much the truth. host: what is that story that you would want people to know? caller: well, it was a very nice thing, that the cia was involved in things that are very honest. and i got a divorce when i saw the movie "air america," it was bad. host: why, betty? caller: well, he put my family in a very dangerous thing. people need to see the opium fields, they have poppy fields, and they will know what i'm talking about. host: that's betty -- go ahead, finish your thought, betty. caller: and president -- was our landlord. so go from there. host: that is betty in kentucky.

this is dan in maine, republican. good morning. caller: good morning. i wanted to say i've been listening to c-span for a long time, and your anti-trump message and lack of republican callers, i think everyone must be asleep or something. but there is an episode i would like to get c-span to rerun again that had to do with this d.c. national guard, and i should have the paper in front of me, but i don't, but there is an episode that the d.c. national guard talked about the three-hour delay that happened on january 6. and i've never seen it repeated on c-span, but i've looked at a number of times myself. i've been trying to get the message to someone, somewhere, to replay.

the fellow's name was aaron. anyhow. so it was recorded in april of 2024, and it tells -- well, it does not tell exactly, but it tells what happens during the three-hour delay on march 6, which i think the country ought to get together on. but it seems like no one likes to hear that message that was given by the d.c. national guard about their activities that day. and i would like to hear it on the news again. host: dan, good news for you, everything that is aired on c-span is available on our website, c-span.org. our archives, our c-span archives, very searchable, easy to search. i think you will find what you are looking for. just go to c-span.org, and that search bar is at the top of the page. rich in schenectady new york,

you are next. his open forum. caller: yes, hello. i am so disgusted by claiming to be an american. i don't know how half this country voted for the scheming putin wannabe. they are not republicans, they are trumpicans. when are they going to wake up, the congress? this man is just, him and his phony, just because they have a few dollars, they think they can buy everything. they just think they can steal everything they can, everything they can control. people, america, wake up, please. host: that is rich in new york. as we said earlier, marco rubio, the secretary of state, is set to give remarks this morning. he is departing panama.

we will take it to you live when he begins speaking. it looks like they are getting ready to start. we will listen for a little bit and see if it begins. [overlapping conversations] and we will show you the secretary of state's remarks when he goes before the cameras to make them. he's been touring the panama canal zone. meanwhile, this is david on our line for democrats. good morning. it is open forum. caller: hello?

the most highly educated federal agency among those with at least 1000 employees is not nasa or the national science foundation but the u.s. agency for international development. two-thirds of its 4675 workers hold a masters degree, doctor, or other advanced degree. that is a quote from the pew research center. and i am just amazed that the other day, trump can talk about finding the brightest and the best federal workers, and then they want to take an entire agency and elon musk's words, kill it. i don't understand. i don't understand what is going on. it is just crazy, and that's all i've got to say. host: lewis, colorado,

republican, good morning. caller: good morning, john. thank you for taking my call. a couple quick points. 300,000 plus missing children. thank you, democrats. the covid shutdowns, devastating. the only good thing to come out of it is the exposure of the education system and the terrible results that they've produced. the education system, it should be sent back to the states. thank you, democrats. with regard to tariffs, they are a tool, but the fault is with the american manufacturing who sends their products to be manufactured in china. who's going to -- you cannot compete with slave labor when it comes to making profits. if the hostages have to be mentioned. i think there is progress being made. i'm not happy with it, but progress is being made. the panama canal, we built it

and lost thousands, 30,000 plus lives building that thank. we paid for it. now it's being run by china? thank you, democrats. with regard to the border, dented a border patrol agent just get killed by people crossing over the canadian border? thank you, democrats. come on, john. we voted for trump to be a change agent, and he's being a change agent. not everything is going so smooth, but i think in the end, i tell you what, the inflation rate over the last four years has been 5% plus. my social security benefits went up about 1% a year, so in the end, it is a net loss. the same thing with wages. inflation versus wages, it is a net loss. thank you, democrats. host: lewis, you said not everything is going to go smooth. do you think there is something

that has not gone smooth so far? caller: well, i think it has been chaotic. i think musk, you know, the federal government is not porter, but i think these same principles can be applied. look at eight come the usaid program. did you hear the story about $50 million being spent on condoms going to gaza? host: lewis, i saw a fact-check on that and the "washington post" yesterday, giving a four pinocchios, his worst rating for that. that was one of the fast checks--fact-checks on that particular story that has gotten a lot of attention. caller: well, thank you for the fact checkers. who's the fact checker, john? is anyone fact checking them? does that come from a little

fact -- from politifacts? all right, "the washington post," there is a reliable source for fact checking. but still, the usaid program, when you sent aid to gaza, it is taken by hamas. is that not true? thank you. host: all right. cody in indiana, pennsylvania, independent. good morning. caller: hey, good morning. howard stern. host: ok. jeff, st. paul, minnesota, democrat. good morning. you are next. caller: good morning. going to the other gentleman who just talked about on some being "a change agent," i would definitely say he's more focused on the "agent" part. as far as what i am calling into

place importance on, i would ask all republicans and democrats to look at what happened this past weekend. an unelected official tried to access our social security and our medicare, over a $6.1 trillion. that is not ok. america needs to stand strong against elon musk and everything he's trying to do. host: that is just. this is best in florida. good morning. republican. caller: yes, good morning, john. thank you for taking my call. i wanted to say a couple of things. number one, firstly, i am so thankful for our country being saved by president trump. he has done more in the last couple of days, little over a week that he's been in office, than the past four years.

he's got total transparency. he answers everything from reporters. we know what's going on. he is pro-american. and i'm just so proud to have voted for him, and that he was brought in by a landslide. host: we will end if they are. marco rubio at the panama canal. here's the secretary of state. >> he says this is a great partnership between panama and the u.s., a partnership, friend, brother, a great deal of collaboration. what has happened with this hemisphere it was mass migration is quite unfortunate. it is a tragedy. and we have people who, as part of this process come in many cases, people are victims and have been victimized through this irregular path that is created. we also understand from the united states that most people who come in here have come as a

goal, eventually making it to the united states, so you can say at a certain point, our own border does not begin at texas or mexico come it begins a lot farther down. and what we can do is create incentives so people do not make that trip. we seen a cooperation program today that helps prevent people with criminal histories, and in this case, and this grow, there were six or seven people with criminal histories. the idea is to prevent them from going forward and creating problems in panama and other countries as well. that will be with the cooperation of the united states with our friends here in panama. we have worked very hard together, and we will continue to do so as a part of very many things where we do have strong cooperation with our friends and partners in the panamanian government. "we hold these 'truths' these tragedies -- sec. rubio: these tragedies in

the modern area, we recognize that many people who seek mass migration are victims and victimize them along the way. the only people who benefit from migration our traffickers. this is how i will cooperation can help stem the flow, by creating a disincentive, by sending a clear message that if you come and you come in regularly, you may be stopped, and you may be returned to your country of origin. it can be done in a regular and dignified way to we seen the numbers. the numbers have dramatically declined. this program and what you saw her today is possible due to a partnership between the united states and our friends here in panama, and part of it is taxpayer dollars at work through the state department, for the programs we provide. this likely was possible due to a waiver we've issued, and we will issue a broader want to continue this cooperation. this is an example of the kind of program at the state

department that helped make america stronger and safer and more prosperous and also strengthens the work of our willing allies like we find here in panama. it is an effective program and one that works. in this alone, they were at least six or seven people with criminal records, many of whom were seeking to continue forward. and it destabilizes countries along the route and on the way, and ultimately as they reached the southern border and into the united states, it creates serious problems for us. this is an effective way to stem the flow of illegal migration, mass migration, which is destructive and destabilizing, and it would have been impossible to do without the strong partnership we have here with our friends and allies in panama. and we are going to continue to do it, and we are grateful for it. thank you. >> thank you, everyone. host: secretary of state marco rubio there. you are the interpretation at the beginning, and then marco

rubio speaking as well. he is leaving the panama canal zone after the visit. here on capitol hill, it is another busy morning. the setting is back in at 3:00 p.m. eastern today. plenty of events here in washington that we will be covering, and also coming up, a view from the white house today, what is happening at the other end of pennsylvania avenue. we will take you there in about 10 minutes this morning on the "washington journal." until that time, it is our open forum. we continue to hear from you this morning about what is on your mind. this is paul in connecticut, independent. good morning. caller: good morning, john. i believe. the fact checking is very slim these days, especially on the sunday morning programs. for these misinformed people to constantly bring up, you know, issues of loss of life in the panama canal. most of those lives were lost under the french.

the americans took it over, and with their administrative skills in cutting down the yellow fever and the mosquito deaths, that issue, sanitary conditions and so forth, they were able to prevail without much loss of life. there has been an update of the canal undertaken by the new canal authority. like so many situations with our neighbors, including our best neighbors, they are cast to the winds for political expediency and campaign promises, i.e. canada. canada was the first to stand behind us post 9/11, and they lost lives as a key ally. now, isn't it amazing when you hear these people talk about the socialist state north of us? and all they can do is spread

racist and genocidal talk through the official office of the president's spokesman, when she lied knowingly, giggling, stating this trash about condoms going to gaza. like, in other words, look at us and the oxymoron that we are putting out. genocide being committed, loss of lives, and the symbol of condoms, which is, what? preventing life. it is no comparison. it was done for genocidal purposes and to prop up netanyahu, who is soon to visit here. we need to stand by our key allies, but we also need to be getting the truth from our media, and we need to have media officials put a check on these constant, you know, when you hear this stuff day after day

after day, and there is no end -- i appreciate your pushback. you did pushback on that fellow, but they come on with rapidfire ms. truths and misinformation, which is partisan in nature. host: you mentioned the panama canal zone and the numbers of americans who died during that construction. that number set by the viewer, he said 30,000. the president has set as high as 38 thousand. usa today with the fact-check after the president's inauguration on the history of that, saying there were multiple attempts to build the panama canal, and while thousands of people did die in those efforts, the toll of american deaths did not remotely approach 38,000 lives. matthew parker, the author of "hells gorge: the battle to build the panama canal," told the bbc that 20 stacked -- 25,000 people died, from

mosquito borne viruses, and the fails of french attempt to build the canal in the 1880's. parker said none of those were american, though. rather they were largely french and jamaican. during the u.s. construction from 1904 to 1914, about 6000 people died, almost all of whom were from barbados. about 300 americans died in this effort. those figures were largely in line with the estimates of the death toll in the effort to build the canal, which, of course, was completed in 1914. bridger, oceanside, democrat. good morning. caller: hi, john. i have you muted on the tv, but you are still on the phone. i appreciate your discussion today. when i watch with congress and trump's agenda and reluctance to side with the president.

i have in my hand, i spoke with you at the end of december come on the 31st, i believe, a copy of my local newspaper, "the tribune," on page nine of the local section. a political cartoon -- i love political cartoons. the last one showed the cabinet pick. it was pretty interesting. this one showed peter cooper of politicalcartoon.com a large living room beset by a giant reptile. and it says, the title is, "can we still even referred to as "the elephant in the room?" the elephant symbolizes the republican party. i found that amusing. that was a couple days ago could i get a kick out of political cartoons. host: why do you like little cartoons, caller: richard?

caller:well, they are kind of a tongue and cheek thing. i read, for instance, harper's magazine. harper's magazine has been around since 1850. this newspaper has been around since 1868, i think it was, and these are a little bit more reliable than other people's opinions. i like cartoons could you can make up your own mind. host: when you say "make up your own mind," in how you interpret the cartoon? caller: exactly. some people might think it is humor. some people might think it is rude. i find donald trump to be reptilian in his ways, and that is why this cartoon amuses me to he has these reptile-like eyes. in harper's magazine just recently, he referred to this

statement come among many others, he said the rancor, essentially unknowable, rising from the waist like trump, sauron, this joyful agency. i find this to be a well-written piece. and sauron, you may remember, he was the evil sorcerer and "the lord of the rings." it was a long time ago. i have not read the book in 60 years. host: i know the character, richard. if you like political cartoons, go to c-span's american history tv, c-span.org/history. and there are plenty of programs in which we cover political cartoons. this is one from a couple of years ago about the famous political cartoonist pat olyphant, his cartoons from lbj to reagan times.

you can see his cartoons, various lectures and events we cover, c-span.org/history, if that is what you are into, richard. caller: can i say one more thing, or is it time to go? host: what else do you want to say? caller: the last thing is the word of the day that i like to read also. it is an adjective. it says, "what does this word mean?" the word is dislocations. that's all i've got to say, john. and good luck, trump. he is to need it. host: that was richard in open oceanside, california.

let's go to the hill, a white house reporter joins us now. we were talking about trump's tariffs that he signed on saturday. they go into effect on tuesday. what is the most interesting reaction you seen from your perch at the white house? guest: republican's have been in line with this decision to impose tariffs, the top three international trading partners. we've seen some republican criticism, mitch mcconnell on 60 minutes, he was sort of critical, saying this movement will raise prices. but for the most part, republicans seem to be in favor of this. they think it is time to impose consequences on canada, mexico, china, for bringing fentanyl into the united states. they are in line with the trump on this, even though, you know, it seems poised to create a widespread trade war. host: we will hear more from the

president today. we heard a few comments from the tarmac at a press briefing today. guest: you will hear either from the president or press secretary catherine levitt. the florida panthers, championship hockey team, is in town. i was on the tarmac last night when he told us he would be speaking this morning with justin trudeau of canada, leadership from mexico, so certainly we will be closely tracking, you know, what the white house has to say about how those calls went. host: in what the president set to meet with an nhl hockey team, do you think they will bring up the going of the u.s. national at them at that nhl game, i think it was yesterday, that

happened and went viral on social media? do we expect the president to address that? guest: yeah. it's a great question. with trump, you always leave the door for him to weigh in on day eight today events like that. as you mentioned, we saw it at a hockey game, toronto raptors give them a basketball game. again, there was going of the u.s. national anthem, and that is exactly the kind of reaction that tends to get trump's attention and tends to rile him up a bit. certainly i would not be surprised to see him weigh in on a visit or social media after. host: staying on foreign affairs, you mentioned a visit, benjamin netanyahu visiting washington, d.c. this week. what will be happening at the white house and where the prime minister will be? guest: yeah. certainly. premise are benjamin netanyahu expected to be at the white house tuesday, expecting a chaotic, sort of madhouse atmosphere, which we seen certainly in the first couple weeks of the trump administration, where there's just, you know, a huge surge of

people here, interested in what is happening, especially when foreign leaders visit, especially when i for later is prime minister netanyahu, who obviously has a lot of, you know, tensions whenever he is in town. you will see trump and netanyahu together touting this cease-fire deal, which the trump administration has not been shy about taking credit for. hostages released, one israeli -american citizen, and of course the white house was quick to take credit, saying this was because of a deal trump was able to broker. trump and netanyahu have a pretty strong relationship, and it will be interesting to see, you know, the public-facing side of that, especially given how frothy biden-netanyahu relationship was. host: this visit to washington,

to the white house and the second trump administration. guest: absolutely. yeah. it's easy to read into that come into the significance of netanyahu being the first four and visit the white house. biden publicly criticized netanyahu, saying it was making it more difficult. with trump, he's been vocally pro israel, even though at times during the campaign, he suggested israel was "losing the pr campaign," as he put it, a couple times. trump and netanyahu has a strong relationship. obviously trump welcoming netanyahu into the white house a couple weeks into his second term. they want to tout this partnership, tout trump's support for israel, and certainly it will be interesting to say what -- to see what john has to say about the future of gaza. you heard him talking about wanting to "clean out gaza," so

certainly will be closely monitored what those two have to say. host: finally, brett sandals, walk us through what we should be watching for with trump nominee is on capitol hill and confirmation votes last week. guest: yeah. last week obviously was a huge consequential week of hearing something with robert f. kennedy, jr., with cash motel, and tulsi gabbard, who is the director of national intelligence. parscale junior is that you have -- rfk junior is expected to have committees this week. tulsi gabbard has a committee this week. todd young has been critical of her nomination. those are, i think, the two was closely watching. energy secretary chris white, for example, may get confirmed early this week.

he's been busy on capitol hill, at the white house. the japanese prime minister will be in town. lots of action on both ends of pennsylvania avenue this week. host: brett samuels is always busy and always good to us here at the "washington journal." thanks for joining us this morning. if you want to see his story, it is at thehill.com. we will let you start your day. back to your phone calls now. open forum continues on "washington journal." another few minutes, taking your calls on whatever is on your mind this monday morning here in washington, d.c. and around the country. this is ken in madison, wisconsin, independent. good morning. caller: hey. host: go ahead. caller: i want to comment on something that is important, which is term limits. which is now two, but if we made

it one in 5, 1 term, five years, every president would then essentially be a lame duck president, and he would have to get elected, get it done, get out, and pass on to somebody else who wants to be president of the united states. i wish somebody would start discussing this. i can't seem to get through to people that we don't want to have a king there. let's not elect him a second time. also trump would not be running for a second term, biden would not be running for a second term, and even obama would not be running for a second term. so i think the idea needs to be discussed. what do you think? host: so it is the reelection that is the problem, ken? caller: i think so, don't you? trump got into office, and he said, "i'm running for a second term." why don't you get something done first, and then decide to run? and he was assuming he was going to get elected again. he was very disappointed when he

didn't come and he made a big deal out of it, and now we have him back again. host: what about members of congress, ken? caller: well, that can be debated, too, but let's start with the most powerful man in the country. they do this in parliaments, and i think we should really get in there and amend the 22nd amendment to the constitution, making it one in five years. that would mean you get three congress you get to work on, not just two, but you will have an election in an odd year, which allows people to really debate the issue about the president. but, you know, we can't do anything unless somebody brings this up and starts talking about it, so i've had a hard time getting through people on this. host: ken, thanks for bringing it up, in madison, wisconsin. this is mark in maine out on

mount desert island, it's northeast harbor. my for democrats. good morning. caller: i agree with the previous caller about term limits, definitely. for congress and senate. but the reason i called it i would really like to see a segment or a guest concerning elon musk and his associates getting into the computer system , with all of our social security numbers and banking information. plus the fact that i had not heard a peep about it on any of the mainstream media and not much on c-span. host: mark, we always appreciate suggestions. i imagine that is something we will certainly dive into on one of the programs, whether it is this week or the coming weekend. thank you for that. joan in cleveland, ohio,

republican. good morning. caller: good morning. i just wanted to make a comment, you know, the super bowl is coming up this weekend, i believe. host: yes, ma'am. caller: and what i want to tell the parents and grandparents, if you have not done, when your children were young and in t-ball, football and that, you don't belong at these games. those were the most important people in your life them and you did not take care of them. there is no such thing. you cannot make up for lost time. and put the money for them to go to college instead of all this hoopla. i myself have not really a football fan, but i am so disappointed, because when i was young with mine, i made sure i went to basketball, baseball, football. and all you fathers and

grandparents out there don't care about your kids. you are more enthused about the big guys playing in the super bowl! and i think you don't belong there. host: that is joan in ohio. are you going to watch? caller: no! like i said, i have nothing to do with them. i did my share. i'm 80 years old, and i can tell you is what i see, why our kids are getting into so much trouble is because the parents don't care about their kids, and going to their games. they are more enthused about going to the bars, having fun, and just totally putting their children aside. so i think it is about time these parents and grandparents started doing their job and quit worrying about the major leagues and all the other games out there. i really feel sorry for them, because you can't imagine how much fun you have and they have

when you are there watching them. they are always looking back to the parents and grandparents to see what kind of reaction they are getting, so you know if they got the first play, how happy everybody is. if they are playing football and made it to the 50 yard line or made a touchdown, everybody is jumping for joy, and the same thing with basketball. host: what was your favorite sport to watch, joan? caller: well, i'm not into basketball at all, and i only watched the cleveland browns with its on tv, of course, and since i really don't know who is playing anymore, and it is hard to keep up with them, all i say it is the browns have to reorganize.

and they got so much trouble about where the stadium is supposed to stay in cleveland or move out to grove park -- brooks park. host: joan come if the browns make it to the super bowl at some point in the future, would you watch it then? caller: well, wait a minute, i can watch the sports anytime i wanted to, but i'm saying to parents now, forget about watching the browns and pay attention when your kids are playing. they are not your life. those players get paid so much money, and that is even ridiculous. and you can even afford to get a ticket to go to the game. so how much do you want to put into them? my life is more important than all the sports out there, ok?

host: joan, thanks for the call from cleveland, ohio, our last caller in open forum. up next, a discussion with the george washington university professor casey burgat about his book "we hold these 'truths'," how to spot the myths that are holding america back. stick around. we will be right back. ♪ >> c-spanshop.org is our store. browse through apparel, books, home to core, and accessories. there's something for every c-span fan, and every purchase helps support our nonprofit organizations. shop now or online anytime at c-spanshop.org. >> if you have been any of c-span's coverage, you can find it anytime online at c-span.org.

videos of key hearings, debates, and other events feature more markers that have newsworthy events and highlights. this timeline makes it easy to quickly get an idea of what was debated and decided in washington. scroll through and spend a few minutes on c-span's points of interest. >> in his latest book titled "waste land," author robert kaplan focuses on the importance of technology in determining the world's future. kaplan, author of 24 books, holds a chair in geopolitics at the foreign policy institute, and the chapter, number three in his 177-page book, kaplan claims "civilization is now in flux. the ongoing decay of the west is manifested not only in racial tensions coupled with new barriers to free speech but in

the deterioration of dress code, therosion of grammar, the cline of sales of serious books, and classical music and so on, all of which have traditionally been signs of civilization. >> author robert kaplan talks about his book "waste lan a world in pnt crisis," with our host brian lamb. booknotes+ is available on the free c-span mobile app or wherever you get your podcasts. >> listening to programs on c-span through c-span radio is easy. tell your smart speaker, "play c-span radio," and listen to "washington journal" daily at 7:00 a.m. eastern, important public affairs events throughout the, and catch washington today. listen to c-span any time. just tell your smart speaker, "play c-span radio." c-span, created by radio. -- cable. >> democracy, it is not just an

idea, it is a process, a process shaped by leaders, elected to the highest office and entrusted to a select few regarding its basic principles. it's where debates unfold, decisions are made, and the nation's course is charted. democracy in real-time. this is your government at work. this is c-span, giving you your democracy, unfiltered. ♪ >> "washington journal" continues. host: casey burgat joins us now. he's the author of the new book "we hold these 'truths'," with, you will notice, "truths" in quotation marks. with the subtitle "how to spot the myths that are holding america back." what are mixed or even outright lies? guest: where do we begin? i appreciate the emphasis on the close.

there are a lot of myths we fall for on accident, and sometimes they are put on is on purpose by politicians, the lobbyists, they all matter. so the myths are premeeting our systems from the courts, campaign finance, what members of congress dukem of the filibuster term limits come as a wide list. where do you want to start? we will jump in. host: give us an example of one of the myths. guest: term limits, to kick out members of congress after a certain period of time, just will empower the wrong people, right? if you are frustrated that the president is to power, lobbyists are to power, term limits will exacerbate that power dynamic and polarization all at the same time, so stop wanting it. host: another myth you talk about in this book that members of congress don't do anything. guest: it's true. i often hear from people back home, members of congress are

always on recess, and this picture on the playground playing to freeze tag. but that is not it. when members of congress go back home, they are often working more hours than they do in d.c., and when they are in d.c., their blocks of scheduling are 15 minutes at a time. they are constantly raising from hearings, subcommittee meetings, back to meet with constituents. this is a really demanding job, so to undermine it by saying they are not doing anything just because they are not doing what you want them to do is a really an effective way to think about congress. it matters because it makes us distrust kit and think it is not working the way it should. there are reasons that is not working come it is not that one. host: how about this one, "bipartisanship is dead," something we hear from callers. guest: i hear this from my drunk uncle, too. we need to work together. there are commonsense solutions, and they choose not to work together. that is sometimes true, but if you get a lot, like we are about ready to have another government

shutdown fights here, and republicans are going to need democratic support. if you get a lot, you are going to need bipartisan support, right? even with unified government, with republicans in the house, the senate, and donald trump in the white house, often these big bills that have meaningful differences in people's lives, they're going to be democratic support to get it done. when you look at the data, the bills that become laws on the ones that you have that bipartisan support. which means when members of congress are trying to go it alone, when they are trying to only go with her own party, they are not going to get the lock. they want the issue, they want to fight, and we should be able to spot the difference. host: there are another dozen or so myths that casey burgat talks about in his book, "we hold these 'truths'." why did you feel like you needed to write this book now? guest: to be honest with you, it needed to be written a long time ago. we turn on the news, and all of a sudden the things we took for granted for so long, like

congress appropriate the money, congress has the power of the purse, any news channel you flip on is talking about donald trump taking over. the power of the purse there's a whole lack of civic education in this country were almost one quarter of our citizens could not name the three branches of government. that's bad! that a good. all of that is bad for institutions come as bad for trust in government, and we need to increase trust more than we do have these partisan fights. host: who did you work with to write this book? guest: almost everybody. the fun part was going to find practitioners. we can write this book on our own, i could write a book on my own, but i did not want to do that. i wanted to get people who live these jobs, including former members of congress, academics, president trump's former white house communications director, to not only point out the bipartisanship of these m yths, but also that people tell

their stories, and some of them are saying yeah my take advantage of this, people not knowing the truth of this. campaign finance is one of those examples. i went and got an all-star team of former representatives, the smartest and, most accessible academics out there, and then some really good practitioners that live and work these jobs each day. host: who is steve braddock, and why do people believe it is a myth that the supreme court has become politicized? guest: steve braddock is one of the main voices on supreme court decisions. he has an incredibly popular book called "the shadow docket." if you have not read it, go check it out. he explains the power of the supreme court. breaking down the idea that the supreme court has ever not been politicized. as the nominees are put forth by political actors, and then they decided political questions. if you are frustrated about the supreme court come and you

should be. there's a lot of reasons to be frustrated about how it works, how it conducts its business, how nontransparent it is, then the only branch of government that can actually change it, whether it is the number of open supreme court hearings, the number of justices on the supreme court, is congress. so you will need political actors to get into the politics -- involved in the politics of the supreme court. even if you like to think of it as a neutral arbiter, it never has been. host: who is matt fuller, and why does he think the myth that the media wants to polarize us? guest: matt fuller is the washington editor for not notice, where he is the long-time capitol hill beat reporter. he has an interesting connection with a lot of tea party members. members of congress look from that and had a good, honest conversation. his chapter is about the myth of media polarization. the media is an easy scapegoat. you cannot have the presidential

campaign: the media the enemy of the people. that good. that is reminiscent of the nixon days, to foster distrust of those who are meant to give you the news. we kind of get what we want, right? this is the netflix generation. you don't just get in your feed random bits of news organizations. we select it, and algorithm to make it more and more doubt into exactly what we want it so the myth that one, the media, is this all-encompassing being that goes from "the new york times" to some teenager with a phone in his basement, that ain't the media. there are different standards about what they are able to report on, the levels of fact checking i going to come up media source are subject to libel laws, where a lot of things in social media are not subject to get and the want to polarize us. the people i don't media want to tell you the truth, they want to tell you the story. they don't want to tell you only good news. that is a misconception, but

they want to tell you what is happening behind the scenes come and i am glad that they are there as a watchdog of american government. host: funny you say the words "dialed in." let me give you the phone numbers come as usual split by political party, republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. casey burgat with us until the top of the hour, taking your phone calls this morning. for viewers who don't know your background, though you've been on c-span plenty of times, how have you been around this institution? how long and where have you worked? guest: i love c-span. you guys are my favorite nerds out there. before, i was in the government with a focus on government. while it was finishing that up, i worked at the congressional research service, which is congress' private, nonpartisan think tank. and there i focused on congressional reform, with a focus on the first branch of

government. i worked at some think tanks around town doing the same thing but in a more public way, now a lead the masters program in public affairs at george washington university, because i love the teaching side, too. i love the home at gw, and i can think, write, and political processes are top of thli. host: an ti twrite a book. "we hold these "truths": "how to spot the mythshaare holding america back." a quote from that book -- "the toh to swallow truth about our politics is that there are no quick fixes to our big problems. and we have big problems. many. but there is noavr candidate with a cure-all, d expecting one is aerct wedding our dysfunction. the sooner we can accept this, the sooner we can have honest conversations about what to do about it. and the sooner we come of the people, can return from our cliff edge of futility and engage in solutions."

there are things we could do, lots of them. what are some things we can do? guest: dang, that sounds good, john, did i write that? there's a lot we can do. we need to stop falling for this "i alone can fix it mentality," right? we see this playing out in the trump administration, where we just think if we get one more law, if we get our candidate elected into office, if we remove campaign perversions, then all of a sudden, all of these things that are, at our core, pretty broken, it's not true. and to keep falling for that is perpetuating this cycle we keep finding ourselves in. reading to the cynicism that makes people step out rather than step income and we need more people to step in. so a lot of those solutions come as much as i want to say all you have to do is 1, 2, 3, anyone who is telling you want to three, alarm balls should be going off in your head. maybe they are trying to take advantage of simplistic solutions that simply will not

solve all of our problems. check in with who you're media sources are. if you are talking politics with your friends, which you should probably do more often, talk to someone who does not think like you. and try to figure out why they think like that then thinking that they are dumb or misguided. say where you got your information, because even if you have to say it out loud, you will check yourself in a way where you are not just saying, hey, i saw on read a," or "i saw on joe rogan," i saw a report from cdc or where you are equating one or the other. they are not the same thing. the other thing, you need to get involved. getting involved can take a lot of different forms, right? start a book club, start a conversation, go to a city council meeting. stop paying attention to national politics, where

ironically you have the least amount of impacts, and pay attention to local politics, where they would love for you to show up. they are begging for people to be interested in it. if you want politics to be happy and entertaining, like wrestling, go to a city council meeting. those things are wild i really recommend it. host: we would like to chat with some callers. this is barbara on our line for democrats. you are out first with casey burgat. caller: hi. ok, i'm listening to what you are saying, and here are a couple of thoughts. first of all, we do not teach social studies anymore in a lot of these schools. and people don't know where to search for trusted information. then they don't trust, you know, documented information from government sources. we have 21% or one out of five people in the country that are actually illiterate.

they cannot read. and then you have the project 2025 that wants to eliminate the department of education and replace it with people that don't even have a teaching degree. and there's one more thought. i remember, and people can google this, trump said to a group of his rally people that he "loves the poorly educated." this is what we are dealing with. thanks for listening. host: that is barbara in pennsylvania. casey burgat? guest: barbara, thank you. you are right on. we do teach social studies, but what we don't teach is civics. it's one thing to know the organization of congress and the house vs. the senate. it's another thing to know the date of when the declaration of

independence was signed. but it is a very different thing to be an active participant in our democracy, right? to show up, to read a ballot, to understand the power structures between who has decisions over what authority right now. that is a civics lesson, and we need to reinstitute civics in the classroom. i'd like to think of this book as that entry point into our civics education, knowing that it is not in our classrooms anymore. so i'm right with you, barbara, that we need to reorient ourselves, to teach folks before they become voters how to become a voter. it is really backward to think that we just send 18-year-olds out in the world without the training to be an active participant in our democracy. so i'm right there with you. host: do we need to just get back to the founders and their infinite wisdom? guest: that's a good transition. that chapter one in the book, where it takes down the myth that the founders had everything decided for us back in 1787, right?

that we don't need to update our government, because they had it all right and i all we have to do is follow their instincts, follow their lessons. this is one thing in politics where two things can be true at the same time. they were geniuses, and we can still improve their work product, right? the iron are here -- the irony here is they were under no illusions that they had every answer for their time, let alone in 250 years when we have bitcoin, google, and amazon, things they cannot even comprehend. they let us build a way to update things through the amendment structure and congress, to make sure we have a functioning democracy in the time in which we lift them and we need to take advantage of that more often than we have. host: the caller barbara mentioned people don't know where to go for trusted information. you work at the congressional research service, were members of congress have a question of an issue, they turned to you. where did you go for trusted information? what advice would you give to

people barbara is worried about? guest: yeah. government data is very trustworthy, and start looking at the sources where people cite, right? on the media side, i know they are getting trashed all about town, but when the legacy media report a story, we should be educated about how many levels of fact checking go into getting a story reported out. this ain't a blog, right? these are people's careers, where if they report misinformation, especially if they do it on purpose for some sort of partisan slant, their career is ruined. that is a very different calculation than throwing something up on wikipedia or a blog where your opinion is in termers to with fact. those new sources where it is legacy media -- do not confuse cable news with news. they have argued in court with fox news that we are an entertainment company.

knowing that as you select the news channels put some onus back on us the consumer. in a profit driven model they will not give us what we do not want. we like the salacious, we like the dramatic, we like the partisan fights. we tell our friends we don't but our consumption habits are telling a different story. host: texas, this is andrea, independent. guest: running. -- caller: good morning. i want to say thank you god for coming on this channel. this is my second time calling in the first time i talked to john about how american people are so ignorant with voting and they do not know the basics which you had cited which is the three branches of government. i appreciate you reiterating that. i have a lot of stuff but i do

not want john to cut me off. host: i won't cut you off. caller: my question came out but i want to ask you anyway because i want you to reiterated. you said at least three times. i want to ask you, can you share with us how we can become actively involved in this political democracy -- this republic democracy we have and also how people can help themselves to discern between whether they are falling into a tribal group versus an educated citizen. guest: i appreciate the kind words. i will take the second part first because it is a chapter within the book. where we like to claim political independence, i vote the issue and not the party and whatever candidate speaks to my issues i am willing to jump from d to r

as long as i'm finding the right person. the data do not support that. even when we claim political independence we are much more likely to reverse engineer our vote to support the conclusions we came to the ballot box with. we are able to explain pollutions -- we are able to explain conclusions from local parties we support when we are able to blame actors from the other party doing the same thing. we are not equal and we are not showing up with his pros and cons list. we are partisan beings and it is important to recognize that. then we can do what my best recommendation is for people struggling to get involved. the first is just pause. do not respond emotionally, do not respond out of defense and defending your position or your candidate or your party but try to hear people. when you ask questions -- what you end sentences with a? rather than exclamation points,

different conversation start happening. you would be surprised with people who you fundamentally disagree with, he start curing them and why they came to those conclusions that is a must different conversation. if we can make that snowball where my conversation with her and him turns into one of my having with 20 people, mention how many people we can reach instead of yelling at. that is a different model to follow it it starts with something as simple as pausing. host: what is your opinion of the filibuster? guest: my personal? the filibuster is one of the biggest misconceptions where we picture the jimmy stewart mr. smith goes to washington where there is this principle of lawmaker standing on the senate floor and making this emotional appeal to stop a piece of legislation from happening. that is what people think is happening when things are filibustered. that is not what happens in 2025. the filibuster has taken a different tone and method.

it is used to block legislation from ever receiving a vote. right now the filibuster in the senate is assumed. you do not even see someone going to the floor to make that speech on the floor of reading charles dickens or a chicken noodle soup recipe. they do not have to go to the floor at all. it is assumed. last time we had a talking filibuster was ted cruz a decade ago. the filibuster come if you think it forces politicians to get of the table to get over that supermajority threshold of 60 votes, it does not happen. right is used as a cultural to keep things off the floor so we never have to take these tough votes. voting exposes people and puts people where they stand it makes people and voters know what does my politician thank? when you don't vote you can talk out of both sides of your mouth and politicians love that because they can take advantage of being able to tell this audience this thing in this audience this thing there's no

vote with their name attached to back it up. guest: -- host: down to port charlotte, florida. caller: i have one quick question. is it a myth or a truth that members of congress and the senate partake in insider trading? thank you very much. guest: insider trading. i don't know. i don't have any firsthand account of members of congress engaging insider trading. when you talk to everyday americans and ask should members of congress be able to trade stocks on industries they oversee, that just creates the appearance of a conflict of interest that members of congress should be wise to respond to. do i have personal instances of members of congress trading and profiting on the information they have before the public does? no. i think the appearance of that

conflict gives reason for people to distrust an institution at a time we need to raise the trust levels as high as we can get. that stock act that they have been debating for a couple congresses, they would be wise to bring it up and respond to people's immediate distrust of a system. host: who is steve israel and why is he writing the chapter on the myth of politicians being bought and paid for? guest: the campaign finance one. this is one people want to talk about when we get out the trump new cycle 12 years from now. steve israel is a longtime member of congress from new york and he led the democratic campaign committee. his job was to recruit candidates and fund raise for those candidates to run for congressional seats. he was literally the one in the room telling people to dial for dollars and you have to meet your quotas and this is the amount of money it will take for you to win your seat and come

back after you've won the first election. he is the perfect person to write about what the incentives are to raise a lot of money in politics but also where the influence is. we think you are buying your seat to get in or people are showing up with these brown paper bags like in the lbj memoir and buying votes. that is not where the money influence is. it is this mutually assured destruction between r's and d's that we have to raise more than you. it is not necessarily buying votes. they are not changing their voting behavior but raising a bunch of money because the other side will do it too these campaigns are expensive. host: about 20 minutes left with casey burgat, george washington university professor and author of the book "we hold these truths: how to spot the myths holding america back." this is bernie, good morning. caller: i have two premises i

want to object to the rhetoric casey is spilling out today. what is he is omitting there is a thing called censorship. people could not say it with a really want to say anywhere because they get caught off and on top of that there is an old adage that the fish rots from the head down. he is telling you to go to your city council -- that is a myth. the other thing he is omitting all of these channels and newspapers decided, 90% of them are owned by one tribe of people who have a monopoly -- who have a monopoly on what we hear and see on tv.

host: casey burgat? guest: the censorship question. i like that we could call in and voice our opinions while claiming we are being censored at the same time. the point we make is we get what we want. we should not equate blogs and sub stacks with news organizations who have to be subject to libel laws for reporting information. i get the frustration with the media. we are told -- speaking of rotting from the top down -- we are told by politicians not to trust the news sources unless they agree with us then they start recommending those with clear partisan slants because -- with clear favorable reporting. there are myths of what it takes to be a member of the media and what laws and requirements they are in terms of reporting the stories. that is something the media needs to get their message out better so people trust this and

we cannot keep calling for this trust them but not that person type of media reporting. host: cleveland, ohio, this is laura, line for democrats. good morning. you are on, go ahead. caller: i have a couple of questions. one is about the january 6 people that were let out of jail. or any of them charged with treason against the federal government? host: do you address january 6 in your book? guest: i do not take on january 6 at all. personally i live about a par 5 away from the capital and this affected us and this community. i know members of congress and staffers and the police officers who were there. this is a personal thing for a

lot of folks who lived through that event. i know it can be in abstraction, something that will go down in the history books, it was not that way for us that day. host: this was rich in wisconsin, independent. good morning. caller: a couple questions. when barack obama use the intel community to spy on hillary's opposition after they had found she had this private server and then everyone in his cabinet was communicating with her over that server, which means he had knowledge of it, wanted that make him complicit if someone was getting that information and then for them to go after trump for asking questions about the money laundering through zelinski in ukraine after they started the coup in 2014 and

then they impeached him for it and then joe biden parted everybody who set him up for the phone call that they impeached him for and then then when it cannot get him that route they took him to court in favorable jurisdictions with people that came out of the justice department? host: a lot of topics there. guest: i will avoid almost all of them because the point of this book is not to be they did this so we can do this or what aboutism. you will never win those debates and they should not be debates. the purpose of this book is to talk about what we think is wrong and what is actually wrong. any collar and i can agree there a lot of things we should do on policy fronts from education to health care to immigration to climate change. there are things we must do in 2025 but we cannot get there because we are distracted and having the wrong conversations over and over again. host: what about the pardon

power? is that a conversation we should be having? guest: sure. the constitution does give the president the pardon power, so to change it would take a constitutional amendment. there is a route to do that and it should be kept in mind the pardon power was given to a president at a time there was not all these layers of court cases that you can appeal. this was a break glass in case of emergency type power that obviously presidents have extended and extended and extended. now we are having conversations that the founders never had in their brains as a potential. if we want to change it and we are worried about it, there are routes to ameliorate those concerns with a constitutional amendment. host: this is willy in arkansas, democrat. you are next. caller: my question is all the

stuff he says we have learned through the books and social studies and stuff, now we learned all of that back in the day. now they have -- they have somebody doing something different lately to what we learned. the same stuff we learned back in the day it does not associate with us today. host: a question about education again. guest: it is that same point that civics is different than history and civics is different than government. one is an active participation requirement or knowledge and one is knowing the theory behind it. theory and practice are very different thing and to expect people to know the theory and go out and be a good player, it does not work like that. we should get people involved, and the younger the better. how to read a ballot.

we in the united states have an incredible number of elections which means we are constantly facing this high-stakes emotion of showing up and deciding to get out, knowing what our city council does versus our mayor versus our state legislature. there is a lot to learn and to pretend it is simple or the minute you turn 18 you're ready to go do that and decide things for not only now but decades from now and generations from now is not a helpful way of conducting a government that requires the participation and the knowledge of its citizens. if we want to have a government that requires the knowledge of its citizens then let's educate our citizens and what it takes to have such a government. that takes a lot of practice and we should be purposeful about that instead of pretending the minute you turn 18 you're ready to go make decisions about everyone's future. host: houston, roberto, independent, good morning. caller: perfect timing. i am a retired history

government teacher, civics teacher, and what you are missing and all of your guests miss this point, you have to practice democracy at your level. i was a counsel sponsor in high school. that is very important. i was in student council when i was second grade and i was elected recording secretary. i vote every time. you have to practice it come he just can't keep saying take civics class, listen to what is being said, three forms of government. all of that goes in one ear and out the other. you have to practice. the other thing is and i hope you keep this number, it is a number you can call to get the name and telephone number of your representative and your assemblers. that is how you get involved. call these offices. my question to you -- i think

trump is losing it. we have an amendment to the constitution. it was not used against biden. he only has four years. i do not think it will last. we the vice president to takeover within the four years. that is not been limited. how do we implement that? host: that is roberto in houston. the number he gave out as the number to the capitol switchboard which can get your member of congress and call their offices directly. to what he said. guest: amen to the first part of what he is saying. practice is key. it is not enough to learn civics, you have to do civics. that means literally showing up. one of the biggest barriers to entry is the fear of the unknown or the fear i might make a mistake or think about this politician or this policy and therefore i will take a step back. it has to be the other way around and he is right.

you need to show up early. you see it in practice before your ever being called on to be a decider. it is helpful to see it and mock it up in our classrooms and our participation at the most local level. completely agree with that. with the 25th amendment question , to have the cabinet kick out a sitting president of the united states and elevating the vice president, that is an available option. it is a pretty dangerous one. a slippery slope to catch left. the route is used where the route is available. if the cabinet thinks the president of the united states is unfit for the job they have the ability to do that, to elevate jd vance. there was conversation about that in biden's administration and even trumps first term but right now we do not see that as a likely scenario. host: back to the chapters of your book, who is jane mcmanus

and what did you ask jane mcmanus to write about? guest: this is the chapter that is not like the others. the myth is keep your politics out of my sports. the underlying assumption is people are frustrated when they turn on the tv and an athlete is making a political statement or making their stance heard. you remember colin cap reinecke kneeling at the national anthem. sports and politics have always been connected, not only because athletes are some of the most revered people in the united states who have a genuine platform and should be able to use it like we expected anyone else, but also sports conversations proceed political conversations. when we think about the black athletes raising their fists in the games against hitler's, these conversations can foster a faster way to process a lot of the things we are struggling with culturally and given the amount of love and support we give our sports figures, going

back to the days of roman emperors, sports and politics have always been intermingled. you do not have to shove it down your throats when you're watching the super bowl but should be recognized as a helpful platform that not only sports figures can use but we can use to bring ourselves together when it is often times hard to see each other outside of party labels. host: these myths that your book focuses on, did they all start around the same time, are these myths that have emerged in the past couple decades or have we been dealing with a lot of these myths the entirety of this experiment that is happening in the united states of america? guest: is a good question. it is individualistic to each of the myths. i will say the trajectory of them is getting worse and not better. we are falling for them more and even using them as defenses of what we believe and who we support rather than checking our assumptions. as my therapist's wife will tell

you, if you want to make genuine change you cannot start at the conclusion, you have to start at the beginning. what are you getting wrong about how you see the world and that he could have helpful conversations about what to do about it. a lot of these things have been weaponized by political parties and politicians who use the ignorance of voters because it puts them in office. you run against congress to win a seat in congress. you run against the administrative state to control the administrative state. it is a perverse incentive. to be able to point and say this is who to blame even if it is never that simple, that is a way to garner support for yourself and your position. blame lobbyists, blame campaign-finance, all of these things can be used to accumulate political power and ultimately mold the government and policy in your image. it is a tough doom loop we need to escape from. host: is this your first book? guest: this is my first book people will read.

i've written a book about congress for an academic setting. this is purposely for people, it is supposed to be accessible, it is supposed to use stories and people you have heard of to put them within the myths themselves to see where they are taking advantage of the american voter ignorance. i am hopeful this is seen as an entry point into understanding government where i know it is incredibly easy to step back from because there is so much information out there. this is an evergreen book. it is applicable right now but it will be applicable in two years come in four years. use it as a resource. you do not need to open it up on page one and crank through all of the myths. you can go chapter by chapter of what is of interest to you and what is dominating the news headlines. they are all applicable. host: what is the most interesting myth we have gotten to -- the most interesting myth we have not gotten to get?

guest: there a lot of misconception about lobbyists where everyone has this house of cards mentality where they are showing up on capitol hill bribing members of congress. what lobbyists do, their power does not come from money. it is actually information. members of congress and their staffers do not struggle with access to information. they struggle with the processing of information. to be able to decide and write legislation on a tuesday that has ukraine aid in it, whether we are shuttering usaid, tariffs , who knows all that stuff to the degree we expect members of congress? they are inundated with information and congress lacks the capacity to process that in a way that makes them effective at their jobs. if you don't know the answer to something you do any of us to come you google it and then when that doesn't work you find someone who does know that information. who does? that is lobbyists.

we think of them as influential because of their money and their information. we should have conversations about access problems with lobbyists because there are huge discrepancies between the haves and have-nots and lobbyists, you are not showing up in capitol hill -- most people are not showing up to lobby directly. meaning if you want someone to get in members of congress's ear about issues you care about you will need an intermediary. those are lobbyists. you love the lobbyist to advocate for things you believe in it is easy to hate the lobbyists advocating against things you don't stop it is a misunderstanding of how the system works. host: time for a couple more calls. this is james in new jersey. republican. caller: i had a quick question. i've been watching the senate hearings over the last couple of weeks. it just occurred to me on the grandstanding and showboating, it is not just the democrats, it

is the republicans -- this will never happen, but how about we not televise these hearings? the supreme court does not televise their hearings and we have done alright with that. guest: is a really good question and there has been this debate since the 1970's. post-watergate is when they flipped on the cameras to get around the distrust of government that was happening. sunrise is the best disinfectant? we've seen perverse disincentives with unrecognized consequences -- they will play to the cameras. they can reach millions of people by crating a viral moment which means there is an incentive to create a viral moment to raise your brand, to fund raise, to be known as this type of lawmaker. there has been a growing debate of have we gone too far with our public transparency? your question gets down to the

root of does the public have a right to know what is going on within these committee hearings, on the floor of the house should we have privatized votes? this gets to a long-standing debate about privacy, transparency, and is there such thing as too much transparency where you start incentivizing the wrong behaviors that it is pretty undeniable when you flip on a committee confirmation hearing to not see those really trying to be very public in their questioning to create a brand for themselves instead of trying to get at the root of the question in every good-faith faith back and forth with these nominees. host: you think there is such thing as too much transparency. this network has try to put cameras in the supreme court and we every day try to put cameras in as many hearings as possible. we have meetings about which hearings we think we can cover with limited resources to show the public what is happening on capitol hill. guest: i am sympathetic to the

transparency debate. at the end of the day i think if i would have to choose come and it is hard to have a middle ground solution, if i do choose between knowing what my members of congress are doing and voting on and saying versus not, i will choose knowing every single time. i think too much distrust can be weaponized when you close the cameras off, and to say nothing of we want our people to be involved in be involved mean seeing it in action, i would rather know that. to me if you are taking a different vote because the cameras are on versus off you do not deserve the job in the first place. if your name will be attached it, then stand up and put your name attached to it. host: time for one more phone call. maryland, democrat, good morning. caller: good morning. i was wondering what your thoughts are on elon musk staff plugging into hard drives inside the office of personnel

management, the treasury department, and the general services administration and it does not seem like anyone is reporting on this and i would like to get your opinion. guest: the elon musk and doge questions is the final boss of a lot of these myths playing out, fundamental misunderstanding of presidential power and who has the power of the purse, which is unquestionably congress. congress needs to step up and say i support you, even republicans in congress, i support you president, but this is not how it is supposed to work. congress needs to step up and make its place known as a constitutional separation of powers instrument. it was not supposed to work like this worry over private citizen who has not been appointed to anything official, doge is in and in between place of a government agency and quasi-government agency but there's been no active congress

to establish it or fund it. this is where you get two of the president just says it is so that right now in this nationalized political moment we just accept it, or at least his supporters to. that is not the way to supposed to work and members of congress need to recognize that and be vocal about that. host: the book is "we hold these truths: how to spot the myths holding america back." the author's casey burgat and we always appreciate your time on c-span. guest: thank you. host: that will do it for us on "washington journal." we will be back tomorrow at 7:00 eastern, 4:00 a.m. pacific. we take you to a discussion on the challenges facing the united states hosted by the brookings institute, the american enterprise institute, and tulane university. that is said to get underway momentarily in washington. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2025] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its captiont