♪ host: this is washington journal for saturday, february 8. federal judges temporarily blocked some of president

trump's and elon musk's doge efforts. president trump side more executive orders, including one banning transgender athletes from girls in women's sports. those are a few of the stories that made headlines. to start the program point want to hear from you. what is your top new story of the week? republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. you can text comments to (202) 748-8003. include your name and city. you can post a question or comment on facebook at facebook.com/cspan. or on x at @cspanwj. thank you for being with us. we will get to your calls in a few moments.

similar information -- some more information about the headlines we have been following. this headline from the washington post. federal judge blocks musk's doge from access to treasury department material. a judge issued an emergency order saturday prohibiting elon musk's u.s. doge service from accessing financial data on millions of americans at the treasury department, noting the possibility for irreparable harm. the decision ordered musk and his team to destroy any and all copies of materials downloaded from the treasury department's records and systems if any. the conditions are in place until another judge hears arguments on the matter on february 14. the ruling came hours after attorneys general from 19 state

sued musk's team for dealing with sensitive files, an unprecedented effort that skirted security measures and permitted access to systems only to trade treasury employees. -- trained treasury employees. on the new york times. judge freezes elements of trump's plan to shut down usaid. it says in part a federal judge on friday ordered the trump administration to halt some elements of its attempts to shut down the u.s. agency for international develop it. judge carl nichols from the district of columbia, a trump appointee, issued a restraining order pausing the eminent administrative leave of 2200 employees and a plan to withdraw nearly all the agency's overseas workers within 30 days.

he ordered the temporary reinstatement of 500 employees, -- the judge was willing on a lawsuit on behalf of the largest union represent federal workers and the union that represents foreign service officers. judge nicholas said the union established the employees affected by the leave and withdraw orders would suffer "irreparable harm." judge nichols sorted the pause through next friday to allow for expedited arguments to determine the legality of the actions and schedule another hearing for wednesday. those actions happening. there is more movement with usaid. a couple of tweets from repoers. aura baron lopez with pbs. " usaid name is being covered with looks like black duct tape on a sign outside the ronald reagan building, her photo

shared by source -- per photo shared by source." she says, "crews are removing the u.s. agency for international development signage from the washington hq. a striking visual of the abrupt dismantling of usaid." yesterday during a press conference with the japanese friend minister -- prime minister, president trump was asked to criticisms of doge. [video] >> i wonder what you make of the criticism the staff reductions doge is doing is an unlawful power grab. is anything you have told elon musk he cannot touch? >> i will tell him to go here and there. he has a capable group of people. very, very capable. they know what they are doing.

they will ask questions and seek immediate if somebody gets tongue-tied they are either cricket or don't know what they're doing. we have very smart people going in. i have instructed him to go to education, military, other things as we go along. they are finding massive amounts of fraud, abuse, waste, all these things. i will pick out a target and say go in. we are a government. we have to be open. i guess he gets it may be some high intelligence or something. i will do that myself if i have to. generally speaking, i just say go. he will be looking at education quickly and military too. host: doge efforts in the lawsuits filed in response. one of the top stories we are talking about this morning. we want to hear what your top story is.

republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. we will start with david in michigan. the line for democrats. caller: good morning. thanks for taking my call. i want to make my comments quick. people need to understand what's happening here. elon musk has gotten carte blanche to go to the u.s. treasury, looking at people's personal information. checking accounts, savings accounts, thomas money they make, social security -- how much money they make, social security accounts. he has no business going into the u.s. treasury. i know some of the strong people will call in and agree with that, man. what's going on now in this country is not right.

elon musk has no business with these 25-year-olds getting into the u.s. treasury. getting folks' personal information. you know what? that is what these guys voted for. good luck with trump and things were taking the call. this is my second time calling c-span. people better understand what's going on here. it is not good. thanks for taking my call. host: jim in virginia on the line for republicans. caller: good morning. my top new story is the great job elon musk and his crew are doing. just in a few days they saved over $50 million to the united states taxpayers being robbed from the u.s. --usaid where they are paying news organizations that are sitting in the white house defending joe biden. they wonder why trump wins in a landslide.

host: albert in kalamazoo, michigan. the line for democrats. caller: i have to correct that previous color. trumpeted not -- caller. trump did not win in a landslide. he got 49% of the vote. it was under 50%. i think hillary clinton beat trump by a larger margin, even though she did not get the electoral college. my top news story would be the approval of russell vought. he was approved for office of management and budget. is that correct? host: that is correct. caller: i wanted to make sure i got the right -- host: there are a lot of them. caller: office of management and budget. remember when we were debating about project 2025? when trump lied and said i don't

know anything about project 2025? i've never seen it. i've hardly ever heard of it. he lied about that because russell vought -- didn't he write large portions of project 2025? can you fact-check that? host: he did. i will share this article from roll call. firebrand vote confirmed as white house budget director. it says in part russ vought is a conservative with passion for downsizing government. he became the budget director on thursday when he was confirmed on a party-line vote. i'm trying to find the bit about him being included in the 2025 project. he was one of -- they we go. he became a target from the

moment he was nominated. democrats never forgive him for holding up aid ukraine in the first term. antagonism group when he helped author project 20 when he five, they hurt -- 2025, the heritage foundation's playbook for overhauling the government. caller: exactly. thank you for confirming that. what that means is that money will be impounded -- i'm talking to the trumpers in the audience. russell vought will impound money. he doesn't care about breaking the law. he could like medicaid, medicare, maybe social security. he could block snap benefits, food stamps, daycare, federal health clinics. if you look at a map, a lot of the red states are poor and getting federal-aid. they are getting food stamps and

medicaid. russell vought will break the law and impound the money. that is what he has done in the past. that was the most serious thing we had this week. host: that was albert in michigan. ed from philadelphia on the line for republicans. caller: good morning and things for taking my call. i want to say it's always interesting to hear people's calls. a great cross-section of my fellow countrymen. in terms of stories of the week, mine is having a front seat to observe the metastases in the prion disease affecting my party. the caller congratulated elon musk and his boys for getting rid of $50 million in a couple of days. how about this?

get congress in session i will save more money than that if you cut off the subsidies to elon musk. these people are performing open smash and grab in our government. anybody who loves this country should be committed to making an investment with the worth of ourselves and our republic, which should have the best people sitting at this desk, waiting to answer phones at the irs and everywhere else. these people don't want to spend money nowhere on nothing. the only thing trump ever promised and delivered his he was going to make hard times. ok? between him and elon musk, they can kick rocks barefoot. it is groundhog day all over again. thanks. host: jack in new orleans, the line for independents. caller: i have been watching

this. you know how donald trump tricked everybody when he said he will march to washington? he's a great manipulator. i think what he's doing is he got rid of the hispanics. his people protested and ended up in jail. they will do the black jobs he was talking about. my warning to everybody is do not like the law. do like martin luther king. demonstrate peacefully. do not give them a reason to put you in jail because he will be doing those black jobs picking strawberries, cotton, and whatever else he wants you to do. that's all i gotta say. you look lovely this morning. host: that was jack in louisiana. a couple of colors ago talked about -- callers ago talked about russ vought. also confirmed was pam bondi to be attorney general.

associated press is the vote fell almost entirely along party lines, with only senator john fetterman, a pennsylvania democrat, joining with all republicans to pass her confirmation 54-46. more confirmation hearings or votes will be held next week, including one for toll see -- tulsi gabbard and robert f kennedy. mentioned that senator fetterman voted for pam bondi. from the hill, federman says he will vote against both r.o.k. junior and gabbard they're not -- rfk junior and gabbard further nominations next week. --for their nominations x week. bill cassidy, chairman of the

senate health education labor and printer committee explained why he will be voting yes for kennedy. [video] >> based on mr. kennedy's assurances on vaccines and his platform to influence american'' health, it is my consideration he will get this done. as i have said, it has been a long and tense process. but i have assisted, as i would assess a patient as a physician. ultimately restoring trust in our public health institution is too important. i think mr. kennedy can help get that done. as chairman of the senate committee with oversight authority of his position i will do my best to make sure that is what we accomplish. i want mr. kennedy to succeed in making america healthy again. his success will be tied to the health of our nation. he has the opportunity to

address the most pertinent issues affecting americans' health. we need to reform institutions like fda and nih and those are my priorities as chairman of the health committee. i look forward to his support and encompassing this. if confirmed, i look forward to working together with mr. kennedy to achieve president trump's mission of improving the health of all americans. with that, you'll. -- high-yield. -- with that, i yield. host: gene in louisville, kentucky. caller: they are pedophiles, serial rapists. they do a lot of stuff in the field. up in washington they have sex anytime they want. they need to shut down the cia or the fbi. they need to shut down something. they are corrupt.

trump was right. they are corrupt. he was there for four years and he's doing for more years. he knows how corrupt they are. when you have little kids -- rape little kids and say join the fbi after you rape them for 10 or 15 years, that is a lie have to say about that. --that is all i have to say about that. host: danny from denver on the line for democrats. caller: i would like to see senator whitehouse run for the presidency. republicans cannot be trusted anymore. they are dismantling our government, taking it apart. they negotiated deal, renege a deal. republicans refuse to shut it down after it's been negotiated. look at what republicans did when they took obama's supreme court takes away from him.

2025 project, trump lied about it. i used to think trump was the antichrist. it's actually elon musk. host: dave in adrian, michigan. the line for republicans. caller: thank you for taking my call. i listen to c-span every morning with the washington journal. i find it very informative. my item for the week, this usaid . this is something that is really interesting that has come out, which is something that has never been done before the government. telling where our money is going and who is accountable for it. we the people. it is our money. i think it is great we are finally getting somebody in there to run the government other than the people that have been there 20, 30 years. it is a good thing they are

doing this. the biggest thing out of everything they are doing is getting it out to the public as to what is going on and making our government accountable. this is something i think is needed for we the people. i watch all of your -- all of your investigations on the other channels and stuff like that. i love to listen to the hearings and get the rest of the story. one of the biggest things with the american people is you don't educate yourself. read and listen to what other people have to say. that is what i like about the journal. you get other opinions and stuff like that. what their reasons are behind it. it is one of the freedoms of the united states, being able to express your opinion. i feel that is a big thing we need to do. thank you again.

you guys all do a good job. host: dave, thanks for being a c-span fan and appreciating our mission. we will go to dorothy in las vegas, nevada. the line for independents. caller: i wanted to share with the viewers when i was listening to c-span's coverage of maxine waters and the democrats at the department of education, they looked ok -- sorry about this. they looked a little guilty. they were so upset when there is only an audit going on. i just wanted to share that was my opinion. they looked too upset when -- just like the caller from michigan was saying. we want transparency. we want to know where all of her money is going. -- our money is going. have a wonderful day. host: dorothy in nevada. bill in brunswick, ohio.

the line for republicans. caller: hi. with elon, everybody is worried about their info being released. why does the government have an info to begin with to be released? if there was no income tax, the government would not need to know your information. if we had a national sales tax, everybody would pay taxes. that is my thoughts. host: some of the information is also tied to social security, medicaid, those types of programs. caller: ok. that step should be private. -- that stuff should be private. host: sheila also in ohio, the line for independents. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i'm listening to everybody else's comments. first of all, there is no

mandate, because we had so much voter suppression to begin with. he did not win by a landslide. everybody needs to watch that movie by greg pallast. they will see that kamala should have won. now we have oligarchs in charge and they are dismantling every thing. it is a coup. it is plain and simple to seek. the democrats are not going to stand up and put a stop to this. i don't know if they are in cahoots with it or not. fine. let it all fall. let everybody stand in a soup line. then maybe we will get some social justice in this country. that is all i got to say. host: that was sheila in ohio. another story from this week. from the associated press, trump signed executive order and

tended to bar transgender athletes from girls and women to sports. the article says he signed the executive order on wednesday. the order, keeping men out of women sports, gives federal agencies wide latitude to ensure entities that receive federal funding abide by title ix in alignment with the trump administration's view, which interprets sex as the gender someone was assigned at birth. he spoke. here is some of those remarks. [video] >> with my action we are putting every school receiving taxpayer dollars on notice that if you let men take over women's sports teams or invade your locker rooms, you will be investigated for violations of title ix and risk your federal funding. they will be no federal funding. [applause] -- there will be no federal

funding. [applause] this will effectively end the attack on female athletes at public k-12 schools and virtually all u.s. colleges and universities. i don't think we missed anything, but if we do, we will make it up quickly with an order. host: we are just about through the first hour of this morning's washington journal. your top news story of the week. lewis in salisbury, north carolina. the line for democrats. caller: good morning. it is a shame how some people's heart can be so cold concerning the usaid. charity covers a multitude of sin. america has a lot of sin. but to give things to people in need and to stop it because you are worried about where the money is, look at how the process is working. they are not doing it lawfully.

they are doing it unlawfully. they are doing it in a way that you have to have court orders to do these things. there is no more rules and regulations when it comes to president musk. president trump is going to say i didn't have nothing to do with it. it was all his doing. concerning the d.e.i., can i say something about that? on the labor board area concerning the dei recipient. they are five or six categories. the very first one on the list is white women. the second is ceo whiteman, then down to hispanics -- white men, then hispanics, native american, gays, disabilities. the last one is african-americans. the first thing trump said when the helicopter hit the plane, it must have been dei.

have you heard anything else about that? they were all white pilots. he shut his mouth. buckle up. chaos is beginning even more. thank you. host: rick, nashville, tennessee. the line for independents. caller: there is so much to cover when you watch sees fit. i wanted -- when you watch c-span. i'm 70 years old. my mother raised two boys. she moved from a little town to a city to find work. she's about to turn 90. she never got on welfare or food steps and never had anybody help her with anything -- food stamps. help would have been nice. she did not believe in that. when you look at all the money being spent, whether you think it's a good thing or bad thing, money spent outside this country, whether it is all the things you have seen listed, whether you think it is right or wrong is irrelevant.

i want you to think about that. my dad left my mom when we were eight and nine years old, never to return. she had the race to little boys and work three jobs. she came out of it by hard work and saving her money and not getting what she wanted but only what she needed. i would like to see some of that money go towards the teenager that got pregnant, the young woman who had to raise kids because the young man was not there. i want to see that money go to helping food stamps and welfare, people who need it in this country. that woman is now 60 or 70 or 80 years old only living on $600 to $1500 social security. that is all she's got. the government tells her she makes too much money to get qualified for any benefits from the government, whether it is city, county, state or federal level. when that is your mother or grandmother and your having to see them struggle because of their plight in life, that is

who i want to help. when you look at all the money going around the world and all the crooked politicians and crooked businessmen, whomever it may be, you may like them or dislike them, but when it is your mother, your grandmother and they are having to struggle on a pittance of income every day, that is where -- that is who we need to be helping. those people are wasting this money that could be going towards our indigent in this country. whether you are black, white, any ethnic background, be concerned about those that are elderly they cannot work anymore, won't be hired by any corporate company because they are too old to work or hurt or have medical problems or had to file bankruptcy. that is who we need to help. not the ones that here feeding off the system. when that stops we can all come together as one people. america is great. we have all ethnic backgrounds

in this country. that is a good thing. go to another country and see what happens. thank you. host: that was rick. william in louisiana, the line for republicans. caller: good morning. i agree totally with that settlement from tennessee. my question is -- my first comment is god did not make mistakes. i totally agree with trump and everybody with the gender deal. the second thing is, our republican senator on here, mr. cassidy, has a hard time getting reelected. i've heard him several times. it ought to be investigated more than other stuff going on. how many billions and billions of dollars have they taken out of our social security -- our retirement fund that is supposed to be our retirement. that is why the social security is so low. can anybody in the united states

-- i don't care how the situation is -- live on sitting hundred dollars a month with three people in a household? -- $1600 a month with three people in a household? it barely gets by. with the prices going up the way they are, everybody wants the prices of eggs. biden had the chickens killed. it takes two to four years to overcome what the last president done. have a nice day and i appreciate everything you're doing. host: donald in golden valley, arizona. the line for democrats. caller:caller: good morning out there. you know what he's doing all the stuff, don't you? why he's getting all this government money? he was to get all his rich buddies a big tax break.

i will tell you one thing. this information that elon musk is getting, it is worth millions to one of our enemies, the governments overseas. all you people out there that want to be a flunky for trump, he will throw you under the bus just like he has done all the people that has worked for him and done everything for him. just a warning. host: that was donald in arizona. another story making headlines is efforts to fund the government. house gop rushing to produce trump's budget bill with tax cut program cuts. house republicans are working overtime after a lengthy white house meeting to meet president trump's demands for a big budget

package. that includes some $3 trillion in tax breaks, massive program cuts and possible extension of the nation's debt limit. speaker mike johnson had gop lawmakers working late into the night ahead of a self-imposed friday deadline to reduce the package after having blown past an earlier timeline to draft the contours of a bill that would begin making its long journey through congress to the president's desk. trump's message as he popped in and out of the meeting on thursday at the white house was simple. get it done. it was yesterday that house minority leader hakeem jeffries responded to a question about where the budget negotiation stand. [video] >> speaker johnson said that democrats have been unresponsive over the last couple of days over government funding

negotiations. can you update us on where things stand and your response? >> projection. >> can you clarify that? he's alleging democrats or try to set up a potential -- >> first of all, republicans control the house, the senate, and the presidency. they have every vote they need. as we have been lectured to do whatever the heck they want to the american people. let's be clear about that. it is not democrats saying that. that is republicans. that is the whole idea behind the so-called budget reconciliation process. republicans told america repeatedly we can do whatever we want. because we control the house, the senate, and the presidency.

republicans have been saying that. so, i think my initial response, projection, should speak for itself in that context. but would also is clear, as rosa stated publicly, democrats continue to negotiate with our republican colleagues. we want to find bipartisan common ground in funding the government to meet the needs of the american people. rose deloro, who is leading our effort is leading our effort as a top democrat on the house appropriations committee, has been trying to get republicans to respond to her for weeks. weeks.

she's had the opportunity to actually speak with senate democrats and senate republicans. it is projection. we want to find bipartisan common ground. we are working hard to reach a spending agreement that meets the needs of the american people. in advance of march 14. i'm hopeful that republicans are actually willing out to sit down at the table and reach a spending agreement. in the best interest of the american people. not in the best interest of their billionaire donors. host: more on efforts to find the government -- fund the government.

gop unveils its own senate plan. senator lindsey graham on friday unveiled a budget plan that would increase spending for the military and border security measures in a move aimed at expediting president trump's agenda as house republicans remained divided over their own massive fiscal package. mr. graham, republican of south carolina and chairman of the budget committee, has long argued congressional republicans should pass mr. trump's domestic agenda in two bills. one that could be quickly passed to take early action at the border and defense. another measure extending the 2017 tax cuts. that approach has been largely rejected by the house with publicans arguing their razor thin majority has left them with political capital to pass only one bill.

gop leaders have been laboring in recent weeks to put together a huge legislative package. that can win the support of the conference. divided over issues, mr. graham announced senate republicans who will dine with mr. trump on friday at mar-a-lago would not wait for their colleagues across the capitol to get their act together. back to your calls, asking your top news story of the week. rick in gaffney, south carolina. the line for independents. are you there? caller: yes. host: hi rick. caller: i would like to see musk go after the republican senators and the congressman and investigate them and their kickbacks they are getting in the fraud and waste they do. also the democrats too.

and musk to go in trump's backyard and investigate him. he's already been convicted of fraud. that is the way i feel about it. thank you very much. i love c-span. host: that was rick in south carolina. raquel in new jersey on the line for republicans. caller: good morning and thank you for taking my call. everything that has been happening this week, there has been a lot of chaos with donald trump and doge and elon musk. i think what elon musk is doing is amazing. this needs to be exposed. he is not taking personal data. he's doing an audit. the democratic party is freaking out. you are going to the education department and screaming outside, demanding to come in.

what happened? for decades and decades they never worried about a school system. they didn't care. they did not go there to make a scene. whyare they so -- why are they going so crazy? this rhetoric caused president trump's life to be almost taken. this is unacceptable to the democratic party. you don't see the republicans screaming and yelling. they lost. they to accept it. we all need to come together to make america better. it is like cat and dogs. we cannot get along. you cannot work together. both parties need to come to an agreement. we need to make this country better. you lost. the democrats need to take the fact they lost. president trump is elected president now. he did not pardon anybody. let's talk about biden. he pardoned a lot of people, his entire family. they are looking so guilty. why are you guys going so crazy?

he is only auditing. i don't care if you lend musk goes into my taxes. -- elon musk goes into my taxes. 80% of americans are for everything donald trump and elon musk are doing. less than 20% is on the democratic side. it's ridiculous. they need to stop acting the way they are acting because they are losing there might. chuck schumer says we are going to win. you are just starting your rhetoric to cause chaos. to cause protesting, violence we do not need. you don't see that happening with the republican party. you do see it with the democrats. why are you guys losing your mind so bad? what is so bad? the corrupt people don't want to be exposed. i need to see who is all these corrupt people are. host: got your point.

this is from the washington post. americans flood lawmakers with calls about musk. it says that senators' phone systems have been overloaded. lawmakers said some voters are unable to get through to leave a message, says the senator's or murkowski of alaska -- senator lisa murkowski of alaska. they were getting 1600 calls a minute compared to the usual 40. many are from people concerned about u.s. doge service having access to sensitive information. they are asking whether the information is compromised and about why there isn't more transparency about what is happening. it also says it is a deluge on dodge. truly our offices have gotten more phone calls on elon musk

and what the heck he is doing monkeying around the federal government than i think i have ever gotten and 10 years. people are really angry. the article says lawmakers, including republicans, have asked for clarity from the white house about the scope of musk's ascus -- access to data. some also expressed confusion about what is going on. just about 15 minutes left in this first hour asking your top news story of the week. denny in columbus, ohio. the line for democrats. caller: hello? host: hi denny. caller: you hear me ok? host: yes, i do. caller: the top story to me was what trump has plans for the gaza strip.

i would say that this is a movie that as a country we have seen before. it is called occupation. it has not worked out so well for us in iraq or afghanistan, or even going back to vietnam. the idea we would occupy the gaza strip is just -- i can't understand it. thank you very much. caller: -- host: chas in nevada. caller: before i get to my top story, i want c-span to please do a story on federal subsidies that go to corporations. i can tell you that since 2000,

over $100 billion has gone to corporations. if elon musk wants to save money, he can start right there with low hanging fruit. my top new story is russ vought. if you can play the video where he says he wants to traumatize employees so bad that they don't want to come to work, well, people are already being traumatized. i have received phone calls with people crying. people from usaid have been abandoned where they could not call the government, could not hit their panic button. russ vought said get in their faces. let me tell you something. you are going to get in the face of the wrong one. you have people working for the government with ptsd. they have killed people in wars. they have seen people get killed. you have people with schizophrenia, bipolar.

they are only getting by because they love their jobs and are on medication. this is not going to end well. this constantly threatening people. there's a woman working in a state office. they cut off heating expenditures. a judge said to turn that money back on. they are ignoring that. they told her she better not say anything and better not speak ill of elon musk. ap, reuters, all the stuff is out there. this threatening people, this is not going to end well. nobody is probably going to do anything to them, like in the office. you have folks that are not wrapped too tight. messing with some people, their minds, military folks, this is bad. that is my top news story. thank you for my time. host: we will go to stephen in

california. the line for democrats. caller: where do we start here? with donald trump. four years prior, truthfully, even during his term, his first term, all he did was lie. 4000 lines. here -- lies. we are at it again. the democrats and the people being affected, and it's everybody, the people in the red states voted for this guy and he has taken away some of their ability to even survive. they need to be on the phone with their congressman. i have spent time leaving messages, hoping i get a response. when you are dealing with the richest guy in the congress, it

is difficult to get an answer. i will wait to see if i get one. the thing about gaza, that's another occupation. i'm a vietnam veteran. i spent three tours in vietnam. it was not a pleasant place. what is going to happen is if his intent is to make it a riviera, he would have to put troops in there and they would be sitting ducks. look at what's happened to the jews. they are surrounded by muslims. that was a big mistake in 1946, to give them that territory. the reason they gave it to them was because of the holy land that is there for all religions. look what is going on. netanyahu and trump are partnering up again. it will be nothing but problems in the middle east again.

i don't see saudi arabia and the rest who are supposedly friends of the data states being happy about -- united states being happy about this. i appreciate you taking my phone call. host: stephen, another caller this morning talked about gaza. this headline from the hill. trump says gaza will be given to u.s. by israel. the article says president trump on friday asserted gaza will be given to the u.s. by israel, expanding on his plan for an american take over of the war-torn region that he suggests involves the permanent relocation of palestinians. the controversial proposal stands up to decades of u.s. foreign policy in the middle east. when asked of the proposal, the president told reporters that gaza will be given to us by israel and said his proposal to take responsibility for the gaza

strip currently under hamas control has been very well received. from tuesday, here is president trump alongside israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu making the --announcing his plans for gaza. [video] >> i believe the gaza strip, a symbol of death and destruction for decades and so bad for the people anywhere near it, and especially those who live there, and frankly who have been very unlucky. it's been an unlucky place for a long time. being in his presence -- its presence has not been good and it should not go through a process of rebuilding and occupation by the same people that have really stood there and fought for it and lived there and died there and lived a miserable existence there. we should go to other countries of interest with humanitarian

hearts. there are many of them that want to do this. build various domains of ultimate be occupied by the 1.8 million palestinians living in gaza, ending the death and destruction and frankly bad luck. this could be paid for by neighboring countries of great wealth. it could be numerous sites or just one large site. the people will be able to live in comfort and peace and will get -- we will make sure something really spectacular is done. they will have peace. they are not going to be shot at and killed and destroyed like this civilization of wonderful people has had to endure. the only reason the palestinians want to go back to gaza is they have no alternative. it is a demolition site. this is a demolition site. virtually every building is down.

they are living under fallen concrete that is very dangerous and very precarious. they instead can occupy a beautiful area with homes and safety. they can live out their lives in peace and harmony instead of having to go back and do it again. the u.s. will take over the gaza strip. we will do a job with it too. we will own it and be responsible for dismantling all the dangers -- dangerous onyx footed bombs and weapons on the site, level the site and get rid of the destroyed buildings. create an economic development doubles apply unlimited numbers of jobs and housing for the people of the area. the real jobs. something different. if you go back, it will end of the same weight has for 100 years. -- way it has for 100 years. i'm hoping this will in the bloodshed and killing once and

for all. my administration has been living quickly to restore trust in the alliance and rebuilt american strength throughout the region. we have done that. we are a respected nation again. a lot has happened in the last couple of weeks. we are actually a very respected nation again. host: seven minutes left in this first hour. taking your calls and asking what your top news story of the week is. mike in philadelphia, the line for independents. caller: thanks for taking my call. yeah. love to hear foreign policy from the number one tax loser of all time in our commander-in-chief. i love to wake up and hear folks talk about military spending as if it is unimpeachable. while some ketamine bozo who was unelected and failed every business he takes his hand and

has scaled upwards the same as trump continues to cut our government to the bone. this is absurd. listen to this man. he called genocide bad luck. host: we ask our callers to watch their language. there's a lot of passion out there but we still want to be respectful. valerie in st. louis, missouri. the line for democrats. caller: good morning. can you hear me? host: yes. caller: thank you for c-span. thank you for taking my call. my top story was when i read about senator cassidy from louisiana. he was talking about -- he was talking about how he was not going to confirm jfk.

then he read from the scripture of joshua. he talked about the courage. i read that he met with jd vance and president -- jd vance and other people. he said jfk was going to do whatever he was going to do. i sent him a message. i saw his heart. my concern is all of this -- i have been watching. i have been attuned to what is going on. in my prayer, god, what are you telling us? i see the heart of america. it was about our country. my neighbors where i live in st.

louis here, no matter whether they are black, white, republican, democrats, they are concerned. one woman cried on my shoulder said she did not know -- what is this country? we are america. [indiscernible] i have been praying for god to touch the heart of the people. i have told him -- i sent a letter to trump, the johnson, to the senators. we are not going to be accountable to one another. we are going to be accountable to god. no matter what your religion, your preference, it is the heart. they changed his heart. it is not that we don't like -- has not about liking president trump or liking [indiscernible]

it's about our country. what we don't know is what is it they are holding over their head ? are there eyes blinded? when i hear president trump talk, i was one of the biggest -- pray for our president. we pray for our government. it's about his heart. the hatred and the lawlessness and the evangelicals that stand with him. what got are you serving? -- god are you serving? host: gina in mississippi on the line for republicans. caller: good morning. before i forget, i would like to point out to all the people who are always calling in and talking about the tax cuts, that

they didn't get one, and it's all given to the top people. i would like to point out that 50% of the nation pays no -- and i mean no -- zero federal tax. if you don't pay any federal tax, you don't get a tax cut. ok? please try to remember that. do a little studying and see what you are saying. second of all, i want to say that about five calls ago, the last republican call that was taken, i agree with everything that lady said. anybody who does pay taxes in this country should warrant an investigation to what is happening to all of our money.

it is absolutely telling when you object to that. it means that your main goal is the hatred of trump and nothing good of the united states of america. we are $37 trillion in debt and eventually all these freebies we are giving out, even medicare and medicaid, will come to an end because we will be out of money. bankrupt. that is all i have to say this morning. i wish everybody well and thank you very much. host: that was gina. diana in mathews, virginia. the line for independents. we lost her. deborah from south bend, indiana. the line for republicans. caller: good morning.

in my world this is what we are concerned about. when president trump first came on no one really understood how things would work out for him because not any of us knew anything about trusting the government. we already was dissatisfied with the government. but after seeing everything they sent him through and he got back in the second term, in my worldo -- overhaul every agency that has to be in his company. that has to work with him, that has to protect him. donald trump does not walk around with a weapon.

those people have a -- at the back of his head. who can he trust unless he overhauls everyone in that government agency? they all have to be replaced. we don't trust him and he don't trust them. we have to fix that trust. if we don't fix that trust, trying to keep somebody that has been there is not going to work. in my world, we don't trust not any of them. host: that was never in indiana and our last call in this portion of the program is sandra in new hampshire, lying for republicans. -- line for republicans. caller: i have a couple of questions. and an opinion. i keep listening to the

republicans saying why isn't this a good thing? it is a good thing. we should look into where our money is going. however, i don't think they realize it has to be done through congress. you can't make up an agency without votes from congress. am i right? i could be wrong. also, i'm concerned about pbs and in pr. -- npr. i believe he wants to cut funding for that. i think that is suppression. and i'm not sure why republicans are saying that the democrats are all up in arms. i mean, that's what this country is. we get to speak our opinions and we listen to republicans and democrats. i agree a lot with the republican policies. i agree with democratic

policies. we have to do this the way the constitution says we should do it. and once you resend on our constitution, it's not american anymore. thank you for taking my call. it was my first call. have a good day. host: that was sandra's first call into c-span and our last for this hour. next on washington journal, two perspectives on education policy and president trump's plans to dismantle the education department. rick hess, the american enterprise institute -- of the american enterprise institute and robert kim will join us for that discussion. later, a conversation with mark zaid. he will discuss the trump administration's efforts to reduce the federal workforce and what legal protections the workers have. we will be right back. ♪

>> american history tv, exploring the people and events that tell the american story. this weekend, historians discuss resident lincoln's views on race and slavery. then we will talk with four new media creators on tiktok -- watch american tv history's first 100 days. this week, we focus on andrew jackson's first term in 1829 including his policy agenda and controversy surrounding his cabinet. and louisiana state university journalist professor john maxwell hamilton talks about the propaganda efforts during world war i. watch american history tv every weekend and find a full schedule on your program guide or watch

online anytime at c-span.org/history. >> book tv, every sunday on c-span two, features leading authors discussing their latest nonfiction books. here's a look at what's coming up this weekend. at 6:15 p.m. eastern, angela merkel who served as german chancellor from 2005 to 2021 discusses her memoir, freedom with former president barack obama. at 8:00 eastern, ilia shapiro argues there is a decline in intellectual diversity, academic freedom and civil discourse in elite law schools, creating a climate of intolerance. he's the author of the book, lawless. at 10:00 p.m. eastern on afterwards, omo moses talks about being black in america through the voices of three generations of the moses family.

he's interviewed by freeman were about ski -- freeman hrabowski. watch book tv on c-span2. >> 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 regarding its basic principles. it's where debates unfold, decisions are made and the nation's 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: joining us now to discuss the trump administration education policy is rick hess, a

senior -- he is education policy studies senior fellow and director at american enterprise institute. and robert kim, education law center executive directive -- director. robert and rick, thank you so much for joining us today. guest: good to be with you. host: rick, i know you have joined us on the program before. remind our audience about edi and your work there. -- adi and your work there. -- aei and your work there. guest: i started how as a high school teacher and college professor. aei deals with a whole range of issues. our core values relate to opportunity, promoting civil society, and generally supporting constitutional unlimited government. host: bob, you are executive

director director of the education law center. tell us about the mission into you work with. guest: thank you. the education law center is a nonprofit organization, a national one that works to protect and strengthen public education and the rights of students. so, we do that work through -- we work in court areas including school funding advocacy, protecting the public miss of public schools and also working to advance students civil writes. -- rights. host: there were reports this week that president trump is finalizing plans to dismantle the department of education. rick, do you agree with that effort? guest: you know, there's a lot of moving parts. what do we mean first? sure. first, it's important for the

viewers to understand the big distinction between the department, none of whom are educators or run schools. and the federal programs, the ones that congress has authorized, pell grant, title i, the every student succeeds act. whether or not the department exists does not actually have a direct impact on whether those dollars are going to families and schools. i think it's perfectly reasonable to abolish the department. it was created in 1979 by jimmy carter to fulfill a promise he made to the nation's largest teachers union. it has -- what the department mostly operates as is a mega bank. it's been poorly run and losing taxpayers money with the small k-12 policy shop, which is most known for writing extraordinary numbers of rules and regulations

around things like time and effort reporting. which tends to drown school leaders and school district leaders. now, do i think the administration will be able to abolish the department? no. that would require an act of congress. but i think they will be able to downsize it, reduce its ranks and probably reorganize it in important ways. and i think that would be all to the good. host: bob, your reaction to that news? guest: yeah, i agree that only congress can take steps to change or alter the course in the future of the to part of education. -- and the future of the department of education. it's not something the executive branch can do unilaterally. i think it is a damaging and extreme move to take steps to dismantle an important federal agency such as the department of education.

i used to work there during the obama administration so i have some understanding of the different parts and components of it. there are some very important functions that go on in that department. it is more than just a mega bank, i would offer. it is important supports to states and districts in the delivery of pre-k through k-12 and technical education. a lot of help to students all over the country to access and afford college. there are students and families being helped to ensure their civil rights and ensure their privacy. and there is important research and data connection -- collection. only the government has the ability to monitor the value and research and trends in terms of how we are doing as a nation and whether we are doing a good job. that in addition to the overall accountability we need to ensure

standards of quality and efficiency in how taxpayer dollars are being spent, those functions are very important for there to be a federal role in departments, governing education. i think it is a damaging move and one that ultimately has a symbolic effect that is saying that education will be de-prioritized at the federal level read and it also has a substantive policy effect as well. host: our guests for the next 45 minutes or so are bob kim, executive director of the education law center and rick hess, education policy studies senior fellow and director of the american enterprise institute. if you have a question or comment for them, you can start calling in now. the lines for the segment are a little different. the parents and students, you can call in at (202) 748-8000. if you are an educator or administrator, the line is (202) 748-8001.

all others, you can use (202) 748-8002. and of course, you can continue to send us text messages at (202) 748-8003. rick, you mentioned that some of the programs would not change, even if the department of education were to shut down. are there programs that would be targeted? guest: yeah. again, this is where the median narrative has made it hard to have a thoughtful conversation. there are some points that bob made, some of his points i actually think we might be on the same page. for instance, he's right about the data collecting capabilities. of the department of education. we want somebody who is administering the national assessment of education properties. we want the national for center and statistics to have data on school spending.

abolishing their department would not abolish, for instance, the institute for education sciences. for instance, senator mike -- what it would do is you would remove the statistical and research operation somewhere else in the federal government. the office of civil rights would move over to the department of justice. the trillion dollar portfolio would move to treasury. which has not failed three consecutive audits in which did not have three years to simplify the federal student aid form and make a complete hash of it. part of the argument here for abolishing the department is frankly there is, i think, real grounds for being skeptical that the department has executed its mission in a competent or apolitical fashion. and that part of the dismantling is an opportunity to move entities to a place where they

will be better run. to your question, the programs that congress has authorized, special education for instance, spends $15 billion to $20 billion a year. those dollars would still be allocated. they might be allocated out of the health and human services. those funds go to local education agencies through states, to serve eligible children who have been identified as having special needs. all of that will continue as is. they might have fewer rules and regulations read although probably not. title i about the $15 billion to $20 billion that goes out to slow -- serve low income schools with higher concentrations of low income children, those dollars would still continue to flow. pell grants. what would be discontinued for the most part, if you start to dismantle or rearrange the

department, are the discretionary programs. the grant programs which exist at the discretion of the department, for which the biden administration put a heavy thumb in terms of its particular passions for dei and dei aligned priorities, for which the trump administration obviously will have a different set of priorities. frankly, it seems to me that if we want to depoliticize education and start to back away from some of the national culture classes, reducing the ability of an executive to put a heavy thumb on the scale, for their particular priorities and agendas is probably a healthy thing. host: we will go to kohl's. we have several people waiting to talk with you. we will start with tiffany in vero beach, florida. she's on the parents and

students line. good morning, tiffany. caller: good morning. my question was to special education, particularly. there are parents who have confirmed that if the department of education goes away, their children will be affected. are there any steps congress can take to give parents the money directly? host: bob, would you like to respond? guest: yeah. i think it's a great question. special education is one of the most important duties that the federal government has some role in in terms of the department in particular. not only is there a dedicated special education office there, to enforce the congressional act called the individuals with disabilities education act, but

there is also a civil rights office that enforces federal civil rights laws, including the ada and the rehabilitation act. these are laws set forth by congress to ensure that students with disabilities have equitable access and that they are receiving free and appropriate public education. that iep's and school districts around the country are being established and followed. those are really important laws. every school district in this country has students with disabilities and could use the federal support to ensure that those students needs ar being g met. it relates to civil rights in general, which is an important role of the federal department to ensure civil rights, not only for students with disabilities

but also students of color. also, students on the basis of sex. i think those important functions, without a strong federal presence, that civil-rights could be jeopardized around the country. mr. hess was mentioning that these functions could be redistributed to other agencies. and pushed down to state and local responsibilities. i think that would be damaging to do. let's remember, when the department of education was established in 1979, there were problems at that time. the education functions, including special education were distributive across a half dozen other agencies. there was a lot of sentiment at that time that there was fragmentation of efforts and duplication of inconsistency and

efficiency across government. the public was not being well served and the president -- the white house was not being well served by educational functions being dispersed in such a haphazard way across multiple different departments. that was what led to the creation of the department of education. there was a recognition that it was important, the world was changing and we needed a centralized location to focus on education, not as one part of many other functions for sectors of the government. that's what led to the creation of the department. special education is one component among many across pre-k takei 12 career technical education and postsecondary that we need a federal direction. we need there to be a federal focus and a prioritization in the white house that education

are super top priorities to be competitive with the world and ensure our economy is secure. and frankly, to also ensure that lack of education does not become a national security concern down the road. host: rick, i will give you the opportunity to also respond if you like. guest: sure. i think bob and i could have a very interesting conversation about the history of the federal special ed law. i won't try to inflect that -- inflict that on your viewers. that is less relevant at the moment. let's say that bob and i would explain how we got there very different. two facts that are useful to people who don't spend all day following this stuff. one is when we are talking, especially about k-12 education, it's important to understand

that washington only pays about $.10 on the dollar. $.90 on the dollar for k-12 education comes from states and communities. abolishing it apartment does not mean the federal funds will go away. also, washington plays a very minor role in financing education. in fact, of the $80 billion, 30 $5 billion to $40 billion is what washington can spend. $.45 on the dollar winds up in classrooms. a lot of it is school lunch and other kinds of programs which are run out of the department of agriculture. the second thing i think is important to keep in mind is bob alluded to the fact that we needed a department of education because it keeps our eye on the ball and provides federal leadership. i would submit it has done anything but. we saw the new national

education progress results last week. they were abysmal. we have been in a 12 or 13 year stagnation or swoon. the worst children are the kids who are low achievers. our high achievers are at least treading water. our low achievers are where the bottom is falling out. in the past four years, secretary cardona's main point of emphasis with schools seems to be spend all the money we are giving you because i promise i will get you more. he offered a backdoor conduit to the teacher unions, so that they could review and slow efforts to reopen schools. the department of education wound of conspiring with the national school board association to have the fbi investigate parents who were protesting school boards because of prolonged school closures and masking. not only am i skeptical of the notion that the department is providing leadership in this

national security dimension, making sure our schools were effective but one of the reasons i think you see such passion for downsizing or abolishing the department in trump two that was not there for trump won is because a lot of parents and policymakers, especially on the right, have come around to the conclusion that the department of education was not only not providing that leadership, but it's actually actively undermining that kind of focus for our schools. host: we will hear next from amy in new york. she's on the line for educators and administrators. good morning, amy. caller: good morning. i've been a special education teacher for over 40 years. i also work after school. i am dedicated to my students. i understand the points of both of our gentlemen.

i see that we want to make sure the federal government has a role to make sure that our government -- our children are needed and serviced equitably across the 50 states though it could look different in each state. i also think we need to streamline the services. i will give you an example, i spend over an hour a week just taking attendance, when i could be planning or working with my students. there have been so many bureaucratic mandates and different things that we have to battle against in order to help our students. if we can also streamline the money so the money goes to provide more teachers. so we have less people at the administrative level and more people in the classroom, working with our students. not only the teachers but our paraprofessionals work so hard with their kids. the more we can get that money back into the actual classroom in whatever way possible, i just

wanted to hear either of your suggestions for that. thank you. host: bob, we will start with you. guest: it's true. in terms of school funding, states and district provide for most of education. the federal role for school expenses is relatively low compared to states and districts. it varies state-by-state. the percentage of revenue that comes from federal sources that goes to schools and classrooms is actually the highest in what we might consider states that predominantly supported president trump. south dakota, mississippi and montana. those states received upwards of close to 1/5 of their school funding comes from the federal government. the lowest spending states in terms of the federal contribution to public schools

are states like new york, new jersey and connecticut. almost under 5% of funds. i am large, states and districts already control the spending for most of what goes on in schools around the country. so, we have to place it into context. i would like to say that, to the point about the country going down in terms of our test scores and performance, that is all the more reason not to dismantle the federal department which is trying to improve educational performance and standards and achievement across the country. if the federal government has not done a good enough job, the answer is not to blow it all up and dismantled the federal government. but instead, come up with a vision and a real plan to help

states and districts educate their children. educate the neediest among the children. the most disadvantaged. that's what the federal government and the department primarily are set up to do. help states and districts educate students living with poverty. through the title i program. to educate students with disabilities through the idea grants. to educate the homeless, migrant students, foster students and really -- also, there is a division that helps with students learning english. that's a big challenge for districts around the country, how to integrate english learners into the school environment and into our society. helping millions of students afford college and go to college through student loans. this is the role of the federal government and the department,

to help states and districts do this work. it's not to micromanage them. the federal government does not control school curriculum. it's legally prohibited from controlling or influencing school curriculum. so, schools are already run by states and districts. the federal role is primarily to help, give a boost through funding for the most challenging , at risk students. and to create equity and equality between the states because the states frankly vary a lot in terms of both their ability to pay for schools as well as their effort and commitment to ensure equity and quality and excellence in schools. and so, even with this decentralized system we have in the united states, the answer is not to dismantle a federal program that is designed to help. but in fact, improve the and

take steps and let's roll up our sloops -- sleeves and to figure out how we can better support the states and districts in meeting their needs for students. host: rick, do you have any response? guest: first off, i admire bob's passion and vision. honestly if i thought that the department of education was adhering to the vision he has sketched, i would feel differently. it's completely unrecognizable in terms of the department with the job. the department of education employs a little over 4000 people. 1400 work on student lending. student lending was federalized, the banks were closed out of it during the obama administration. this was supposed to be a revenue maker for taxpayers. it was part of how president

obama was going to pay for the affordable care act. it loses money partly because during the biden administration, president biden with his now legal authorization of congress wound up giving away 400 billion dollars from taxpayers to borrowers who did not want to repay their loans, mostly for graduate school before the courts were able to stop him. there are 89 people who work in the communications office. if i thought the department was actually having people who were educators, who were skilled, who were helping with english language learning, that would be one thing. that's not what's going on. the caller, for special educators, in the past, we don't have good data on this because unfortunately, education research too rarely asks questions we need answers to. but provided in the space of surveys, there have been estimates that special educators

spend 30%, even 40% of their time filling out federally mandated paperwork. special educators are always at a premium. we never have enough folks who actually have the skills and training to make a difference for kids with the special needs. and when we have these folks, they are spending inordinate amounts of time not just -- they are spending an extraordinary amount of time on their laptop, filling out paperwork. when you spend time with school principals or with district title i coordinators, they are terrified to zero out even ineffective programs because federal guidelines about supplement and not supplant mean they risk encountering what they call an audit extension. getting in trouble with the regulators.

if there is a suspicion that even an ineffective staff mentor or an ineffective program is somehow being terminated without federal permission. this is in districts where there are title i dollars which are three pennies on the dollar to district spending. i love bob's vision. aspirational he, that makes sense. in practical terms, one of the huge problems is that congress is authorizing these dollars to serve children -- serve schools, helping low income students. help students with special needs. i support that. i think that you found that most republicans in congress consistently voted for those funds. the problem with the department of education is it's not actually giving those funds. what it is doing is diffusing them in paperwork and rules and

red tape and not really adding much in the way of value. i think the argument here is let's send those funds out to schools or to families and certainly into classrooms, rather than creating paperwork. here's the most basic point. since no child left behind in 2001, nationally, u.s. student enrollment is up 5%. central office staffing is up 90%. what we are doing is creating paperwork 18 times as fast as we are having students. and i think when you talk to educators in the field, there is a sense, i think a proper sense that a lot of this is originating in washington. host: we will go next to danny in hampton, virginia. he's on the line for parents and students. good morning, danny. caller: good morning.

i don't believe in executive orders dismantling what's been around since 1979. my dad was in history. they spent hours and hours and hours that they didn't get paid for. now we are talking about dismantling it. i think we need to go back to the legislative branch. thank you. host: bob, your background, you have a legal background. what can you tell us about potential challenges to president trump's actions? guest: yes, well, as we sat at the top of the hour, only congress can determine the future of the department of education. so, we will be watching as will many others to evaluate whether or not decisions around the department are --

there is a separation of powers here, one of the nation's founding principles. as a legal matter, we and others are watching to make sure that the white house is not acting unilaterally in extreme ways to fundamentally alter or reshape not only the department but other agencies as well. which raises a point here. i think we should all be clear about this. that this rhetoric around dismantling the department of education, it's not simply to redistribute these functions to other agencies or to localize educational spending in the states. it's really part of a broader goal of this white house to shrink or eliminate the federal government, as well as shrink or eliminate education funds for states and districts.

and instead, to enhance the privatization of education throughout the 50 states. so, this larger agenda here to shrink education, the federal government overall, and privatize education, it's clear throughout the project 2025 playbook, as well as its clear through its other executive actions and orders that have already been released by the white house in the first few weeks, that not only religion -- relate to education but other sectors of the government as well. so really, we are not talking about simply the existence of a department. we are talking about the future of this country in terms of whether we will have strong or viable public schools throughout the states and whether the federal government will play a role in supporting states and districts to ensure not only that there is funding from the federal contribution but also,

to ensure that states themselves are supporting publication, public schools and not diverting funds to private and religious schools. nothing against private and religious education. those are also important components of the education sector that many families rely on. but the problem here is that we need strong public schools. any industrialized nation that hopes to have a bright future for itself, its economy and security needs strong public schools in every state. and the federal government has a role to ensure that that happens . that civil rights of students are being protected and students have equal educational opportunity. these are the goals that congress set forth in the 1960's, during the civil rights era, to ensure that students living in poverty were not left behind, to ensure that all students had a chance to have a

high-quality public education. and to go to college, which was, as we know, becoming more and more expensive. there needs to be a program to ensure that students can afford to go to college if they so choose to do so. these are things that it's important for the federal government to play a part in. and yes, there is bureaucracy. yes, there is a lot of paperwork. nobody likes that. i don't like the paperwork on my desk, at all. but that's not the answer to that. the answer to that is not to jettison these important functions of the federal government. it is to look at them and to say how can we enhance and better support states and districts to help more students experience equal educational opportunity. host: we will go next to marie in silver spring, maryland. she's on the line for educators and administrators. good morning.

caller: good morning. i am very concerned about gutting programs. as a person who is middle class today because i was able to get a program -- pell grant, live at home and go to the university of new york, get a bachelors and masters degree, are we cutting off the pipeline for students whose parents can't write checks for them to go to college? and are we doing this to a majority of kids who are going to college who are black and brown? host: rick, i think this is something you spoke to earlier. guest: yeah, it's a fantastic question. and again, this is where i urge your viewers to just treat the narratives on both sides with some caution. because i think a lot of -- a lot of what you would think the debate is about if you just read the headlines mrs. what is actually going -- misses what is

actually going on. there is a lot of i partisan agreement which i think is enormously healthy, that we need to do a much better job of ensuring that when folks finish high school, they have a range of auctions that makes -- options that makes sense to them. one of the frustrations of americans in every economic class is you have to go by a college diploma in order to be able to compete for a good job. it's a problem. it's a problem because as bob mentioned, we have seen massive price inflation. what you have seen is a raft of ideas on the right and left about how to combat this. on the right, the argument is the kind of loan forgiveness that president biden tried to do, even after nancy pelosi said the president does not have the authority and president biden tried to give $1 trillion of taxpayer funds to borrowers, one of the problems is it says to colleges, it's free money so you

may as well raise your price. what you saw in the house was the republican house, virginia fox education committee past the college cost reduction act. it says we need to insurer if students are borrowing money to go to college, they are not ripped off. let's make sure colleges are offering students a decent value. that means programs and a college have to demonstrate that you are not making less money with your degree then you would have made without it. otherwise, you are not eligible for spending. it requires colleges share the risk. if their student borrowers default, it does not all fall on taxpayers. the colleges which pocketed the money would have to pay. this is very -- these provisions are likely to be written into the reconciliation bill that is likely to make it out of congress this year. it's not about closing the spigot.

it's about ensuring that the risks moved from taxpayers to the colleges who are taking the money so they have skin in the game and so they are not fleecing students who are going to programs which have no return. pell grants, pell grant's aren't going away. strong support on the right and the left. there is a lot of interest in what they call short-term pell. it's impermissible to use pell grant's for a lot of shorter higher education options and nontraditional degrees. if you want to go to a coating boot camp -- coding boot camp and it is three months to six months and the starting salary is $80,000 to $90,000, the argument is there ought to be more programs for students to use it in that way. it is about us disagreeing on whether washington is well situated to provide leadership.

the problems washington creates through red tape and rulemaking. a separate question is making sure we have those ladders of opportunity out there and that we are providing those funds in a sensible way that creates healthy incentives for the folks who are serving those secondary students. i think when you dig a couple of inches under the headlines, you will find that there is more important, more interesting conversations going on between lawmakers than you might have guessed. host: we will hear next from andrew in perl land, texas. good morning. caller: thank you for having me on. i am an educator. i work at a public school in the houston area. and we are a title i school. we also receive free lunch and free breakfast for our students.

and so i have a student who has muscular dystrophy treat he's in a wheelchair. he cannot use his hands. he has an aide that is with him all day long. she and i have spoken about this. we are afraid that if the department of education closes and as mr. hess says, these funds are allocated through some alternative way other than being directly allocated from the federal government to the states and the school districts, that this child will lose his aid. and some of our parent professionals will be cut. some of our secretaries will become. we have a pair of professional who acts as a safety liaison. he checked stores and makes sure schools are secure. he's not on law enforcement but his position is mostly

paid by federal dollars. i want to say something about what mr. kim said about this republican and conservative push to privatize schools. not privatize schools but to defund public schools and be able to send tax dollars to private schools. that is about to happen here in texas. the texas senate has already passed it. for the past two years, we have not really received spending increases because our governor, governor abbott, has held those increases hostage until he gets his way on the school voucher issue. and, you know, i looked up the cost of a private school in houston called st. john. the average cost is $29,000. so, to me, this lie that doing the school vouchers would help poor, low income kids the able to attend private schools is

totally false. this will help already attending students, their families, their rich families to be able to get a discount for them to go to these private schools. so, i am very wary of all of this. i don't think shutting down the department is the right thing to do. i think like what mr. kim said, get somebody smart, get somebody who is motivated and has a vision to go to run it. i don't think linda mcmahon, the x wrestler, is the person to do that. thank you so much. host: bob, we will start with you. guest: a lot of good points made. the services and personnel the caller was mentioning are supported through the federal funding. it's not just the funds themselves but it's the technical assistance and yeah, a little bit of requirements and

enforcement to make sure that money gets used by states and districts for the purpose intended by congress, which is to ensure that services related aids and related services and supports for those students are being used, the dollars are being used to ensure that free, appropriate public education. so, these attempts to either block grant or get rid of and provide unfettered discretion to use those funds in other ways is a concern from a disability rights standpoint. from an efficient and proper use of federal funds standpoint. those are concerns we should all be having. as to the point about texas, the proliferation or the desire in states to privatize education,

that we know is happening around the country. as we were getting through the pandemic, we went from zero to 13 states around the country that have universal voucher programs. which means that any student, whether or not they ever went to public school, including wealthy students, can take advantage of taxpayer dollars meant for public education and attend a private school or a school run by a church, a religious school. so, that critical funding, we already see the siphoning of public education dollars in states like florida, arizona and other states around the country. that is profoundly damaging to the public education system in states around the country. this is part of what the trump administration is signaling it wants to do. eliminate the department. to send money with unfettered

discretion to states. many of which want to shrink their own public education systems, further reduce their spending and move that to the private sector. what happens when you move all of your education systems and increasing thousands of students to private schools? then you lose all sense of accountability whatsoever. you don't have accountability over teacher credentialing. over civil rights law's. over basic standards in private education in terms of what they teach and to ensure that they teach everyone. that school is open to everyone no matter what religion they have. no matter what sexual orientation or gender identity they may have, not to mention the other civil rights categories. students with disabilities. as a private religious school, is it subject to the federal

rights laws? no. this is part of the bigger, slow-moving, some might say over the last several weeks, not so slow-moving, attempt to infuse and change the way public education is delivered in this country. contrary to far less oversight with no oversight. no accountability and no adherence to civil-rights and other education laws set forth by congress over multiple decades. this is what we are entering into. it's a cautionary tale. the dismantling of the public education is one facet of this broader agenda. host: rick, your response? guest: there's a lot there. first, let me try to reassure viewers that, look, special ed funding, the administration tried to do this freezing $6

trillion. there was a court injunction by the end of the day. they could try to do an injunction on the $17 -- $17 billion or $18 billion in special education funding. look, this is a president who has promised, unfortunately, not to make any effort to rein in medicare or social security. for folks out there concerned that they are going to try to eliminate or downsize special ed funding, i would suggest that is highly unlikely. and they don't have the votes in congress to do it, even if they wanted to. i see no indication they want to. just on a practical level, that students aid is not going away. fundamentally, let me talk for a second, let me respond to the caller and to bob's claims about public education.

look, to my mind, there's two ways to think about public education. one is that we spend $800 billion a year in taxpayer funds on k-12, so that we can give it to the employees who run traditional public school districts. and it is their $800 billion. for 50 million kids, we spend about $16,000 to $17,000 per kid and they get to do what they want with it. the other way to think about this is we spend those funds because we want to educate the public's children. and there are many mechanisms through which we might choose to educate them. starting back in 1990 one, minnesota enacted something called the charter school law. charter schools used public funds to authorize schools that are not necessarily geographically configured to serve kids. there are about 7000 charter schools today. states can do something we have been doing since the great society with vouchers.

the initial insight was instead a building public housing, why don't we give those same public funds to families as a voucher, so that they can find an apartment or a home that makes sense for them. look, the logic of education, savings accounts, the voucher programs, is that the public and a given states democratic representatives are saying., our public schools are not serving our kids well. as bob noted, a real inflection point was the pandemic. lots of parents said we have counted on the schools forever and they are refusing to open. and yet, right over there, there are private schools which are running full-time instruction. there are charter schools that are open. we are seeing micro schools springing up. why should my ability to get my kid educated be held hostage to

the politics of the school district reopening when there are other schools that are interested in serving my kid. -- in serving my kid? what is important to understand is that what bob thinks of as privatization, somebody like me thinks of as empowering families to make sure they are finding the right learning environment for their kid. because those schools don't belong to the school board and the school superintendent. they are there for the purpose of educating the public's children. and if the parents are concerned that schools are doing a lousy job or not doing the job at all, i'm interested in ensuring that they have alternatives. as far as the caller raising the question of $29,000 a year for this used in private school, sure. i forget which houston -- what the houston independent school district spends, i'm assuming it is $19,000 to $20,000 per kid.

keep in mind that the average cost of a catholic school is in the $6,000 to $9,000 range. whereas the average public school is spending twice that. in new york city for instance, the new york city public school district is spending $38,000, 39 thousand dollars per child this year. so it is important to understand that in fact, outside of a handful of these superduper private, fancy schools that you hear about that serve the kids of the elite, most private kids options are cheaper and in many cases significantly cheaper than what public school district's spending per child. host: we have a couple of minutes left. i want to get in one last call. suzanne in washington, d.c. is on the line for others. good morning. caller: hi. just briefly, the perspective i am coming from is i am from

california. my father is one of the creators of headstart. he's a federal standard guy. he's in his mid-90's. i've seen firsthand the grants and just how it really works and where the money really goes. at this point, i am without a party. i clearly can understand how incredibly frustrated everyone is. there are problems in all of the departments and they are intractable. there seems to be no curiosity to do research that would benefit anyone or fix anything. it is bloated and it does not work for anyone. this system -- if the system does not work for me, it's not working for anyone. i've never unable to work or even go to junior-college. and i'm 56 years old. that's my family.

yeah. i understand the anger and how crazy what is happening is right now. it is in direct proportion to how frustrated everyone is. host: we will get a response. we are short on time. rick, we will give you one of our last two minutes and then bob, you will get our last-minute. guest: sure. i think the caller is spot on. so much of what everyone is dealing with. one of the problems in a lot of our debates, i think the conversation about abolishing departments is emblematic. it's easy to go from what the caller put her finger on, this frustration, the sense that things are bloated and bureaucratic and ineffective and abolishing the department has, i think for both parties, kind of

become symbolic. i think whether or not you want to abolish the department, i think it is perfectly fine. for me, the bigger issue is not just abolishing the department but fixing the problems that exist in the department. the fact that we have a broken student loan system, which is costing taxpayers a fortune and not serving borrowers well. the fact that we are making the lives of educators out in the country far more difficult than they need to be with the rules we have proposed. that the department of education , that the office of civil rights was weaponized. not by following through on congressional statute, but by using half-baked, off-the-cuff guidance to force people to strip due process from folks alleged misconduct during the obama years or first schools to weaken discipline. let's

let's talk about abolishing the department but let's also make sure we are delving into the actual problems reported on and make sure we do not lose sight of them. host: bob, we will give you the last minute or so. bob: it is important to understand public education is under attack from many different vantage points. what we really need is a strong federal role in preserving and supporting, preserving public education and supporting states and districts to deliver high-quality education. public schools are key to the economy and our democracy. they are the engines of social mobility. civic engagement. help us compete with other nations economically. and they are really the center of communities. we need a president and secretary of education who

believes in public education and will work to support states, districts, and families to increase the quality of public education and to help more students go to college, afford college, or whatever pathway they want after they graduate from high school. that is what we need, not shot out of the dark to eliminate whole federal departments without any other alternative plan on how to help states and districts and struggling families to educate their children and themselves and to secure a better future for themselves. host: our guest, rick hess, you can find his work online at aei.org, and robert kim, executive director of the education law center. you can find his work and others at edlawcenter.org.

bob and rick, thank you so much for being with us. next after the break, a conversation with mark zaid, an attorney who specializes in national security and federal employment law. we will take a closer look at the trump administration's efforts to reduce the federal workforce and what legal protections the workers have. first, here is a portion from this week -- past week's oversight committee hearing entitled "rightsizing government." [video clip] >> how government was designed to be by, of, and for the american. people. . it is made up of civil servant to take an oath to support the constitution. more than one in three federal workers is employed under the postal service or the department of veterans affairs providing care to our veterans in v.a. hospitals, clinics, and nursing homes.

almost one in three federal workers is a veteran. more than 85% live outside the d.c. metropolitan area, across every state and serving every community in america. one in three americans and half of all american children are enrolled in a government program. our government provides the support these americans are counting on, including social security, medicare, medicaid, snap, head start, the national school lunch program. we depend on our government to safeguard our food supply and to ensure life-saving medication is safe to consume. we depend on our government to provide alerts about extreme weather to the national -- through the national weather service which you know all too well from the tornado that devastated your community, mr. chairman, a few years ago, and to provide disaster relief to communities where it is needed, such as in los angeles after the

devastating fires of the last few weeks. this is the so-called deep state president trump and his acolytes continue to demonize. and these are the programs and services sitting on elon musk's chopping block right now. >> for decades and on a bipartisan basis, members of the committee have lamented the inefficiency of the federal bureaucracy. we have fought never ending battles against the waste, fraud, abuse bureaucracy generates during both republican and democrat administrations. one byproduct of the inefficiency according to g.a.o. is the near quarter trillion dollars of annual improper payments government issues. but now that president trump is taking action and draining the swamp and has exposed how the federal government is spending taxpayer money, which he was elected to do, democrats are hyperventilating and sensationalizing it.

over the past few days, we have heard wild claims from democrats that we are, " at the beginning of a dictatorship." and we are in a constitutional crisis. this kind of theatrical rhetoric is exactly what the american people rejected in november. americans know that washington needs reform. doge is taking inventory to bring about change and steward taxpayer dollars entrusted to the federal government. real innovation is not clean and tidy. it is necessarily disruptive and messy. but that is exactly what washington needs right now. and it is what the american people voted for in november, a departure from the broken status quo. this committee intends to work in partnership with doge. we want to reinforce its efforts and not want the momentum it is generating for needed change to the federal bureaucracy. >> "washington journal"

continues. host: joining us now to discuss the trump administration and federal employment is mark zaid. he is a national security attorney and also cofounder of whistleblower aid. thank you so much for being with us. guest: good morning, tammy. thank you. host: i mentioned you are a national security attorney. explain who you work with and what kind of issues. guest: i have been practicing law in washington, d.c., for over 30 years. in essence, i am an employment lawyer but i am a spy lawyer. unfortunately, the malpractice insurance companies do not know what that means. that means i represent predominately individuals who work inside the intelligence community, often classified environments, even for me as a lawyer. law enforcement, like the fbi, which we will discuss, and the military. but i had all sorts of employment avenues and areas --

handle all sorts of implement avenues and areas dealing with investigations, a lot of security clearance cases. i also represent a lot of journalists who represent major media entities. the wall street journal, the daily caller, politico, the daily beast. mostly for freedom of information act litigation in trying to force disclosure of documents from the u.s. government as well as advising on espionage act concerns. and i also do a lot of whistleblower work which is why it was mentioned i cofounded whistleblower aid almost a decade ago which is a nonprofit that provides free legal representation to whistleblowers. we help work on the trump first impeachment case. not the impeachment part but the representation of the whistleblower who filed the complaint, the facebook whistleblower, the twitter whistleblower, we run the gamut. we do a lot of great work in that area and we expect to be very busy. host: one of the issues we are

talking about, we will talk about the fbi, but we want to start with president trump offered federal employees the chance to leave their jobs. we have heard the terms buyout, resignation. explain exactly what was offered to who and what the judge's temporary block means for the plan. guest: let me first be the "good lawyer" to say i am not giving anyone legal advice doing this. i am giving my opinion on some of the legal analysis and an update factually of where we stand. this is a very complicated matter that is unprecedented. that means a lot of the lawyers people are going to talk to her are honestly not going to know the answer because there is not a known answer yet. i want to give a quick example so people understand what i am talking about. you live near a highway that is 55 mile an hour speed limit. you have been traveling it for years.

you even know the cops who patrol it. you know that even though the speed limit is 55, you can go up to 75 and no one is going to bother you or pull you over. all of a sudden, the cops start enforcing and pulling people over for going 57 miles an hour, maybe even 54 miles an hour. that 57 miles an hour, the norms and practices have stopped. that is totally proper and lawful for the cops to pull you over for 57. it might not be efficient. it might not make sense. judges might be upset. 54, that is something we can do about. that is where we are at right now. so much of what this administration is doing is unprecedented, but there are policy arguments. people can debate reasonably on both sides, does it make sense to do this or not? the big issue happening is how quickly it is being done, how harshly it is being done, how

opaque it is being done. lack of transparency. that is why we are seeing all of this litigation that so far has been predominantly successful in federal judges, many of whom were appointed by president trump his first administration, are pushing back and issuing injunctions or temporary restraining orders. the fork in the road, as it has been called, it has been called that because essentially the language sent out a week or so ago by the office of personnel management and gone through all the agencies so federal workers were receiving it on their phone or in their email box, that fork in the road with a message that elon musk sent out to his company in 2022. get very much member writ -- it very much mirrored it. it essentially was this generic offer that said you can resign right now. you can quit. and if you do so, we will pay

you through september of this year. you do not have to come to work. we might bring you back to work if we really need you. but we will basically pay you to go on vacation. but you have to give up a bunch of rights like you cannot challenge us for enforcement of this offer, which is an issue. we can talk about that more further. they were supposed to tell the federal employees were supposed to respond by thursday evening. a federal judge extended that. right now, the deadline is monday to tuesday morning. they were expecting or hoping for at least 10% or 20% even of the workforce to accept this. the last number i saw was about 2% a federal employees which was

about 40,000. there are legal issues with it. i have seen arguments on both sides of whether it is lawful or not. we can dig down further if you would like. host: our guest for the next 30 minutes or so is mark zaid, a national security attorney and cofounder of whistleblower aid. if you have a question or comment for him, you can start calling you now. the lines for the segment will be a little different. if you are a federal employee, you can call 202-748-8000. all others, 202-748-8001. mark, you were talking about the buyout numbers, the 2%, that is the same number i saw, the most recent. there was another email sent out to employees this week, the

headline, take the buyout or face possible furlough if they do not accept the offer. under what circumstance are employees furloughed? how is this different from the offer being made? guest: is a lot of issues to dig down on in that -- there is a lot of issues to dig down on in that. there are procedures as to how it can be implemented. right now, things like that are not going to be followed. i have been receiving lots of emails from people, friends, people i do not know, federal employees who get the email messages such as you referred to, i tell you, the initial reaction is how insulted they are because if you read through the language, you can easily interpret it rightly or wrongly as if you are the bad guy on the recipient side and you should

leave the government. many people would love to see the government reduced in size. there are very good reasons for that. many people would like to see the budgets reduced. very good reasons for that. it is the procedures happening right now. we have internal regulations in the agencies that have to be followed. that is why a lot of the litigation brought so far has been under the administrative procedures act from 1946 which allows you to challenge agency actions that are final or arbitrary, capricious, against the rule of law. that gives judges the opportunity to challenge what the agencies do. in fact, we heard and i'm sure your program covered supreme court case dealing with a chevron decision which used to stand for that deference would be given to agency decisions by

the courts. now, ironically, that now works the other way where because that was essentially struck down the courts can second-guess the agencies and all of these policies being decided and attempted to be implemented so that these injunctions can be issued. host: we have callers waiting to talk with you. we will start with ann on the line for federal employees. good morning. caller: good morning. my remark is all the federal employees they are trying to get rid of all have been doing their jobs for as long as they have been federal employees. how come they do not go after the house or the senate that has not done their jobs in the last 16 years that i know of? alls they do is fight. they are not doing anything, they are not passing anything. they are not stopping anything.

i do not think elon musk has the right to go through any of our stuff at all. he has no right. he is not a federal employee. this program trump just brought up out of his mind. everybody in there is nothing but for the rich and they do not care about the hard-working taxpaying federal employees or the people that depend on social security after they have worked for 30 to 40 years of their life. guest: some good points. a federal judge agrees with you about the doge so far. early this morning, a federal judge issued an injunction regarding doge access to the treasury records. all of our financial records, irs records, social security records and payments, etc.. we will see how that case goes.

congress in its infinite wisdom over history exempts itself usually from many federal laws paid i mentioned the freedom of information act which i sue the executive branch all the time. congress wrote the act and passed it almost 60 years ago and exempted itself from that. the president of the united states, any president does not have much control over congress, especially hiring decisions. what can the president do? what was done yesterday where members of congress were blocked from entering the department of education by security of the building. the issue on the federal workers, 100% true. many of these people are career civil servants. they are not partisan, not political appointees. they might have voted democrat, republic, or communist. who knows?

that is not a question asked of them. many of the people being impacted, again, you can raise legitimate questions about, has that employee performed work properly? has that employee performed in the manner we hired them to do? and have a process to get rid of and maybe fix that process, reform it so it is easier to terminate employees. but i give you one quick example. i do not want to go into the debate of dei good or bad, how should it be implement it? that is not the issue. a new administration came in. they have policy differences from the one prior and they want to run the government in a different way. that they can do as long as it is lawful. but many employees in the intelligence community where i often work who are working dei cases or offices are just doing so on a rotational basis. they have been at the agency 18

years working on all sorts of stuff. and then, a new rotation comes up and they went into this new office created just to experience something different. they were not trying to promote that as policy necessarily. they were not doing anything in creating policy. it was just a new job, like many federal employees do. normally what would happen if that office would be shutdown is they would be reassigned to other offices or go back to their home office. what we are seeing now in this administration is those individuals are all being suspended and threatened and we anticipate to be fired. that is what normally is supposed to happen -- that is not what normally is supposed to happen. host: the email this week warned many could be stripped of civil

service protections. what protections are currently in place and how difficult or easy would it be to remove them? guest: it varies widely. is something called the civil service reform act. it has been around since the 1970's if i am recalling correctly. it exempts certain agencies like the fbi, like the intelligence community. we sue for those individuals. it is very strange. the act applies but it does not apply. it is called a right without a remedy. the act strips them of protection but they have no ability to challenge what is being done. fbi employees cannot go generally to the merit systems protection board where a lot of employees in the federal government can go to challenge adverse action in excess of 14 days or a suspension, something of that sort. that is an administrative body

that appointed terms for the judges. it is excluded. same thing with the intelligence community. probationary employees we are going to hear a lot of because there is a threat the trump administration is going to fire or already has i believe was in some prosecutor positions within the department of justice but we are being told 1000 perhaps fbi probationary employees may be fired as recently as this coming monday. probationary employees generally do not have many, if any, rights to be able to sue. it really depends on your posture, what your position is in the federal government, what your grade scale might be as we call it. gs is the level. if you are a senior executive at an agency, how long you have been in the position, what agency you work for. typically, there would be an internal process that would be

available to you to challenge an action. there would be an administrative body action to challenge and there would be a federal court ability to challenge as well, or maybe all three depending on who you are. host: let's hear from tom in richmond, virginia, on the line for federal employees. good morning. caller: good morning. how y'all doing? guest: good, thank you. caller: i was hoping you would be able to get more into the legal arguments of how musk and his team are able to do this. we are hearing a lot from democrats that this is illegal and potentially unconstitutional whereas from republicans we are hearing they are essentially behind this and willing to allow it to continue forward. for someone like myself who might not have spent their time studying law, breakdown the two sides of the legal argument if

this were to go to court. guest: i will try, appreciate question. it is going to court for several of the agencies. from what we have heard, musk and does, sometimes we have heard spacex employees, the other elon musk company. the department of government efficiency which is not a government agencies but it may be special government employees, that is all up for grabs. there have been already lawsuits involving the office of personnel management, usaid, the agency for national development, the treasury department i mentioned already. we have heard about doge individuals inside even some of the intelligence systems as well as inside the fbi, we have heard of some spacex individuals. a lot of what i say in my world is it depends because facts matter.

there is a difference between these individuals having access to unclassified systems and classified systems. obviously if it is a classified system, they are required to have security clearance. it is unclear for many of these whether in fact that is the case. some of these doechii employees -- some of these deluge employees i will say in air quotes appear to be employees from agencies walking around the halls with badges issued by other agencies to show that at least they might have some authorized access or security clearance. some of the more controversial doge employees like the 19-year-old we are starting to

hear about, odds are they have a security clearance through the normal process probably slim. the caveat the president can issue someone a security clearance as they want, no background investigation, nothing we would normally, and i have held clearances at the highest level trade go through background investigations, i fill out forms, i go through interviews, all sorts of that stuff. theirs significant issues surrounding many of these systems where the systems and the internal regulations sketch out who is allowed to have access. some of the treasury systems of which the court ordered the injunction this morning are held incredibly closely to only a small number of people for the obvious reasons of what data is in those systems. social security numbers,

sometimes our most personal data. there are restrictions on it. but we have been seeing so far is they have been getting access widespread. i have even heard from individuals, i have heard of individuals blocked properly but god in the system and removed the blocks to be able to continue to draw access. it is hard to say. it is complicated to go into the legal issues of yeah or mavis can be done or not -- yay or nay this can be done or not. those cases will go to what we call a preliminary or permanent injustice to see what the

government does in response to those orders because it could be a temporary restraining order is issued but preliminary or permanent injunction is lost. host: the hearing is scheduled for monday. guest: yeah, i think in the one case we have talked about so far. host: we will hear next from karen in illinois on the line for federal employees. caller: thanks for taking my call. hi, mark. guest: hi. caller: i am just really mad. i work for -- first of all, i am an army vet. i actually had a secret clearance. i was a spanish linguist interrogator for the army for a

few years. i work for the v.a. and was directly affected by the mission act, accountability act. it took five years to get the money back that was owed to me. that i wanted to bring up because it goes to show how long it takes to get even if you went through the legal process to defend yourself, it takes forever. now, i work -- guest: don't say what agency you work for. caller: thanks. i got the fork in the road email. i responded and i hit "resign." now, since it is a block, i am worried i made the wrong decision. my question for you is, you know , can i rescind that?

is it even worth it? i feel like everything is falling apart and i do not know who to turn to. thanks. guest: thank you. thank you for your service in the military and as a civil servant as well. none of us could function without people like you, so it is appreciated very much. these are difficult decisions. you should not have to make them on your own or buy what the government is sending you. do not hesitate to reach out to me. google my name or they will say my email address. some of this is outside my area with respect to in the weeds of the fork in the road but let me highlight some things you need to consider. this is what we do not know. i have heard both sides of the argument. i do not know which one is

correct because, again, unprecedented. someone will sue, we will find out. the notion of if there is an anti-deficiency act violation. it is such an in the weeds act. essentially, it means the argument is the budget is funded right now through march. the buyout is the fork in the road that goes to september. the march to september funds have not been authorized by congress, the congress that controls the funding of the u.s. government. that is part of the give-and-take of our system and the branches of government. i know democrats have been arguing that the antideficiency act is being violated because the president cannot offer a buyout for money not yet funded.

i have heard legal arguments to say that is not accurate. i do not know the answer on that. what i do know is that at least by the terms of what is in the fork of the road -- fork in the road offer is that if you take it, and i say you generically, if you take it and something happens along the way, it indicates in the documentation that you cannot sue, you have waived any claims. you have waived enforcement ability for something you have agreed to. in a normal contract for any party, and the government can enter into contracts, you can soup for a breach of that contract. that is a serious issue -- you can sue for a breach of that contract. this is a serious issue. can you enforce it if something happens along the way? whether it was something out of your

control or if they find that you committed misconduct and they decide to fire you. the notion of rescinding, i imagine you can pray but i imagine that is something you want to talk to a lawyer about directly to get legal advice. i am happy to put you in touch with someone who i know can pretty anyone listening can email me and i'm happy to do that. host: we will go to darius in new hampshire on the line for others. good morning. caller: good morning. good morning. my question is i heard the board of education was not enacted by congress. it was done by executive order. i was wondering if that was true and also if it is not, what can president trump do with his executive order? guest: for the department of

education? i think i heard you say the board of education? caller: the department of education, yeah. guest: we are seeing two departments under intense attack. the usaid agency for international development that does a lot of our work overseas with the foreign aid programs and the department of education. the department of education is not a new issue. we heard that in the 2016 presidential election debates about whether or not it should be dismantled in some way. my understanding, and i am telling you this not as an expert on this particular area, my understanding was the president could not dismantle an agency created by congress. there may be ways to do it but you cannot just say likely saw

where they literally took the flag down from usaid and they took the letters off the building, literally took them all down and told everybody not to come to work. does people were going into the building and screaming, had that from people firsthand, screaming at them and threatening them to bring the u.s. marshals service, not sure how that would work, but bring the marshall service into the building to remove them if they did not go. we are starting to see a little pushback even from republican members of congress on that which is good because this should not be a partisan exercise. it should be one that is thought through in an informed manner to make sure the federal employees, as so many of you are, are taken care of properly, either given the opportunity to resign with

enough time to decide, not just days, and do it in a way that does not harm a lot of people. some meals on wheels programs were being impacted by what was happening. i saw some comments by some dough jet officials quoted in the press that they wanted to stop some federal payments to american just to make their point. that is not how it works. i think the short answer to your question is i am not aware that is how it is supposed to work. it ultimately may go that route. a lot of these departments for our lifetime has existed. but in the history of our country. the department of energy has only been around since the carter administration. i think even the education department if i am remembering my history.

a lot of the programs we have today paid social security is the roosevelt administration 90 years ago, franklin delano roosevelt, not teddy. that is 90 years ago. we are about to celebrate our 250th birthday next year. clearly, these programs were created and can be dismantled. the question is how. host: i want to ask you about a headline in the washington post. judge bars publicly naming fbi agents who investigated january 6 cases. this is something you were involved with. what can you tell us about it and what does the judge's ruling stipulate? guest: it was ironic when i was arguing this case with a number of phenomenal lawyers. it is a real group effort. i said the last time i appeared

before her laws in a case also against the fbi where i was suing to require disclosure of information by the bureau. now i am standing before also suing the fbi in order to prevent the disclosure of information. there was a requirement by the acting deputy attorney general ordering the fbi to provide the names and identifying information of all fbi personnel. not just agents, analysts, examiners, staff people, support people, who worked on the january 6 prosecution and also a n hamas criminal case in new york. i still have not heard a good reason why that case is part of this gathering, but it is in

that requirement. at first, the fbi compiled all the information over the weekend. monday, they sent the information to the information to the justice department but only gave them identifying employee numbers. the department of justice was very perturbed about that. in fact, said the acting director of the fbi was being insubordinate. while we were in court thursday trying to get a tro to prevent the names from being released because we were told these individuals were going to be fired and their names would be released alongside the notices of termination which had happened a few days earlier on january 31 when eight senior officials in the fbi who still had civil service protection were told to either quit or you will be fired, and that memo was

released. do not know how it was released. it was sent from the acting deputy attorney general to the acting fbi director and someone in the government released it so these names, these individuals were stigmatized. i told the court notwithstanding my working on fbi cases for 30 years i did not know who any of these names were, because they just were not public names, which goes to show the impact the release of the names could have. we sued narrowly to simply protect the names. while we were in court, the justice department reordered the fbi to produce the names and reluctantly the fbi did. we did not know that until thursday night as we were negotiating with the government to enter into a consent

agreement yesterday which the court adopted which effectively gave us the relief that we wanted, that the u.s. government is not allowed to release the names of the people on the list which is thought to be 5000 to 6000 people who touched upon the january 6 prosecutions, and cannot release them without 48 hours or two business days realistically to give us an opportunity to come back into court. in the meantime, assuming they do not change their mind to release the information, and this goes back to the earlier question of what role doge has, is it government or not? we are assuming for purposes of this motion and the consent decree that they are part of this, that they are held to the

terms of this, that we are now going to go for injunction over the next month and will be back in court march 27 to argue for the preliminary or permanent injunction to block the names. it is not to say the fbi cannot fire individuals or the justice department. there is now these weaponization committees ordered first by executive order of the president and then by the now attorney general pam bondi. we do not know what the standards are that apply to that. they talk about seeking out corrupt fbi personnel and whether or not people disobeyed orders when they were pursuing their investigations which to me sounds fantastical because anyone who understands how the process works, and fbi agent does not just open up a case on their own. they have to go to superiors and

then they have to bring it to the u.s. attorney's office, they have to go to grand jury, they have to go to a federal judge. there are so many layers to this case to think that an fbi agent corrupt in initiating the case which most likely became known to them because of social media postings the actual defendant posted online and was then turned in is kind of crazy in my view but we will superior right now, we have this order in place and we will see what the government does in the meantime as we prepare for the preliminary injunction. host: we have time for one less call. pam in pennsylvania on the line for federal employees. caller: i am one of the people considering taking the resignation but i am told my pension and annual leave could be impacted because it is not spelled out that it is safe to take this without them being

impacted. guest: great question. thank you. you got that far so i know that means you have worked for the u.s. government for a long time. excellent question. people would not normally know this if you are not a federal employee. you build up annual leave. you build up sick leave. there is a dollar value assigned to all of that. it can be significant depending on your grade level and how long you have built it up. when you retire, you do not lose all of that just because -- sometimes you hear lose or leave, i am trying to remember the phrasing, meaning sometimes there is certainly about the end of the year if you do not use it for vacation or whatever, you lose it, but most of it accrues. that dollar value gets assigned and it gets paid out to you when you leave federal service. same thing for sick leave.

the question pam raises is an excellent one and it is one i have been seeing in a lot of the trump administration executive orders and policies that come out. they are not thinking through things sufficiently enough because they are acting too quickly. there is an easy answer 2:00 p.m.'s -- there is an easy answer to pam's question if they address it. of course, she should get her leave paid out and she should get her pension that she has learned. because it is not spelled out in this offer that question is open. that is why lawyers need to be involved and the courts to make sure that his answered prayer because there is no answer right now, you have to throw your hands up because it is not likely worth it to risk losing

that until you get an answer. please contact a lawyer experienced in that. do not hesitate to email me. i will help you find one because that would not be me. you are absolutely entitled to having that question factually and legally answered so your service to our country is properly compensated. host: our guest is mark zaid, national security attorney. you can find him online. he has offered a couple of times to help anyone who wants to reach out to him, either find another resource or help how he can. we appreciate your time this morning. guest: thank you. really appreciate it. c-span is a wonderful institution. host: we are wrapping up today's program with open forum. if there is a public policy issue or topic you would like to discuss, you can start calling in now. republicans, 202-748-8001.

democrats, 202-748-8000. independents, 202-748-8002. we will be right back. ♪ >> lunch american history tv's new series --watch american history tv's new series. we will look at accomplishments and setbacks and examine how setbacks affected the presidency in the country. andrew jackson was elected president in 1828 in a rematch with john quincy adams from the 1824 election. mr. jackson came to office with a vision for the country but his agenda was stalled by

controversy. early issues included states rights, payment of national debt, tariffs, and treatment of native americans. watch the new series today at 7:00 eastern on american history tv on c-span [applause] -- on c-span2. >> next week, the house and senate are in session. the health will consider legislation establishing new penalties for evading border patrol agents in car chases for the senate continues voting on president trump's cabinet nominees including tulsi gabbard as the director of national intelligence and robt f. kennedy as health and human services secretary. jerome powell will give a semiannual monetary policy port before two committees on tuesday and wednesday. c-span continues our competence of coverage confirmation

histories for cabinet nominees. they will hold hearings for tw cabinet nominees. wednesday, the nominee for secretary of labor, and on thursday for linda mcmahon, nominee for secretary of education. also thursday, the senate judiciary committee will vote on the nomination of kash patel for director of the fbi. watch live on the c-span networks or c-span now. go to c-span.org for scheduling information or to watch live or on-demand anytime. c-span, democracy unfiltered. >> "washington journal" continues. host: welcome back. we are in open forum until 10:00. we will start in beverly hills. good morning. caller: thank you for

pronouncing my name correctly. it is not an easy one. i am familiar with mark zaid's work. national security is an important thing. the situation going on now that is under so much debate, it seems to me incomprehensible our american citizens cannot understand the fact that we overspent so dramatically there will be no future if we keep going in the same direction. you can follow the yellow brick road off the cliff and that is exactly what is happening. as a harvard trained economist and international investment advisor, professional negotiator, ambassador, i was on fox news throughout 911 because of also being a middle east expert and ambassador of goodwill, i take very strong objection to fighting against ourselves. it seems to be something

unfortunately that we are doing constantly. it is built into our system unfortunately. i think the founding fathers, most of whom were quite rich, really want the laissez-faire system and they did construct a government that fights itself. let's understand the most important word in the united states of america is the word "united." let's unite together. our president was elected. he does have powers, extraordinary powers. obviously, he is using them. even though people do not seem to like elon musk, we have a president who moves fast and sometimes breaks hearts and blows minds but he gets things done. i think that is one of the reason people so strongly supported him despite many

invitations not to do so. let's unite together. let's show respect. let's stop bashing elon musk, jeff bezos, mark zuckerberg. these are people who created their american dream and it was not easy. anyone studying their lives understand how much they suffered and risk. they stuck with it, they persevered. they should be grateful their genius minds are helping us. thank you. thank you for taking the call. i applaud anyone who involved themselves in the process because that is what america is about. it is about us uniting together and running this country because, after all, it is our country. our country, of the people, by the people, for the people. . i would really love it if our country was renamed into the united people of the united states. host: we will move on to valerie in michigan on the line for democrats. good morning.

caller: good morning. you know, it is kind of hard to make sense out of all of this ridiculous nonsense. everything that lady said is just the opposite. she worked for fox news. what other news channel had to pay out that much money for lies and misinformation? as far as our country, that is right. elon musk did not create whatever that company is and he did not create the space. he got to hold those companies through our tax dollars. if they love the country so much like they say, why do we have corporations on welfare, corporate welfare, but we so mad about a mother of two getting food assistance or feeding kids lunch, free lunch, or any of the

things? it is a shared responsibility. it should not go up. it should go both ways. spread it out. when are we going to see donald trump's tax receipts? they just treat us like we are stupid. elon musk was not elected to tear this country apart. trump did not say he was going to tear the country down. he said he was going to trim off the fat in agencies. he got rid of every person responsible for during that -- doing that. then they said he don't get to be held accountable for the economy because it is biden's economy for the first two years that he has got to fix. obama gave him a good economy and he took credit for every positive thing. host: that is valerie in

michigan. tony in chapel hill, tennessee, on the line for independents. caller: good morning, fellow americans. thank you for taking my call. [indiscernible] snowden was a criminal. host: tony, we are having a hard time hearing you. caller: how about now? host: there you go. caller: better? ok. can you still hear me? host: yes, go ahead, tony. caller: wonderful. i wanted to ask if snowden or chelsea manning or any of them if they are traders or if he thinks they are whistleblowers. i do not get that. if you give out information from the government everybody should know, you are a whistleblower. if you give out secrets, that is something else. one more thing i would like to say.

i hate that our country is so divided. i spent a year in vietnam fighting for what i call freedom . [indiscernible] my heart was in saving my country. everybody in the service, that is all they had, to serve their country and do the right thing. [indiscernible] now we have a dictator i am calling because he has no spine in the congress to put this man aside and make him do the right thing. one more thing i had to say. i am really sad about my country going downhill. i am a 75-year-old man with copd and my lungs are messed up from agent orange. however, i still love my country and i wish everyone would get together and think about what is really going on. i am so embarrassed.

i hate to tell somebody i am a southerner. southerners are so uneducated. i do not mean to be detrimental to their attitude or personalities. but you have to get out there and live and find out what is really going on in this world. host: i think we lost tony. wanted to show you a headline from the washington post. trump plans to fire kennedy center board members and appoint himself as chair. this was an announcement president trump made last night on truth social saying at my direction, we are gog to make the kennedy center in washington great again. i have decided to immediately terminate multiple individuals from the board of trustees, including the chairman, who do not share our vision for a golden age in arts and culture. we will soon announce a new board with an amazing chairman, donald j. trump!

just last year, the kennedy nter featured drag shows specifically targeting our youth. is will stop. the kennedy center is an american jewel and must reflect the brightest stars on its stage and from all across our nation. for the kennedy center, the best is yet to come. just a few minutes left. we will go to sue in virginia on the line for republicans. good morning. caller: good morning. i have a comment regarding usaid. they completely ruined their reputation with some of the ridiculous expenditures. i was listening to warren buffett the other day. he said with his companies come he can take a loss in revenue but you cannot take a loss to your reputation. the workers there, and the democrats, felt so protective of the good programs.

i am certain there are good programs within usaid that would have maintained the highest standards, the highest ethical levels, to protect those programs. it is a death knell to any charity in the private sector that comes out and has a corruption scandal like this. people stop contributing. they really risk everything when they get sloppy and lose their reputation. thanks for letting me call. host: that was sue in virginia. valerie in san antonio, texas. good morning. caller: thank you, c-span. i enjoy all of your programming. i have some hope with the situation because a lot of people are not happy with it but they will have to become we the people to change things.

i am talking about voting. people are looking at methods used by mahatma gandhi to push back. if they could push back the british empire, if this is too horrible, the american people, we the people, have the power to do something. i hope the people that want change bad enough will do it. host: that was valerie in texas. our last call this morning. we appreciate our guests and callers who contributed to the conversation. we will be back tomorrow morning at 7:00 eastern, 4:00 pacific, with another program. until then, enjoy your day. ♪ [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2025] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] ♪

>> our live forum to discuss the latest issues in government, politics, and public policy. from washington and across the country. sunday morning, the president of citizens against government waste will talk about government efficiency, waste and federal spending, and efforts by the trump administration and elon musk to overhaul the federal government. then, the president and ceo of the progressive group on the legal efforts to challenge the trump administration's agenda.