♪ host: this is the washington journal for february 18. what changes would you make to the clinical party you belong to? a recent gallup poll shows

democrats wanting moderates to have a voice within their party. republicans saying they want to see their party's state the way it is. the dnc new chair spoke about the way he plans to change his party after the last election. president trump taking credit for the viability of the gop. if you think changes are needed for the political party you belong to call and let us know. on the phone lines, (202) 748-8001 the republicans, (202) 748-8000 free democrats, and independents (202) 748-8002 full up if you want to let us know about those changes and you want to text us about that, (202) 748-8003 is how you do that. as always you can post on facebook and on x. facebook.com/c-span and on x it is @cspanwj. here is the gallup poll from last week taking a look at

questions asked of members applicable parties and the changes they would like to see. one of the questions was when it comes to preferences saying if you had to choose, would you rather see the democratic party become more liberal, stay the same, or become more moderate commit if you had to choose what you see the republican party become more conservative, stay the same, or become more moderate. when asked in 2021 free democrats, 34% saying they wanted to see their party become more liberal, and more moderate, 34%. 2025, same questions with democrats and democratic leading independents. 29% saying they want their party to become more liberal, 45% of those questioned saying democrats and democratic leading independents, more moderate is what they wanted to see. when asked of republicans in

2021, 40% say they want to see the party more conservative, 34% more the same, and 24% saying they wanted to see the party more moderate. 2025, 28 percent of those conservatives, 28% saying they want the party more conservative, 43% saying they wanted to see their party stay the same, and 27% saying they wanted their party to become more moderate. that is the gallup poll. we are taking our own pole when it comes to the party you belong to. you think it needs changes and what you think this changes should be. for republicans (202) 748-8001, (202) 748-8000 for democrats, for independence (202) 748-8002. and you can text us at (202) 748-8003. specific categories for members

of the democratic party, saying if you had to choose would you see the democratic party become more liberal, stay the same, or more moderate? amongst those identified as liberal democrats saying they wanted the party to become more liberal, 45% of those. 22% of those things are the same and 30% say more moderate. when it comes to those identified as moderate democrats , 14% saying the party should be more liberal, 22% staying it should do the same, 62% of those saying the party should be more moderate. here's a look at the gallup poll. more democrats favor party moderation than in the past is the title. when it comes to those party modifications you would like to see, if you think your party does the those changes. luke in miami florida on the democrats line starts us off. good morning. caller: it is my first time calling. absolutely the party needs to change. i have been disappointed in the

democratic party recently. i think they are stuck in a lot of positions that are extremely unpopular with the voter base. especially the social positions. there was an incident where someone that was the chair of the democratic party or something was like trying to do with pronouns and it was a complete mess. i think a lot of those positions are incredibly unpopular and if the recent election is anything to go by if the democratic party wants to win it needs to abandon some of these weird positions it has. host: was a specific position you have that would differ from most within your party? caller: i don't think we should be having these transgender athletes competing in women's sports.

i think they have an unfair advantage. statistics i have seen say over 60% of the general american population does not think they should be participating in sports. positions like that where we have clear statistics that most people do not want these things, the democratic party refuses to change on. it is really putting them out of touch with the american people. host: luke in miami, florida. democrats line about changes he would want to see within the party he is belonging to. raymond in new york, republican line, your next. good morning. caller: good morning. i want to know is term limits a possibility in this country? it seems like people are in office too long. there should be an age requirement for congress and the senate. just my question. host: which you want to see

those within your party be term limited as well? caller: everybody, yes. host: why is that? caller: i feel like they been in office for so long. they always bicker and back-and-forth. politicians, that is what they do. it seems like they are in office too long. host: that is raymond in new york. gallup taking a look at issues of the republican party. here's a question they asked, saying if you had to choose, would you rather see the republican party become more conservative, stay the same, or become more moderate? conservative republicans as they identify themselves, 38% say they want to see the marty become more conservative, 45%

say they want the party to be the same, 16% saying the party should become more moderate. amongst moderate republicans, 10% of those saying they want to see the party become more conservative, 36% saying they wanted the party to stay the same, and 50% of those polled by gallup amongst moderate republicans say they wanted the republican party to become more moderate. you may reflect those ideas, you may not. call and let us know. democrats line in wisconsin. mike, good morning. caller: the problem the democrats have is a number of things, but the biggest one is they do not have a simplified platform. i went back and looked at fdr's platform in the early 1930's and that is what the democratic party needs. too many french ideas. they need to focus -- too many fringe ideas.

they need to focus on big ones they communicate to the american people. it is not left or right, conservative or liberal, it is what is relevant to the american people they need to focus on those things. one of the big ones we need to do is campaign funding -- citizens united has destroyed the country with money in washington. we need to reformat and go back on the issues where we'd made mistakes and refocus. that is one campaign finance reform and stay relevant in terms of the american people. it is not left and right but the democrats went with some very fringe issues. for example the ncaa in terms of the sexual change rules, there are 10 people participating in the ncaa out of 511,000 student athletes and we are focused on 11 of them. i'm not saying they should not

participate. what i am saying is that is what was focused on and it defocuses the relevance of the party and dissipates what is meaningful to the american people. relevance is the important thing. the other thing is we have to round up representatives able to communicate the new deal 2.0 and focus on that. one of the other big ones is we have a rich and poor issue in the united states. we need a sovereign wealth fund where we dilute every public corporation in the united states by 25% and that becomes the sovereign wealth fund. i did the calculation. it is about half of the national debt. that would be equity held by the treasury of the united states on behalf of the american people. there are restrictions on how to be used.

that is my thought for the day. have a wonderful one. host: mike in wisconsin with a list of ideas on how his party should change. if you are independent and you want to give your thoughts on the party you are a part of were lean towards. mike in orlando, florida. you are next. caller: pedro, i've been a registered independent since 1974. i've been hoping for a viable third party. it was kind of happening when ross perot made his run. we got close to 20% of the vote. as i get older i do not see a viable third party. here's my suggestions. for the republican party, their party has turned into nothing but a spineless people that are basically donald trump's bootleggers or whatever you want to call them. the democratic party needs major change.

i am above 65. if you are 65 to 70 it is time to retire. we need young voices. aoc, frost from florida. these things have to change. i don't understand why these old fossils want to keep going when it is time for younger people who are energetic and ready to get in there and fight. host: why do you think they don't have the opportunity to do so? what keeps them from doing that? caller: you're talking about the younger people from getting positions? i just think the older people, and me being one of them do not want to give up that power and prestige of being in d.c. and calling the shots. i understand, here comes a younger person. i taught school for 25 years. there are very good younger people who can take a stand and take over this party. he being up in that upper age, i do not understand how these

people that get to be 70 or 80 years old can do it on a daily basis. i am in great shape and i don't want to do it on a daily basis. host: mike in florida giving us thoughts for younger voices within the party. maybe that is one of the things you see as far as what your party needs. call and let us know. maybe you think there is no changes needed to the current state of your party. let us know those thoughts as well. (202) 748-8001, (202) 748-8000 for democrats, independents (202) 748-8002. in california, democrats line, this is oscar. caller: can you hear me ok? host: go ahead. caller: the democrats need to refocus on money.

on the money separation. they need to simplify things and not clutter it up with unnecessary issues and they need to stick to that because one thing democrats are good at digging into the corruption. not that they are not doing it either, but they are good at finding discrepancies with the republican party. they can do that all they want but they need to refocus on making it about the billionaires -- doing away with the constitution practically. we know it and republicans -- you have to be seeing this. you voted the guy in office. both parties need to focus on this because that is what it is all about. it is big money in their leaving the working class behind in everything across-the-board.

host: oscar in this early morning for him in california giving us his thoughts. one of the people making their thoughts known is the new head of the democratic national committee can martin appearing on msnbc talking about the new role he has and what he saw was job one as he described it for his party. here is some of his thoughts from yesterday. [video clip] >> iran i said we need to get the d&c out of d.c. and they said what you mean? it is a mindset change. building a 57 state party strategy contesting every race and all of our counties. we have to be organizing everywhere which is the name of this tour. we'll be talking with voters and union members, doorknocking for candidates, holding sessions throughout the red and purple and blue states we are visiting. we need to get the d&c out of the beltway, reconnect our message with voters.

that is job number one. someday parts of our coalition left us this last election cycle. we know that, latino voters, working-class households, women. the only groups we were performed with were wealthy households and college-educated voters. that is a damning indictment on the democratic party. that is why we have to get out to the states to reconnect our message to the voters. host: some of you posting on facebook. this is cindy saying "when it comes to the party -- when it comes to the party, primary every republican in name only or rhino that does not support the president's agenda. michael saying a very strong ethical oversight based on logic and knowledge that removes rumors and mistrust. misbehavior must not be tolerated. heather collins saying the 99% needs to make the change.

party politics, the politics that relates to political parties rather than the good of the general public. you can take some of those ideas and call us or share them on our text service (202) 748-8003. you can post on facebook and facebook.com/c-span and on ask @cspanwj. this is bill in florida on the changes needed for your political party. good morning. caller: good morning. i think there has to be or transparency in all government institutions. in all levels of those counties, cities, state and federal. also as far as positions like plans, concerns, that type of

thing needs to be changed. medical insurance. also how to handle our tax money in general which is nothing is accounted for. i think all parties including independents need to start being more active as far as the election process goes and it is set more younger people are not. host: bill in florida. let's hear from eric who joins us from maryland. also on our independent line. go ahead. caller: i was a democrat for my entire life until after the 2016 election. i will respond that way. democrats biggest problem is

they lie about everything. it is the most extreme -- they accuse people of the most extreme things that are not happening. it continues through today. i was at party meetings where i had leader heads telling people in the room that their own relatives wanted them dead and when i asked them if they believed this after a second or two of contemplation they said yes. that is the mentality of the democratic party these days. as for the republicans go, i am in maryland, they do not call us independent they call us unaffiliated. i have been unaffiliated since after the 2016 election. republicans cannot get their act together. they fight all the time. the george bush days when you

went online and the party message -- there was no party message for the republicans. the democrats, the party message is ridiculous. you can see it from a mile away. host: when it comes to that party messaging, project lead amongst republicans and i think you were talking about disagreeing with their infighting. why you think that exists? caller: republicans have always been that way since i first looked into political parties as a kid when i first went to vote and decided what party are was going to belong to come the republicans have not had a coherent message that they all stick to. you see the democrats, when they go and say something you can literally see they got the memo because every one of the democrats is using the same words. identical words. that is also a tip for

propaganda. republicans do not have a cohesiveness and they always fail in the end because they do not have a backbone. the least i can say about the democrats, no matter if they're going down the wrong path and sinking the ship, they will open the whole bigger in the bottom just to sink it faster. that is their way of doing it. they get together and do it all the way. republicans never get it done because they cannot work together. host: eric giving us his thoughts from maryland. let's hear from michael in new hampshire. democrats line. caller: i have been voting since 1968 as a democrat. the first thing i think they need to do is find somebody to stand up against trump because if they do not it will not matter what direction they move because their jobs will be meaningless. host: who is that person? caller: right now chris murphy

from connecticut seems to be the best to me. chuck schumer's to introduce a bill that says what trump is doing is wrong and what will that do? that will not do everything because everybody knows what he is doing is wrong and they need to do something to stand up against him and stop him from what he is doing. host: what is it about senator murphy as far as what he brings to the table. why you think you will be the best figure at the head of the democratic party? caller: he is the most vocal and he is not bending to trump like the rest of the democrats are. nobody has come up with a plan to stop what he is doing. it will continue. if it does continue, being a democratic congressman is not going to mean a thing because it will not do anything. host: michael in new hampshire

giving us thoughts. this is krisn om portland, maine texting us saying as decrs we need to be more moderate, rational, with a touch of darkum. bring bk al franken to run with mark kelly in 2028. it's not to bang soon to find true leader -- it is not too soon to find true leaders to combat trumpism. share texts at (202) 748-8003. edward in jersey city, new jersey on changes would like to make towards the party you lean towards. go ahead. our independent line. caller: good morning. i am in new jersey as an independent voter. i got mail from the board of elections thing in the state by law you have 55 days to register with a party before you can vote in the primary. this is a shame.

i will be changing my voter affiliation to democrat because there is not a republican in the state that will come to my community and visit to talk about issues, to talk about their platform. that is one thing. yesterday i was watching washington journal with the interview with juan williams and his new book puts this whole context -- this whole conversation in some context in my view. with the democratic party, i am not registered as a democrat outright because the caller mentioned it. old mostly white men representatives in d.c. during barack obama's term it was -- that is what we are looking for. someone to speak to our grievances. juan williams talked about the current distain for the government and political leaders. he is correct.

although you see many of us pulled away from the democratic party for kamala harris because the status quo will not do. if the democratic party will only afford us more of the same they should be ready to lose. what that party needs is someone who is younger, someone who is more progressive, and there you go. host: who is that person? caller: it does not necessarily have to be someone who is younger, but it is younger abuse. like a bernie sanders is the opposite of younger but his views across the board -- many young people care about climate change, free government and medical care, housing for all, human rights, the democrats do not get the picture. host: one of the people making recent comments about the state of the party's republican national chair michael whatley

appearing in an interview that took place last week talking about future plans for the republican national committee and the party. here are some of his comments. [video clip] >> is always nice to play with the lead, isn't it? >> it is, and it is not surprising. the president made it clear this is what we will do when we get into office and he has hit the ground running. we look at the personnel he has put in place at the white house in the cabinet. the policies moving forward with the executive actions. everything is lined up the way he told america he was going to do it. we had a mandate coming out of that election. he is implementing that mandate and we are seeing the results in the polls. >> what is next for the rnc? >> right now we're doing everything we can to support the president and his agenda. it is a common sense agenda. we want to see these cabinet nominees get moved through. then we are already into the 2026 election cycle.

we know the main question the president will have visited a two your presidency or a four year presidency based on what happens with the elections in the house and the senate. host: this is from facebook. speaking as an independent saying term limits is the first category for him. then when it comes to republicans, what he says is to kick mag out, they make -- is to kick maga out. democrats getting rid of figureheads like nancy pelosi, the clinton types. they make the party look stupid. if you think that is some of the changes you need to the party and other changes that are needed as well, (202) 748-8001, (202) 748-8000 for democrats, and independents (202) 748-8002 of the new york times took a look at the democratic party and

concerns of some within it saying are they missing the chances of remaking the party. they wrote "there is almost universal agreement on a diagnosis of the parties problem with the working class. the question is if there'll be a consensus on a treatment plan. some favor shooting unpopular policies or reprioritizing new ones. others focus on improving the messages deployed to voters or on how to deliver the parties message. whatever it turns out to be in a fractured media environment. already a blizzard of organizations are holding focus groups, conducting polls, and studying voter patterns to assess the severity of the situation, especially the parties were some decline with groups where it once held sizable advantages like younger voters and latinos." that is the story from the your time. randall is calling -- that is the story from the new york times. randall calling in with changes

he would like to see to your political party. caller: some of the changes -- it would be helpful -- i am 64 -- you might want to have young people coming up. the truth of the matter, the democrats did articulate a platform -- for some reason the majority of people voted against their interests. trump did not articulate any kind of a platform. that is why you know it was all sentiment. sentiment is emotional. you can say with those emotions were. based on racism and so forth. it is aspirational on what they want trump to be and not what he is.

host: ok. randall in austin, texas. jeannie, independent line. caller: i feel politically homeless. i am a registered democrat. i did not vote. first time in my life i did not vote. the reason was i was disgusted with either of the parties. trump or kamala harris. no way. they are not listening. the democratic party. i want to register as an independent. i've not done it yet but i want to do that. i will stay politically homeless and i will not vote again in a presidential election if they do not let more than two or three parties debate. both parties do not allow it. trump or biden. they need someone like matthew mcconaughey.

common sense and not cruel and mean like trump. trump is just land grabbing. i want to own gaza? really? having meetings without ukraine or the european union? what a joke. i want to give that man a chance but he is a liar. you make maga so powerful with all the bro attitude and elon musk. i'm looking at it like i am hanging in. host: you talk about more openness within your own party. why do you think that doesn't happen? caller: because they're not listening at all. there was no compassion from biden or kamala harris the whole time they were in office until the election started. can you believe that? not once that we feel you, we know you're hurting financially. me and my husband had $11,000

saved in 2020 and that might be peanuts to somebody. to us that might as well as been $11 million. we are now under 1000. this is where we're at and this is where we are still at. trump will get in a lot of trouble. this lovefest -- he is lying about the prices. host: that is jeannie in austin, texas giving us her thoughts on political parties as some of you have during this first half-hour. you can continue on and make those suggestions if you wish about how to make changes to your political party or if you want we will transition to a set of open forum and you can make other thoughts when it comes to the world of politics as well. if you want to participate in this open forum and give support and let us know your thoughts on the state of politics as you see it, (202) 748-8001 for republicans, (202) 748-8000 for

democrats, (202) 748-8002 for independents. you can still make the comments about your political party. if there is another topic with an open forum you want to participate as well, feel free to do that. we will do that in the next half-hour. let's go to ron in illinois. republican line. good morning. caller: i think it is great. this of the percent approval rating shows you -- this 70% approval rating shows you he is in line with what the american people want. it is hilarious these democrats cannot figure out the fact that they are on the wrong side of history and they are so focused on this trumped arrangement syndrome they have -- on this trump arrangement syndrome they have that they will lose elections. they are not in line with what people in america want. i think it is larry's -- i think

it is hilarious people are getting upset about what he is doing. he is doing exactly what he said. i am -- democrat stand up for this wasteful spending of my tax dollars. my tax dollars are going to some rapper in gaza or reassignment surgery in these third world countries? that is not what i want my money to go to and i think what they're doing is what needs to be done. host: you talked about the president as far as the party is concerned. do you think any changes are needed within the party? caller: i don't. i think they finally aligned as a party. the democrats have been able to control everyone one of their members for years up none of them stood up for themselves. that is the only way to get things done in washington as

they have that cohesion. the republicans are finally doing it. i love watching your show and watching all of these democrats that are losing it. it is a fun new cycle for republicans. host: it is ron in illinois kicking off this open forum. he talked about the state of the party. one of the things in the wall street journal focuses on a certain republican, senator mitch mcconnell. "diminished mcconnell makes a lonely stand against trump." saying "out of leadership senator mcconnell has more freely speak his mind on trump's nominees. he has voted against three so far and more forcefully break with the president on foreign policy but it is not clear if colleagues will listen or if you will find himself increasingly persona non grata like other republicans who have crossed mr.

trump." it wasn't comments about mr. mcconnell voting against some of the nominees the president has put up. not only talking about mitch mcconnell but the current state of the republican party as he sees it. there are of those comments. [video clip] >> i feel sorry for mitch. he wanted to go to the end and he wanted to stay leader. he is not equipped mentally. he was not equipped 10 years ago mentally in my opinion. he let the republican party go to hell. if i did not come the republican party would not exist. mitch mcconnell never had it. he had an ability to raise money because of his position as leader. anybody could do it. it is saying a lot. the fact is he raised money and he gave a lot of money to senators so we had a little loyalty on the fact that as leader he could raise a lot of money. senators would call me and say he wants to give me $25 million, i would say take the money.

he engendered a certain amount of -- i do not call it loyalty. he was able to get votes. i was the one that got him to drop out of the leadership position so he cannot love me. he is voting against me. that is all right. host: let's hear from jodi in texas, independent line. caller: i am listening to these democrats just drive trump, trump. they ought to look at their house. the house schedule came out from steve scalise's office and out of our 365 days in the year our house is only working guess how many? 136 days of the whole year. they want a raise. that comes up to $1249 a day of

their working schedule. i think we have a bigger problem than trump. democrats want to get on their high horse that we want you working. we want you in session. we want our spending. we want our appropriation bills done. we do not want to see on the buses and everything. i think they work seven days until march 14. we have a bigger problem than just trump. host: jodey in texas. the senate back in session expected to vote to confirm howard let nick as commerce separate -- howard lutnick as commerce secretary and expected to advance a vote on kash patel as fbi director.

this is rob from mission talking about money issues inside the republican party, saying the gop needs to pass a balanced budget provide authorization legislation to the president to cufunding if needed. danielle from oregon saying we need more exciting candidates. akeem jeffries and chuck schumer are no that. our member when clint was campaigning for democrats in his present 25 years ago and i'm still a ounger than trump. new blood and raised social security. seniors will love you. going back to how we started this hour, you can continue making those thoughts to other things in open forum. let's go to ray in pittsburgh, democrats line. caller: the thing i wanted to talk about with democrats and what they need to do in their party is really simple. they know when the republicans

-- they argue among themselves. this is a national election, they fight and they fight. when they go to that voting booth they vote for their party. the democrats have that party. they would not vote for harris because they did not like how she stood on this or there was a group in michigan that did not like the palestinian situation where there was his other group that did not like this. they said we will not vote for a democrat or we will not vote at all. that is the reason the democrats lose. they should have learned this by saying what the republicans did this time. they stuck together and they got all three houses -- two houses and the presidency. that is what the democrats need to do. they can argue all they want. when it comes time to go in that voting booth and they are stuck together they will end up with what they have now. like one of these people who did not follow harris or do not

vote, i would like them to get onto the line and tell me how they feel about how the situation is for palestine or women's situations or anything like that now that they did not bother to vote for a democrat when they had the chance. maybe one of them when calling and explain to me how much better it is that they withheld their vote or do not vote at all or voted for someone else. that would be nice to have on the program. thanks for taking my call. host: this is j in north carolina, republican line. hello. caller: thanks for taking my call. my opinion is that i feel that trump is doing a fantastic job. i was a skeptic of him in his first administration. i think he has proven he is really fighting for america in trying to straighten the ship that has been almost sunk by the former administration.

as far as politicians are concerned, it makes me so sad and sick to see these 70, 75, 90-year-old politicians in office sitting around doing nothing and affecting our country in such a negative way. the amount of money they waste and they are spending and they are getting is of torrent. -- is abhorrent. i hope the administration is able to make changes as well. i think people like chuck schumer and mitch mcconnell and nancy pelosi in all these politicians that have been hanging around for multiple decades, including the former president biden it was in for more than 50 years, that is the problem. our country is mired in these people that are ideologues and

have no care for the american people. they are wasting money. as the previous caller said, they are doing very little work for the men of time they should be spending helping out the american people and trying to solve the problems we have. the great thing is with this new president in office -- i think he is doing a great job in controlling the border. i think that is the main issue of what has been causing a lot of our problems. the fact that he has people like elon musk and others that are looking into fraud and waste is a fantastic thing. we continue putting the pressure on. i think the democrats should wake up and come around. these elon omar's and aoc, they

just need to sit down and let the adults take over. host: jay in north carolina giving us his thoughts. the new york post reporting was the social security administration's active commissioner reportedly residing after a dispute with the department of government efficiency over the group's efforts to access sensitive government records. michelle came, career federal worker who had been with ssa since the 1990's quit and was replaced by a supporter of doge's efforts who will serve as acting commissioner of ssa. presidents strums picked to lead the agency -- until president trump's pick to lead the agency is confirmed by the senate. when it comes to doge itself, who is in charge of doge?

elon musk is not the leader of doge, the trumpet ministration operation overseeing the effort to remake the federal bureaucracy. he is not even technically part of it. white house said in court papers . in a three-page declaration of top white house personnel revealed that mosques title is senior advisor to the president, role in which he has no formal authority to make government decisions himself. that explanation provided to a federal court by joshua fisher, the director of the white house office of administration which seems to be directly contradict the way president trump and elon musk have spoken about the department of government efficiency widely seen as a elon musk driven project to trick to dismantle pr aspects of the federal government. the story adding that the sworn statement deepens the questions around doge. let's hear from robert in texas. independent line. caller: thank you.

i think there are two things long -- two things wrong with the political apparatus in this country that should be addressed. one is term limits as a previous caller put out. i think it should apply to all three branches of government. including the supreme court. the other one, i think we need to get back to some kind of political senses about what constitutes donations to elections and take a hard look at the citizens united. i think that is basically abdicating our basic premise of this government is about we the

people. corporations are not individuals. i don't know how that ever came out in that direction. i think if we did those two things our government would be so much more equal and cohesive with each party. three parties or four parties. you take the money out of it and you put them all on equal footing, maybe we would turn the corner to something really bright for the future in this country. term limits go hand-in-hand. you cannot get complacent in your job. after a certain amount of time. we have it for the president so there should be no reason we do not have one for the senate and the house and the supreme court. that is my opinion.

host: let's hear from milton in baltimore. democrats line. caller: i just want to relate something, a conversation i had with my philosophy professor. kind of like talking about how we could solve the trump problem and what he told me was you cannot get out too far ahead of the social issues. your smart, your bright, but you are black. no white person in america is going to follow a black person to their death with you in front. therefore, the solution will have to come from white people. unfortunately, 50,000 or more of them will have to perish before they get up to fight. don't get in front of them. you will just be fodder to the

canon, he said. host: jim in florida. republican line. caller: i would like to talk about how money is spent and how the business side looks at it and the government looks at it. elon musk has been given the responsibility to find out where the money went on the government side. he went to usaid and he found out there was a lot of checks written to different organizations that should not of been written. it is common sense. we can never reclaim that money but we can stop it from going out in the future. that is the government side. that is protecting the taxpayers money. let's go to the business side. there is a conversation run by the government go to the banks and find out what the banks are doing. they go to the banks and they say you've made some loans you should not of made. you've made some personal loans. it is hard to get your money

back. some say they have a house they have financed. it is in default. they do not want a house, the bank does not need a house, but they have $100,000 the need to get back so they put a bid out and say the lowest bid we will except as $100,000 on this house the bids will close at noon this friday. i am investor. i invest. i make a bid of 125,000. i get the bid. they give me a clear title. the bank got their $100,000 back. they make 25,000. whatever i make later on is the profit i make. what i'm trying to say is the bank examiners are no different than what elon musk is doing for the taxpayers. the same thing. that is what i have to say and i appreciate you taking my call. host: that is jim in florida.

the new york times saying elon musk is expected to gain access to systems within the internal revenue service, saying the systems contain the private financial data tied to millions of americans including their tax returns, social security numbers , banking details and employment information, the examination of the iris systems represents latest move by members of elon musk steam to push the boundaries of access to government data beyond what is typical for political appointees. this also says that the young software engineer who was brought into the office of personnel management as part of the doge effort worked at iris headquarters on thursday according to two people familiar with the matter not authorized to speak publicly. you will be assigned to the irs as senior advisor to the acting commissioner and the story adding that as of sunday evening he had not gained access to sensitive virus data according to two people interviewed for the story which you can find at the new york times. from north carolina, independent line.

john, good morning, go ahead. caller: i have a bad throat today. it's others claim trump did not do anything about children. i don't know why you can say that when they stop people from having abortions. [inaudible] 2+2 equals four. i did not see biden with his granddaughter. that thing on television about him singing and iver heard such filthy -- and i never heard such filthy talk in my life.

they are going to be standing in front of him. host: michigan, democrats line. caller: the other caller talking about the arabs who do not vote for the republicans -- for the democrats. they saw the whole family and lifestyle get destroyed so why would you vote for the democrats when you are present that late a major role in that destruction? i voted for kamala harris only because i was not going to vote for joe biden. before that i was very interested in a guy that was on your show stop his name was chase oliver, in independent, 38-year-old man that worked in

the food industry and had great ideas. he was against the war in gaza and had some good ideas. i hope he runs in four years. we need some youth. and working-class people. host: that is glenn in michigan. the associated press reported in top diplomats from russia and the united states meeting today in saudi arabia to distrust negotiating an end -- to discuss negotiating an end to the war in ukraine. it marks a major change in foreign policy under president trump. no ukrainian officials were present at the meeting which came as the beleaguered country is slowly but steadily losing ground against were numerous russian troops in a grinding war that began nearly three years ago. president zelenskyy said his country will not accept any outcomes if kyiv does not take part. beyond that ukraine meeting attended by the secretary of state art rubio, the russian --

secretary of state marco rubio and the russian foreign minister had been expected to focus on thawing relions between the countries. a picture you see there. the onset of the meeting between the heads as we show you that we will go to republican line. this is conrad in pennsylvania. caller: i was just calling. i am listening to democrats and republicans. they are all crooks because none of this stuff could not have happened unless they all participated. all of the money stolen behind the scenes, they all had to vote for it. it is not one parties part -- it is not one parties fault. they are all includes. -- they are all in cahoots.

if you cut me a $1 billion check you can stand in washington, d.c. with me. all of these callers have everyone brainwashed. it is about money. it might cost $2 million to run for office. the bottom line is i hope that when this is over all of these people who been working there were voters. all donald trump will do is get every republican sold out of office in the next two years because these are democrats getting laid off, republicans, independent. you think they will vote for elected officials after getting booted off the job they've been there 25 years? they are retired. it is not affecting them. all of those people getting booted out of the jobs, they will bring their voices and they will be heard. host: conrad in pennsylvania.

that's your david in philadelphia. independent line. -- let's go to david in philadelphia. independent line. caller: i think the democratic party needs to focus on rebuilding. if they have any chance of taking the house and the senate back, stop this dictator. ok? they forgot one golden rule is putting americans first. the border crisis, the crime, i think it is time for the democratic party to go back to its core values and find what they are. americans first. host: when you say rebuilding and when you say core values, what should they emphasize? which of the democratic party emphasize? caller: what roosevelt did. the new deal. what the democratic party stands

for, the working class. when barack obama ran for reelection, that is the message he conveyed to the people. and he won reelection, even against all odds. that is what the democratic party needs to do again. what they stand for is the middle class. taxes. you know? host: david in philadelphia. one more call from charles illinois. democrats line. caller: good morning. i would like to make two short points. number one. everyone is saying trump is getting so much done in such a short time. they don't realize that for whatever reason you cannot do everything in such a short time. you do not have time to audit, you do not have time to pull the records they are going into our

complex and they are doing it because this plan was already in place. i don't think they're looking in the records, they're just putting out the information. .2, the information -- point w wo, information elon musk is accessing, this is the same information they are telling you to protect from identity theft. this is what they're doing right now. that is all i have to say. host: charles in chicago finishing up this round of open forum. thank to all of you who participated during the last hour. two guests will join us throughout the morning. next we'll hear from the alliance from menu -- they alliance for american manufacturing's scott paul to talk about trump trade tariff policies and how they may impact the manufacturing sector. and later natasha hall on the cease-fire as it currently stands between israel and hamas

and the trump administration gaza plans plus other topics related to the middle east. all of that coming up on "washington journal." ♪ >> all this week, watch c-span's new members of congress. -- series where we speak with republicans and democrats on their early lives, careers, families, and why they ran for office. tonight at 9:30 eastern our interviews include troy downing, who paused his career in business to enlist in the air force after the september 11 attacks. >> i was moose hunting so i was one of the last people on the planet to find out about it. i got stuck there because the borders were closed and i cannot fly over canada. and as soon as i could get home

i walked into a recruiter's office and set i had a pilots license and i used do -- i was a researcher, what could you do with me? >> watch new members of congress all this week starting at 9:30 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> if you ever miss any of c-span's coverage you can find it anytime online at c-span.org, videos of key hearings, debates, and other events feature markers that guide you to interesting and newsworthy highlights. these appear on the right-hand side of the screen when you hit play on select videos. this makes it easier to quickly get an idea of what was debated and decided. scroll through and spend a few minutes on points of interest. >> c-spanshop.org is c-span's online store.

browse through our collection of products, apparel, books, home to core, -- decor and accessories. every purchase helps support our nonprofit operations. shop now or anytime time at c-spanshop.org. >> listening to programs on c-span through c-span radio is easy. tell your smart speaker play c-span radio and listen to washington journal daily at 7:00 a.m. eastern, important public affairs events and on weekdays catch washington today. listen to c-span any time, just tell your smart speaker play c-span radio. c-span, created by cable. washington journal continues. host: this is scott paul joining us the president for the alliance of american manufacturing to talk about the state of manufacturing with the new initiatives. morning. guest: great to be with you.

host: how do you describe who you represent to people? guest: we are unique. we have the united steelworkers union which is north america's largest industrial union and investigation and you are or who have steelworkers in their plants. so, it is a select group. mostly what i think people would call heavy manufacturing. and we have been around for about 16 or 17 years now. host: as far as those who represent, how would you describe the state of the steel industry? guest: stable, ok? not great, not horrible, but stable. you know, in a lot of ways that is good because it had been in freefall for several decades. so, there have been some developments in the economy lately, the infrastructure money. there have been tariffs in place

on imported steel since 2018. there has been a fair amount of stability in steel whereas in the decades prior it had been on a pretty downward trajectory. host: how much do tariffs lend to the stability or instability of the steel market? guest: when it comes to steel, aluminum or commodity materials like that, they can be extraordinarily helpful. the reason is this. we are a big steel consumer in the united states. we do not supply all of that market from here at home. and our market is generally very open to imports. the challenge has been, particularly with china is that you have massive firms that are owned by the chinese communist party that have dominated the steel industry, making more than half of the world's steel. they cannot possibly consume all of that at home. that ends up somewhere else.

again, not necessarily a problem but the problem is that they will sell it at basement rates. unfairly trading. it does not reflect the actual price of making this deal sometimes and that drives other firms out of business. we saw that happen in the united states about 15 years ago. and it was devastating to the steel industry. so, that is why you have this need for tariffs so that you have a support level of steel in the united states that can status -- satisfy our manufacturing needs and does not get lower. there are a couple of kinds of metals where we have only one or two plants that makes it. that has left us vulnerable. we said look, we cannot go down any further, it would be detrimental to national security. host: when the president says i will put tariffs on steel and

aluminum, what does he mean and how will that work? guest: i would characterize this as a restatement of policy and there are a couple of layers to it. over the last couple of decades there have been some tariffs put in place on some steel that has been called what we have -- what we call unfairly traded. it is very selective and depends on the country and the problem. in 2018, president trump utilized one of the aspects of trade law called section 232. basically it means i can impose tariffs if there is a national security rationality. he did that on steel and aluminum in 2018, 20 5% for steel. the issue was there was a process put in place to exempt a whole bunch of different products, thousands of them. and, exempt some countries from

that as well. what has happened over the last six or seven years is that you have seen those imports creep into the u.s. market. so, that relief was no longer as effective as it once was. and you have seen surges in steel come from mexico and vietnam and other places, not necessarily china but it is working its way around. this is basically pressing the reset button on the tariffs and saying we are going to start this over again at the 25% level with all countries and all products. and you will have to work very hard basically if you want to get an exemption or exclusion. and aluminum, which had also been covered at 10%, that is rising to 25%. all of this is scheduled to take effect next month in march. host: for those who depend on steel for manufacturing in the united states, what happens to

the price they pay or charge for the things that they make? guest: it depends on what the demand is as well. and what we learn from the last round of steel tariffs, it is that a net effect at the end of it is because of currency devaluation and some other things like that, there was not a lot passed on to the end use consumer. let us take an automobile is an example. there is a lot of steel in an automobile, but the actual price component of steel in the automobile is pretty low. and so, it is impacting a small percentage of that price. so that does not necessarily need to be passed on. the consumers and what we found with the last round is that there is an ability to renegotiate some manufacturing contracts and seek efficiencies and it is part of this currency

devaluation that really meant to that there was not a large price impact. and i would say and i would talk to audiences of steel consumers and i would defend the tariffs which is not an easy thing to do. and i will tell you that the principal complaint that i heard is i cannot find enough workers and i am still hiring and i cannot find enough workers. i can find a way to deal with steel tariffs if there is a transparent process and i know what it will be. but, i am still struggling finding workers for my factory. host: scott paul with us and if you want to ask him questionings -- questions about manufacturing in the united states, 202-748-8001 for republicans. 202-748-8000 for democrats. 202-748-8002 for independents. you can text us at 202-748-8003. and post on the social media sites as well. what about the idea of retribution by these other countries and what does that

ultimately do for the price of steel? guest: there was some retaliation to the tariffs, and let us be clear, it is not only the steel and aluminum tariffs but there are a lot of tariffs with respect for china and others down the road. what we saw the last round is that there was some retaliation, but congress and the administration put into place some mechanisms to compensate the domestic producers for that. i would anticipate that there is a similar mechanism this time. i would also say this. people talk about trade wars and it is a little bit more complicated than that. there are differing trade and tariff rates, trade disagreements that happen all the time. i know it is a catchy headline but it does not capture the truth. here is the truth. we are the largest consumer market in the world, consuming 20% of the world's products.

our market is generally very open. we actually are not as nearly as trade exposed as a lot of other countries are. that depend on their imports coming into the united states to generate national wealth. so, we hold far more cards than any trading partner then we are dealing with. so we should not be afraid to utilize that. we have more ability to escalate than most if not all of our trade partners. so it would be very dangerous. we saw this with the china tariffs. we might be talking about them. china decided that when trump applied the latest round, the 10%, just to do basically a nominal amount. to investigate google which does not do a lot of business in china to reopen a case against nvidia and do very narrow tariffs.

those were what -- much more of a symbol -- symbolic. host: to push policy initiatives. when you talk about assistance from the government if the tariffs do impact steel or other things, isn't that picking winners and losers if the government gets involved? guest: not necessarily. fundamentally trade policy has been picking winners and losers. the bargain that we made is that we are going to give up market access and expose our manufacturers and in return we will have allies first and the cold war, and then hopefully with respect to china, 25 years ago, that did work out. and, we will also make gains in financial services what have you. what we have learned from all of this is that it has been one sided. we have a $1 trillion trade deficit in goods, annually, $1 trillion that we are bringing in

more than we are taking out. we are a very entrepreneurial and innovative country and we can be very cost competitive and that is called a trade policy out of whack. this is resetting it a little bit. and, traditionally with respect to trade policy, there has been some compensation of people impacted by trade. it has not been generous enough but there is a long history of that since the early 1960's. that is not an unusual circumstance for our economic or trade policies. host: this is scott paul joining us. the first call is from new jersey on the republican line. that morning. go ahead. caller: good morning pedro. good morning mr. paul. my -- good morning pedro and paul, i have a question for you

and that is during the 2019 you said we had the lowest unemployment rate -- rate were 50 hires and meanwhile the democrats say that if we have tariffs, we will have taxes raised and every middle-class or most americans will feel the pain and impact. and so, my first of two questions is one, why do democrats say that taxes might go up even during the first trump american -- administration 2017 through 2019, the unemployment rate was low? second of all, during the first trump administration, some allegedly comedian said that trump had made things worse for some people like farmers. you know ohio and pennsylvania.

and saying that they are having their things worse because of tariffs. is that true or is not a fabrication or a lie? host: thank you. guest: very good question. i would say this, the question about passing along costs to consumers is an unsettled one. there are a couple of ways it could go. if a tariff is charged there will be revenue collected. it is up to that company whether it passes along the cost to consumers or absorbs it. whether it re-negotiates contracts or moves the manufacturing out of china to another country that is not impacted. there are all sorts of things that could happen. it is true that the evidence based on that round of tariffs was that there was a negligible

contribution to inflation compared to other things like energy or housing costs. that does not necessarily mean that will be the case. if there is a universal tariff applied to every product, everywhere, depending on what these companies will do there might be costs passed on to consumers. i do not want to pretend like there is not a cost associated with this. there certainly is. there is a cost of inaction. we saw decades of erosion of our manufacturing base in this country. that impacted millions of lives, hundreds of thousands of communities across the country. and it put us in a national security position that is dangerously exposed. and so, again, there is a trade-off. thanks about it like the cold war. we built up the military in part two make sure that the soviet union could not challenge us.

and there is a cost of that because there was a

with all of this especially when we have all of these relationships and we have been bringing tariffs down over a number of decades. that is a really important question. with china in particular and i will answer it because it is very broad. if you look at the goods that china supplies to us and we buy a lot of it includes christmas and party decorations that also smart and laptops. and you can kind of laughed at the first one because we can

source that from anywhere else. truthfully it is not the easiest thing in the world to shift laptop and smartphone production to other locations much less the united states. that is underway in some host: good morning gentlemen and good morning to you all. caller: i am not a democrat or republican. they can put on those tariffs are left that -- let those tariffs. my question is what is the long-term impact for tariffs? and which sector of the economy and our country will get a direct hit that they will see that? and then will we stay independent first to manufacture in the future. and i thank you very much. host: thank you. guest: great question and i would say that indiana is the largest steel producing state and it is relevant to that state. again, what happens with nt%ra% ithat could be where we see an adjustment issue. with respect to steel, we need a base capacity of steel in the united states to preserve our economic security and the tariffs are part of that guarantee. we also need a healthy economy and we need to be making investments in our economy. and that is an important aspect that we cannot lose sight of. host: how much comes from china compared to canada and mexico. we see --'s we see less steel coming in from china. the challenge is that it ends up going to vietnam or to malaysia and then coming to the united states indirectly, not

necessarily subject to a full tariff. and we have seen steel exports surged through mexico. there was a lot of trade in north american steel. our challenge is not with canada. there was generally fair trade relationships and there were some issues. they were generally fair trade relationships. they were a little bit with mexico and we had seen a surge of steel coming in and the biden administration recognize that too and was prepared to take actions on it. and that is where you see a lot of the challenges. host: the former deputy prime minister of canada wrote a recent opinion piece and wrote this about canada's perspective saying "in 201sed dollar for dollar retaliation in -- on 60 point 6 billion canadian dollars in u.s. steelluminum another engine -- imports deliberately targeting products from red states. mr. trump might not care about the objectionsoplen

canada, but he does care about american workers and businesses. effects court -- if exporters feeling the squeeze for to for tat tariffs the pressure on the administration will -- will reverse course." guest: from her perspective that is probably the right argument. i articulated this before. the impact of any trade major -- measures that we would apply to canada would have a massive impact on their gross domestic product because of the size of the economy. the impact of any trade measure that canada could apply to the united states, yes there might be some targeted impact, that it would not be felt economy wide in any way shape or form because the economy is too large because this would be a small and select subset. if there were a escalation

-- caller: i one about -- i want to talk about the machine tool industry. our worthy congress allowed people from not only asia and europe to butcher the machine tool industry. it was run by family

organizations now we have nothing left. all of the large companies that made steel meal -- steel mills and they made them right here in pittsburgh, they are gone. they are never coming back. talk to nucor and they would tell you that all of the things that they are buying for their new plans is coming out of europe and japan. we have lost it. and i do not know how mr. trump expects as far as to build in industry, any industry and manufacturing without a reliable machine tool industry. i appreciate your time. host: thank you. guest: i agree completely. machine tools are something that people do not see when you are in manufacturing you know how important they are because they are the things in the factories that are helping to produce and convert raw materials into

something that is useful up the value chain. we did lose a lot of that industry to europe and asia. and -- but i will say that i think a couple of things show that if we have a policy, we can do it. and this is an ode to industrial policy, which gets a bad name sometimes that it is highly effective. we have had an industrial at -- policy for agriculture and that is why we produce a lot of agricultural products. the same for fossil fuels whether you agree or not, it has been an effective policy. we are producing more fossil fuel output than we ever have even before trump took office. now, the last administration, the biden administration took that notion and applied it to semi conductors with bipartisan support and as a result we have -- as a result we have seen a

rebirth of high end semiconductor manufacturing. there are a dozen or more factories under construction that are going to put us back into the semi conductor game. and so, i will say that tariffs alone, not going to bring machine tools back. that if you have tariffs combined with that sort of muscular industrial policy, it is quite possible. host: democrat line from south carolina. jermaine, hello. caller: how are you doing, good morning. i had my original question answered. i have another question. as far as getting the steel from china, and producing it domestically, speaking as a consumer, how is that going to help the consumer? will the price of goods be cheaper or with the prices remain the same? guest: that is a good question.

it is important to understand that no one buys bank a ton of steel -- buys a ton of steel directly. but steel is part of other products. we use the automobile example before. and even though there is a lot of steel in the automobile in terms of the purchase price it is a small part. and already, most of the steel that these auto manufacturers are utilizing is coming from the united states or north america where it might not even be subject to a tariff. so, there is very little that is passed on to the consumer. i will say this. if you believe that the overriding responsibility of the government's is consumer efficiency, that gets you to a different policy point than if you believe that it is the national security of our people.

and, that is fundamentally what the government is supposed to do, guarantee and safeguard our national security. and so, again, i will not let shy will not pretend that there is no cost. there could be some cost. the question is is it a cost worth bearing and how will it be distributed? how much will these very innovative companies that can figure out different ways to get more efficient, how much will they absorb and pass along? but, it is worth it at the end because we are getting to the point if god forbid we had to mobilize for something, we do not have the capacity to turn out the military equipment or armaments in a way that we did say 50 or 60 years ago. that makes us extremely vulnerable. host: does your organization represent u.s. steel? guest: we do.

host: we pushed -- we saw japan -- president biden president trump pushing back against the idea of japan buying u.s. steel. guest: we have not taken a position on that because we have stakeholders on every side. i will say this, we are at a point in time where it makes sense no matter who it is to invest in the steel industry rather than offload the assets like they were doing for the last 30 years. and so, the fact that there is investment that might be coming into steel from some source, i think that is a good sign for the industry without stating an opinion on the purchase. host: what investments the countries interested in making specifically? guest: say again? host: how would japan buy u.s. steel and change the company? guest: they proposed making $3

billion in investments as part of that. there are other companies that have expressed interest in purchasing u.s. steel. and in the past you have seen a lot more interest in investing in the steel industry in general in the united states because they say -- they see the united states market as a good and healthy one moving forward as opposed to the past where it was shrinking because of the import penetration. host: is u.s. steel an outlier in form of investment or are other countries are the same shape or condition? guest: again the difference is investment versus rescue or having a vulture come in. in the past it was a lot of mergers and acquisitions in steel and a lot of downsizing. there was a wave of bankruptcies at the end of the 90's and the beginning of the oughts, where

you saw bethlehem and others that went out of business and just disappeared. they had been part of the american landscape generations. and that is not the situation we are in. we also cannot afford to take the tariffs off because that is where we would end up again and we do not want to see that. host: scott paul joining us for this discussion. kathy is up next from georgia, hello. go ahead. caller: good morning. i enjoy watching your show and this one just sort of hit home. i am not going to really ask a question and i just want to make a comment. i was born and raised in a small town in the appalachian mountains in north carolina. even in high school and i graduated in 1975, i worked all through high school, a job. i did not have a choice. i could go from one plant to another to get a job. this is a small 2000 population

town. poser emails, --hosiery mills, furniture builder, blue gene factory, ethan allen. i mean there was always someplace to work. i was very fortunate and i was able to go to college on a scholarship. and so i got out of there and got a better job. and i have five brothers and sisters who lived up there. and over the course of 20 years, this is in 1975, when everything was sort of rosy, every manufacturing plant is gone. right now they are ravaged by helene. we lost every major furniture builder. the hosiery mills, blue jean factories and everything. the largerest -- the largest employer is walmart.

i am just perplexed because i saw my family suffer from it, and many families in this little town in the mountains. so, if you could shed some light on that and if there is a chance that any of these jobs whatever come back to these old towns across america. i guess i am looking for hope. is there any? guest: i would say there is hope. it is not going to look like it did in the 1970's. but, there is the possibility to attract new factories to communities. it takes some policy to do that and it takes a reversal of the free-trade policy is that we saw over the last -- policies over the last couple of generations that led to the demise and manufacturing in a small and mid side towns in a wide variety of industries and it takes some investment in the skills of the

workers and innovation. we have seen some points where it is possible but the ideas not to reimagine manufacturing as it was 50 or 60 years ago. that will not happen. that does not mean it will not have good jobs. in a walmart comes to town you will not get other economic development. when a factory comes to town you are going to get other things. you get folks to supply the factory, more activity at the hardware in the grocery store and you might even get a walmart if you are able to attract a factory. it is possible to do that and we have seen new factories come online over the last 15 years because reshoring has become of a practice. so you see more companies looking at bringing work back to the united states. we just need to scale it up. host: richard from baltimore, american.

-- maryland. "what percentage of american manufacturing employee legal workers?" and where does immigration policy fall into how you represent? guest: from a manufacturing perspective it is not a problem. at all. in fact, it is part of the solution. the immigrant workforce has been a massive part of a solution particularly in a lot of these communities that have been hollowed out where the kids left seeking opportunity elsewhere and these family-owned factories are seeking workers. and, refugees, immigrants have helped to fill the void. and they are not taking jobs from anyone. there are 400,000 open jobs in manufacturing now. it is not like folks are getting squeezed out. if you talk to any manufacturer, and i am sure that a lot of them

voted for president trump, they will say that there workforce, and having some refugees or sap -- or having some immigrants as a part of that will be key to keeping them running at full strength. host: what are your employers doing to make sure that those that do not belong, the undocumented, are not working in factories? guest: our employers who were all steelworker represented there is a deliberate process that workers go through for all of that, for trading and all of the checks. again, it is not an issue and seasonal employment. this is the other thing, it is not casual seasonal employment. this is shift work where you are there. it is a completely different circumstance and immigration again is part of what it will take to see more employment in

manufacturing. host: russell in winchester virginia, works in manufacturing, go ahead. caller: good morning. i have recently retired from an industry and it was really steel intensive. i would like to go back and revisit the tariffs from the first time. i think it was like a 20% tariff on the chinese steel put down, and i am thinking while i am working that this is a good thing because now will i go back and start buying steel from ohio again as we had before they made the switch to chinese? but then, it was with -- it was within a month end close to three weeks after the tariffs were instated that u.s. steel announced that they would up their prices 20%. and all of a sudden, the

manufacturing expanding the customer base and all of that was out the window because no matter where you bought it you were paying more. all we did was put a surtax and send it on to our customers. and that is just money coming out of people's pockets. u.s. steel had a chance to expand its manufacturing base, but they chose that we will board -- reward shareholders. all it does is cost consumers more money. that is pretty much what i've got to say. oh, and, you were talking about us being a consuming nation. we should import more because we consume a lot more than anyone else. but, whatever and good luck. and i think that all of this will do is just make the inflation worse and feed it good. host: thank you. guest: i mean, again, the

evidence with respect to the steel tariffs is that overwhelmingly what happened is that these comfort -- these companies were able to make investments in their factories that had been deferred for decades because they did not have the resources. a modernized and became more efficient. when steel prices go up it is because demand is increasing. it is a very demand sensitive industry. and so, it goes up and believe me, it comes down and to a level where it cost more to make than they could sell it. and that is how all the dumping for china and other countries did. and i do think that on net, it is well worth having steel and aluminum tariffs in place to have -- to protect a basic level of production in the united

states and to provide that stability and that choice. and i would say, i would much rather have u.s. companies in competition with each other dealing with prices and having the estate owned chinese for -- chinese firms set the prices and being hostage to them. host: the caller made the point towards the end but there is a viewer who sent a text saying " what if we had a consumption tax? wouldn't that be a better way of reducing consumption and thus reducing the price of imports?" guest: i do not know. we do not have a tax system based on a consumption tax. i think that is highly unlikely to have. that is the european model. and something that this administration is concerned about because they believe it serves as a nontariff tax on our employers going into europe --

imports going into europe. i am not sure if that is the answer. i think more balance in the trade policy would be a good starting point. host: senator mcconnell talked about trade and tariffs towards his state saying "kentucky cannot afford tariffs in the trade wars." he said "trade wars with our partners hurt working people most. in the president has better toils to protect american workers without forcing our families and businesses to absorb higher costs." he does not elaborate but are there things i can make up for ultimately higher prices on people? guest: again, trade theory is complicated. it is very unsettled. one of the things that we saw when these steel and aluminum tariffs were imposed before was that the value of the u.s. dollar went down a little bit. and that actually on net makes the imports less expensive than

a day otherwise would be. does it negate the effect? not necessarily. they can still be impactful. but the idea behind the tariffs is that you will either generate the revenue or get the jobs back, one or the other. i would like to see the jobs come back and the firm start to reshore rather than to pay the tariffs because that is an option for some of them as well. again, with respect to senator mcconnell, for his entire career he has been a free-trader. it is not surprising, this. but i think he would agree that china has not played by the rules. and so far, what we have seen in place from the trump administration right now is a 10% tariff on chinese products across the board. we have seen some steel and aluminum tariff announcements. they will take effect next month and we will see what happens between now and then.

we know that things can change very dramatically. that is what we have seen so far. host: al from washington. democrat line. hello. caller: hello. good morning. i went to georgetown in the late 70's. and i watched the demographics of the nation change overnight during that election of 1980 when carter was drummed out and reagan came in. i am seeing something happen similar in the most recent election cycle where overnight everybody is now in favor of the current administration. i grew up in west virginia. i mean, my family was from down in coal mining country. and i saw the u.s. steel divest

in the coal mining regions of the country. so when that lady was talking about north carolina and manufacturing jobs, the whole state of west virginia literally dried up. and i am here -- i am hearing drill baby drill and all of this stuff, right? but what i am really curious about is what are we going to do to bring america back, even with these dynamic election changes we have seen. i will stand aside now. guest: simple question. how do we get america back? part of it is that there has been a realization. i think this was true from the biden administration and the trump administration that says we have to reorient our trade policy. instead of just negotiating free-trade deals and giving away market access, we need to demand a level playing field and to be able to utilize tariffs as one

of the tools. keep in mind, biden signed a tariff proclamation to put 100% tariffs on chinese electric vehicles. ok? that is -- so when progressives are saying trump is doing this i was like look, biden was doing some of this. it is a similar thread to trade policy and a welcome one. that is not alone the answer. we need to invest in workers, community colleges, career and technical education programs. we need to be massively innovative and continue to build out our infrastructure. and to explore all energy sources so that we have an energy advantage for generations. there is a lot that we need to do and we can do and we are well-positioned to do it. in this washington can we get it done? i am not sure.

it is a vote one way or another so i am not holding my breath. there is a pathway to kind of get back that economic strength. host: americanmanufacturing.org is the website for the alliance for american manufacturing. scott paul serves as the president. thank you for your time. up next we will hear from csis' natasha hall who will take a look at the current cease-fire between israel and hamas and the issue when it comes from the recent announcements from the trump administration about its desires for gaza. that coming up on washington journal. ♪ >> democracy, it is not just an idea, but a process.

a process shaped by leaders elected to the highest offices and entrusted to a select -- select few with guarding its basic principles. where debates unfold, decisions on -- are made, and the courses charted. democracy in real-time. this is your government at work and this is c-span, giving you your democracy unfiltered. >> democracy is always an unfinished creation. >> democracy is worth dying for. >> democracy belongs to us all. >> we are here in the sanctuary of democracy. >> great responsibilities fall again to the democracy is. >> american democracy is bigger than one person. >> freedom and democracy must be constantly guarded and protected. >> we are still at our core a democracy. >> this is also a massive

victory for democracy and freedom. >> listening to programs on c-span through c-span radio is easy. tell your smart speaker play c-span radio, and wish -- and listen to washington journal, an important public affairs events. and on weekdays catch washingto today. listen to c-span any time, just tell your smart speaker to play c-span radio. >> c-spanshop.org is c-span's online store. browse through our latest collection of products, apparel, books, home decor and accessories. there is something for every fan every purchase helps support our nonprofit cash organizations. -- organizations.

shop now at c-spanshop.org. >> if you ever miss any coverage you can find at any time on c-span.org. videos of key hearings, debates and other events feature markers that guide you to interesting and newsworthy highlights. these markers appear on the right-hand side of your screen when you hit play on select videos. this makes it easy to quickly get in idea of what was debated and decided. scroll through and spend a few minutes on points of interest. washington journal continues. host: natasha hall is joining us from the center of strategic international studies serving as her senior photo for the middle eastern program to talk about policy and the trump administration. a little bit about the program you represent given -- when it comes to issues of the middle east, what is a perspective that you have? guest: we are seeing seismic

shifts. the likes of which that we have never seen before with u.s. policy including the displacement of palestinians for the first time in u.s. policy. but we are also seeing some seismic shifts in how the administration is dealing with geopolitics and other great power competitors in the middle east in places like syria. this can be very concerning, if we see a pullback of the united states and some of these places like syria, does russia come back in. that is what we are looking at right now. how are these seismic shifts happening in the region that have been going on for about a year now, how is that going to affect u.s. policy and be affected by u.s. policy. host: marco rubio is talking with the saudi crown prince and one of those topics is gaza. how are you viewing -- viewing this meeting? guest: it is this -- interesting

that president trump lay down a gauntlet that no one really accepts, which is which is for them tantamount to ethnic cleansing of palestinians from the gaza strip. resident has trump as said this is hell on earth so we should just remove them and then reconstruct gaza to create the riviera. and jordan, egypt and saudi arabia are all countries that would be affected in terms of stability. by even just the statements let alone the actual implementation. but, president trump keeps reiterating that this is an actual plan that they plan to implement. i think what is happening right now is that arab countries are trying to get together to form an alternative plan for president trump because they do know a lot of their stability is dependent on the united states nojust in terms of aid that military and defense spending. the united states has spent decades trying to stabilize

these countries and working towards a peace agreement. so, this is a huge moment for the arab countries to get together and try to formulate some kind of alternative. it remains to be seen if the trump administration will accept anything. host: as far as the countries and the potentially them taking in any palestinians, what is the willingness? guest: it is not feasible in the case of jordan, which is a country that right now operates on a water deficit. this is a country that is resource poor. in addition to that, it is already housing 60% of its population as palestinian refugees who have been forcibly displaced from israel and the west bank in the decades past. this is a really volatile issue for the king of jordan as well. if he is seen to be facilitating a forced displacement of palestinians, it really calls

into question the stability of the monarchy. the same goes for egypt and saudi arabia. i have heard from saudi diplomats when it comes to the normalization and this was months ago before the trump administration came into power. they said that our guy's head is on the chopping block meaning the crown prince of saudi arabia. and so, they cannot be seen to be facilitating this kind of plan. they are working very hard around-the-clock to try to create some kind of alternative that president trump would accept. host: our president and the king talking about these issues. i want to play a little bit about the exchange with reporters to get your perspective. [video clip] >> i think we have to keep in mind that there is a plan from egypt and the arab countries. we have been invited to discussions in riyadh. the point is that how do we make this work in the way that is good for everybody. obviously we have to look into

the best interests of the united states and especially to my people, of jordan. you will have interesting discussions today. one of the things we can do right away is to take 2000 children that are either cancer children or in a very ill state to jordan as quickly as possible and then wait for the egyptians to present their plan on how we would move with the president to work on the gaza challenges. >> i want to tell you -- excuse me, wait just please. i did not know that what he just said, 2000 children with cancer or other problems. and that is really a beautiful gesture. that is really good and we appreciate it. we will be working on the rest with egypt. i think you will see some great progress. with jordan you will see some great progress. the three of us and we will have some others helping and some others that are high-level helping. it is not a complex thing to do.

and with the united states being in control of that piece of land, a fairly large piece of land you will have stability in the middle east for the first time, and the palestinians or the people who live now in gaza will be living beautifully in another location. they will be living safely and they will not be killed, murdered and having to leave every 10 years. i've been watching this for so many years and it is nothing but trouble [end video clip] host: the president said it is not hard to control. what gives united states authority to make these ideas? guest: it is against international law for certain. this is sort of heartening back to imperial days when stronger company -- stronger countries would just take over other countries. this is what the world order that was created essentially by the united states after world war ii was meant to stop, essentially, in order to allow

each country regardless of their weaknesses to have sovereignty and territorial integrity. and so this is quite troubling, i think not just for gaza and palestinians in the region. but more generally if we look at russia which is seeking to take over ukraine and other parts of its country abroad. if we look at china and its interests in taiwan. this essentially gives excuses to our adversaries to pursue those kinds of imperial ambitions. so, this is a bit troubling. certainly the united states does not have the legal ability to do this. certainly, the most powerful country in the world can do quite a bit if it actually wanted to. whether or not that would pan out for u.s. stability or israeli security is another thing. host: earlier on it was the king who said we wanted to make this work for everybody. what was he saying and what was

he not saying? guest: it was painful to watch. i think the king was trying to do what he could in a fairly awkward situation and you saw him also offered to take into thousand palestinian children. i think to somewhat distract the president from this much grander plan of displacing 2 million palestinians as well. but, he is in a very awkward situation. jordan is very heavily dependent on the united states in terms of usaid but there are thousands of u.s. soldiers and jordan. but their stability and the defense of the country is heavily reliant on the united states. the king knows this and he knows that he has to provide something to the united states and he has to emphasize the strong relationship between the united states and jordan. and really sort of so -- cozy up to trump whether he likes to or not. host: if you want to ask her questions it is 202-748-8001 for

republicans. 202-748-8000 for democrats. independents, 202-748-8002. if you want to text us your thoughts you can do that at 202-748-8003. for all of that said, what would you say is the future of gaza without u.s. involvement and given the future -- its current condition. what is the future and its -- in other countroes -- countries' involvement? guest: this is why the gauntlet was laid down in such a dramatic fashion. there was question about if the gulf countries would reach out if there was an avenue towards a palestinian state or authority governing gaza. none of these countries wanted israel to reoccupy the strip. and we are not going to do anything if that was the case. now, we are seeing the oil-rich gulf countries and others get

together and think about creating a reconstruction fund and not only that a trump reconstruction fund. they are really trying to i think really stoke the ego of president trump and try to get something implemented that would actually work for them. egypt has been working on a plan to reconstruct the strip with palestinians remaining in that territory. but, it remains to be seen if israel would accept any of this, especially since that hamas substance of lee controls the gaza strip. host: i was going to say what is their role in the future as well? guest: their police are still patrolling the area. after over 15 months of devastating conflict, they are still there. that tells you something right away, you cannot really put down the self-determination ambitions of a people, right? this will be very complicated. if it is not hamas, it will be a

different insurgency or a worse one in the future from all of the trauma that we have seen from the past year and the past. so i think that the -- this is going to be very difficult. we have seen most of the gaza strip wiped out. part of the initial plan in the cease-fire plan was that mobile homes and tents had to be allowed in to provide some accommodations for all of these displaced palestinians. and hardly any of them have gone through. so i think this is also israel's sign that they are amenable to trumps plan that these people will actually be removed from gaza for reconstruction. host: the center for strategic and international studies the tosha hall joining us. our first call comes from bill in arkansas, independent line. caller: good morning, a very interesting discussion and something that came up recently.

i wanted to point out a few historic elements and ask your opinion on that. one is after september 11, 1922, the palestine entrance for jane mandate were made. then after of course world war ii, 1948, the map was reinvented to the same or most exact map to become israel. it seems there is a two state dilemma and no two state solution. what do you think of us going forward regarding that and it is interesting the islamic terrorists sometimes pick these states -- these dates, 911, october 7, how do we get through

the two state dilemma and take care of palestinians? it was all carved up i western societies anyway. host: bill in arkansas. guest: thank you for that question in the historical context. certainly i think it is very difficult to foresee a two state solution now. i don't think it has to anything to do with history at this point, but more the past 25 years of the buildup of israeli settlements. we've gone from something like 50,000 in the west bank to 750,000 israeli settlers in areas that were deemed illegally occupied by israel in just 25 years or so. so the two state solution is difficult to foresee because palestinians in the west bank don't actually have control over much of their infrastructure including water, electricity. israel really has the final say over all of that. so to imagine a two state

solution would have to imagine some kind of land trade. we have seen those happen in negotiations in the past it it simply did not actually occur. so i think it is possible but it would really require the united states to be pushing on israel which it is the most far-right government and society we've seen since the establishment of the state of israel right now. in order to put pressure on them to move forward with the two state solution that most u.s. presidents have said they want. but otherwise, those palestinians he would speak with today are fine with a one state solution as long as they get freedom of movement and equity and basic human rights. so it is more i think the onus is on the united states that has been promoting the two state solution for decades. host: robert is in new york, republican line. caller: thank you.

the idea that 60% of the population of jordan is palestinian refugees is really just a repetition of a trope that's been promulgated by the arabs since the creation of israel in 1948. how can you refer to people as refugees after multiple generations it's already been well over 70 years since the state of israel was established. to call these people refugees, even those of gaza on the one hand they say we are refugees on the other hand they say we are not leaving for you can't have it both ways. at some point there has to be a recognition that the state of israel is here to stay and the israelis have rights not to be bombarded constantly every six or seven years. that's my comment, thank you.

>> thank you robert brady as someone who is jordanian and part palestinian i can tell you many palestinians in jordan still very much identify with palestine as the place of their birth or their grandparents birth. the thing about refugees and this is according to u.s. law and international law more broadly is refugees have the right of return. and this has never been the case obviously for palestinian refugees. they have not in many cases been given citizenship many of them are stateless in places like lebanon and syria and that has really exposed them to vulnerability. in jordan i can tell you but most people who have a father who is not jordanian, do not have citizenship and this is a big problem of statelessness essentially for many jordanians or palestinians in jordan as well. this is not a resolved issue by any means. and i think my overall point

with regards to this is because so many jordanians and palestinians and people of mixed dissent which is most are damien's by now feel so strongly about this issue that it would destabilize the country whether you like it or not. >> alan in indiana. democrats line go ahead. >> thank you for accepting my call. the question i have to ask is why has the united states always shown such blind allegiance to israel? i disagree with your previous caller, israel does not have the right to exist. palestine was invaded by displaced european jews 77 years ago and it was a shame that at the time the united states had and all europe -- had banned

all european jews coming here. and they didn't want to go back to europe because it was antisemitism there and i guess england wouldn't take them. it was decided let them dump in palestine because who cares. palestine was a sovereign state it was a location that's been there for over 2000 years and it got invaded. the united states had supported this occupation of the oppression of the palace and people for 77 years and i never understood why. israel has nuclear weapons that the united states will not give any foreign aid to any country that has nuclear weapons. that makes sense. and the simple solution it is i think our government should end

foreign and military aid to israel. cut off trade and try to deal with the palestinian people starting in the gaza strip to make up for 77 years of occupation. so why does the united states support this occupation? >> thank you. i will handle this question delicately. i think israel does have the right to exist by u.n. mandate. so it is interesting to see sort of the debate between the u.n. and israel over the years. because israel has been formed essentially because the united nations. if you're looking at the situation today though in reference to the question about the united states blind allegiance to israel. i think this is a real question. a lot of it has to do with ensuring lobbying in the united states which is an issue with regards to many other issues for

congress members. there is also a very close security alliance. we have our ammunitions depots for strategic weapons in israel. we have provided more weapons per capita basis to israel than any other country in the world. so it is challenging to understand why it has been so difficult for the united states to move peace talks forward because it has a considerable amount of leverage when it comes to the israeli side of these negotiations. and if anything you've only seen it get worse and if you look at a map of the west bank for example, four years ago to today you see how it is increasingly difficult to see where -- what a palestinian state would actually look like. so i think that especially what we are seeing today, it is really challenging to see how this is amenable to u.s. security over the long term. we have seen terrorists very far

back saying the palestinian issue is one of the sort of galvanizing issues for them. so i don't really entirely understand why we can move forward with a peaceful resolution to the conflict or at least mitigating conflict over the years. but right now we are in the most challenging position i think we have ever been. because we have such a far-right population but also cabinet in israel. you also have a prime minister that is trying to push off charges against him that would potentially put them in prison. and so you have all of these different moving pieces and with this administration in particular and with the last one it is very clear the united states is not going to sort of use its leverage in favor of maybe a more sustainable solution for the palestinian issue.

>> how would that be applied, what's the best use of that leverage? >> last year we saw a deal for 20 -- 20 billion in u.s. arms sales to israel. we saw more in colluding 2000 bombs at a lot of human rights groups have said is not needed in a place like gaza but also really and truly devastating talking about enormous radius of blasts in urban populated areas. in the sort of anti-isis coalition fight in eastern syria we use these kinds of bombs may be a handful of times in a much larger territory. so we have a lot of leverage. we also protect israel diplomatically at the u.n. and other multilateral forum. there is quite a bit of leverage there but we haven't seen it used in the previous administration and certainly not in this one. but it is there.

if it needs to be used to sort of put something forward print that would be what i think president trump has said he wants which is a more sustainable resolution to this. >> since late last year rebels in syria overthrew the government of assad. what's been happening since then and what concerns you have? >> it's been truly astonishing i have to pinch myself every day. someone has been working on syria for the past 15 years to see what's going on. we saw a man move from being sort of maligned terrorist with a $10 million bounty on his head to becoming the president of syria accepting calls from high-level officials around the world and visits. he spoke to president putin, i will remind callers that russia was instrumental to bashar al-assad survival for the past 14 some years. so this is a truly momentous

thing that is happening. and truly an opportunity for the united states to come in and really challenge russia's place in the region, a region that the united states has historically had supremacy over russia in. and also to keep iran and iranian proxies out. what we have seen in recent weeks is sort of a pullback of the united states when it comes to syria. we still see the sanctions that were placed because of the last regime and its war crimes. those are still on syria. we've seen the limitation of foreign aid in many cases so we are seeing a lot of talking to ngo's that are basically having to shut down in syria. this is precisely the moment where the united states where the united states should be really involved i think in the formation of what is hopefully a new country that is better for the syrian people and the region itself.

>> greg is in los angeles, or public in line. >> this is often very interesting. i've been listening for a long time. but my question is president trump said that the gaza strip could be the las vegas of the middle east. it has so much with the luxury hotels and how the jobs that would bring in. what are your thoughts on that? >> i believe he said the riviere of the middle east. certainly it can be with the existing -- it should be that with the existing population that still there. if you can bring in jobs for palestinians that have been suffering without jobs for many years now, great. but i think the main issue with that plan is the forced displacement of palestinians away from the new gaza riviera.

i've heard this plan multiple times before it makes sense. gaza has a beautiful long coastline. it is filled with sewage right now. they've attacked wastewater treatment plants and we've seen and we've seen some progress on that in recent years because the funding from european donors and others. but all of that has been destroyed. i think for gazans would sound wonderful that wasn't for their forced displacement being part of that plan. >> the president's former israeli ambassador in the first term had a recent op-ed taking a look at this idea for gaza saying in part here is a secret i learn from direct conversations with g residents. most were desperate to leave long before the latest work began. for the simple reason that living under hamas rules a

nightmare before gaza was turned to rob. allowing desperate civilia to voluntarily leave a war zone is a crime. it's the gazans leaders as opposed to their movers. >> a lot to unpack there. i think. a lot of gazans want to leave now i would assume. because they are in a desperate situation where there isn't aid and there are no homes for them in the winter. we have seen tens of thousands of children missing limbs without getting adequate care, a third-degree urns all over their body so if you are a parent you want to get your kit at what health care in a safe place. but doesn't really take away from the illegality of it. we saw this with syria we were just talking about syria. where bashar al-assad essentially had a seed starve and surrender campaign in multiple parts the country where it would embark -- bombard the

population, starve the population even used chemical weapons on the population. and eventually yes the population in many cases capitulated and was effectively transferred to other parts of the country. now we still consider that a crime. under international law. because there was a reason for them to want to work to essentially be transferred to a different location. i think you have to look at sort of the totality of the circumstances there. i had not heard a lot about gazans wanting to leave simply because a mouse was in power. i think certainly they were quite cruel to a number of people, but they were in power for many reasons. in addition to the fact benjamin netanyahu had been supporting hamas for many years to essentially discredit and divide palestinian leadership. >> center for strategic and

international studies let's hear from eddie under independent line also in los angeles. >> good morning. i've listened to a couple of callers talk about this is a christian nation. another person called and he was wondering why the united states backed israelis so much. i believe it is because maybe you can help me with this, this is part of what they do. they go in with religion and they take over your country. it's the same way america did here. as of the palestinians of the native americans. we don't have a gaza. we have a reservation and a ghetto and it's often times per -- patrolled by the military. we are just looking at a microcosm. don't you find it funny a country declaring to be so christian send weapons of mass destruction to the holiest place

in the world. the place, i will not lie steal or kill. this is what europeans do. host: eddie in los angeles. >> i will try to take some of that. i think religion has been used as a sort of reason for u.s. support of israel, the judeo-christian values and whatnot. the issue with that is i don't suspect this is actually a religious issue for palestinians. as you probably -- the caller probably knows christian palestinians and muslim palestinians, this is more of an issue of territory and self-determination as you point out. i think if you look back to the beginning of zionism and the zionist project and you look at the founders of zionism, they did talk about being settler colonialists.

this is part of what they were able to talk to europeans and essentially get support for this project. that's their words not mine. i think this is israel was basically born during a time when there was a lot of division of borders by european countries in particular. israel was sort of part of that. obviously. but the fact remains that we are now in a current situation where we have to deal with the current frontlines. >> this will be from kevin in kentucky, democrats line. >> thank you for taking my call today. regular listener, we appreciate the show. i would like to comment on president trump's with gaza and his overall comments about it. i noticed nowhere in there did he have much to say about

hostilities of the united -- possibility is the united states taking some of the refugees he proposed to push around. i think that might take the sting out of some of that conflict over there that jordan is going to have in the neighboring countries. given the size of america compared to jordan and the other countries over there, maybe the united states the proposed taking possibly no less than 20% of those refugees. i've heard estimates of 2,500,000 so that would be five under thousand palestinians and then once gaza is all built they can go back and that's basically i think he should consider possibly taking in some of those refugees. >> kevin in kentucky, thanks. guest: you bring up an interesting point and i think a

good point as someone who has worked in refugee resettlement of the u.s. government, the issue with that is president trump is shut down resettlement program received by -- which received bipartisan support for decades. they did that during the first administration and has done it today as well. the united states was essentially absent during the worst displacement crisis since world war ii was syria. we've taken a pittance of syrians to the united states which have also helped with the stability of the surrounding countries. a drop in the bucket as you mentioned. but i think a fig leaf to our allies that are taking in so many refugees we are still working on what to do about the afghan refugees, the people who helped the united states government during the long war there. they have also been left in the lurch in many situations. so the notion that we would take

palestinian refugees as well as think is a good one but i don't see it happening with this administration. >> the website for our guest organization is csis.org. center for strategic and international studies. coming up we will have open forum. if you want to purchase but you can call the numbers. 202-748-8001 for republicans pray democrats 202-748-8000. independents 202-748-8002. more than 60 new members of the house of reprentatives now in place and we wl meet many of em this week starting tonight at 9:30 on our main channel. you can meet these members of the 119th congress and talk about their lives and past careers and why they ran for congress. here is some of what they had to say. [video clip] >> time in technology and

education and worked a lot on helping others to the same thing that i did. a lot of angel financing. when september 11th happened it really hit me in the chest. this country is been good to me and what if i done to deserve it. i did not have a good answer. i was moose hunting in alaska. one of the last people on the planet to find out about it. and i got stuck there because the borders were closed. i couldn't fly over canada. and as soon as i could get home i walked into a recruiter's office and said i've got a pilot's license, i was a researcher at nyu. and the recruiter says how old are you. as it 34. he said good, 35 is the cut off. ended up getting recruited because first i had no idea what i was doing. they sent me off to take the vocational aptitude battery and i come back with my test scores

and the recruiter rolled his eyes and said ok you qualify for any job that i offer. he said if your thought about going into intel. or thought about going into anything. i set out want to do something meaningful. so i said it sounds like i will be in a dark room. and then he has this other guy who talks to me and says i've got this horrible job. i'm losing my hearing, my back hurts. but it's the best thing i could imagine. i said what you do. he says we take these 22,000 pound helicopters and fly in formation 50 feet off the deck in the middle of the night with night vision goggles on and we ring people home. in the hair stood up on the back my neck. so i got sworn in to the search and rescue squad. >> it's inherently about trying to make -- and listening.

when i spend most my days as a doctor. to what hurts. and talking together a health plan to go forward. being a legislator is a lot like that. we have town halls, we listen to our constituents gather that information and come up with a plan and some kind of legislation. so i come from a science-based background. i like evidence and facts and try to pursue policy that is evidence-based in that same way. >> this began with my grandfather, he first ran for congress in 1968 and was not successful in that race. ran again in 1970 and beat a gentleman for the seat in 1970. served until 1972 when sadly he

was on a plane flight, disappeared and was never found in 1972 it was late in the election cycle. and actually he ended up winning the race anyway. there was a special election because the plane was not found. and winning that special election he became the longest-serving republican in the u.s. house in history. so moving forward from that i have an uncle named mark who was a united states senator from alaska, defeated ted stevens in 2008 and served one term in the u.s. senate. so i come from a line of traditional democrats, but i was actually raised on my mom's side of the family. my mom side of the family is conservative republican bread father's side is democrat. and of course i'm a republican. >> i was a deputy legal advisor

to the white house on a detail. deputy legal advisor on the national secure the council staff. the chief ethics official and so i worked right across the hall from my twin brother and he had the portfolio of russia ukraine belarus, moldova. he listened to the phone call, he heard the president's attempt at extortion and he reported directly to me. we talked about it briefly and we knew we had a duty to report the call. we reported it up the chain and the rest is history. >> washington journal continues. host: this is open forum and if you want to participate, 202-748-8001 for republicans. 202-748-8000 for democrats. independents 202-748-8002. if you want to send us a text

you can do it at 202-748-8003. as always, you can post on our social media site. joining us now to give us a sense of what is the week ahead, spectrum news, he serves as the national political reporter. thanks for your time. what do you know as far as the agenda for this week. but what are they looking for this week. >> a slightly quieter week paid i'm hoping not to jinx it by saying that but the president is down in florida. he went to his mar-a-lago club last friday and is staying in florida at least through wednesday because the white house official confirmed to me tomorrow he is set to attend a saudi back investor conference in miami before returning to the white house. we know yesterday the presidents' day holiday president trump into his golf club, today he doesn't have any

public event scheduled the white house tells us he will sign some executive orders later this afternoon and then later on we expect him to speak at the conservative conference that have happened -- will happen here in washington. the white house looks pretty quiet. >> can you elaborate on the investor conference in the purpose of that? >> some limited details but this is a huge gathering of global financiers that is essentially hosted by prominent saudi arabia and investors and we know the president will speak there. he's expressed interest in having saudi arabia invest more into projects here in the u.s.. saudi arabia is a very wealthy country per they've a giant wealth fund the president has spoken directly about. what's interesting is on this very day some of trump's top advisers are meeting in saudi arabia with their russian counterparts to talk about the russia ukraine war and saudi arabia serving as the host of that. it is interesting that both of those are happening one day after the other. >> host: for those meetings

taking place we saw concerns from the ukrainian president about having a seat at the table so far as the discussions are concerned. what is the white house saying about those concerns on the part ukraine will play in this. >> we heard from the secretary of state shortly after these initial meetings wrapped in saudi arabia they were essentially going on overnight and he indicated this was kind of a first step after president trump and russian president blood boudin spoke last week. rubio has said ukraine will have a seat at the table as you alluded to ukrainian president zelenskyy is really frustrated that neither he nor any of his representatives were at this meeting in saudi arabia. this was just the u.s. and russian officials with saudi arabia and official serving as hosts. the trumpet administration insists they will have a voice and this is just the beginning but rubio and national security advisor michael waltz said this was a very productive first meeting. >> later on we are expecting more nominations to be put through the senate. the commerce secretary and fbi director, the white house as far

as their optimism concerning the fbi erectors part where are they as of today? -- fbi director's part. >> especially after they were able to get confirmed by this are public and led senate the ceiling with a slim majority. they're expecting cash patel to be able to sail through especially because those other nominees cleared that benchmark. people like howard let nick the incoming commerce secretary are checking to sail through as well but really the gop is staying that way united behind president trump and allowing his nominees to really get through without a lot of issue. host: elon musk consistently in the news over the last few weeks. what is the white house doing to at least give the message out when it comes to his ability to do his job. not only the independence from the president but who he actually reports to being the president of the united states. caller: guest: there was -- guest: there was a court filing overnight where the trump administration set elon musk is

essentially serving as a senior advisor to president trump and is technically on paper not even affiliated with the so-called department of government efficiency. but we know muska has kind of free access to the oval office. he's been one of the president's top advisers through the last couple of weeks. they're even appearing later tonight on a pre-tape on foxnews with sean hannity that was taped last week at the white house. he is playing a direct role, democrats are really voicing frustration over it. i asked the white house press secretary about the apparent conflict of interest with elon musk owning giant companies that have federal contracts with the government worth billions of dollars that he has not separated himself from while being a special government employee but the white house insists he is doing everything by the book and will essentially police himself and right now he and the president have a great relationship. host: the back-and-forth over the last couple of days about the associated press particularly over their views on the gulf of america. >> this has been a bubbling

issue that members of the press have been paying attention to for several days in a row, the associated press us had reporters and photographers barred from everything from oval office events to press conferences to even a seat reserved on air force one to go down to florida. we've seen the white house correspondents association that helps represent all of us expressed concern about this and call for the white house to reverse everything. the white house is arguing because the ap serves a global audience is not recognizing the america only guidance the gulf of mexico should now be called the gulf of america they feel they have the authority to bar the ap from various events. there's been a lot of members of the press over the last few weeks so they have also been saying there's a bunch of other media we can bring into fill their spot who will adhere by our guidelines. press advocates argue this is concerning because of the other times administration changes wording on something and insist everybody follows along and a news outlet doesn't this could foreshadow big also be

potentially banned. host: a quick bit about what you mentioned earlier, the president returning to cpac. tell us about the event and what to expect. guest: it is a years long conservative gathering and it's taken place in various places over the years but it is in maryland just across the river from d.c. paid in the many ways it's transformed to being a gathering of the trump maga movement. president trump has spoken there year after year and gets a hero's welcome. of all the prominent influencers, members of congress aligned with trump will all speak at this conference over the course of the latter part of the week. we expect to hear from the president weren't sure he will get along address talking about his compliments and his goals for the months ahead. host: you can find him online. guest: spectrumnews.com.

host: thank you for your time. thanks to those who view called and wait new york, or public in line first up go ahead. caller: i am very upset with the open borders. i served in denmark with special forces one time we were actually attacked by some muslims. they destabilize places and they don't integrate, there's been an awful lot of people killed in the united states by illegal aliens. illegal aliens are identified over 20 years with the future travel to destabilize countries. that was going on in europe right now. people plowing into crowds and everything else. i served with a sergeant in special ops once and her favorite line never trust the cia. host: marilyn up next in ohio. thanks for calling go ahead. >> i was calling about gaza and

other subjects as much as i can get in. usually when we talk about a two state, republicans of the first ones to call in and talk about the holy land and prophecy and how sinful it would be. yet they are going to let america own gaza? and he is going to use the tax dollars that have taken away from america to help build that country. so he can plan his hotels, casinos and golf courses. he is going to use that money for panama and all of the other countries he wants to take over for those cost money. another thing is the policy of the democrat republican party as they get more to the rich and take those who have the least. there the first to call appear and defend the rich man. >> pat is in new york, independent line. >> can you hear me?

>> yes you are on. >> we were looking at the last interview regarding gaza. we know the history and injustice and the power in this country which takes away the democracy that we supposedly have because we are controlled by the moneyed elite minority. the solution, from the northern border of gaza, we should create that new state of palestine and it would help us politically it would help us internationally, we would get the agreement of a lot of nations that are against us. it would lower our security problems and by doing the right thing, showing the old american belief in doing what's right. as compared to doing what's wrong. and it would also help perhaps even make jerusalem an international city. and protect it what is the new

border of israel and the israeli people within it while protecting the palestinians paid it would be a show to the world but we are doing the right thing. it would alleviate a great deal of animosity against this country and help us in so many ways. that's the solution. we should talk about solutions and we should be real about it. >> the new york times reporting russia released another american held on drug charges monday. the kremlin acknowledging goodwill gesture and those talks between senior russian officials in saudi arabia. the american kayla buyers was arrested on charges of carrying a small amount of marijuana in response to a question about the release, the spokesman said the talks in saudi arabia on tuesday would be about restoring relations between moscow and washington and certain events can be viewed in this context. it is not clear how broad the talks would be but focus on the war in ukraine.

the team is led by officials president trump has named freight let's go to carolyn in missouri. >> this is carolyn. i had a question. if all the convicts are running the white house and they are taking away the legal rights to people that are standing for the law, they are closing down -- i had a case with the fbi mortgage fraud, as well as the people not in this country. trump is not taking care of people of the united states of america. he's taking care of his own personal pocket. him and elon musk. i want to know where is the log -- when is the log going to stand up for the people standing up for the law. i am waiting on a case to be resolved. he's closing down fbi, closing down cia, all of these business

-- these companies that help people here in the united states. when is he going to start helping the people in the united states to stand on the right side. host: republican line this is becky in ohio. caller: good morning. i just i am getting disappointed in hearing some of these people from ohio that's democrat, is very that's democrat. insinuating that trump is trying to hurt us. he is trying to help us from all the things going on. with the government. elon musk isn't even getting money and paid for doing this. he is doing this on his own. trump hired him to do that. and he is allowed as the executive. it is just like anybody else that goes into be a president can hire their own staff to take care of the business that needs to be taken care of.

so for people to say we are -- he is a criminal is not true. he is just trying to help the people. he is helping us by finding out what's going on with our money and i'm a taxpayer, i can't believe they are so upset about this. we need to stop the spending. thank you. >> kentucky is next, independent line this is henry. >> good morning. i'm calling to object to cash patel being made fbi director. he is a confessed anarchist who wants to destroy the fbi. our last route to keep the rule of law are the courts. other than the u.s. marshals service the only other agency to enforce court orders is the much larger fbi. admittedly both agencies operate under the direction of the loyalist department of justice, but it would cripple the

enforcement of court orders and national security. thanks for hearing me out. listeners have until lease the end of sunday to tell red state senators to reject cash patel. if he is confirmed, it will be like christmas, hanukkah, easter and mayday all rolled into one for mr. putin. i urge listeners -- host: the associated press reporting a surprise announcement atop a boss leader says the militant group will release six living israeli hostages. the bodies of four others on thursday including the remains of the family for many israelis in the captors played in gaza. israel has said it is greatly concerned about her and her two young sons. that is reporting from the associated press. let's hear from alice in oklahoma, democrats line.

caller: what's going on. there's so much bad -- hello. host: you are on, go ahead. caller: there is so much going on i've never seen such a mess going on in my lifetime. trump said i'll make it better again. that's all i needed to know. if people don't have a job. how is he going to be better. thank you very much. host: allison oklahoma. he'll reporting that a of government efficiency saying on its website that it is found 55 billion in savings through combination of efforts including a reduction in the federal workforce and said it estimated and realize the 55 billion in savings by canceling or renegotiating leases and contracts selling assets and canceling grants finding a regulatory savings, leaking

problem -- changes to the government and reducing workforce. finding contract savings as a percentage of the federal government. the story saying the team quickly moved to dismantle usaid which provides food for those in need around the world in his first month in office. the hill is where you can find that story. let's hear from alabama, independent line. this is alonzo. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my phone call. i'm just calling in reference to the importance of voting and as one who voted for donald trump, this is what you are getting. you are getting the grocery bills still high, we have the

situation which no one wants to talk about. right now this is what you voted for and this is a lot of commotion and confusion. right now we need something stable because it -- not causing people more about how much money they will need to go and purchase groceries paid it is ridiculous. i have heard nobody talk about how high groceries are now. host: judy is up next in tennessee, democrats line. caller: i tried to get in earlier when you had the middle eastern specialist on. she did not address the fact that amnesty international has condemned the israeli state, that the israeli state's true

mission is to cleanse the whole area of israel of any palestinians. this was founded by european nonreligious jews. people should look at on the academy awards there is a documentary called no other lands filmed by a palestinian and israeli. about the israeli destruction of the palestinian homes in the west bank which is going on right now. this is blatant colonialism and we do not need to have the name of the united states in their. thank you. host: judy in tennessee. something so watch out for on the various networks today. 1:00 this afternoon a discussion on u.s. allies in the trump administration and partners navigating the second trump administration's presence in

washington dc it's live from csis. you can watch that on c-span two, our app c-span now and on our website sees and.org. a look at charges that elite colleges and are committed to free speech and diverse academic instruction. this is hosted by the american enterprise institute. you can see that our main channel as well as the app and the website. and then this evening 6:00 former republican new hampshire democrat -- former answer governor chris sununu. hosted by george washington university. if you want to wat that on our main channel c-span you can do that. as always you can follow along on our app that you can download and c-span.org there available to you. in tennessee from a republican line you are next up on this open forum. go ahead. caller: remembering what trump

campaigned about. he said on day one that he was going to have the border, the immigration problem and he also stated he would do something about the groceries. trump talking about the groceries are so high in the stores and he said he would have that on day one. he promised to lower the prices of groceries and the -- three times more that we are having to pay for utilities and every -- everything else. so he should keep his promise like he said. he said he was going to do it on day one. the immigration take care of the

immigration problem and he was also going to do something about lowering the prices that we have to pay for for groceries and everything. host: dave in las vegas, independent line. caller: hello, first of all trump is a communist fascist dictator. he's broken every law in the book. the constitution says when he did that he got those people killed when he sent them to the white house and the ones who killed the officers he pardoned. there is something wrong with this guy mentally and now he starves millions of people all over the world. cutting usaid. there is something wrong with this guy. we are in a crisis, people need to march on washington. elon musk shouldn't even be near the treasury department per he was not elected. this guys the biggest liar, the biggest con artist guy in the

world. host: from diane in iowa, democrats line you are next up on this open forum. caller: good morning. donald trump is a felon. i think everybody in the united states knows somebody that is a felon and we all know how they treat you. it is like an alcoholic. listen to me. but where is that $55 million that they think they found, where does that go? is it going to go back to the taxpayers or is it going to go towards the deficit because the deficit is growing right now. >> should it go back to the taxpayers of the deficit? what would be your choice. caller: i don't know because -- they don't even know.

we have a rich guy that is going to try to make his all his self better. he put it terrified steel and aluminum. one of those trucks made out of. it is really sad that -- i.e. mailed bradley and ernst. you should -- it's not even worth to reply back because they are marching soldiers. and it is like -- like yesterday, in des moines i did not know they're going to the capital. but i so want to do stuff and i am in a little town and i am rural but the democrats here aren't reaching out to us. and there are not many at the statehouse anyway. it is iowa -- don't even start me on covid kimi. just a waste of what she's doing

to our children here. host: diane and i owe up to the house is out this week, the senate is back. with government funding running out on march 14 it was representative kean jeffries, the democratic leader in the house talking about what would be needed at least from the democratic -- democrats in the house wind comes to agreeing to a spending bill to keep the government open after march 14. here's a bit of that exchange. [video clip] >> republicans are shut down the government in the past and it would be no surprise if they do just that this time around. a republican president, republican house and republican senate. the responsibility to make sure government remains open it can function. with respect to any spending agreement our test is whether that spending agreement meets the needs of the american people in terms of their health, their safety or national security.

and certainly the economic well-being of everyday americans. the top democrat on the appropriations committee, she is in off and on conversations her republican colleague in the house as well as our republican and democratic colleagues in the senate. we will see how that unfolds over the next few weeks, but we are going to make sure any agreement that is ultimately signed off on has to be one that meets the needs of the american people. and it has to be implement it fully in compliance with the law. >> have you had any conversations with the white house. have you talked with the chief of staff about this? >> i have not had any conversation with the white house, but i do expect as we get closer and closer to march 14 that those conversations will perhaps intensify and at the end of the day what we have been clear about is that this budget that's working its way through

the house of representatives is a nonstarter. everything a democrat opposed it a few days ago in the budget committee. i believe that will continue to be our position because it is out of control. >> let's hear from our independent line in >> indianapolis this is james. >>good morning pedro. this is a great format that c-span offers. you are doing a great job. i enjoy hearing everyone's opinion. honestly i did vote democrat this past election. everybody needs to know our elections have consequences. he is our president mr. trump and whether we like it or not we need to rally, come together in a civil manner and move forward. i think a lot of good things to come.

i'm grateful to hear him say that he is not going to cut social security or medicare. that's you know something anybody could look up and you can hear him respond to that direct question. you just have to trust him on that. anything does go awry in terms of social security or medicare, it will wash out in the next election cycle. but i enjoy everybody's comments. this is just wonderful where people can call in anywhere from the country and be heard. thank you pedro. host: let's hear from another from our independent line this is north carolina, stephanie hello. caller: good morning. we have a lot going on here. for all the maga people, what makes them think elon musk and everybody there that's

destroying our country is not making money off of this. they are making salary, they were hired, they have jobs. they are not working for free. and for the democrats in congress i think they should let the budget, to a screeching halt. they are not going to do the things they say they're going to do, they passed it anyway and the senators just want more money. the thing they're trying to pass with more money for defense and the defense gets 90% of the budget to begin with. that's all i have to say. thanks. >> stephanie in north carolina. this is rosa from ohio. democrats line. caller: i am good. i just wanted to say ok, i'm 87 years old and i'm on social security. now if they cut social security

and everything what are we going to do? i figure the republicans do not care, they only think about themselves. and as far as musk is concerned, they need to get rid of him. i don't know -- i would wish they wouldn't cut social security and medicare or medicaid. thank you. >> diana new york, republican line last call in this open forum. go ahead. >> thank you. i am very upset about these people that call in and have such disregard for the truth. do they realize there are checks going out, social security checks going out to people that are 350 years old? trump and musk found this recently. there's millions over 100 years

old, 203 years -- i would praise president trump and thank him for finding waste in the government, elon musk is only finding the waste, trump is initiating and redoing all of the waste in this government and they are not after a penny for themselves. so please america get behind your president. >> diana new york just to show you this from pull it fact to diane's point it's a story this been going on for the last couple of days as far as the age of certain americans supposedly still getting social security checks, some of things from pull it fact finds government oversight agencies of worn for years that social security should do more to improve its accuracy rate with proper payments. showing fewer than 1% of social security payments or improperly made because the program is so big even a tiny fragment means large dollar amounts are spent in the explanation for the

hundred 50-year-old receiving checks could relate to arcane coding practices according to experts you can see more of that if you want from political fact. that's it for the program today. another addition of washington journal comes your way tomorrow at 7:00 a.m.. we will see you then. ♪ [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2025] >> on capitol hl, the u.s. senate gavels and at 3:00 eastern. mississippi republican senator roger wicker will deliver the annual reading of george washington's 1796 farewell address which rotates between e parties.

the senate has observed washington's birthday by reading the address every year since 18. lawmakers will also vote to confircaor fitzgerald ceo howard lutnick to become her secretary. later in the week, the senate will consider president trump's nomination of cash patel to serve as fbiirtor. watch live coveragef the house on c-span, senate on cpa two, and all of our congressional coverage is avaiblon our free video at, c-span now, and online at c-span.org. >> 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 with guarding its basic principles. it is where debates unfold, decisions are made, and the nation's course is charted. democracy in real-time.