♪ host: good morning, it is monday, march 3, 20 25. the house is in at noon eastern and the senate returns at 3:00

p.m. we begin on foreign policy. britain and france promised a peace agreement between ukraine and russia after the collapse of the economic deal between the u.s. and ukraine and two days before president trump sets to offer a major address to congress this week. we begin live asking you this question, what is america's role in the world today. phone lines broken up by political party, democrats, (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001. independents, (202) 748-8002. you could send us a text at (202) 748-8003. catch up with us on social media. on x it is @cspanwj. on facebook it is facebook.com/c-span. start calling it now. this is the headline.

british prime minister keir starmer calls for u.s. support after pledging planes and troops to ukraine. britain will lead europe in the fight for ukrainian defense. a gathering of 18 european leaders, ukrainian president volodymyr zelenskyy was there as well. this is prime minister keir starmer addressing the british people. prime minister starmer: we have to learn from the mistakes of the past. we cannot accept a week deal which russia could break with ease. instead, any deal must be backed by strength. every nation must contribute to that in the best way that it can. different capabilities and support to the table. we are all taking responsibility to act. all stepping up their own share of the burden. we agreed, some important steps today.

first, we will keep the military aid flowing and keep increasing the economic pressure on russia to strengthen ukraine now. second, we agree that any lasting peace must ensure ukraine's sovereignty and security. ukraine must be at the table. third, in the event of a peace deal, we will keep boosting ukraine's defensive capabilities to deter any future invasion. fourth, we will go further to develop a coalition to defend a deal in ukraine. to guarantee the piece. not every nation will feel able to contribute. that can't me and we sit back. instead, those willing will intensify planning now with real urgency. the u.k. is prepared to back this with boots on the ground

and planes in the air together with others, europe must do the heavy lifting. to support peace in our continent and succeed, this effort must have strong u.s. backing. we are working with the u.s. on this. after my meeting with president trump last week. let me be clear, we agree with the president on the urgent need for a durable peace. now, we need to deliver together. host: that was british prime minister keir starmer. yesterday we will -- we will hear from president trump this week, tuesday evening said to give a joint address from capitol hill to a joint session of congress. we will be airing that live on c-span for you to watch and listen in. donald trump yesterday in one of several truth social posts said we should spend less time worrying about putin and more

time worrying about migrant rape gangs and people from mental institutions entering our country so we don't end up like europe. the president will look for more of his comments on social media. we will talk more about that address to congress. a preview of that coming up in about one hour here on "washington journal." for the first hour, we are what -- asking you what is america's role in the world today. [indiscernible] (202) 748-8000 for democrats. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. we will start in texas, joe is on that line for democrats. good morning. are you with us? we go to ron in california, republican line. caller: thank you so much for taking the call.

this is amazing times, historic times. it was just the highlight of my life since the election to watch the meltdown of our maga president. it was unbelievable what they did bringing in mr. zelenskyy into the oval office there with all of those people. why did they need 20 members around him along with the press to make a big deal out of this? when they realized zelenskyy wasn't buying their process and he wasn't going to sell out his country without security, they melted down. host: you say all of this as a republican? caller: i could be honest.

i'm a reagan republican. i'm from that branch of the republican party. i'm beside myself with what has happened to our country and what they did in front of the international press. host: what is america's role in the world today? caller: you are exactly right. what the role should be is to be a leader as we have been for all of these years. bring mr. zelenskyy into the nato area would be a good thing. i think they should be european union. america should try and answer the european union. i'm hoping they will step up and fill the void that we are going through right now. it is a terrible thing. host: finish your thoughts. caller: i would just say this,

we are at a crossroads that we really need to make a change. one last thing if you will let me mention this. when they put the deal together with the saudis and the russians and they didn't bring the european union or ukraine as part of the negotiations, you know trump made a side deal with putin for goods of the rare earth. i'm hopeful that mr. zelenskyy never sells rare earth to the united states. thanks so much. host: we will stay in california. dan is in santa barbara, independent, good morning. caller: that last caller was spot on. unfortunately with this president the u.s. foreign policy is switching from global

leadership and consistently siding with the moral countries. we are spiraling into this infantile isolationist type of foreign policy. maybe at times predatory foreign policy, transactional, if it bred -- benefits the president and his cronies, it is really sad. there was a good monologue yesterday about that. except for a few mistakes we have made, we have always been on the side of right and just. now it seems like this president wants to make global alliance with empires like russia, china, take more of a predatory mindset and get what we can. prey on countries we view as weak. host: when you say except for a

few mistakes we have made, what do you think in recent years has been 1-2 of the mistakes we have made? caller: the iraq war, a good idea of democracy flourishing but it was done. it led us to where we are at now with isolation with jd vance and hulsey gabbard -- tulsi gabbard. they have this isolationist thing now. any conflict, don't get involved with it. being anti-nato, anti-global order, it will hurt us and hurt a lot of countries in the long run. things like that. it is a sad day for american foreign policy for people like reagan, john mccain, all of those guys are spending in their graves. host: that is dan in california. somebody who is very much an

influence on foreign policy is the united states national security adviser, was on cnn yesterday going on sunday shows in the wake of this blow up in the oval office. this is michael waltz yesterday. secretary waltz: let's ask, what will this look like a year from now? the patients of the american people to keep giving billions with no end in sight is not unlimited. we also made that clear to president zelenskyy at the end of that meeting. what i'm saying is this war needs to end. that will take concessions on territory, russian concessions on security guarantees. that is going to take all sides coming to the table. we are working very hard to drive these negotiations forward. we had our engagement in riyadh

with the russians. we thought we had a deal with the ukrainians and then we will bring all sides together, not only president trump. >> you just mentioned a specific concession potentially that you would like vladimir putin to make, could you elaborate on that? we haven't heard any specifics before. sec. waltz: this will be some type of territorial concession for security guarantees going forward. that has been discussed in previous rounds. >> a security guarantee from the u.s.? sec. waltz: some first principles, this needs to be a permanent end, not a temporary end. this needs to be european led security guarantees. part of that is europe's contribution to its own defense so he at -- it has the

capability to do so. we have the united kingdom and france talking about their troops on the ground going forward. let's not get too far ahead of ourselves, what type of support we provide or not is to be negotiated. we do not see ukraine being a member of nato. that would automatically drag u.s. troops in. host: u.s. national security advisor michael waltz yesterday on cnn. this is the front-page headline of the "wall street journal" this morning. u.k., france look to repair diplomatic damage. speaking of volodymyr zelenskyy, this was his tweet yesterday talking about europe's role in the u.s. role as a result of these days we received clear support from europe. he said on the platform formerly

known as twitter. even more unity, even more willingness to cooperate. everyone is united on the real issue for peace, we need real security guarantees. this is the position of all europe, the united kingdom, european union, turkey. we understand the importance of america and we are grateful for all of the support we have seethed -- received from the united states. there's not a day we haven't felt gratitude. our resilience is based on what our partners are doing for us and their own security. we need peace, not endless war. security guarantees are the key to this. volodymyr zelenskyy on his acts page -- x page yesterday. eric, new york, democrat, good morning. caller: good day, i'm also ukrainian. everybody has been making great

points about ukraine. the question is about america's role. define america, it is supposed to be the people's choice. the latest numbers were that 80% of americans don't trust putin. this doesn't look like america's role in the world, it looks like it is trump and putin's world. they will be heading into an oligarchy. that fits russia's vision. they have been saying the stance from that meeting on friday works that way anyway. anybody who has listened to americans -- host: what should be the vision for america? what should we do in the new world? caller: we shouldn't be anybody's enemy for starters. i watched vietnam happen. i watched people get fed right into the meat grinder now like the ukrainian war.

america has to be firm around policy and react to what americans want. i didn't vote for putin. host: do you think americans want american troops in ukraine? caller: no, i don't think so. how does america do it? i don't know, it is very complicated. we have people on both sides that is the yen and yang of it. host: do you think americans want billions of dollars more in american money to ukraine? caller: i think that is a good price to pay. they are willing to fight the war and have their young men -- let's face it, both sides, there is russian men dying. it shouldn't be like that. i watched america's role in vietnam. i don't want it to be like that. that is for sure.

i don't think americans like it either. everybody i'm talking to is really upset about this putin thing. he has given in way too quick. i had two uncles at the beach in normandy. trump's disdain for the military is just -- i don't know what to do. i think we should always strive for peace obviously. we couldn't do it in vietnam, we could not do it in iraq, certainly not afghanistan. i don't like the role of being policeman. that doesn't work out. still people die for that cause. i would like to see americans represented in the world. host: got your point. that is eric in new york. this is arthur in florida. good morning to you. caller: america first. host: anything else you would

like to add? caller: i would like to add something else, we have spent so much money on ukraine that could be spent better in the united states. instead of us thinking we could spend millions and millions of dollars and it magically reappears, there has to be a point that this war stops. that is all i have to say. host: that was arthur in florida, this is lynn, independent in the tar heel state. caller: good morning, i'm so disappointed. this is the same playbook from world war i. you are talking about military, mining, all of this for what? for what? imagine putin comes over here

telling us what to do. this is crazy. this has got to stop. host: did you say this is like world war i? caller: yes. is the same playbook as world war i. host: explain what you mean. caller: world war i was started over nationalism, being militarized. those type of things. this is the exact same thing. almost the exact same playbook. we have nothing to do. we are helping ukraine fight, the same thing that russia did in world war i. the same exact thing. we are going to be involved in another war. we can't let putin do this. host: this is the editorial

board of the "wall street journal," the conservative pages. this is what they write. with his first week's back in office after friday's oval office brawling with ukrainian president, it's clear president trump has designs for a new world order. perhaps he could share this vision with the country when he addresses congress on tuesday. while he solicits moscow, trump is hammering traditional u.s. friends. claiming tariffs on canada and mexico in violation of his own trade deal. his trade secretary has threatened to invade mexico to pursue drug cartels. he wants to hit western europe with heavy tariffs. it's a return to great power competition and balance of power that prevailed before world war ii. it is less a brave new world then a reversion to a dangerous old one. tuesday night would be a great moment to make his ambitions

create -- clear talking about president trump explaining his vision to the american people. that is the editorial board of the wall street journal. this is brian here in washington, d.c., good morning. caller: i think people need to check their history. the reason this is appearing is because the united states and western europe. when the soviet union broke up, they had the third largest arsenal in the planet. that is a big card. trump talked about five bases -- aces. forgiving up that, the west and the united states ended up taking the nuclear weapons agreed to protect and ensure ukraine's borders at their then

current state in the early 90's. host: talking about the minsk agreement. take me to today and what america's role should be? caller: the united states, they said they would agree with that, they didn't. you had the one that zelenskyy talks about himself. why should ukraine agree to anything unless they put boots on the ground and have something to lose? right now, the only people losing is ukraine. all these things the west is doing. host: when you say they should have boots on the ground who are you referring to, the united states? caller: i know that will not happen, everybody part of that minsk agreement. we could protect ukraine and their border.

i'm a black man in d.c., you know who i voted for. russia did everything against them. they gave up their cards. at the urging of the united states and other country, they gave up their cards and folded. host: that is brian here in d.c., this is robber in maryland, good morning, republican. caller: i think everybody needs to think back a couple years ago when biden was in saudi arabia. he called the prince of saudi arabia i think a terrorist or whatever. he went to shake his hand and he left with nothing. i think trump is a phenomenal negotiator and he knows you get more with money.

i don't think he likes putin. he is a dictator. he's not going to get in a fight with him trying to get a peace deal. he's totally saying i'm going to take care of you, it is critical that ukraine stays free. he's not going to do it by having a public fight. i watched the entire news conference three times. trump said at least six times, i'm not talking about security right now. we will take care of security. now you have all of europe saying we will take care of you. nobody is throwing ukraine under the bus. you just have to trust trump. it scares me how many people are thrilled he looks bad now. they don't realize if trump looks bad, the u.s. looks bad. host: do you think trump looks

bad right now? caller: i think to a lot of people he does. to me, he looks great. i think he handled it beautifully. trump is holding all the cards. zelenskyy was terrible. listen to the callers, i'm so embarrassed. it's crazy. if trump looks good the united states looks good. how could somebody want to see trump fail? i think he did a great thing saying you are not ready for peace. thank you very much. host: you are in maryland, you might want to read the piece in today's washington post. making some of the points you are making here. mark writing the blow up in the oval office was zelenskyy's

fault saying he should've stayed in washington until the rift was mended. trump gave him a way out in that truth social post saying he could come back when he's ready for peace, he should've seized that opening expressing his sorrow that the meeting had gone off the rails. regretting the role he played in its demise and clearing his intention to work with trump for peace. he got on his plane and left. his stubbornness internet -- was an asset in 2022 when he refused to flee kyiv with advancing russian forces. his greatest virtue becomes his worst vice is the headline in the piece if you want to read it today. simply asking you what is america's role in the world today? questions amid these discussions about the future of ukraine, about zelenskyy's role in ukraine and the future of ukraine.

some suggesting that peace negotiation could include zelenskyy stepping down. bernie sanders was on "meet the press" yesterday and specifically responded to that suggestion. sen. sanders: zelenskyy is trying to lead a democracy against an authoritarian dictator. i think millions of americans are embarrassed, ashamed, we have a president of the united states who says ukraine started the war. that zelenskyy is a dictator. he has it backwards. the people of ukraine have lost tens of thousands of soldiers. their cities are being robbed as we speak. our job is to defend the 250 year tradition that we have of being the democratic leader of the world. not turn our backs on a struggling country that is

trying to do the right thing. host: senator bernie sanders on "meet the press," yesterday. also james lankford giving his view about the implications of what is happening today in ukraine, what it means for the united states in the world going forward. james lankford, republican of oklahoma. >> are you concerned that what happened in the oval office, the fact that the united states sided with russia and north korea in that u.n. vote? the fact that president trump accuse zelenskyy of starting this war. could that be sending a signal to china that is a green light to invade taiwan? mr. lankford: if china receives that, they are receiving the wrong message. we want to see peace in that region and continue to have relationships all across that

region. china should not miss read this at all. what president trump is trying to do is get both sides to the table. this is the interesting challenge that has not been done through this entire war the last three years trying to get both sides to figure out how to get a stop to the fighting and keep the fighting stopped. that is the next challenge. host: senator james lankford. the senate is in today at 3:00 p.m. eastern. the house returns at noon. we are expecting a busy week here on capitol hill including a joint address to congress and the american people by president trump from the house of representatives. it is what in other years would be called a state of the union address. simply referred to as a joint address in the president's first year after an election. that is on tuesday night. we will cover it here on c-span. 7:30, asking this question, what

is america's role in the world. what do you think? caller: thank you for taking my call. i have three points. as far as the united states role , after world war ii we were the leader of the free world. we were a safe haven, protections for the world. we also control and try to fight people -- evil. i have not watched any senator in the last seven days even talk about this, about russia. this is what i think, i looked at that and i just think that was a terrible thing that happened in the oval office the other day. i think they should still pay for our military. we forget, three years ago, we

came home every day for six months in a row, we sit down, we are watching cities get bombed on our tv. that's the first time other than israel that bombs were on civilians, apartment buildings. afghanistan, we were there for 20 years, we could've ended it in three weeks. russia, your organizing outside ukraine's borders for a month and a half. no one asked this question, not one senator, not one congressman, what does russia want before they invaded and what to they want now? nobody talks about that. it is hard to make a deal. what do they want? host: what do you think they want? caller: i think they want that

seaport. if you look at the map, the actual geographic, when you look at it russia has a tiny sliver of waterfront. they probably want minerals. nobody even talks about that. how do you make a deal when you don't know why they invaded and what do you want now? as far as what i would do, what is france, poland, germany, are they going to take on china without the united states? they will not have the equipment. they don't have the military to fight a big war like that. host: on that last point on the coalition of the willing as british prime minister keir starmer talked about yesterday, he also talked about the role of the united states in a european led effort to ensure peace in

ukraine. this is again from 10 downing street yesterday, the prime minister. >> a defender of european freedom in the oval office said too many people what you have already said that everything has changed. given that the u.s. has become an unreliable ally, did you as european leaders discussed the prospect of actually going in alone and what the reality of the u.s. pulling out of all of this would mean? do you think you really do need the u.s.? if you do, do you think the coalition of the willing will be enough to bring president trump back around? pm starner: nobody wanted to see

what happened last friday. i do accept the u.s. is an unreliable ally. the u.s. has been a reliable ally for many decades and continues to be. there are no two countries as closely aligned as our countries in defense, security, intelligence being intertwined the way no two countries are. it is an important and reliable ally for us. the discussions we have had today, particularly the coalition of the willing is on the basis that we will invoke with the u.s. and it will have u.s. backing. that is the purpose of the plan. that is why i spoke to president trump last night before we develop the work on this plan. thank you. host: keir starmer taking questions from the press after that meeting. some 18 european leaders, the ukrainian president was not in attendance -- was in attendance

as well. it sparked the question, what is america's role in the world today? this is harold, tennessee, democrat. good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. our place, we need to get to our minds what is going to happen when russia does take ukraine over? it's going to be slaughter of children. we need to stand up and stop putin before he gets any further. i don't know what he holds over president trump. looking at president head of the, jimmy carter, joe biden, now we will turn him loose. the onslaught that will happen,

they don't want to live under russia's rule. if russia takes ukraine they will keep on going. right now, i blame jd vance for most of this. trying to get something done and vance started this. right now we are looking bad to the rest of the country. as ronald reagan said, we are the shining light. we were. people want to trust us. ronald reagan put a lot of effort into get russia under control. this administration is sacrificing all of that. my thing is the women and children, what will happen to them in that country over there. keep that in mind.

we will stand with right. thank you much. host: this is tom in north carolina, republican, good morning. caller: good morning. the issue i have is i don't mind us helping other countries, why do we have to spend so much more in these other countries than our allies do. we are giving ukraine $350 billion. host: i think the numbers a little south of $200 billion but go ahead. caller: whatever. we could use some of that money here. we don't have a problem giving money to these other countries. we need to keep some of that money here. i don't have a problem with president trump did on friday. he stood up, he didn't back down and he has my support. host: that is tom in the tar heel state. to the garden state, this is

john. caller: good morning, thanks for taking my call. we have been asking a lot of question about what the u.s. should be doing. it's actually pretty clear what vladimir putin wants to do with respect to ukraine. he wrote a masters thesis on the subject. an analysis of a political scientist from 1864. he said russia should not be a second-class nation with respect to europe. russia should be calling the shots in europe. russia's strength should dominate europe. that was his thesis and that is pretty much what i think motivates putin. whenever you want to think about

what europe ought to do, it is pretty clear trump does what putin wants to do. host: with that in mind, what should the u.s. do? what should that be vis-a-vis russia and the other hotspots? there is taiwan, a u.s. aircraft carrier arrived in south korea as a direct response to recent actions by north korea. here's a picture of the uss carl vinson escorted in on sunday. it's presence meant to show the alliance in the face of the north korean threats as the washington times puts it. you are saying if you know what's in the mind of vladimir putin, what should be our role in the world? caller: now i'm getting out of my opinions. i don't know how much the united states could afford to support a

counterforce to putin's ambitions. i think it is true that europe should have been spending a bit more money. host: is that counterforce nato? caller: the counterforce is nato except it is basically a treaty to go to war. let's look at the votes going to war in europe. it would be nice to avoid that. we have to somehow create a deterrent that putin will recognize to expanding russian influence in europe and keeping europe friendly to the united states. host: a lot of people will say article five, the guarantee of the nato partner attack is an attack on all and the guarantee of response that is the

deterrent. that is often cited as the deterrent that you are talking about. caller: i believe that is a solid deterrent. the question is what will the price be if nato is calling upon the united states? that will be a heavy price. host: that is john in new jersey. this is another john, john bolton served as national security adviser in the first trump administration in 2018 and 2019. he has a piece how to protect nato from his old boss, donald trump. he writes this, nato isn't the only alliance in jeopardy. in his first term his assault on nato arrived with other criticism from allies not as publicly, the u.k. u.s. consortium to build nuclear powered submarines in the exploit control rules designed to keep rogue states from

acquiring weapons of mass destruction. japan and south korea are in question. taiwan should be very worried today. mr. trump never appreciated winston churchill's insight, there's only one thing worse than fighting with allies, that is fighting without our allies. john bolton writing in today's wall street journal. debbie, michigan, democrat, good morning. caller: i haven't called in a couple years, i used to call every month and set my watch. host: good to hear from you again, debbie. what should america's role be? caller: i believe it should be the same it has always been. we are the brightest star for democracy. when it comes to affording to help ukraine, we could afford it better than anybody can. i understand the president makes everybody mad, it is so sad like

bullen just said trump has been dismantling these things as every turn. our security vision, house at is that. something was said, nobody wants to talk about what the actual agreement was. bessent wanted him to sign something that ukraine had to give us $500 billion. we were supposed to give them $5 billion in the rare earth trade. nothing going forward. that was going to pay for everything. if we didn't give them 500, why were they expecting zelenskyy to find something.

they got all emotional. he had a look on his face. i think he's a hero. he's at war, he's not a sycophant like the rest of these republicans are. i'm talking to you republican senators. we would not be having this problem. host: that is debbie and michigan, this is joann in connecticut, good morning. caller: i just want to say, this is supposed to be a ceremonial signing. zelenskyy was disrespectful. we have given ukraine an awful lot of money. we have the money. doesn't know what a mediator is? they try not to take sides.

we have more ships, planes, close to our shores by russia. we don't want another war. zelenskyy to me looks like a shakedown artist. it has been reported that the democrats talk to zelenskyy before this meeting. does he realize that his people are not going to win this war? the reality is they cannot beat russia. host: you said the mediators, is that our role? caller: this deal, that is what it is, trump is trying to mediate between people. does anyone think ukraine is going to win? do they want to save -- send

more money to ukraine? put our soldiers in ukraine? i don't understand that. you will not beat russia, unfortunately there is nobody else left basically to fight this war. host: this is jimmy in shreveport, louisiana, good morning. caller: i don't agree with a lot of what these people say. i think we shouldn't be focusing on putin as much as we need to focus on the maniac in the white house. i saw two bullies friday night. i didn't see zelenskyy do anything wrong other than try to be grateful while he was having

people bullying him. host: what do you want to see as an american, america's role in the world today, what should our role be? caller: we need to keep our friends, we need to keep our allies. we need a leader who will lead and not act like a child. the money being spent in ukraine for a good reason. we are trying to help save democracy. anyway -- host: we will take your point. this is regina in maryland, good morning.

caller: thank you for taking my call. it is really a very difficult question to answer as to what america's role is in the world today. i have always understood that much is given to you, much is expected. the united states has been a blessing to the world. unfortunately we do not have a leader who understands that perspective. he is someone with the most selfish, immature, narcissistic personality. it is unfortunate because our country will be isolated. they will not protect us from the enemy that is going to come and attack the united states.

when it does, who are we going to turn to? donald trump? we will not have any allies anymore. they came to our aid after 9/11, who are we going to turn to now? we don't have a leader in the white house. we don't have an administration who understands what it takes for democracy. all of the cabinet members, he has people he loves. i wish i could answer that question. it really frightens me. as to where our country is headed. we have no leader. i don't think the united states has a role. we don't have anyone who understands what leadership is

about. host: that is regina in maryland. here is president trump this morning on a truth social post from 10 minutes ago and in seven minutes ago. seven minutes ago it was previewing tomorrow speech in that building behind me at the united states capitol. tomorrow night will be big, i will tell it like it is. a few minutes before that he made his post about ukraine saying the only president who gave none of ukraine's land to putin's russia is president donald j. trump. when the fake news gladly puts out anything that they say. president trump this morning up in our truth social. here is jamie in garden city, maryland. caller: i have so many thoughts. i watched huckle -- tucker

carlson, he interviewed someone who wanted to run for president in ukraine. this is nothing more than the military industrial complex making a lot of money from the lobbyists to fund a perpetual war and longer money as people die. president trump is trying to create peace. that's what leaders do. i watched 60 minutes last night. i can't afford groceries. i will not spend $1 billion a month for ukraine's pension. there is no end to the war. to create peace would allow president trump's plan to come in and secure that area over there. get a little policing going. we will not do this nato

nonsense military-industrial complex paid for by our tax dollars. host: who does the policing that you say? who does that? caller: the plan to mind minerals in ukraine would put some american presence there to maintain the disagreement. president trump and president putin or president zelenskyy, we could build something good here, make something good here. everybody gets along. did you guys not watch anything from vietnam or the korean war? we just got out of afghanistan. you are trying to create a

peaceful, profitable solution. peace is what leaders do. people over there that talk about president trump. what is the end of the game? we could throw all of the money in the world at ukraine, we will be at world war iii. that is just the gist of it. i love my country. i support what is good. host: is your son or daughter still serving? caller: he is a lieutenant, yes sir. it's kind of personal to me. i don't want to see people dying. i don't think putin is this

great guy. i don't think zelenskyy is either. there hasn't been an election. the is acting like a dictator. that is not good. host: that is jamie in missouri, this is rich in hickory hills illinois, independent. caller: thanks for taking my call. the role of america has changed. when iraq invaded kuwait, there was a coalition. that is what nato is about. that is where the united states took that lead to stand up. there is investment there. this is a world economy that is at stake there.

the leadership i am seeing is sort of like it is changing to where it is a matter of what is in it for me? there is a balance there. the scales are tipping in the wrong direction. if our soul responds to going to help ukraine was first off, let's see what i'm going to get out of it before i help you, or it appeared with our allies to protect in the -- and save. russia invaded ukraine. because they did not put up the substantial front before the invasion. there is a narrative that is coming out of it that seems to

me it doesn't sound like that's the role that we are taking. what's in it for me? if it's not enough for me then screw you. if that's the way they want to do it, if that's what's best for america. that is how biden got elected. he was there to repair the damage they did in the first place. that wasn't good for us to take that stance. we should be running our country and not have to repair the damage. host: you talk about the biden administration, what was your view of 20 years of involvement in afghanistan, what is the lesson therefore america's role

in the world? caller: our role in the world, what we went into afghanistan for was the aggression that came out to the outside world. especially for our interests when we were attacked by bin laden. his attack on the american soil, 9/11. that is why we went in. what we were doing, -- host: should we have stayed for 20 years? caller: the policy of the military, when you use the military as some kind of a leash

, they are there to win, that is the job. we want to do this. to go in and knock on doors and go door to door. that is not the military's way. that is part of the package. host: not our last caller, may be time for one more. good morning. caller: nobody has said anything about the five bullet points, they have a salt mine in ukraine, 50% is there, they have the rare earth minerals. five, they had a radiation plan

when chernobyl went off. to get the radiation away. russia wants back. we should get that breadbasket and keep it. host: that is dave in new jersey, our last caller in this first segment of the washington journal. up next, we will be joined by scott wong of nbc news. we will preview the week ahead in congress and the joint address to congress tomorrow night. the head of the gao, gene dodaro discusses federal program deemed that high risk for waste, fraud, abuse. we will be right back. ♪ [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2024] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org]

>> this week on the c-span networks. the house and senate are in session. the house will vote on legislation to repeal biden administration energy and environmental rules. the senate continues voting on president trump's cabinet nominations. includes secretaries of education and labor. the house could be begin voting on legislation to extend funding to end of september to avert a shutdown. on tuesday the senate foreign relations committee considers nomination for matthew whitaker as u.s. ambassador to nato. tuesday evening, president trump delivers an address before a joint sessionf congress. wednesday, t mayors of boston, chicago, dver and new york city testify before the house oversight committee on th policies of sanctuary cities. c-span continues our coverage of confirmation hearings for president trumps leadership nominees. the senate health, education and

willold hearings for two nominees. o wednesday, stanfordniversity professor as director and on thursday, john hopkins surgical oncologist -- watch now. head over to c-span.org for scheduling information and watch live on demand any time. c-span, democracy unfiltered. >> if you ever missed c-span's coverage you can find if any time online at c-span.org. videos of key hearings and debates feature markers that guide you to interesting and newsworthy highlight. these markers appear on the right side of your screen. this timeline makes it easy to quickly get an idea what was debated and decided in

washington. scroll through and spend a few minutes on c-span's points of interest. >> "washington journal" continues. host: congress is in session, we we like to look at the week ahead in washington. we do that by joining scott wong. trump set to address members of congress and the nation tomorrow night. tuesday night from capitol hill. then joint address is not officially state of the union. what are we expecting? guest: this is going to be a big speech by president trump. it is his first major address to the united states congress since taking office. especially since implementing all of these doge cuts that has been so controversial and widespread across the country. we have seen the democrats protest these cuts at the federal agencies. we have seen the reaction from townhalls around the country.

protesting republicans who have been supportive of elon musk and this doge department. we will hear directly from the president i think it will be a victory lap of sorts looking back at president trump's first month in office saying, look, i campaigned on these promises and i have carried out and fulfilled a lot of these promises. the scale back the size and scope of government to go after spending. we didn't really know that he was going to do these mass firings. we're going to hear from the president about how he thinks these mass firings have gone so far. host: how much do you think that friday night's blow up in the oval office is changing the speech right now? how much he's going to focus now on ukraine and peace and minerals deal? what are your thoughts? guest: it will be a big major part of this address because it is in the news. it is the biggest story at the moment.

i think everyone at this point several days out has now seen the blowup in the oval office between zelenskyy, president trump and vice president j.d. vance. this is an important deal that in the eyes of the president. this mineral deal. they thinks that this is the path to peace between ukraine and russia. clearly, zelenskyy wanted more. he wanted security assurances from the united states which the president trump was unwilling to give him in that moment. they walked away from the deal. zelenskyy returned to europe and ukraine where he did -- he was received well in the european community and did receive some additional support financial support as well as verbal support from european leaders there. to go back to my original point, this is important deal for trump to get done. he sees himself as a deal maker.

a lot is riding on this mineral rights deal. i think we will expect to hear from the president. host: it's not officially state of the union address. all that pageantry will be there. mr. speaker and the president of the united states and the guests we're expecting president trump to have guests and members of congress always have their own guest to try to make their points. what do you know about any of those things the guests and the audience who might be referenced or guests that members of congress bringing? guest: we know chuck schumer democratic leader to say look, invite guests who can demonstrating about impacted by some of president trump's policies. who have been hurt by some of president trump's policies. people like v.a. workers who are supporting veterans and veterans with disabilities. usda workers, noaa workers,

federal government workers who to the work of the country that is oftentimes unseen as well as people like who are impacted by potential medicaid cuts that we have heard so much about from democrats as the republicans try to advance their agenda including tax cuts and figuring out how to pay for that agenda. what democrats say will come out of the pockets of people who are recipients of medicaid. that have been disputed by republicans. we'll see what happens on that front. the other thing i would also mention is that we're kind of see a lot of the cabinet members very likely, key members of trump's cabinet who just had their bruising confirmation hearings before the united states senate. you'll see the senators sitting there with some of the cabinet

members who recently had rough goings. but so far everyone has made it through and gotten through and confirmed president trump's cabinet. that will be an interesting dynamic. host: 9:00 p.m. eastern is when this gets under way. that pageantry starts half hour. members start arriving hours beforehand. one thing afterwards is always the response to the president speech this year it's senator elissa slotkin of chigan to deliver the response of the address. what do viewers need to know about her? guest: she has served in the house of representatives for several years. she's now a freshman democratic senator from michigan. what's important to know about slotkin is that she outperformed trump in the 2024 election in the state of michigan. trump won michigan.

she as the democrat won the senate race in that state. outperformed by quite a bit. host: many people marked donald trump for president marked her. guest: she's a former cia analyst. she has a history with trump. she was instrumental. she was one of the hand full of national security democrats in the house who had been resistent for the first trump impeachment. at one point, they all came together and wrote a op ed in the "washington post." these are the national security democrats. elissa slotkin was one of them. saying that we believe it's in the national interest to pursue impeachment against donald trump. remember, this was the issue

pertaining to ukraine and russia. this was the famous phone call between president trump and zelenskyy where there were allegations that president trump was withholding ukraine funding. it's kind of a full-circle moment now that we're dealing with zelenskyy and ukraine. that's sort of elissa slotkin's background. she's an interesting choice. host: what make for a good response? how high or low is the bar here? guest: that's a funny question. there's an ongoing joke on capitol hill that deliver -- delivering the response to the state of the union it's the worse possible job. it's potential to flub it. people remember with those responses, marco rubio's infamous grabbing the glass of water off camera and then coming back on camera is one of more memorable ones. of course, things turned out for

marco rubio. he's now secretary of state. oftentimes these are not memorable speeches unless you have a major flub like the marco rubio incident. host: the week ahead in congress is our topic. that joint address. a major component of the week ahead here on capitol hill. all eyes on washington on tuesday night. scott wong with us for this conversation. phone number is 202-748-8000 for democrats, republicans 202-748-8001, independents 202-748-8002. as folks are calling in, give us an update on where we are on funding the government past march 14th. host: we saw speaker of the house mike johnson appear on our network, meet the press and nbc over the weekend. he said that republicans want to push forward on a full-year cr that could carry the government,

fund the government current funding levels through the fiscal year which will bring us to september 30th. the deadline is less than one weeks away. march 14th. government funding will run out. we're at a risk of shutdown. the two sides are still far apart on top line numbers. democrats line in the last many days has been republicans you control the entirety of the federal government. you guys should figure out how to fund the government. obviously, given what we know about the breakdown of the house of representatives, mike johnson can only afford one maybe two defections at most on any vote. we know that there are at least two republican who oppose any sort of short-term stopgap funding that we call a cr. the math becomes very difficult. mike johnson will almost certainly need democrats to come to the table and help him pass

any sort of funding bill to avert a shutdown on march 14th. we're in this very tricky precarious situation once again staring down a potential shutdown in a couple of weeks. host: should the idea of full year resolution be be that hard? we're five months in the fiscal year now. when we say full year -- host: it's not a full year. congress is notorious for kicking the can county the road with the short-term funding resolutions what we call cr's. this case is no different. what johnson has said over the weekend is that look, we will -- this is what he said last year as well. we're not going to do any more cr's. they are horrible for the country. doesn't allow the country to plan ahead. host: explain what democrats will be looking for here in the next a couple of weeks as we come up to this government funding deadline.

what leverage do they have for what they are looking for? how can they get something out of this? guest: what some of them want is a promise of written into this resolution saying that the money that congress appropriates, remember congress has the power of the purse, will be spent by the executive branch, by the trump administration. normally, that's not a big issue. normally, that's the way it does work. in this case, congress appropriated money and trump has said that we're trying to scale back the size of government. i've created this doge department with elon musk at its head. we are cutting spending even though congress has appropriated this money. this is where you're seeing a clash of operation of powers except for the fact that republicans control the united states congress, the legislative branch and the congress, the gop control congress.

so far has said we're okay with what we've seen the trump administration do and the doge department do. host: i want to get to some callers. brad fayetteville, arkansas, independent. caller: it's funny how trump fired hundreds of thousands of government employee, trying to put food on the table and feed their families and pay their bills. meanwhile, the cia, the d.e.a. and dod have no cuts. this is nothing but protection for the oligarchs and the plutocrats and the billionaires. trump should be a i -- ashamed of himself and the republican party should be ashamed themselves. this is nothing but a class war of the wealthy against average americans trying to make it to

another day. host: that's brad in arkansas. some of the cuts, dod in particular. has doge reached the dod or will they? guest: they will. doge is largely has operated in secret. it has not -- it is a strange -- it's not even technically a department even though they called it a department. it was not created by congress. it was created by president trump. elon musk is not an elected official. he was appointed by trump. it's been interesting to watch how this so called department has operated largely in secret behind the scenes with not many of its members known to the public. people are slowly figuring out who these individuals are.

the caller is exactly right that dod represents the largest portion of federal funding and elon musk has said that he will be targeting every federal agency really including the department of defense. host: dod workers have been subject to that e-mail saying justify what you did last week. tell me five things that you did last week. a story from fox that came out earlier this morning might have been last night. pete hegseth directing the department of defense civilian workers to comply with elon musk doge productivity e-mail. the dod being impacted there. we'll see what happens. this is douglas in colorado, republican, good morning. caller: good morning. i want to say one thing. with this budget that supposedly

is coming out with big cuts to billionaires and also it includes a corporate tax reduction from 34 to 21%. instead of cutting, why don't we increase the taxes on these people so the budget is balanced? host: balance budgets. guest: i'm not sure i have any comment on that one. i will say that you're going to hear a lot about this fight over medicaid in the coming months. what has happened in this reconciliation process, what we mean by reconciliation just to revisit, i'm sure your callers and viewers heard about this term. as i think about it, i think, how can i explain this process to my 12-year-old daughter who's in middle school and learning

about government. what has happened is the senate has passed their budget framework. the house just last week passed their budget framework. we thought it would fail. but it passed by one vote to spare. basically, this is an outline. it provides some details but not many. it directs the committees to then sort of fill out the details. we're not even at that step. mike johnson speaker has referred to this as the kickoff of a football game as he loves football analogies. what's happened now is that you have these two competing budget resolutions that have passed. trump has sided with the house one. the house has quite a bit more in it. it includes a debt ceiling increase as well as extension of his 2017 trump tax cuts.

which is critically important for the president and his administration and republicans. they don't want to see taxes go up at the end of this year. the two chambers now have to reconcile these competing frameworks. that will take place in the coming weeks. at that point, once they figure out, okay the senate make some tweaks to the house one and they are both able to pass the same budget resolution, they have to pass the same one. it has to look like -- they have to be mirror image. then the committee will go ahead and start filling out the details of that framework. that's sort of where the rubber hits the road that we're talking about earlier. that's where we're going to start to see some major internal fights happening within the republican party over things like cuts to medicaid, potentially other entitlements.

host: how long does that process take? are we going to be watching this play out all spring, summer and fall? guest: the answer is likely yes. at least, all spring and potentially into the summer. these things do take a while. the challenge for the president and the republicans who control congress, the later this seeps in the year, the harder it becomes. in part because you start thinking about reelection. 2026 is around the corner. people that are in tough elections start to get a little skeptical a little worried about their seat. we're seeing these townhalls. these are townhalls in sort of ruby red deep red areas. you're seeing resistance what's played out with these doge cuts and concerns about cuts to things like medicaid and

medicare. as that pressure intensifies on republicans, you potentially could see republicans start to get a little weary and not want to vote for this reconciliation package because they think it could cost them their reelection in 2026. host: loretta in spring hill, florida. democrat. good morning you're on with scott wong. caller: good morning. i'm just wondering why the american people should let our government do the tax cuts of 2017 that trump put in the first time again? why on each side of every party, independents, republicans, democrats. why is that acceptable to give the ultra rich more tax breaks? people need to stand up.

host: tax cuts in congress. guest: trump and congressional leaders and the republican party would argue that they campaigned on renewing these tax cuts. this is a central message that you've heard every time there has been pushback to a trump policy, you have heard republicans and the white house say well, we campaigned on this. we were very transparent with the american public. we let them know what we were running on and what we will do if you put us into power in washington. they would argue that this was a central tenant of their political campaign in 2024. renewing these 2017 tax cuts. if nothing is done, if this reconciliation package fails, taxes will go up for americans including for the wealthiest americans.

republicans who are anti-tax don't want to see that happen. they feel like they have a mandate to get this done because they ran on this very issue. host: the tax cut and jobs act passed in 2017. why are they up in 2025? guest: well, they were only guaranteed for a certain number of years. that very likely, if my memoriry serves correct, we should term back and go back to 2017. this is the last time that we were in this exact situation. president trump had been elected in 2016. republicans won the house and senate. they own the trifecta. we're in a similar situation here in 2025 where republicans are control the entire government. they're in a situation now where they can push through on a partisan basis their agenda through this reconciliation process that happened in early 2017 when they tried to repeal

obamacare, you'll remember, you were around that failed and by one vote essentially. it passed the house. john mccain killed it with his thumbs down. later this year, they made another run through reconciliation and were successful in passing the trump tax cuts. they only went for a certain number of years. that's why they are going to expire at the end of this year. republicans are once again dealing with this tax issue in reconciliation. host: here's what happened in the 2018 election. guest: yeah. there was backlash to efforts to repeal obamacare. there were townhall protests. there was backlash to the trump tax cuts. democrats positioned this as a tax cut for the wealthy. they are doing the same thing here with the renewal of these tax cuts saying that republicans are only looking out for the

special interest of the wealthiest americans in our country. therefore, want to raise -- cut taxes on the backs of working-class americans. the republicans challenge here is they will have to figure out how to pay for this massive tax cut. basically, the reconciliation budget that the house has passed states that they need to find cuts worth $1.5 trillion, john. the biggest portion of those cuts will have to come from the energy and commerce committee. what's interesting about energy and commerce is that energy and commerce oversees medicaid and medicare. to have this number, $880 billion that the budget lay lays out to find cuts -- the

house has to find cuts from the enc committee, that is why you're seeing democrats say if you're going to cut that much from enc. where is that coming from? it will very likely come from medicaid potentially medicare. president trump and republicans saying no, we're not touching your benefits. what we're going to target is waste, fraud and abuse. what does waste, fraud and abuse mean? that's really sort of this gray area of what does waste, fraud and abuse mean. where will those cuts come from? who will be impacted? host: going back to the numbers in the house in the 2018 house democrats gained 40 seats in the 2018 election and took control of the house of representatives. just a walk back not too long ago. this is cindy in washington state, republican. good morning.

caller: good morning. i'm calling about the meeting with ukraine and trump in the oval office. you know, zelenskyy and trump had an agreement and zelenskyy flew here to sign the agreement. zelenskyy met with senator chris murphy just prior to the meeting with trump. he sabotaged the signing of that agreement. then, set out to say trump and j.d. ambushed zelenskyy. zelenskyy and murphy ambushed trump. guest: well, i think that meeting is in the eye of the beholder. if you are a supporter of president trump, you find blame with zelenskyy that he blew up

the deal. clearly zelenskyy had intentionings of making a deal flying all the way from kyiv to washington to meet with the president of the united states and the vice president as well as a number of senators in the runup to that oval office meeting. democrats and critics of president trump would say that president trump and j.d. attacked zelenskyy in the middle of that meeting in front of all of those television cameras. host: i think most member of congresses were home and on their way home when that went down. you'll get senators back today at 3:00 p.m. who you most interested in going up and asking a question about what happened on friday to what member of congress? guest: i think certainly, the republicans who have in the past been supportive of zelenskyy and

ukraine in this war against russia. i think the loyal republican supporters of president trump, we know what they're going to say. certainly, there are democrats up there who have taken a real interest in this ukraine-russian war. i want to hear from them. people like mark kelly of arizona who said over the weekend that he was actually in one of those meetings with zelenskyy just hours before the now infamous oval office meeting. what mark kelly said over the weekend this was america at its lowest point. it showed that america is -- it showed america weakness. it undermined america's standing in world. he called it a dumpster fire of

diplomacy. that's the thinking from the democrats. i want to know from some of the more anti-russia republicans on capitol hill how they view this meeting. host: mark, last call here silver spring, maryland, democrat, good morning. caller: thank you. elon musk is known as a guru. what i decided to do is go online, access chat gpt and ask it to balance the budget or reduce the deficit. what i asked was, how do you decrease the deficit by $2 trillion over ten years while minimizing the corruption including minimize federal job losses, maximize maintenance

services and avoiding taxes. anybody can do this. senator, congressman, you can do this. the answer was eye opening. the answer was for one, voluntary retirement incentives. don't use massive layoffs. use voluntary retirement packages. secondly, what else can you do? expand i.r.s. audits for high income earners. which includes targeting high income individuals, corporate tax avoidance, invest in technology. use federal services, charge them fees for the services. you can streamline government, for example, by merging similar

functions, let's say in labor and in education that deal with job training. there's so much you can get. some zero cost, access chat gpt. host: you're behind the chat gpt plan? caller: well, it minimizes all this angst that we're seeing. it's awful. it minimizes massive hurt and suffering and deaths in africa by the millions. host: thank you for the call. scott wong. guest: that's an interesting exercise to use chat gpt to find saving. i will try that later today. the interesting argument from democrats about some of these republican plans is that they actually will increase the deficit. if you look at the reconciliation plan, it is not fully paid for. it will

increase the deficit. there are efforts under way by republicans to try to fudge some of the numbers to change the way that package is scored. we'll see if they are successful in trying to do that. to the caller's point about the i.r.s., what's interesting is that democrats have argued that cuts to the i.r.s. by doge and trump's efforts to target the i.r.s. and target those i.r.s. workers and reduce that workforce, actually could increase the deficit as well. you would have less i.r.s. enforcement, less people i.r.s. workers going after people that are cheating on their taxes on trying to get around the tax rules. while republicans really are hammering home this idea we need to cut government spending, we need to get our debts and

deficits under control, democrats would argue that a lot of these policies that republicans are pursuing actually will hike the deficit. host: what didn't wet get to? what else you watching for this week? is this enough for a congressional reporter? guest: this is quite a bit. the senate leader today will hold a procedural vote on what they call the protection of women and girls in sports act. this is a legislation by tommy tuberville of alabama this will ban transgender women in sports. clearly republicans think this is a winning issue. it has to pass a 60 vote threshold. it likely will be blocked and filibustered by democrats in the senate. looks like democrats will hold

firm and block that legislation in the senate. host: scott wong has been a force in congressional reporting. follow him on x and check out his reportings on nbc news. we appreciate your time. coming up in about 40 minutes this morning, it's a conversation with gene dodaro of the u.s. government accountability office. we'll talk about the high risk list programs at risk for waste, fraud and abuse. until then, it's our open forum time for you to lead the discussion any public policy issue that you want to talk about, the numbers are on the screen. start calling in and we'll get to your calls after the break. >> discover the heartbeat of

democracy of c-span voices. we're asking what you like to hear from the president during his speech. >> i'm clay from silver spring maryland. i hope president trump talks about two things. the first and biggest one in my opinion is our relationship with russia. i hope he takes a stronger stance against russia, especially given the recent meeting with zelenskyy that turned into more of shouting match. i like him to address the concerns of the american people who have been laid off recently. seemingly by unelected person who claim isn't running the department of government efficiency, clearly is >> i'm from abilene, texas. i like to hear the president talk about what he's going to do to attack the deficit. >> i'm from oklahoma. i would like the president to address what's going on with the ukraine-russia war.

>> i would love to hear the president talk about finances, business the economy. >> i like him to talk about the economy. states that our nation is in. the border, his future. objections he has as far as the war in ukraine. i think he's to deal with them. where he sees the next six or eight months as far as the economy. where it's going. the tariff address. just things he has in motion. i know he has a lot of things going on and he's cutting deals, tell us what deals he's cutting and where he sees the future or the next six to eight months. >> c-span's voices. delivering democracy unfiltered. be part of the conversation. >> "washington journal" continues. host: it's just after 8:30 on

the east coast. here's where we are today on capitol hill at noon the house returns for legislative business at 3:00 p.m. the senate returns today. there's plenty going on around washington today at 9:00 a.m. in about 25 minutes this morning, it's a discussion on local and state matters. it's the national association of counties legislative conference, federal and state and local leaders meeting to discuss taxes, budget issues, disaster prep and the impact of trump administration policies at the local level if that's your thing, you can go over and watch that on c-span 2. about 20 minutessal on c-span.org and the free sp now app. this week it's the jointddss to congress. president trump hisir big primetime address since his inaugural address. our coverage begiinat

8:00 p.m. tomorrow might here on c-span. e dress itself expected to start at 9:00 p.m. eastern time. busy week here in washington. we'll let you kick it off with our open forum. my public policy issue, my political their that you want to talk about, now is your time to call in and lead this program. this is jeff in royal oak, michigan, republican. what's on your mind? caller: i was just watching your guest, scott wong, first of all, thank you for having me. his democratic senior congressional reporting is absurd. some of the comments that he made were absurd. he was all over the place talking about how transgender cuts, etcetera are not going to make it through the democratic party. it was so one-sided that i really can't believe that you

let him get away with not hitting him little harder with tougher questions. host: did you try to call in last segment. caller: i called in just now. host: if there's a reporter or member of congress or my guest we have, when we have phone calls during the segment, you can call in and ask them questions about their report. i known scott wong for a long final. he's very open in explaining why he believes what he believes in his reporting. who host talked to. he's very open with his work as it were to explain the conclusions that he's come to. if you feel that way about him or anybody else, call in and talk to him yourself. does that work? caller: it works for me. i didn't realize i can call in while he was talking? i was listening to his comments and making a few notes. i think that at the point where he started getting off track

about the budget plan, etcetera it won't get through the democratic house. i thought it was a little bit off. host: call in next time. appreciate the call from michigan. this is brenda in maryland. line for democrats. good morning. caller: mine is easy. we keep saying we want to cut the budget. we're looking at people, i live around the corner from social security. what about the defense spending? elon musk contracts with the american government. he's running this but he's not talking about cutting anything that he's involved in. i got -- this is a conflict of interest for me. anybody else that believes in

america, because we want them to cut we want them to cut the right way. go after bigger contracts we own. make some real decisions. you're taking people's jobs away and saying they are not going their job and five bullet points. there's no way five bullet points on any given day is the same. not in the government. cut some of the senators and our congress, their paychecks. let's do that. let's start at the top and work to the bottom. not start at the bottom and work your way up while they are still making money. it's that simple. all this other stuff is outrageous. friday was a disgrace to america. it was a disgrace. host: that's brenda in maryland according to u.s. debt clock, the total amount of money being

spent this year on defense is about $884 billion with social security, it's $1.5 trillion. by the way, medicare and medicaid is about $1.7 trillion current spending for total spent on member of congress salaries, i don't have that number off the top of my head. they make about $172,000 a year. there's 535 members of congress. you can do the math there if you want to know what that comes out to. u.s. national debt right now, $36.5 trillion and counting. this is john in illinois independent. good morning. caller: hi, thanks for taking my call. thank you for c-span. what a great show. you know, one of the most incredible thing that happened in the last couple of years is like him or not when musk bought twitter and turned into x and free speech indicated that lot of people that thought

conspiracy theories, they were actually real. there are so many people that call in this show. do you have understanding how serious it is that the government was conspiring with big tech to shut down the free discussion of anything from covid to ukraine to anything else? i tried to get in yesterday when you had alexander vindman on your show. i want to talk about ukraine. when has government told the truth about any war since world war ii. they lied to us about vietnam. they lied to us about iraq. they lied to us about afghanistan. a government that will lie to you about war, where with you might lose your children is going to lie to you about anything else. there's nothing more serious. c-span has really failed in one way. i love your channel and you guys are great. you have to failed to bring on the opposing side that actually

can tell you a lot of facts. victoria newland air our -- and our government including the cia, pushed ukraine. they got rid of elected leader in 2014 to force us into nato. you can google this stuff. we instigated because our military industrial and corporations want to steal russia's natural resources. host: on the free speech issue that you talk about, have you read jonathan turley's book? caller: i read some of it. i read some excerpts. i really like turley.

host: he's going to be at the tucson festival of books on march 15th. we're going to be live book tv on c-span 2. we're covering a panel he's on. he's going to come and take calls from book tv viewers. if you haven't made it through that book, maybe listen to that and you can call in when he's on the program and talk to him about it. caller: great. thank you taking my call. please americans do research. don't believe the mainstream media. host: that's john in illinois. this is billy in the lone star state. republican, good morning. caller: yes, sir, thank you for taking my call. only thing i had to say was we need to kind of take the step back. we've only had little over a month. let's get to 100 days and then start talking about things that why isn't that getting done and

why isn't that getting done. as far as five bullet points. i can done that when i was in marine corps. what do you do yesterday? it's more than five. i guarantee you. i like everybody to step back and give him the first 100 days and then the year. we'll be in a lot better shape. that's about all i got to say except semper fi. host: billy, there's ongoing series on c-span's american history tv called historic first 100 days. we're looking at the first 100 days of presidents throughout the years from george washington, andrew jackson and franklinoosevelt. it's on c-span 2 american history tv. this is jackie on our line for

democrats, new jersey. point pleasant beach. good morning. caller: hi, good morning. i wanted to express concern about how the administration is not coupling anything with respect to democratic institutions, territorial sovereignty, human rights in terms of its efforts in securing a peace deal. i feel that the administration is making a lot of the public uncomfortable by merely talking about the economic prosperity that could result from it. i think that is really bifurcating how people feel who's to blame here. this was provoked by nato this war or it was a fight for democracy. i think that that is something

that's necessary to make people comfortable regarding this peace deal that's going to be signed. i also think that people have to understand the task of the president in terms of business in terms of who has financed many of his development projects. who came to his rescue when his businesses were failing. all of this is relative in terms of what's being touted to the public by the administration. host: that's jackie in new jersey. robert is in napels, florida. independent, good morning. caller: i'm trying to figure out how musk and president trump are getting around 1974 act. it states the business of the house of representatives and congress is to make the budget and to authorize payments. how these guys going around that

and not adhering to the 1974 act. host: robert, a lot of democrats bringing up that issue on capitol hill and wondering if it's the courts that will be having final word on this. certainly something if you watch c-span you start to hear about the impoundment act. this is margaret in dayton, nevada. republican. good morning. caller: yes, good morning, thank you for having me on. i like to say, i like to see president trump focus more on the risk in our nation instead of the risk between ukraine and russia. we have a big problem with everybody complaining about everybody else and cuts and republicans. we are all united states citizens. our country is suffering. i like to see him that will help

all the people they laid off and let go. how he expects them to survive. i'm a republican. i'm not really happy how things are going. i do believe there should be checks and balances for everything. there should be a balanced government in the united states of america. another point. america includes canada and mexico and south america. it's a continent. the united states is a nation. host: margaret, what's one thing that the president can do to do what you want him to do to heal the divide as you say in america? caller: he makes great deals. he's a deal maker and great negotiator. he should figure that out and follow his cabinet members and all the expertise he has.

host: this is allen in on our independent line. caller: hi, john, good morning. i'm sure you recognize my voice. i tell you, i'm not sure why i do this, my heartbreak probably goes up to 200. i can feel it go up as i'm waiting. takes me about ten minutes eafter the call to get a pulse down. good morning, again. guess why i'm calling forgive me for bringing this up again. i am bringing it up again because c-span has helped this in ukraine for the listeners, the viewers. for six months in a row, last year, i would call while you were on mostly talking about

ukraine and finally you kind of got a little exacerbated with me saying allen, talk about something else. i know you call so many times. host: explain who that is for viewers who may not have heard your calls before. this is a podcast. caller: yes. host: youtube, podcaster. caller: she caught my attention two years ago. when i first called mentioning -- this is how c-span viewers helped, i think, we'll see after today. when i first started calling, she had about 80 or 90,000 subscribers.

over the last few months as i've been calling c-span listeners, i've been going on i think clicking followers, she's now over 300,000. host: what is it about this podcast and her take on ukraine that speaks to you so much that you've been doing this for months? what is she talk about? caller: thank you again. that shows what a great questioner and broadcaster you are. i tell you that because 50 years ago, i was on the radio. i had a talk show 50 years ago. actually, my claim to fame, i invited the political genius that got mr. clinton elected in passed away waiting for his

first interview after bill clinton was elected president. waiting at a tv station. i was a student. a freshman year student. happen to be starting in high school kid. he came and spent an hour long interview on my radio. this was the only show he ever did. host: i got other folks waiting. caller: i say this, try to give credibility here. she's the most brilliant interviewing intellect. i always have watched folks over the years. she caught my attention because of her range of absolute brilliance. i think she's going to be the next foreign minister for ukraine and the future president of ukraine.

i wish you would invite her on it's the reason i call these six months to please invite her on as a guest. you will see. she is the spokesperson that really articulates the position in ukraine even though now, i have supported everything in ukraine. i think this cease-fire is the way to go. if the united states will get in ukraine on the ground, we will be there to protect ukraine. i think this is going to be like berlin where we have to be there for 20 years until this putin guy is gone. cease-fire now. let u.s. come in. that's the brilliance of this plan. host: that's allen in arkansas. this is edward in georgia. stockbridge, georgia, democrat. good morning. caller: thanks, john.

thanks for having my call. i am a retired public school teacher. i listened to the news and your broadcast daily. i call all the time. we talked extensively. people have to listen to what trump is saying. just the other day he said, the meltdown on friday, that zelenskyy really hates putin. the guy killing millions of his people. he's got 20,000 children that he's held captive. he's joked about a third term. he's not joking. he wants to be king. i think the best thing is europe and great britain, they're going

take over the negotiations. trump is not -- if he really wanted a true cease-fire, he'd be talking extensively to zelenskyy and not to putin first. that's showing their cards. i'm a gym teacher. we don't have a leader. all his cabinet members are loyalists. my best friend from college, he's a republican. he hates trump and his son is a die hard trumper. i asked his son have you ever seen "washington journal." he thinks he's so knowledgeable. he has never seen your show. he's 35 years old with a family of three boys. we're in dire straights. i'm really thinking civil war in the united states. something big is going to happen. we don't have 100 days left to

see what trump is going to do. here's my last thought, john. why would trump do all these executive orders when he has the congress, the senate and the executive office? he might have to lay off the congressmen and senators if they really want to save money. he's doing everything illegally, tieing up our courts. just making a fiasco. biden took the whole term trying to gain respect again from our allies which we need to prevent a world war iii. keep up the good work. host: stockbridge, georgia. barbara in alexandria, virginia. republican just across the potomac river. caller: good morning. i wanted to comment on the disgusting situation that happened in the white house on friday. it's obvious, so obvious not only was trump brutal, he was

crude. host: you say this as a republican? caller: yes. i come from a long line of republicans. yes. host: did you vote for donaldca. i could not. what i wanted to say is neither he nor vance know anything about russian history or the soviet history in the last 100 years. they don't have any understanding of what being under the soviet boot really meant. i was a young bride in germany in the 1950's after world war ii when we used to have these alerts that possibly the soviets were going to cross a line.

the fear level is like being in a burning house and you cannot get out. the people have no idea of what is going on. i feel so bad for the ukrainians . biden was so slow to react. i never understood why they weren't able to defend their airspace. central european countries that have been under that russian boat until the 1990's, they are deprived. they never recovered from the devastation of soviet rules. and now i just want to remind americans that the soviets are experts at subversion. look what is happening in hungary now. they already had the yellow roof

of the central european and eastern european countries. they have not been able to rebuild their economies enough to withstand the onslaught of russia. host: it is just after 9:00 on the east coast. we are with you for another hour on "washington journal." want you to keep calling in. we will head up to the other end of pennsylvania avenue. we are joined there by philip wg egmann. what you to start with the latest on what you are hearing on president trump speech before the house and senate tomorrow on the tone of that speech and the content of that speech. guest: this morning president trump seized that he would be making big news. we don't know exactly what that news will be. perhaps an announcement on tariffs. i could tell you one part of the

speech that needs a be right is the foreign policy section of that speech after what we saw go down in the oval office. the u.s. relationship with ukraine is very much thrown into question. the white house was expecting that in this joint address to congress the president could tout a minerals deal. he left the white house with a stonefaced delegation and without a minerals deal. what kind of rewrite are this features going to do here -- speechwriters going to do here. host: you profiled jd vance recently. what is your take on his role in what happened there. how do you read it from somebody who specifically looked at jd vance and his political style? guest: the vice president was very much simpatico in the oval

office. previously we have seen other folks in the president's orbit sort of avoid the spotlight, try not to get in his way. it was vance who first responded to the question of zelenskyy when he was questioning the efficacy of the diplomatic effort overall with the russians . rather than shrinking or getting out of the way of the president, vance was ready to take center stage and step forward. there doesn't seem to be any consequence. with vance, he has very much found his apprentice. host: with vance tomorrow at that joint address, this is not a state of the union. it is in everything but name. what do you know about who president trump will be shouting out or pointing out in the audience this time around?

guest: all of us will be looking for elon musk, the leader of doge. he is a manifestation of what this administration has done. one of the things that is very apparent as donald trump goes to speak to lawmakers is this is his show. he is moving fast on his own with regards to executive action. some of these trade deals he is trying to push through. the unilateral enforcement of immigration. this is not going to be a lame-duck presidency. he's moving on his own. elon musk is a good example of that. he has someone who has cut a lot of jobs, red tape. he will likely be there in the balcony. i'm not sure who the other guests will be beyond the first lady and some others.

donald trump informing congress what he has done on his own as they get their ducks in a row for the legislative progress on that tax bill. host: what are you looking for this week on doechii? -- doge. guest: his business empire is famous for cutting down to the bone. if you are not rolling back 10% of the clouds you did initially you are not doing it correctly. i'm not sure where he will be in the federal leviathan this week, with his small army of programmers. host: last week was a parade of international visitors, what's on tap for this week? do we know if the president will be going anywhere after his address to congress tomorrow night to sell whatever it is he talks about?

guest: the ukrainian president did not expect donald trump or jd vance to respond. the leaders here last week. they certainly thought they were building momentum towards the foundation for a peace deal. all of that is in flux right now. the question for tomorrow is how will donald trump switch gears. the last thing he said was that he was ready to invite him back

but only when zelenskyy was willing to negotiate on donald trump's terms. host: they will be calling it -- covering it all. you can see his work and you could follow philip wegmann on x. thanks for starting your week with us. guest: thank you. host: about 10 minutes left in open forum. any public policy issue, political issue you want to talk about, now is your time. noel has been waiting in shaker heights, ohio. caller: i was on a carrier in the mediterranean. israel helped us in lebanon years ago. the russians had a warm water port. the canals are there, waterways

are there. we support them financially and with our military. the waterway, the resources, we support them financially. we would never ask israel to give back the money we supported them with. host: what carrier were you want? caller: independence. host: there's an article about the carl vinson is in south korea. in response to recent news by north korea. what does that symbolize in your mind? caller: it symbolizes that we are keeping the seas safe for democratic trade and safety for our allies around the world. it is a power thing.

we have to keep it safe for all so everything could take place in a democratic way. host: what was your job? caller: i don't want to get into that. host: these carrier groups are so expensive, do we need a dozen carriers? caller: the technology is changing. it may not be effective as it once was. might have to update your profile. that's what i say. you don't ask your allies to pay you financially when they are supporting you in other ways. host: thanks for the call. this is ingrid in pensacola florida, democrat line on. caller: yesterday, the host

asked mike turner, saying a report had come out that confirmed the defense secretary had ordered the united states cyber command to temporarily halt cyber operations and planning against russia. caller: he must have something

on trump. why would trump be so defensive of our enemy? as far as the cutting, i'm amazed that very seldom that these tax cuts that republicans want, $4.5 trillion, are made it be permanent. they want to add 40 trillion dollars to the debt ceiling. maybe someone could explain it? thank you. host: this is donald in missouri, republican, good morning. caller: good morning, thanks for getting me in.

i want to explain to everyone what is happening with zelenskyy , president trump, ukraine, russia. so many people in america think the united states has to have an enemy. they are stuck in the cold war mentality. there was something coined in 1962 called mutual assured destruction. it is so bad that if it starts then everyone is going to get hooked. there will be a nuclear war coming. we are in the very last days before christ comes back.

president trump wants to try and make sure we don't run right into this nuclear war without looking both ways. what we need to do is try to negotiate with russia on our nuclear arms so we don't run into a situation where our arsenals automatically launch at the same time. the end of the world is coming. it will be very bad when the nuclear war does arrive.

let's just enjoy our green grass and blue skies long as possible. zelenskyy when he was in the white house the other day, he did not want to accept a cease-fire. he's into revenge is his mindset against russia. host: that is donald in missouri, our last caller. about 45 minutes left this morning. we will be joined by gene d odaro, the programs most at risk of waste fraud and abuse. we will be right back. ♪

>> tuesday night, watch c-span's live coverage of president trump's address to congress, the first address of his second term . c-span's live coverage begins at 8:00 p.m. eastern with a preview of the event from capitol hill followed by the president's speech and then watch the democratic response. we will take your calls and get your reaction on social media. you can also watch a simulcast with reaction from lawmakers live from capitol hill. live tuesday at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. on c-span now, our free mobile video app. also online at c-span.org. c-span, bringing you democracy, unfiltered. >> looking to contact your

members of congress, c-span is making it easy for you with our 2025 congressional directory. get contact information all in one place. this compact guide contains bio and contact information for every house and senate member. contact information, the cabinet, federal agencies, state governors. the directory costs $32.95. every purchase helps support c-span's nonprofit. go to c-spanshop.org to preorder your copy today. nonfiction book lovers, c-span has a number of podcasts for you . listen to best-selling authors and influential interviewers on the influencers podcast. on "q and a,"

regularly feature fascinating authors of nonfiction books of on a wide variety of topics. find all of our topics by downloading the free c-span now app or wherever you get your podcasts and our website. >> there are many ways to listen to c-span radio anytime, anywhere. in the washington, d.c. area listen on 90.1 fm. on sirius xm radio on channel 455, tune in at and on your smart speaker by saying play c-span radio. listen to house and senate proceedings, committee hearings, news conferences, and other public affairs events live

throughout the day. for the best way to hear what is happening in washington, live interviews, and analysis, listen to c-span programs on c-span radio anytime, anywhere. c-span, democracy unfiltered. >> "washington journal," continues. host: we are joined by gene dodaro, he has served as the comptroller general. what does the comptroller general do? guest: my responsibilities are to lead the government accountability office, an independent organization in the legislative branch of government. our job is to help congress carry out constitutional responsibilities and improve performance to make sure the accountability of government for the american people are independent, nonpartisan,

objective organization. our scope is the entire scope of the government operation. how do you ensure accountability? guest: we will do 500-600 audits every year. the development of weapons systems, the provision of medicare, services across the full spectrum and its responsibilities. we audit financial statements and we do these performance audits. if programs are delivering on expectations they could you made more efficient and effective to provide better services to the american public. we also try to make sure it is delivering on its public safety responsibilities, national security, homeland security, etc. host: you use the term efficient and immediately people think the department of government efficiency. is gao the doge of the

legislative branch? guest: they could actually carry out activities and make decisions. in our job, it is to advise the executive branch and provide for congress. most of our implementations are implemented by the executive branch. 75% are implemented every year. we save billions of dollars every year through the implementation of our recommendation by the executive branch and by congress. host: what is the high-risk list? guest: it is to focus the attention of the congressman. it is also helpful for the administration. particularly new administration that highlights what we think to be the greatest risk of broad-based abuse and mismanagement in the government.

it also points for the last several decades to areas needing transformation. they need to change their missions, they need to adapt to modern challenges for the 21st century. it is a combination of both of those things that we help focus attention on. host: there are 37 high-risk areas according to the high-risk list this year. viewers could find this report themselves. here's some examples of what gets listed. dod weapons acquisitions. enforcement of tax law, ensuring the national cybersecurity, managing real property national flood insurance a gram. start with the weapon systems acquisition. that is an area for folks who have paid attention that has been on this list for decades.

you are still saying this is an area at high risk. guest: the main area here, it is one of the charter members when we started back in 1990, medicare was another one. in this area we have seen some progress. still the weapon systems take on average about 10 years to develop. they develop usually at cost much higher than they originally estimated. they tend to be delivered and schedule delays later. we made a lot of recommendations to implement those practices. we have seen some improvements. we are seeing continual problems. this has gotten more sophisticated with software intensive weapon system.

we look at how some of those things have been developed and best practice. host: if we know what the problem is and you have offered ways to fix the problem, who's fault is it this has been on the high-risk list for 35 years? is it congress not having the desire to fix this problem? guest: it's primarily because the department of defense is not consistently implementing practices that we have suggested. they have adopted these changes in policies and procedures. we encourage them to do more. we are encouraging them to do more. they can't seem to consistently apply these practices. one of these is to not put things into production before the design is complete. they are under a lot of pressure to develop these systems because of nuclear competition from

china and others. they need to be more deliberative about the practices and to make sure they stay with things over time. there's a lot of turnover there. host: what is the poster child for defense department system development. what is the example? guest: in the navy, they have had some problems with what they are developing right now. the navy has had challenges. the f-35 programs, the messed expensive weapons system in the history of our country, we find despite all of these years it is costing more than what they expect. it is not able to be used as much for those that are deployed already. those are among the ones that we have singled out.

host: we will go through more of these high-risk list. gene dodaro with us until our program ends today. start with your questions, comments. we could talk about those areas. [indiscernible] -- (202) 748-8000 democrats. (202) 748-8001 -- we will do it by regions. (202) 748-8000 if you are in the eastern or central time zones. (202) 748-8001 if you are in the mountain or pacific time zones. another one of the charter members of the high-risk list is the enforcement of tax law in the united states. why has this been something on for 35 years? guest: there's a gap between taxes owed and taxes collected each year.

voluntary compliance is between 82% and 85%. there is a net tax gap of $606 billion. we have problems collecting taxes. there's a lot of underreporting. there's people that report and don't pay. and then there is people who don't have taxes at all that should be filing taxes. the irs needs to have a better enforcement strategy to close that gap so the government gets its fair share. this is particularly important because of our fiscal sustainability on long-term is not good. they made a number of recommendations to get the government on a more sustainable path. there is overspending and improper payments as well. the other problem the irs has had is because of identity theft.

there's a lot of people that steal identities of legitimate taxpayers. we made a number of recommendations. one was to expedite the information on w-2s from employers to irs. the irs was due to give it to individual taxpayers in the end of january. in the past employers haven't given the information until march and april. they needed it to compare to the return. the irs has been able to forestall billions of dollars in identity theft. they still need to focus on that. host: managing federal property. this one has only been on the high-risk list for 22 years. guest: there has been a lot of excess property around for a long time.

it has been accentuated because of telework during the pandemic. a lot of the buildings were older, they were built for days when you used to have paper flats. he needed to have room and administrative support. the computerization of a lot of things has changed that dramatically. the buildings were good for the current workforce. host: the government printing office has a huge building on capitol hill because they used to have huge printers. in that it went digital. there was all this space in that building. guest: you could replicate that across government with different examples. the government hasn't had an efficient way to dispose properly. to create a separate board to expedite that.

they haven't been in sync with opm about the disposal of its properties. host: wasn't very commission for the military side of this? guest: it was separate from the government with some experts. we had to turn the list over to omb, they had to execute a list. often they did not agree. as a result weren't that many companies. this is a big problem. one thing we have to do is get out of a lot of costly leasing over time. they need to continually improve that. the deferred maintenance exponentially, there is security concerns.

we did some testing trying to get through item for security cards. we are able to be successful in a number of cases. the security of the buildings needs to be there as well. there is a huge opportunity there to save a lot of money by getting rid of some of these buildings, consolidating buildings and getting rid of some costly leases. host: gene dodaro is our guest taking your phone calls. how many folks work at gao now? guest: we have a multidisciplinary workforce. we have health care environment, transportation. we build our capacity in science

and technology areas. a chief technologist, 160 scientists that focus on artificial intelligence, quantum computing. we are looking at the refurbishment of a nuclear weapons complex. some of the weapon systems at dod are nuclear based as well. host: hasn't been anything we have seen from doge in the past month? guest: it depends on where the appropriations are. we have been having pretty good stability from our staffing. we are being asked to do a lot more government activities that continue. we have been asked to look at the department of efficiency and

we will be looking at their access to information systems. many of which we audit. host: do you have any early thoughts on doge itself? guest: as someone who spent decades butting heads with bureaucracies, there is an opportunity for great efficiencies and effective us. i think however that it was better to do it by identifying the functions you need to get rid of first and then figure out how you will then shape the staffing for that. i don't think starting with eliminating groups of employees, i would not consider that the best practice about how you would go about it. host: we will get you some calls. alex is up first in washington, d.c. good morning to you. caller: i just wanted to provide

my experience, i used to work with the department of defense. i listen to mr. dodaro talking about implementing better business practices. fundamentally the issue is they could fire employees that don't perform. the government can't do either. the problem you run into is you could write a bunch of papers but at the end of the day if you have people that are not capable leaders, you can implement those changes. it is like a big network where all of these notes are around to function. all it takes is one or two bad leaders or bad department. they get in the situation where the organization knows this department is terrible and they

can't get rid of them for years. a lot of this stuff encouraging better business practices is performative until you are willing to remove people. you need people that are able to be there and say if i'm not doing a good job, we need to go in a different direction. host: let me take your point on that. guest: it is a fair point. all of these people are important, leadership is important. i do think there is a problem because they rotate people through a lot. people don't stay through the entire process. people are coming in and out of the assets. we also have the leadership across the government. there's at least 3000 people

across the government who are then replaced by new people coming in. the average tenure in the government is only a couple of years. your point about holding people accountable is exactly right. that is what we try to suggest making changes and recommendations. they are always to the leadership of the department. congress needs to hold them accountable as well. host: is it too hard to fire a political appointee? guest: not if you document their performance. it takes work, you have to set expectations, clearly so you could judge their performance. you are willing to give them early notification that they are not performing well. i'm not saying it is easy.

if you are a good manager, you should be able to do it. host: sue, you are on with gene dodaro. caller: i was calling in, i thought we were still in the last conversation we were having before you added this gentleman. i will say by listening to him, how he praises the people in his organization as highly skilled and people we need to solve these problems. why are his people so much more important and more skilled than all of these other people? they are slashing out of these jobs. the congressman, i heard marjorie taylor greene saying these people don't deserve to be treated like human beings.

somehow they infiltrated our government and collect paychecks. every civil servant has -- helps this country, it is work that they love. we are going in and eliminating them. host: let me take your point. guest: thank you for that observation. it is very astute. one of the advantages we have since we are under the legislative branch we have our own personnel authority. we are independent of the office of personnel management. we also the gao, the controller general has a 15 year term. could only be removed by an act of congress, impeachment or joint resolution.

our attrition rate is only 4%. now, as it relates to what is going on at the executive branch, i'm very concerned. i have been in the gao over 50 years. thousands of federal employees over those years. most of them are dedicated. they are trying to do a good job . they didn't cause this deficit. they didn't structure the organizations the way they have right now. the elections have consequences. there is a need for more efficiency. we need to go about it in a way that achieves those objectives and treats people with dignity and respect. host: does that mean you're term is up this year? guest: yes.

host: could you be reappointed? guest: even if i could my wife would not let me in the house. host: how is the next comptroller general picked? guest: there is a commission that gets formed as soon as there is a vacancy. the majority and minority leader. the chair ranking, the senate majority leader, minority leader. they come up with three or more names. three or more names go to the president, the person has to be confirmed by the senate. host: just about 20 minutes left. gao.gov and you could search through all of their reports on that website. i encourage you to do that while listening to this segment. the high-risk list released a 37 high-risk areas.

one was added this year. a lot of these carryover year-over-year. it is the new member of the high risk list. explain. guest: everybody would agree we are having more severe and frequent weather events. it has cost the federal government over $500 billion. the disaster areas. fema is stretched way too thin. they are managing right now over 600. some of them go back 20 years. takes a long time for the recovery phase. there are over 30 different federal agencies involved. requirements are different for each agency. if you want to build infrastructure, you could go to

hud and fema. our recommendation is we need to improve the delivery with the disaster assistance. they are not insuring a lot of these events. we have seen that happen. the flood insurance program, that one is not actuarially sound. it was $22.5 billion. host: $22.5 billion? guest: billion, that is after congress in 2017 receipt -- did $16 billion. our whole disaster response as the needs perform in light of these recent severe events.

government could do better in this area. the survivors would agree. caller: could you hear me? i'm listening to mr. dodaro and i have to say i'm really encouraged by this man. he speaks with such a level head . i just want to know when there are people like themselves, there were inspector generals of all the other different departments. they had already spoken a bit, i already feel like my question is answered. what is the need for doge at

all? guest: with regards to inspectors general, i was -- it was unfortunate in my view that they were fired. we lost a lot of expertise, the inspector generals need to be independent to function properly. when some inspector generals in the past, if you will fire them, the president has the authority. the inspector general is also reporting to the congress. they have been given 30 days notice and specific reasons for removal. that wasn't done in this particular case. in the apartment of -- department of government

efficiency, the executive branch needs to have an executive role trying to streamline the government. the executive office of the president hasn't had the capacity to do this to the full extent possible. i don't quibble with the need for it. it needs to be more deliberate. the agency heads need to be involved. you don't have unintended consequences. they have let people go, had to bring them back because of their positions. 20 of the high-risk areas are on there because of skill gaps and shortages within the agencies whether it is vha. medical health professionals, we had problems, we have 17

veterans on average a day commit suicide. we need emergency responders. we need to protect nuclear safety. we need people in health care. we could have a national surveillance program. you need to take great care. the government is in need of more efficient and effective processes, it does very many important things essential to the well-being of the american people. we need to make sure that we have the right skills, right place, right mix. i'm also concerned about the probationary employee issue. you need people willing to commit to the federal government over the long-term.

we are taking on many important domestic issues and national issues. you need the pipeline of talent. it has been hard enough to attract people to carry out these critical responsibilities. whatever policy the administration wants to set. over the decades i've been in government i have seen administration after administration set policies in place but not have the capability in the executive branch to implement those policies so that they get implemented. you need to have the right workforce. you need to get great care with this. the government has such a critical role providing critical services with vulnerable

populations. host: you mentioned gao in this government efficiency space. has anybody come to talk to you or your folks at gao on efficiency efforts? guest: there's a presidential transition act, in that act, listed as a source the administrations could go to. what i did was be proactive, i sent vice president vance a letter, we sent a letter with all of our heart -- high-risk work. we gave them context for experts in those areas. we haven't had any official outreach. the only outreach we have had is the treasury department, we have

done some audits and we issued a report and they asked for more help. as i do with every administration, and outreach to the new secretaries and other major departments. that is where it stands right now. host: you mentioned testifying before congress last week. anyone who has watched your testimony knows that you are not one of these agency leaders that come in with a giant binder. i've never seen you come with a piece of paper. why is that? are all of these reports in your head? guest: a good deal of them are.

i do a lot of briefings. a lot before testimonies. the one last week was 3.5 hours. you get a lot of questions. i have a fairly good idea of those. i prepare properly and well. they will pay more attention then they would be. host: some of the members of congress will know you are doing that and you see them pay more attention as you watch. guest: there's a reason we read our kids to sleep at night. if you are reading prepared testimony they don't know if you believe it or if somebody is preparing it for you. i started back many decades ago to develop this technique.

it suits me, you may not suit everybody. i find it easier to deliver your message. host: next call, james in ohio, good morning. caller: good morning. they won't take much time for me to say what i want to say. i'm 96 years old, i'm a world war ii veteran. as far as our obligations are concerned, i'm concerned about america keeping their obligations to the people they make obligations to. we promised ukraine we would take care of them all the time. i wonder why we are not protecting them. when i tell somebody something, i stick to it.

it's about time for the president to put on his big overalls and his pan and tell russia to get out of ukraine. we are at fault for not taking care of them. we owe them a lot of stuff because of what we promised them. the last president was too chicken to do what he was supposed to do and stand up against russia. host: that is james in ohio, care to comment on foreign policy? guest: i want to thank you for your service to the country. we owe our vetted to -- veterans gratitude, which is why i have listed a number of veterans issues. with regard to ukraine, i don't get involved in foreign policy

decisions. i would say that prior to the recent change in administration, we were providing training to the accounts chamber on how to audit some of the assistance that was going there. that has been halted. i got to know a number of the ukrainians through that process. they are very dedicated people to their country. i have a lot of admiration for them and their focus on protecting their sovereignty. host: how much fraud, outright stealing of u.s. funds were they finding in that program? guest: it was just getting started. they started with the budgetary support we gave for the health care workers.

they did not have a lot of revenues. the u.s. provided some budgetary support for pensions, health care workers, things of that nature. the first couple audits that they did they found some issues but not anything significant. host: the.a. health care, how do we improve health care for veterans in this country. that has been on the list now 10 years? guest: i was very disappointed with the v.a.'s initial response. took them a long time to come up with an action plan to come up with high risk issues. they could be held accountable for making sure veterans,

getting timely appointments and getting the care they need at the va hospital or at community care. we still have a lot of recommendations there. particularly in rural areas of getting people the right mental health treatment that they need. right now we are looking at the suicide crisis hotlines. to try to prevent this unfortunate event that we have on a daily basis. we are trying to get them to acquire their medical supplies in a more efficient manner. i'm hopeful we are trying to meet with the new secretary and encourage them.

they have spent a ton of money on this new electronic health care system. the new system is only deployed four medical facilities. they will do five more. there is 160 two go. user satisfaction is high. the estimate of the users in the system don't think itself. host: less than five minutes left. i want to ask about some of the high risk list success stories. what have you been able to move off this list over the years? what has been the most successful effort you have been involved in? guest: i will give you three quick examples. many years ago our weather satellites were due to expire. the government didn't have a good plan to replace them.

these were geostationary satellites that gave short-term weather forecast. they give the long term forecast. the air force runs the longer-term. we raised it on the list, they got serious about it. congress funded it and we have better weather satellites. host: over the course of how many years? guest: it took a while. i was afraid it wasn't going to get done. last year we took off the list pension benefit guarantee corporation. this is corporation that has employers contributing the pay for this. if the company goes bankrupt, the people don't lose their pension.

congress provided a lot more money. that will be solved for probably the next 30 years. the last one was after 9/11, there was a lot of problems with the intelligence community. congress passed the information sharing environment. the intelligence community by 16 agencies. we have a much better sharing of information of intelligence to help perfect our countries. i'm very proud of that as well. host: of the 37 on the list today, what is the one you are most worried about when the next comptroller general finishes his or her 15 year term? guest: that's a tough question. it's like asking me to pick which one of my children i like more than the other ones. the one i'm most concerned about

is cybersecurity. the cybersecurity area, i listed that first as a governmentwide high-risk area. i had a critical infrastructure. host: it was pretty new at that point. guest: you could see it coming. critical infrastructure, 2003, i was concerned about the water systems are telecommunications. all of that with cybersecurity and technologies developing. it could help but also has a dark side. you have quantum computing on the horizon. that will decimate our current encryption approach. it is a whole new ballgame. the cybersecurity thing started in its infancy, i hope it's not on the high-risk list for my successor. i wouldn't bet on it.

host: gene dodaro is the comptroller general. we always appreciate your time. guest: it has been great to be with you. host: that will do it for our program today. we will be back here tomorrow morning at 7:00 a.m. eastern, saying here on c-span we will take viewers over to an event hosted by the anti-defamation league. congresswoman police the phonic is set to speak at that event. we will take you there now. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2025] [captioning perfmed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible forts caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> we seem to be having a technical issue with our signal from this live event. we hope to resolve the issue and resume our live