sam sabin, people making that argument? guest: you are hearing that argument, particularly in the house intelligence committee , people arguing that we need to be able to investigate, have all of our surveillance power intact. there is no good, they would argue, from impeding the surveillance program. that's exactly the argument that is being made in terms of passing this and keeping it without a warrant in this moment. host: fbi director christopher wray on capitol hill today, you can bet that he will be asked about the program and will probably bring it up himself. our coverage begins at 2 p.m. eastern time of the fbi director testifying about the agency, and likely this program as well. you can watch on c-span three and on our free mobile video app, c-span now, or online at c-span.org. portland, maine, independent line, darrell. caller: i just wanted to speak about the new act that's coming on. i heard all about president kamala harris and the irs and the vote coming down on this thing. i feel like reagan should be able

. >> sam sabin is at a table who cover cybersecurity with axios you to talk about renewal of the foreign service intelligence act. renewing section 702, remind our viewers why there is a section 702, what it is. >> guest: section seven of to his foreign intelligence surveillance act, has been around for so long. it is here primarily to give intelligence agencies the ability to surveilled non-americans abroad. to think anyone who might be, the intent is to surveilled anyone might be planning a terror plot, who might be caring at cybercrime, ransomware, anything of that nature. however, the history of the. >> and has been a bit fraught. intent is for text messages, e-mails, things of that nature. but those whoio are broad who ae non-americans, but, of course, if i'm an american his communicated with someone abroad, who for whatever reason is targeted by this program miking medications also get stuck into this program. all this information is put into a database that is been freely available, they cannot freely available, but available to intelligence agencies for years to come. and they co

sam sabin is our guest. we will discuss the arizona supreme court abortion ban, us aid to ukraine in israel with representative judy chu and congresswoman harriet hagerman. "washington journal" starts now. ♪ host: good morning. we begin with the debate in washington over reauthorizing section 702 of the foreign intelligence surveillance act. yesterday in the house, 19 republicans join the democrats in blocking speaker johnson from holding a floor vote on the legislation. we would like to get your thoughts on the debate. , kratz, -- democrats, (202)-748-8000. (202)-748-8001 for republicans. democrats, (202)-748-8000. independents, (202)-748-8002. you can join us in the text, include your first name, city and state at (202)-748-8003. go to facebook.com/c-span and put your reaction there, or in a post on x at --@cspanwj. we will get your thoughts in a minute. let's begin with "the wall street journal" reporting the surveillance vote failed in its setback speaker johnson. that is their headline this morning. lin

host: joining us from capitol hill this morning, congresswoman sam sabin -- congressman judy chu. your response to the arizona supreme court decision on the abortion ban? guest: outrageous and based on a law is passed arizona was a state women had the right to vote. to deprive women of the ability to have an abortion player, for 50 years before the dobbs decision, this arizona law, it's very drastic, doesn't even provide exceptions in the case of rape or incest. it it's a people of arizona in a terrible position. host: from the ruling, "in light of this opinion, physicians are on notice that all abortions, except those necessary to save the woman's life, are illegal." how do you determine when you need to save a woman's life? guest: well, this is exactly why she -- why we should not such as this. i spoke to a woman in texas who was carrying a fetus who had abnormalities, they needed an abortion to save their lives. officials were not willing to do it because they thought that this would be considered an abortion, therefore illegal. what determines the question, including having an

they haven't appointed, they are like a typical judge with security host: sam sabin 702. that can be part of our conversation as we move to open forum. pat, virginia, a republican. caller: hi, greta. i found you. the reason i am calling is it is unconstitutional and we should not be renewing it. host: why do you think it is unconstitutional to begin with? caller: it is spying on people without a warrant and invading privacy. the thing of it is that if 100 million people say and do something silly, it is still silly. founding fathers put the constitution together ironclad. i have watched over the years as congress and others have attempted to break that constitution. that constitution is ironclad. i don't think we need section 702. host: as a reminder from earlier this morning, section 702 allows intelligence agencies to conduct warrantless surveillance of non-citizens outside the united states. some can sneak in if americans are talking with non-us citizens overseas. data is collected and stored in a database that intelligence agencies can tap as part of other investigati