tv Washington Journal CSPAN March 31, 2016 7:00am-10:01am EDT
then efforts by republican presidential candidate to unbound convention delegates. we will speak to alex rogers. host: good morning. it's thursday, march 31, 2016. on today's "washington journal," we'll discuss the religious freedom laws making their way through several state legislatures and the pushback they're receiving from gay rights groups. we'll also take a look ahead at the republican national convention and the race for so-called unbound delegates. but we begin this morning on the debate over raising the minimum wage in california today. the state assembly could approve a deal to raise the state's minimum wage to $15 an hour over the next six years. meanwhile, new york state governor andrew cuomo continues to push his own package for an increase to $15 an hour.
as those two high-profile efforts play out in two of the nation's most populaced states, we're asking our viewers to weigh in. should the minimum wage be raised to $15 an hour? if your answer is yes, should it be done on a state-by-state basis or as a federal increase? special lines this morning on the "washington journal," minimum wage earners can call in at 202-748-8000. business owners, the number is 202-748-8001. all others can call in this morning at 202-748-8002. you can also catch up with us on social media, on twitter, it's @cspanwj. on facebook, it's facebook.com/cspan. a very good thursday morning. the minimum wage increase legislation that's moving through california's legislature is moving quickly this week after that deal was struck early in the week between governor jerry brown and legislators in that state. here's the "l.a. times" talking
about the status of that legislation this morning. the plan sailed out of committee yesterday with broad support from democrats and is scheduled for a floor vote in the assembly on thursday morning, today. the bill is expected to have an easier time in the senate and supporters are expecting to possibly send the bill to governor jerry brown today. here's what the plan would do. under the plan, the state's hourly minimum wage would increase 50 cents from its current $10 an hour on january 1 to $11 an hour the following year, and then increase by $1 annually until 2022, though brown and his successor could delay the increase by a year if the economy falters. businesses with fewer than 26 employees would get an additional year to comply. then the minimum wage would increase annually based on inflation. here's some of the background on the legislation. brown negotiated the package after two labor unions gathered signatures for november ballot measures that would increase the wage on a more aggressive
time table. the governor touted his plan as a compromise that can be adjusted for changing economic conditions. that's the news that's running through california this week. also a push in new york as well, as we said, governor andrew cuomo with his own increase, his own package that he's trying to push, this according to syracuse.com. governor andrew cuomo said tuesday that the legislature's leaders agreed with him that there should be a minimum wage increase in new york, but state budget negotiations are continuing over the amount and phase-in periods for different regions of the state. "minimum wage, the same thing. we all agree there will be a minimum wage increase. now we're discussing how much and by when and when," said cuomo, who wants the minimum wage to gradually be hiked to $15 an hour. so those are two of the high-profile efforts that are moving. we want to hear your thoughts this morning on the "washington journal." should the minimum wage be $15 an hour? again, minimum wage earners,
202-748-8000. business owners, 202-748-8001. all others, 202-748-8002. charles lane in this morning's "washington post" lays out the case against increases in minimum wage, or at least an increase to $15 an hour, as much a large jump. he writes in his column today, the basic tradeoff is that the increased earnings that a higher minimum wage gives workers at the low end of the income scale might be offset by pricing those workers out of jobs that they could have had at less than the new, higher minimum wage increase. e writes -- host: that's the debate we want to talk about today. business owners, want to you call in. minimum wage earners, want to
you call in, have special lines for you. all others, it's 202-748-8002. we'll start with business owners, craig is in louisiana. craig, good morning. caller: good morning. host: go ahead, craig. caller: good morning. host: good morning. your thoughts on a $15 minimum wage? caller: yes. what was the question again? host: would you support a minimum wage increase of $15 an hour? caller: no. no, sir, i wouldn't. host: why is that, craig? what kind of business do you own? how would it impact you? caller: basically right now the il field is in poor shape, and a person go to school and get a further education when you're paying them $15 an hour. you know, that's -- minimum wage was set up for people to get started and get their education and what they want,
not to support a family for, you know, you've got to try to pick yourself up by your bootstraps and it's not the fault of the government where you can make six figures on minimum wage. i'm just using that as an example. host: craig, how many people work at your shop, and how many are on minimum wage? caller: i have four people now, man, because the oil field is shut down. host: and if today increase the minimum wage to $15 an hour for those employees, would you have to lay anyone off? caller: well, the employees i have now are getting paid better than $15 an hour, but i couldn't hire any helpers around the shop for $15 an hour, because it wouldn't support them. host: craig, appreciate the call this morning. james is calling in from buffalo, kentucky. that line for all others. james, good morning. caller: yes, thanks for taking my call. you know, on the $15 wage
increase, it's a real bad shame that our country has fallen to such a new low. ack when i was a kid, the jobs , the minimum wage jobs for kids, our congress, our president, all sent us down the river without a paddle. d the thing about it is, the democrats would vote for trump so you could give them $5 and a fruit basket and they probably would vote for trump, because they react well for free stuff. and no, it shouldn't be no -- they should just set there and create jobs and bring our jobs back from overseas. those are kid jobs, and the foreigners coming in here, mexicans and stuff, that's what they want. they want the $15 an hour. we're taking -- they're taking the kids' jobs. so, no, it shouldn't be. thank you and have a nice day. host: that's james in buffalo,
new york, this morning. here's a map that shows the state of minimum wages in the united states. the green states on this map are states that have minimum wages higher than the federal rate, the $7.25 an hour. all the other colors are states that have minimum wages at the same or lower than or no minimum wage than the federal law. the floor is the federal rate in those states, that $7.25 an hour. but the green states are states that have wages higher than the federal rate. again, california looking to increase theirs to $15 an hour over the next six years. and the l.a. teams, which has been covering this story all week in all the california papers, been very closely following the story, has a chart this morning about who would be impacted the most with that $15 an hour wage increase. the share of workers who would get a raise under this proposal
if it went through, 16% of retail workers in california, 15% of restaurant and food service workers, 8% of health workers, 7% of administrative and waste management workers, 6% of educational workers, and so on down the line. those numbers coming from the u.c. berkeley center for labor research and education. you can check out that graphic at the "l.a. times" website. rich is a business owner from centreville, virginia. rich, good morning. you're on the "washington journal." caller: good morning. how are you? host: i'm good. caller: just a quick point. a business owner pays payroll tax, or a portion of the payroll tax. so if you imagine taking somebody's wage from, say, $7 to $15 an hour, the business owners share the payroll tax that's going to double. for me, as an example, i pay $1,000 a week in payroll taxes for my employees. so if they double the wages,
say i just employed, you know, entry-level workers, which i don't, but all the sudden it goes to $2,000 a week, that's somebody else you could have employed or paid down debt or so on and so for the. then the other point is -- well, two quick points. the other point would be, so what happens to my guy if he's making $15 an hour right before the minimum wage goes up? all the sudden he feels like he should be making more because he's worth more than an entry-level worker. and my last point is, it would be great if you guys could do a show or at least get somebody on to talk about payroll taxes, because that's something that the employers pay. the employers don't even know about it. and i'm not even sure why the hell we have to pay them. so thank you. thank you for taking my time. host: thanks for the suggestion. good topic for us to get into here on the "washington journal." we'll take the suggestion. tom is up next in los angeles, california. tom, good morning, on that line for all others.
caller: good morning. listen, i'm a senior, ok? this $15 an hour is a political thing. it allows the illegals that we have here to stay here. we have places in los angeles where it created stpwhrones to give people who don't -- where it created zones to give people who don't speak english. it's a political thing. it's put together by the unions. you have workers who are in the restaurant business, your dishwasher, minimum wage is an entry-level. it's not a living wage. it's a wage to start on and move up. it's done primarily by jerry brown, the unions in l.a. it's going to be -- you think mcdonald's can stay in business ? in san francisco, they're already experimenting where you go in, you talk to a computer, you pa the computer, and you go pick up your food. this is going to cut down on
business, and it's not beneficial to anybody except the democratic party in california. we really don't need it. we want educated people to earn $15 an hour, and we want something that makes common sense. like i said, it's all politics. host: tom, you mentioned mcdonald's. a story that is from the associated press talking about new demonstrations happening at mcdonald's, this in northjersey.com, running the associated press story. mcdonald's customers stopping in for a big mac on the eve of tax day may be greeted by demonstrators calling for a pay and labor union organizers say they're planning another day of strikes and protests exclusively targeting mcdonald's stores in dozens of cities on april 14, following similar demonstrations outside of a variety of fast food restaurants a year ago. the fight for 15 campaign has been at the heart of these efforts to raise the minimum
wage for fast food workers. the fight for 15 campaign, as the associated press notes, is being backed by the service employees international union. for april 14, organizers say they're focusing on mcdonald's because of its size and ability to influence pay practices throughout the economy, that according to the story. getting your thoughts, should the minimum wage be $15 an hour? and if so, if you support it, should it be done on a state-by-state basis? should it be done by raising the federal minimum wage? let's go to that line for minimum wage earners, special line for you this morning, 202-748-800. ruth is on that line, michigan. ruth, good morning. caller: good morning. yeah, i don't think it should be raised. this is the reason why. every time they raise anything, that means the prices of the food goes up, the prices of the gasoline goes up. so it really doesn't give us an increase. what they need to do is start fixing the prices of everything
to get things back in order. right now, anybody can raise every price that they've got, from health insurance to medicines and everything like that. that is what is making it impossible for everybody to live on, no matter, you know -- i mean, when i was working, i made good money. i'm on social security. we haven't had even a 1% increase in the last three years, but yet look at all the increases and all the other prices. this is what is causing most of the problems. host: ruth, you used to be a minimum wage earner? you're retired now? caller: yeah. i'm on social security. no, i was above a minimum wage earner, but the thing is, it doesn't matter, because between the taxes and the price increase on everything, it's ridiculous. host: minimum wage in michigan, where ruth is calling in from, $8.50 legislation already passed to move the minimum wage up in that state to $8.90 on
january 1 of 2017, and $9.25 on january 1 of 2018. those numbers coming from the national conference of state legislatures. it's ncsl.org if you want to check out all the information they have on minimum wages in the various states. michelle on that line for all others, minneapolis, minnesota, your thoughts on raising the national minimum wage or state minimum wages to $15 an hour. caller: hi there. good morning. it's a very sad subject when people sound as if a minimum wage is some great target. i mean, no one raises their child to say, hey, i just can't wait until you graduate high school and don't get any additional skills and get a minimum wage job and stay there for life. i'm going to sound like most of your other callers this
morning. minimum wage was -- it's for young people. the key here is that we have to -- there shouldn't be a 30-year-old working at a counter in mcdonald's. that 30-year-old should have had built their skill sets. jobs are based on skills. employers can't afford -- employers have different levels of jobs in their corporation based on skills, and the goal is to get everybody's skills to a point where they can get a better job. i mean, the goal is not a minimum wage job. i don't know how you're going to raise a family on a minimum wage. i don't even know -- frankly, i'm single, and i make $40 an hour, and i live comfortably, yes, but i mean, the goal is to get people educated. and you're want going to have these employers -- you're not going to have these employers who call in, they can't afford $15 an hour for a young kid, your young kids out of high
school, i mean, 16, 17-year-olds. how are they going to get a part-time job in the summertime if an employer has to pay them $15 an hour? they're just not going to do it. and i agree with the gentleman that called. unfortunately, it's the people at mcdonald's that are going to protest, but those people are going to be replaced by terminals, and that's just the way it is. it's very sad, and i don't know what the answer is, but the goal is not to grow up and keep a minimum wage job. those are entry-level jobs, and probably exit-level. host: michelle, got your point. on the issue of younger people being the ones who benefit most, here's some more numbers from that u.c. berkeley center for labor research and education. these were the numbers that were shared with the state assembly committee that took this issue up yesterday that passed this on a mostly party line vote, though not completely party line vote. in terms of who gets a raise with the $15 minimum wage, the one that would kick in in california over the next six
years, 18 to 19-year-olds, about 3.9% of those who would get an increase are 18 to 19-year-olds. 37.8% of those who would get an increase are 20 to 29-year-olds. 21.8% of those who would get an increase are 30 to 39-year-old. 6.1% are 40 to 54-year-old. and then 55 to 64-year-olds make up about 10.4% of those who would get an increase under this legislation that's moving through the california state legislature. in terms of ethnicity of those who would get an increase, 54.8% would be latino. 25.1% white. 12.7% asian. 4.8% black. if you want to check out the story, it's latimes.com. they've been covering this and covering the numbers that have been coming up from the u.c. berkeley study and others. minimum wage earners have a special line this morning, 202-748-8000.
sandra is on that line from florida. sandra, good morning. caller: good morning. host: good morning, sandra. what do you think? should the minimum wage be $15 an hour? caller: yes. and i'd like to see y'all out front passing out hamburgers for $15 an hour. host: sandra, what do you do? you're on our line for minimum wage earners. i have -- ave -- therefore, i can't work, but i still say y'all being out in front and work like they do.
host: ok, that's sandra in florida this morning. manny's on that line that we have set aside for business owners this morning, daytona beach, florida. manny, good morning. caller: good morning. yes, i own a bookstore in daytona beach, and i used to be a manager up a department store, so i know quite a bit about this. and what happens, in a department store, people just divide the sales by a certain percentage that the company allows, and then that's divided by how much people make. so like in my business, you know, i think the way to do it, i have an opportunity where my people can make more money if they perform, but to just say to give somebody $15 an hour, if i had to give people $15 an ur woit, say, like a bonus base -- an hour without, say, like a bonus, i would have to close. so there was a company out -- i
think it's called lincoln welding company, and i think this is what the united states should go toward, is that they ve the employees a part of how the company does. in other words, what i'm saying, it has to be a win-win. it seems like these days everybody wants to kill the corporations, and the corporations are the people that make the jobs, and small businesses, it should be win-win, not let's tax the crap out of business. host: ok, thanks for the call from daytona beach this morning. one of our earlier callers said this was a political stunt. politicians weighing in on the california increase in the state of the federal minimum wage, democrats especially supporting this increase in california and an increase in the federal wage as well. barbara lee, congress woman from california, well known congress woman, been in
congress a long time, writes on her twitter page this week, people working full-time shouldn't have to live in poverty. california's fight for 15 is a step toward a living wage. and then there's congressman maloney, a democrat from new york, again, where this effort is being pushed, no one who works full-time should be living in poverty. i'm a proud ally in the fight for 15. presidential candidates weighing in as well. hillary clinton with a tweet this week after that deal was announced in california, raising california's minimum wage to $15 an hour is a big win for workers and fight for 15 organizers. i applaud california and other states' work to raise wages. and then there's bernie sanders, who's been talking about this issue quite a bit, talks about it in a speech, talks about it every chance he can get on the campaign trail, a job must lift workers out of poverty, he writes this week, not keep them in it. the current federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour is a starvation wage. want to hear from you, our viewers, this morning. lines set aside for minimum
wage earners, business owners, and all others. tuscaloosa is next, line for all others. john, good morning. caller: good morning. yes, i don't think anybody that's earning a minimum wage could even, you know, afford to get to work and back. so how can you afford to feed and clothe yourself, especially if you have a child that you want to take care of and have a school, you know, that they have to go to? now, the other thing is, i hear some people talking about, you know, foreigners taking our jobs. foreigners aren't taking any jobs from americans. if you want to look at it, they're exploiting these people that come over here, the prisoners who are in federal prisons, they make a lot of
products like prosthesis. they make army uniforms, army helmets. they make an array of things, and they only get paid $2 and $3 an hour. now, that's where a lot of your jobs are going to, because they equipment, computer mouses. and the other thing that they do is you don't see any houses or anything like that in the united states anymore, because the prisoner does all the beef, all the food, and most of the stuff the prisoners are doing. and then the other thing is, the jobs are outsourced overseas. and then they want to pay the workers here, the americans a minimum wage, which you cannot survive on. that's all i have to say. thank you. host: john in tuscaloosa, alabama, bringing up prisoners and how we treat prisoners in
this country. some news on prisoners and sentencing reform. president obama yesterday commuted the sentences for 61 drug ofteners, extending his administration's efforts, according to the "new york times," to reshape a criminal justice sentencing system that the president has often described as unduely harsh and unfair to minorities and badly outdated. brief comments on wednesday, the president singled out house speaker paul ryan for his support on the issue and said he was still hopeful that criminal justice reform can get done. we're going to be talking about that issue, criminal justice reform, on sunday. there's a segment on that at 8:45 on this program, if you want to watch that. in terms of other upcoming segments, the jobs report coming out tomorrow, the monthly jobs report, the march jobs numbers. a story in today's "usa today" on the jobs report, economists predict solid gains will be announced friday. those numbers come out tomorrow morning. we'll be talking about them on saturday morning, breaking down
the jobs reports numbers. that's at 9:30 on the "washington journal." then a front-page story this morning from "the washington post," trump's unpopularity could shake up the house, talking about whether the house is in play with donald trump at the top of the republican ticket. paul kane will join us on monday on our show. we can talk about that story and talk about other efforts moving through congress and what's going to happen when congress gets back the week after next. so some upcoming segments if you want to tune in. but back to the phones on this issue of the federal minimum wage, should it be increased to $15 an hour business owner cynthia is in watertown, connecticut. cynthia, good morning. caller: good morning, and thank you for c-span. i appreciate having the opportunity to talk about this important issue. i was wanting to share -- can
you hear me? host: yes, cynthia, i'm lisping. caller: oh, i wanted to share my opinion about this as a business owner. first off, i wanted to tell you that i think that $15 is a bit high for a minimum wage. i think the minimum wage has to go up, because it hasn't gone up in decades. but, really, $15 is a bit high. and one of the reasons for this is a reason that was brought up earlier by another business owner, and that is that a person who's highly experienced is going to say, ok, that guy's minimum wage now is $15, and i have 10 years experience in this particular area, so i deserve more, and right now that person's wage might be $15 an hour because our minimum wage here is $8, $9 an hour. so what we're going to see as business owners, our payroll costs will go up, and we're
going to have to raise our prices in order to break even, let alone making a profit. but another comment is, as a former teacher, i believe that the lack of labor unions has really impacted our wage earning ability. labor unions used to be very popular in the united states, and when you had labor unions working in a particular region, it would automatically drive all wages up. so if you had labor unions increasing the salaries, you would start seeing salaries in the entire region going up. and because we don't have labor unions anymore really to drive up those wages, we're seeing a deflation in wages. and the worker has lost incredible amount of power in the workforce, and part of that is because of the increased use
of outsourcing. being a manufacturer here in the united states is extraordinarily difficult. it's made difficult by the incredible amount of regulations that were put through, and i'm a food manufacturer, and being a food manufacturer is an almost unsurmountable task with the f.d.a. host: how many people are employed at your business? caller: 20. host: and then how many of those are minimum wage? caller: only about three. because they're just starting out. host: and if the minimum wage were to go up, it's $9.60 in connecticut right now, going to go up to $10.10 in 2017. if it goes up to $15 an hour, would you have to let any of those three go? host: well, i wouldn't have them there, yeah, unless -- the only way that i would be able to afford to bring those people in is if i had a real increase in demand for my product.
host: would there be somewhere else -- does it come down to wages? is there another place you could cut to not let those people go? way i: well, the only could cut is if i start to use a more inferior product. what i tried to do is use organic products, non-gmo product. organic food is more expensive, so if i start using an inferior food product, it is going to impact on the health of people that he the food. -- eat the food. any processed food, they are using the cheapest food product materials possible to make more of a profit. any food that is manufactured over in china, i would never trust because there is no real control. they say there is a control, but believe me, there is no control really. host: thanks for the comments
about your business in watertown. that has not been a minimum wage increase in decades. just want to give numbers on that. this is the federal minimum wage, the national minimum wage. it was increased in 1997 and $6.55n 2007 to $5.85 to and then to its current $7.25 per hour. those numbers from the department of labor. we want to keep taking your calls. on the is in maryland line for minimum wage earners. good morning. caller: how are you doing? i think we are missing a point because the matter is there are many, many people who are working like at mcdonald's and
so forth to support their families. i think we fail to realize the many people that are in that situation. i think that is the reason why minimum wage is important that we increase it because we talk about we had this job crisis in america right now. this is where they are forced to work, at places like this. this is why it is so important know, this job problem here. they are forced to go to mcdonald's and support the families they have to support on this little bit of income. that is why it is important. i don't think people realize a lot of people here. you need a skill. you should look for minimum wage jobs. to get thatey
skill, to get the education and be successful in this skill. you know, it all comes together. i think it is very important that the minimum wage go up. host: germane, you are on the line for minimum wage earners. how much do you make in takoma park, maryland. caller: i am on the line for minimum wage, but i make a little more. i make over minimum wage, by just wanted to get my point in because i am driving to work now. i did not hear the numbers. host: i appreciate the call. in maryland, minimum wage is $8.25. legislation is to move it to $10.10 in theand summer of 2018. these numbers are from the national conference of state legislators tracking state and
among wages and upcoming changes, future enacted increases that are happening. you can see it at ncsl.org. conversation happening on twitter as we have been talking. tweets about this conversation about minimum wage being increased to $15 per hour. answering the question about how states should go about doing this and what it should be a federal enacted minimum wage. hour to put$15 an burgers and sweep floors, i want $25 an hour to do actual work.
a few of the tweets this morning on the "washington journal." david is in auburn, new york. a business owner. good morning. caller: good morning. host: go ahead, david. caller: i would like to make a quick comment here because i followed this issue for three years. they tried to legislate away property since fdr came in and probably before. the only people that have grown out of poverty or the people that are trying to legislate this. you are not going to create austerity by raising the minimum wage. one statistic bears this out. the only thing that has grown in all of this controversy is the size of government. 45 sense of a dollar -- 45 cents
of a dollar today compared to $.20 ofn it was every dollar. men of the people on minimum wage are business owners. host: you are a business owner. what is your business? caller: is impossible to legislate your way out of this. you need a larger economy. that would create jobs and a demand for labor. that would raise wages. host: what kind of business are you in? caller: construction. host: do you have workers that make minimum wage there? caller: no. i will just tell you this. every time you raise the minimum wage or raise wages, there is the payroll taxes that come on top of that, the liability insurance, the workmen's comp., the health insurance. it all gets added onto that. if you go to a $15 minimum wage,
you are paying $20 an hour for a worker. we don't talk about that a lot, but that is huge. new york state is a high-paying state. 1600 people a day are leaving new york. that is not a good thing. host: thanks for the call from new york. morningk times" this has an editorial about the effort to move to $15 per hour as a minimum wage, noting that new york established a $15 minimum wage for fast food workers in state law allowed the law.nor to bypass the governo
this "new york times" new york times editorial board today. every is next from florida -- eric's next from florida. good morning. caller: how are you doing? host: doing good. go-ahead. caller: the reason why it should go up a little bit, it does not have to be $15, but go up because everything in the store -- if you raise the minimum wage, everything will go up. everything is already going up. the water bill keeps rising up, but your pay is not changing. they keep raising my water bill and my light bill and gas bill. how can you afford anything if which?n't regime in -- raise the minimum wage? host: the national minimum wage,
the floor for minimum wage in this country. as we show that chart earlier, several states have got about that floor. florida is at $8.05. the states in green on this chart are the states that have minimum wage rates higher than the federal minimum wage. all the other colors are states that do not have minimum wages set or are sent at the federal minimum wage level. angela is next from new orleans, louisiana. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for c-span. i think you are overlooking something in this. you have to compare big corporations like cosco and walmart. costco pays their employees a livable wage. walmart doesn't. walmart employees are subsidized the federal government with food stamps and welfare or whatever.
john's pizza, you cannot give his workers livable wage. paychecksene the high the ceos and corporations are making compared to the people at the bottom, who are making all of the money for the corporations, but don't hurt enough to live on. -- earn enough to live on. host: how much are you making? muchr: i spent my life be making minimum wage until i got into a field, the music industry, where i was still making minimal. it, i i progressed in
developed ways to make more money. you got to give people a chance. host: what is a living wage mean? we hear that term thrown around. is enoughliving wage to put food on the table, pay your rent, send your kids to school. it is ridiculous to expect somebody to live on what is the minimum wage nowadays with the cost of living. the cost of living keeps going up. businessese that say they cannot afford $15 an hour, let me explain something. if you cannot afford to pay a minimum wage or livable wage, you don't belong in business. host: let me ask don about that. don as a business owner in north arlington, texas. good morning. caller: i have several fast food
restaurants. nobody works for me and makes minimum wage. i am curious to know how many --ple host: how many people what, don? caller: how many people in this country are actually paid minimum wage. host: we will find some stats are you on that. go-ahead. was your business. what isyou do -- your business? what do you do? caller: i have several fast food restaurants. host: if the minimum wage goes up, will you have to lay off some workers? caller: absolutely. host: numbers-wise, how many? caller: i have several restaurants i own, over 100 employees. i will have to reduce my force by about 20%. host: how does your workforce do people?b with 20% less
is their automation you can incorporate or how would that be replaced? caller: that is being bandied about about having more self-service so to speak. but also, people will have to double up. host: do those workers talk to wage?out a $15 minimum do they want a $15 minimum wage? do you talk to them about the impact saying i would have to reduce 20 of you? caller: absolutely, but you have to understand also that these are not careers. these are starter jobs to get these kids on a path to a real job later in life. host: when you have that conversation, when you explain that i will lay one in five of you all if this happens, what do they say? caller: most of the kids are understanding of that. are 15 at 16 years old and they will be making $15 per hour? most of their parents don't make $15 an hour. host: i appreciate the call from
north arlington, new jersey, not texas. jacksonville, florida, is next. sam is on the line for minimum wage earners. go ahead. caller: hello. host: yes sir. caller: i don't agree with the $15 an hour pay increase because i think that is too much of a problem for businesses, but i do think $11 would be a decent wage increase. owners in keeping the wage increase above the so they caused this problem on their own. host: thanks for the call from jacksonville, florida. one other editorial to point out for you. this was yesterday from the journal."street
talking about the california measure that is moving through that could get a vote or expected to get a vote in the state as a way today.there will be more examples like walmart's recent decision to close a store in oakland, california, where the minimum wage is $12.55. that is the wall street journal editorial board yesterday. trying to get one or two more calls.
go to california, costa mesa. john, what do you think about this effort? caller: i think it is a good thing. i have worked all of my life since i was 17 years old. i am 62. i have earned $100 an hour in the last job i worked. i had no disposable income after that. i am sick of these business owners calling in and talking about the math. why don't they do the math around their employees? it is a slave wage to work for a dollars an hour or nine dollars an hour. , i had no disposable income left over. host: what about the argument -- thaty would make those people would rather have the job then lay off the business?
if they force me to do it, i will have to lay off one in five of my workers. caller: they are taking advantage of the uneducated, of people that will never be able to go to college, people that just don't have the ability to excel to that. there is going to be those people. for them to pay that, i don't know how they look -- say that, i don't know how they look at themselves in the mirror. if they have kids, they have to go to state assistance, and their employees are being paid by the state, not them. they need to raise it to $50 an hour at least. host: try to get in john in south carolina on that line for minimum-wage earners. thank you for waiting. go ahead. caller: good morning. how ridiculous this conversation is. my 60's. barn remember when a candy was a nickel or a dime, when gas
was $.67 a gallon. hadou're the government done the way pay along with the wageing of a candy bar -- pay along with the pricing of a candy bar, you can buy a car for $6,000. you are telling me you cannot pay $15 an hour? go to hershey's, nike, or one of them. good grief. how much is enough? this is all about greed. why not cut back $1 billion this year and say we will give it to the employees? come on. host: that is john in south
carolina, our last call in this segment of the "washington will revisit we this topic at the end of our program today as california is getting ready to vote on the deal that came together very quickly earlier this week on raising the statement in the wage to $15 an hour over the next six years. two other stories to make you aware of. today in washington, d.c., president obama is welcoming world leaders on a summit on nuclear security. and looking to refocus global attention that he called a top priority on which his administration has had limited success. that story from the "washington post" this morning. in virginia, just outside of d.c., governor terry mcauliffe vetoed the bill that would have thisibited commission against same-sex couples. we will talk about that bill and other bills moving through state
legislatures on religious freedom issues coming up next in a roundtable. we will be joined by sarah warbelow and tim schultz. later in today's show,'s writers will be -- show, alex rogers will be here. wooing about the effort to unbound delegates. that is coming up on "washington journal." we will be right back. ♪
>> this weekend, the z's bid cities to -- the c-span long beach taser to california california. on the tv, learn about women's contributions. >> when the u.s. army was looking for a place to build aircraft, produce with it that we would need in world war ii, they picked here because steps away we have a wonderful airport founded in 1923. it was one of the first airports that had a takeoff and landing in different directions, which the army loved because they can use military planes in a way there that they cannot use in other places. douglas went into full production mode and was turning
out planes 24/7. is needed a lot of people to work here. the men went off to war. the women for the first time were brought out of the house and into the workforce. douglas was employing 45,000 people and day at its peak in the long beach area. about 40% of those people were women. >> on american history tv, we visit the port of long beach and discover the important of the nations second busiest container port. >> it was established as a former harper in 1911. we are little over 104 years old, and through that time, this port started on a wooden wharf and was a lumbar terminal that used to come up to the west to provide lumber to the growing region. navy, thee had a u.s. table station, and the naval
shipyard with our complex. they were here until the early 1990's. unfortunately, through the base closure process, the naval complex shutdown. will we were able to do is take an old federal facility and turn it into one of our modern container terminal. where we are today, 104 years later, we are sitting on the most modern sustainable marine terminal in the world. >> watch the c-span cities and sundayk tv afternoon at 2:00 on american history tv on c-span3. tour working,ies with our cable affiliates and visiting cities across the country. >> "washington journal" continues. host: for the next hour here on the "washington journal," we will discuss the debate happening over state religious freedom laws.
to do that, we are joined by sarah warbelow of the human rights campaign. tim schultz is with the first amendment partnership. appreciate you both being here. tim schultz, many of our viewers hearing about the religious freedom laws this week after a veto of a bill. the virginia governor as we just pointed out in our last segment vetoed another such bill yesterday. first, explain what these two laws, the virginia one and the georgia one, woman a design to do? tim schultz: for starters, these orders of these laws believe religious freedom is important because religion is so important that mason better citizens and religious freedom allows faith-based institutions who serve the homeless, educate children to go about their work unfettered without government interference. it is best for america even if you are not a religious person.
it is still an important thing. i think what is happening is states since the decision that legalized same-sex marriage in all 50 states, states are looking at ways to protect religious freedom in a way that is similar to the states that voluntarily enacted same-sex marriages. they are seeking on the back end of the judicial decision to institute protections that are similar in kind to laws signed into law by governor cuomo of new york in 2011 or passed by the hawaii legislature in 2013. host: wire these bills needed? -- why are these bills needed in state legislature? tim schultz: unfortunately in 1990, the supreme court decided which the aclu called the dred scott.
you basically did not have many constitutional protections for the free exercise of religion. since that day, since the early 1990's, most protection for religious freedom has come from statute, not from the constitution. i am not think the constitution does not provide protection, it just provides a lot less. host: why do they see these laws as a threat? sarah warbelow: there is over 200 laws in states targeting the lgbt community just the new legislative session alone. that is 12 weeks, 200 bills. the truth is a very tiny fraction of them mirror or model language has in states like hawaii. i can count on one hand the number of bills that are designed in such a way. instead, what we are seeing are really sweeping legislations design at undermining every aspect of lgbt people's lives,
impairing the ability to receive services that are taxpayer-funded, undermining protections that have been passed in cities across the country, designed to ensure that ay individual who goes into store and seeks services is guaranteed the ability to receive those services that they can pay for them. host: gay groups getting a big win any marriage case last year. legislatures the new battleground for gay-rights groups? bottling has been legislation in this state for a long time. there are those who oppose any basic civil rights for lgbt people. there may be some people who are uncomfortable with the decision, and that motivated some of their actions. but truthfully, it is the far right that has taken a hold of this issue to push an agenda of
demeaning and pretending lgbt people are not citizens of this country. host: sarah warbelow of the human rights campaign is with us. tim schultz of the first amendment partnership. if you have questions or comments, democrats, 202-748- 8000. 48-8001.ans, 2020-7 a law in north carolina making a lot of news this week. explain what this bill would do in north carolina. guest: that is not a true religious freedom law. it might have ancillary effects on religious freedom, but it is not one we have been involved with in terms of the explanation. i am not an expert on the north carolina law. guest: the north carolina law strips away municipal andections from lgbt people
some veterans as well because they are not a part of state law. in indiana and north carolina have passed protections for veterans. one of the dirty secrets about the bill is it undermines protection for all north carolinians. it made it harder to address discrimination by forcing people to file federal suits instead of state suits. and then to add even more damage , the law prohibited transgender people from accessing .ppropriate facilities by government buildings, we are talking about any government building owned by the state or local government. that includes schools. it includes many of the convention centers, many of the universities. really a sweeping negative bill. host: phone lines for democrats,
republicans, an independents. you can start calling in now. on the religious freedom laws like the virginia law, the georgia law, is there a middle ground that can be met between the two sides? i heard about a utah compromise. is that something that respects both sides of the civil rights versus the religious freedom debate? guest: we supported the so-called utah compromise, and it worked in other states. host: what does it do? guest: it has robust protections for religious liberty alongside non-determination guarantees for lgbt people in housing and employment. i think by doing so there were two things that happened. one, illegally protected religious freedom quite broadly. way it did so in a
that lowered the temperatures around this issue. i think it is important because battlelines are being drawn, swords are coming out. if you look at the social media conversation, it is pretty hostile on both sides. cohesion, it is important to try to address these issues in a state of mutual understanding, so i think in general, that is a good approach that i would like to see other states consider. host: sarah warbelow, the the utah compromise as it is called worked? guest: and worked in utah for a couple of reasons. one being it did not expect religious liberties much. the underlying law in utah as pertained to race dissemination and sex this commission already have very large -- for religious organizations. adding sexual orientation and gender identity to law resulted in lgbt people being treated the same as every other protected
characteristic. the truth of the matter is the laws work very strong for -- werenation in utah tha not very strong for dissemination in utah so it cannot be a model moving forward except we like the idea and want to see lgbt people added to existing nondiscrimination laws. no changes, no different treatment than any other protected characteristic. host: let us start with sheila in carrollton, georgia, on the bones. good morning. caller: good morning. good morning to your guests. i have 65, and i am straight -- i am 65, and i am straight. when i first came to georgia, i lived with two gay men. -- i called
for vetoing the bill, and i called my state senator and asked him please don't try to obstruct it. i don't understand these laws. we haveunderstand why to be so mean to people. they are just people. host: thanks for the call in georgia. sarah warbelow, can you explain the lobbying effort behind the vetoing of this georgia bill that happened earlier this week? guest: even from the get-go at the beginning of the state legislative season, there were over 400 businesses who had come out in opposition to this legislation in part because it was motivated by this commission. -- by discrimination. was similar legislation was introduced last year, one of the republican legislators kindly
made an amendment that said this cannot be used to engage in discrimination. the sponsor of the bill and several colleagues through a temperature term -- threw temperature interim and said that is exactly what we want to do is allow dissemination. i agree on isas the motivation behind religious actdom restoration was to protect religious minorities. it was to provide the ability for someone to challenge neutral laws. over time, particularly in the past couple of years, it has turned from allowing an individual to be able to say to the government yes, i do get to headpieceigious in a public space into undermining people basic civil
rights. host: an area you agree on? guest: she is right about the original motivation of the act, but sarah is happy about the fact that people object to same-sex marriage are now probably themselves a religious minority. i think if you believe in religious freedom for some, you want to believe in religious freedom for everyone. that the from inside reason the so-called nondiscrimination cloth lause is added -- c being added is not to be a licensed to discriminate, and this goes back to the original, you resist amendments to the fundamental structure of the freedom of religion acts and then you rule out and classes that is what people don't want
to have those kind of clauses that sarah likes. religious freedom supporters disliked because they rule completely out of bounds certain topics. on theet us go to lou line for democrats. good morning. caller: good morning. i have two questions. one on a related topic, karen a gay guy mary -- can a gay guy marry a lesbian woman in every state now? two, how does the government decide what the gender of the individual is? i will wait for the answers on line. guest: sure. yes, a gay man and a lesbian woman wanted to marry, they can certainly do so in any state in this country. even prior to this decision, they had that option. generally, gay men are not interested in marrying lesbian women. it goes against their sexual orientation. i so sorry, i forgot the second
part of that question. guest: i did also. i was so entranced by the first part. is that it a reality show concept, unfortunately. host: we will go to ken in lancaster, south carolina. good morning. caller: yes, i will start for one whe minute. everything you say i agree with but the transgender. if a transgender man is dressed like a woman, you should not be able to use a woman's restroom. the bill takes the matter in schools and public spaces. also, a tom rice for everybody, by don't approve of that aspect.
-- also, equal rights for everybody, but i don't approve of that aspect. why are you emphasizing the transgender part? host: you want to pick up here? this goes back to the restroom legislation debate in north carolina. guest: yeah. transgender people are part of the lgbt community. discrimination against transgender people is very serious and very real. individuals who are transgender simply want to use facilities consistent with their gender identity. if you are a woman, a transgender woman, you present yourself on a daily basis to the world as a woman. you understand yourself to be a woman. entering a men's restroom is a dangerous proposition for you. you are likely to be assaulted. you upset people. if a transgender man were to walk into a woman's restroom,
women would be furious. hat is not the kind of society we want to live in. what we want to do is make sure everyone has the safety and privacy they need in restrooms and making sure transgender people can use restrooms consistent with their gender identity is the best way to do that. host: did you want to jump in? obviously, i can say that this is a clearly relative issue. not that transgender is a is a new phenomenon but society is debating this in a new way. if you google search on articles about this prior to five years ago, you would not find very many. i think jeter is a complex -- gender is complex on the science of this. it is important to do with this in a nuanced way, in a non-shouting right.
when you can come together and think about solutions that work out for everybody. be all that, that is from -- beyond that, that is probably my only comment on that. host: explain what the first amendment partnership is and how you got in this group. guest: we are a platform to work together on issues related to religious freedom. we focus purely on the legislative side of that, not be litigation side. we have had a particular focus of states. we have been on the ground for 30 states over the years working on these issues. host: it is first amendment partnership. hrc.org is the website for the human rights campaign. republican.ana, good morning. caller: good morning. .irst time caller
might issue with these laws and that -- my issue is with these laws and that when it comes to these gays and transgenders want to go to my church and demanded to be married in my church, and it is against our belief. i don't think that that is right. that is where i feel like we are being discriminated against. they want to cram down their freedom to destroy my belief. host: tim schultz, is brings up a good question. could a pastor or preacher who does not believe in gay marriage before his to perform -- be forced to perform a transgender, gay, lesbian marriage ceremony.
guest: no, that would be a violation of the first amendment. i think there is also this fact att i think he is hinting that right now if you look at the teachings of the majority of religious bodies in america, 90% of americans who belong to an identifiable faith community belong to a community that will not actually perform a same-sex marriage, ok? really the question these laws raise is sure these faith-based bodies be punished? should they be punished in other ways? should they be denied tax benefits or nonprofit status or the ability to contract with the government when it makes sense for the government to do so? that is at stake here. some of these issues related to hosting a wedding a little bit of a distraction from the real
controversy. host: did he want to weigh in? guest: we have no expectation that any church will marry anyone that they object to. definitely across-the-board, it does not just apply to other bt people. i-- to lgbt people. may be the couple does not matter some other teaching of the church. the issue is not about whether these searches are going to be interfered with in their religious teachings. it is when those religious bodies, those associated entities step out and engage in the public sphere. they accept taxpayer dollars run aroundeople and and refused to provide services lgbther bt people -- people.
without receiving huge grants and money from the government, they should be able to do so, but it you will take funds, including funds from lgbt people and deny emergency housing, critical counseling, that is a serious problem. york.let's go to new where matthew is on the line for democrats good morning. caller: good morning, gentlemen. i have a quick question for mr. schultz. christianityeved and religion as a whole was supposed to be inclusive. i am missing the point about what religious freedom means. if i am a sick person and i go to a catholic hospital, are you health carey me servic service because of baby my affiliations or whatnot? what would jesus think if you deny people that come to you in
their time of need? thank you. catholic hospital will not refuse service to anybody.i am not catholic , but that is not how they do service. this last question gives to the nub of what this controversy is. i think most people of faith believe that religious freedom has to extend outside of the walls of the church. when you come into the public square, that the government can go after you. i don't believe that. i don't believe that is the right way to go. sometimes, taxpayer money is involved, but when it is involved, it is to save taxpayer money. because theyg so are saying that it's actually be best way of providing public services at the highest quality to the taxpayer, and ultimately, these kinds of public-private
partnerships benefit the public and taxpayers so we should not use some limited concept of religious freedom to limit something that would balance to the benefit of the entire community. host: two tweets on this as folks at home watching. you can join the conversation. about a half hour left in this segment. you can call in as well like valerie did in berlin, new jersey, on the line for independents. good morning. caller: good morning. two brief comments because i transitioned from male to female some years ago. listening to some of your callers and guests time to time, there are still so many misconceptions. awould like to give you two
brief comments to clear that up because education is so important about this. first of all to put transgender the lgin reawith communityb is a misnomer because lesbian, gay, and bisexual people are just committed against because of who they are attracted to or who they have relationships with. transgender people are not sexual minorities in that it is about their choices of attraction with intimacy in a mate. to be transgendered is to have a brain wired in a gender that is one way and a body that is not developed in a way that matches it. it is a conflict. it has nothing to do with who you are attracted to or who you sleep with. that is never one. -- that is number one. the only way to get attention is to be a minority so you can be
recognized. the other issue is the bathroom issue. i look very much like a female because i am one. i talk like a female. i walk like a female. yet, these religious freedom laws that want to say my birth certificate says i was born biologically male, even though everything i just said about how i describe my appearance and save my personal matches uim, me, you would want these crazy bathroom notions, you would want me as a woman in heels or a skirt to walk into a men's room? that is ridiculous. first of all, there would be men that might want to do me harm or be upset by it. it is just asking for trouble. this country has to learn to accept people for who they are. someonele thing about who is different violates or affects or takes away or
threatens like a big argument with gay marriage before he became legal was gay marriage threatens my straight marriage. i would like to know how it is a threat to your straight marriage because it does not conform to your beliefs of what marriage is is one thing. it is not a threat. is a difference. it is not a threat. people in a minority, the last thing they want is extra attention. host: that is valerie in berlin, new jersey. the you want to weigh in on that? guest: certain. transgender people can be straight. they can be gay. they can be bi. we do operate as a united community because we think it is so important to advocate for everyone who has been disseminated against because of their sexual orientation or gender identity. many people who are gay, lesbian, bisexual have
experienced discrimination because they do not conform to norms about gender. people find that some gay men feminine for them. some of these concepts hide our though all unique. host: kathleen in saint augustine, florida, a republican. good morning. caller: good morning. my issue is i don't understand how the matter in which you live your private life can in any way be considered a religion. i am a catholic. my definition of marriage, we believe it is a sacrament between a baptized man and a baptized women. onbody who wants to infringe that for me is not ok in the catholic church, but there are other churches who will serve that, and that is fine. the issue that i have is i don't
people have to make such an issue as to the way they live their private life, and if someone does not agree with them, take it as a personal affront. i just don't understand it. i don't understand how anyone can think that a law can change the way i think. openly force a person to tolerate or whatever word you want to use, but you cannot ever force your thinking to accept no matter what laws you have. host: tim schultz. guest: thank you for your call. i think sexual orientation and gender identity are things that are at the core of individual identity, and it would be therefore appropriate just as it is with religion for those identities to be publicly shared just as other parts of our identity are. sex, anything. where are you from.
butink that is appropriate, i think what is true for sexual orientation and gender identity is true for religion. i think religion is such a parter part of that core of human identity that as long as it is in church or in your private life, if that is what the law says, i think we will have big trouble because religion is so central to identities of individuals and the religious organizations they form to serve including serving lgbt people. host: have you respond to that? guest: i agree with a chunk of that that religion is a part of their identity. that is why we have laws go beyond the first amendment. organizations like the human rights campaign worked with cities around the country to adopt nondiscrimination ordinances where they do not have one. we always make sure religion is one of the characteristics that
receives protection. just like we think that someone should not be fired when they put a picture of them and their spouse on their desk, we think that an individual who puts a picture of themselves having been baptized or part of a bar mitzvah ceremony should not be at risk of losing their jobs as well. it really is about treating people equally in our society and giving everyone equal opportunity. host: new york is up next. stephen is on our line for democrats. to five minutes left in this 25 minutes left in this segment. caller: good morning and thanks for c-span. the governor of georgia and the governor of carolina is looking at economic statutes that these kind of laws would bring a loss
of businesses to the state. , churches0 years ago, in these conservative states would not marry interracial if you in the name of it did not look right or was not religiously correct. in kind of discrimination this day and age should not be accepted. it is hidden under the guise of religious freedom, but it is this commission anyway you look at it. guest: i think he is actually incorrect sociologically about the history of the majority of religious denominations in the u.s. did recognize interracial marriages as real marriages. that would include the black denominations, black clergy, historically black institutions. that is part of what is different today.historically
black religious congregations do not generally recognized same-sex marriages, won't perform them. i think that is one of the ways in which this is different and why the comparison should probably not be made. i am not arguing there is no injustice here, but comparing it to that horrible injustice is a mistake and something we should not do. host: from kentucky, line four, ann is waiting. good morning. caller: i would like to know where one person's right to begin and where the other end.n's writerights that couple that wanted to get married with kim david, they targeted that county. they drove one hour to that county to get there because they knew that would be a big deal because they knew who she was and that that woul was going toe a problem. the couple that wanted a pizza parlor to cater their way as if
they really wanted pizza at their wedding, they went there because that family-owned pizza gns abouthad side christianity and a wall for praying for people. they went there because they knew it would be a problem to work with them in that way. as far as the bathroom, you know, i am pretty sure there have been men dressed as women and women dressed as men using these other facilities all along. nobody has known about it. if a man wants to walk into a women's restroom, and he is fully dressed as a man, but he is transgender, he just likes to dress as a man that they, were about all the other woman that are in that letter? what about them -- what about all the other women that are in that bathroom?
what about thm? them?-- guest: i think there is some real misinformation here. the pizza parlor did not have a customer that came seeking access to pizza for a wedding. that was a company that proactively decided to waieigh in on a political debate at decided to refuse lgbt people. that was a choice they made in making those comments. a lot of misinformation about bathrooms, around access to facilities. states plus the district of columbia that protections for transgender people in accessing public spaces, including restrooms. in fact, minneapolis has had such a law in place since 1975
and minnesota adopted a law in 1993. that is over 20 years of experience in which nobody in minnesota feels unsafe in the bathroom. there are not problems. there are not problems anywhere in this country in which transgender people have protections accessing the appropriate restroom. host: i want you to into this question but i want to play before you do that a bit of the oral arguments that happened in the case that brought up the issue of the religious freedom restoration act and where this question this color brings up of where one person's writes ends -- rights ends and the other begins. discussing different laws in the united states.this is the oral argument . [video clip] >> i'll try to find out something about being a member of society.
sometimes, when a religious person who is not a hermit or monk is a member of society, he does have to accept all kinds of things that are just terrible. who objecte quakers, to vietnam. think of the people who object to laws protecting blacks. think of people who object to shoveling snow in front of the walk that will lead to the abortion clinic. think of the christian scientists who know when a report the accident will go and receive medical care that his against their religion. think of the taxes. there is no question that does not violate the religious law, but plenty of other things do. what is the line? why do the quakers have to pay the taxes for vietnam?
but you don't find the religious an extraslim getting day off during the week when the law says nobody can work on sunday against seven is on saturday -- i've been reading and reading to find a clear, simple statement of what that line is and how it works. host: that was the case, that argument happening on march 23. the contraceptive coverage mandate -- viewers can go to www.c-span.org. what is the line? guest: by the way, i do support the literature in that case. it's interesting that he mentions the quakers. at the beginning of the country as a british armada was sailing -- we had to have everybody to defend the country. the u.s. exempted quakers from
mandatory military service, give irheu way, company did religious belief. there will never be an absolutely bright line. , it should be the same principle bill clinton cited. government ought to have a very good reason before it interferes with summons religion. i think government should do everything it can to avoid it if it can. there are ways for gay people to be married as they have a legal right to be without conscripting other people of that process. if we approach this with a spirit of let's accommodate both sides come if we can, let's not force this on anybody, that is the principle that ought to guide us. host: billy in miami, florida appeared independent. good morning. caller: good morning.
i think you're doing a fabulous job, sarah. as a veteran, i am embarrassed that the man on the other side is exposing that we should have different rights for different people. what the heck did i go to vietnam and fight for? we should all get along and strive to be a bit closer. what would jesus do in this position? the reason we are going against gays and transgenders is because you cannot do it to the blacks like the church is used to do it. it is against the law. , i have a religion -- ais is a parody -- i have religion that tells me i'm against black people. it is a slippery slope,. you should really think about it. sir. is a slippery slope,
guest: first come i want to thank the color for his service to our country. most veterans who understand the constitution understand that the constitution does demand that we treat certain things differently. sarah is talking about a federal non-dissemination lobby and we have protections for religious organizations. with respect that we don't have to race. we treat these things differently. the caller is just mistaken on this particular question. sometimes equality and justice demands that we do treat things differently. i think that is appropriate. host: if you want to get your questions income of 10 minutes left. -- if you want to get your questions in, 10 minutes left. lou is a republican. good morning. caller: there are some things
you people don't say. whether liberals or progressives , whatever you want to call it, you are trying to lower the population worldwide. they do this because they cannot breed. some have experimented with this. this was going on even back in the 1970's. if someone had a bad relationship with the opposite sex, they decide to go with the same-sex. you people never talk about that. guest: same-sex couples actually do have children. they adopt children, they have children in the same way that many straight couples do with assistance from reproductive technologies. the literature is overwhelmingly clear that same-sex couples are just as good at parenting as opposite sex parents.
the children's outcomes in life are just as good. theally cannot speak to interest in population control. it is certainly nothing the human rights campaign is ever about. i don't know of other lgbt organizations. we are really about promoting dignity and fairness for lgbt people and their families. --st: the science is also that is why we need to try to find a balance and accommodation in these situations. the evidence is overwhelming, religion is good for our country. host: don is a democrat. in morning. caller: good morning. and thesen the left gay folks, they don't read the bible, obviously. they know that the bible says a man that lays with another man
is an abomination before god and they should surely be put to death. america has become a solid amend the more anyway. a --solid amend the more gamora comesodom and anyway. you on ancouple of island and you ain't going to have no babies. guest: i'm horrified that in this day and age, that anyone would suggest that anyone in the u.s. should be put to death for who they are. we don't murder people of faith, we don't murder ;gbt people -- lgbt people. people neednk lgbt to be able to live in the u.s.
with dignity and without persecution. most christians come everybody of all faiths would agree with me. host: martin, good morning. i strive to live by the golden rule because over the course of recorded history, summoning people have been disseminated against, especially black people and jewish people and gay people. -- discriminated against. they been dehumanized to the point from bullying to genocide. i try to live by the golden role. -- golden rule. host: illinois. line for democrats. caller: good morning, everyone. i have a statement and kind of a question. i am gay, also a christian.
the thing i have to say is, we are using religion incorrectly it's forcing people to go against their religious believes. the have to practice their faith completely. i cannot go into the catholic church and asked to marry another man. i cannot go to the catholic church and ask you to marry a divorced person or person of a different faith because all of those are deeply held religious beliefs. i have an issue when someone is i cannotd saying provide flowers or cake because of my deeply held religious beliefs about gay marriage. but i have no issue with providing it for divorce people that divorced people -- .roviding it to divorced people if you have no problem with itlterers, you cannot say
for one and not the other. it has to be universal. what really scares me with all legislatorsthese are so quick to try to pass these things that they are missing the fact that they are passing poorly written and bad laws. the law in north carolina that stands right now, their whole fear is men going into ladies bathrooms. if youw made it illegal have a child of an opposite gender or you have someone who is physically or mentally challenged, that you need to help them to the bathroom, you cannot take them to the bathroom with you. you would be violating the law. that is one of my biggest concerns. how do you address that? these laws impacting everyone. as much as i disagree
with north carolina laws, much of that did get overturned. the legislature did put in provisions that allow for caretakers to take someone who is disabled or a child under the age of seven. i don't want anyone in north killing it to be like they cannot engage in those activities. the underlying message is right. -- i don't want anyone in north carolina to feel like they cannot engage in those activities. the was leaked to the media night before it passed we heard from legislators that they only bill final version of the five minutes before they were asked to take a final vote on it. five minutes they saw that final bill. they cut off debate. governor mccrory signed it within two hours of the legislature passing it. there was no opportunity for anyone to assess what the law did, the wisdom of the law or its comments on it.
guest: christopher raised a good point about hypocrisy, which is an important one. and a lot of these situations where they say they are singling out gay people, a lot of these wedding professions, wedding artists have refused lots of other jobs on moral reasons. they have nothing to do with lgbt people. same with catholic adoption agencies. provided options to single people or single individuals. they are following their faith broadly, not just with particularly. are there other laws moving through state legislatures that you think the two of you could agree on? is there a religious freedom law you think might pass with support from both of you? guest: i think it's possible.
it would take is quite some time to find out what that would look like. we very much support religious freedom. we do believe in it. it is a core american value. we are not out there to undermine the first amendment. where we have some disagreement and where we need to figure things out is that we don't believe that religious freedom laws should allow for certain third-party harms. when you are a claim against the religious because believes are impeded, you should be able to do that. the first amendment does provide a number of those protections, but you should not be able to interfere and harm other individuals. guest: there is case out of startingre a pastor is a prisoner reentry program out of his church, the neighbors objected and said we do not want ex-cons hanging around our
neighborhood. he took his case to the texas from court and one -- texas supreme court and won. the neighbors did not want a bunch of potentially dangerous excrement is hanging around the neighborhood. if you had a rule that said this could never impacting third-party, this prisoner reentry program would be closed out today. criminalsus excrement hanging around the neighborhood. you can have your free speech, as long as it does not offend me that we would not have freedom of speech or freedom of religion. and timrah warbelow schultz. we appreciate the time from both of you this morning. up next, we will be joined by
alex rogers of "the national journal." talking about the for a contested republican convention this summer and a behind-the-scenes efforts to woo those unbound delegates. ♪ >> book tv has 48 hours of nonfiction books and authors every weekend. here are some programs to watch for. , george washington university professor catherine ross this guesses book "lessons in censorship -- discusses her book "lessons in censorship." mary frances berry examines illegal voting practices in the u.s. in her book "five dollars and a pork chop sandwich."
she's interviewed by francis overton. >> through the people in office and running for office, those same people over and over again very often. they are the ones who are corrupt. they are the ones corrupting democracy. the other people are not getting the benefits of it because they are not acting collectively to counteract this. in all of these years. sunday, steve forbes, author and publisher of orbs magazine. he will join us to talk about his life and discuss his latest book, "reviving america." join in the conversation. we will be taking your phone
calls, tweets and e-mails from noon to three clock p.m. eastern -- 3:00 p.m. eastern. home to the world's largest shakespeare collection -- go to book tv.org for the complete we -- booktv. work for the complete weekend schedule. >> landmark cases come his torque supreme court decisions. cases, his torque supreme court decisions. -- historic supreme court decisions. >> it sets up the political structures. it is also the law. if it is a law, we have the means -- tell you the >> it is the ultimate anti-presidential case. >> who should make the decisions
about those debates? tonight, we will look at the case that struck down many state and federal regulations on working conditions. host: alex rogers is a staff correspondent for "the national journal." the race is on for the unbound delegates. a race happening on the republican side. and are unbound delegates why is this race for them being called the primary within this year's primary? guest: the candidates are trained to get a majority of delegates. delegates, at least on the first round of
are less than 10% of the overall delegate count. these people are free to vote for whomever they choose. north dakota this weekend, senator ted cruz is going to fargo to try to get some of these unbound delegates to vote for whoever they like. there's also in pennsylvania, when they vote, 54 out of the 71 delegates will be unbound. , they decidedates to somehow linked the result of the congressional district or -- there is now going to be come as we approach possibly the first contested convention since 1976, a search for these unbound delegates. host: why are some of these delegates bound and some unbound? guest: it is a state party law.
in pennsylvania, you will have a large pot of unbound delegates. in the case of a potential contested convention, those people will be very influential depending on how they decide to act. host: a reminder of where the republican delegate count stands right now. the all-important number, 1237 delegates. if a candidate hits that number, the unbound delegates will not be a contested convention. comes to thee convention with less than that delegatesese unbound become very important. donald trump at 735. rubio had 121 delegates before he dropped out of the presidential contest. do those folks remain bound to marco rubio or do they become unbound? guest: he is trying to keep
those delegates right now. he's been reaching out to gop members in minnesota and alaska. i was talking to the puerto rico gop yesterday. rico. puerto are expectings that at some point will say we support this candidate. for now, they are up in the air. host: democrats, 202-748-8000. publicans, -- republicans, 202-748-8001. independents, 202-748-8002. take us through the first day of the convention and how this process will work and where these unbound delegates come into play. guest: the campaigns are trying to figure out how to do this. they are hiring people from the
last time this happened in 1976. donald trump recently announced that he hired a new advisor to run his convention who was there in 1976. the john kasich campaign has hired two other people who were there last time. 1237, theyas the will have to start doing multi-ballot voting. depending on which ballot it is change the percentage of delegates which are unbound. voting,e first round of how many are bound and how many get to decide at that moment who they will vote for? come ithe first ballot believe over 90% of the delegates are bound. about second ballot, it's a majority. on the third ballot, it's 80% better unbound. -- that are unbound.
it will be historical. be aat happens, it will massive point for the gop to figure out who they are. host: for the delegates that become unbound on the second round, how do candidates go about reaching out to those folks? what is happening inside the campaigns right now to try to potentially pick those folks up in the second round? guest: a great example is south carolina. donald trump got all 50 delegates. that first ballot, they will all have to vote for donald trump. on the second ballot, they will be unbound. so, you are seeing the campaigns oning to woo them and say the second ballot, come to our site. host: do we know who's made those commitments?
is that something made public? guest: no, most of this will be behind the scenes. i've talked to a few d.c. delegates who were bound to marco rubio. they are reaching out, getting calls from the ted cruz campaign. i talked to one d.c. delegate who was getting this call is as marco rubio was giving his concession speech. these campaigns are aggressive. another good example would be the northern mariana islands, people say donald trump may not have as good of a delegate strategy as ted cruz. delegates.p got nine took over some of the ben carson delegates and has been chipping away here and there. host: the primary within the primary, talking about the unbound delegates that could
become kingmakers at the convention if it is a contested convention. none of this matters if someone gets that 1237 number. we are talking with alex rogers of "the national journal." dennis from kingston, pennsylvania. independent. caller: good morning. about the unbound delegates, are they unbound in the primary or are they just unbound at the convention? delegatesthere's a 71 from pa, that's two thirds of the delegates that are unbound? so, they will save their nomination for the convention?
or, do they vote in the primary and then give their delegates to the candidate then? host: let's break down pennsylvania. guest: in pennsylvania, the primary is in april, april 26. you will have a vast majority of their delegates being unbound. they will be off the ballot and many of them can say whether or not they will go for one candidate or another. or does not say at all. there's over 120 something people running for these 54 spots. when you see that person, you will be able to book for that delegate specifically. -- be ableent roles to vote for that delegate specifically. there's different roles for different states.
if you are a marco rubio supporter, you can vote for the marco rubio delegate. in north dakota, colorado, there's two places people are looking at right now. north dakota, all of those are unbound. many of those are unbound. in colorado, many of the votes will be on local conventions. insiders choosing those delegates. host: those party insiders could pick donald trump, pick ted cruz or pick and unbound delegate. what is the incentive for colorado to send a bunch of unbound delegates to the public and national convention -- republican national convention? the coloradof delegates are going to be unbound.
can say on their thing who exactly they will be voting for. but, they don't have to. the idea of it is the state parties have decided in some particular areas they want to have more control over the process. they want to be able to have these people who are very involved in their state party vote exactly who they want to vote for. host: victoria, texas. republican. good morning. i would just like to --, i just don't see how week the voters who go out in the rain, sleet, get off of work early, fight traffic and stand in line for five hours in the are,and cold -- here we we've got to be the dumbest people in the world because you get up there to the voting booth
and we vote and then come to find out when it's all dabbled outcome we have somebody else making that decision for us, whether we should go to this person or that person. how much longer are we going to do this, people? i really think this is unjust for the voter of this country. it is saying we are so stupid, we should vote for what delegates will take our vote and then vote for whoever they want to. let's wake up, people. host: can you talk about the history of this? has there been pushed back? -- pushback? guest: one virginia rnc member try to change the rule. 2012 thatthis rule in
decided to be a nominee, you had to get a majority of the delegates in eight states. that hurdle commit they decided hurdle would knock out a guy like john kasich. now, the rnc rules committee will be looking at some of these rules that can potentially affect who will be eligible. , if you question is change some of these rules, will that affect the impression of the voters? will they be upset if some of these other candidates are now going to be eligible to be the nominee when come in the last cycle, maybe they weren't? the trump sort borders -- trump supporters will be very upset. host: step back in history, has there been republican
presidential candidates who have used this unbound delegate process to change the outcome in their favor? guest: on the other side of the a 1980there was candidate who try to get the nomination from carter. he wanted to go income even though he did not have enough delegates, wanted to change the rules and make everybody unbound. that failed and carter got the nomination. in 1976, the less time there was -- lastted convention time there was a contested convention, president ford was .gainst reagan tempers andome high so much of the phone off and started bashing it and there were shoving matches and whatnot.
-- someone took the phone and started bashing it. host: alex rogers is our guest. the article that recently ran in journal." the national huntsville, alabama. .ine for independents fred, what is your expectation for the republican convention this summer? caller: it's been about 34 days since i called "washington journal." i want to reemphasize some thing i said last time i called. you need to make sure it is john kasich. i know he has passed ties with fox news. these e desperate times. i would sleep in whole lot better at night with john kasich in the white house than those other two dumb people he is running against. it is time for you guys to do as a favor.
don't put those two idiots in the white house. think you. have a nice day. -- thank you. have a nice day. host: talk about what's going on in the john kasich campaign when it comes to this unbound delegate process. guest: the campaign has hired some staff. this is essentially their only real shot. they are mathematically impossible to catch up to ted cruz and donald trump. it will be fascinating to watch what he will be doing with his 140 delegates. host: pat in new jersey. republican. good morning. my question is based on what i've seen in presidential elections where you've had selectors -- they did not vote for the person who won that state in the general election. evenis to stop delegates,
those who are bound, from voting for someone else on the first ballot? guest: if you are bound, you have to vote for that candidate in the first ballot. after the first ballot, number will be unbound. host: if you try to not vote for the person you are bound to, does your vote just get erased? putoes it automatically get up for the candidate you are bound to? guest: you are bound by state law to vote for that candidate on the stat first ballot. host: john on the line for democrats. morning. caller: i'm a democrat. question twicea about what is the incentive to vote for a delegate that is
unbound on the ballot, particularly one that does not state a name? i don't think you really answer that. i have two comments. first, i would like to reiterate what the gentleman before said about john kasich. he is by far the best candidate. he and bernie sanders are the only two with real integrity still running the race. have come amment i lot of people are complaining that it donald trump has a plurality but does not get the majority, he should still that it would be some horrible crime if he does not get chosen. .here is no runoff if he does not have a plurality -- if he does not have a majority, it means most of the people who voted did not want
donald trump. the delegates who are there as the people's representatives, everyone cannot vote again -- the delegates have no choice but to pick someone. that doesn't have to go to somebody who most of the people did not want. thing.ot some horrible it makes sense. if they can get together -- they may not be able to get together and pick somebody to get more votes than donald trump. if they do, that is perfectly ok. host: a couple issues from john. guest: the never trump folks would say it donald trump does not get the majority, the law clearly states their candidate is eligible to get that. subsequent ballots come if they eventually get the majority, the
our principles pac has spent $35 million on super tuesday, $15 million to make sure trump does not get the majority. there are clearly many republicans who don't like donald trump. 62%favorable ratings are negative unfavorable. when you look at head-to-head matches between donald trump and hillary clinton, hillary is up by 10 points. i can see why some republicans out there are making the john kasich eligibility argument. do betterh can against hillary clinton the donald trump can head-to-head. host: does it make a state more of a kingmaker?
they have a lot more influence on the convention floor. guest: pennsylvania is going to be a major player. colorado, north dakota will be interesting as well. and some of these territories. some of these states who are could later in the cycle see their influence is still vast because they have these unbound delegates. host: colorado is having trump, kasich coming to their convention to woo their supporters because they know these unbound delegates are at stake there? delegatesof the 37 are at stake there. over 500 candidates are trying to become one of those
delegates. i think the fact that these candidates are traveling to north dakota this weekend, ben carson and ted cruz will be going there trying to woo some of these delegates. host: april 8 is the day to look for for that one. sue in south carolina. republican. good morning. before you go, i meant to read a statement. steve says if the gop changes to stop trump from throwing a tantrum, it is the end of the republican party. go ahead. caller: i like what the man from texas said. people standing in line. i'm 64 years old, disabled. when i stand in line to vote, i
want my vote to count. i don't understand a lot of politics. i live in south carolina. it is a poor state. i think it is terrible, i think donald trump is 100% right. because he is not a politician. all these things that politicians are beating him down with, but he is right about letting all these people in. the government can't help us, the people who are here in the country. we are in bad shape. i live week to week not knowing how i'm going to live. you have thousands of people coming in here for us to take care of. it's not right. i don't think any of this has been handled fairly because donald trump is not a politician. but he is a fair and honest man. i think he will do good for the country. donaldyou've seen
trump talk about if i get the nomination, there will -- if i do not get the nomination, there candidatests these not being forthright in saying i will support the nominee. there's a lot of tension between the campaigns right now and their supporters. if there is a contested convention, despite the fact that the rules are if you do not get the majority of the delegates, you cannot become the nominee, many of trump's supporters, even if he gets a plurality, would be shocked and saddened and upset if another candidate eventually gets the nomination. host: kansas, line for democrats, eileen, good morning. caller: thank you for having c-span. you are wonderful. i want to say how upset i am
about how they are treating donald trump. he has made it on his own. last night, chris matthews was disgusting. he pushed him and pushed him. donald trump is wonderful. we need him. we need someone who will get things done. party's turn to put romney in or someone else? it will come back on them for .eing so rotten and wicked my husband is republican and he is voting for donald trump. i'm a democrat and i'm voting for donald trump. but for donald trump. he is wonderful. when you are talking about chris matthews yesterday, you , the have seen on the news news broke about donald trump comments on abortion. can see the whole context of
what donald trump was saying and what chris matthews was asking. [video clip] >> the woman should be punished for getting an abortion? if you say abortion is a crime or murder, you have to deal with it. should abortion be punished? donald trump: people in certain parts of the republican party would say yes, they should be punished. i would say it is a very serious problem. a problem we have to decide on. are you going to say put them in jail? >> i'm asking you. you say you want to ban it. donald trump: i am pro-life, yes. you go back to a position like they had where people will perhaps go to illegal places, but you have to ban it. are you catholic? how do you feel about the catholic church's position on this issue? do you know their position on
abortion? do you concur with that position? >> i concur with their moral position. >> what do you say about your church? they are very stern. >> you are running for president of the united states. the believe in punishment for abortion? yes or no? >> the answer is, there has to be some form of punishment. >> 10 years, what? >> i don't know. >> why not? >> it's a very complicated position. host: the new arc times coverage of that noting that hours later, donald trump recanted his remarks. -- "the new york times" coverage of that.
plenty of headlines on that. read editorial in "the wall street journal." "thes the headline from washington times." give the viewers some context. we're talking with alex rogers. unbound delegates is our topic here. wilmington, north carolina. independent. jim, good morning. caller: good morning. we have a donald trump sign in our yard. we are voting for donald trump. we don't know any better. it's like, if we don't get to vote for donald trump, we are not voting. we did not vote in 2012, the first time since richard nixon. my wife says voting is a waste of time.
so, we did not vote in 2012. if they give us donald trump, we will vote in 2016. if they do not give us donald trump, we will not vote. host: have you thought it had to the republican national convention and what you think might happen? is that something you are concerned about? i don't want to see it. i can understand the ted cruz people. you know, we are trump people. i hate it. the republican party has gone to pieces. this is a mess. host: the number to get to is 1237. donald trump at 735 delegates right now. if he comes up 15 delegates yout of that 1237, do think he should be the nominee? caller: yeah, let it go.
we still have california and new york. host: alex rogers, take me through the rulemaking process at conventions and how these rules are made, when the delegates become unbound, whether a new candidate might emerge at the convention and how that would happen. how they would get on the convention ballot. guest: you make a good point about california. california and new jersey will vote on june 7. there is a possibility that donald trump could get the majority of delegates before any of this is responsible. in terms of what would happen in the case he does not get the majority of delegates, the rules matter. the rules people are looking involved in this
-- the people involved in this are going through the rulebook and everything. candidates,outside someone who has not run yet, that is highly unlikely. were talking about paul ryan. adc delegate who supported rubio was hoping that somehow that would be possible. it is unclear now with the rules would even allow that. whether the rules would even allow that. there is a convention rules committee made up of 112 men and women who will meet at the convention come before the convention to decide how the convention will take place in cleveland. host: who is on the rules committee? guest: a man and woman from each state and territory.
host: who gets to select that man and woman? guest: there's elections in different states. there's meetings and they say who wants to be on which committee. louisiana, one of the points people have been making about how strong ted cruz's operation has been come even though he lost to donald trump narrowly, he actually got more delegates. he picked up some of marco rubio's. there were also some uncommitted delegates there. he got some delegates on the all-important rules committee also. they will be interesting to see exactly what the rules committee does. if nobodydetermine gets the majority how things will play out. cleveland, ohio. c-span will be there covering it in full.
a lot can happen before we get to that point. miami, ohio, line for democrats. william, go ahead. caller: i think it is a shame that our political system is getting so corrupt, i figure it is a waste of my time to go vote. whoever i vote for can win, the delegate can change it in the people we do have running -- and the people we do have running, it is just a shame. i knew donald trump when i lived in florida in the 1960's and 1970's. you have marco rubio who i don't think his american. he will probably filibuster his when. -- he will probably filibuster his win. i feel it is a waste of our time. thank you. host: anything you want to jump in on that?
james in georgia on our line for republicans. go ahead. caller: good morning, derailment. -- good morning, gentlemen. for hillaryvote clinton, bernie sanders or donald trump if they water boarded me. , the a new phenomenon delegates picking the people in the primaries. just a biged he is blowhard telling everybody what they want to hear in order to get the nomination. him by is going to smoke nine to 10 points. everybody is making a big deal about the republican convention. watch for the big changeup. if hillary gets in any kind of --they won't slide in
they will slide in and pick elizabeth warren and these democrats come even the ones who were going to vote for trump or bernie sanders or hillary, they will laugh and dance and sing all the way to the ballot box. can you talk about the democratic convention? we focused so much on the republican convention. guest: when we look at the delegate count, it is clear that hillary clinton is the front runner and is going to win. you take into account superdelegates there where bernie sanders is not doing nearly as well, in york, a few different primers were hillary clinton is looking to do well. host: with 1243 delegates isdged -- the number to win
20383. mike in the newkirk, oklahoma. independent. good morning. caller: good morning. i guess i will try to do fine establishment, the people accepting all the corporate new polls and lobbyists -- these people have a lot of money on the line. they feel so threatened by that money that they are willing to take the voice of the people, their vote away from them. can donald trump run as an if they take the election away from him?
my second question is -- this is important -- how does my vote count if donald gets the majority and they take it away from him and give it to paul ryan or mitt romney? how is it that my vote even mattered? guest: if donald trump gets the question, there is a that the caller raised about whether or not he could run as an independent. i assume that he could. he talked about signing that loyalty pledge, he stepped back from the pledge. on the terms of supporting the gop nominee. host: in terms of whether donald trump will hit the target needed , that magic number, the 1237 report hasolitical look into where candidates should be at certain stages -- a
politico report has looked into e candidates should be at certain stages. still below the delegate target he needs to reach 1237, but just barely. he is at 96% of what he needs to be on track for the nomination thanks to his loss in th ohio to john kasich. john kasich is at just 21% of the target he would need to get the nomination. a weekly update on this. guest: there was a piece of week ago saying that based upon the various models, trump is 30 delegates short of getting the majority he needs. that would pose a fascinating question. if he goes to the invention in
july and has all but 30 of the delegates he needs, what does the gop do? host: we will see whether it is a question at all with several of the primaries coming up. susan in pennsylvania. line for democrats. good morning. caller: how are you doing this money? -- this morning? you are both bright and cheery and look good. host: thanks, susan. caller: i am an unbound voter. obliged toel at all choose the person my party picks. i will write in bernie sanders. i will advise the republicans out there to write in donald trump if he is their choice. this is what the vote is about. representing us. int: we will try to fit
blanche in ohio. publican. this republican. -- republican. caller: everyone is saying that women hate donald trump. women do not hate donald trump. votedmen i've talked to for him. he is a businessman. he is the only one up there who has enough sense to run this country. i believe that with all my heart . because america is a business. we need someone out there who is a business person who knows what to do to get america back to where it should be. i'm voting for donald trump. i did vote for him. the people i talk to, they voted for him. what they are saying is we have no say. they can say you are vote did not mean a thing. that just makes me so mad.
that they will take that boat from us. -- a vote from us. when we vote for that person and the majority of people vote for him, that is the person who should be president. not someone who they say, oh and -- the super pacs lobbyists are scared to death of donald trump because they will lose their little voter things -- that is what is going on in our government. it is a horrible thing that's going on. donald trump is not beholden to any of those people and i'm so glad that someone is running who is not beholden to those people. host: blanche in ohio. where you areyou watching in this unbound delegate race. if folks want to keep an eye on this process, what should they be looking for in the coming weeks? guest: they have to look at the count.
if you get 1237, it's over. what will be interesting to look if some of these people are going to be changing some of the roles before the convention. that's rules before the convention. that will make a difference. also, pennsylvania, the other states we mentioned that have these unbound delegate pools, who's doing a good job of trying to reach out to those potential delegates and advertising for them entering to get them -- and trying to get them elected. host: you can read it at nationaljournal.com. alex rogers is a staff correspondent there. in the last half hour, we will revisit the question we talked about at the beginning of the as california state legislature is debating this deal about raising the statement in wage to $15 an hour over the next six years.
wage behe minimum raised to $50 an hour -- $15 an hour? we have a line for minimum wage earners, business owners and all others. we want to hear your story. you can call now and we will be right back. ♪ this week, we are featuring programs on the situation of the current supreme court vacancy. with an apparent impasse between democrats, the white house and republicans over the next supreme court justice, we look at what today's leaders have said in the past concerning the nominating and confirmation process. >> in my view, confirmation hearings, no matter how long, no matter how fruitful or throw, can provide a sufficient basis for determining if a nominee
merits a seat on her supreme court. of barring an ideological opponent are not likely to outweigh done to the court's institutional standing. it even goes on, ideological opposition to a nominee from one is of the political spectrum likely to help generate similar opposition to later nominations from the opposite. >> those are some of the programs feature this week on c-span. we continue our travels across the country, visiting our winners from the student can documentary competition. we made a stop in james, oklahoma to recognize their student winners.
we also visited winners in oklahoma, and the dallas, texas area this week. in bus will visit winners new mexico this week. cablee worked with our partners to coordinate these visits for the winners. watch all the winning videos from this year and get more information on c-span's community efforts, as well as the schedule. this morningdline in the orange county register, wage deal heads to the floor. that wage deal is a deal worked out by the state legislature and governor jerry brown to raise the minimum wage in california to $15 an hour over the next six
years. getting a lot of coverage because it is moving very fast through the state legislature. the state assembly expected to take it up today after it was passed along partyline votes. california not the only state where a $15 an hour minimum wage is being proposed. efforts by the new york governor to move the proposal in that state are ongoing. the fight 15 program, the union-backed effort, is pushing for $15 minimum wage or fast workers and others across the country. other protests expected later this month in mcdonald's at several states. the question we are asking is should the minimum wage be raised to $15 an hour?
if you say yes, should it happen by a state-by-state basis, should the federal government do it, how do you think it should be raised, if you think it should be raised? business owners, we want to hear from you. (202) 748-8001. minimum-wage earners, (202) 748-8000. .ll others, (202) 748-8002 here are a few of the other papers from california. talking about wage hikes that would impact the government workers in the state. here is the front page of the levine news sentinel. leaders weigh in on the proposed wage. just a few of the california newspapers covering the issue.
there is on first, auburn hills, i am forcaller: minimum wage of $15. it is a fair wage for a fair days work. i am a former union leader. i know what the issues are on these types of issues. i think $15 an hour is what we need to make a family, maybe to get a family started in our country. it is a fair way to go. i think we -- business can absorb this. host: on that last point, business can absorb this. the argument from the other side is this good for businesses to have to cut employees, and therefore, the people impacted the most common the lower wage theseees, the people that changes are trying to benefit. talk about that.
caller: let's let business be fairer. for less than that for many, many years. let's let business step up to the plate and give a fair, working wage for a fair day's pay. let them do the hard work to justify it to the community through advertisements, whatever means to get the market -- keep the market healthy, but let the businesses step up and do the job. host: is $15 fair? could it be $12, $13? $15, that big jump that california is talking about over six years, is that fair? california is usually ahead of the country in terms of wages. the rest of the country cannot absorb that, but california, $15 should go a long
startedelp a family get , due to the fact that they have a higher cost of living generally than most other states. is $10.ght now it $15 if the proposal goes through over the next six years, a gradual increase. mary is up next, a business owner in canton, michigan. caller: good morning. host: what kind of business do you run? caller: disaster restoration. host: how would a $15 minimum wage impact your business? caller: it would impact it because we hire young men and women who do labor. most of them are not experienced as to what to do because they are not educated properly. many times, they come from families that do not have that kind of a work ethic. so you end up training them and
you watch what they do. if you have to pay them $15 an hour, you are cheating someone who is worthy of $25 an hour, and that is the problem. be whatmum wage should it was originally intended to be, for young people to get the job and to learn how to work. not to support his family. $8.50 in michigan, scheduled to go up to $9.25. when it gets there in 2018, will you have to lay anyone? actually, the ones that come in on the minimum wage, if you prove themselves worthy, if they are dependable and work hard, we give them a raise. we start at the minimum wage. once they prove themselves worthy, then we move forward from there. to show theher map
viewers from the department of labor. minimumn green have wages higher than the federal minimum wage. all the other colors have wages at the federal limit, or no minimum-wage. $7.25 is the federal minimum wage. let's go to the line for minimum wage earners. dolores in dayton, ohio. caller: good morning. onust wanted to comment ideas.sanders and his , i thoughtse ideas as a young girl, the concept of , someone who was rich was trying to produce an
america where everyone was living [inaudible] that is in the social program. [no audio]be rich host: you mentioned bernie sanders. he tweeted out a bit of this debate happening in cal on and liftork, they job must workers out of poverty, not keep them in it. $7.25 an hour is a starvation wage, he writes. mike is in south carolina. go ahead. caller: good morning, how do you do? i have a common with regard to the minimum wages, and i kind of lost it when you mentioned it
would raise taxpayers taxes. perhaps it would save the government a lot of money on entitlements, if they gave people a chance and earned enough money to support and their families, and then give the businesses a breakout taxes or incentives, so they could raise the wages to $15 an hour. the businesses do not really matter. this country is owned by the citizens. , as far as note migrant workers go, california, picking in gardens and farms, wednesday also be eligible for $15 an hour? i work for construction companies for i have made $25 an hour, and they have mexicans working, eight of them living in a hotel room, making five dollars an hour, so they can
send money home to mexico to support their families the best they can. three, this is off the beaten path, and i called on the all others line. i try to get in earlier. as far as these delegates not being used, when one of the campaigners drops out, i think, that everything would be would be for the federal government to pass a law that every state has to comply with, that any delegates that are not used should be's the equally among the remaining campaigners. host: some states actually have that law. delegatesrco rubio's split -- adjusted to how the candidates are doing -- but there was an article recently breaking down that, and some of marco rubio's would be distributed that way.
to the first part of your question, talking about the headline i read about how the wage hike would increase taxes. herald."rom "the times that is just the first two graphs, but a lot of analysis being done about who would be impacted, how many people, and what parts of the population would be impacted. florida, forasota,
business owners. caller: good morning. i just wanted to tell you, in our business, we write about 60 paychecks a week. hours are independent contractors, and we paid more than the minimum wage. wageagainst the minimum raising up because what that will do is cause us to have to go up further in our pay. $12 to $18 anrage hour, depending on their skill level, what they do. one of the problems we have had government,federal they took these independent contractors, and the them under and that is they work more than 40 hours a week, they take on the entrepreneurship of them being contractors, and then we had to charge time and have for the same client.
host: what kind of business do you do in florida? caller: a home health care business. we have independent contractors. if they work over 40 hours a , we have toth flfsa pay them time in half. we have to pass that over to the client. these clients are not made out of money and they cannot do it. a lot of times, people do not get the service they need and want and desire because the government is putting rules and restrictions on workers. i find the minimum wage will help to push that. from the business owner's point of view, it is not just going up three dollars more. now you have fica and all of his other incidental things like worker's comp., that is based upon the wage. it is not just a one-time hit
for these people. i can understand these businesses, and now with the mandatory health care, four dollars means a lot these days to a business. host: thanks for telling us about your business in florida. darlene has a business in lake placid, also in florida. caller: hello, independent contractor. ica. not take out f they do not pay workers compensation. general liability is not based on payroll because they don't have one. they are calling each one of their workers entrepreneurs, as the gentleman said. that out of the way, we have 30 employees, we pay them all wages. we have a health insurance plan that is quite good. inonly ask that they put
basically a $25 stipend for week so they feel in control of their health care. a pension plan that is also quite good. in sharing the world -- the wealth, even though people make fun of it. we are definitely moving to democratic entrepreneurship. we have over 30 employees and we are not affected by the aca rules, but we are complying by those rules. we have a successful business because of our workers. wage,r point on minimum they all make more than minimum wage. what i hear from business owners is they would like to be able to hire a teenager and not pay that teenager $15 an hour. they would like to be able to try out a new employee and raise
their pay overtime, maybe it if it issee good, before they pay them. you say all of your employees make over the minimum wage. do they make more than $15 an hour? does calling him that are change your business strategy? caller: i think our lowest employee is $13 an hour. and i'm talking about employees, not independent contractors, making more than $18 an hour. florida,it happens in what does that mean, do you have to cut people? caller: absolutely not for us. however, i wonder if 15 is an arbitrary figure that is sexy or something. if it waseel better
time to the economy, whatever the number turns out to be. a addition to that, as business owner, if the business owner could do a phase-in, to try out those employees, we do sometimes start of employees at $10 an hour depending on the position. i also believe that if you raise the minimum-wage to a flat figure, it will become baked into the economy, and after begin used to it and a number of years goes by, that one by the employee anymore bread or housing than it does not because it becomes baked and. i would like to see the minimum-wage tied to the economy. host: that is the debate happening on the other side of the country from cal you. new york governor andrew cuomo said legislative leaders agree with him, that they should be a minimum wage increase in new york but state budget negotiations are continuing over periodunt and phase in
for fferent parts of the state. the minimum wants wage to gradually be hiked to $15 an hour. proposals on whether it should happen sooner in the city. that is happening in new york amid this debate in california, a deal reached earlier this week. kim is a minimum-wage earner in north carolina. caller: good morning. host: i am listening, go ahead. i have a comment. think if you are in business and you cannot pay someone $15 an hour, i don't think you should be in business. these companies are keeping all the wealth for themselves. our work for a fortune 500
company. i barely make minimum wage, and i get around it by giving me 32 hours a week at the most, no health benefits, and i'm in the medical field. i think it's a disgrace that ,hese companies, big or small are keeping all the money for themselves, and want to hire someone at a lower wage and not give any benefits. it is just not fair. host: do you think you make a living wage? caller: absolutely not. host: what would a living wage before you? do, i: for what i would say about $70 an hour. i am a phlebotomist. the medical field has gotten so over flooded, they do not want to pay people, so they will hire whoever they can for the cheapest. it is just not there anymore.
host: what do you think about this proposal from bill on twitter who says, what about a graduated minimum wage by age? do you think going about it that way might work? caller: i think that would work, but that is still too low. they dollars is still too low. there are people coming out of college, they have their degree experience, and they are entitled to be paid what they are worth. host: appreciate the call from north carolina. california,op, business owner. as a business owner in california, what are you thinking as you are watching
this debate happen in the california legislature? caller: i cannot understand what is happening in california. , there is the attitude of the previous caller that thinks that if you are a business owner, just suck it up. but nobody is coming in and looking at my budget and asking me what my business can absorb. i am in a very rural part of the state, so rent is a little lower than southern california or sacramento. but it just leaves the employer's hands tied. there is a guy that has worked for me for almost nine years, and i would love to give him a one dollar an hour raise, but this will stop me from getting married to my people that have been with me for a long time. i am going to hire less people, i will do more of the work myself. to find somebody worth $15 an
hour has been really difficult. unlike a couple of callers before, it does affect your fica , liability, workers compensation, all based on your payroll. there will be so many other costs. , orke the graduated system me being able to hire someone at nine dollars an hour for the first 60 days, to see if they are a good fit. business is really complicated. for people to generalize and say, they should just do this or that, without having any facts or figures in front of them -- i get it. maybe we should just call it a living wage. that seems to be the term. minimum-wage was an entry-level job, where eugene some -- gain some skills to move up to the next level.
maybe the definition needs to be changed. host: what could your business absorb? you say $15 will change the way you do business. dot if it was 12, could you that and not change the way you do business? caller: i could probably do 12, but it is more of a principal for me. to pay someone $15 an hour and then i see them sitting down watching tv, there are so many issues involved in it, people are not thinking about it. if someone is worth $15 an hour, i will pay them that. keeping a tightwad all the money for myself. you should pay them for what they deserve, not based on what the crazy california government thinks should be. the standard of living -- everyone says people are not making it, but everyone has an
iphone, they have stuff going on, they go out to lunch. it is a huge issue. why are people having less money? they are walking down the street with an iphone. host: for those that do not live in california, how the process works, and this is passed by both houses in california, signed by the governor, who came up with a deal -- under the plan, the hourly wage would torease $.50 on january 1, $11. then one dollar annually by 2022. jerry brown and his successor could delay the increased by the year if the economy falters.
then the minimum wage would increase annually based on inflation. those are the details of the plan based to be on the floor of the california state assembly. in youngstown, ohio. a minimum-wage earner. caller: i don't think the minimum wage should change. with theause problems employer not hiring people, and laying people off. i also believe it should go state-by-state, because it costs more to live in some states than others. i think we need to look at other alternatives than raising the minimum wage. most people cannot even live up to $15 an hour, due to utilities, medical. i don't think it will work anyway you go. you will be in the same problem soon again. couple moreor a
calls, but a few programming notes today. on c-span, we will be covering the road to 2016. cruz will be joined by carly fiorina at a meet and greet in appleton, wisconsin. there, happening at 1:45. later on c-span2, we are covering a bernie sanders rally in south frocks, new york, at 7:00. bronx, new york, at 7:00. sharad is a business owner in maryland. caller: good morning. i am a business owner but i also work for a company. i have been working since i was 18 and the climate has changed significantly. our work server jobs where you would get two dollars $.50, and
you knew you were working for tips. but the only way to have change is to have condition work. then you need a basement on. a lot of people don't understand, even at $10 an hour, week,week -- 40 hours a your living situation is about $1000 a month. you are not getting enough every two weeks. you do need a living wage so you can at least pay your rent, car insurance, food. it is just not enough at $10 an hour. a lot of places it is nine dollars. at the job i work at, it is $35 an hour. i know i could not pay anyone any kind of wage with the work
i'm doing now, so that is why it is hard for startups and new businesses. you have to get a lot of money rolling in before you can pay anybody anything. one more call in front royal, virginia. also a business owner. ramona, go ahead. caller: i am 88 years old and i cannot drive. i need help with my house and my hour.and i pay $10 an when i go to town with my driver , i pay for their lunch and mine , and their drinks, and so forth. i give a bonus sometimes. to workn who are able in my yard, i pay them $10 an hour, unless they have their own equipment, then i pay for that.
i have a lot of equipment. my father, many years ago, had a store. .e hired high school people that was in south dakota. ,hen he is to let the kids go but some of them stayed with him. anyways, that is my two cents. host: thank you and have a good day. have a good day to all the viewers on "washington journal." see you back here tomorrow morning. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016]