tv Washington Journal 09142021 CSPAN September 14, 2021 7:00am-10:05am EDT
post's john hudson. later, los angeles times reporter phil willon on the recall election of california governor gavin newsom. washington journal is next. ♪ host: good morning. it is tuesday, september 14, recall election day in california. today, golden state voters are being asked to decide whether democrats gavin newsom should be removed from the office of governor and if so who should replace him. we will begin focusing on your view of the job your governor have -- has done. if you have the ability to recall your governor, would you? democrats can call in at (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001. independents, (202) 748-8002.
you can also send us a text this morning. that number, (202) 748-8003. if you do, include your name and where you are from. otherwise, catch up with us on social media. twitter is @cspanwj. on facebook, facebook.com/cspan. you can start calling in. 19 states have laws that allow for recall of state officials, including governor, but our hypothetical question this morning, from viewers in every state, would you recall your governor if you could? for gavin newsom it is a serious question today. this is the headline in today's l.a. times. president biden says the eyes of the nation are on the california recall. this is president biden from in california last night. [video clip] >> the reason i am here and you are all here is to thank and support our friend, governor gavin newsom, the best governor
in the country. california, if you did not know it, you should. the eyes of the nation -- this is not hyperbole. the eyes of the nation are on california. the decision you are about to make is not going to just have a huge impact on california. it is going to reverberate around the nation and the world. here is why. all of you know the last year i got to run against the real donald trump. well, this year the leading republican running for governor is a -- the closest thing to a trump clone i have ever seen in your state. i really mean it.
he is leading the other team. he is the clone of donald trump. can you imagine him being governor of this state? you can't let that happen. host: president biden appearing with gavin newsom last night in california. the leading republican running and that recall is conservative radio host larry elder. here's the latest polling on where he stands in that election . among those that are seeking a recall, he is far and had head the candidates with the most support. nearly 30% of support ahead. according to the latest polling, 57% of california voters say they want to keep gavin newsom. 42% say they want to remove
gavin newsom. those polling numbers also from a website wrapping up holes across the months as recall elections continue. you can see the race is close on the issue of keep or remove. as recently as early august, gavin newsom gaining in the polls, up to now 57.3% in the latest wrap up. republican larry elder with his ad campaign targeting gavin newsom in the recall. here is a little from his campaign. [video clip] >> education, 41st and the nation. gasoline, highest in the nation. sales tax, highest in the nation. income tax, highest in the nation. holmes, highest in the nation. it is time for a change.
returning gavin newsom to office again and again and expecting different results is the definition of insanity. host: just one of the ads that california voters have been seeing on the airwaves amid this recall effort. some background on the california recall, if you have not been following it closely, this out of rutgers. the effort to recall governor newsom began before the covid-19 pandemic. the petition was one of several launched. recall petitions are common in california. every governor elected in the state has faced at least one. this did not mention the pandemic but the effort gained traction as the pandemic began after california courts extended the signature deadline until march of 2021 due to the pandemic. the petition received over 1.7 million signatures, enough to trigger the recall election that will take place today.
as california voters go to the polls, this question of whether you would recall your governor. we want to hear if you would, if you would not, why or why not. (202) 748-8000 if you are a democrat. (202) 748-8001 if you are a republican. independents, (202) 748-8002. eugene is up first out of new mexico this morning. your thoughts on your governor? caller: my governor is michelle lujan grisham. she is a democrat. i would not recall her. governors do not have much power compared to the president. usually whatever is going on in the executive branch has the most impact on the state. i think governor lujan grisham is doing a decent job. she is at least trying to take care the most vulnerable in our
state. she is a supporter of the medicaid and food stamp programs. that is something i admire about her. at least she shows respect toward the lower income citizens of our state. host: earl is in california. your thoughts on this very real real call -- recall having in your state? caller: god bless c-span. listen up. i am going to vote for mr. elder, larry. i think it is time for newsom to go. you know what bothers me? right after we suspect that china let loose a bio attack on our country -- not all of us suspect that, but a lot of us do. this governor went out and placed a billion-dollar mask
purchase with china, $1 billion worth of paper masks. i have not heard, but i did hear through the grapevine some negative things about that purchase. i do not know why it was muffled. i have not heard anything more about it. that is a red flag to me. this state, i wanted to leave but i could not get the price i wanted for my home. i want out of here. that is all i have to say. host: where would you go if you could move? caller: you know, idaho. i will look toward oregon -- oregon is out. that place has turned into a zoo. washington, i like washington. i would get out of this state.
host: we will stay in california, kathy in brownsville. your thoughts on this recall? caller: i am definitely voting no. i just am appalled that this republican trump freak show is coming to california. i do not want it. host: we mentioned president biden out stumping for governor newsom last night in california and some of the ads gavin newsom has released and those supporting stopping the recall campaign have included bernie sanders. here is one of the latest ads from the group, stop the republican recall in california. [video clip] >> at this unprecedented moment
in american history, when we are trying to address the crisis of climate change, guarantee health care for all, and pass real immigration reform, the last thing we need is to have a right-wing republican governor in california. the september 14 recall in california is a republican power grab. turn in your ballot or vote no in person by september 14. host: bernie sanders and his ad. asking you this morning whether you would recall your governor. just 19 states have laws that allow for recall of state officials. here is those 19 states. alaska, arizona, colorado, illinois, kansas, michigan, montana, new jersey, north dakota, rhode island, and wisconsin.
our question this morning, asking if you would recall the governor in your state. we are throwing it open to all our viewers this morning. the question is a very real one in california. susan is a democrat. caller: i would recall our governor. she does not represent the greater population in south dakota. she jumped on the trump train. without any of us residents knowing, she was doing the campaigns with trump, so i am not sure if we paid for that or who paid for that. the citizens just approved the medical marijuana and recreational marijuana and she has made that as difficult as possible. even the other day the abortion
situation in texas, our governor happened to want to speak on abortion subtly in south dakota, so i guess she is looking to run for president. i wish we could recall her. i know many other people in south dakota feel the same way. host: we also talked about the party breakdown in the house and senate on capitol hill. here is the breakdown when it comes to governors in the country. there are 23 democratic governors, 27 republican governors in the united states. montana was the only state that flipped from a democrat to republican governor in the 2020 elections. we will start with duane in new york, independent. you just got a new governor. what you think of kathy hochul? caller: i will give her a chance. i do not know much about her. i am willing to give her a
chance because she is fresh and new. cuomo was too toxic. i am glad he is gone and i hope he does not run again. that is basically what i have to say. host: in new york, michael. caller: like the previous caller, i am waiting to see how our new governor fares. i hope she does not align too far to the left. one of my problems with my party is the left fringe is pulling the party too far left and away from the middle class. this is something we have been reaching out to senator schumer on there are concerns with regard to the salt cap. we pay taxes on taxes we have already paid. our previous governor said this is hurting business, hurting
middle-class new yorkers, which seems to be lost in the press. in general, i feel recalls are important because we do have situations where we had to remove him from office. the governor resigned. with governor newsom, the people are dissatisfied, they should have a voice. they should have the ability to remove a governor if you are she is not doing what they are promising. host: a little more information on recall efforts when it comes to state and local politics, recalls much more likely to happen on the local level than statewide. this is back to the political institute at rucker university. gavin newsom will be the fourth governor in u.s. history to face a recall election. scott walker was the first to emerge victorious in a recall. a north dakota governor was removed from office following a dispute about state owned
industries. newsom is the second california governor to face a recall election. gray davis was recalled in 2003 after voters blamed him for the state electricity crisis and economic recession. that is some of the history of the national picture when it comes to recall. we will head to st. petersburg. caller: i wouldn't typically say now. i do not think a recall is good because i think it is a waste of time and money. however, under circa -- certain circumstances where you have governors who are co-conspirators to cause problems, and dissent is done bad with the virus and done nothing but spread it, i think in that situation somebody like to santos should be removed. host: if he was removed, who on the state level do you think in
california -- there are 46 candidates running to replace him. is there somebody on the state level you would like to see is governor? caller: i think you need to start from scratch. it is a cluster you know what in california and here and everywhere. i think you have some people that are criminals and some people that are not. i think that is where you draw the line. host: you mentioned the fight against covid-19, actions by ron desantis in that state or inactions as well. this is ron desantis yesterday on the issue of vaccine mandates from his press conference yesterday. [video clip] >> if a government agency in the state of florida forces a vaccine as a condition to employment, that violates
florida law and you will face -- you will face a $5,000 fine for every violation. if you look at places here like the city of gainesville, that is millions of dollars potentially in fines. orange county, many more than that. at the end of the day, we did a lot in florida to distribute access. december when the pfizer came out, i said we would work hard, prioritize our seniors come and make it available for all, but mandatory for none. that has been the policy we have had from the beginning. host: florida governor ron desantis on vaccine mandates. we are asking you what you recall your governor if you had
the opportunity? (202) 748-8000 for democrats to join the conversation. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. independents, (202) 748-8002. a very real question for viewers in california this morning. helen, a republican, your thoughts on the recall of gavin newsom? caller: i have already recalled my governor, newsom, because he is incompetent. i have lived in california all my life and i have been living for quite a while. i have never seen my stay so bad. i live in los angeles county. i always have lived there. the cost of housing is 100% higher than anywhere else in the nation. inflation for everything is high. there are taxes upon taxes. we have carpool lanes that squeeze off people who cannot afford it.
it is a scheme designed to keep a constant squeeze on the taxpayer, the people of california. we have a probably infrastructure. we are going into a bad drought. our tax dollars have not been put toward improving infrastructure or addressing the critical shortage of water we are facing. energy, nothing has been done about that either. we have rising energy costs. nothing has been improved for the last 30, 40 years. finally we have a candidate, larry elder, who i voted for, who says he is going to take our tax dollars and use it to improve our infrastructure, to do something about the homeless and the mentally ill. we have so many people living on the streets.
it is inhumane to see these people existing like this and i have not seen one entity got democratic entity, approach this problem in a reasonable way. this has been going on for 10, 15 years. host: you said you are voting for larry elder? caller: yes. host: how confident are you at the latest polling has keep gavin newsom at 57%, 42% on removing him? what are your thoughts on what is going to happen today? caller: let me tell you something about polls and statistics. there are lies, damn lies, and statistics. who did they pull -- poll? i do not go based on statistics. i go by what i see and other people tell me.
i have done my own personal study and i know people are dissatisfied with the quality of life in california. newsom's approach is whenever he gets backed into a corner he pops out his stimulus checks. guess when they first start going out? two days. he is buying off the vote. there is not much substance to this individual. host: that is helen in california. taking calls especially from voters in california. ballots do today on the recall. here are more numbers from the race. a $70 million war chest for governor -- governor newsom and plenty of outside spinning as well. the democrats' principal advertiser is responsible for
97% of the $22 million spent so far by those opposed to the recall from the article yesterday, leading the republican field and spending and the number of times and add heirs in california. john cox has spent $4.6 million and larry elder follows him, spending $3.5 million. the former san diego mayor comes in third with 850 thousand dollars spent by his campaign. the non-candidate fund for a better california princely finance but a real estate developer has spent $1.4 million in the race. some of the numbers there in california. we mention republican john cox, one of the republicans on the ballots today. here is his recent add -- ad.
[video clip] >> i am not a cable tv personality. i am a businessman, the only cpa running for governor. california is a mismanaged mess. water, wildfires, homelessness. these are not political issues. they are fixable management issues. career politicians, celebrities -- i have salt problems all my life. let's fix this great state. host: the recall in california ends today. ballots are due today in california. we have been covering it this morning, taking your phone calls about whether you would recall your governor whether you are in california or any state in the country. i want to keep you updated on other news on capitol hill. we found out yesterday how democrats intend to pay for some of the large spending bill they are trying to move through congress.
the top democrats monday released legislation that would raise as much as $2.9 trillion to finance president biden's social safety net package through a series of tax changes, including increasing the amount the wealthiest americans and corporations pay in taxes. the legislation amounts to an opening offer as democrats in the house and senate try to cobble together pieces of the economic package. we will talk more about that in our 8:00 our. -- hour. if you are watching c-span yesterday, you likely turned into -- tuned in to antony blinken taking questions from house members. that is happening again today at 10:00 a.m.. today, he goes before the senate. you can watch it live. this is the headline from the
washington post. lincoln -- blinken clashes with gop over afghanistan. john hudson is going to join us to wrap up yesterday and preview today, so stick around for that in about an hour and a half. for the next half hour, we continue with this question. would you recall your governor if you could? in kentucky, a republican. it is andy beshear in kentucky, former lieutenant governor of kentucky before he became governor, correct? caller: he needs to be gone too. he is our governor now. i want to ask you a question. what about biden going out there to help the loser, -- newsom? why don't you go down to the border -- he go down to the
border? why don't he do that? host: we will head down to a border state. brenda is in houston, texas. your thoughts on greg abbott down there? caller: good morning and thanks for taking my call. absolutely not. we are not going to get rid of our governor, our rational governor. he is getting it right. host: brenda, issues like abortion and rape, very much in the public sphere at this point. how much do you think it will be part of the national conversation and other elections around the country? caller: i do not think it will be one of the major points. what the democrats need to focus on are getting our state and
government offices. we need to win back these places because the crazy people have taken over. i do not see it getting any better. they will have to start treating the january 6 gang. i think they are supposed to be returning to the capital soon. they are going to have to start treating them as if they were all black people. maybe then we would put an end to this. host: brenda in houston, texas on the issue of abortion and the texas law restricting abortion access. the issue of abortion has made its way into the commonwealth of virginia and the governor's race happening this year in virginia. tammy call if current running to take back his own -- hold job as governor. it is one term allowed as governor in virginia, but you can run again after leaving
office. this is one of his recent ads in the race. [video clip] >> i am terry mcauliffe and i sponsor this ad. >> a secretly recorded video of virginia's gop candidate for governor getting some attention. >> glenn juncker and -- glen you ngkin -- >> when asked about defunding planned parenthood and banning abortion -- >> the short answer is -- when i'm governor and i have a majority the house we can start going on offense appearing as a campaign -- on offense. as a campaign, that will not win independent votes. >> glenn juncker and -- glen youngkin wants to ban abortion.
he just does not want you to know about it. his far-right agenda is wrong for virginia. host: that from terry mcauliffe's campaign in virginia. here is a recent add in the race. [video clip] >> homicides in virginia are at a 20 year high. now, extreme democrats supporting terry mcauliffe want to defund the police. >> glenn youngkin will defend us. >> he has a plan to crackdown on crime. that is why over 50 sheriff's are ready to roll with the governor who will keep virginia safe. >> i am glenn youngkin and i sponsor this ad. host: james, good morning. caller: this terry mcauliffe
commercial about defunding planned parenthood but we have a current governor saying he would make the baby countable on the table and asked the mother what to do with it. talk to the california race, i think newsom will win from the simple fact that senator feinstein has not resigned or anything because of the medical situation. i cannot imagine the democrats will lose a senate seat. i think this race is sewed up. her medical situation has been going on for a couple years. host: that is james in virginia. nick is in phoenix. your thoughts on governor ducey? caller: where do i begin? first of all, his handling of
the virus has been horrible. he has the blood of arizona and americans on his hands, like most of the gop. trump lied and the gop died. i have hope. the candidate for governor, hopefully she can help turn around this race. i feel for the people in california, our neighborly brothers and sisters there. i hope they keep him. host: in that upcoming open seat race in california, the cook political report ranking of where the races stand at any given time. it has been one of the few toss up governor races of the cycle, currently a republican held seat that will be open -- the kata kirkley democratically --
categorically democratically held seats. two seats the cook political report sees as the most competitive. 18 democratic held governorships, 20 republicans. this is wilda in kentucky, a democrat. caller: good morning. host: go ahead. caller: ok. all the people in kentucky who are against our governor, andy beshear, if they will check our coronavirus numbers with this pandemic started and compare them to what they are since the republicans stripped him of his authority, they will find out he was doing a wonderful job and they are killing us. host: to eugene, oregon. this is patricia, a democrat. caller: good morning. first, i wanted to say about
texas. i heard the woman calling in from texas and have to chuckle. i just loved molly ivins. she was a journalist. she died. i think it is a loss for texas. she knew how to get down to the brass tacks about issues. i hope her spirit is alive and well in texas somewhere. i am from oregon and california. i sure hope that governor newsom prevails. he has deep knowledge and he believes in the administration. all of the collaborators that work for the state, he believes
in collaboration among state workers and deep knowledge workers. he is there to help. i sure do hope he prevails as well. thank you. that is all i wanted to say. host: back to the commonwealth of virginia. this is joseph, a republican. caller: good morning. how are you today? i want to recall my governor. host: we can avoid the name-calling. why do you want him gone? what policies? in l.a., eddie, your thoughts on gavin newsom? caller: newsom needs to be out.
the democratic point of view needs to be out of los angeles. for one thing, it is racist. they are doing everything they can to get illegals here without vaccinations, without housing. they put so many in the black community. the largest homeless community now is blacks. anytime you have more illegals working than citizens and make it hard for citizens because they do not speak spanish -- they do not get the illegals to speak english -- then you need to go. when you can having restaurants on street corners and people have to walk to get past, it is illegal. this is what -- he needs to go. host: this is lynn saying, i am rooting for gavin newsom to win today. california does not want a republican governor.
lynn for massachusetts this morning. we mentioned the group stop the republican recall of gavin newsom parent here is another of their recent ads airing in california. [video clip] >> here's what you need to know about the september 14 recall. voting yes elects an anti-vaccine trump republican. voting no keeps gavin newsom fighting the pandemic based on science, compassion, and common sense. if you do not vote, we could have an anti-vaxxers republican governor of california. do your part to stop the spread. every voter will receive a ballot in the mail. well your ballot or vote in person by september 14 -- mail your ballot or vote in person by september 14. host: showing you as california voters have been seeing when it comes to the recall of gavin newsom. would you recall your governor if you could? democrats, it is (202) 748-8000
to call in. republicans, (202) 748-8001. independents, (202) 748-8002. we are having this conversation for the next 20, 25 minutes this morning. this is ricky out of michigan, a democrat. caller: i love my senator. you seeing this? host: we're talking about governors, gretchen whitmer. caller: i love my governor. this is the thing. i was looking at the bills last night and the republicans have a thing on their website where they already lost the election and the election is not even until today. that is the game they are going
to play. they are going to keep saying it is fraud when there ain't no fraud. host: that is ricky out of michigan. here is the story from the hill newspaper. the campaign for larry elder on monday began fraud allegations before resulted even been released. elder's campaign shared a form that appeared to assume that newsom held onto his seat, letting he did so through election fraud. the california recall election is taking place today, though mail-in voting has begun and early voting took place earlier last month. that is the story from the hill newspaper. a few more of your comments this morning from social media got this from jerry, who talked about living in kansas.
saying my governor has handled covid as well as she could. i would vote for her again. mary saying no way out of maryland. i loved governor larry hogan. hate to lose some next election as he is termed out -- him election as he is termed out. and more support for governor hogan, saying i did not vote for hogan but he is doing a good job. about 20 minutes left for you to call in. let us know if you would recall the governor in your state. (202) 748-8000 for democrats. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. it is (202) 748-8002 for independents. also keeping you updated from the news on capitol hill. another scary moment on capitol hill this week, this from the washington post. a man from california was arrested after he was found with
multiple knives, a bayonet, and a machete outside the democratic national committee headquarters. he was charged with possession of prohibited weapons. he dashed his father told washington post his son had been diagnosed with -- his father told the washington post his son had been diagnosed with schizophrenia. authorities are still trying to find the person believed to have placed pipe bombs near the republican and democrat national committee headquarters in d.c. before the january 6 insurrection. authorities said it is not known if craighead was planning to attend upcoming demonstrations in support of people arrested for the january 6 -- riot.
your thoughts on governor beshear? caller: yes. i am very pleased with what andy has done in kentucky. regretfully, most of our legislators are republican, and they have started to restrict what he can and cannot do. andy has done a good job, especially keeping the public aware of what was going on and dealing with the covid situation. host: what specifically? caller: he had daily meetings through -- for a year in the covid. he had health representatives
come in. he had very transparent with his handling of how the party for dividing -- we have had the mock campaigns done by different parties or republicans, but he did a good job. host: it is kay ivey in alabama and this is the line for democrats. caller: this is norma. host: go ahead. caller: i most definitely would recall kay ivey in a heartbeat. our county, we are still in the
20% range of vaccinated, which means we have about eight out of 10. you go to walmart, you have eight people out of 10 who are not vaccinated. it is a scary situation to go out in public. my first cousin's daughter was a high school science teacher. she died of covid. she believed the conspiracy theory that getting the vaccine would allow the government to tracker. she was on facebook all the time. her father, my first cousin, still refuses to get the vaccine after his daughter died.
i just can't understand people's thinking and reasoning, and i do not know what this state is waiting for, if they are waiting for common sense to come along. it is not here yet, that is for sure. i called kay ivey's office once a week. i have never had a return call from her, but i leave messages. asking her to please do something, please do some pr appear. please get -- up here. please get somebody that is famous in the state or would have maybe -- somebody from the university of alabama, a football team. that gets attention. the state is about 35% vaccinated, by the county is in
the 20% range, under 25%. i am in my 70's, so i am afraid to get a haircut. you could have somebody standing above you reading down on you -- breathing down on you and you have people refusing to get the vaccine or refusing to wear a mask. host: how much were you calling elected officials' offices before the pandemic? was that something you did before? caller: i do. i do not call once a week before, but last year when we had a mask mandate before we had the vaccine available i had to go to the dmv in town to get my license plate renewal. only about one person out of 14
working in their -- there had on a mask. the public has to go in there, so you have to go to one of the windows. the lady that waited on me had a mask down on her neck, below her chin. i asked, why aren't all of you required to wear masks? you a government office. i said, it is mandated by the governor. she never replied to me. she just kept working on the paperwork. i asked to speak to the commissioner's office. my voice just kept getting louder. i said, why is it -- isn't she wear a mask? -- wearing a mask? when i asked to speak to the
commissioner, a lady said he was not there that day, that i could call back the next day. i came home and called kay ivey's office and was told that the message would be given to the state commissioner of the department of motor vehicles. host: thanks for sharing your story in alabama. 10 minutes left and plenty of callers we went to get -- want to get to, including ted. your thoughts on roy cooper? caller: i was born and raised a republican and became a democrat after nixon. i would not recall anybody unless they had violated a law or their oath of office. in regards to covid, it has been handled terribly from the beginning. we should have shut down all international travel and we did not.
in california, we did not stand up and mandate no interstate travel. we handled it poorly. to all those people who are not getting vaccines based on ignorance and based on the fact that they do not know anything about it, they ought to go to the johns hopkins site and get the truth. i believe we should have a mandate requiring everybody to get the vaccine. for anybody who wants to use a medical reason, i can understand that. but religious reasons -- if you had a vaccine for anything in your life, i would not grantee religious grounds to not get the mandate. host: back to greg abbott in texas. this is in spring texas -- spring, texas, a republican. caller: we have got a disease
that has a fraction of 1% mortality rate. people are so petrified about this. i cannot figure it out. people become apoplectic about the lack of people wanting to take an experimental vaccine and it does not make sense. how do you think -- in -- host: how do you think greg abbott has done handling covid? caller: he has done a good job. i would not replace him. i think desantis'order is more effective for the policies. host: more effective than greg abbott? how is ron desantis more effective than greg abbott?
caller: well, personal style. it is hard to account for that. i think ron desantis certainly is a showstopper. people listen and respond. in a meaningful way. with abbott, they do is welcome i have to admit. we respect him. -- they do as well, i have to admit. we respect him. on desantis would be my -- desantis would be my choice for the 2024 president. he could mobilize troops, so to speak. host: you prefer desantis over donald trump? caller: yes. host: why? caller: i will get a lot of ire.
mr. trump did a good job in a lot of ways, but he is -- he -- it is hard to put it, but he divides people. so much. it did not turn out to be a great thing. he has narcissism, the personality disorder. he is the personification of it. i do not think i would want him back coming to tell you the truth. -- coming back, to tell you the truth. desantis, the press will not hate him so much. host: just a few minutes left in this segment of the washington journal. a few more of your social media
condiments -- comments, including diana at a new jersey. my new jersey governor governs with people's interests in mind. he puts forth legislation that benefits working people and honors commitments promised by law. he cut taxes for seniors and low and middle income tax holds -- households. governor phil murphy, the democrats in new jersey. new jersey, another one of those states that had an off year election. they are holding an election 2021. here's one of the recent ads from the republican governors association targeting phil murphy. [video clip] >> new jersey suffered in the covid pandemic. covid cases are skyrocketing again, but where is governor phil murphy? instead of leading us through this new crisis, he jetted off to his luxury italian villa for a vacation. murphy leaves well businesses
struggle, kids fall behind icus -- fall behind, icus fill up. leave him behind. host: that ad from the republican governors association. if you had the opportunity, would you recall your governor? tom is in minnesota, a democrat. your thoughts about governor walton? caller: i like our governor. she stood up to the epidemic. she is on board with our school systems about masks. she is willing to talk to the people. i like the way she handled the george floyd incident. she is a governor for the people.
i cannot say my district congressman -- i really like the governor. i do not believe in getting rid of governors because of the political views or certain incident if you are elected governor. host: what did he do right when it came to the george floyd trial, the protests, everything that happened there? how did he handle that well? caller: he was upfront about it. an officer had no respect for the law and you have other officers who have no respect for the law. he had to balance that with the black community, the white community, economics, all of that. he did not do it with his face
as the front runner. he was not a showboat like the governor for texas and florida who want to be in the spotlight, who want to be the president in the future, who do not care about what they are doing to their state now. texas is going to be hurting. educated women will flee the state of texas. doctors will flee the state of texas. it is sad. host: tom in minnesota. dr. roy cooper and the tar heel state. this is robert in greenville, a democrat. caller: roy cooper is doing a fine job. our big problem is greg abbott and desantis and the majority of the republican party. they are as a criminal -- absolutely criminal.
if we do not get the truth exposed, we have qanon people in congress. it is ridiculous. the enemy is within the republican party, and it is time for us as americans to forget about republican, independent, and democrat. if it is a bad person, it is a bad person. we have a lot about republicans trying to destroy our democracy. it is frightening. host: back to california, where we began this conversation. this is beverly in california, sending us a text. i am pleased with governor newsom's leadership during this covid pandemic, although his -- through that program he kept me safe and healthy. i believe he has done an excellent job. i have voted no on his recall. gregory also out of california, an independent. what is your view of gavin newsom?
caller: i am in favor of gavin newsom keeping his position. i voted no on the recall so he can remain our governor. host: what do you like about the job he is doing? caller: taking the lead on the covid and keeping california safe to keep the vaccine out. i approve of that. host: one more call from the buckeye state. this is renda in ohio. good morning. -- brenda in ohio. good morning. caller: it was up to me, i would like to recall my governor, mike dewine. he did good at the be any of this, but he is playing political now -- at the beginning of this, but he is
playing political now, sing is up to you to wear a mask. it is your choice to send kids to school. it is their choice again. our kids are coming down with this. i raise my granddaughter. they have the thought process that if 10 cases come down in the school that school will wear a mask. that is how they take care of this. that only applies to -- if that happens at the high school, that happens at the high school. the elementary, they go on and infect each other. that is not safe. that is not a safe process. our schools are bad. you cannot go out in the public if you wear a mask. they look at you like you are on
the crazy side. we have had people dying. the people that do not want to take the shot, they have reasons for it. none of it makes sense to me. i am not super religious, but i think god gave you life and a brain. you're supposed to think and not be led to leave yourself and your family to the grave. host: stick around. plenty more to talk about, including a discussion on congressional action on president biden's economic agenda. we will be joined by the americans for prosperity's akash chougule and seth hanlon. later, john hudson will join us.
we will be right back. ♪ >> live, wednesday at 10:00 a.m. eastern, world champion gymnasts simone biles, aly raisman, and others testify on the fbi's handling of his investigation into larry nassar, the former usa gymnastics addition and convicted sex offender. the hearing comes after the fbi inspector general found the agency failed to properly investigate reports that mr. nasser was assaulting young athletes. horowitz and fbi director christopher wray will appear before the committee. watch on c-span, online at c-span.org, or listen on the free c-span radio app. ♪ >> he was a notorious
philanderer. he was ambitious. these are the words of david, a journalist and former reporter at the "wall street journal," words from a book review about joseph p kennedy senior, father of jack, teddy, and bobby kennedy. her book is about joseph p kennedy, sr's time as abbasid or to great britain, 1948. >> listen at c-span.org/podc asts or wherever you get your podcasts. ♪ >> you can be a part of the national conversation by participating in c-span's national studentcam competition. submit a five-minute to
six-minute documentary that answers the western, how does the federal government impact your life? you c-span video clips, which are easy to find and access, at c-span.org. c-span studentcam competition awards $100,000 in total cash prizes, if you have a shot at winning the grand prize, $5,000. every entry must be received before january 20, 2022. for rules, tips, or just to get started, visit our website at studentcam.org. >> c-spanshop.org is c-span's online store. rouse to see what is new. your support will serve our nonprofit operation. go to c-spanshop.org.
>> "washington journal" continues. host: a roundtable now on the biden economic agenda. for this, we are joined by akash chougule, americans for prosperity, senior economic advisory, seth hanlon as well, center for american progress. seth hanlon, they headline in today's politico, democrats put massive tax plane on the fast track. when it comes to this 3.5 trillion dollar budget plan and turning it into a legislative and spending reality, explain what is happening on capitol hill this week. guest 2: right now, the committee in the house of representatives are basically meeting to put together the various parts of the build back better legislation. it is part of the budget reconciliation, where every committee has to meet and
consider the changes and reforms, the policies in their jurisdictions. that is something last week, and then this week, tomorrow, the ways and means committee will meet to discuss the revenue raising provisions of the bill, and they have been meeting to discuss other parts of the bill as well. and then -- so after this week, the bill will be put together, the entire house to consider. host: any revenue raising provisions is what we learned a lot about late sunday and yesterday as well. here is how democrats plan to raise, maybe not all the 3.5 trillion dollars, but expected to be well over $2 trillion, according to the congressional budget office, to pay for their spending proposals. among the proposals, raise the corporate rate to 26.5% on businesses with income over $5 million. that is from the current 21.9%.
raise the individual tax rate to 39.6% on individuals making over $400,000. a 3% of surtax on individual's making about $5 million, and increase the top capital gains rate to 28.8%, from the current 23.8%. seth hanlon, your reaction to those proposals. guest 2: it is a really good step forward to, first of all, finance the bill but also to reform our tax code, simply to make it more fair. like you said, it includes about $2 trillion in revenue increases , and those are from the highest income individuals and wealthy individuals and large corporations. so i think it is a large step toward basic fairness in the tax code. i think there's also some more work to do as the legislation progresses.
host: akash chougule, if these changes became law, how big of a change would these be? guest 2: this would be enormous and harmful. these are not is on the wealthy and large corporations. the wealthy and large corporations do not have enough income, frankly, to pay for all of the promises made in this package. that nearly $3 trillion in tax increases will hit the middle class, despite president biden's promised they would not raise taxes on folks below $400,000. and you can run through the list, there is a tobacco tax increase, numerous versions of a carbon tax, the tax hike that many claim will only hit large corporations is largely borne by workers, in the form of lower wage, higher prices. what is it all for? it is all to find bernie sanders'$3.5 trillion monstrosity that will put the federal government in every
aspect of our lives, from cradle to grave, at a part when we are already facing a percent increases year over year. the american people cannot burden this wasteful spending, but even all democrats are not on board with your the american people should be outraged. host: the 3% certain tax on individuals making over $5 million. have we had surtax as before? how unusual is that provision? guest 2: they have long talked about trying to pursue a wealth tax. that would be unconstitutional. a surtax is something they think will pass muster in the courts a little bit more easily. the fact of the matter, again, this is not only a wealthy tax -- a tax on what individuals. it includes hundreds of thousands of small businesses that employ over 60 million workers, so when you raise that top individual tax rate, when you're actually raising taxes on
struggling small businesses who just got out of eight months of dealing -- 18 months of dealing with shutdowns than limitations and whatnot -- and that is why you see polls that just came out that say 80% of the country opposes raising taxes right now, as the country attempts to come out of the pandemic. host: seth hanlon, only raising taxes on the wealthiest of americans, is that what happens with this? guest 1: absolutely. he was clear that it will only be on individuals making over $400,000 and large corporations. he repeated that throughout the campaign. polls show more than 50% support when you specify you are taxing high income individuals and corporations. more than 60% of americans are for it. it is one of the reasons president biden won the election by 7 million votes, and he is delivering.
you mentioned the 3% surtax. it only kicks in once a person has $5 million of annual income. and so it affects something like 0.04% of people, which are the only very richest people in the country. the top rate increase, 39 point 6%, that is only going to affect individuals making over $400,000 and couples making over $450,000. and the overwhelming revenue rates is for the very, very top, i mean, not even moderately rich people but extremely rich people. host: you mentioned there's more to be done. this from today's front page of the "new york times," they say these proposals we are talking about, while substantial in scope, stop well short of changes needed to dent tycoons
like jeff bezos and elon musk, closing the most egregious loopholes. it aims to go after the merely rich more than the fabulously rich. what are your thoughts on that? guest 1: it is right that congress has more work to do. a key proposal that president biden had made that is not included in the committee is something called repealing for wealthy people. that is a capable term, but the idea is a billionaires like jeff bezos, warren buffett, and elon musk can avoid paying income taxes on their entire lives because of the massive gains come in some cases, hundreds of billions of dollars. i think that is a critical proposal, but i think it is also important to recognize that, in president biden's plan -- it is important to recognize that the
ways and means legislation really does take great pride strides toward a more progressive tax code, but, you know, it taxes the top 1% of americans, 1% or 2% of americans. host: our conversation on president biden's economic agenda, a conversation we will have until 9:00 a.m. eastern. plenty of time for you to join the conversation. here is our you can do it. democrats, (202) 748-8000, if the number to call. republicans, (202) 748-8001. independentss, (202) 748-8002. akash chougule is our guest, seth hanlon as well. akash chougule is with americans for prosperity. for viewers who do not know who the group is, explain. guest 2: americans for prosperity is america's largest free-market grassroots organization. we are made up of millions of activists all across the country. hundreds of thousands of them
have taken action against this legislation. there have been 2 million letters sent opposing this bill, 170,000 phone calls reaching members of congress office. we are talking a lot about taxes on the wealthy. the left-leaning tax policy center, they would see incomes fall as a result of only the corporate tax increase. that is one provision alone that would impact 75% of middle income households. the federal reserve sent families making $80,000 a year could lose anywhere from $2000 to $3300 in lost wages because of the corporate tax increase. it is a well-established fact that many of the taxes folks claim only impact the wealthy or businesses are actually borne by workers, both the left and the right understand that fact.
it is not just numbers that appear on paper that president biden is relying on. but workers are going to bear the brunt of that bill. host: seth hanlon, remind viewers what the center for american progress is. guest 1: we are a progressive policy organization and think tank in washington, d.c. our research covers a number of areas. i work on economic policy. just on the corporate tax point, i think, you know, and president biden has been crystal clear that he is going to tax large organizations some of which is overwhelmingly popular. when it comes to something which is, you know, if we are taxing the profits of exxon or walmart, will that have a trickle-down effect on workers' wages? i think what we have seen from the trump tax law that was enacted in 2017, the promises that were made about that bill, that it would written investment
boom that would trickle down, and increase workers' wages, we have not seen that at all. so if we are talking about theoretical models where proportions of the corporate tax are imputed to an individual, but those models come in the last four years, have not borne out in the real world. we are talking about the corporate tax. the 2017 tax law because the corporate tax rate from 35% all the way down to 21%. we are talking about the rate paid by the largest corporations . so president biden has propose raising it back, or at least halfway, to 28%, and the house legislation is proposing to bring it back to 26.5%, so only partially all the way back. so i think we need to be clear
this is a tax increase on large, wealthy corporations, not on ordinary americans. host: we learned yesterday, at least from that house ways and means bill you referred to commit is also a bit of a sliding scale for companies, depending on their size and profit. companies with revenue about $5 million would pay that rate. businesses with revenue between 400,000 dollars and $5 million would see that rate stay at 21%, and businesses with revenue less than $400,000 would see a rate cut to 18%. akash chougule, i will let you respond. guest 2: going back to the corporate tax, it is not true that it is not intact workers' wages. going into 2018, 2019, the fastest wage growth was taking place in low income industries. lower wage workers all gains of
4.5%, so much so that there was a closing income inequality for an extent because gains were rising. we know it works. allowing people to pursue opportunity. just something that is not really, frankly, debated about whether corporate tax impacts workers' wages are not. people can debate whether it is 20% or 16%, but fact of the matter is the corporate taxes largely borne by workers. there are multiple ways the jobs act benefited workers. one was to higher wages. the other was lower energy costs. that is another thing this bill is likely going to reverse. after the tax cutting jobs act, utility companies across all 50 states passed on $90 billion in savings to consumers. as of 2015, 20 5 million americans reported forgoing food and medical costs in order to pay medical bills. the tax cut the jobs act help address that by passing on
savings to energy consumers. this bill would raise energy cost potentially by triple digits to american families, at a time when americans can least afford it, will make life more expensive and difficult for them all because of bernie sanders' takeover of our lives, from cradle to grave. host: joseph is on the line for you, a democrat, go ahead. caller: good morning. so i am a retired teacher. i am living on my pension and social security. i probably report about 80 $90,000 a year, i pay my, whatever it is, $8,000, $9,000 in taxes. i follow the rules. we know there's a lot of injustice in our system here, and i am not an expert on despair you have two experts there, but i have two points to make. number one, as a grade of society, we should not have people in the street homeless
commingling veterans, etc., health care, etc. this may be a good beginning, like the "times" report said this morning, the "new york times," it is a beginning, but it is not addressing all the problem, ok? elizabeth warren had an idea, a 2% while tax. the gym and they're saying that is against the constitution. i don't know about that. i am not an expert, but i don't believe it. anyway, i read an article this morning that really upset me about the roth ira. the gentle man who started paypal, he put $2000 into his roth ira, and three gimmick -- it is a gimmick -- he made $260 million or something like that, and then he cashed it all in, tax-free commando he went to new zealand to live.
stuff like that is going on. something has to be done, gentlemen. host: we will take your point your seth hanlon, we will let you start. guest 1: that is a perfect example of how tax code is broken. he is talking about the billionaire, peter kiel, something like $5 billion in his retirement account. the house ways and means bill shut that down, the provision about so-called mega ira's. ira's, 401k's, these are designed as middle-class savings vehicles, not tax havens for the wealthy. but i think it is also critical to understand, this goes back to what akash was talking about, how this bill in so many ways lowers costs for americans, including families raising kids and teenagers. so for seniors, it covers
medical hearing and dental. it expands medicaid coverage to more than 2 million people. it dramatically reduces the cost of raising children, especially for low and moderate income children, through an expanded child tax credit that is already having an enormous impact on people's lives, in a positive way. and also through both tax credits for childcare care and also a guarantee that middle-class families will not have to pay more than 7% of their income for child care. so just in so many ways -- and we can, you know, the trickle-down effect of the corporate tax increases. these are things that the corporate tax increases are paying for. so from the standpoint of middle-class families, moderate income families, seniors, the benefits just are overwhelmingly greater than whatever
theoretical trickle-down effect there is from taxing large corporations. host: akash chougule, specifically on the expanded child tax credit, you think that the one-year provision that we are operating under now it has been a good thing? guest 2: well, what i would say about raising children is it is expensive to raise children in this country come and we needed to something about it. the caller made an important point about poverty and folks struggling in the street. addressing poverty is not the same thing as waging class warfare among many americans. it is popular among many folks, but it is not a solution to poverty. was a solution to poverty is breaking down barriers that stand in people's way of achieving dignified work. poverty rate among people who work full-time year-round in this country is 2%. we simply have a case where, you know, our welfare systems do not work.
there are too. . many barriers to folks getting jobs. i would posit instead of adding more to the $1 trillion we already spend on poverty, let's roll out existing programs that the get money to people in a way that they actually value rather than filing want to programs that simply are not serving their purpose. as far as actually lowering costs to families, whether it is low income families in income families, government is not lower costs. government heights costs, right, by subsidizing things, pouring money into these over subsidized systems and the way it does that, you know, it pours more money onto a system that needs reform, that don't have anything to do with money. the more and more the government over spends, the more and more it is going to do to work through inflation. 72% of voters over age 65, many of whom, like the caller, live on fixed incomes, believes this bill will worsen inflation for it as inflation workman's --
inflation worsens, it will make it more difficult to make ends meet, that is what we will have with this $3.5 trillion spending bill. host: we have mentioned an expanded child tax credit. the american rescue plan waves maxim credit -- maximum credit. it provides that that credit be allocated as a monthly payment. that is only for 2021. some proposals to expand that to perhaps 2025 and beyond. just one of those provisions in the larger $3.5 trillion bill that we are talking about. jimbo is next out of bakersfield, california, an independent. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you, c-span, "washington journal." gentlemen, i have really more philosophical question to you guys come in regards to just taxation.
do you think those who have benefited most of american society have an obligation to pay a higher tax rate than those who have not benefited as much, for whatever reason? so just really a more philosophical question. it could be answered in just a simple yes or no. thank you so much, "washington journal," for your daily contribution to democracy, and, john, thank you so much. host: thanks for the call. akash chougule, we will later take this one. guest 2: if you think the wealthy should pay more, they already do. the top 1% pays by far more, and so by virtue of making more income, they would be paying far more than middle income folks do in income taxes. i would go back to the point i made earlier, which is the manner in which our tax code functions, when you raise individual income tax rates, you are actually impacting over one
million small businesses, hundreds of thousands of small businesses, and not just a small businesses, but, again, workers. more than 60 million workers are employed by businesses that tax their income, and they pay income taxes on the individual side when you raise taxes, you raise small businesses, many who employ workers who are going to bear the brunt of that cost. host: seth hanlon? guest 1: yes, unfortunately, i believe that the wealthy and those who have been more fortunate should pay taxes. what this bill is about, fixing the ways in which the tax system really fails to fulfill that goal. we mentioned one way before, with the, you know, mega ira tax shelter, and then also with the, you know, the form of taxation of capital gains. so, i mean, we should with
these tax increases in perspective with the enormous increase in income and wealth inequality of the united states. that is the backdrop of this legislation. the wealth of the top 1% has grown by $23 trillion over the last 10 years. we are talking about $2 trillion of tax increases over the next 10 years. so it is certainly something that the wealthy and the rich can handle, and these are just important steps forward to fulfilling that principle. the wealthy should pay more. host: this debate that we are having this morning, you are going to hear a lot more about it on capitol hill this week, including this afternoon, we will join the house ways and means committee, as lawmakers debate the $3.5 trillion budget plan. you can watch live on c-span, online at c-span.org, listen to it live on the free c-span radio app. and the debate also taking place on the senate floor yesterday.
the senate returned to capitol hill. this wasn't senate majority leader chuck schumer in his opening remarks as the senate returned yesterday. [video clip] sen. schumer: with this legislation, we have a one and a generation opportunity to rebuild our economy and rekindle americans' faith in our future. it will regrow the middle-class. it includes provisions that are both critical important and overwhelmingly popular with the american people, strengthening childcare and education, making health care more for for millions, and crucially, it will include unprecedented steps to fight the climate crisis and preserve our planet for the next generation. after yet another summer marked by hurricanes, floods, and wildfires, we cannot hold off on taking action any longer. the world is looking to us for leadership on climate change, by achieving the emission goals
democrats are laying out, we can reassert america's leadership, and we can make for those at the very top finally pay their fair share. when the senate majority began its work many month ago, our original task was to pass legislation that would get our country out of the depths of the covid pandemic. now the legislation we will work on over the next two weeks will lay a new foundation for the future of our economy. it will restore the middle class and 21st century, and it will give more the opportunity to get there. building ladders to the middle class. . that is what this is about. that is what we are going to do. host: senate majority leader chuck schumer yesterday, and immediately after him, senate minority leader mitch mcconnell took to the floor, talking specifically about the revenue raises that democrats are going to save pays for th spending plan. [video clip]
sen. mcconnell: the democrats are cooking up, more higher taxes, targeted tax hikes that hit small businesses and family farms, pulling more americans into the death tax. this tax hiking wishlist would add up to one of the biggest tax hikes in american history. at exactly the time their liberal policies already have our economy sputter. it is the very last thing american workers need. it is the last thing american families can afford. and republicans are going to fight these terrible, painful policies, to stand mail. host: some of the debate on the senate floor yesterday, asking you to join the conversation. about a half an hour left on this conversation. democrats, as always, (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001. independents, (202) 748-8002.
wayne is waiting in anchorage, alaska, republican. good morning. caller: good morning. host: you are on with akash chougule an seth hanlon. caller: thank you. i work in the oil industry in alaska, and, just for example, the last two weeks, i worked 210 hours, so i had a pretty substantial paycheck, but they took 25% of that paycheck. so all that work i did, it seems like the more money i make, the more money they take, and it is kind of hard for me to wrap my mind around how that works, because i'm working very hard and a lot of hours. host: go ahead and finish your point, wayne. caller: well, i had another point, that was about chuck
schumer they're talking about climate change. my thought of that is, you know, the planet earth has always been plagued by wildfires and hurricanes, and i do not think there is any definitive proof that mankind is doing that, so i guess that is my point. host: wayne up in alaska. seth hanlon, why don't you start? guest 1: well, i mean,, i mean, if you make under $400,000, you will either be unaffected by the proposed tax bill, or you will receive a tax cut. it includes a large middle class tax increase, especially for families with children. on climate change, i would just say the science here is established, but we are also seeing it all around us, wildfires getting worse, hurricanes getting worse, floods getting worse, and people in communities are already feeling -- already bearing the effects there.
this bill is by far the largest step forward to address climate change, so it really invests in the clean energy industries, and that is going to create millions of jobs. and so this bill invests in the transition between clean energy future, creating jobs, and improving and protecting the health of our planet. host: akash chougule, i will give you howard, out of indiana, a democrat. good morning. caller: yes, good morning. i am just frustrated when i listen to these budget and funding discussions, because they seem to avoid recognizing that we have a fiat bobbing currency. these are not required. the federal government has to
issue a currency and can issue these investments which enhance our productive capacity substantially, in terms of the infrastructure bill, in terms of the human infrastructure elements that are built into it. these will grow, not inflationary, and there's no need to go through this fallacy of pretending this tax revenue is a constraint on forward expenditures. they are not. they should be decoupled. your panelists seem to be pretty sophisticated individuals. i am not sure why they are not addressing the planning and this way. that is the essence of my comments. host: akash chougule? guest 2: i would just raise concerns about the government printing an endless amount of money to pay for it and those amount of promises. we are already in the throes of an inflation crisis.
prices are up 8% year-over-year. the government printing money and running up a huge deficit will not only potentially worsen our existing inflation crisis, it also -- the point i was making -- it actually risks any of the programs people depend on, right? people want to see all kinds of investments. people can debate whether we can have government involved in every facet of your life and having bureaucrats making these decisions. but the fact of the matter is government programs that struggling people depend on operant risk of the more they are expanded and the further and wider government comes into our lives. we need government to be targeted, and we need it to be, you know, good at the things it is supposed to be doing. the more expansive than the more expensive it gets, the less likely that becomes. host:, seth hanlon this is from the while back report on twitter, i have heard biden say the wealthy americans should pay their fair share of taxes.
what should that "fair share" be? guest 1: as a percent of what? host: is a percent of the total income tax collected each year, what should that fair share be? guest 1: first of all, individual income taxes, along with the corporate tax, one of the more progressive -- individual income taxes, i think that is the wrong question, just to look at individual income taxes. you have to look at all kinds of taxes, income taxes, payroll taxes, and then at the state and local level, you know, property taxes and sales taxes. and when you do, you see that the, you know, people with higher incomes do pay more as a percent of their income, but it is not an extreme amount, and
lower and middle-income taxpayers bear a large portion of the tax burden as well. but, i mean, if i could go back to the point about inflation, i mean, i think it is important, you know, the inflation we have seen in recent months is exactly what one would expect with an economy that is coming back from the depths of a pandemic, where it was essentially shut down. factories were shut down, offices were shut down, and they are slowly but surely coming back from the pandemic, which means that, you know, there are bottlenecks in the supply chain. there are shortages of some things because factories have been closed for a long time, you know, can't be found. so it is exactly what you would expect to see. but i totally agree with our last caller, that the
investments in this bill will make our economy more productive over the long term, and that is one of the things that is going to keep inflation under control. and i would note, you know, markets are not panicking about inflation. the fed does not expect inflation to persist. so i do not think there is any reason to think that this bill would change anything. it is a small share of the economy, and it is largely paid for. and then, of course, as i was talking about earlier, it is important to recognize the many ways this bill lowers the cost on families. host: akash chougule you have got lori in cocoa beach, florida. good morning. caller: good morning. i have a question for mr. h anlon. i am a little confused. president biden said no one making $400,000 a year would
have their taxes raised, and then they said if you are a married couple, and your spouse makes $400,000 and you make over $50,000, your taxes would be raised, so i and confused, the consideration of two people who happen to be married, and then taxes would be raised over $450,000. i am just confused on that math. thank you. host: mr. hanlon, do you want to pick that up? guest 1: sure. taxes, married, proposed as a unit, married couples making more than $450,000 represent a very small percentage of the population. and, you know, they are going to face rate increases. i think that is completely fair, and it is exactly what president
biden discussed repeatedly throughout the campaign. host: mr. chougule, anything you want to add? guest 2: the whole idea of the class warfare, which is at the root, that we want to punish welfare, we want to punish big businesses -- punish the wealthy, we want to punish big business, is not how we create upward mobility. government does not create resources. it can shift the chess pieces around. that is what this bill is about, frankly, the rejection of the american idea. it is an attempt to turn america more like europe, right them aware of the government is very huge and very restrictive. what we see the flipside of that in europe. europe is much poorer than the united states. the slower growing. is less innovative. there is very little to invest and work hard in europe. this is a really concerning
fundamental rejection that millions of families have benefited for over 200 years. it is something american should be worried about, that you have class warfare swamping the american dream. host: this is steve. good morning. caller: yes, good morning. this is not a question but more of a request for comments. john, please come if you could google world health organization and build back better, you will find many references to build back better under the world health organization. now, president biden, speaker pelosi, they all mention build back better. my question is, it is a chicken or egg scenario. is president biden's build back better program a response to the world health organization, or did the world health organization come up with this after president biden? i think it is the former.
and i don't know if people are aware of this, but i think it is a global initiative. it is almost plaguerist tick, and every time i hear the democrats say "build back better," i just want to heave. i will listen to your comments. host: mr. hanlon, on the build back better slogan. guest 1: i think it is a recognition that, you know, we are coming out of a pandemic where many families were devastated. i should not even say we are coming out of a pandemic. we are still very much in a pandemic, and people are still getting sick and dying. but, you know, as you look toward emerging from the pandemic, the build back better slogan is a recognition that the economy will or the pandemic -- before the pandemic has a lot of serious inequities, and it was not as dynamic and growing as fast as we would have liked so the point is that we are just not going to restore the
pre-pandemic status quo but move forward toward a more dynamic and inclusive economy. to akash's point that this bill rejects the american idea of opportunity. in so many ways, it will expand opportunity for families, i mean, so just to give one example, it provides for tuition-free community college. i mean, so just letting people enroll in community college, you know, without incurring that cost, obviously creates opportunity. the bill also expands pell grant's. and then also, i mean, there is just so much research, and we are now seeing it in the real world, giving low income families of the resources to raise their children so that they are not growing up in hunger and desperation improves those children's lives so much, not just at the moment but later in life.
so that is what the child tax credit in the bill is really all about. it has already reduced hunger among children dramatically, just in the last two months that this program has been in effect, and it will continue to do so. but also, what it is going to do is increase, by supporting children, bettering their health, it is going to allow them to achieve more in schools and go on to earn more later in life. research has shown that earnings of children, when you increase the family income as they grow up, increases later in life, and their work ethic increases. so this bill is all about expanding opportunity for american families. host: mr. chougule, any issue
with the build a better slogan? -- build back better slogan? guest 2: it is a slogan. i think there is a problem with having the federal government and your life, from cradle-to-grave. absolutely, pre-pandemic, there were problems and barriers. so many of those barriers are actually created by government grants and created by bureaucracy. let's take a simple one that disproportionately impacts low income people. it is housing, right? we have seen housing skyrocketing areas that are most restrictive, where government most inhibits growth, expansion, and places like san francisco and new york city come a very progressive cities, where you price out the low income people, you price out the middle class. rather than poor in more money, we should be reforming those systems. education is a great example, ask seth run up. the idea to go to college is a nice concept, but right now, less than one-fifth of students
complete comedic college in the standard amount of time. we are going to pour more money into the system, push more kids into degrees that don't work for them, enjoy system that does not work for them, and when you get back down to the free-trade level, by all means, it is important that all kids get a good preschool education. unfortunately, the federal government has a horrendous record, so i do not think the path of creating opportunity for kids to have federal bureaucrats in washington, d.c. involved in educating them when they are three and four years old. we should be looking at bottom-up, private sector, locally-driven solutions, because that is what made our country the most innovative, strongest, most prosperous in the world. host: we have about 15 more minutes in our discussion about the biden economic agenda. as akash chougule alluded to earlier, so much of that agenda rests on getting 50 votes in the
senate and holding all senate republicans together. over the we can come on the sunday shows, on "meet the press," it was senator joe manchin who expressed concern. here is what he had to see. [video clip] >> you are not against if your you can support this $3.5 trillion plan? sen. manchin: no, i cannot. >> is a time issue, not a cost issue. sen. manchin: it will be a lot more than $3.5 trillion, it will continue. with that being said to made is a social reform. i am saying we should be looking at everything, and we are not. we should not be rushing into this because of some deadline we are meeting, or someone will fall through the cracks. we have got child nutrition. i want to make sure children are
taken care of. we have 11 million jobs we have not filled, 8 million still unemployed. something is not matching up there. with that being said, we have people talking all the time that we cannot find help, or there is a reason for that. >> so what would this bill look like if you are writing it from scratch? sen. manchin: if i were writing it from scratch, i would look at adjusting the tax code. it was unfair to the wealthy. we need to change that. that is why i want to go to reconciliation. i am not going to go to reconciliation and shoot myself in the foot and not be competitive. host: seth hanlon, on joe manchin and other democrats who have some concerns with these bills. guest 1: yeah, so, i mean, there's no doubt that democrats are going to have to gain senator's manchin and sineman. with regards to the $3.5 trillion, a lot of those include
tax cuts, so it is not $3.5 trillion in spending. secondly, $3.5 trillion in spending spread over a decade is pretty modest. it is a low single-digit, not 5% increase. i think at some point in this process, the, you know, the senators who have expressed qualms about the topline number of $3.5 trillion should really need to start explaining where they would cut in the bill. i mean, so, this is not just about abstract numbers. this is about what the investments are in the bill. i think, you know, there were some comments yesterday from senator tester from itinerary who basically said, you know, the topline price is not the most important thing for me, it is the content and quality of investment. we have already discussed that
come as it goes forward, the better. host: in california, tim has been waiting, an independent. good morning. caller: good morning. i'm grateful for c-span. one, i am not a democrat, but manchin definitely does not seem like he is one, either. i heard a comment from one of your guests that this is class warfare. yes, it is. it is a war now from people of color, you know, the essential workers who kept us going during the pandemic, making $15 or less. the minimum wage is not been raised in 20 years, and you are talking and whining about maybe raising the taxes on the rich? i hope so. i hope this class war continues. i hope that we overcome this oppression of capitalism that has ate up the very core of what you call america. thank you.
host: mr. chougule. guest 2: again, that is not a we are on a country and really relies on the fallacy that we function in a fixed pie. that the government cuts at the pie and handed out to people properly. that is not what has made our country the most prosperous in the world. it is not what is lifted literally when i say billions of people risen out of poverty in india, southeast asia , africa, it is those ideas of capitalism, free-trade, property rights, the rule of law that has allowed people to climb the ladder of opportunity. america has been the shining example of that, and i would really hesitate to, you know, for viewers to even consider this idea that we should move away from that i become a little bit more like europe and become more centrally planned, and rather than trust americans to lift up neighbors and create
opportunity, that we put all of that power and money into the hands of bureaucrats in washington, i do not think that is the solution to or middle-class needs. host: seth hanlon, you have peggy out of jacksonville, florida, a republican. caller: hi. how are y'all doing? i have a specific question. when they talk about pass-through come if they are going to eliminate subchapter s, you know, where the small business owners can file and have income pass through to their individual returns. i did not see any specifics on that. host: mr. hanlon? guest 1: no, the answer is no. tax reform will stay good with the bill does is raise the rates on highest income pass-through business owners. host: mr. chougule we are talking about a provision here come a specific provision. can you remind viewers what s.a.l.t. deductions are? guest 2: it stands for state and
local tax deduction. prior to the 2017 tax reform, folks could write off the entire of their state and local tax burden from their federal tax burden, so the more you pay in-state and local taxes, the more you could produce from your federal tax burden. the 2017 tax law limited data $10,000. there is a bait right now, for all of the talk about class warfare and going after the rich and all this, there are many democrats who want to restore that deduction that disproportionately benefits the wealthiest people. right? it is healthy people in high tax states, california, new york city, new jersey, they play the most in taxes, they would get the vast majority of the benefit of that deduction, and it actually cost $85 billion. that is a significant chunk of money that this bill potentially, if many democrats get their way, would be an $85 billion tax cut. the vast majority of which goes to wealthy people in wealthy states, wealthy cities.
and, again, i think that really is a shining example of the hypocrisy that is at play here, where, on one hand, you need the votes of democrats and do right by wealthy constituents and blue district and at the same time talk about class warfare and all these investments the government needs to be made -- the government needs. to make that is something i would be watching closely as a viewer. host: this statement put out yesterday after the details of this democratic proposal, the house ways and means committee, tom suozzi saying, "i have been consistent for six months. no s.a.l.t., no deal. i have spoken personally with senator schumer. a s.a.l.t. fix needs to be part of the final package." seth hanlon, on s.a.l.t. deductions? guest 1: i largely agree with what akash said,
it would be unfortunate for democrats to repeal the deduction, because it would be a tax cover high income people. i do think, you know, not unreasonably, democratic members of congress from blue states use the 2017 tax law as an attack on them and their districts. and they are concerned about the effect of the s.a.l.t. cap on middle-class families i think those concerns are largely exaggerated, very often exaggerated, but it would be very easy and not so costly to entirely protect the middle class and remove any effects of the s.a.l.t. cap on the middle class without repealing the whole thing. in other words, let, you know, middle-class families claymore the s.a.l.t. deductions, but don't let millionaires and billionaires, you know, don't life the cap for them.
to be clear, the overall crux of the bill in any scenario is overwhelmingly that rich people are going to receive the tax increase and that middle class middle income people are going to either have no change or have their taxes cut. but the s.a.l.t. cap is one issue where i hope they do not go too far in repealing that cap, at the expense of making more important investments. host: we had about 55 minister find an area of agreement -- minutes to find an area of agreement between you guys, but that is nice. our next call is from maryland. good morning. caller: good morning. how are you? host: good. go ahead. caller: the directors from the
center of progress guy, i do not understand why you do not use history against these conservative, you know, reaganomics-type people. we know that history shows fdr taxed the rich at 99%, every dollar over $2 million was taxed at 99%, so no one would profit off world war ii, ok?? and then went to bill with unions, the infrastructure, dams, electrical grids in the states, suburban communities, that o'reilly's guy, levittown, all of that was that by government money. that is what made america great. steel, cars, all of that was when a tax rate was 99%, fdr,
brought down to eisenhower and jfk, 76%. there was incredible prosperity! host: michael, we will take your point. michael, seth hanlon, the progress guy, we will let you start. guest 1: i totally agree. i think we absolutely should be looking at american history, the decades, the 1950's and the 1960's with the decades of both the strongest growth and the most shared prosperity, where all americans were growing together. now, obviously our country had problems with racism and discrimination, so we don't want to go back to those days, but, you know, we want to move forward with shared prosperity. i think it is exactly right, that the decades of recent american history, when we have the strongest growth, we had much, much higher tax rates on
high income individuals and corporations. host: and we started with that, seth hanlon, so we will end with akash chougule, give you the final minute or two here. guest 2: i think i would just go back to, you know, what the american people really admire about this country, it is the land of opportunity, it is the land of american dreams, it is the land where, you know, the circumstances of your birth do not determine the circumstances of your life. the reason that is the case is because people have freedom, and they did not have government making all of their decisions for them. this bill would fundamentally alter that. it would encroach the government into nearly every aspect of your life. it would take away your choice. it would take away your freedoms. it would take away your opportunities. i think i would make one final point about the accounting around all of this, right? president biden a bernie sanders can make any comment they want to about the middle class, even if their income tax rates don't change, the fact of the matter is their taxes will go up, their
energy prices will go up, their gas prices will go up if the democrats passed this mall to defined a takeover of nearly every aspect of your life. the american people should be up in arms about this. every aspect of the american dream is at daycare. i would urge you to call your congressman, beat this. host: you can find americans for prosperity at americansfor prosperity.org. akash chougule is a senior fellow there. seth hanlon, a senior fellow for american progress, up we will turn to the testimony of antony blinken from yesterday, and he will be back on capitol hill today we will be joined by john hudson, and later more of your calls as we look at the efforts to recall california
governor gavin newsom. ♪ >> this week, watch views from the house where 14 members of congress share stories of what they saw, heard and experienced that day on january 6. >> the senator was objecting to the slate of electors and at that moment i sadly shouted out, this is because of you. i screamed it. >> the police officer started coming in and they were being very loud. we were still talking, and they were making a lot of commotion. the doors are typically open and they started shutting all of the doors. >> someone up in the chambers, and the gallery, a member, was yelling at the republicans to call trump and have trump call off his mob.
>> there a lot of freshmen there that i got to know during orientation that this was their first real experience as a member of congress, and we were watching them and talking to my fellow colleagues about what we could do to try to stop this. >> watch january 6, views from the house, this week on c-span, c-span.org or listen on the radio app. >> he was ambitious and defeatist, these are the words of a journalist and a former reporter at the wall street journal or, from a book review, and it is a new book by susan ronald, "the ambassador." it is about joseph p kennedy or
-- kennedy. >> susan ronald on this episode of book notes plus. visit wherever you get your podcast. >> live wednesday at 10:00 a.m., simone biles, mckayla maroney and aly raisman testify before the committee on the fbi handling of the investigation of the former olympics position and convicted sex offender. they here he comes after the committee found the agency improperly reported on nasser. watch our live coverage wednesday on c-span, online at c-span.org or listen on the
c-span radio app. >> "washington journal" continues. host: antony blinken was back on the hill today for second day of hearings and reporter john hudson is covering those hearings. yesterday -- here is the headline from the washington post, blinkens clashes with the gop. you expect it to go any differently today? guest: i think it will be more aggressive because not only do you have republicans who are ready to be critical of the administration, but you also have the top democrats, bob menendez, one of the more hawkish members of congress, in terms of foreign policy, when it comes to the use of military
force abroad, he is in many ways just as conservative as a number of republicans. even though he is very much a liberal and it comes to domestic policy issues. to the extent blinken will feel ganged up on, it is going to be even more of a slugfest with the only reservation i give that the senate has the reputation for being a little more congenial, more friendly, so i do not think there will be as many raised voices and yelling as we saw yesterday. host: for the viewers who missed the appearance yesterday, here is a flavor of it. this is lee's delving questioning the secretary of state. >> we should not have been operating off of this deadline,
instead what we should have done is tell the taliban that we are going to lead afghanistan -- leave afghanistan when we are done with bringing every last american home. we should have been relying on the taliban to provide security at the airport. we should have been allowing millions of dollars of u.s. weapons to get turnover to afghanistan. the administration should not of been lying to the public, like the white house practice -- press secretary is standing out there saying they americans are not stranded even though we all know they are. i am concerned that this administration is exposing vulnerability that other countries, like receipt nor -- north korean yet now testing missiles, what happens with china and russia and al qaeda and the taliban? they press forward because we have an administration that does not know how to confront an adversary understanding that
they only respect strength. it is so unfortunate, and i believe that you should resign and that would be leadership. i yield back. >> to the contrary, i believe there is nothing that are -- our adversaries would've liked more than for the president to free up -- agree to the war in afghanistan and to be on now in that conflict and now we are able as a result of the decision to end the war after 20 years to ensure a third generation of americans did not have to go off and fight and die in afghanistan and ringing 125,000 people out. we are now in a much better position to confront the challenges that we face in 2021. host: that was yesterday. the secretary of state will be
back at it today. john hudson is covering it for the washington post. did we learn anything more during yesterday about americans still in afghanistan or ongoing efforts to get allies out of the country? guest: he came to the hearing with some data, about 100 americans seeking to get out of afghanistan that are still there , and that the state department is still in touch with and trying to help get out. a way that he described the situation is that they have had to go through difficult decisions whether not they would like to leave, and in some cases they have a large family and they might want to stay. the state department has been in touch with them, communicating with them on what the best ways are and how they can help get out. obviously the situation is more
difficult. the u.s. is no longer operating the airport, the military forces have left, so there are two options, get on a charter flight out of that newly operating international ought -- airport, or get over a land route out of the country. those are the two ways that the u.s. government is facilitating evacuations at this point in time. not doing it themselves but in coordination with the taliban. that is the element that you saw causing a lot of consternation amongst some of the republicans who have said that negotiating and working with the taliban in any way is anathema to what they believe in. what you saw blinken say is that we are not the first ones who struck the deal with the
taliban, that was tricksy and that set the timeline for the withdrawal that raised the pressure on president biden to escalate, bring more troops into afghanistan to stop the offensive that was happening, or do the pullout. president biden decided to pull out. host: if you watched yesterday or plan to watch state and have questions about the secretary of state before the members, give us a call, democrats (202)748-8000, republicans (202)748-8001, independent (202)748-8002. john hudson, a reporter with the washington post, before we get calls, one other topic yesterday was international efforts to get aid to the people of afghanistan and how that will work with the television in control of the government. what did we learn from the secretary of state? guest: what we learned is that
he is in a very difficult situation when it comes to dealing with the taliban in deciding whether or not to afford diplomatic recognition. we get an update on his conversations that he personally has had no contact with the taliban leadership, and that is being left to lower level state department officials. it is a pretty interesting exchange remember of congress a get democratic member, and he was as to the most senior official was who is dealing with the taliban right now. the secretary sidestepped the reality that our cia director met with one of the top taliban leaders right now and basically the secretary noted there is a political talent -- channel that
exist to talk to the taliban and that is being -- a longtime diplomat, and worked in the bush administration, and in the tricksy administration and has continued to work inside the biden administration largely because he has deep contacts in afghanistan, knows tribal leaders and political leaders, many people on each site and has been dealing with the taliban for a long time. even though he has left where he was taking up a lot of the negotiations, he is now back in d.c., but his services have been called upon especially to get the stranded americans out of afghanistan. he has been pushing the contacts significantly. host: rob, out of west virginia, mccright. you are on with john hudson.
go ahead. caller: i am a democrat and also a veteran and have completely opposed everything that happened. it seems to be a partisan issue. that we pulled out of there and that afghanistan is now in the hands of the television with the third largest military in the world, and i think this will really haunt to country for a long time. host: on the issue of the military that was left to the taliban, did we learn about that yesterday? guest: just to respond to your guest, i agree that this is a deeply american issue, and the only reason i was praising it in the sense of a partisan issue is
because that really came down rigidly along party lines, if you're are watching yesterday. democrats played a lot of defense for the administration come and the republicans almost uniformly criticized the move. your point is well taken, that this was an american effort, and it was a massive effort over multiple administrations, trillions of dollars spent and thousands of lives lost. sons and daughters, not democrats or republicans, but americans. in terms of the equipment lost, that came up during the hearing, and a lot of lawmakers were expressing frustration that the taliban had a lot of equipment, even many modern industrial states that do not have, the new
helicopters, the range of different equipment picked up as the spoils of war. blinken said in some cases they do not have the capability to use some of the technology, but clearly they do have the means to use some of it as we saw them roll through in armored vehicles and things that were made by the united states. he did sort of deflect through the defense department do some of the most technical information about how the capabilities have been improved through this equipment, but that was certainly a topic of concern that lawmakers were raising yesterday. host: this is greg k republican from wisconsin. blinken -- caller: good morning. just a brief comment on the credibility and the increasing lack of credibility that seems to be focused on the biden administration starting with an
-- afghanistan where there have been no material leaks contradicting what is been publicly said. can also make some of the same comments about how the covid situation being handled, no therapeutics, lack of reporting in the media, i have been around for a while and i have never seen such an increasing lack of trust in the government that i have been witnessing over the last six or eight months. host: keeping it to afghanistan and national security, lee selden brought up a point that you just brought up, put the admin station is saying publicly , what we are learning about behind-the-scenes being at odds with that. guest: that was such an embarrassing month for the administration, and there is a lot of blame to go around, but
it is true that if you look at a clip real of the different administration officials and what they said about afghanistan starting with the president talking about how this is not going to be a saigon moment, but it will be an orderly withdrawal , this was a chaotic withdrawal. this was a frantic withdrawal, a violent withdrawal. secretary blinken said this would not be a friday through sunday evacuation, where they take over and were sort of running with our tails between our legs. that is exactly what happened. it depends on how you look at this, where you place the blame. some can say what happened in the last month is an absolute failure on behalf of the biden administration. we cannot trust the biden administration anymore.
others can look at this in the broader terms of a failed military mission that has been a total debacle across multiple administrations from the bush administration to the obama administration to the tricksy administration and there's failures on the parts of generals, political leaders, and it was a u.s. nation building effort that was never understood. some people say that the way that we withdrew from afghanistan, it was befitting of the way that this war was conducted over years and that includes the drone strike that we saw a few days ago in kabul where the military hailed it as a righteous strike. now there are questions raised by forensic analysis and the washington post and the new york times raising questions if an
isis member was even hit, if they actually hit an aid worker and killed 10 people including children. so a really grim end to a 20 year war, and who you want to blame depends on how you look at it. host: you mentioned the democrats mostly playing defense for the secretary of state yesterday. he just brought up, the drone strike, a moment where that was not necessarily the case focusing on the exchange with elana mark omar -- omar. guest: congresswoman omar noted that she first of all did start with a somewhat warm exchange saying congratulations on ending america's longest war in washington, it is much more difficult to end wars than to
start wars. she did raise concerns about that drone strike and asked for countability and asked what happened and if blinken could explain it. blinken said that the united states and senior officials are looking into it very closely, did not have much more to add. clearly this was something that is being looked at, but this is an opaque situation that we do not have many more people on the ground, very unclear if they're going to be more answers especially for the extended family and friends of the individuals killed in that strike. host: about 10 minutes left before we have to let john hudson go to prepare for the hearing today. you can watch it live yourself at 10:00 a.m. here on c-span. this is albert, from chicago, a democrat. caller: good morning.
i have two questions that i would like to ask, my first question, who did president trump intent to take over afghanistan when we left if it wasn't the taliban whom he signed the agreement with? my second question is, after tricksy signed the agreement -- after trump signed the agreement, he had 11 months to evacuate people, how come he didn't? guest: that is a good question. i think for your first question, who did trump intent to hand the country over to, did he not anticipate the taliban would take over, i do think that he took probably the same risk that others were considering doing,
which was the notion for a number of officials was that it was time for the united states to leave, and we had done this training and equipping mission for a very long time, and a lot of military generals were saying they are not ready to fight on the round. the political pressure was very clear, when are they going to be ready, is there going to be a perfect time? probably there would never be a perfect time. i think the trump administration approach was that this would be a sink or swim moment for the afghan national -- security force. leaving afghanistan was more important than the possibility that the taliban would take things over. i think they would still say they would not have expected the taliban to take over the country in 11 days, and that is the
exact same for the biden administration, they did not expect it to happen, so that is why the in hindsight would have been evacuating people sooner, getting people out probably processing things quicker. i think the trump administration likely would've been speeding up that process as well, but it blindsided everybody. that is another reason why this isn't necessarily a partisan issue, and it is dubious to think either administration might have handled it better. in both cases you would've had the military totally blindsided by the fact that they had invested billions of dollars in this foreign army which collapsed faster than anyone would have anticipated. host: now huntsville, texas, this is emmett, a republican.
caller: it does seem to me that when you consider the fact that the infrastructure bill, very little of it has to do with the infrastructure in one of the stipulation seems to be to bring money or make available money for resettlement of afghans. they did this ahead of time before the fall of afghanistan. when you take into consideration that you have millions of governments across the border and the elections coming up next year, the biden administration is impatient for a change in constituency in the red state so they are -- they got the outcome that they wanted of afghanistan, which was the fall and the refugees coming into the country as future voters. guest: when you look at the pressure that the administration was under to take in a lot of
the allies, individuals interpreters, who had worked alongside members of the military during this war, a lot of that pressure came from republicans, especially veteran republicans who had worked in some cases and served in afghanistan and had personal relationships with afghans and interpreters, and they really -- people like adam kinzinger, a lot of other republicans who were pressing hard for a serious campaign to get them out and help them resettle back in the united states where they would be safe and free of reprisal. this theory that the reason the biden administration is moving all of these afghans into the united states is for electoral purposes, i had not heard that and it is not something from
what i've seen was a part of the intention. but it certainly is an issue where there is going to be political tension, where we have elements from both parties that are concerned about foreigners resettling in the u.s. i see that very much as the next phase in this political disagreement over afghanistan, and it is a real question, are the democrats and the republicans especially the more immigration skeptic wing of the republican party going to be welcoming and tolerant of the new afghans coming into the country? host: on resettlement, i listened yesterday but what did the secretary say about that left behind applicants, like my friend who worked beside her military and then open an
english academy for children despite the threat from the taliban terrorists? guest: the message was essentially for the sivs and the allies and americans that are still behind in afghanistan, and they will continue working to resettle them, try to get these routes and charter flights through. they have less control of the situation now, and much depends on the goodwill of the taliban, and there is a real question of how much the taliban will tolerate people leaving. these people that you just mentioned, a lot of these are people with significant skills. there was a question at one point, the taliban who have these rural roots do not have a lot of recent practice in governance especially among a major cosmopolitan metropolitan
area. kabul is a large city. will they want to use -- to kick a sort of the city slickers out and get them out as soon as possible, or will they realize a function city relies on the this -- this expertise in people who have skills. it looks like right now they see a country that is in economic freefall and what to keep as many as possible. they have said they are willing to grant freedom of travel to anyone who wants to leave, but this is all going to be tested. this is all new so we will see how it plays out. host: tom, from lancaster, california, a republican. caller: biden's waved the white flag to isis and al qaeda. he did not drown state -- drones
like al qaeda, just like you wave the white flag on the southern border for the drug cartels that are enslaving -- people from other countries in our own country. he does not care about the american public. he cares about his agenda and how he can make his people rich. host: did you watch the secretary of state yesterday? caller: i'm going to watch, i would like to hear why didn't they drone strike the air force base with al qaeda and isis prisoners being released? guest: i don't know that striking the airbase would've had an impact on the prisoner release that happened, but it is true that there were military officials testifying on the hill saying how much of a troubling development that was when there
were prisons that were opened up by the taliban, that u.s. officials viewed as being occupied by some extremely hardened terrorists, people with al qaeda and isis ties. some of our top officials said they believed the taliban would have a difficult time managing that as i think many people know that isis and the taliban, isis-k and the taliban are blood enemies and have fought and killed each other over the last several years. it is a big question, how those ties will be managed. the question about the airbase, republicans who were talking about this yesterday, their criticism was that the united states didn't control that airbase and keep it and they should not have forfeited that. they were saying that that would've been a better airport to evacuate people from.
then there was some back-and-forth on that. blinken said that was a military dish vision -- decision that any sort of question but that would have to be answered by the secretary of defense. host: sure to be hunting more back-and-forth today. it gets underweight and just about 30 minutes. the secretary of state is set for his testimony, and john hudson covering up for the washington post. we appreciate you walking through yesterday and good luck today. guest: great to join you. host: we return to the question we began our program with, with the backdrop of the recall vote taking place today in california for the governor gavin newsom. if you could recall your governor, would you? phone lines as usual, democrats (202)748-8000, republicans
(202)748-8001, independent 2 -- (202)748-8002. start calling in and we will be right back. ♪ >> live wednesday at 10:00 a.m. eastern, simone biles, mckayla maroney, maggie nichols and aly raisman testify on the fbi handling of the investigation into larry nasser, the former physician and convicted sex offender. this comes after the fbi inspector general found the agency failed to properly investigate reports that he was assaulting young athletes. the inspector general and fbi director will also appear before the committee. watch the live coverage wednesday on c-span, online and c-span.org or listen on the free c-span radio app.
>> this week watch january 6, views from the house, where members of congress share stories of what they saw and experienced that day. >> the representative was objecting to the slate of electors and i simply shouted out at the top of my lungs, this is because if you. i screamed it. >> the police started coming in, and they were being very loud. we were still actively debating. there was a lot of commotion. the doors to the chamber are typically open and they started shedding all of the doors. >> someone at some point up in the gallery, a member was yelling at the republicans to call trump call off his mob. >> there were a lot of freshmen
there, that this was their first real experience as a member of congress. we were watching them and talking to my colleagues about what we could do to try to stop this. >> watch january 6, abuse from the house, this week on c-span, c-span.org or listen on the c-span radio app. host: some 19 states around the country have laws that allow for recall elections for state officials including governors. our question for you, would you recall your governor if you have the opportunity? democrats, (202)748-8000, republicans (202)748-8001, independent (202)748-8002. that question is a very real question facing governor newsom out of california today. it is recall day in california,
the headline from the l.a. times, in final campaign push, biden says the eyes of the nation are on the california recall. for more we turn to our staff writer from the l.a. times. what are california voters seeing on their ballots today? how will this election work? guest: there are two questions, one is kind of an up or down question on newsom, do you want to recall governor newsom, yes or no, and how you put on that, the second question with a list of the candidates from the parties, saying if newsom is recalled, which of these candidates would you like to be governor? and whoever gets the most votes, wins. host: what are the polls telling us about the next governor? guest: going into election day today, the polls would favor
governor newsom. he is up about 20 points towards retaining him over kicking him out, and that has been a steady increase since late july. in late july it was almost 50-50, because a lot of the democrats were indifferent to the whole thing and republicans were jazzed up about kicking him out. as campaigns happen, there been a multitude of negative ads over the past once and this seems to have paid off. host: here it is on 538, the wrap up, from late july you can see the choice between keeping and removing newsom going from near 50%, leading to the increase in his favor. what has been a closing message for gavin newsom? guest: california does not want
a trump surrogate as governor. it would erase a lot of the progressive gains that the state has made come a lot of the gains the state has made against covid . we are one of the best states as far as case rates right now and hospitalizations and deaths. we are doing pretty well compared to texas and florida, so basically a message of here are the other guys, more than look what i have done. the other guy, i mean one thing that has changed has been larry elder, he has gained as the leading candidate to replace newsom, a conservative talk show host and he has said some things that newsom has legend him with over the past seven weeks. host: who are the other guys in this race? who else is seeing this race as
possibly being in it? guest: we have a cast of characters, the former san diego mayor, kevin faulkner, who was seen as kind of the golden boy for the republicans, conservative fiscally, margaret -- moderate on social issues, but he has gone nowhere, no traction. we have the democrat, a youtube star and he has about a man followers, he gives financial advice, and he is really the best known democrat on the ballot and he is not that will know. -- well known. he is in second place pretty far behind elder. we have kevin kiley, from northern
california, who is kind of like the darling of a lot of the rest root republicans in the state. and john cox, a republican from
the san diego area who ran against newsom and got trounced. host: what time did the polls officially close tonight and how long will this take to count? guest: they close at 8:00. it will take a while to count. we will get kind of a rush of votes in almost immediately because ballots were mailed to every voter in the state even though people can go in and vote at the polls as well or drop them off at boxes that are scattered around the state. there will be kind of a massive count right at 8:00 so we will get a good idea. but then it is a big state, so we expect the votes to trickle in over probably a matter of
days, it is a matter of whether there is enough one way or another that it could be called earlier. host: the l.a. times is the place to go to track results.
we appreciate you getting up early for us and walking us through ahead of a busy day for you. for this last 20 minutes this morning, on the washington journal, asking you whether you live in california or any other state in this country, would you recall your governor if you could question mark (202)748-8000 if you are a democrat, (202)748-8001 for republicans, and independents (202)748-8002. we will stay in california for a minute. this is sean, democrat. caller: good morning. i would recall my governor if he was breaking rules, if he was violating laws, if he was doing criminal things towards the citizens in california. however, governor newsom is not doing this thing. he is a great governor, doing the best he can right now.
we are in the midst of a pandemic, and right now we should not be looking at recalling our governor. we look at other states and see how the governors are renting their states, and how they are taking the rights away from their citizens in their state. congratulations to our governor, because the majority of california, you cannot pull the wool over our eyes. host: another governor that gets a lot of dissent -- attention, ron desantis, our color is from florida. caller: i wish i could recall ron desantis, i wish i could. i wish we could. this governor is talking out of both sides of his neck. first you got this so-called states rights, and we have these rights, boudin comes to parents
-- but when it comes to parents preserving the rights of their children to be secure in safe areas, they don't have any rights according to this governor. host: this is ron desantis yesterday talking about the issue of covid-19 and mask mandates. >> if a government agency in the state of florida forces a vaccine as a condition to employment, that violates florida law, and he will pay for it. [applause] annual face a $5,000 fine for every single violation. if you look at places here in alachua county, like gainesville, that is millions and williams of dollars potentially in fines, orange
county many more than that. at the end of the day, we did a lot in florida, in december for the pfizer and all of that came out, i said we would work hard and prioritize our seniors, so we would make it available for all but mandatory for none. that is been the policy from the beginning. host: that was yesterday. staying in florida, this is carolyn from jensen beach, democrat. caller: i absolutely would recall this man. i wish we could do it today. he has been horrible for our state, the numbers keep going up, fines going up. he is just disgusting. i don't know how we can get rid of him, but i wish we could do
it yesterday. host: florida, a state that does not have a recall provision for officials, 19 states around the country with provisions for recall of state officials in those states, alaska, arizona, california, colorado, georgia, kansas, louisiana, michigan, minnesota, north dakota, oregon, rhode island, washington and wisconsin. we are asking this question, if you could recall your governor, would you? this is david out of overland park, kansas, republican. caller: i am a conservative republican, and we have a democratic governor, and i oppose any recalls. that is what the voting booth is for. we can't just wake up every day
and decide for ourselves, hey, if 51% of us want this, we get to have our way. i oppose all recalls. i oppose referendums. host: some history, have a nurse and would be the fourth governor in u.s. history to face a recall. scott walker is the third and most recent, back in 2012. in 1921 lynn fraser was removed from office following a dispute about state owned industries. newsom is the second california governor to face a recall. gray davis was recalled after voters lain him for the electricity crisis and overall recession. now, north carolina, chandler, this is ashley, and independent. caller: good morning. i wanted to voice my opinion
about our government in north carolina, roy cooper is a disgrace. i would like to say thank you to mark robinson. you have been a great voice for this country, not just this state. as far as california, i support larry elder and i hope to see him crush gavin newsom. it is time for the wave to come through. all americans are ready to move on to bigger and better things. america first. we need to leave all of this tyranny and throw away the mask. it is time to move on and let's be americans as one. host: what he do -- what you like about your lieutenant governor westmark caller: -- governor? caller: he is pro-choice as far as everything, it is not just a mask. we are adults.
we should be able to pick and choose the battles we want. we did not elect these officials to be only one way and only be the way that they are being paid to preach to us. we have thoughts and values, and we need to leave that up to each and every person. host: susan is in alabama, a republican. caller: i would not recall the alabama governor. she has passed budgets on times and attracted industry. she knows how to work with the legislature and she is responsive to alabamians. we have no recall provision, like california. host: this is betty in texas, fort worth texas, a democrat for governor. caller: i would recall abbott.
i am a retired teacher, and i have not had a raise since the year 2000. we have more poor people in texas than any other state, and they refuse to take the medicare, to help the poor. the government was going to pay a percent of it. host: back to the golden state, this is rudy in sun city, independent. what is going to happen today? caller: i have already voted. i hope gavin makes it through. he was not perfect, but anything would be better than the republican candidate, gray davis ran up against a juggernaut. the republicans do not have an arnold. so hopefully it will go ok.
host: where you think he could do better? caller: with the homelessness here, some of the housing crisis, things have gone up quite a bit here in california. hopefully he will look at that after this scare that he is going to get today. host: this is bill in california, independent. what is going to happen -- caller: as you are probably aware, we are in a recall today, and this governor that we have had is basically one of the most overreaching governors have ever had. he is basically taxing us to death here in california, implementing the cunning and -- draconian tactics during this
pandemic and it is about time to get rid of this guy and put a guy in there that really changes the system. as a voter in america, these guys work for us. they are not going to turn this country into a socialist arena as he wants to do. i am absolutely for the recall, and we have got to get rid of this guy. host: at head the recall, president biden traveled to california to campaign for newsom. this was him from last night. pres. biden: the reason i am here and you are all here is to support our friend, governor newsom. this governor is the best governor in the country. california, i am not sure you know it, but you should. the eyes of the nation, this is not hyperbole, they are on
california because the decision you are about to make is not just going to impact california, it is going to reverberate around the nation. this is not a joke, around the world. there is why, all of you know last year i got to run against the real donald trump. well, this year the leading republican running for governor is the closest thing to a trump clone that i have ever seen in your state and i really mean it. he is leading the other team, a clone of donald trump. can you imagine him being governor of this state? >> no!
pres. biden: you cannot let that happen. host: president biden last night , the republican leading in the polls right now, larry elder, conservative radio host, with some 30% in the polls, far and above any other candidate among the 46 or so better on the ballot in that recall election. (202)748-8000 if you want to join the conversation as a democrat, (202)748-8001 if you are a republican, (202)748-8002 for independents. this is an ad from larry elder airing on television. >> the report card from governor newsom, education 41st in the nation, gasoline highest in the
nation, sales tax highest in the nation, income tax highest in the nation, homeless highest in the nation, time for a change because returning newsom to office again and again and expecting different insults is the definition of insanity. paid for by elder for governor 2021. host: asking you if you could recall your governor, would you? this is will from ocala. the publican. what he think about ron desantis? caller: a great guy. host: what do you like about him? caller: i am a new yorker, and i moved down here around eight years ago, i will tell you, he is a good guy. host: what policies do you
support that he is for? we will go to sharon from dade city, florida. caller: i went to thank you for taking our calls. i definitely would he recall -- would recall desantis come he has politicized this pandemic, and risking the safety of the entire community. anybody that would just be so cavalier about something so deadly he needs to be gone. host: this is rob, independence, missouri, a democrat. mike parson, republican mike person -- person is in missouri. caller: i think parson is a horrible governor. it is too bad that galloway did not win back the last election.
she would've been so good. when we look back, i don't think any of the republican governors would have been elected. i predict that newsom will keep his job because the guy that is running against them, he is no arnold schwarzenegger who was basically a very liberal republican. i think that governor newsom's seat is safe and i think california can rest easy because they don't want that state to turn into a texas or florida where the pandemic is running rampant and people are not wearing masks or getting vaccinated. i don't think californians want that. they will keep the governor. host: in nevada, this democrat mike. good morning. caller: i think the governor has
done a great job here in nevada. we have had all of the traffic that comes into the casinos, and he has done a really good job as far as handling this crisis. as far as desantis in florida, that is unbelievable. i think anybody that has been elected and has lied about this pandemic and downplayed it the whole time, i think they should be responsible for the deaths that they have caused in the state. i really do. thank you. host: new hampshire, chris sununu, the republican, and jimmy is a republican. go ahead. caller: first of all, washington journal, c-span, you guys are great. the performance that i am looking at, we have two close
republican governors, one johnson a new and one in massachusetts, and i think they're doing a very good job, but i have issues with some of the liberal views, so i think if everybody looked at what they are saying -- i'm sorry, are you there? host: i am listing. caller: if they look at some of the liberal views, if they could all work together, i think it would be great. the sununu governor here is doing a wonderful job in keeping estate that is becoming much more liberal, keeping people from boston moving to southern
new hampshire, and new hampshire is becoming much more on the liberal state. i don't think that is bad. i think that is a good thing. host: would you like to see chris sununu come to washington? caller: absolutely. as a politician or as a spokesman? host: as a united states senator. caller: that is annexed like question. -- an excellent question. i think -- i don't think that would be a good thing. we have two great senators here. new hampshire is the only state that has two female senators. correct me if i am wrong. i think with johnson in new going there that would interrupt our wonderful two female senators coming here from new hampshire. host: some breaking news at the
end of our program today, the new york times with this tweet, senate democrats have united behind a pared down voting rights bill, but the effort still faces publican opposition and set a national voter id standard to make sure that all voters could request but by mail and make election day in national holiday, from the new york times. we will be hearing more about that in the next between for hours. back to your phone calls as we wait for this hearing with the secretary of state for the senate foreign relations committee to begin, senators in the room, but we are expecting the secretary of state to testify as well on capitol hill. until he does, your phone calls about recalling governor in your state, would you do it? elise from california, a democrat. caller: we love our governor here. california is like the
rolls-royce of states and the united states. we have the ocean, the mountains, the deserts. it is expensive to live here because it is expensive to live here. he will continue to do a great job and he will be elected today. he sent out 20 million valve -- ballots to people. california is awesome. we have earthquakes, but i the time you realize it is an earthquake, it is over. he is going to win and we are going to keep going on track. he has been aggressive, progressive, he is a wonderful man. of course the republicans want to take over california. that is my opinion. host: this is yvette, a republican. caller: i voted for larry elder. i am tired of newsom.
i see he took that smiley face out there and that is not doing anything for california. people cannot afford to live in california anymore. it is out of control. i have lived here for 64 years, and i have never seen it this bad. host: where is your cost of living going up specifically? caller:caller: housing, food, ge -- gasoline is out of control. now, they want to charge you per mile to drive to your job. most people cannot live next to their job. it is too expensive. host: back to the east coast. mavis in fort lauderdale, florida, independent, on ron desantis. caller: if there were a recall, i would do it tomorrow. he has been a disaster for florida. as a parent and grandparent of smaller kids in school, the cost
of living here, in terms of gas, food costs -- mr. desantis has got to go. he has politicized just about everything here in the state. he started off as a good person, but he just -- host: mavis in fort lauderdale, florida. just after 10:00 a.m. eastern. this hearing with secretary of state antony blinken about to get underway in the senate foreign relations committee. we will see you back here tomorrow at 7:00 a.m. eastern on the "washington journal." [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2021] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org]
[indiscernible] sen. menendez: this hearing of the senate foreign relations committee will come to order. secretary blinken, thank you for joining us today. last week, the new york times reported on a local afghan reporter who was covering a demonstration by several women protesting against the taliban. he was arrested, his karma confiscated.