inflationary spiral. so, but as far as the biden administration, theyti caused this. i mean, what is the definition of inflation in it is too many dollarss chasing too few goods. the lockdown suppressed productivity for two years, this administration comes in spends trillions of dollars we don't have, prints those dollars and releases them into the economy. well, of course you're going to have a massive inflation. that's the very definition of inflation. it's not complicated. >> host: is that still happening by administering, and do you see those -- >> guest: it all depends if they're able tog get their so-called build back better agenda through, that's trillions of dollars of additional money that we don't have that has to be printed that will inflate the economy. right now interest rates are going up, but we've got to hold line on spending. and it's all caused by the spending. if you want to know the entire budget in three numbers, it's pretty simple. 28, 76 and 89. 28, 76, 89. 28% is the combined growth of population and inflation over the last 10 years. 28%. 76% is the increase in federal revenues in the same period. federal revenues are growing more than twice, approaching three times what inflation, population combined -- and that's after the republican tax cuts a few years back. 89's the problem, that's percent increase in spending in the same period. to borrow from the old clinton phrase, it's spending, stupid. >> host: obviously, the price of gas,s prices in general are affecting the entire country. specifically though for your congressional district in the 4th district there in california, what are you seeing, what are you hearing from your constituents? >> i'll tell you what i saw when i went to the airport on monday, gas, $6.95 a gallon at airport, arco, that's for regular. that's quite a bit higher than rest of the country, but california has imposed so many additional green laws that that's the price that we're paying. but the bottom line is this can't continue. it's crushing families, and it's unnecessary. this was not some mysterious with act of god that was visited upon our nation. these were specific acts of government. this was bad public policy. and the good news is we can change that the moment we summon the political will. >> host: i want to ask you about the congressional efforts after shootings in buffalo, the mass shootingsings in buffalo and uvalde, texas. house passed a bill, the protecting our children act. the senate reportedly is working on a deal, some of which will include, that senate bipartisan proposal will implement funding for state states, it would close the so-called boyfriend loophole on domestic abuse, it would fund school-based mental health services and community health clinics, fund school safety resources, clarify rules on who needs to register as a licensed gun dealer and enhance background checks for under 21 gun buyers. some of the reporting on that bill, what are your thoughts? is that something that sounds like you could supportsome. >> guest: well, we can go to each of the specific details, but overall we have now more than 50 years of experience with gun control laws in this country. they are very effective at disarming law-abiding citizens. they are very ineffective at disarming criminals and madmen andd terrorists. they create an environment where a law-abiding citizen is defense less and the gunman is king. -- defenseless. that's been thehe king in all of these so-called gun-free zones including uvalde. putting gun predators in jail until they're old and gray works. executing murderers works. identifying the dangerously mentally ill and confining them to mental institutions where we can treat them works. and law-abiding citizens who can shoot back works. you know, the day after uvalde there was an incident in charleston, west virginia. a gunman with an ar-15 style assault weapon fired into a graduation party. there was a woman there with a concealed weapon who shot him dead on the spot. we didn't hear about that mass shooting because will wasn't a mass shooting because there was a honest citizen with a gun who was able to stop it before it started. >> host: congressman tom mcclintock is with us up until about 8:30 eastern, so we welcome your calls and comments, 8001 is the line for republicans, 8000 for democrats and for independents and others, 202-748-8002. ar -- the around the time of passage of that bill, congressman, the house version, the headline from cleveland.com, house democrats advance gun control legislation over objections from republicans, but you were quoted in that saying nobody questions the commonje sense of having an armed guard at a bank, but leftists somehow cannot see the common sense of having an armed ad guard -- armed guard at schools. does that mean you're in favor of hardening schools and arming teachers? >> guest: yes. a teacher who has a concealed weapons permit, has gone through the training -- what is the purpose of a concealed weapons permit? it's self-defense. why shouldn't that teacher, if they want to, be allowed to use that concealed weapons permit to defend the students in their own classroom if they want to? and why in the world don't we put an armed guard at every school the way we put an armed guard at every bank, every shopping mall? we think nothing of it when we see an armed guard at a shopping mall. they're there to protect merchandise. why don't we use the same resolve and force to protect our children. this is inconceivable. >> host: it's a relatively new phenomenon having schoolteachers armed. what data do we have to to show in those locations, those states and localities that, indeed, that shootings at those schools have gone down? >> guest: i haven't seensc datan that particular point, but i have seen the data on the overall incidence of gun violence in those communities that have concealed weapons permits, and it's generally much lower in the areas where you have armed citizens. not only because they can shoot back, but because criminals know they can shoot back. the buffalo shooter in his twisted manifesto went into this in great detail. he was specifically looking for so-called gun-free zones. you know, you look at uvalde. there it's illegal -- even if you have a concealed weapons permit, illegal to take take a gun onto the campus. every administrator, teacher, janitor obeyed that law. the only person who didn't is the gunman, and there are 19 children dead as a result. >> host: on that buffalo shooter and the manifesto, that was published at the time of that horrible, that shooting, so we had no way of knowing what -- >> guest: yeah, but we know what was going through that twisted mind. and he was reasoning this through. if you're in a gun-free zone, people aren't going to shoot back. that's the place to do a mass shooting. >> host: so you think in the senate legislation that the efforts to identify potentially, potentialen mental problems or emotionalde problems with people under the age of 18, people 18 and under, the shooter in buffalo, the one in uvalde, texas, both 18 or 19 years old, both having some trouble or issue that had not been identified, do you think that we should beme able to find ways to identify those -- >> guest: we had ways. we had ways to identify those. for years when we identified somebody who was a danger to themselves or others regardless of their a age, they shouldn't have any access the firearms. they also shouldn't have access to any p other kind of weapon. they shouldn't have access to people where they can hurt themselves or hurt others. and with we had a process that respected all of our due process rights. we encountered someone like that, we could commit them, confine them and get them the help they needed. we need to get back to that -- i checked just for california. if you compare the number of individuals, dangerous, mentally ill individuals combined in our mental hospitals today compared to 1960 and then adjust for inflation, we should have just in the state of california about 100,000 dangerously mentally ill in mental institutions today where they can be treated, but we don't have them there. they're out on the streets. >> host: what's happened to that process? >> guest: it's been completely corrupted by left. i mean, look at it. we used to prosecute gun criminals to the fullest extent of the law. we'd put them in jail until they were old and gray, that worked. the left stopped that. leftist d.a.s refuse to prosecute. the first thing they do is plea bargain down the charges. look at hunter biden. he committed two gun felonies when he purchased a .38 revolver. the first is you're not allowed to do that if you're a drug addict. he was ane admitted drug addic. and then he lied on the form, which is a sec felony. is he being -- and these facts aren't in dispute. is he being prosecuted? what kind of message does that send, and what does that tell us about our own resolve to protect our citizens from violence? >> host: let's hear what our callers are thinking. we'll go first to j.b. in hot springs, arkansas, for congressman tom mcclintock. good morning. >> caller: yeah, good morning. congressman, you were talking about the interest rate when you first came on, and i think you said you thought it might go to 8% inht can you imagine what the interest on the national debt would do if you raise the interest rate to 8%? >> guest: it's as 8 promom calcr but you forget that's what paul volcker ultimately had to do. we had double-digit interest rates in order to quell the carter inflation. again, thisle is just basic economics. but you're with absolutely right about the debt. >> caller: paul volcker did not have a $30 trillion national debt when he was in the federal reserve. it was a minuscule amount back then. he raised rate, he raised the national mint, quadrupled it, but, of course, it was still small. >> guest: yeah. >> caller: volcker could cothat and get away with it. powell, if he raises it to 8%, you wouldn't have enough money left to pay social security probably or anything. so it's not realistic. >> guest: yeah, your point's well taken. the size of the national debt today means that a small increase in interest rates, when it churns through that debt, creates a massive interest cost. i believe it was every basis -- every 1% increase in rates produces about $200 billion of additional interest payments. once we've churned through that debt. so your point's well taken, it's extremely dangerous. but that's where we are. >> host: brownsburg, indiana, next up. kevin on the independent line. good morning. >> caller: how you doing? all due respect, sir, you're the reason why somebody like me is considered independent. democrats and republicans like to blame everything on opposite party. tell me some bad things that your party done. quit just blaming everything on the other party. butt i'm a staunch two-way supporter, and i do agree with you that teachers should be armed. and like you said, and i don't understand why people can't get it through their heads. i'm going to pick a soft target ifll i'm going to do something. i'm not going to go to an nra meeting and shoot it up, because i know somebody's going to shoot back. my last thing is i don't understand why they call it the boyfriend bill. to me, it's a slap in the face, disrespect to men. abused a too. >> host: that term is called a boyfriend loophole that's in the proposed senate language. >> guest: yeah. well, let me hit major point you make, and that is it's not a matter of parties, it's a matter of policies that work and policies that don't work. and you're absolutely right, we we know how to fix an economy. you reduce the tax and regulatoryhe burdens, and the economy prospers. that's what donald trump did as a republican. that's also what bill clinton did as a democrat. people forget that bill clinton reduced federal spending by a miraculous 4% of gdp. he approve what amounted to one of the largest capital gains tact cuts in -- tax cuts in history and the economy blossomed. john f. kennedy did the same thing, dramatic cut in the income tax which produced a remarkable period of expansion. george w. bush -- or george h.w. bush increased taxes dramatically, increased spending dramatically, and it caused a period of great economic distress. so it's not a matter of the party, it's a matter of the policy. problem is m right now the democrats are pursuing a policy of massive spending, massive taxation, massive regulation, and it's crushing us. >> host: let's hear from tony on the republican line, california. >> caller: yeah, hi, representative. i've been a staunch supporter of the second amendment my entire life, and i just can't reconcile what happened with my views with what happened at uvalde. i don't understand how you can say that we need to arm teachers, we need to have police officers at schools when the simple solution so just do some godch damn -- >> host: oh, go to ah are i on independent -- ali on the independent line in maryland. you're on the air. >> caller: yeah, thank you very much. congressman, i have to say i agree a little bit with the previous caller. i have to say that we have to listen very carefully how you phrase your words. you said that laws over last 50 years do not protect law-abiding citizens, and they only help criminals and crazy people. well, the crazy people got their guns as law-abiding citizens when they went to buy their guns, there was no documentation, nothing that said, oh, i'm unstable, i'm crazy. they got it perfectly legal as a law-abiding citizen. and then the other point i'd like to make is why do we always havee to split things in termsf right or left or republican or democrat? why don't we look at data? data is what we should be using. how many,da you mentioned the family, the graduation with party and the lady that used her gun. well, how many cases are there? >> guest: let me answer that directly. there have been a number of studies on that, between a half million and two million crimes a year are prevented by armed citizens. >> host: our caller's off. do you want to respond to some of his other comments or -- >> guest: regarding? well, once again, i agreed completely. it's not a question of party, a question of policy. the problem is the policies being pursue by the democrats right now have been proven to be absolutelyci disastrous to our country and the policies that the trump administration and the republicans produce produced a period of dramatic economic expansion. we had theth lowest up employmet rate in 50 years, the lowest poverty rate in 60 years, the fast wage growth in 40 years. for the first time in our lifetimes, the income gap between the rich and the poor was narrowing. this was very much a blue collar boom. we secure our borders. so the record speaks for itself. these are policies that work. if this administration had come in and simply maintained those policies, we'd be inni a far different position than we are today,s but instead they reverse all of those. >> host: like every other member of house, you're up for re-election at the end of this year. have you been endorsed by the former president? >> guest: yes. >> host: what's your view of the work by the january 6th select committee? >> guest: i think there's some important issues that need to be resolved by that, and unfortunately, they're notk revolving them -- resolving them. the first is the authority of the congress to reject electoral votes. it has no such authority. it doesn't exist in the constitution. i think it's a very dangerous concept. we need to be addressing that. we need to ask why wasn't there adequate with security at the capitol. we've now learned that president trump, four days before january 6th, offered national guard assistance to the democratic leadership and the mayor of washington, and it was turned down. why was that? why was the capitol so inadequately prepared? those are important questions. and, for that matter, was there a conspiracy to break into the capitol? you know, what happened was a national disgrace. it was an effort to disrupt one of core functions of our constitutional government, peaceful transfer of power. those are serious questions. they can't be resolved through the soviet-style show trial that's going on right now. we have a time-honored process that we've evolved over centuries to get at the truth, to sift through various opinion. and that's an add very -- adversarialth process where both sides choose their representatives. i think then cross-examine each other, they challenge facts, they challenge opinions. that's democratic process. that's not what's unfolding with this january 6th committee for the first time inat the historyf our institution. speaker has arrogate to herself the ability to choose the committee members and has arranged a situation where only one side -- her side -- is being heard. that's a travesty to the process. that is also a tragedy because there are very serious issues thatar a arise from january 6th that do need to be addressed. >> host: the vice president will be the focus of today's hearing coming up this afternoon at 1:00 eastern, vice presidentay mike pence. what are your views on the stance he took on that day? >> guest: he was absolutely right. you know, on january 6th i actually had an op-ed piece in the washington times where i argued the point that the congress has no authority to reject constitutionally-cast electoral votes. and think about it this way: under our constitution if no gets a majority of electoral votes, who chooses the president? the house does. if the house can simply refuse to count ballots, then there's no point to an electoral college or, for that matter, the presidential elections. if that power actually existed in our constitution, the house gets to decide the president every four years. that's extremely dangerous, and it's nonsensical. as i said, there was an 1860 #s law that asserts that authority. it's wrong. it's never been tested in court, and that was what was at crux of the challenges to reck tomorrow ballots. the congress has no such authority. it can't -- it's a matter of simple logic -- cannot have that authority if the constitution's going to work the way it's design. >> host: let's get back to some callers. manuel in brighton, colorado, on our democrats' line. >> caller: yes. everything the that this individual is saying is a bunch of b.s. what has happened is the republican party passed a tax cut for the rich and basically stole money from the tax payers allowing corporations to pay zero tax on billions of dollars of profits. republican party, guy in particular -- this guy in particular, supports trump who -- trump kept the interest rates down. inflation is obviously going to happen. the republican party picks -- >> host: we lost our caller there. >> guest: let me -- the data says quite opposite. thee inflation rate under president trump was around 2%. it took off like a bat out of hell after we started printing trillions of dollars to pay for biden's spending spree when he took office. so that should be fairly clear. with respect to republican tax cuts,, again, the data is quite different from what your viewer beliefs. believes. the republican tax cuts actually produced more revenues after cuts than we'd been taking in before. corporate revenues and income tax revenues are now at an all-time high. why is that? because the economy expanded rapidly as a result of reducing those burdens. and it wasn't just the taxes, it was also the biggest regulatory rollback in american history. those policies worked. and it's notry just republican policies. as i've said is, john f. kennedy did same thing, bill clinton did it during his administration. harry truman did it during his administration. and it's always a consistent result; reduce the burdens on economy, the economy expands. increase the burdens on the economy, economy withers and contracts. >> host: so the trillions of dollars of spending has happened in terms of covid spending, covid relief spending both under president trump, as you know, and under president biden. what do you think the legacy of that spending will be, that that it saved the economy during covid or that it has led us to this point of high inflation? >> guest: well, i think quite clearly the latter, because we're living through it now. we can see that very clearly. the lockdowns did enormous damage to the economy. they did not slow the spread of virus. we are now seeing study after study after that compares areas thatat locked down to those that didn't, areasud that mandated masks and those that that didn't. youwe remember sweden being so viciously attacked because they never closed their schools, never forced their citizens to stay home, never mandated masks, and yet their death rate from covid -- despite the fact that it's an older population than the united states -- is much lower. if we had sweden's covid death rate in the united states, there'd be 407,000 fewer dead americans. so we know lockdowns didn't, didn't work from a public health standpoint. but the damage they did to the economy was astronomical, and we can see that very clearly, by the way, comparing those states with severe lockdowns with those that didn't lock down. those that didn't lock down today have booming economies, those that did lock down are still struggling. the damage has just been enormous. .. policies that work impulses that don't work. let's stop imposing policies and a proven time p and time again don't work. soon let's go to the republican line in suwanee, georgia. alan you are on. >> yes or i livee in borja about a month ago it's gone down statewide except one small area that's a city of atlanta controlled by democrats for the other point i want to make is the january 6 about the whole whatever is going on paper i live in georgia but encrypted, then after they sent poll watchers homeport even after the investigations only 3% of the signatures were verified. everybody that was on that should have been brought into court and nobody was. everybody just took when 3% of signatures verified is not conclusive. and i never in my life with the voting stopped in the wake up in the morning and one candidate had counted all night. my boss tells me don't doe something and i am caught on camera doing something, it is wrong. quickset is an issue for the people of georgia by the constitution is very, very clear. the president is george is the electoral votes are chosen by a process established by the state legislatures. when under the laws of that state a slate of elect tours is sent to the capitol to be counted on that's the only role is to count those ballots. that issue has already been settled. the challenges need to be made at the statech level. there were some federal issues involve the most crucial was we had several states that change their election laws last minute. not by legislative actions required by the constitution, but by administrative. we challenge that an supreme court and the supreme court refused to take it up. so under our process the electoral ballots that were sent to the congress were certified by the individual states. that satisfies the requirement of the constitution pair they have to be counted. to the extent that fraud is suspected or is being committed that has to be policed by the individual states under the processes at each of the states havece established records of or call paul cedar hill, texas. goiter there quick comment orwi question. >> yes thank you very much for taking my call. i have h a question for the gentleman. first of all going to covid. a lot of republicans still seeot this point in time denied there's even such ay thing. i think that kind of restricted a slowdown of the progress if you will. >> i do not know many republicans who said covid doesn't exist. of course it exists. it is a very serious virus. i think the measures that were taken were not only completely ineffective of slowing the virus they were very effective at destroying the economy for. >> quick, go ahead. >> another quick comment is, president trump is the one who cameut out and said every amerin person should have $2000 he's going to make sure of that. and so therefore that's when all this so-called spending took place. he delayed the checks he wanted to put his name on top the checks for. >> and going to let you go they were wrapping up comments from some final spots on his comment. >> i cannot disagree with him for the trumpmp administration made some mistakes and that was a big one. it was at the very beginning of the outbreaks. but the administration came very quickly the president can very quickly to the conclusion these lockdowns are been counterproductive for. >> congressman mcclintock thank you for being with us. >> my pleasure bill thanks for having me. >> he spans washington journal every day we take your calls alive on the air on the news of the day and we discussed policy issues that impact you. coming up friday morning we will revisit the watergate break-in on its 50th anniversary with "washington post" chief correspondent who will join us to talk about the historical impact the event has had on trust in government. an informant watergate special prosecutor and geoff shepard former deputy to the nixon administration special white house counsel will also talk about the watergate break-in. watch a washington journal by that seven eastern friday morning on c-span on c-span now a free mobile app. join the discussion with your phone call, facebook comments, text and tweets. >> c-span the weekly podcast brings you over 40 years of audio recording smart video library comparing the events of the past two today on this episode watergate in g gordon. >> the watergate break-in happened 50 years ago. june 17 , 72 police arrived and arrested burglars in the committee headquarters at the watergate complex in washington d.c. but first we remember g gordon liddy and this episode of c-span's the weekly. libby helped plan the watergate break-in and went to jail because of it and served five years of a 20 year sentence. then he reinvented himself as a radio talkshow host. he used his radio show to offer provocative history and memories of watergate. >> it occurred to me that they might have me assassinated. and i did out some amateur doing it with a shotgun on a sunday morning in through the kitchen window for the take out not only me but also misses in a couple of the kids i said if they wanted to go that route i would just go stand on some remote street corner we get it done without harming any of the taxpayers. it said i don't think we've got to that point yet. >> you can find that weekly on c-span now our free mobile app or wherever you get your podcast. >> 's american history tv saturdays on c-span2. exploring the people and events that tell the american story at 8:00 a.m. eastern on lectures and history on the 50th anniversary of the watergate break-in, american university professor joseph campbell talks about the 1972 scandal and what he calls the myth of heroic journalism for it he argues that congress and other federal agencies contributed to the downfall of nixon presidency and it was not solely caused by the "washington post" reporting. then at 2:00 p.m. on the presidency, mark the president and ceo of the op j foundation talks about his book incomparable grace, jfk and the presidency and his reassessment of jon f. kennedy and how jfk grew dealing with domestic and foreign challenges. exploring the american story. what american history tv saturday on c-span2. find a full schedule on your program guide or watch online anytime at c-span.org/history. >> cspanshop.org is c-span's online store. browse our latest collection of c-span products, apparel, books, home to core, and accessories. there is something for every c-span fan. and every purchase to help support the nonprofit operation. entrance shop now or any time at cspanshop.org. fix a vote of 84 -- 14 the senate approved a bill