coming up in an hour, representative dunn rodney davis -- representative rodney davis of illinois, top republican on the house administration committee, discusses election security. and oregon representative earl blumenauer discusses the future of health care. >> and it never really stopped. we have been going through this now for over three years. it was evil, it was corrupt, it was dirty cops. kers and liars, and this should never happen to another president ever. i don't know that other presidents would have been able to take it. some people said no, they wouldn't have. ♪ host: this is the washington journal for february 7. that was president trump from yesterday, at the white house democratic processes during impeachment and other aspects. what house speaker nancy pelosi said about the president post acquittal, and we will hear from you too. a two-hour program today, so in the first hour you can let us know about the events of yesterday on one of two lines. if you consider yourself a supporter of president trump. (202) 748-8001 if you oppose the president and his policies. you can still text us at (202) 748-8003, tweet us at @cspanwj, and post on facebook at .acebook.com/cspan across the united states and on the front pages of papers, many the event yesterday at the white house, where the tosident talked only not his supporters, but had some choice words for his critics. acquittal and fury is how they put their headline. trumpizona daily star, denounces political foes as --eaze bags and some "sleaze bags and scum" rips senate democrats one day after his acquittal, and highlighting two of the main characters yesterday in the back and forth post acquittal, the president from the white house and speaker nancy pelosi making comments. we will show you both of those. it will start with the president from yesterday not only talking about the efforts of the senate majority leader, some of his critics, and how this plays out for the 2020 campaign. [video clip] >> kevin mccarthy has done an incredible job. [applause] and he loves his job, he loves his country -- tell you what, mitch and kevin, they love what they do. mitch would not even tell you he liked it. mitch, do you like it? i don't know. [laughter] he is the greatest poker player, right? kevin would say, i love it. i will say, you will be speaker of the house of this impeachment hopes -- because of this impeachment hoax. i really hope so. [applause] work on it. i'm going to get into those trump areas we won by a lot. 2018, we did not win. just two beautiful seats in north carolina that were not supposed to be one. twoid a great job, we took seats, nobody writes about that. if we lost them and would have been the biggest story of the year. we are going to go and do our job and win a lot of seeds. people are very angry that nancy pelosi and all of these guys -- myler, i know him much of life. he has taught me in new york for 25 years. i always beat him. anotherave to beat him time, and probably beat him again because that they find that i happen to walk across the street and maybe go against the light or something, let's impeach him. we will probably have to do it again because these people have gone stone cold crazy, but i have beaten them all my life, and i will beat them again if i have to. what they are doing is very unfair. [applause] host: that was the president from yesterday. you can see the full comments on our website, c-span.org. on capitol hill yesterday, house speaker nancy pelosi in her weekly dugout, as is described, talking about the , talking about the president specifically after the impeachment and the acquittal. [video clip] spoken inate has terms of any punishment to the president. he is impeached forever, no matter what he says or what you want to carry around. he is impeached forever. they are never getting rid of that scar. history will always record that you were impeached for undermining the security of our country, jeopardizing the integrity of our elections, and violating the constitution of the united states. host: some of the back and forth with that took place between the president and the house beaker. you can comment on the president's comments, or nancy pelosi's comments too. here is how you can contact us. consider-8000 if you yourself a supporter of the president. (202) 748-8001 if you oppose him. you can also text us, tweet us, and post on facebook too about this issue. bob you are up first. go ahead. caller: thank you for taking my call. at the prayer breakfast, i noticed trump questioned the faith of all of the people that opposed him, and that is not right. said, jesus said to love your enemies, he did not agree with that. he basically mocked the words of christ, so that is my comments. host: was it just the statements about faith, or where he said those statements? he doesn'tsaid that agree with the person that was speaking before him, that said you should love your enemies. doesid he should -- not agree with that. host: doug is next, california, on our support line. hello. sawer: i think what you nancy pelosi do after the state of the union is indicative of how corrosive she and the democrats have become. i think trump is the kind of president they have never seen before. they gos back when after him, and if they keep going toer him, he is keep fighting. the american people are tired of this. they want congress to do it job, and that is why i think the democrats are going to lose the house come the fall. host: given the current back and forth you saw yesterday, do you think it is possible to get anything done, considering the things that were set from both sides? they managed to pass the usmca, but that is because it was advantageous to both political parties. otherwise, no. i do not think much is going to happen. that is not necessarily a bad thing. host: why not, if i may ask? caller: well, the more laws that legislatures pass, the more difficult it gets for people just to live their lives. host: ok, that is dug in san jose, california. we will turn next to ryan, in illinois on our oppose line. caller: good morning, pedro. i thought both of president s presentations yesterday were absolutely pathetic. if you look at the record of donald trump's life, he is a man of very low morals, very low character. he lies, cheats, and steals at every opportunity, he makes things up constantly, and the media laid there and lets him get away with it. host: what about the statements he directed to democrats? what did you think about those statements? caller: i am an independent. i believe both of our parties are sick and corrupt and we have gone to the bottom of the barrel with the presidency of donald trump. i was taught to judge people by who they associate themselves with. how come donald is always the victim and surrounded by all these criminals all the time? paul manafort, his lawyer, michael cohen, all these people around donald keep getting in trouble and going to jail. i don't understand what is going on. actions,king about about the state of the union for a little bit, what did you think about speaker pelosi ripping up the copy of this age. -- the speech? caller: she was right. it was a donald stream of consciousness, it was a reality tv show. the state of the union has devol ved into a political circus. it has not been good for decades. it is like a high school pep rally. we need to start acting like adults in this country instead of middle-aged children, and we have a middle school child in the white house right now. support line, from phoenix city, alabama. this is john. caller: good morning, sir. how are you doing. host: doing well, thanks. go ahead. caller: i think trump is a good president. there are some things i agree with, some i don't agree with. it,p and pelosi going after that is just what they do in the white house. host: did you agree with the president's characterization of democrats and the white house? caller: what are the characterizations? host: he called them cheats -- caller: i think both parties are at fault with each other. they both have flaws. host: so is that something you agree with or not? caller: i couldn't say for sure. i don't know them, you know? you are always boast a have common sense and good judgment, you know? host: do you think this will affect the rest of the year not only legislatively, but this back and forth, what do you think it does for the upcoming election? caller: well i hope it does good for the election, you know? good, bad, and different. you treat others have you want to be treated, you know? as long as you always tell the truth and never lie. sterling,ew is in virginia, on our oppose line. go ahead. caller: i would like to make a recommendation. i think c-span should have a separate line for the make it a zombie line. i have never seen such a pathetic performance by an american president in my lifetime. the fact that he stood at the prayer breakfast and shouted out his grievances and then proceeded to attack romney, pelosi, at a prayer breakfast for crying out loud. this guy is a disgrace to our country, a cancer on this country, malignancy. as for those hypocrite evangelicals and so-called american patriots that support this clown, it's incredible what has happened to america that they should follow, that they should advocate for a piece of trash like this. it is incredible. host: is it about what the president said or where he said it? caller: my god, yes. where he said it, a prayer breakfast. no president in history has made such disparaging, nasty comments about fellow americans in a prayer breakfast. he could not even behave himself at a prayer breakfast. for him to attack the losey, romney, the only republican in that party with any spine, any is incredible. the republicans who went to the second meeting ought to be ashamed. they stood there like a bunch of trained seals and clapped and laughed. it is incredible how far trump has dragged this country down into the gutter. host: andrew in sterling, virginia, getting comments not only about the events of the prayer breakfast, but the events of the white house yesterday. you can see both those things on our website if you want, go to c-span.org to watch those events. a couple of reactions from members of congress post-impeachment. representative conor lamb, democrat of pennsylvania, saying i just think everyone needs to river, it does not seem to be the number one issue in a knot of people's minds. as the year goes, people rightly demand where we are going in the future? comment, i think democrats wanted it to affect the president's reelection legate of -- negatively and it's not having that effect. that was from representative fred keller. if you want to call and you consider yourself a supporter of the president, it is (202) opposing for the president, it is (202) 748-8001. up next, doing from georgia on fromppose line -- eddie georgia on our oppose line. hello? one more time for eddie. we will build to emmanuel, in washington, d.c., a supporter of the president. caller: good morning. my reason for calling is to say presiden presentation was uncalled for. the impeachment has been done, it is time for him to focus on the united states. what is done is done. somebody accept that could make a mistake, everybody has done it. he should move on and get country together. [inaudible] mistake.the worst a manual, you are a supporter of the president, we want to clarify that? caller: no, i am an independent. the linesre dividing differently, if you support or oppose the president. when you consider yourself a supporter? iller: no, i am a critic but do not oppose my leader. host: i am going to let you go, because i want to respect the people calling in on the appropriate lines. white bear lake, minnesota. joe, you're next. caller: yes. yes, i'm somewhat dismayed that the is support or against president, versus you could have had the program today support or against pelosi. distressed that the journal would take such a position. if you go back in time, only after impeachment, if you go back to the clinton era, the next best example, these are the lines we used there. since you called, what did you think about the events of yesterday? caller: i did not see the prayer breakfast. i cannot comment. one, and the second after what the president has been through the last three some, i think he made rather truthful statements. the other thing that i have noticed over the last two days is that the democrats have flooded facebook with such karen does hate beach -- such thatndous hate speech, what used to be a venue to where people could share things about , it has turned into a hate speech venue for democrats. host: let me take you back to the statements from the president. you said some were truthful. what do you mean by that? give me an example? oh, i did not mean to say some were truthful. host: go ahead. caller: he shared his feelings, his observations from what he has been through, what i have observed over the last three years, the democrats have been despicable in the way they have conducted themselves, and no president has received the hate and the slander that this president has had from day one. this has just been a campaign to remove trump from office from day one. host: ok. joe in minnesota, calling in reference to the bill clinton impeachment, by the way, those are events you can still be on c-span. contrast, president clinton rosessed contrition in his garden remarks, saying he was profoundly sorry and regretful for acts that led to his impeachment. president trump declared himself completely innocent and went on to settle scores. house speaker nancy pelosi also's part of ,hursday looking backward looking at the state of the union address on tuesday, which she said offer no contact with reality whatsoever. president'suted the claims that the economy he inherited from president barack obama had been in decline. some of the context from the events of yesterday. of those events available on c-span.org. from santa rosa, california, oppose line. caller: hi. when trump first got elected back in november 2016, i was really opposed to him because, first off, how morally bankrupt now, and-- was and is i think the problem that a lot with trump have had was the implications of the and more importantly of the wall on the southern border. let's go back to the events of yesterday, make those comments to that as far as things the president said or speaker pelosi said? think trump was really -- as much as i probably would have wanted trump it is hard to admit that it felt like the democrats were just kind of grasping at straws about this impeachment. they were throwin absolutely everything -- throwing absolutely everything at trump to get him impeached. as far as sabotaging another campaign,s election that's an impeachable offense in sayook, i can't help but trumpreally, do you think should have been president in general? i'm just saying. host: should democrats continue on these oversight investigations, as they will call them, looking into the activity, or are there other ways to go leading up to an election year? elections, i think that sabotaging any election goes against the bill of rights, in general. it goes against really, i think, the first amendment. i don't know. then you have to take into consideration the people who are backing trump and are kind of the big part of trump's voter base, like the alt-right, the and evangelical christians those kinds of people. is william, santa rosa, california. callsl continue on your with the events from yesterday, about the president and his critics. inhighlight what is going on iowa with accounting and tabulation of the caucus results, 99% of precincts reporting so far. here is how it breaks down when it comes to percentiles of votes. pete buttigieg enjoying a slim lead of 26.2%. bernie sanders at 26.1%, followed by senator warren, joe biden, and others. if it holds when it comes to delegate counts, pete buttigieg and bernie sanders both will share 11 of the 41 delegates available from iowa. they are all in new hampshire campaigning in the lead up to next week's primary there. show you guests from new hampshire and talk about the new hampshire primary, probably talk about iowa as well as part of that. we invite you to stay closed our program all week long when it comes to those topics. in flushing, new york, a supporter of the president. go ahead. caller: you should not be impeached. i followed everything at the prayer yesterday. i wonder, were those people believe or? -- believers? some of them believe in islam, some of them believe in christianity, so i do not want to say he is not complying with certain things. this president has been harassed from day one, so his anger is understandable. subjugated ton be such pressure from day one? definitely. trump is trump. he should not be clinton or -- thenot be or obama obama. he spoke about those criticizing people of faith, like mitt romney and nancy pelosi, was that appropriate? caller: it might not be appropriate, but that's -- that doesn't mean this man is a double. i do not believe in that. i'm not asking that, i am just asking if you think it is appropriate. caller: [inaudible] forget,g he should not stressing it about the house speaker. the behavior of the house speaker in public was disgraceful for her position. if he calls for her resignation, i would have arguments with him. is our caller from flushing, new york. we will take you back in time to the prayer breakfast from yesterday morning. the president they're not only talking about those who oppose butand impeachment, politics. here is what he had to say. [video clip] >> as everybody knows, my family, our great country, and your president have been put through a terrible ordeal by some very dishonest and corrupt people. they have done everything possible to destroy us, and by so doing, very badly hurt our nation. they know what they are doing is wrong, but they put themselves far ahead of our great country. weeks ago and again yesterday, courageous republican have thens and leaders wisdom, fortitude and strength to do what everyone knows was right. i don't like people who use forr faith as justification doing what they know is wrong. nor do i like people who say, i pray for you, when they know that that is not so. ,o many people have been hurt and we cannot let that go on. was an eventthat that started the day yesterday, the national prayer breakfast in which the speaker was in attendance and the president made those comments. his laterefore event at the white house. it was also later in the day that the speaker had a chance to talk about the events, including the remarks made by the president, particularly in matters of faith. [video clip] >> could you describe what you are thinking this morning as the president said impeachment was a terrible ordeal put through by corrupt, dishonest people, speaking about you and other democrats, and his suggestion that you don't actually pray for him? if the not know president understands prayer or people who do pray, but we pray for the united states of america, i pray for him, i pray for president bush, president obama -- it is a heavy responsibility. i pray hard for him because he is so off the track of our constitution, our values, our country, the air our children breathe, the water they drink, and the rest. he needs our prayers. he can say whatever he wants. he can say whatever he wants, but i do pray for him, and i say sincerely and without anguish, i gently want to pray for everybody else. i thought what he said about senator romney was particularly with our class -- without class. some people use their space as an excuse to do the wrong thing -- mitt romney there? at the so inappropriate prayer breakfast. god bless you. it is a prayer breakfast, and that is something about faith. it might not be something i agree with, but it is appropriate. to go into the stock market and raising up his acquittal thing and mischaracterizing other people's motivations, he is talking about things he knows little about, faith and prayer. host: a couple of social media aspects to share with you, a text from tennessee. i voted for the president in 2016, but i will not vote for him again. agree with someone who disagrees with the words of jesus christ. what have you to say, mike pence? another, they did not get their way and now they are suffering from terminal pouting. they are outraged when the president hits back. it is about time they get some pushback on their self-righteous, pious rance. impeachment is permanent, so his acquittal. comments from jim in buffalo, new york. as well ond those facebook and twitter, available to you. ryan from russellville, alabama. hello. caller: how are you doing today. ? host: i'm well, go ahead. caller: i would like to weigh in on the wall. i know you want to know about the breakfast -- host: we are going to keep the comments about the statements of the president and the back-and-forth, if you don't mind. caller: -- my country is so corrupt, we are working for half the amounts to feed our families. apologize, there are people lining up to talk about yesterday. i do not want to distract from that conversation. make your comments to yesterday please. caller: [inaudible] judy ok, we will go to from riverdale, georgia, on our oppose line. caller: hi, good morning. i want to say that his behavior yesterday was so inappropriate. he does this all the time. this is who he is. he is very vindictive, and the reason why nancy pelosi rip the is because everything he said in the state of the union was alive. -- was a lie. he is trying to take away protection and the health for pre-existing conditions, he is trying to take it away. people do not know that right now it is in the courts, because everything that he does is against obama. host: ok, but back to the topic at hand. when you said the statements were inappropriate, does that mean that any time the president has sharp words from his critics -- for his critics, that is inappropriate too? caller: yes. what the democrats did was not inappropriate. they were following the rule of law. if you do not have anything to hide, why didn't he provide the evidence? his supporters need to be more careful. ok, that is judy in georgia. let's go to our support line in new york. hill, you are next up. hello. do not agree with the things he said at the prayer breakfast, that is not what it was for, but i agree with what he is doing. i think the caller in virginia calling republicans, you know, the names that he did, that is the problem with this country. there is such a divide that it is bringing down our country in such a great way, it is really horrible. host: do you think the president adds to the divide, not only for the words used at the prayer breakfast but at the white house yesterday? no, i don't think so. i understand the source of frustration. i do not think it was appropriate. the house against itself will not stand, and that is what we are facing in america right now. it is horrible. i feel like he is doing the best he can, but how can you do that when you are always fighting all these rings and dealing with nonsense when they are supposed to be doing their jobs, and that is not what they are doing. host: do you think they could do the job, the president and congress, based over the last couple of days on what they have said? do you think they will be able to work together in future efforts? caller: no. no. we all need to pray. we all need to take a deep breath, come together and stop calling each other names, and focus on doing the right thing or it is going to get worse. it is going to get worse if we do not come together and listen to each other and talk and compromise and work things out. i really think that is the key, you know? pray, absolutely. we need to pray for each other, pray for our country and do the right thing. in new yorkll giving his thoughts on the support line. matt giving his thoughts on twitter, saying it is easy to support the president. all of us are used to partisan attacks, but democrats have taken it a step further by never accepting the fact that president trump is president, now they refused to accept his acquittal. with the adding, if we keep in mind that the president is human , if we have been attack nonstop for three years, accused of things we did not done, and turned the other cheek, trump has human feelings just like we do. a human reaction. , ins hear from robert bridgeport, connecticut. hello. caller: good morning, pedro. you know, i have been around a while and i remember when martin luther king, when he made a speech at a religious gathering, it was the day he denounced the war in vietnam. to lovewhen christ says your enemies and pray for him, he said that is the hardest rule to follow. christ is king. you can look that up. you have this man, donald trump, who has been battered since day one. they even picked on his 14-year-old son on saturday night live and everybody got a big laugh about it. he is a human being. he is going to fight back. he is not a religious leader, but i will tell you what -- he is the only one who is standing dayor the 3000 abortions a that go on in this country. he has the guts to do that. nancy pelosi says she is a catholic? she is not a catholic, because catholics are the number one fighters of life. host: robert -- robert, a question. sides, do people have to rise above these criticisms in order to get things done in washington? caller: i think nobody is going to rise above nothing. the democrats are not going to because if you look at who they destroy -- these people have gone into oblivion once they destroy you. yesterday they made a big deal about mitt romney and what he said? mitt romney had the light shine on him, and that is why he said that, because he is gone. when he was running against obama, look at the things he now he is jesus christ. it is so crazy to hear hypocrisy going on in washington. host: ok, that is robert in connecticut. pamela in tennessee, on our oppose line. you are up next. caller: hi, how are you doing yo -- you doing? i think wednesday showed us the death of democracy and thursday was the rise of the dictator, and the dictator unchained. he has been given permission to do virtually anything he wants and get away with it. republicans have shown they will support him in anything he does, regardless of breaking the law, breaking any kind of moral values that may be held in this country. what makes you think the impeachment acquittal makes him able to do anything he wants? caller: because he did break the law. it was against the law for him it is notd the aid, the president's prerogative to withhold aid that the congress has approved. maybe democrats should have said that specifically in the impeachment, but it is what he was accused of doing and the republicans refused to look at the evidence. they declare that they were going to acquit him well before the senate trial even started. juror in any courtroom in if country would be excused they stated that before the trial. host: the statements between trump and policy, was one appropriate versus the other? what do you think about the statements -- caller: at the prayer breakfast? made by the president yesterday or by the speaker. what do you think about either? caller: trump's was beyond inappropriate at a prayer breakfast, to deny the words of jesus christ. he doesn't agree with the gentleman before him who was quoting jesus christ. he is vindictive. he has been vindictive from the very beginning. i think this is a coup in slow-motion, in plain sight. i think he is becoming a dictator and i think democracy pretty much died on wednesday, and iowa waiting for them to announce the coronation. in waterbury,ne connecticut on our support line. caller: hello? host: hi, you're on. caller: hi, yes. i am independent. i did not vote for either trump i have lostbecause faith in this country. i have lost faith in the democrats, because i believe the democrats have changed the laws of god. they have changed everything that is biblical and illegal and they have made it legal. to the comments made yesterday by the president or speaker, what do you think of those? caller: i expected trump to retaliate as he did, because nancy pelosi tore up his speech right on camera, and that was inappropriate. and the president's comments from yesterday at the prayer breakfast or at the white house, what did you think of those? caller: i did not expect him to say anything nice about it, about her. expected him to defend himself and i do not see anything wrong with it, because he should -- host: diane, we will leave it there. mindiewers, if you do not muting your television while you are watching and waiting to get online, we would appreciate it. thear as next steps in impeachment process, the washington times have a couple that have a couple of stories. second impeachment could be on the horizon, still pending is a wide-open probe launched by adam, california democrat. mr. schiff has been investigating mr. trump, his family, his businesses over the suspicions of money laundering and bribery. mr. schiff saying during the congress, the, -- any coronation between the russian government and foreign actors that associated between donald trump campaign and business interests, and furthering of the russian government interest. mr. schiff again, when it comes to terms of blackmail, with any foreign actor has sought to compromise or hold leverage over -- and for his part, the washington time alss also highls the work of the senate. this is from mitch mcconnell perspective, before the senate adjourned, the kentucky republican prepared four district court picks and one federal appeals court nominee for both. when the senate convenes monday afternoon in washington, senators will debate the u.s. 11th for the circuit court of appeals. his confirmation vote expected early in the week. for district court picks mr. mcconnell lined up for consideration, the district of alaska, the eastern district of the northern district of illinois, and the southern district of new york. we can expect that in the senate playing out next week. we will go to chris in louisiana. chris, hello. caller: can you hear me? host: you are on. it was appropriate considering everything they did to him, what they said about him. need torxist democrats be exposed. they are exposing themselves if man, they- my god, treat people -- host: when it comes to the president's comments, what makes it appropriate? why is it justifiable in your mind? what is he supposed to do, stand there and let them attacked him like they have been doing? look at what they did with the mueller probe and look how they treated him with, you know, with the courts? the democrats accused trump off, take trump's name out and put the democrats in, it is pretty much accurate. host: do you think the president has a responsibility to rise above these kind of things? caller: if the media would be the same way, if they treated him the same way, gave him an equal chance, i would say that. [inaudible] and you have nancy pelosi doing what she is doing, the other democrats -- thingi will say the same about speaker pelosi -- does she have to rise above the level of criticisms that she has been saying over the last couple of days? caller: [inaudible] she is an idiot. she can barely come out with a complete engines. -- complete sentence. we will leave it there. richard in mount juliet, tennessee, a supporter of the president. good morning. caller: good morning. uses, and some people use god, as nancy pelosi --yed for donald trump daca donald trump? who -- kidding who? host: why are you questioning her sincerity? caller: she prayed for donald trump? give me a break. she is using god. the president criticized both mitt romney and nancy pelosi in matters of faith , do you agree with that you? -- that too? caller: yes. host: why is that? caller: they are both using god. god uses people like donald trump. then there are people like nancy pelosi that uses god for their benefit. host: ok. that is richard in mount juliet, tennessee. on the republican side, president trump running for reelection, former governor bill weld running as well, and joe walsh, the former representative in that race -- he is out of it now, ending his primary challenge against the president. austin, texas, we will hear from mary on our oppose line. good morning. it makes me really sad to hear people that really agree with the president in attacking people of faith. i know a lot of people of faith who pray for their enemies, these people really believe and live their life according to and theyiefs, absolutely pray for the people they don't like, that they fear, that they disagree with. and i believe that nancy pelosi is that kind of person, and mitt romney is too. these people believe different things, but they believe in god and live their life accordingly. as far as mr. trump being a victim, there is so much when he to show that -- was born, he was born with a silver spoon in his mouth, even from the beginning of his business career in new york, i came from that area, he did know, whatwas, you hire contractors and not pay them, he would redline black applicants for apartments -- host: back to the events of yesterday, you said the white house characterized mr. trump as a victim? we all want to characterize him as a victim when this is a man who has had more benefits than anybody -- i do not know who else i could name who has had more advantage, but has successfully brainwashed people and kept them in silos, and told them about everything he has done and how he is the victim -- he has been attacked as much as he has because he has done so many things wrong. to be curtailed because he has gone outside of the law. host: that is mary in austin, texas. the presidentfrom yesterday after acquittal, whether from the white house event yesterday or the national prayer breakfast. we have shown you a bit of speaker pelosi's responses too. only a two hour program today. two members of congress, a member of the senate and the house expected to come in. when the house comes in, we will end this program. if you support the president, (202) 748-8000. if you oppose him, (202) 748-8001. texts, tweet, and facebook also available to make your thoughts known on this issue. our caller from texas, on the support line. caller: yes. i have been upset about , irybody else calling in support him. one thing i believe nobody paid attention to yesterday when he ,as making his speech addressing the comments from nancy pelosi and everything, as he said, it is politics. before we had social media and all this stuff, you know, it was not as amped up, but politicians have been doing this for years. in michigan, you next on our oppose line. caller: i have two major points i want to stress. first, i believe he is in a an enemy of our democratic republic, and from a spiritual aspect, he goes against everything i have ever been taught, from sunday school as a child, bible class and personal study and sermons. host: ok, relate that to yesterday then. caller: when he stood up at that prayer breakfast and tossed the words of jesus christ back in the face of jesus christ by saying he did not believe in forgiveness and love of your on to man, and then went setting that he had and castigated everybody, was very vindictive -- this goes against everything i have ever been taught. i want to say one other thing. for me, personally, he has engaged in impeachable behavior from the moment he came down that escalator, when he demonized the whole group of when he was running and campaigning and said how he loved wikileaks. host: we will leave it there. clark, from ray elizabeth city, north carolina, the president has every right to answer his critics. the man and his family have been relentlessly and unfairly pounded by false accusations. congress needs to get back to work for us. gary, indiana, never have i in the history of the presidency seen such a vindictive president. adding, he is going to be the downfall of our country. ets --texour t ts this morning. you can call us or text us this morning, and we will go to paul in florida. forer: hi pedro, thank you taking my call. yesterday was a day of celebration for the president. this president has been put -- theythree years of have been pounding him, the entire time. how canways wondering, he handle what all these people are doing to him? look at his face, why is he doing it? i tell you why, because many, many people, including myself and my family, are praying for him. the democratic party needs to get back to work and work for the people of america. saw the president say these things, but do you believe he needed to say these things? caller: yes sir. he gets attacked by people all the time. all the time, sir. the democratic party is nothing. [inaudible] i was not a supporter of the president, my man was ted cruz, but i will never be a democrat. these people have gone to the extreme -- open borders -- everything [inaudible] host: do you think that had to extend to questioning peoples faith then? caller: of course. if nancy pelosi thinks she is praying, she is not praying for him. church, they talk about people -- i go to church to, but these people need to practice what they preach. nancy pelosi is not practicing -- she is not praying for him. she is praying for the next one. the next president. that is paul in west palm beach, florida. even as yesterday's events taking place, the events of 2020 still taking place. several events you might want to pay attention to, today, the 2020 presidential candidate bernie sanders in vermont will join the politics and eggs breakfast in vermont. he might talk about the i/o result as part of that. manchester, new hampshire is where that will take lace. see that at 9:30 this morning on c-span two, and our radio app. town gabbard will hold a hall in somersworth, new hampshire at 6:00 this evening. one more thing to show you, this is from the state solutions conference, hosted by politico, talking about a lot of things -- i suspect the election as part of that. -- c-span3 is where you can view that. that will be at 8:20 this morning. , oncaller from huntington our support line. caller: hi, thank you for taking my call. i would like to make a comment -- people who are calling him vindictive, this man, from the first moment he came down that escalator, was under attack. as a country, as a government body, they have wasted our tax dollars in investigation after investigation, lie after lie. as a catholic, for her to invoke catholicism, she is not doing it. she is not praying for him. romney, when he said he prayed and prayed and prayed, he is the first man in history to ever do what he did. he did. he's going to go down in history and he knows it. that was an act of vain. faith in parthis informed or led him to the conclusions he ultimately made. caller: i believe that was not the reason he did it. i believe in my heart, 110%, he did it because he could not do what donald j. trump has done. he lost twice and this was going to get him in the history books. this was going to give him a nudge. if you need that kind of nudge, go to the socialist party. donald trump has been sent to fix our country by the almighty, and he has done so. my 401(k) looks great and i have lost a lot under obama. if they want to start investigating, let's go back to 2015, when the initial meeting in the oval office with obama and the ukraine. host: what you believe he was brought by the almighty. so if that is the case come you support the president when he was attacking other people's faith? caller: i don't believe they have faith. i believe they are false prophets. host: but speaking to the president's comments about their faith, you support that? theer: i support him 100% goods he never had a chance to face his accusers. the house took that away from him. this impeachment should have never even gotten to the senate. he does not have representation. there are three bodies of government and nancy pelosi does not stand alone. she may think she does, but she done. host: that is xena in pennsylvania. but go to our next caller. hello. hello -- the next caller, wow. that is really crazy. you cannot tell nobody who has faith are not -- faith or not. i'm wondering how the evangelicals felt when he said what he said about jesus. why theike the reason democrats were attacking donald trump, he came in attacking people. the other thing that mitt romney, he used his conscience. his conscience was bugging him if it was true or not, you know? so for me, he did the right thing. and he not only proved the democrats wrong, he used the senate -- proved the senate wrong too. host: do you think the president was motivated yesterday by nancy pelosi ripping up that speech? no, not really. donald trump always attacks everybody he don't like. that is just another thing that he wants to do. host: but do you think the speaker ripping up the speech was appropriate? caller: i don't. i can understand how she felt about it. it was wrong and a bunch of lies, but she should not have done that. as theo you think as far two parties or two sides that have to work together on issues moving forward -- i have been asking this to some people -- where do we go from here? is it so polarized now that nothing happens, or will things happen yet -- will things happen? caller: it is like two basketball teams. one challenge is one, the other challenges that one. host: that is our caller from tucker, georgia this morning. the house comes in at 9:00 this morning, so that is when our program will end. up until then, we will be joined by two guests talking about activities in the house. up, representative rodney davis, republican from illinois, top republican on the house administration committee, will discuss election security. later on in the program, oregon representative earl blumenauer talking about the future of health care. this is washington journal. we will be right back. ♪ month, the ago this united states, great britain, and the soviet union met to discuss germany at a liberated europe. american history tv's real america, the 1945 documentary of that meeting, the yalta conference. >> i come from the crimea conference with a firm belief that we have made a good start on the road to the world of peace. have the major allies been more closely united, fought met -- not only in their war aims but also their peace aims. >> and on oral histories we will talk with herschel woody williams, who recounts his experiences as a marine on iwo jima. they jumped up and started firing their weapons into the air, screaming, yelling, that kind of stuff and i thought everyone had lost their minds for a second. i could not figure out what was going on. and i caught on what was going on. and it was on top of the mountain. c-spanura nation's on three. -- explore our nations passed on c-span three. >> washington journal continues. >> -- member ofey davis, a the administration committee, the ranking members to talk about election security. good morning. how much more prepared are we this time around than we were in 2016? guest: much more, what gets lost in this debate on election hadrity is the success we in the midterms of 2018. we had a historic midterm ofnout and not one instance accusations of foreign interference but we have to do more, which is way my colleagues and i introduced the protect america's vote act. host: can you give us a snapshot of what it does? >> sure, there's a lot of discussion on the ballot marking devices that democrats have tried to push through numerous pieces of legislation that would actually deal only with the ballot machines. but there's a lot more equipment and activity that needs to be addressed when it comes to election security. those are things like the voter registration rolls, look at the iowa act -- app. we could have done more proactive measures to make sure the counting mechanism was up to par when it comes to call-in results. but this would allow us to address the real problem of 2016 in states like illinois, my home state, where our voter registration system was hacked by foreign interference. and these types of activities, these types of equipment don't follow standardized guidelines like we do with ballot marking devices. for thehe concerns machines themselves, their ability to be hacked? i understand that most are not connected at the time of the election, but what are the main concerns? guest: the ballot marking devices are not connected, when you cast your ballot with a paper backup, those are not connected to the internet. but much of the voter registration rolls and states have the ee poll books that are in precincts throughout the nation. they are connected online. we have to make sure that standards are in place for them, just like the standards are in place for the ballot marking machines. the machines generally still electronic? paper? what's taking place? guest: what's great is that we don't have a centralized voting system. we have voting systems that are chosen by state and local election officials. that will a fit -- that will fix their affordability needs, most ,allot machines that we have most are obstacle scan machines. the ballot is marked and it's taken to a machine and slid in for final verification, and eventually catching in at the office. almost every machine that locals use now has a paper backup. so you have that backup system. i think most localities are moving away from electronic machines only. it's another reason why we don't need the federal government, washington, telling our local election officials what type of machines to buy, because we have to look at new and emerging technology which might be safer than the equipment that we have. host: such as? used in auitman being test in places like west virginia which would allow some of our military veterans to vote online with block chain technology. i don't think we need to limit ourselves, that might be the technology safest in the future. some of the bills that my colleagues have tried to push through the house administration ourittee really limit what local election officials can do and i think limit our ability to move ahead to the safest technology in the next five to 10 years. iowa, doesentioned that expressed concerns about the use of technology in these matters? is this a case study? -- iowa was interesting is interesting, it get so much attention in the presidential process but the caucuses are run by the state parties, not by secretaries of state, local election officials, but because the attention i would gets -- iowa gets, we might think it's like every other election that we would have an illinois during our primary. i was in iowa and i got to participate in one of the caucuses on the gop side. it's a party run operation. really the problem with iowa was not the votes being counted at the local precincts, it was a reporting mechanism. something that should easily been fixed beforehand. mike rogers, the ranking member ,ent a letter to the app maker asking why they did not partner with dhs, why they did not test this before the iowa caucuses. what was the response -- host: what was the response? guest: i just sent it. host: what testing do they do? what are they looking for? guest: dhs is already partnering with our election officials and as a matter of fact, it can help and localities run tabletop exercises to plan for if the app fails, in this case there was a coating -- coding error. so maybe you should have some backup phone call systems. that's what they didn't do, that's where we are going to ask questions, just like the success of 2018. rodney davis is taking your calls on election security matters. ,or republicans (202) 748-8001 for democrats (202) 748-8000, for independents (202) 748-8002. rick on the republican line. good morning. caller: why can't everybody just systemcentralized voting instead of having the dhs run every state and it could all be centralized, going into one thing for the federal government and each state reports instead of having like the iowa caucus which is stupid and they changed rules this year. can they do something like that? thank you. guest: that's a great question and i think that's where many democrats in washington have decided that's where we should go, to maybe federalize our elections. but i and my colleagues think that the way we keep our elections safest to be decentralized. if there's one central facility where all of our election machines are held, and all of our voter registration systems are held, i think it's easier for foreign interference, it's easier to affect the outcome of the election. i think the decentralization process as we have are the reason why we don't see as much foreign interference as a be other countries. on the democrats line in independence, oregon. hello. caller: since they equated president trump of this crime, is it ok for us to do the same thing? lie and cheat and steal to win elections, i think democrats should do exactly that and i don't know how you could refute it. thank you. guest: that's a great question and i happen to disagree. nevada, catherine, on the independent line. hello. caller: i think it's really important that we all start taking better care of this planet. i think what happened is very .ad it's people. trump is a very concerning individual that shows very little respect, civil decency, proper moral conduct. the: we are discussing topic of election security, do you have a question or comment? i'm just concerned about an evil president, which i believe he is. host: that's catherine and about it. to what level are you concerned about foreign interference in the upcoming election? guest: i'm always concerned, we always have to be vigilant but i believe we have the right people and processes in place to continue to move forward to have another successful major election like we did in 2018. we have invest at the federal level $425 million to help our states -- state and local upgrade. if we pass the act, this would allow us to set the standards on including the- app that was used by the i would democratic party that we saw fail miserably this week. does not include the testing of the machines? would it be dhs? guest: we would have the election commission, robustly funded now, we would make sure that our group out here in washington that's going to be tasked with setting the standards would appoint a committee of expert, we would set the standard to make sure that any piece of equipment, just like with valid marking devices and electronic voting machines, they have to reach a set of standards before they could be sold and marketed. was a report that came out in the senate taking a look at the 2016 election and what the obama administration knew about russian interference, saying that there is prolonged inter-agency -- were caught off onrd by russian interference fall of 2016, saying they learned of the hack from the dnc from media reports, as a case of routine xp nosh. -- espionage. sharing, interagency has that improved? would say look at the successes of 2018 with a lack of accusation of foreign interference, there's always room to improve and we can always go back and look at what decisions were made, or in this case, in 2016, look at the decisions the obama administration did not make. but i believe we are more prepared, but we have to ensure that other pieces of election equipment that are not following standards and guidelines actually have guidelines in place, so that we protect ourselves even further. the case doess the help america vote act have enough money to provide new machines and make them viable and available by the november election. there's never going to be enough money to provide people the dollars they need but there needs to be local investment and toy have already upgraded the safest equipment that they believe will work with their precincts and other areas of concern. i think when you look at hava, it's a bill that has not been updated since 2002. i think we should take a good bipartisan look at it and bring more standards into place, like our protect america's voters act does. let's stop fighting out here over nationalizing and federalize in our election process and start doing what local election officials have asked. host: so the chief update to the hava asked, what's needed? guest: setting standards for other pieces of equipment that don't have voluntary voter systems guidelines, that would be the people books, apps like those used by the i would democratic party and many other aspects of our voting system. host: deborah, on the republican line, from texas. ander: a quick question come in, nationalizing and federalize a elections, how about equalizing. concerned that poor neighborhoods with digital divides and technology gaps, we spend $420 million helping local counties but impoverished counties, just like public schools, some rich with nice schools and some with bad, but this is our election and i'm concerned that we don't have a central way to do it, which we do, which is writing it down. whether we are poor or rich, we do have hands or an attendant to help us and i think we should look at paper ballots. we are all agreeing even though we are on different parties that russia interfered in our elections. all of that has been lost in the impeachment. i'd like to talk about the digital divide and how we are rushing to 5g when some people don't have any access to technology. thank you, i will take your answer. guest: thank you for your question. there were some issues with the question that relate to other areas of technology and advancement, when it comes to local precincts and election machines, what we are looking at , we have the accounting machine where the ballot is slid into, but there are other election machines being used by officials that have a verified paper backup. i think we ought to make sure that our local officials can address the needs of their citizens the most, rather than having a one-size-fits-all approach from washington, d.c.. all -- as long as that equipment is meeting standards in place, by the election assistance commission, but let's not forget those machines are not hooked up to the internet so does not matter if 5g is available in certain parts of the country or not, those machines are picked by local election officials, and they follow a set standard of guidelines before they are even sold to those officials. but when we talk about other types of election activity and software, like the app that , thosein iowa this week do not follow standardized guidelines and we should make them. that's why our bill was introduced and i certainly hope we can get a bipartisan agreement to passage. -- to pass it. you speak about a cyber assistance unit, how does it fit in the future of election security? guest: that is similar to what my home state of illinois has created with their cyber navigator program, providing opportunities for technical assistance and helping local election officials, no matter how rich or poor their county are -- there counties are, help them understand what they need to do to protect election information and activity. social media will be a factor in the election, should more be done about misinformation on platforms? guest: i certainly think that will be a debate, especially when it comes to deepfakes, but we also have to protect the right to free speech. i think many of the proposals my democratic colleagues have put forward will infringe on free speech and we have not been afraid to make sure they know that. host: such as what? guest: like limiting access to social media, may be having the federal government determine what free speech is and what protected speech is not. that is something i think should be left the consumer and voter. and othera facebook platform self police, does not go far enough? guest: they already are in many cases. i was in ireland a few short months ago meeting with facebook officials in a bipartisan way. they told us how they monitor election activity worldwide from places like dublin, ireland. there are mistakes made during the monitoring process, and the policing process can be taken advantage of by folks who have a political interest. we see that on twitter daily. host: this is walt, in georgia, on the democrats line. caller: how are you doing this morning. representative davis, we please abouthe american people russian infiltration of the voting ballot, and why the thatcan people were told they could be assured that their votes would be counted. thank you. so i don'tafraid have the answer to that. our goal as republicans and democrats is to have as fair of an election process as possible. my local election official in christian county, illinois, some when i grew up with and graduated high school with, he's a democrat and i'm a republican but i know one of my witnesses from a few weeks ago to talk about the issues that rural communities face when it comes to election security. mike once the fairest election possible. politics should stop at the door of the voting precinct. unfortunately, doesn't, especially with processes that are legal in states like california, like ballot harvesting, that we saw someone take advantage of in north carolina and is probably going to go to jail for. it's illegal in north carolina but legal in california. those are the issues that we as republicans and democrats need to address together. davis, as is rodney republican from illinois, he is a ranking member of his committee. what are we doing with election security question how does not fold in. guest: this is the smallest committee in congress, three republicans on the minority side, six democrats. democrats this year, the majority have decided to use this as an authorizing committee. they have tried to force through bills that are 600 pages long that nationalize election system and would provide the first-ever corporate money going directly into congressional campaigns. i thought that. the republican minority fought provisions like this. house administration is traditionally a committee that runs the operations of the house. if there's no hot water in the office, something wrong with your wi-fi, you go to house administration and we work with the architect of the capitol to make sure those concerns are addressed. but it's being used much more differently in this democratic majority. host: the legislation you are promoting, is this a bipartisan effort, do you have democrats signing on? guest: we are hoping it becomes a bipartisan effort, right now election security bills have become more partisan because of what the democratic majority trying to do. they first wanted a six to one max program, their solution to too much money and probably -- in politics, that come starkly from you, the taxpayer it i don't think anybody thinks the solution to too much money is taking millions more from taxpayers. host: he also serves on the committee of agriculture and are associated with the civility caucus. what do you think of civility in light of the past couple of days , particular with statements made by speaker pelosi and the president. rise toivility means to a level in washington that it's not at now, by all sides. host: does the president contribute to that from the statements made yesterday at the national prayer breakfast? guest: i will vote on the floor the house and i can look around at both sides of the island's name a lot of people who contribute to incivility in where we are as a country in washington. host: would you extend that also to speaker pelosi? guest: i didn't leave anyone out in my statement. montreal,s go to canada, richard, on the republican line. caller: good morning congressman . on march 8 2019 and the house of representatives 97% of democrats voted against a resolution that would condemn illegals from voting in the american election, and they are against voter id laws, so democrats obviously want illegals to vote, how are republicans going to prevent illegals from voting in the 17 states where you have no voter id laws, for example in pennsylvania. thank you. question,t's a great you look no further than my home state of illinois, where we are going to have a roundtable to address some of the concerns that have been brought up by the automatic voter registration issue, 500 70 who are identified as noncitizens were registered to vote through the new automatic voter registration system for the secretary of state in illinois needs to address this problem and make sure does not happen. because there has been at least one verified voter who was a noncitizen who should not of had the ballot cast. if we say it's just 1, 1 vote matters. has acounty, illinois, local sheriff's race in a highly populated county was decided by one vote. that one vote can and will make a difference in many cases. we have to ensure that the proper procedures are followed, which is why we should pass our protect america votes acts. because we have to have standards in place for all of our election equipment, including automatic voter registration since aces like illinois. oregon, leicester, on the republican line. caller: hello. say [indiscernible] wrong -- what's happening is the votes from votes arecounty, the all return -- overturned so they don't really have a chance to vote for governor. have a nice day. could be wrong, but there are several states, maybe some that do mail-in ballots, is that a loaf i way of resolving these issues? guest: that's why we should leave it to the states. some states vote by mail, completely. we have to make sure that everybody gets a chance to vote and every vote is counted. state and local officials know the best way to run their election. not the colleagues that i serve with in washington. host: on the independent line, donnie, in creswell, north carolina. good morning. caller: good morning. i have three quick points i'd like to ask about. in north carolina we have voters who voted for voter id, which would eliminate illegals voting and double voting and people using dead people voting. i believe that should be one of the requirements, just like everybody needs an id to drive, i should have an id to vote. my second thing, the paper ballots work the best because once they are in that machine they can't be tampered with until somebody counts them. i know they're kind of archaic and the internet age, but they are safe. that's what we have, we are a small rural town. -- this thing is about is a question because i have that theeral comments thing and i what came from the hillary camp -- the app in iowa came from the hillary camp, is that true? guest: i don't know the answer to that last question we have sent a letter and hopefully we will have some questions answered as to why they did not partner with the department of homeland security to test the apps'verification processes so we would not be waiting three to four days for results to come in which were counted that night in the iowa caucuses. not a problem was of who voted for which candidate, it was a problem of being able to go online and actually report those results. but i'm glad you called from north carolina, you mentioned paper ballots, paper ballots were tampered within north carolina in the last general election. we have a gentleman going to tol, a republican, going jail, likely, for tampering with ballots during a process called ballot harvesting which is illegal in north carolina, but legal in states like california where many elections were decided weeks after election day . we have to have a debate in states that have ballot harvesting over the chain of custody of that balance. we have to ensure that political operatives like the gentleman in north carolina, a republican, needs to make sure that they don't take advantage of the lack of a chain of custody procedures. and then determine the outcome of the election. north carolina had a special election because of the activity in california that same activity would not be illegal and we have to be concerned. host: one more call on the republican line, pennsylvania, cheryl, go ahead. caller: hello. , inso thankful you are here president,tions for i never had a problem with voting before until the 16th election, we have a small area for and the machine i voted trump. one, sometimes i choose different people from different sectors. -- host: color we are running short on time, if you could get to your question question mark caller: at the end of machine it tells you to tack -- to check everything so i did and i hit the button, when i hit the button it all of a sudden gives you the queue to check it again before the final shut off. so when i looked up there it clinton.from trump to ok. host: you are going to have to ask a direct question, we are running out of time. caller: i called the representative over and i put it back up to trump and i hit the button and finalized it. this happened twice. host: we will leave it there. to her experience. guest: that's why local election officials know their machines the best, when we have a problem with the voting machine that is in a local precinct, the good news is, most of the time somebody is trained to take that machine off-line and ensure that the accuracy of any vote cast is going to be as accurate as possible. and you are one of several congressmen attacked on that softball field, how has your work on congress changed in that time? of the mosts one terrifying experiences and i don't wish it on anyone. something i think that goes back to the civility discussion we had earlier. no one regardless of where they stand in politics should have to run from bullets on a baseball field while a gunman's screaming health care because they disagree with you politically. we have to do better and i'm hoping to lead the charge to make sure that we all do better and we do more to ensure that political debate does not turn to violence like it did that morning. host: steve scalise was on the field, the president saying that you look better now after the shooting, did that go too far? guest: that is something steve wood look at as a joke. steve and i joke that that's a heckuva way to lose weight, getting shot in the but and having to go to the hospital for a while but steve has a great sense of humor. you have to understand when comments like that are made of a personal nature, because people know each other, too many times social media takes those comments and takes them completely out of context. but for political reasons. that's what we have to watch, it's that type of behavior and discussion that poisons our politics. and leads it somebody who was obviously mentally ill, like the gentleman who tried to kill us to determine that the only way he can solve problems is through violence. host: representative rodney davis, a ranking member of the administration committee. thank you for your time. we will change topics and talk about the topic of health with organ democrat earl blumenauer, he's a member of the progressive caucus about the issues on the future of health care when washington journal continues. ♪ >> this weekend on book tv, discussions on race, and gender. on sunday at 6:30, charles murray talks about his book, human diversity. >> from most a century the social sciences have been in the grip of an orthodoxy that is scared stiff of biology, but the moment it takes the form of three loudly proclaimed truths, gender is a social construct, race is a social construct, class a function of privilege. espn 9:00 on afterwards, .com senior writer on sports and race in america. yukonnterviewed by thomas. withether it's dealing schools, police, work ethic, you are looking at other people, your white counterparts, being able to do things that you cannot do because there are two sets of rules. >> i noticed my white counterparts never question their own competence. they assume they belong. they always assume they belong. yet when you look at the actual raw numbers of who gets hired and who doesn't, and we are talking about this in sports over the nfl coaching and how frustrating -- it's almost a full dissidents moment that nfl coaches are having where they are recognizing that no matter how much time we put in and how much experience we have they don't want us. >> watched charles murray and howard bryant, this weekend on book tv and c-span2. washington journal continues. this is representative earl blumenauer, the democrat from oregon, a member of the ways and means health subcommittee and trade subcommittee thank you. you are a key sponsor something called the medicare for all active 2019. what would it do if it were passed? guest: we are moving towards having universal access to health care. medicare for all cuts to the chase. it's time for us to be -- for us to not be the only rich country that is unable to provide health care as a parent he'd write -- a guaranteed right. we pay twice as much for health care results, on average, which are mediocre. americans get sick more often, it takes longer for them to get well, they die sooner. we need to be able to cut through the clutter and to be able to provide care directly, making sure that we are not spending huge sums of money on administration. a typical doctor at $80,000 a year dealing with insurance, it's a little misguided. people talk about insurance companies but i don't know anybody who loves their insurance company. what we are seeking to do is to be able to provide that degree of health, like we have done .ith the medicare program better care, less interference, lower costs. can you make the case that your way is better than having this through an insurance company. ofst: there are a number ways you will be dealing with the transition, none of this happens overnight. the principle of universal care and move forward, some people want medicare for more, medicaid for all. the notion is being able to fight for universal access. i think the outline in that legislation will work. he will be more effective. it will cost less. it will get to the point of actual care. we've been dancing around this for 70 years and we still have these fundamental problems that you don't have, our neighbors to canada, are very similar with dramatically different outcomes. this having single-payer universal coverage is the key. host: how was your legislation paid for? your legislation paid for? for federal health care are going up dramatically. we are in a situation where the long-term implications in terms of what we are going to be doing are becoming unaffordable for individuals in terms of higher co-pays and what the deductible is, being able to have a uniform approach and have the federal government step up and fill that gap. the federal government is doing a lot of that now already. i'm quite confident in the course of the next couple of years we will be able to make the adjustments necessary. my friends on their public inside passed a $2 trillion tax cut for people who do not necessarily need it, adding to the deficit. now we are dealing with things that affects people's lives. i'm optimistic we will be able to do that in a way that people will be surprised at how much is saved. being borne by people now in ways that are not as visible, denying care, increasing deductibles, and co-pays. host: so as far as funding is it a new tax structure? guest: we will be dealing with a lot of things of the tax structure, with things of the republicans did, there are a number of areas that cry out for reform, getting rid of the inheritance tax altogether is insane. right. an area that is the corporate tax cut given was more than what the business community asked for. there are areas where we can make serious opportunities for adjustment that will be welcomed by most people and give them a tangible benefit. ust: earl blumenauer joining as our guest. if you want to ask him questions, for republicans (202) 748-8001, for democrats (202) 748-8000, for independents (202) 748-8002. let's start on the independent line with jeremy in wisconsin. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for c-span. it's a pleasure to talk to you both. you started off the segment surprisingly intelligent regarding the idea of universals . there's a problem with health , we getng discussed these existential qualifiers to this universal idea, and i'm hoping you can respond. thank you for c-span. i'm not sure what the caller was driving at. as a matter of fact, what we are dealing with now is a system that is nonsustainable. we have ever burdensome costs, we are finding that companies increasingly bear a burden that foreign competitors don't come if you have employer-sponsored health care. we have areas that have defied simple common sense adjustments. for example prescription drugs, we are not able to deal in a competitive sense to get a better price for the largest consumer of prescription drugs in the world, the medicare program. so having a principle established of universal coverage, the legislation we have offered up, i have had a chance to debate it at home with folks, people walk away convinced that there are opportunities to improve care, get more value, and get rid of the clutter that we have in terms of the current administration. we are on a path that is nonsustainable. the vat a, onn the republican line. caller: good morning. yes. thatarl, i want to say your universal health care plan is just a nice word for socialistic health care. socialistic health care kills people. up in canada, people are waiting for months and months just to get liver transplants. my point is that socialism does not work, and under donald trump's watch you will not succeed in forcing every american to have insurance under your policy and plan. look up under the obama administration obamacare on page 1001 it states they will be able to force us to -- you and your cronies, will be able to force the american people to get a computer chip embedded in them and we will not take the mark of the beast. pass onell, let's computer chips. i'm from the pacific northwest and routinely have an opportunity to visit in vancouver. people along the border have the chance to see that national healthcare program in canada has not created huge problems. there might be a glitch here or there, but overall the statistics are clear, canadians live longer. they have greater access to care. they don't get sick as often. it's one of the reasons you don't see people on the streets in canada that you do here we're -- do here with people simply not having access with substance abuse issues. americans go to canada to get risk and drugs that are affordable. it's ludicrous the notion that somehow people are dying light -- right and left in canada. they have a vibrant economy. we have people in the united states that travel to that country, and see it for themselves. it's a donald trump talking point but it's a lie. host: one of the statements made by the president during the state of union was the topic of health care were you there to extremes it firsthand? guest: absolutely not. i'm not going to subject myself to a reality show barker with exaggeration and things that i find unseemly. nothe point of whether or there is a problem in terms of providing health care, the veterans administration are all doctors that are paid for by the federal government. people are trying to change that , but it provides better health care. it completely socialized. host: let me show you with the president said and get you to respond. [video clip] shouldamerican patient never be blindsided by medical bills, that's why i signed an executive order requiring price transparency. [applause] many experts believe that transparency, which will go into full effect at the beginning of next year will be even bigger than health care reform. [applause] it will save families massive amounts of money for better care, but as we work to improve american health care, there are those i want to take away your health care, take away your doctor, and abolish private insurance entirely. 132 lawmakers in this room have endorsed legislation to impose a socialist takeover of our health care system, wiping out the private health insurance plans of 180 million them -- 180 million very happy americans. to those watching at home tonight i want you to know, we will never let socialism destroy american health care. if he could get out of mar-a-lago and the bubble of his campaign rallies and speak to real life americans, he will find they are not happy. they have real challenges. my guest at the state of the union has a daughter with type 1 diabetes and has been fighting for years to have access to insulin. thatis the administration talks out of both sides of his mouth. he claims he's in favor of protecting those with , but heting conditions and republicans are litigating right now to have the affordable care act invalidated, which would take those protections away. he went into office promising something bigger, better, cheaper, and it fell flat. you can sign an executive order for transparency but if you are an emergency room thank you very much after an accident, or just given a diagnosis of some serious form of cancer, and you are going to wade through the fine print and disclaimers given thatu, that's ludicrous you are somehow going to negotiate in the operating theater for a different doctor. that's not how the real world unrealistic and cruel to offer up that is a solution. host: from our democrats line, in louisville, kentucky, lisa. caller: thank you for c-span, i appreciate this segment. i agree that everybody should have some kind of insurance, universal, that would be all right with me. i know it couldn't be implemented totally right away, but can you promise me that people currently on medicare, like me, that our premiums will not go up. i've already paid into the system and i think that would be unfair. and would you mind checking into the medicaid program? i know many people on medicaid and they are required, whether they need to or not, to go to the doctor every three months. that's billing you all for unnecessary things like going to the doctor because i won't give you your refills on your pills if you don't come in every three months. that's unfair and wasteful. but other than that i quite agree that everybody deserves health care in one form or another. i will think my comments off-line. thank you. host: thank you. guest: while there's no guarantee that there won't be adjustments in premiums, that's been the case as long as health care continues to become more expensive. there will be adjustments upward i anticipate, but if we have an opportunity where we are spending less on unnecessary administration, having more people covered, you don't have the problems with catastrophic failures which you and i pay that bill. because once they get access to an emergency room they cannot be denied care. there's so much inefficiency ample the system and opportunities to make those changes. if we have more people involved with uniform standards and we don't wait until conditions get so bad that they are admitted to an emergency room we have people on the streets with substance abuse and mental illness who do not have care, and it spills over into the broader community as well as themselves. there is real potential to be able to put these pieces together in a way that provides better care, lower costs, and less individual tragedy. host: if your version comes in the place what happens to the affordable care act and those under it? subsumed would be under that. there will be transition issues, we talked about two years, four years, these things don't happen overnight and there would be an opportunity for people to weigh in and fine-tune it. that's fine. but the principles need to be universal access, the government pays for it, streamline proposals, health care as a right, and be able to make sure that we are not paying so much on failure. and you relieve the uncertainty, even those with insurance, they have deductibles that go up every year. have co-pays going up every year. and in some cases the policies themselves are getting skinnier. there's a subtle but real reduction in the health care being provided, even under some of the best plans. the: from bill, on independent line, in maryland. caller: what prompted me to pick up the phone if you asked the several occasions how it's going to be paid for. and i did not hear an answer. is goinghe government to pay for it, where is the money -- where does the government gets its money from? taxpayers. my question to him would be how are you going to fund it when my understanding is that we brought in 3.7 trillion last year and spend 4.7 trillion, meaning we borrowed one trillion. we owe 23 trillion and there's 150 trillion of unfunded andilities for medicare social security. how are you going to pay for it. how much are our tattoos -- taxes going to increase trade i have heard estimates as high as 50% tax in order to do the things that the socialists want to do. with that i will get off the air. guest: people ought to scroll back and look at what's happened to the tax system. this was the largest transfer of wealth in our nations history, passed by republicans, on a tax bill that they literally wrote what we were voting. a massive reduction in corporate taxes, we don't have to continue that tax giveaway. most people, even some friends of mine who benefit from it in terms of carried interest, a special tax break for certain categories of investors, which is not available to the rest of us paying an even lower tax rate. why do we have to have a lower investe for people who than people who work? is there a different tax burden for work and wealth? . mentioned the inheritance tax these are all areas right for adjustment that are not going to be burdensome on typical americans, but would have an opportunity to recalibrate the balance. that's before we look at a whole series of programs that most americans feel should be cut. we are on a trajectory for $1.2 weapons.in new nuclear nuclear weapons we cannot afford , we cannot afford to use, that don't help with strategic towns is now with things like terrorism -- strategic challenges now like terrorism and cyber terrorism. there is no end of opportunities, if we are going to reset not to start tax priorities but are spending priorities to be able to get the american public a better shake. host: our guest is the democrat from oregon serving on the subcommittee for the ways and means health subcommittee. of the your assessment federal response to the coronavirus to the u.s.? guest: it seems a little confused. but we have not had that much it seemse of late, and to me that what happens usually with this administration, they tend to get spent up on things at the border on things that are , with peopleto us who are refugees, now denying opportunities for people in new york to be able to have traveling, these are real life problems that they are making like mountains out of mole hills. when it comes to something like this, we are not really prepared. we have people in acting capacities and they are distracted with the drama of the moment as opposed to the nuts and bolts of hard-core administration. keeping us safe, i think, is one of them, the investment in public health is going down by this administration. it's not prescriptive for success. also the chair of the ways that means -- of the and means trade subcommittee. there's a trade agreement with tariffs being slashed, where does that follows far as we are with china? guest: it has really been an embarrassing episode. we have real issues with china and trade. are act in ways that dramatically unfair to american business in terms of getting access to intellectual property. our businesses are completing -- competing with heavily .ubsidized chinese enterprises the government gives them virtually unlimited money to compete against us. come in fore to american projects and we don't have reciprocity. the president went through these drive-by tariffs for three years , went through all of this agony , inflicting damage on americans . despite the delusional claims that the chinese are paying for the tariffs, the tariffs fall on american consumers and business. and the opportunity here to start to unwind some of this, i think, is important. but it's only part of it. canadiandent declaring auto companies a national security threat to the united fores as a justification this erratic tariff policy, this is embarrassing. it doesn't help us. it confuses our allies. and it emboldens people who are competing against us. host: and on the passage of the usmca? guest: i was proud work with the speaker and the chair of our committee to be able to take a seriously flawed proposal, and they gave it to congress, it did not have the votes to pass and it should not have. we systematically worked through to strengthen the environmental provisions. i led the charge to strip off unnecessary protections for the pharmaceutical industry, shielding them from competition. and most important, enforcement has been dramatically enhanced. working with people in organized labor, not picking fights but working cooperatively. i was proud of that that bill that we put forward that would not have passed originally had 193 democrats, and 192 republicans, and will be a dramatic improvement over what we have today. the democratsn line, we are ending in a few minutes, go ahead. caller: my mother is 89. i am her caretaker and caregiver at home, until recently, her needs became greater than my capabilities. her condition became serious. this past week she was hospitalized, she was stabilized and they said she is still not ready to come home and needs rehab in a rehab and nursing home facility. she is covered under medicare at the hospital, for the first 20 days of the rehab facility because she has medical needs and physical therapy to get her back so she can maybe come home. we don't know. care qualify for long-term , and approved, conditions that are approved for long-term care, but they are telling me she cannot start getting it until .he's approved for medicaid sayre lower middle class, i to the professionals, i say what do i do in the meantime until she gets certified for medicaid and they look at me sadly and say you are in for a long process. and long-term care premiums are expensive, they would have bankrupted her so she doesn't have long-term care insurance. host: i apologize, we have to leave it there, does this get covered under the a scope -- under the scope of what we are trying to do? people aremany facing uncertainty. medicaid is the default, it's available to people only after they have largely exhausted all of their personal financial resources. yet this is a program that my republican friends are looking downt, to be able to scale in the name of efficiency. but it means less care for more people. these are the sorts of comprehensive areas that we have to go ahead and include. we don't want to have a variety of different one-off programs paid for the administration, and have the gaps. if we have a notion that there ,s a universal access to care that that's our responsibility, health care has a right, it provides a context to work these items through as all other rich countries do, not having gaps of this nature and burdens on individual families. host: we have 30 seconds left, what's the process of hr three being passed in the senate? what are its chances? the force good, but behind prescription drug reform is building. peril,me at their denying americans progress. the president even can paid on it. he has not done anything but there's an area where we could have a breakthrough to make a difference injecting comp attention into the system. earl blumenauer, the democrat from oregon the subcommittee member on the ways and means subcommittee talking about health care issues. thank you for your time. guest: thank. host: we are about to go to the house of representatives come as part of our 2020 campaign coverage several things are happening, go to our website for more information on that. now to the house of representatives.

Related Keywords

Alabama , United States , Nevada , United Kingdom , Vermont , Somersworth , New Hampshire , Minnesota , China , California , Whitehouse , District Of Columbia , Dublin , Ireland , Russia , Eastern District , Virginia , Connecticut , Ukraine , Russellville , Iowa , New York , Georgia , York Hill , North Carolina , Texas , Washington , Kentucky , Florida , Vietnam , Republic Of , Illinois , Indiana , Wisconsin , Manchester , Canada , Oregon , Michigan , Puerto Rico , Germany , Tennessee , Capitol Hill , Montreal , Quebec , Pennsylvania , Maryland , Christ Is , , Americans , America , Chinese , Russian , Britain , Soviet , American , Earl Blumenauer , Kevin Mccarthy , Mount Juliet , Steve Scalise , Dunn Rodney Davis , Mitt Romney , Jesus Christ , Nancy Pelosi , Pete Buttigieg , Mike Rogers , Charles Murray , Rodney Davis , Ted Cruz , Michael Cohen , Bernie Sanders ,