tv Washington Journal 08222019 CSPAN August 22, 2019 7:00am-10:05am EDT
business will be on to talk about the state of small businesses. we will take your calls and you can join the conversation on facebook and twitter. "washington journal" is next. ♪ host: this is the "washington journal" for august the 22nd. the trump administration announced a plan to keep migrant families indefinitely detained together as they await trial. the move hopes to discourage illegal immigrants from coming to the united states. nancy pelosi called the proposal "child abuse, plain and simple." we will tell you about this proposal and for the next hour, tell us what you think about it. 202-748-8001 for republicans. 202-748-8000 for democrats.
and independents, 202-748-8002. you can tweet us your thoughts at @cspanwj and post on our facebook page. that is at facebook.com/cspan. joining us on the phone to explain this proposal from the trump administration is anna, she covers homeland security issues for the publication. a morning to you. guest: good morning, pedro. host: could this -- could you explain this proposal and how it changes from the current policy? 2015, a judge of the central district of california ruled in a settlement that children in i.c.e. custody and any person with that child could not be held in custody more than 20 days. this is under the obama administration and at the time, you have families going through
dockets seeking asylum being held 45 days, sometimes 90 days. the issue at hand was you cannot just indefinitely detain a family. now what we have is any family weather they present at a port and does not have documents or illegally crosses and says i have a credible fear of returning will be taken into custody and border patrol will process them, supposedly in 72 hours and hand them over to i.c.e. who will decide this person gets deported or we will hold onto them. i.c.e. can only hold that family 20 days and they only have so much room to house families. the issue we have today is tens of thousands of families coming over the border every month.
with i.c.e. unable to hold people 20 days, they are releasing people. i wrote a story last month saying since december, i.c.e. has released 218,000 people into the u.s. who arrived at the border with a family member. host: the headlines all use the word "indefinitely." if this proposal comes about, what is a realistic number to that term? guest: that is the thing we don't know yet, how long can people actually be held. is the trump administration going to surge immigration judges and asylum officers and other necessary officials down to the border, uscis, immigration services can get through all of these cases? you have 900,000 cases waiting to be decided.
anyone coming over today and claiming asylum is at the bottom of that list. we also don't know where people are going to be held. remember, these ice facilities are completely overwhelmed. they do not keep single adults in the same place they will keep me and my child, obviously. typically they would hold someone when they could, more than 20 days. they are not like border patrol stations, they have amenities. they are meant for longer-term -- i don't want to say detention, but it is the tension. these are the questions we don't know yet and the interesting thing is dooley and castro had said -- julian castro said we should be searching them down to the portal -- border. you could see how there might be away way for democrats and republicans to work together on
this. what is scaring them is the word indefinitely. how long is this actually going to take? i am sure there will be cases and exceptions where you see someone was held a very long period of time because you see patrol.n with border the trump administration is doing this so people don't feel like they can come in, apply for asylum, and take years to hear their case and wether they show up to court or not, remain in the u.s. indefinitely after that. host: the trump administration put this proposal out -- one of the ideas was to keep families together in reaction to criticism they received over the treatment of some children. guest: exactly. that has been there point, it is going to keep children safe and
families together. you remember during the zero-tolerance policy last spring, families came over together even seeking asylum, the parent would be referred for prosecution, therefore separating the two. right now, any family released from ice custody is together, so it is a very technical thing the administration is trying to play the high road on. it is saying if somebody wants to apply for asylum, they should keep the parent in custody or someone together, it is a very technical thing. at the end of the day, they are right, families will stay together. it is a better way as opposed to they would not stay together. and be held in custody. host: walk us through the
timeline. when does this proposal become policy? guest: they announced it yesterday and they have had about four years, the government in general, the obama and trump administration to put forward a final rule and that is what we have been working on. dhs has been working on this policy and the reason they have gone about it this way is congress has not gone about a legislative fix. you have heard plenty of lawmakers say congress needs to deal with this legislatively. to putve the authority this regulation out there because the judge ordered it in 2015. the timeline is still blurry. we are not totally sure yet. certainly, it will start having a very quick effect. it looks like it will be rolled out soon. giaritelli covers
homeland security, telling us about this proposal from the trump administration when it comes to the detention of migrant families. thanks for your time this morning. guest: thanks. host: you can tell us what you think. 202-748-8001 for republicans. 202-748-8000 for democrats. and independents, 202-748-8002. if you want to put your thoughts on twitter, it is at @cspanwj. our facebook page is available to you as well at facebook.com/cspan. talking to reporters about a number of topics yesterday, the president addressed this proposal. [video clip] >> president obama had separation. i am the one that brought them together. this new rule will do more to bring them together. it was president obama that had the separation.
being very strong on the border. the numbers are way down. i want to thank mexico for that. yournited states -- question could make that problem go away easily if democrats would meet and we could fix the loop all and asylum. let me tell you, very much i have the children on my mind. it bothers me greatly. people make this horrible journey. one of the things that will happen when they realize the borders are closing, the wall is being built, we are building tremendous miles of wall right now. one of the things that is happening, when they see you cannot get into the united states or they see if they do get into the united states, they will be brought into their
country, it will not matter if they get it or not, they will come and many people will be saved. many women's lives will not be destroyed and ruined. host: the leaders in the house and senate commenting yesterday. chuck schumer saying let's make abouttake, this rule is stephen miller and president trump keeping children in horrible conditions. having seen firsthand the awful conditions the trump administration subjects migrant families too, it is imperative the court blocked this from going into effect. this is from the senate majority leader. we will start this morning with donnie in crandall, texas. what do you think about this proposal from the administration ? caller: my thought is this
country would not even be here if it were not for immigrants and the way he is putting all these children and everything in cages and talking about the , i think theent president needs to read the second amendment. host: back to the topic of the migrant families being kept together, what do you think about that proposal? caller: they should be kept together, they should not be separated. wrotecond amendment was december 15, 1970 -- 1771. host: mike rogers says this about the proposal saying this new rule seeks to protect children and reduce fraud in our immigration system and it will remainmigrant children safe. i applaud the trump
administration for taking action to close this loophole. smugglers and children have continue to exploit it at the expense of children. when it comes to those facilities, you heard our guest talk about -- usa today highlights the three family centers immigrations and custom enforcement keeps. two in texas, one in pennsylvania. the number of migrant families in those facilities represents a small fraction of the 55,600 immigrants held in detention in august. the regulatory proposal, which is scheduled to be published on friday would establish i.c.e. licensing with the goal of receiving the 20 day deadline for releasing migrants. facilities would be inspected monthly by third-party contractors. we will hear from steve in california, republican line.
good morning. pedro. good morning, the last time, before i got caught off, i was -- cut off, i was trying to explain this. host: about the policy in general, what do you think? caller: as far as keeping the families together, the problem usedme of the kids being are not even the kids that belong to the parents. i think what we should do is put the money that is supposed to go toward the wall and all this judgestuff toward more and get this sorted out so we can stop or allow those who want , into the country. host: from massachusetts, bob is next.
independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. host: you are on, go ahead. caller: i would like to know exactly what number of people coming across the border would you call an invasion? we have 40 million undocumented people in this country right now. country everyhole day. host: you are going to have to stop listening to yourself on tv. wasn't, iknow, i accidentally stepped on the control. we take in a whole town or city every month from those countries. what is overwhelming our country is too many of these people. we let a million people in now and we cannot let 40 million people come walking across the board. of keepingolicy
these families together while they are awaiting trial, what do you think? caller: i think that is perfect. stop releasing them into the country, they are not coming back for their court date. texas,ommy is next from republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. my comment is you have all these women and children coming across the border and i know a lot of them need help -- but where are their husbands? who is going to support them when they get over here? host: do you agree with this policy or not? caller: i don't see why we should have open borders like that. where are all the husbands of these people? that is what i would like to
know. host: nancy pelosi making comment saying the administration is seeking to codify child abuse, plain and simple. it would rip away basic protections for human rights and violating every standard up morality and civilized behavior. this utterly unconscionable rule circumvents -- we expect the district court to strike it down referencing the legal challenges this policy will most likely face, this idea of keeping migrant families together indefinitely as they await trial. that is what we are getting your comments on. caller: good morning. how are you? host: i am fine, thanks, go ahead.
caller: i was in this country used foodrs and never stamps or wic or anything, i .ook care of myself husbands, if they are not here bang, the mothers will work like i worked. this country needs to be about love, not about hate anymore. this president is a racist and it is nothing to do with being a president. this president is a dictator. this idea about keeping families together, what do you think about that? caller: they should be together. they should not be incarcerated. host: tony on the line for
democrats. caller: i feel like it should be strucken down because there is no need for them to be in custody. everyone deserves their freedom, this is america. host: even if they come across illegally? caller: i feel like it should be a system in place where they are system like there is a system in place where their records are run and if they have violent crimes, they should be sent back over. the kids and most of the women i feel like should not be separated or incarcerated. accounts foran families being kept together while they await trial, is that something you agree with? caller: yes. host: some of our comments from
facebook. keith saying it is a conundrum. i have empathy for those children, they are victims of a situation. children are being used, generally. bill king says this is an overreach on part of the trump administration. the courts need to slap it down hard. congress needs to cut off funding for dhs if that is what it takes. sonny lucas from facebook as well. is jccebook, this courtney. they are human beings. if you must attain them, at least have senatorial -- sanitary conditions. rick next in pennsylvania. caller: hi. thanks for taking my call. this drive-by democrats to allow
tens of thousands of a legal undocumented immigrants into -- they are immediately going to get more democratic congressman in congress and that is clear as day as they fight against the census asking if you are a citizen or not. the eagle -- illegal immigrants will get representation in congress and by fall, all those congressman they get will be democrats. host: this is about a policy keeping people detained, let's start with that. what do you think about the proposal? caller: i think it is great it is keeping families together and the reason democrats are fighting anything trump is doing --they want to foster
they are not innocent, they should be charged with child endangerment smuggling children across the border run by the most horrible gangsters on the planet. it is a terrible trip. innocent.ot bringing them in -- when they do this crime of crossing the border and releasing them, you are giving them what they wanted to begin with. that was the goal of their crime, to get into the interior of the united states. host: let's hear from charlotte, north carolina, republican line. you are up next. caller: yes. this.is a solution for all the democrats that are
complaining, why don't they sponsor a lot of them? host: what about the policy -- that this is the announced policy by the trump administration? caller: i agree with our president. kids hopingheir that they are going to get some government help when they are in our state. i have been here since 1968 and we could not get the government help. i was not a citizen yet and we were struggling. these people are abusing our system. host: david is next, independent
line. hello. caller: hello. host: you are on. caller: okay. would solvey what all of this and what would never happen after the president let them pay for the wall, all of this stuff would not be taking place and i spent 18 months in vietnam. have border. tell juan from the other. they were shooting us and throwing grenades on us and everything else and killed a lot of troops that way. the same thing is going to happy -- happen here.
that wants to can come across the border, i.c.e. or whoever. the would solve this if democrat would let presidents build the border and have a border wall. host: kevin mcaleenan is the acting homeland security secretary and making the announcement yesterday, he talked about policies involved, including how long migrant children can remain with their families. [video clip] >> the new rule closes the legal loophole allowing the federal government to house alien families together inappropriate facilities together. prior to the 2015 court ruling this -- granting those with claims prompt release and permission to stay in the u.s. while repatriating those
with meritless claims. our goal remains, as in the previous administration, to provide an expeditious result while holding families together. the current system, however, serves those with meritless claims and leaves migrants in a state of limbo. a removal for families that arrived at our border -- this rule changes that dynamic. in mustang, .klahoma, line for democrats caller: i am more concerned with the unaccompanied children. they made a very dangerous trip ill.any arrive here i don't think they should be
locked up. 30% of them claiming to be with their families, even the -- they shoulds have a cooperative agreement with whatever country they came from and send them back to their legal guardian. if not, go from there. do not lock little children up. i think it is dangerous to lock them up and i think it is dangerous to keep them here. we have no business keeping other people's children when we are not the authority over those children. as established by the case years ago, their home country is and their home country and guardian should be notified. that is what we are doing when we are acting like we are
humanitarian and keeping them in here and holding them. today adding families make up a significant portion of -- federal authorities apprehended family units attempting to enter the u.s. .llegally if the u.s. district court judge who oversees the settlement approves of the regulation, the regulation can go into effect within 30 days of publication. that is in usa today. debbie in henrietta, independent line. i am very happy they are going to keep the families together, but i think congress surgeto do something and
judges down there. if that doesn't happen, we are territory.red they are in detention and who knows how long. as for the unaccompanied children, i don't believe they babies, i think most of them are teenagers. within -- arere adults within a year and they are here to join gangs. host: julius in atlanta, georgia. caller: hello. one thing i see is there are over 500,000 europeans that are illegal in this country, but nothing is ever said about that. host: where did you get?
? that figure from caller: you all can check it out. i cannot remember where i got it .rom you all can check that out yourself. i would appreciate if you all would. jay in west palm beach, florida. caller: i think what president trump is doing is a great thing for this country and i think a better solution for the president would be i think they should have a detention facility/embassy in guatemala and mexico and all the people should be bussed to that facility. happen.l never
you called this policy a great thing, tell me why. the president -- the policy the president announced yesterday. otherwise, the democratic party is separating. this man is trying the best for this country. they want open borders, they want to change the major cities -- they want to change texas and florida, this is all in their mind. aen border, i used to be democrat. i will never be a democrat in this country. host: for the next half hour, we will get your thoughts on this announcement on keeping migrant families together indefinitely. you can make your comments on the line.
here is some reaction from twitter for members of congress. kiersten jill a brand saying this, the trump administration wants to set up internment camps. rashida taleo saying week -- t laib saying we have gone over this before, migrant families deserve better and families deserve -- failing to take basic steps to prevent the flu is a public health risk for all of us. senator marsha blackburn of decision todayhe to close loopholes in our immigration system is absolutely the right one, keeping migrant families safe from human
traffickers is paramount. oldessing the decades agreement is a pivotal step -- preventingng human trafficking and insuring bad actors do not impede the -- chip roy, the trump administration is right to move forward with holding migrant families together while their cases are pending. i have been saying this for months, it is the right move. senator casey mentioned the possibility of flu in usa today, there is a report saying when it comes to those detained, no flu shots will be available. do to the short-term nature of customs and border protection holding, the time the vaccine -- administer vaccinations
to those in our custody. customs and border protection never have administered vaccines. people may get them at a local medical facility the agency said. in such cases, -- about this policy announcement from crystal city, florida, independent line. mike, tell us your thoughts. caller: hi. keeping families together is a indefinite detention, i don't understand that. from what i understand, congress -- these detention centers are all independently run. where is all this money going?
section of the washington post reporting this --ning the administration northwest washington. emergency rules prohibit the child welfare agency from licensing facilities housing more than 15. part of the trump administration's efforts to address a surge of minors apprehended without apparent -- without a parent. laura from new york. isler: i don't believe there true sentiment on the side of democrats to safeguard people. i personally have experienced a
-- i was born in brooklyn, so i am an american and i am an artist, screenwriter and every time i get close to making any money, i would feel radiation into the house. my husband had a stroke. i had to move to get closer to a town and they are still bothering me. int: we will hear from gus south bend, indiana. caller: you have a great show, first of all. think there isi another -- this is another way for trump to get reelected. host: meaning what? caller: meaning he is playing with people, he doesn't really care about the people down
there. he is making it look like -- he could have kept them together. the steering wheel, he is in charge. host: we are going to go to tom in new york, independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for c-span, thank you for the time. it is really disgusting all this stuff is being lumped on president trump. he is doing what we asked him to do. they are spending us into oblivion. we have a huge debt as it is. host: you agree with this policy decision from the administration? caller: of course i do.
they cannot just come here and take money and services from our country. people that are dying. it is ridiculous, i don't understand. this guy created this whole problem. host: it was the acting homeland secretary who talked about the facilities that house migrant children and families to give an explanation of the condition -- conditional operation of those facilities. [video clip] >> the facilities we will be using to temporarily house families are fundamentally different than the facilities where migrants are processed. dining and private housing facilities. the first family residential center in berks, pennsylvania, family.es for each
there is a large community living room with a big screen television. other television sets, video games, and board games. the facility has a wing dedicated to classroom learning. another wing is the medical including all immunizations. there are phone banks to call relatives, consulates, attorneys, or other representatives. three hot meals a day are provided and snacks are available throughout the day. all of our three centers offer indoor and outdoor daily recreation for children and adults. outdoor recreational facilities
include soccer fields, volleyball courts, and play structures. parentse is provided to while they meet with attorneys or represented his or attend these hearings. representatives approved to appear at immigration court hearings are provided access to residents at various times each week, unable and families to obtain counsel and not have to appear at .mmigration hearings host: this is karen in chesterfield, michigan, democrats line. caller: hi, pedro. how are you? host: fine, thank you. caller: that is nonsense. i was listening to the -- acting director mcclellan -- host: kevin mcaleenan. caller: thank you very much.
acting secretary, it sounded like he was an automated line. i used to work in a psychiatric facility. , they areur staffing discriminating against people everybodyt understand saying this is okay. host: why do you question the acting secretary? what gives you pause for that? caller: first of all, when he first came out and wanted to change the poem on the statue of liberty and now he is reading verbatim. it sounds like an automated line you get for a for profit hospital. you need help, we provide this and this and this. it is nonsense and we know it.
host: greg from florida, republican line. caller: good morning, pedro. let's remember there is a difference between legal and illegal immigration and that is what we are talking about. there is no issue about people coming into our country illegally. the reason these people are coming to our country is their countries of origin do not enforce their own laws. as a nation of laws, are the number one nation in the world. we should pat ourselves on the back. these people, the first step they take when they enter our country is illegal. are for the border criminals, people that break laws.
when we take 400,000 people to date this year, and if you invited 14 people to come into your house, 400 showed up. what would you do? before you go -- the specific policy announced, what do you think of it? caller: that is the sad part, we are trying to accomplish something our laws are written for and nobody wants to abide by them. the 400,000 to date this year do not want to abide. there rushing to achieve impossible. host: you disagree with the policy, then? caller: i agree with a temporary policy to deal with a temporary problem that our democratic and republican colleagues will not solve. thank you very much, pedro. if host: reuters reporting more
than 1000 thousand american migrants have given up and excepted free rides home under a program funded by the u.s. government and run by the assisted voluntary return program has paid for buses and flights for 2170 migrants who neither reached -- if either never reached the u.s. or detained at the border. according to an official with the u.n. international organization for migration, the $1.65 million program is raising concerns among immigration advocates who say they could violate a principal under international law against returning asylum-seekers to countries where they could face persecution. more of that available if you type it in. danny,twood, virginia, hollow. on our democrats line. caller: hello. how are you, buddy? host: fine, thank you.
caller: trillions of dollars going to iraq for an unnecessary war, but we can help those people and get it straightened out, that is the reason they are coming here, they are fleeing for their lives, which is what native americans did. in westom rose virginia, independent line. you,r: good morning, thank c-span. guess my issue is the policies being enacted right now seem to be inhumane and yesterday on c-span there was a program discussing the fact that there is a good portion, i believe it was 40% of our illegal immigration problem is visa overstates.
if we are really going to address immigration, we need to cover all the bases and we are obviously not. that tends to make me believe there is a lot of political and inhumane and cruel behavior going on with all the focus going on with our southern border and i can only say i cannot imagine this must be -- the way we are responding like they are invading and infesting us, i cannot imagine that must be how the first nation felt when europeans came over here and spent one million years rap ing and stealing and pillaging their lands. i think that is the problem with humans, we develop this border thing, we land grab and think we own things and we don't. myth offallacy, a huge humans and their supremacy on the planet and we break
ourselves down by color and monetary status and stuff. i think it is really unfair. tom inet's hear from connecticut, republican line. caller: good morning, pedro. my suggestion is all colleges, their various border prestige and legislators enact legislation so 50% of all for peoplesing be who have not gone to trial yet and there will be plenty of opportunity for these immigrants to learnse supervision a marketable skill. i know it sounds a little communistic, but it would also cut down on the college tuitions and room and board. they could take care of the culinaryes and hire
people and teach people how to make meals in a large-scale, that is a marketable skill suitable for nursing homes. that is my comment and it is wonderful to listen to the show today. host: we will continue for the next couple minutes taking your calls. of a presidential note, jay inslee is no longer running for president of the united states. two people close to him reporting he has plans to run of a third term of governor washington state since launching his campaign. he has laid out plans to combat climate change. those plans drew praise from activists and even fellow candidates. he was unable to catch on with voters in the early polls.
politico reporting out of chicago that joe walsh, the flame throwing conservative radio show host and illinois congressman is moving toward challenging president trump in a republican primary, calling the president an unfit provider in chief. he told politico he was confident he could secure the resources and support the mounted challenge them -- against the president and if he ran, he would announced in short order. on wednesday he would not confirm he would enter the primary. privatelyme it -- confirming. if i am going to happen, it will happen soon. concern he isl absolutely unfit. politico also reporting the former colorado governor, john hickenlooper, who dropped out a week ago saying he will challenge republican senator cory gardner in 2020.
"i don't think cory gardner understands the games he is playing are hurting the people of colorado. i am a straight shooter. i have always said washington is a lousy place for a guy like me, but this is no time to walk away from the table. i know change in washington is hard, but i want to give it a shot." todd in california, democrats line. thad.: it is host: sorry about that, go ahead. smart: i think trump is about this because he is boxing in democrats on this political argument. host: how so? caller: unless i am incorrect, you can correct me, weren't the democrats first complaining that trump was separating families and separating children from their parents? host: that was an argument commonly heard.
caller: right. now he is saying, sorry about , keep the families together . now democrats are saying what? you can't do that, let them go. is for the campaign, trump going able to be say, 6 of one, half dozen of the other, what do democrats want? first they wanted them kept together and then they want them separated and now they want them let go. let them go into the country, nobody knows where they go and they never show up to have their cases adjudicated. host: what do you think of the policy itself? caller: i know friends of mine that came here from vietnam. iny spent two, even 3 years
refugee camps in places like the philippines and indonesia. i cannot hear you. host: i did not say anything. caller: sorry, i am looking at the tv. they stayed in humane conditions and got put on a waiting list as long as they passed the necessary health checks, background checks, et cetera. if these other people can do it, the people that really want to come here and go through the process and willing to do that, they should be willing to do that. we are trying to weed out the people that do not want to do it, they just want to come here and get free handouts. host: another californian from bernie, george on the line. you are next up, hello. caller: i think it is interesting your previous caller called on the democratic line
and was stone cold republican, you go for the -- to the bad pace for lying -- bad place for lying, the same as stealing. locking people up in cages? really? do was toled in to remind people like your previous caller, under u.s. law, illegal immigrants cannot vote and they cannot get federal benefits. ist: the actual policy keeping families together while they await trial. what do you think of that policy? caller: they are still locking them up in cages. you can sugarcoat it all you want. just because you call a rose a pig doesn't make it a pig. host: teresa is next in new jersey, independent line. you are next. caller: the democrats don't care about citizens of the united states or immigrants.
they only care about getting open borders to gain control of this country hoping all these people will become democrat. they fight trump every step of the way about his borders, so he has to do things on his own. tell me that the trip over here isn't more dangerous to their children and everything else then our helping them when they come here. what are we? supposed to do open the door to the whole world? -- what are we supposed to do? open the door to the whole world? host: in buffalo, new york, we will hear from harry. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. no matter what happens, we are going to have to support these people. if we keep them in detention, we
are supporting them and if you turn them loose, they cannot support themselves. the truth of the matter is if you don't support them, we are going to create a situation of desperation and desperation is what revolutions are born of. these people, you cannot turn them loose in the country and have nothing, that is not going to work. we are at a crossroads where we need to make up our minds. to support them, we will have to do it by paying more taxes. we need to make up our minds what we are going to do. policy,out the specific are you torn personally or have you taken a one way or the other approach? caller: i am torn on the whole thing. we are damned if we do and damned if we don't. i think we should keep the families together, there is no doubt about that.
as long as it is reasonable and we are able to do it. host: reasonable, what do you mean? caller: we don't have to go to extremes to rent them penthouse apartments. joe: long island, new york, calling, democrats line. you are next up. caller: hello. in latin are so bad america, why doesn't the u.n. or these charitable organizations like unicef -- where is this money going to? i never found anybody in this country that immigrated to this country and set this country belongs to everyone. that is a disgrace to say about this country. thank you very much. host: from arcadia, florida, terry is next, republican line. caller: yes. i respect what mr. trump is trying to do.
if you let illegals come in, you might as well say it is all right to drink and drive because it is breaking the law. you have to respect the laws. they want to come here, do it legally. thank you. host: from charlottesville, virginia, independent line. jamie is next. caller: i wanted to state i have been appalled by the number of people that seem to think illegal immigrants are coming here as some sort of conspiracy to drum up democratic votes. that is absurd. secondly, there are a number of people who are asylum-seekers and have spent time locked up in facilities and the conditions they have been put through our appalling. put inmedication, solitary confinement, we should
not be doing this as a country. i do not agree with this policy at all. it is sugarcoating putting children in cages and this is not america. this is not what america should be. thank you. int: one more call from emmy georgia, democrats line. caller: hello, pedro. thank you for taking my call. one of the things i want to say is i believe families should be kept together so parents can keep and i on their children and keep them safe. i don't know about keeping them longer. i think it is a shame, some of these comments i hear from some callers, they are obviously not very informed on what is going on. these people do not take benefits, for heaven sake. listen to people other than the right wing media.
even the left-wing, information across the board -- these people come here for the american dream, just like everyone else. they come here, they work hard, they are trying to support their families and there are jobs out there for them. i drove around in georgia and i saw posted notes on the windows spanish.d they were in some of them were in spanish. there are still people that want to employ them. that is all these people want to do, work, but they are being detained at the border where they cannot work and people are complaining that now we have to support them. if you were to let them go, they would get out and get their own job. host: one more call from mike in north carolina, republican line. caller: yes. the previous caller doesn't understand when they come in and
they don't speak english they have babies, they do not have a whole lot of money in their pocket. who is paying for the babies? trump is doing the right thing detaining the people at the cages,and they say about why are democrats in such denial that these are obama's cages? they were built during the obama administration, not the trump administration. host: we will change topics and theet -- talk about economy. we will talk about the u.s. economic outlook and if signs of a recession are on the horizon. later, we will see how the small business sector is doing with brad close of the national federation of independent business. those conversations coming up on
"washington journal." ♪ 7:00turday on both tv at challengesn, the female arab and middle eastern journalists face when reporting. >> all of the authors were able to push through whatever writeers they had and honestly about their cases. it is such a real and honest and it of grief and loss reflects the state of the arab world today. this is an uplifting book. sunday, race, gender and class in america. her most recent book is "breathe: a letter to my sons." not simplyo arm them
with a set of skills and intellectual tools that allow them to flourish in school and ethics and values, but also a way to make sense of the hostility they encounter every day from people whose responsibility is to treat them as community members. "unmasked: big media's war against trump." >> all decency has been cast tode but not by donald trump his opponents but from his opponents to him. they call him far worse things. they are attempting to do far worse to him. they have no right, none. >> watch book tv every weekend on c-span2.
>> "washington journal" continues. from this is mark zandi moody's analytics, their chief economist. good morning to you. guest: good morning. host: what is your personal assessment of where we are going months when it2 comes to the economy? guest: growth has been slow. growth has already slowed. growth was about 3%. growth currently is about 2%. i the next 6-12 months, expect growth to slow even further. a lot does depend on the trade war. if that continues on, the growth slowdown will be more severe. if the president finds a way to end the war or call a truce, we might have a different outlook.
most likely, growth a year from now is slower than it is today, which is slower than it is a year ago. 4%,: unemployment below full employment, gdp plodding along steadily, wages rising, consumer spending is strong. shade yourat assessment of the economy? guest: we can stay at the thatnt rate of growth, will create jobs to keep unemployment low, below the 4% number. the economic expansion could continue on, everything should be ok. slow inh continues to the trade war continues on, we won't create enough jobs and unemployment will start to rise.
once unemployment starts to rise, people sense that right away, they will become more cautious in their spending, businesses will pull back on their hiring. it's a self reinforcing, negative, vicious cycle that will take hold. that is what we need to be wary of. the risks are not inconsequential. they are rising as the trade war continues on. host: is the trade or the main driver of the recent talks of recession? guest: the approximate cause for this significant slowing and growth is the trade war. it is doing significant economic damage. tariffsct effect of the is a tax increase on american businesses and consumers. more significantly is the increase the trade war -- impact
the trade war is having on business sentiment. business confidence has fallen sharply. businesses are unsure of where this war is headed. is it a 10% tariff or 25% tariff? which countries? we've been focused recently on china but we've had tariff increases on many countries in europe and asia. as long as businesses can't answer those questions, they will be nervous and they will be very cautious in their investment. there are other things going on. the overriding reason for concerns about recession the next six months is the trade war. host: let's get your thoughts on what the president said. [video clip] economists say you
should be preparing for a recession. >> honestly, i'm prepared for everything. we are doing tremendously well. our consumers are rich. i gave them a tremendous tax cut. they are loaded with money. the walmart numbers were through the roof. that's better than any pull, better than any economist -- poll, than any better than any economist. the rest of the world, if you look at germany, if you look at their european union -- the european union, look at the u.k., the other countries aren't doing well. china is doing poorly. we are doing better than any country or even area, anywhere in the world, we are doing great.
the consumer is strong. they are going to be for a long time. the curve always means about two years later, maybe you will go -- that's a long time, two years. i could be helped out by the fed. the fed doesn't like helping me too much. frankly, we have money pouring into our country. we have billions and billions of dollars daily that's pouring in. because they want to come into the united states. that's a great thing. that means we can loan that money out. borrowing costs are at an all-time low. it is a great time. i told secretary mnuchin this is a great time to refinance our bonds. the money is pouring into the u.s. like never before and like no other country has ever experienced, including china
money. they are all coming into the u.s. and we've never had anything like it. , plenty to start off with. he talked about the tax cut pouring money into people's pockets. guest: a lot to unpack. well, the benefit of last year's tax cut has completely faded. we got a temporary boost and growth last year. 3% gdpwhat we got the growth last year. we went out and borrowed a lot of money from investors, took that money and cut a check to large businesses and wealthier households. that was spent. that benefit has now completely faded away. the tax cuts are no longer supporting economic growth. that had been some hope
the lower tax rate for businesses would stimulate more investment spending, but so far -- there no evidence of that. maybe it is too early to judge. things are being masked by the effects of the trade war. business estimates for last year have flatlined. the benefits of the tax cuts were short-lived. for: talk about the ability the fed to lower rates and his calling on jay powell to do so. guest: the fed is reacting to the president's policies, trying to calibrate interest rates to the president's trade policy, the trade war. when the trade war is on, the fed has to do one thing. when there is a truce, they have to do another thing.
the fed is working hard to keep up with this capricious policy around trade and tariffs and having a difficult time doing it. my sense is growth will slow and the fed will have to respond to that and continue to lower rates. they are on track to cut rates again in september. in all will lower rates likelihood but that's in response to the damage the trade war is creating. host: mark zandi joins us until 9:00. if you want to ask questions about the economy, 202-748-8001 for republicans, 202-748-8000 fo r democrats, 202-748-8002 for independents. , when it comes to the trade war itself, is there a
happy medium to be achieved? is there a way the united states could act on its best interests with china? guest: very good question. i do think china is not behaving well, it is cheating around intellectual property, access to markets. there is a reasonable concern around our relationship with china. was thetegy transpacific partnership, the tpp. the was the free-trade deal u.s. was entering into with other pacific rim nations, excluding china. china did not play fair. if you can't play fair, you can't play in the sandbox. because china could not be in the free-trade zone, it would do
economic harm to china and that would be the incentive for them to begin to behave appropriately. wasourse, the tpp negotiated by the obama , president trump, one of his first executive orders was to rip up tpp. that was a mistake, in my view. that was the right strategy for china. the trade war is not going to work. i don't think the chinese are going to relent -- certainly not until after the election. they will see how this plays out until they make major concessions. it will be a deal, some sort of face-saving arrangement to get out of this. host: mark zandi joining us.
our first call comes from joseph in orlando, florida. democrats line. you are on with mark zandi. caller: good morning. what i'm about to say is admittedly a quasi-conspiracy theory regarding the tax cut from last year. rightobviously are some wing republicans who have a great dislike for medicare and social security, a group that has been trying to reduce that or eliminate it. it is difficult to do because it is such a popular program. let'set together and say do this big tax cut, we will throw some crumbs to the middle class and give big money to the rich people, 3% of the richest people got 85% of the benefits of the tax cut, it's going to
create a big deficit but that gives us a good excuse to go after medicare and social security down the line. what do you think? host: mr. zandi? guest: that is a theory. i think it is called starve the beast theory. that's going back to the reagan tax cuts of the 1980's. i don't know whether that is the case or not. that is a general sense the entitlement programs need reform. frame, theycurrent are not sustainable in the long run. we do need to make some changes there. sense that that is an appropriate thing to do. why were arguments for
might want to lower tax rates, particularly for businesses, corporations, to incentivize greater creation. not year's tax cuts did help to address any of those issues. the way it was designed and implemented has not supported business investment. in fact, business investment has gone nowhere. we have not made any progress with regard to our entitlement program and the physical situation generally. the debt is rising rapidly. yesterday from the thatessional budget office the u.s. will suffer a $1 trillion budget deficit in the coming year, debt loads are going to rise. the starve the beast kind of validity, it is
certainly not working because the size of the u.s. government is increasing rapidly. host: mark in new york. independent line. caller: good morning, mr. zandi. with whatn ties in you said about the federal debt, which is over $15 trillion. the gao on their website talk about the fiscal situation, saying we need an immediate and permanent increase in taxes by andor 38% or an immediate permanent reduction in federal spending by 27%. that is just to stop the gap from growing. this issue is not on the radar screen. no candidates are being asked about this. the media and press are ignoring
this issue. how much does it worry you? are there techniques for introducing this kind of meaningful dialogue into the political discourse? guest: it does worry me. the fiscal situation is very poor and everything points to it getting much worse going forward unless we change something, increased taxes or cut government spending. the fiscal outlook is very daunting. even more disconcerting, there doesn't seem to be any political will to address it on either side of the political spectrum. it used to be the case that establishment republicans like were very mitt romney concerned about the fiscal situation. that was the stake in the ground for them. that is no longer the case. there's is really no political
constituency out there pushing for fiscal discipline. that is an issue. complicating things enormously, it is hard to connect the dot back from the situation to the economy's performance in interest rates. it is very similar to the problem around climate change. there is widespread consensus that climate change is a problem. if we don't do something about it, it will ultimately be catastrophic, but we don't know when that will be and how that will manifest itself. because of that uncertainty, lack of clarity, we can't find the political will to do something significant about it. same problem with this fiscal situation. sense that this can't be good for the economy long
run. if we don't do something about it, at some point, it will be catastrophic for our economy. down and thethat way this problem manifests itself is hard to identify. it is a serious problem, not next week, next quarter, next year, but for our kids and grandkids, this will be a problem. we are going to have to increase more tax revenue in the growth rates and entitlement programs. host: remind people exactly what a recession is and if we should go into one, what tools do the government have to react to it? guest: a recession is defined as a broad-based, sustained decline
in economic activity. , declines indp jobs, industrial production, manufacturing, all those things go into assessing whether an economy is declining, contracting, getting smaller. historically, the way policymakers would respond to a weak economy, a recessionary economy, is to lower interest rates. the federal reserve would lower rates to help support business investment, housing demand, making it cheaper to go out and buy a car, other consumer appliances, lowering debt burdens for households, interest rates would adjust with the rate the federal reserve sets, the other effect is fiscal policy,
temporary tax cuts to stimulate the economy. there's also so-called automatic stabilizers already built into fiscal policy. if someone becomes unemployed, they are able to get a check to help them out. that's already built into the system to support it when things aren't going so well. is theson to be nervous current environment, we don't have a whole lot of room with those tools. take the interest rates. in the typical economic recession since world war ii, there have been 10, the federal reserve has cut the interest 5%. by an average of right now, the funds rate target is at 2%. recession, the
short-term interest rate will go to zero pretty fast and the fed won't be able to support the economy to the degree they've been able to. on the fiscal policy side, we talked about the deficits and that just adds to our longer-term physical problems, longer-term economic problems. recession is a pretty tough thing. it can be tougher than people are anticipating because there for policymakers to address things if we actually go into recession. host: this is mark zandi joining therom moody's analytics, chief economist. sam in new york. hello. caller: thank you for taking my
call. the u.s.ently claimed economy is strong but many economists don't feel the same. people have many problems here. ask the people sleeping in the streets. economic policy is directly connected. if we want to improve our economy, we need some changes in our policy. budgets for the military are decided to expand the military into space. we could help people with health care costs. another thing that needs , the money weange are paying to other countries to influence their policies.
there's something here that why should we pay iranian immigrants to take americans' jobs? to encourage iranian people to act against their country -- host: what about that idea largely as far as adjusting our spending? do you see a will to that? guest: i do sympathize with the point that there are a large number of americans that are financially struggling. even with a sub 4% unemployment rate. recently dideserve a good survey study and found roughly 40% of american
have less than $400 in cash that they could use in the case of an emergency. if something went wrong and they 40% ofquick cash, households have less than $400. that is a very telling statistic that gives you a sense that despite the good topline numbers for the economy, there are large segments of the population that are struggling. that's why it is so important that we avoid recession, that the economy continues to and and unemployment remains low, so they can save more and prepare for what will inevitably be for all of us a problem. staying out of recession, we can ensure the economy moves
forward, that has to be the priority. longer run, there's lots of do,es and things we need to particularly around training, retraining, education, trying to raise the skill level, the educational attainment of all of us. that means we will have higher wages and be able to compete better in the global marketplace and as a result save more and prepare financially. lots of issues there. has tober one priority be to not go into another economic downturn. those households that are struggling are the ones that will struggle when there aren't as many jobs around. jobs -- for the had to bejobs created
revised to 500,000 less. what does that say about the overall jobs market? guest: that was an interesting statistic. the bureau of labor statistics based that on a large sample of businesses. once a year, they go back and look at data for employment across all businesses. what they did yesterday was release information saying based on this so-called benchmark, they will revise down the job totals by 500,000 jobs. that is quite significant, a large revision. it does change the picture we had of 2018. strong, inrelatively large part because of the temporary effects of the tax cuts.
it wasn't nearly as strong as we thought. the gdp growth wasn't nearly as strong, the bureau of economic analysis lowered those estimates a month ago, and now, we see they were fewer jobs created last year. numbers the weaker job were in leisure and hospitality and retailing. retail laid-off workers. the economy did well last year but not nearly as well as we thought. that means coming into this year and going forward, the economy is not in nearly as good a shape as we thought it was. host: your question for mark zandi. caller: good morning, gentlemen. i'm curious to get mark zandi's response. for starters, it's important to talk about the federal reserve's
contribution to the bubble and bust cycle. we could go back to the qe, the bailouts, mounting $24 trillion of liquidity that went right into the current asset bubbles we have, the stocks and bonds. economists -- for economists to look at the economy and determine what goes up or down, i've noticed over the last 30-40 years, there's been an incredible manipulation of statistics by the government for political reasons. it happens gradually, whether it is in cpi, unemployment, or whether they determine gdp. in the 1980's, you had totally different numbers than we have today. we have economists trying to
tell us what the gdp is. a simple fact that the debts we run through our monetary policy, we are adding $1 trillion to the gdp every year through government spending. curious how economists inl with this problem accurately determining what is black, what is white, what is real, what is not real. host: thank you very much. guest: let me take the second point about the data first before we talk about the fed. i think the data is pretty good. i'm a careful consumer of that information and data. . i've been doing it for 35 years. i don't sense any significant erosion in the quality of the information we are getting.
in many cases, it has improved. we shouldn my view, be spending more resources to get better information and data. the better data we have, the better policy we can put in place. even abstracting from that issue, i think the data quality is pretty good. i think it is accurate data. in all data, there's issues and problems. they are no bigger today than they were 20 years ago. the other thing that's useful in this regard, we are now getting data from other private sources that are very helpful. the humanh adp, resource company that processed a lot of payroll records. we get information on over 20 million employees every month,
which is a large sample of employment. int is very helpful assessing what's going on in the job market. that is just an example. asre's many examples technology improves and becomes more ubiquitous. faith and unbiased faith in thel quality and unbiased nature. these are run by highly skilled individuals. i have every confidence that we have a pretty good sense of what's going on, at least as good as we've had historically. , this is abouted the federal reserve and bubbles -- i'm more sympathetic with the
caller's perspective, i think. i do think monetary policy contributed to two large asset bubbles. 1990's in the late around y2k, the so-called tech prices,a surge in stock that ultimately blew up and caused the recession of 2001. the more serious bubble was the housing bubble in the early mid mid-200ands -- early 0's. 7 million people lost their homes in foreclosure. there is concern about another bubble today. it.less concerned about it is very important that federal reserve policymakers remain focused on potential asset bubbles.
we don't want another tech bubble or housing bubble. so far, i don't see that out there in the marketplace. there are things that make me a little worried, but nothing to the point where i think it's going to be existential to the economic recovery. stock prices are high but they haven't really gone anywhere since the early part of 2018. i'm not overly concerned about that. housing values are up. they are very consistent with underlying incomes and rent. i'm not overly concerned about a bubble at this point. clearly, it should be something we are on the watch for. the headline from "the los angeles times" highlights there was a climb yesterday. how should someone look at the stock market as an indicator of the economy? guest: generally, i wouldn't
look. the stock market goes up and down, all around. i don't think it sends a strong signal about where the economy is headed except around recessions. s always decline significantly, 20% from their peak, prior to an economic downturn. investors sense that companies are having trouble, starting to weaken, and they sell stock. that happens roughly 6-9 months economic recession actually occurs. sustained declines in stock values are good indicators of
recession. the stock market has predicted nine of the last five recessions. what that means is stock prices downo down, they can go significantly but we don't have recessions that follow. it's a helpful leading indicator but not a full proof leading indicator. host: todd, good morning. caller: good morning. i remember him saying that, too. ultimately going to lead to a question about the value of capital gains taxes. i don't accept that tax cuts exist at the federal level -- i'm looking at this report from the senses from 2018, 500,000
-- thinking-olds about what that's going to be like in 52 years. what is thes tax -- value of a capital gains tax? to what degree would it be applied? should there be a small business exemption? conscious thate there will be a lot more 100-year-old people in 20 years? we don't want to put a compromise on their existence. debatethere is a lot of about the capital gains tax and how that should be structured. everyone has a view. tax is the capital gains currently structured is roughly
appropriate for going forward. i do hesitate to use the capital gains tax as a way to generate revenue by making more progressive or complicated. i would keep it very simple, roughly where it is. i think we will be served well by that. morethink we have to raise tax revenue. to address our long-term fiscal issues, we need to raise tax reinue and rain in -- in growth in spending, particularly on the entitlement side. wealthier households will have to pay more in taxes. i don't think i would do that through capital gains. that makes the framework more complicated.
i would focus more on things like estate taxes. we should carefully consider things like the wealth tax, something that elizabeth warren proposed. those are the kinds of things we will need to focus on if we are to address our long-term fiscal sure moreto make americans are able to support themselves in the long run. desire and the wealthier class to address these issues or does it have to trickle down to the middle class? burden couldf the fall on higher income, higher net worth households. i don't think that solves the fiscal issues. we need to address the spending as well. we are going to have to rein
slow theo see how we growth of medicare and medicaid, which goes back to the cost of health care and how we deliver health care. that is a complicated problem. think for the amount of additional revenue we need, we can generate a significant amount with higher taxes on wealth and income for higher net worth households. at least set those rates back to where they had been historically. a reasonable proposal is on the payroll tax. you pay a payroll tax up to that income threshold. after that, you pay no payroll tax, no social security tax. there's been discussion of re-imposing that payroll tax on
individuals above $250,000. that would generate a lot of tax revenue. it feels roughly appropriate. the effects on the economy would be modest. that is just an example of the kinds of things we can do to generate more revenue. host: north carolina, republican line, we hear from judy. caller: good morning. i have a question. this whole thing, this whole bubble started back in 2014, way before the trade war started. it's the same thing. people overpaying for houses again, they are even more expensive this time around then 2006,ere in 2005, commercials about how they can so their credit scores up they can buy houses even though they can afford it.
dsnsumer protection act en government bailout for banks -- instead, the banks will be saved by bail ins. they can freeze your bank accounts, freeze all the money. aret's the way they going to pay off the banks, the creditors. they promised we wouldn't have to pee pay off all these failed banks this time around. guest: no, i don't think depositors, you and i, will have to pay for the future bailouts of the banking system. did the dodd frank reform -- it did many things, but one thing it did do was require large banks to raise a lot more capital.
haveal is the cushion they in case there is losses on the loans and securities they own. to ensure they are more likely to navigate through another crisis or economic downturn. our banks are actually in very good shape. the likelihood of something coming along that would require any kind of bailout is very low. it would be a bailout. i don't think there's any scenario where in the bank would take your deposit. -- any bank would take your deposit. i wouldn't worry about that. with regard to bubbles and housing, i don't think there's a bubble in housing. there are signs that the housing market is getting over active, maybe even speculative.
florida,laces, south around newa, parts areas.aybe, limited i don't think there's a housing close to thewhere situation that existed prior to the last financial crisis. i will say this about housing. we do have a crisis. that is a crisis of affordable housing. we do not have enough affordable homes. for rent and homeownership, post crisis, the construction industry hasn't been able to ramp up construction to meet homes with rent that's affordable.
that is a crisis. it has been having significant macroeconomic effects. it is limiting the mobility of people. if people lose their job in ohio, they can't move to another place like chicago or philadelphia because they can't afford to. lowhomes are priced too relative to the high-priced urban areas. there is a crisis in housing, but it's an affordable housing crisis, not a bubble. yes,rtain communities, maybe, but that's not a national problem. host: edwin in north carolina. democrats line. caller: good morning. the way i've been looking at certain numbers and our
president keeps raving about african-american unemployment being low -- it is 6%. hispanic americans, 4.5%. white americans, 3.3%. these jobs out there are not full-time jobs with benefits. i know people in new bern, north carolina working 2-3 jobs to make ends meet. rentur years, the average has gone from $750 to sitting at $1000. we have to have constraints about some of these things to open up the whole dialogue about unemployment and even our deficit spending. $3are going to $2 trillion, trillion and they are talking about social security not being
solvent in 15 years? i don't know what our congresspeople are doing to address some of these issues. guest: you make a good point. the job market is strong by historical standard, unemployment is low when you look across the entire economy, sub 4% employment. a record number of open job positions throughout the country. there's open jobs available in most industries. we have seen wage growth pickup because the job market is tight. the labor market is good. having said that, we still have some significant pockets of distress, groups that are struggling, still not quite there yet.
that takes me back to a point i made earlier. this is why it's incredibly important that we avoid an economic downturn, particularly a downturn of our own doing. if we go into recession, everyone will suffer, but particularly those groups you mentioned where the pockets of weakness already exist. making sure the economy continues to move forward and we have policies in place that ensure that our key, vital -- are key, vital. we have run this economy on the who become --hose who have become disenfranchised. that's why things like the trade war are very serious.
if that pushes us into economic recession, we are all going to be hurt. host: what do you think the snapshot is for small businesses currently versus the large manufacturers you speak about? guest: the smaller companies are struggling. data that wehe adp work with. seed on that data, we can job growth by size of company. one thing that is evident in that data, over the last couple of years, large companies are doing very, very well, adding to payroll strongly. smaller companies are struggling. the smallest companies are shedding jobs. those are companies with fewer than 20 employees. companies,ery small
mom-and-pop companies, they've been reducing payrolls over the last 30 months. they've been struggling for the last three years. part of that is what's going on in the retail sector. online competition is hurting small retailers. part of that is reflected in the tourist industry, the smaller leisure and hospitality destinations. slowdown, theic smaller companies are taking the brunt of the slowdown. the bigger companies are able to hold out. this tight labor market, the bigger companies have an advantage vis-a-vis smaller companies because they can pay more in terms of wages and salaries and benefits. it's more likely that the bigger
guys will be able to hold on, retain their workers and hire new ones. the smaller companies are starting to struggle. host: for those currently training for a job or getting an education, what does the future look like for them? what do they need to do to prepare for the job market? guest: if you are a young person just graduating from school or in your 20's, the prospects should be good. the long-term fundamentals of the u.s. economy are good. we should create lots of jobs. obviously, the more skills you have, the better your education and training, the better you will do. we do live in a global economy, we are competing with the best and brightest from all over the world. we attract the best and the
brightest. we benefit from all of that globalization that occurs. you will benefit more if you are able to compete and you will be able to compete if you invest in yourself and get the education and training you need to be able to do that. in general, i think prospects are good. just as long as we don't mess it up with bad policy, we should be in good shape. host: mike in ohio. independent line. caller: good morning, gentlemen. mr. zandi, i would like your comments on this. i our dealings with china, like to look at it from a historical perspective. when richard nixon went to china with henry kissinger and the u.s. chamber of commerce, they met with the chinese government, their eyes got wide open when they found out these people
would work for how much? the darling of u.s. corporations, said the objective for any corporation is to put their corporation on a barge and go from low-wage country to low-wage country. it has finally caught up with us. we didn't care. now, they are worried about stealing intellectual property. they didn't care about the slave cappedwhich manufacturing in this country, and now, it has caught up to us. we are in a quandary because the chinese got hip to the game, they have state managed capitalism, and now, we don't know what to do about it. guest: i have a different
perspective. we lostee with you that a lot of jobs in competition with countries like china. mexico as well. we can go back into the 1990's with nafta and before that, japan in the 1970's and 1980's. we lost a lot of jobs when we opened up our economy to globalization. ass perot talked about sucking sound when we debated nafta. generallylot of jobs, lower paying, less skilled jobs to mexico, but that did happen. here's where i part with your perspective. sitting here today, i think we are on the cusp of enjoying
enormous benefits from that globalization. frankly, we lost the jobs already. it is hard to envision them ever coming back. at the same time, these countries that benefited from mexico,de like china, other emerging economies now have big economies with deep middle classes buying lots of buyingand increasingly the things that we are successful at producing. aerospace, the, manufacturing that exists in the united states is very competitive. they lack services. if we continue to engage these countries and continued to work with them, we will benefit enormously from that.
have a trade surplus in services. that's everything from healthcare services, educational services, financial services, professional services, media and entertainment, we do that better than anywhere else in the world. it creates a lot of jobs. manufacturing doesn't create a lot of jobs. even when you manufacturing is doing well -- when manufacturing is doing well. through alle went that pain-and-suffering and here we are, ready to enjoy the benefits of it and we pulled and don't embrace
globalization. i'm sympathetic to the view that our economic relationships need to be fair. people can't take intellectual allowty, they have to their markets to be open like our market, they have to follow environmental laws that we feel are appropriate to level the playing field. i don't think we will get that result by tariffs, a trade war. that's not going to work, in my view. embrace those on the same page with us, free-trade, the transpacific partnership, they will ultimately want in, and the way in is playing fair. host: what do you think of the
usmca?of the guest: i'm not sure the politics of that whether it gets done before the president's term or not. it depends on american labor unions and whether they sign onto it, whether there's enough support to get that through congress and signed by the president. having said that i don't think it's much ado about nothing. it's basically some tweaks to the nafta agreement. there's nothing of substance and change in that deal. life goes on under the same rules. the president has threatened that we would revert back to pre-nafta rules, so-called wto
so-called wto rules. that would almost ensure an economic recession here and globally. the nafta and usmca are one and the same. life goes on. host: this is mark zandi from moody's analytics. thank you for your time, sir. another perspective on the economy, this coming from the small business sector, we will from the by brad close national federation of independent businesses. ♪ ♪ ♪
>> this weekend, and american history tv special from fort monroe. the first africans arrived in america 400 years ago. is cassandra alexander, taking your calls about the origins and history of slavery. and live coverage from fort monroe continues at 9:30 a.m. for a commemorative ceremony. governor ralph northam, senators mark warner and tim kaine, and house of delegates speaker kirtland cox. here the story of the civil war told in 56 minutes by gary aleman of the american battlefield trust. sunday at 6:00 p.m., american artifacts takes you to the virginia museum of history and culture for a lecture on african american history. explore our nation's past on
american history tv every week and on c-span3. >> in the wake of the recent shootings in el paso, texas and dayton, ohio, the house judiciary committee overturned early from the summer recess to mark three gun violence prevention bills that include banning high-capacity ammunition magazines, restricting firearms from those deemed to be arrested themselves, and preventing individuals convicted of hate crimes from purchasing a gun. live coverage begins wednesday, september 4 on c-span and c-span.org. if you're on the go, listen to our live coverage using the free c-span radio app. washington journal mugs are available at the online store. go to c-spanstore.org. see all of the c-span products.
washington journal continues. host: this is brad close of the national federation of independent businesses. t serves f the senior vice president for public policy and advocacy. he is here to talk about small business in united states. who is your average person you represent when it comes to small business? guest: nfib is unique. we represent the little guy. small businesses and independent business owners. they are very small. they are in all industries and all over america. one of the key things is nfib you have to be an independent business owner. no publicly traded companies. we are truly a member-driven organization. we were created 75 years ago under the guide of one member, one vote, and we follow that today. they both are valid at the federal and state level and they set policy for nfib. we don't sit in a room and
decide what is good for small business. they tell us and we take that to the state capitals and the hill to lobby on their behalf. host: what is the main message you delivered at the white house if you have that kind of relationship? guest: one things most policymakers don't understand is small business makes up half the economy and have the job growth. reminding them how important small business is to the well-being of the country, employment, growth and all that. small businesses are different. they are family-run. they are in smaller communities. having a one-size-fits-all policy from washington that may be great for large corporations can do a lot of harm to small businesses. host: with that apply to the tax cut recently? guest: ray point. we started out that debate pushing congress and the white house to make sure they did not forget about small businesses. we heard talk about cutting corporate rates, overseas rates. half the economy is small businesses and most owners are not incorporated. they don't pay the corporate rate.
they pay their taxes through the individual tax returns. making them realize they needed to look at small businesses as separate from large corporations we got there and we got a 20% small business deduction created an individual rates came down. then we had fair rates between the two sides. host: the larger one clearly got the advantage. guest: especially that is permanent. corporations went from a 35% to a 21% rate. it was made permanent. the small business tax cuts on the individual side were not made permanent. they expire at the end of 2025. our biggest legislative priority right now is getting congress to realize these provisions can expire. host: what happens to the average business if is not made permanent? guest: the rates will reset. they will see anywhere from probably a 10% to 50% increase on the individual rates they will lose the 20% deduction
allowing businesses to keep their money. significant tax increases will happen. host: this administration made a big deal about regulation, reducing the amount of a galatian. does small business see that? guest: there are two main areas we have seen it benefit. one has been the tax bill and the other is the regulatory or deregulatory agenda. drivingsues are what is the small business economy right now. when we came towards the end of 2016, small business optimism picked up very high. we had high records but he was based on soft economic numbers like hope and optimism. after some of the regulations got rolled back, and specifically after the tax bill was signed we saw a change in that economic index and how were members reacted. we saw high numbers but it was hard economic numbers. they were investing, they were hiring, they were paying more, sales were up, inventory was up.
we have seen a change based on those areas. host: we will talk more about the state of small business with our guest. if you want to ask questions, you can do so. eastern and central time zones, (202) 748-8000. if you live in the mountain and pacific time zones, (202) 748-8001. if you're a small business owner and you have a question, (202) 748-8002. thoughts on our facebook and twitter feed. the previous segment featured an economist who talked about the state of small business. i want to review the quote. "job growth healthy but slowing. small businesses are suffering from the brunt of the slowdown. --low guest: we are not seeing that it all. when you look at wall street and the market going up, it can be very chaotic. the small business economy is thriving. on a peer size basis, it is the
number three economy in the world behind the u.s. overall economy and china. the numbers are great. monthly two years, our economic index has been at record levels as businesses are growing. they are hiring, paying more, buying more equipment. they feel things are going well so we would not agree with that sentiment. the economic climate has been great. the tax cut bill was phenomenal for them and they feel that washington is getting out of their way finally. that would be the deregulation agenda. they have a lot of pent up economic growth demand. they are doing it right now and they are happy. marcus said an issue was large businesses, corporate retailers like amazon and walmart. what has been the response of the small businesses to be competitive? guest: small business owners, their biggest problem is finding qualified workers. that is their biggest impediment
to growth. it is not regulation or taxes or government policy. larger businesses have other things they care about. maybe overseas issues, taxation issues. our members, five to 10 employees, mom-and-pop grocery stores, auto mechanics, farmers, small construction shops, they are doing well. host: are they getting squeezed up by larger retailers? guest: it depends where you are. convict cities larger retailers definitely would have an impact. when a big box store moves in that can local retailers fisher. the internet has helped. more and more small businesses are selling on the internet. that has helped them find new sales for they have lost some sales to larger retailers. host: our guest with us until 9:30. the lines are available. chris in florida. you are on with brad close of the national federation of independent businesses. caller: good morning.
i would like to make a comment. i own a business. manufacturing.in he continues to be a consultant after the plant closed. i have a unique perspective. -- from my husband's job. most people in small business have a tremendous burden on them when it comes to health care. also social security. you pay 7% social security for a large company. when you're an independent contractor, you pay 15%. you pay for your own health insurance. if you've had anything happen to you in the past 10 years, you will have a pre-existing condition. au are looking at proximally $2000 per month for
family. that is to people. my second comment is to the last guest, the reality of the country. globalization is detrimental to this country. host: we will leave it there because referencing the last guest. guest: you brought up a good point on payroll taxes. what most people don't realize is employers pay half the federal fica taxes. 7.6%. employees pay the other 7.6%. if you are self-employed, can depend contractor, you pay the whole thing. twice the tax, 15.4%. that is on top of your individual tax rate at any other local or state taxes. it's a significant burden on small proprietors who are self-employed. host: how to the one you represent deal with health care? guest: health care is our number one issue in our surveys going back 20, 30 years. benefit,st expensive
the most extensive things business owners need for themselves and their employees. it is very hard. one thing we have looked at is how you make it easier for them to get policies? one thing that's come out in the last two years was an extension of the short-term health care plan. under obamacare these were curtailed significantly. the current administration allowed those to continue for three years. we find more small business owners are buying short-term health care policies to get them through two or three years. health care is the most significant cost driver outside of running your business on a monthly basis. roberto ishouston, next. caller: i would like to tie-in something not shared in the last segment that was related to small business. banks abouting the to go belly up.
to business accounts have more protection than the rest of us? 250,000 thousand -- $250,000 protected. we will lose it. fully bail them out? the answer is no. we will lose our money. are also concerned about their money in the bank. do you have more coverage than we do, the regular people? are you in the same boat we are in? guest: one think we have seen for years, especially since the big recession in 2008 is small businesses by and large are not interested in taking on new debt. what happened in the recession as wall street cratered, a lot of the big banks started shedding smaller accounts. a lot of them were small business accounts. we heard from thousands who lost their line of credit, their loans for no problem. they were perfectly a rated credit. the banks did not want their business anymore.
it shapes how they look at debt and credit going forward. the vast majority of small businesses right now don't want to take out new debt. they don't credit and they are happy with their credit needs right now. a lot of that is a reflection of what they went through 10 years ago. host: how was the small business administration performing? guest: they provide a loan program that can be very bureaucratic. 7a loan program. 3%and large only about 2% to of members actually access those programs. they tell us they don't access them because of the paperwork, the regulations. most small businesses wonder looking for money starting out just max out a bunch of credit cards. that is how they get started. borrowing from their friends or their 401(k). that is how they get started and they try not to accumulate debt after that. host: eric in maryland. caller: good morning.
i wanted to make a comment. i'm pleased to hear this segment,. -- segment. he painted a grim picture today. i'm in the small business office. i've heard there is a record number of new registrations for small businesses. i wanted to say it is good to hear and refreshing to hear the truth. discussed in the overall health of small business in this country. thank you. guest: this is where more than half the jobs are created and where the economic opportunity is for folks. needed tolized they go into business for themselves. either as an independent contractor or start their own business. it is a significant driver for the economy. our numbers for the last two years have been phenomenal. part monthly economic index is looked at by the fed every month, by wall street, by banks. either as an independent contractor or start their own
business. it is a significant driver for the economy. they quote the numbers. we have been charting the economy quarterly and monthly since the early 1970's. they are showing record high areas in lots of areas. i appreciate we are hearing first-hand from an owner in maryland it was seeing positive growth. host: several residents of candidates have the desire for a $15 minimum wage. guest: minimum wage is a tough issue. small business owners care about employees and want them to get ahead. they small business is by definition a family business. they want to see them get paid well and see their employees succeed. , they large businesses work shoulder and shoulder with their employees day in and day out. right now most small businesses pay over the current federal minimum wage. when you look at increasing get the $15, that is almost doubling it and too much for them. host: a representative talked about seattle imposing a $15 minimum wage and the effect it had. we want to hear her comments. [video]
>> today we passed the first minimum wage increase for workers in decades. yes, i am pride represent seattle, a leader in the fight for 15. i served on the committee that drafted the legislation that passed ultimately. it has been four years since seattle raised the wage. i want to tell my colleagues with the effect of that increase has been. seattle is flourishing. today we have one of the lowest unemployment rates in the country. jobs are growing steadily. seattler, forbes ranked the number one best place for business and careers in 2018. despite the doom and gloom predictions from the national restaurant association when we passed the bill, we have seen what the seattle times called a crazy restaurant boom. new jobs created every year. the most recent incredible -- and credible research shows it went up without any negative impact on employment.
local food prices remain constant so families can better afford to buy healthy food. when we increase the minimum wage in seattle, we got strong businesses, healthy families and flourishing communities. all american workers demand the same thing -- deserve the same thing. host:'that is one citys perspective. guest: we opposed that minimum wage increase in seattle. it was raised to $15. our economic modeling showed it would result in significant job loss. a couple years ago, university of washington did a study because the state government asked them to do a follow-up. they came up with the same results we said would happen. when the results came out that showed job loss and economic hit, the state government decided to deep six the study did not use it. they confirms our research that minimum wage has unintended consequences. it does cost jobs.
host: she gave a glowing presentation as far as the effect. guest: a lot of what she had to talk about has nothing to do with the $15 minimum wage. companiesome massive driving growth which is a great thing in providing high-paying jobs. the minimum-wage jobs in seattle-tacoma, are for very small businesses. they did not have the revenue to pay that much. it is much like a household budget. you have to have the revenue coming in. peter creating a new job or paying for an increase like that. if you don't have it, you are left with a lot of bad choices. raise your prices which they can't do, cut back on benefits which they don't like to do, cut back on ours or eliminate jobs and that is what has happened. host: brad close of the national federation of independent businesses. their senior vice president for public policy and advocacy. thomas is in texas. caller: good morning, america. bailout -- bust
and bailout. economy finally? host: what do you want to ask about? guest: small businesses. ishouston, the minimum wage $7.50. would you work for that? thank you. guest: when i was starting out, yes. guest: when i was starting out, yes. a lot of what small businesses pay is a training wage. a new person entering into the workforce. most minimum-wage workers are folk starting out in learning new skills. for a small business, having to go from paying eight dollars depending over they are to $15 means the entry-level jobs probably are not going to exist to the extent they would today. host: lorraine from ithaca, new york. hello?
caller: good morning. my question is what specific regulations can youregulations t have been rolled back? which businesses have benefited the most from those regulatory cutbacks? which kinds and classes of small businesses have benefited the most? thank you. we have seen some rollbacks in key areas that impacted the agricultural community, the waters of the u.s. rule. this was something that would've created navigable waterways for parts on your property that help water seasonably but not year-round. anything from a drainage ditch or whatever would involve the federal epa. folks in the farming community were upset about that. that has been halted. another big one has been the overtime rule, they will passed during the previous administration that would have more than doubled the amount of employee pay subject to
overtime. it raised at this as a threshold that it was small for -- hard for small businesses to compete. we are waiting for a final rule from the administration. we anticipate that overtime rule that splits the difference between what the previous admin attrition had and what went before. host: columbia, maryland. caller: surprise, surprise. another d.c. think tank guy is telling us we can't have nice things. not a wage that anybody can survive on in most places across america. we are trying to get away from folks have tore patch together two or three jobs to survive. the last point is about health care when it comes to small businesses. a is very difficult to get policy as a small business owner .
medicare for all would take that stress off of small business owners where health care is provided to everyone has a right. you think about america being great. i think about how he responded to wars in times of need. the military stepped up. a big part of military service for doctors and nurses who aided veterans coming home and while they were out on the battlefield . we need to have that same mentality in terms of honoring doctors and nurses and bringing them up and having medicare for all being part of the fabric of america. to say way is part of -- the military is part of the fabric of america. guest: we have been pulling on health care for decades. they definitely are concerned with costs. what is the cost?
not what more benefits and my going to get but the cost of insurance. they have been strongly opposed is a government run health care program. it was something we do not support in 2009 and 2010. we pushed back on the public option because are members told us that. one of the great things about our organization is our members that the policy. we ask questions on policy issues and they tell us what they like and what they don't. we are charged -- we have a state director in every state and an office in d.c. we are charged with taking their instructions to capitol hill and the state capitals to either oppose or support something based on what they tell us to do. seen we have administrations promote opportunity zones across the united states. howdy small businesses benefit? guest: we have not heard much from members on that. it is not something our members have told us impacted them one way or another. just not something we have seen. host: rodney in greenbelt,
maryland. a small business owner. caller: thank you for letting me on. i want to comment about the minimum-wage. i have been in business for 20 years. i worked for other people until i was 40 and then i went into business for myself. mostly construction equipment and vehicles and all kinds of stuff like that. i mostly a one-person business but i occasionally hire other people. pay less thanver $15 an hour. there is no way i would do that. like $20i pay more, per hour because people need to make a living. you can't make a living on minimum-wage. not only that, in my business you won't find anybody that wants to do the kind of work i do for that much money. host: what kind of business do you operate? guest: i repair construction equipment and other stuff.
i will do some antique cars, stuff like that. i am trying to do stuff i enjoy working on. host: is it just yourself or other others you employ? guest: -- caller: it is just myself but occasionally i will get backed up to where i can handle all the work i have. i will hire other people to help me out. i have a little yard i workout of. i don't have a shop or anything. occasionally i will hire some of help me in the yard, clean up the yard or something like that. it. is not really mechanic work i still pay at least $15 an hour because people can't live on minimum-wage around here. host: thank you for that perspective. guest: minimum wage is a tough issue but not all business owners can afford to pay what whate paying depending on
business they are in or where they live. you take a small pizzeria owner and a small town. if there wage costs nearly double, they are faced with a few very difficult choices. they may have to increase the price of pizza which means they will sell less. they may have to scale back on their work hours. they may have to cut back on a job. those are not good solutions either. all of them have consequences that small business owners don't want to have to face. while the $15 enema wage sounds great, not every small business has the revenue to do that. host: your organization has a small business optimism index? guest: that's a monthly economic survey. it tracks the small business economy in multiple ways. we look at owners on a base level. optimistic or not optimistic? are they hiring? are they growing? are they taking on credit? farther sales going up? isn't it
-- are there sales going up? his inventory going up or down? this is something the fed, the wall street, the media tracks carefully. it has been right on target through all these years of where the small business economy is. they are still at historic levels. host: how did they track compared to the previous administration? guest: after the recession they were down. part of the reason was the policies coming out of washington. most small business owners did not agree with them. they were recovering from the recession. we sought during the presidential election that it was pretty low. after the election the optimism went up. that was optimism based on we think things are going to get better. after a year and a half we saw --ngs with attack s with the tax bill get better. increasing wages, adding to inventory and equipment. those are the things that drive the economy.
you could see that happen as things past. -- passed. host: the trade wars. is that a bad effect or does it trickle down? guest: not to the same degree. we asked a few times what they think about the trade and tariff top with mexico, canada and china. about a third say they are somewhat strongly impacted negatively by the tariffs. what their was. it was on a groundswell that we are starting to see it. we have let the administration know there are small business owners not happy with this. it is not an overwhelming push from small businesses. depending on what sector you're in, there is a lot of concern. host: do you endorse presidential candidates? guest: not presidential level but we do for congress and the senate and for the governor and state legislature level. host: jane is up. go ahead. caller: good morning and thank
you to c-span. according to the u.s. agriculture report, a study 41eased by the united way, million americans are suffering from starvation. millions are suffering from food security. 43% cannot afford their basic needs like food. it has significantly increased since the 1970's. host: how does that relate to small business? caller: ok. -- the economy doesn't have only one aspect. host: we will let our guest answer. guest: the small business
economy is half the u.s. economy. we think when small business as well, the rest of the country does well. that is let me spend time educating policymakers on how important it is, what happens at the small business level, how they hire. one thing you don't see from big businesses as they are active in their community. they live in the community they work in. they work with the pta. they do all those things in their communities all right america. they are a crucial part. they provide jobs and growth and economic opportunity. we believe the better a small business does, the better the economy will be. host: small business owner, kirby. caller: the caller said about minimum-wage, what about maximum wage? -- run forhing is state senate or statehouse. the problem is you have small
towns with mayors and all the people that are controlling small businesses. i've had my bubble home park destroyed. eight out of 12 mobile homes destroyed. i never had my first day in court. i've written to my senators. these u.s. senators from north carolina. we have not gotten help. we have got to get back to the constitution. it is not obamacare. care and insurance are two different things. care is taking care of -- host: that is kirby in north carolina. mark on twitter says it should be a local issue, not a federal issue. new york should not have the same minimum-wage as alabama.
guest: you are seeing that in some states. there was somewhat of an effort in congress by folks in the middle of the country to try and get a memo wage increased bill hat that reflects differences. it's very different than the rest of america. understand a small business owner in the middle of the country is not going to have that kind of revenue coming in that a small business owner in new york might have. our average members are five to 10 employees. when you look at where they are, most are in the 50,000 to $150,000 a year in income. they are scattered all over the country. when washington's set say one-size-fits-all policy it tends to do more harm than good. host: arthur in north carolina. caller: good morning. i wanted to follow-up on some of
your comments you have made about minimum-wage and the cost of a going up for small businesses. i agree that small businesses can't afford to pay some flat rate or a higher rate than what we are paying now. seven years ago i proposed making minimum-wage tax-free for every worker in america. that way you have a flat base. that way it is not hurting small businesses. if it's more supposedly income -- disposable income in people's pockets which will raise the income and revenue for small business. i would like to hear your comments on what you think of making minimum wage tax-free. guest: that is not something we have asked our members on. we don't have a position on it. in some states were we have lobbied in the statement of a which fights we have focused on making sure the states keep a training waits for the first six months. when you're hiring folks new to
the workforce, maybe people in their early 20's, you can have a training wage period. that is a way to get someone in the door and having the basic skills of showing up on time, working with other folks, with customers, other employees. how to do all the basic job skills we all need to learn as we start our careers. minimum-wage -- a $15 hard memo wage is very hard for most small businesses. it is something they can't afford. position ons your the hiring of a document of workers? guest: we have not heard from a lot of members on immigration right now. it has been in the news a lot. it is not something we heard from a lot of them in the past. this was a big issue in congress. we did some immigration poles. we will probably go into the field detail immigration survey of our members.
was anremember there immigration bill that made its way to the house and senate. it never got anywhere. we are not seeing that kind of movement with the two parties. they both had very different viewpoints. we are thinking of going in and getting more detailed information. you're not hearing from our members that much. host: malcolm from new york, go ahead. caller: good morning. a few moments ago you talked about the regulation being encouraging for small business. would you be specific as to what regulations were removed? host: i think he addressed this. guest: there are regulations that impact small businesses in many different ways. one of the biggest concerns here from small businesses, especially federal agencies but also state agencies, they don't look at the unintended
the indirect economic cost of regulation. aboutl agencies talk indirect benefits of a new proposal, but they don't talk about the indirect negative consequences. that is something we are trying to get federal agencies to consider. we are pushing to get small business review panels at every federal agency so there are small business owners looking at rules and regulations when they are going to the pipeline some of these there is perspective. right now only a handful of federal agencies at these review pounds. host: rockville, maryland. emmanuel? topic and aerful wonderful host. he asked about undocumented immigrants in small businesses. i had a different take on it. did y'all do a study on what ethnic groups mainly occupy the small businesses better taking
the jobs? they few callers go asked about would you work for $7.25. what he was saying is, if that were the case, why aren't more people complaining about everybody taking their jobs out there working in the small businesses? saying the immigrants are coming in taking their jobs. african-americans are taking their jobs. seven dollars and $.25 an hour. -- $7.25 an hour. guest: we are at an all-time low on on employment. -- unimplement. -- unemployment. they are looking for more workers. they want to grow even more. they are having a hard time finding that right now. host: qualified as an educated? guest: they are looking for someone who can do the basics,
who can do customer relations and learn a skill. small businesses tend to train employees as they go along. a small business is not always looking -- most are looking for that highly skilled employee that maybe a high-tech manufacturing shop is looking for. when they can't find qualified workers they are saying or having a hard time finding people who want to show up on time, interact with customers, can do the basics and learn a skill as they grow. host: as you talk to congress, what is the wish list? particularly for the small business? guest: we argue do no harm, small business owners want to be independent. the vast majority are not hoping to be the next bill gates. they want to live their life and grow their business and have employees and contribute to their community. keeping in mind when we say small business we need really small. 500 or less.
we think of business with 100 is really big based on our membership. we are lobbying for truly the little guy and making sure congress realizes when you pass something, look at the small business side of things. don't pass a one-size-fits-all that will hurt the little guy, even if it benefits the big ice. host: senior vice president for the national federation of independent businesses talking about the state of the small business in united states. nfib.com. thank you for your time. to show you a new survey that appeared in the new york times this morning. it's about the economic anxiety that some who were surveyed were asked about. nearly three in five respondents said they were worried about the economy, regardless of whether they were personally struggling or doing well financially. that cuts across party lines and encompasses a large group of voters who could collectively think mr. trump's reelection chances, including three in 10 republicans and seven intent independents.
independent -- seven in ten independents. are you anxious about the economy? republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. we will get your thoughts on your level of anxiety over the economy when washington journal continues. ♪ >> watch book tv for live coverage of the national book festival, saturday, august 31. 10:00 a.m. eastern. our coverage includes interviews with justice ruth bader ginsburg. the heartbeat of wounded knee. sharon robinson talks about her book, "child of the dream." author of the british are ginsburg.
coming, and thomas malone, downy director of the m.i.t. center for collective intelligence discusses his book "super minds." the national book festival lived on saturday, august 31 at 10:00 a.m. eastern on book tv on c-span2. sunday night on q&a, the radical physicist we to caulking kaku talks about digital immortality. >> it takes everything about you and the internet, your digital footprint, your credit card records, what movies you see, by, yours you pictures, your audiotapes, and creates a digitized profile that will last forever. when you go to the library of the future you will not take out a book about winston churchill. he will talk to winston churchill. >> sunday night at 8:00 eastern
on q&a. washington journal continues. host: this survey appeared on the new york times website this morning. go to the website to look at it for yourself. which statement best describes your view of the economy right now? when it comes to doing well responding with 55% of republicans funny and 8% of democrats. doing well financially and worried about the economy? 31% said that was them. 20% of republicans responding, 35% of independents, and 41% of democrats responding. when asked if they were struggling financially and worried about the economy, 26.6% of people in total responding with only 8% of republicans responding. 35% of independents, 40% of democrats.
when asked on the survey if there were struggling financially but they think the economy is good, 11% of people responding that way. 13% of republicans, 11% of independents, 8% of democrats responding that way. with all that in mind, your level of anxiety about the economy. we want to get your thoughts on that this morning. republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. .ndependents, (202) 748-8002 twitter is available. you can also post on her facebook -- our facebook if you want to talk about your worries with the economy. when asked which one is the biggest economic problem facing the country, here is the responses. the gap between the rich and everyone else, only 8% of republicans saying that was a concern over 39% of democrats.
the cost of health care, 26% saying -- taxes and government spending with 35% responding, 10% of democrats, stagnant wages and benefits. 6% of republicans responding. to the idea of the level of anxiety when it comes to the economy, we start on the independent line. jerry in mississippi. thanks for calling. caller: hello? yeah. the economy right is doing pretty good. democrats haveur a lot of radical ideas, like the green new deal and medicare for all. if something like that were to gold going will see
to $10 an ounce in silver going to thousand dollars an ounce. host: your level is fairly low? caller: yeah, at the present. host: when you say the economy -- go ahead. i think thet now economy is doing pretty good. it's a lot better than it was. is going tornment have to cut back on spending. doneal things need to be but right now the job situation is pretty good. that is my thought. host: tom in irvington, new york on the independent line. caller: yes. i am not anxious about the economy.
i am anxious about the media telling me i should be anxious about the economy. about the central banks thinking there was a problem with the economy that does not exist and overreacting to a situation that does not exist. the economy is doing just fine. host: give me specifics on what you think that is. on the economy and what you think it is doing fine. economyon the unemployment continues to be at extremely low levels. there is still growth in the economy. as we heard from the prior part of the program, people can't even find employees today. retail sales are holding strong. i don't see the indication of weakness in the economy anywhere except the media saying they are worried about weakness in the economy. the media is going to create weakness in the economy. of the key banging that drum
it does not exist yet. host: carrie in cleveland, ohio. caller: the guy just took my thought. i agree with him. nbc,ews coverage, abc, cbs, they are all against the president. any time anybody says the economy is going bad, they will keep repeating this until 2020. just like they keep repeating he is a racist when he is not a racist. if you repeat it long enough, people believe it. host: specifically, why do you think the economy is bad or you are not worried about the economy? give me specifics. caller: i am doing well. that is the only thing i can look at. all my friends are doing well. they all have their jobs.
nobody seems to be complaining about it. i am not an economist so i can't give you specific things that are happening that would change that. as far as i'm concerned we are well. well. host: matt from woodbridge, virginia. you are anxious about the economy. caller: i am not anxious about the economy, nearly from my perspective everything is going in the right direction as far as the country is concerned. listenn thing is people to much to what the media is saying. a lot of the stuff they put out in the media is negative stuff about what the president is doing. my family has been democrats since he came to this country in 1995. we have been through three different president. clinton, bush, obama, and trump being the fourth president.
at all four of these president, for me, for where my life is going, trump has been the one to feed me in my position. i worked at papa john's for 15 years. host: when you say the economy is going in the right direction, what do you mean by that? basically there are a lot of contracts -- a lot of immigrants will come here and they would get contract jobs from a company that will lowball prices. there are companies here that are doing things. when other companies come and offer low prices, somehow there is a trickle-down effect that happens in the economy. spectrum. speak on my i am not an economist.
things are moving in the right direction. i don't see there was a need for us to give money to outside countries when we have homeless people in this country regardless. ok.: ok, robert, from missouri, democrats line. caller: i wanted to speak briefly in a generalisty and that about my up -- generality, we cannot look at love and deployment numbers and say everything is great. we have people making -- they have several jobs to cover rent and basic needs. a lot of working americans are using the food stamp program because they don't make enough money. 45 million americans have student loan debt that they cannot get out from under. we just can't look at one thing and say look at the employment
rate, the economy is great. that will never tell you the whole story. myself, i'm in my 50's. 2018 i lost two jobs. i think my employers were looking at my facebook and seeing how somebody who doesn't like trump and i think that was part of the reason i was like go. i can't really prove that. nevertheless, i'm having a hard time getting a job. i don't have health care. yes, i have student loans. those three things, that means i'm not doing well and anybody his in my situation -- in 50's it lost his job and it took him two years to get a job. if we lose our jobs -- i'm working from home and doing some light work but it does not really help with all the bills and things like that.
my economic anxiety is high. i will not be voting for trump. i will be voting for elizabeth warren. host: we will go to troy in long island, new york. democrats line. caller: how are you, pedro? i'm a proud american. job because i'm blind. i listen to cnbc all day. -- if youthe economy don't have anything, you are screwed. host: peggy is next from junction city, oregon. caller: hello. i was a real estate broker for many years. when george w. bush was in office the news media and the powers that be started talking down the economy. all of a sudden people thought the economy was bad. -- don't started doing
let them do that to us this time. the economy is humming along. very low and implement rates for the first time in a long time. media and the liberals talk them into having a bad economy. we have a wonderful economy. we can't hire people enough to work for the company. wanted to send up their red flag warning to not talk about a recession. that is peggy talking about her anxiety about the economy. stories.of news dan elliott of the associated press saying the u.s. appeals court in denver said electoral
college members can vote for the president of candidate of their choice and are not bound by popular vote in their state. the 10th u.s. circuit court of appeals voted tuesday that the colorado secretary of state violated the constitution and 2016 when he removed an electorate and nullified the vote because the electorate refused to cast a ballot for hillary clinton who won the popular vote. it applies only to colorado and five other states in the 10th circuit, and new mexico, oklahoma, utah and wyoming. he could impact future cases if enough members straight from their state's popular vote to change the outcome of the presidential election according to constitutional scholars. when it comes to presidential politics, a revision for medicare all for bernie sanders government, one of the primary concerns union members and leaders had raised about sanders medicare for all plan is that they negotiated health care coverage under the current system. in some cases salary in a change
of benefits. these unions could renegotiate their contracts under the supervision of the national labor relations board and unions will be able to negotiate or provide wraparound services and other coverage not duplicate give up medicare for all. the seeming acknowledgment of the role of private coverage and campaigns has rallied against others not taking a hard enough stance against such plans. if you go to the website, they say that when it comes to climate change plans, the price tag he's considering for that plan is $16 trillion. read more about that at the axios site. studio city, california. jane. caller: hi. i'm amazed at the number of people who are taking their
anxiety personal. trillion -- multitrillion dollar deficit. they have floods in the east. we have water shortages and fires in the west. people are working two or three jobs at minimum wage. our infrastructure is decaying. our water supplies being contaminated. anxiety?es this as this is extreme anxiety. this and ignoring blaming the media for what's actually going on, you are putting your heart in the fan. host: we will go to victoria and illinois -- in illinois on the independent line. caller: good morning. i wanted to talk about the low unemployment.
i heard a man call in. he was talking about how well he is working at papa john's. there is not a lot of money and papa john's. listen to the people. don't is here when viewed. listen to everyone. we don't have clean drinking water this country in some places. people are starving. the homeless are on the streets. for homeless people will be out of the streets. infrastructure, like a lady said before is horrible. horrible. on the floor.ote they were voting for higher wages. the republican party voted it down. that republican party voted down health care for americans. listen to what is going on. watch what is going on. then vote with real knowledge about what this country is about. york,dave in ontario, new
independent line. hello? caller: yeah. concerned about the national debt. host: ok. caller: what would it take to get the clock going in the other direction? host:host: meaning what? caller: you watch the clock going up and up. you have $22 trillion. i want to see it going down, down, down. what will it take? host: what is your level of anxiety about the economy? caller: what are kids going to inherit? $50 trillion? what is the matter with these people in congress? powell, ohio.
caller: hello. i am calling in regards to the economy situation here. i don't think there is anything wrong with it. what is wrong is the media. if it was not for the republicans -- and calling of the democrat line because of no longer a democrat. if it wasn't for the republicans, the democrats would not even have a job. business creates jobs. so, that's all i have to say. host: that is the last call we will take on this topic. another program comes your way at 7:00 tomorrow. thanks for watching today. we will see you then. ♪ [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2019] ♪
house bid, john hickenlooper announced he is running for the u.s. senate against republican incumbent cory gardner. mr. hickenlooper tweeted, i have always said washington is a lousy place for a guy like me, knows how to get things done, but this is a -- not a time to walk away. i'm running for u.s. senate. about,ents to tell you just a couple of seconds here on c-span at 1:30 eastern. we will bring you a news conference on combating illegal robo calls with the state attorneys general. abouta discussion children's online privacy concerns. later this afternoon, former usytin celtics player bob co receives the medal of freedom at the white house. presidential candidates tim ryan john delaney, live here on c-span.
today 9:30 eastern, a conversation on the future of campaign debate. debateshear about how are planned and how some candidates refused to take part. here is a preview. political debate has been an intricate part of american political process at all levels and yet at -- over the last decade, debates between candidates seeking political office has declined. this is not for lack of effort, as community and civic groups including the city club as well as television statement -- stations and other media organizations have organized only to have often incumbents turned down, refusing to debate their opponents were designing highly choreographed debates in front of supporters. in 2006, the city club famously uninvited two gubernatorial candidates after the refusal to participate in an unscripted debate. the debate over debate has
gained momentum. the proliferation of social news, andle -- cable other online platforms, has given opportunities to connect with audiences in ways debates used to provide. furthermore, when it comes to noates, there is often agreed-upon authority and no shared sense of practices or no clear ideas of what debates ought to look like. all things we have seen in recent debates among democratic candidates for president of the united states. in an effort to preserve political debates as part of the democratic process, several states have created debate commissions with the goal to convene high-quality debates that play a substantive role in informing citizens about issues and candidates on the ballot. in 2018, the ohio debate commission was formed, joining asiana, utah, and washington
states with this statewide collaboration of how are they working? what should the future of debates look like? >> you can watch this entire form on candidate debates tonight at 9:30 eastern. a quick reminder that you can watch all of our programs online at c-span.org, listen with the free c-span radio app. >> sunday night on q&a, author of the future of humanity, talks about our destiny beyond earth and achieving digital mortality. additional immortality's everything known but you on the internet, your footprint, your credit card records, what movie , andave seen, what country - creates ties