tv Washington Journal 02072022 CSPAN February 7, 2022 6:59am-10:03am EST
>> c-span is your unfiltered view of government, funded by these television stations and more, including charter communications. >> broadband is a force for empowerment. that is why charter invested billions building infrastructure, upgrading technology, empowering opportunity in communities big and small. charter is connecting us. >> charter communications supports c-span as a public service, along with these other television providers, giving you a front row seat to democracy. >> coming up this morning on washington journal. christina marcus will be on to talk about the week ahead in congress. then, we will discuss the recent rise in traffic fatalities in the u.s. and what is needed to increase safety on the nation's roads with kathy chase, president for advocates of highway and auto safety. and, a look at the state of covid-19 vaccines and testing
with jennifer nuzzo. join the conversation with your phone calls, texts, facebook comments and tweets, next on -- next on washington journal. ♪ host: good morning. it is monday, february 7, 2022. mike pence -- mike pence stepped back into the political spotlight. on friday evening, he rebuked former president trump for claims the vice president had the authority on january 6, 2021, to overturn the 2020 election results. tensions escalating with trump in the discussion. a question for republican viewers only. we want to know what you think about mike pence and what role do you think he plays in today's
gop? republicans in the eastern or central time zone, it (202) 748-8000. in the mountain and pacific times, (202) 748-8002. you can text us that -- at (202) 748-8003. a good monday morning to you. a look at the schedule in washington and on capitol hill. the house returns at noon today. the senate is in at 3:00 p.m. today. president biden is set to meet with the german chancellor today at about 1:30 p.m., a joint news conference scheduled for 3:15 p.m. this morning, we are starting with a conversation about mike
pence for republican viewers only. you can start calling in. this is the lead editorial from today's wall street journal. the headline, mike pence's constitution, the former veep stands up to trump despite potential political costs. this was mike pence at the conference in 40. this is what he had to say. >> there are those in our party who believe that, as the presiding officer of the joint session of congress, that i possess unilateral authority to eject electoral college votes. i heard this week that president trump said i had the right to overturn the election. president trump is wrong. i had no right to overturn the election. the presidency longs to the american people and the american people alone. frankly, there is no idea more un-american than the notion that
any one person could choose the american president. under the constitution, i had no right to change the outcome of our election. kamala harris will have no right to overturn the election when we beat them in 2024. look, i understand the disappointment many feel about the last election. i was on the ballot. [laughter] but, whatever the future holds, i know we did our duty that day. john quincy adams reminds us, duty is ours. results are god's. the truth is there is more at stake than our party or political fortunes.
men and women, if we lose faith in the constitution, we won't just lose elections. we will lose our country. host: former vice president mike pence on friday. those comments by the former vice president, reverberating drought the weekend, including onto the various sunday shows. john barrasso was speaking on fox news on sunday and this is what he had to say about those commons. >> i voted to certify the election and i think mike pence did his constitutional duty that day. it is not the congress that elect the president, it is the american people. president trump and mike pence did remarkable things for this country. i hope they can work out their differences. we are better as a party when we are unified. we are united in wyoming about what this current administration is doing, with regard to high prices, inflation, open border
and crime in the cities. people in wyoming are fed up, as they are across the country, with what is happening today. my focus is on the future, taking back the house and the senate. the 2022 elections, not the 2020 elections. >> do you agree with mike pence? you voted to certify, that he did not powe -- he did not have the power to overturn the elections. >> i have been to 15 events. last night, it hundred boys -- 800 people at a boys and girls dinner. this never comes up. people are concerned about high prices, one dollar higher prices a gallon for gas. crime in the cities, people in wyoming want me to focus on the future, not the past. that is where i am focusing. >> we know that is where their priorities are. she is a wyoming colleague of
years, -- of yours, your reaction to the censuring of liz cheney. >> the state party has done it as well, liz and i disagree. i voted against the january 6 commission. i voted against impeachment twice. we will have a spirited primary here. it is a late primary in late august in wyoming. it is going to be very engaging. i can tell you. liz is going to have to travel the state and make her case to the voters in wyoming if she intends to get reelected. host: john barrasso, yesterday on fox news sunday. we are asking, as we begin this new week, a question to just republicans only. we want to hear your view of mike pence and what you think his role is in today's republican party. in the wake of that speech by mike pence, it got so much attention on friday. a response statement from former president trump, here is a
statement he put out, saying he just saw tense's -- mike pence's statement. other than being a conveyor belt , the vice president's position is not an automatic conveyor. if obvious signs of voter fraud exist -- that is why democrats and rhinos are working to change the law that mike pence and his advisers used on january 6 to say he had no choice. the reason they want to change is because they don't want the vice president to have the right to ensure an honest vote. the president said i was right and everyone knows it. republicans only for this first hour. your view of mike pence. (202) 748-8000 if you are a republican in the eastern or central time zones. (202) 748-8001 if you are a
republican in the mountain or pacific time zones. basin is up first out of liberty, south carolina. the morning to you -- jason is up first out of liberty, south carolina. good morning to you. caller: as far as i am concerned, mike pence is nothing other than donald trump's coattail writer -- rider. here is what i am saying. everybody hates donald trump because until donald trump ran for office, nobody touched politics. now, politics is more popular than the super bowl. that is all because of donald trump. mike pence, nobody asked him to overturn the elections. he was asked to send the electors back to the states. if you would cover it, the pennsylvania -- i forgot the guys name -- but he actually requested it, that the electors
be sent back. now, i would love to have mike pence on this show. because, there is overwhelming evidence at this point. it is ridiculous what is going on in this country. it is ridiculous that cavernous -- the cowardice of these gop career politicians. enough is enough. people are not stupid. host: you said he was asking him to overturn the election great let me read former president trump's statement from -- president. let me read former president trump's statement from last week. president trump put this statement out as members of congress were working, saying the vice president had no right to change the presidential
election results in the senate -- if the vice president had no right to change the election result despite fraud and many other irregular these -- regularly's is, how come democrats and rinos are trying to pass legislation? what they are saying is mike pence had the right to change the outcome and they want to take that right away. he did not exercise that power. he could have overturned the election. caller: he could have said in the process what would eventually be overturning the election, because there was fraud. you know there was fraud. for all of your listeners out there, i just want to let them know that you are funded by the same people that own msnbc. you are funded by people who do business with communist china. host: we are funded by you and
cable subscribers across america. we are a couple of pennies on your cable bill every month. the question we are talking about is mike pence, what is his role in the party, going forward? caller: stop filtering me. you claim to be unfiltered news. you are funded by the same table corporations that are canceling 08 in -- oan, that are censoring people. that is who funds you, sir. that is who funds you. who signs your paycheck? who owns c-span? who owns them? host: trying to have a conversation about mike pence. we are a cable and satellite gift to america. this is a company that was created in the 1970's to give you access to the democratic process. we are funded by your cable bill every month rate is how it works.
christian, phoenix, arizona. you are next. caller: the morning. thank you for taking my call. i too watched mike pence's statement on his failure to send bidens electors back to the state. president trump is 100% right that the week republicans and their -- weak republicans and their friends want to change it so congress won't have to confirm electors. this underscores what the united states is. we are a republic. we elect our representatives and our senators to go into office to represent us, the people. contrary to whatever the democrat media says or whatever any politicians on tv say, we are a democracy, we are saving our democracy, this is a democratic -- no. we are a republic form of government. article four, section four.
and also, as well, it is interesting to me how congressional procedure and parliamentary procedure and the electoral act itself, that all of these things clearly, specifically, explicitly state that the vice president is the chair of the count. it is written into law. frankly, what should have happened was the vice president should have sent those electors back to the states that had all of the issues. we don't have to go down that path because we already know what those issues are. and then the democrats would have filed their legal challenges and we would have had l'affaire in the courts. you would have had many democrats activating their
groups in cities and counties. and literally laying themselves out and saying oh, the republicans are trying to stop biden from getting into office and what was me. that's what would have happened -- and woe is me. that's what would have happened. host: what is mike pence's role in the party? what do you think about him? caller: he doesn't have a leg to stand on. go to any state republican meeting or a republican club by the state party. talk to the people on the ground in maricopa county. talk to the people on the ground in pennsylvania and wisconsin, and georgia, and michigan and wayne county, or mccall county. mike pence doesn't have a leg to stand on. he will never be elected again. he is only trying to save face because there are so many rinos
that give him these talking points. the reality is they will never go to any of these states or a trump rally or any republican meeting and talk to the people on the ground. host: that is christian. this is virginia, out of waldorf, maryland. good morning. caller: good morning. how are you? host: i'm doing well. caller: i find it interesting that the american public is so critical of what is occurring today. in fact, if you read the constitution, you will see that yes, pence chairs it. that does not give him the right to make a decision for the american public. i don't care what anybody is saying because i can't find that in the constitution. in fact, because of mike pence, i am switching from democrat to republican. i think, for once, in a long time, we have a man that is actually going to stand up for the constitution and not the party. host: i tell you what, we are
trying to talk to publicans, current republicans only to hear their views on mike pence. a conversation happening inside the republican party this weekend. so, if we could for the first hour, republicans only on your view of mike pence, where you see him in the republican party right now. don in riverside, california, what do you think? caller: i missed the friday night speech he made. but, i have seen a lot of his speeches over the years and i even looked him up on your archives that you have that are good. i thought he did such a good job as vice president. he was heartfelt and he always delegated the job of like when our marines were killed and
brought back. in retrospect, i think he is a constitutionalist. and that is important to me as well as the lady who just talked. i am a republican. i am not a democrat calling in. i hope president trump will take time to consider mike pence. because, he was faithful. he did what was required. host: if president trump runs for president again, do you see these two men ever working together again? would you want them to be on the same ticket again? caller: yes, i do. i think i can trust them both. i think he brought the right balance to the candidate, trump.
host: that is don in riverside, california. in 2016, before mike pence was picked for the ticket, another name that was in the mix was former new jersey governor, chris christie. he was on the sunday shows and was asked about the former vice president's speech on friday night. this is chris christie on abc this week. >> you can answer that question, where does he stand and why now? why did he do it now? >> look, martha, i think the actions of the vice president on january 6 spoke loudly and i am glad he put words to it. i don't know why it took so long but i'm glad he did. let's face it let's call this what it is. january 6 was a riot that was incited by donald trump in an effort to intimidate mike pence and congress into doing exactly
what he said in his own words last week, overturned the election. they tried to do a cleanup on aisle one in correcting that stuff but it won't change. he told the truth by accident. he wanted the election to be overturned. donald trump didn't respond to what the vice president said. i think it is i can to a kid -- akin to a kid standing in the corner. it is immature and beneath the office he held. host: chris christie on abc this week. republicans only in this first segment, what role does mike pence have in the republican party today? lee in michigan, how would you answer that question? caller: mike pence is fine. he's an ok guy. but, the whole thing is you had a previous caller hit it on the head.
c-span, who runs you? yes, it is comcast, say you are unfiltered but you are not unfiltered. the only on filtering -- unfiltering you do is congress and the senate. other than that, you are covered by conquest -- comcast. this is liberal. host: do you want to talk about the question? caller: i am happy you are doing eight gop, republican thing. it is very rare. donald trump was the best president in the history of this country. he had african americans, mexicans, everybody was working, everything was good under trump. all biden had to do was follow trump's plan. what he didn't do it. now look at us. -- but he didn't do it.
now look at us. come on, get a grip. are we going to talk about ukraine and russia, next? i'm sure you will. whatever the democrats want to put on abc, nbc, cnn, google, facebook, twitter, it is all democrats. host: that is lee in holland, michigan. george in conroe, texas, you are next. caller: good morning. i agree with the first two gentlemen you had on your show. mike pence failed utterly in what he was authorized to do under the constitution. the problem is the democrats don't want to go there. they didn't -- the question to be asked was did mike pence think the electoral votes as cast were correct in the
procedure? nobody asked him to overturn -- trump did not ask him to overturn the election. he asked him to do his job and say hey, i am not satisfied with the electoral process, and send it back to the states to be re-examined. that was what was wrong. and the trick here, with the news media, is that they want to spend it -- they wanted to overturn it -- spin it as they wanted to overturn it. now, the democrats are attempting to actually change the law and make the vice president even more useless than he already is. i'm not speaking specifically about pence. i'm talking about the position in our republican republic. host: would you be ok with vice
president kamala harris in 2024 or 2020 five, counting the electoral votes? would you be ok if she said i'm not satisfied and i want to send specific states results back to the states? would you be ok giving her more power in that position as the chair of that meeting? caller: let me stop you right there. you just change the question. you said give her the power to overturn it, no. i am saying the vice president has the power to examine the procedural results and send it back to the state for re-examination of what they are certifying. it is not a question of giving the vice president any power to stop or change it. it merely says hey, the public is, in my opinion, they have
questioned it. and then send it back to the states, if the states re-examine it and reassert what they sent, it is find three this is one more check and balance in the process. host: sarah in florida, your view of mike pence. caller: thank you for taking my call. what i would like to say is i am happy with mike pence. and his decision in the republican party, for a variety of reasons. i think he is a decent man. he is a moral man. he has tremendous experience as a congressman and later as a governor. the problem a lot of these callers are missing, i am a history teacher. i teach government. that is what would challenging
this election as president trump is due to our country -- do to our country, historically speaking? i would refer it to 1820 eight, when john quincy the electoral college to andrew jackson. they picked adams -- john quincy adams lost the electoral college to andrew jackson. they picked adams. andrew jackson waited four more years and came back and won. the kennedy campaign, not john kennedy himself, but the kennedy campaign had fixed some of the electoral mechanisms in chicago, illinois. he could have made an issue and challenge it but he thought it
would harm democracy so he let it go. not so with al gore in 2000. he challenged it and we had a constitutional crisis. the most recent problem in 2020, it is similar to that. there were irregularities. people were upset about that. they were real in philadelphia and around the country. to say there was a conspiracy and that we could prove it would be fickle and perhaps not even possible. that would have been a dangerous thing to do for pence to send it back or to stop the certification on the spot. host: the reason we are having this conversation is the effort to overhaul the electoral counts act. the act is underway.
groups in the senate are working on that. we talked about sunday shows this morning great senator joe manchin said the overhaul of the electoral counts act is going to pass the senate. the headline on that from today's new york times. that process is waiting to be carried out. we don't know what the specific language would be yet of overhauling that process. there will be an overhaul. about 30 minutes left in this conversation. republicans only, if we could. just talking about former president mike -- former vice president mike pence and what his role is today in republicans party. john in arizona, you are next. caller: good morning. host: go ahead, sir. caller: listen. i voted -- i actually didn't vote for trump last election. i voted for him the first time
but i didn't vote for him the second time. the first time, i actually voted for pence. the second time, i didn't because he disappointed me. he became trump's lackey. host: and you are a republican? caller: that's right. host: who would you like to see run in 2024 against joe biden? who would you like to see when a primary? caller: actually, i kind of like the guy in florida. i like him because he talks like he understands the constitution. trump had no use for the constitution whatsoever. he disappointed me. i didn't vote for him because i didn't like his approach to government. he kept saying i can do this, i
can do this. as if he was running the whole government. i didn't like that at all. i think we have a congress, a house of representatives and a senate and a presidency and a judicial branch and all of those are equal. the way trump had it, he thought because he was president, he had everything and it was just him. everybody had to fall in line behind him and i didn't like that at all. host: that is john in arizona. this headline from the lead editorial from the conservative editorial board of the wall street journal. mike pence's constitution. this is what the editorial board rights. pence stands out as a rare republican, standing up to trump's disgraceful behavior. too many in the gop have lost their bearings.
someone should remind voters that trump ended as a three-time election loser. he cost republicans the white house in 2020 and two georgia senate seats in 2021. mr. pence has received too little credit for his policy and personnel advice. loyalty has always been a one-way street. that is the wall street journal editorial board today. this is donna in florida, good morning. caller: good morning, john. thank you for taking my call. host: yes, ma'am. caller: i think mike pence has a lot going for him.
he has a heart. he has a conscience. he has a lot of wisdom behind him. i think -- the last gentlemen mentioned who he would like for a presidential candidate and he said something like desantis. desantis, yes, he is young and he may get his day. but, mike pence can probably bring more normalcy to our country. i truly believe this. i hope he does run. host: do you think -- the president he served under? caller: i think he should. trump may have done a few good things. the bad far outweighs it.
i'm a republican but you have to stand behind what you believe. and i don't think trump did our country that much good. mike pence might pull us back together. host: that is donna out of vero beach, florida. the latest polling on publican primaries in 2024, this is from morning consult at the end of january. republican voters were asked who they would support in two hypothetical 2024 presidential primary match ups, one featuring donald trump and the other featuring donald trump, jr. if trump senior runs, the number of gop primary voters, about 50% would support president trump. ron desantis and mike pence, both garnering just a little under 10% in that polling.
other names that got significant responses, mitt romney, ted cruz and nikki haley. this is linda out of birmingham, alabama. caller: good morning, how are you? host: i'm doing well. republicans only, we are asking you your view of mike pence and his role in the party today. caller: mike pence did what he was supposed to do. there was no reason for him to send those electoral counts back to the state. there was no fraud noted. the big lie was going on then. the big lie is going on now. donald trump lied. host: as a republican, did you vote for donald trump in 2020? caller: no. host: who was the last republican you voted for that you like? caller: george bush. host: who did you vote for in 2016?
caller: whoever was running against trump, hillary clinton. host: what makes you a republican today, linda? caller: i'm headed out of that because i've seen too much. host: you are headed out of being a republican? caller: the attack on the u.s. capitol was awful. and he provoked it. host: that is linda in alabama. this is diane in jacksonville, florida. you are next. caller: good morning, yes. this is diane and thank you so much for taking my call. i am proud of mike pence. i'm just a little angry that he waited so long to stand up to trump. i've been a republican for the past 20 years and i am an african-american. i am appalled at some of the
things that trump did and i thank god we had someone in the republican party to stand up and say no one man has the power to overturn -- overthrow the government. so, yes, i am proud of mike pence and i am glad he did what he did. if he runs for president, i would vote for him. if donald trump runs for president, no. i will not vote for him. now, nor did i vote for him in 2016. i didn't like some of the things he said out of his mouth. he does not represent me. he does not represent what a true conservative, republican, christian is. host: what is a true, republican, conservative christian and what do they believe right now? caller: that is someone who believes in principles, morals, who does not going around -- who
does not go around grabbing women by whatever. and someone who stands up to the constitution. stands for what our constitution represents. not someone who wants to be a dictator. and that is exactly what trump wants to be. regardless of how many people call in, he lost. i'm glad he lost. and i hope to god that he does not run again. host: that is diane out of florida. republicans only for the next 20 to 25 minutes, asking your view of former vice president mike pence. what do you think his role is in the party today? having this conversation in the wake of his speech that got so much attention over the weekend. that was part of the discussion on the sunday shows, yesterday. you can call in on our phone lines, split regionally. if you are a republican in the eastern or central time zones, (202) 748-8000.
if you're in the mountain or pacific time zones, the number is (202) 748-8001. also, looking for your texts and comments that way as well, (202) 748-8003. that is the line for texts. keep calling in. we will show you more from sunday shows yesterday. this is face the nation yesterday. and this is current senator marco rubio being asked about mike pence's speech. >> do you agree with mike pence? >> if president trump runs for reelection, i believe he would defeat joe biden. i don't want kamala harris to have the power to overturn the election. that is what i concluded in january of 2021. >> that donald trump was wrong? >> i don't think the vice president has that power. if the vice president had that power, donald trump would defeat
joe biden and kamala harris can decide not to overturn the election. i don't want to wind up there. >> this could be a turning point for the party. does the rnc speak for you when they say it is a democrat led purkett -- persecution? >> anybody who committed crimes on january 6 should be prosecuted. if you were there to hurt people, you should be prosecuted and they are being prosecuted. that is what prosecutors are supposed to do. this commission is a partisan scam read the purpose of that commission is to try to embarrass, smear and harass as many republicans as they can get their hands on read >> that is -- get their hands on. >> that is what you believe they are doing? >> there are people, for example, like an older member of the rnc, whose husband just died and she was not in washington on
january 6. she wasn't even in washington on january 6. she can't afford to lawyer up and is being harassed by this commission. this commission is nothing but a partisan tool designed to smear and attack and get their hands on as many people as they can. including people that were not in washington on january 6. host: senator marco rubio. on the issue of january 6 and those who came to washington and protested, and those who have been arrested in the wake of the attack on the u.s. capitol, it was in texas last month that president trump spoke at a rally. this is what he had to say about how he would handle those who are being prosecuted if he were reelected as president. >> so many people have asked me about it, if i run and i win, we will treat those people from
january 6 fairly. we will treat them fairly. and if it requires pardons, we will give them pardons. because, they are being treated so unfairly. this hasn't happened to all of the other atrocities that took place recently. nothing like this has happened. what that committee is doing and the people are doing that are running those prisons is a disgrace. it is a disgrace. we will treat them fairly. and we will take care of the people of this country, all of the people of this country. host: president trump last month in texas. republicans only, your view of former vice president mike pence. this is pierre out of mckinney, texas. good morning. caller: good morning. anchor you for taking my call. -- thank you for taking my call.
we have had three or four consecutive fake republican callers who said they were republicans. to all the other republicans out there who look like me, we all know that they were not republicans and were probably as angry as i was, having to listen to them lie and pretend. it is so frustrating because we never get people time, whether it is sunday talk shows when they put on paper publicans. whether -- they put on fake republicans. whether they put on chris christie, since we are talking about vice president pence, let's bring him in. if vice president pence were able to -- were to show up at any republican primary or chris
christie showed up at any republican primary, they would be laughed off the stage. we, the real republicans, the chompers -- trumpers, recognize that our previous president, the last legitimate president, is the most powerful figure in american history. no figure has drawn crowds and excitement like this person. if you go back and look from the beginning of our country and adjust for population size, find me another candidate that has electrified the nation. find me another candidate that has drawn the number of people that he drew to his rallies. i can find no historical president. host: you talk about fake republicans going on sunday shows, what makes somebody a
real republican? do you think somebody can be a republican and be opposed to anything that donald trump has done? caller: yes, of course. but, we would have to say that is a possibility. look at lynn cheney -- liz cheney. she is in wyoming. she has decided to turn against president trump. i think what adding -- adam kinzinger and liz cheney have done, they have revealed himself -- themselves. it is the people behind the scenes that control most of our lives. and i have a message for the deep state that is listening to me right now. and for fear or for a should -- or fortune, i must one them, when we take back power, and we will.
there is no doubt about that. what do you think we are going to do to them? host: this is rich in nutley, new jersey. you are next. caller: good morning, sir. i agree so much with the caller from texas, especially about the callers who are calling in. first of all, mr. pentz is a great man -- mr. pence is a great man. he said what he had to say. that was fine. the media jumped all over it. just like you guys are this money great you would never do a thing like this on who -- kamala harris or joe biden. the big lie started in 2016. and you guys never ran stories about the big lie that the democrats were pushing that
trump was no legitimate president. a great ticket would be kristi noem and nikki haley for president and vice president prayed it is a disgrace that you guys always do this. negative everyday, negative every day. adam schiff on every day. you had him on once a week. host: i promise you we didn't do that. what we do is topics like this that are in the news, we give you a chance to call washington and speak out about it. this is so much of what washington is, speaking to america. this is a chance for america to speak back and we do these topics on every president and every administration. i encourage you to go back and check out some of our archives. gina is next out of mississippi. good morning. caller: good morning. i beg to differ. but, yes, you do do it.
if you had shows that allowed people to call in and talk about what biden is doing now, like you did when trump was there, he would be impeached already. and we all know it. that is just the truth and you know it. caller: gina, what is a topic about president biden in his first year that you think we haven't covered? >> you don't have any kind of shows where people are allowed to call in and tell what he is doing to the country. host: give me a topic you think we have not covered because i am sure we can find it in the archives. caller: you take three democratic calls to one republican, almost every day. every day. i have been watching for years.
i tally them. yes, you do it. i am ashamed. host: what we do is rotate through our phone lines. republican, democratic, independent, and try to give people the chance to call in on rotating phone lines throughout the day. we do it every day on this program. we take those phone calls a day. it is something we make a real effort to try to do. jean in maine, good morning great you are next. the conversation is about mike pence. what do you think his role is in the already today? caller: i wanted to say three things about what happened. the first thing is that, january 6 was something that everybody looked forward to who was a republican who liked trump because it was our only
constitutional opportunity to object to what had happened with the certification. that was the purpose for january 6. i knew, as a republican, i knew that everybody, every republican was going to show up to washington, d.c. trump did not instigate. republicans just went there. there were the few that caused the uproar and that was unfortunate. that was the first thing. the second thing is the words you are using, overturning the election, that is not what january 6 was about. it was about sending the certifications back to the electorate to figure out whether they had done things correctly. and anyone -- anyone who watched tv or new what was going on new the extent -- knew the extent of
the fraud. host: the words i am using are the words from president trump's statement last week about mike pence. i won't read the whole statement . he said unfortunately, unfortunately, he, did not exercise that power, he could have overturned the election. caller: he could have. here is how. if he had sent it back to the states, which is what january 6 was about. here is the thing. once that riot started, there were about 60 -- 16 or 18 congressman senators -- and senators who were going to object. they knew this election was fraudulent. after that happened, they all weaseled out in the only two who objected were ted cruz and josh
howley. mike pence, i liked mike pence, i thought he was a good vice president up until then. what he did was what everybody else did. they were gutless. they didn't dare do it. worrying about the state of the country by not sending the -- worrying about the state that we are in and what would have happened if the electorates had been sent back, look at the way we are now under biden. look at what is happening to us! host: this is a net out of laurel, maryland. you are next. caller: i have listened to your show and most of the people coming on. i think donald trump, with mike pence, will go down in history at some point as one of the best presidents. he lowered gas rates.
he lowered everything. for four years, they kept him down under russian collusion. january 6 was about recounting the election. and the fact that mike pence said i can't overturn it, that was wrong. they know this could be 100% fact, that there were antifa and black lives matter movement members who were there involved in breaking the member -- the windows. host: to mike pence's point on friday, would you want vice president kamala harris in 2025 to be able to send results back to states if she questioned the results of something that happened? would you want her to be able to do that on her own?
caller: to send them back to be recounted, every vp has that right. to overturn the election and say it is overturned because that is what i feel like doing, that is not ok. the fact that the media, somewhere along the line with mike pence and mitch mcconnell, took words that were wrong. if you want freedom, you better vote for trump. if you want control, vote for biden. i told them this thing was bought and paid for years ago. i knew something was not adding up. host: that is annette. republicans only for another five or 10 minutes. your view, howard, of pence's -- mike pence's role in the republican party. caller: i think he is on the side of liz cheney and kissinger
and i think he ought to be ousted. can i make a comment on you? host: people do it all the time. caller: i was watching you four years and one month ago, during the inauguration. we had two women call in. one was that day and one was the previous day. one mentioned fillet sheol and you cut her off. yet you let the two white entertainers cost -- cuss. host: we try to have a productive conversation on this program. i can understand why i cut some money off at that point. caller: why didn't you cut the people making the speeches? host: what we do here is we allow you to watch speeches in their entirety to make your own decisions and not give commentary around it. i think you were talking about
inauguration day and you were talking about the show we did the morning leading up to the inauguration. i probably took a lot of phone calls from people, getting a sense of the inauguration. that is what we were doing that day and then we step back and get out of the way and let you watch what happens on the platforms and watch the speeches in their entirety. that is our mission here. caller: very biased. i will go along with the previous dollars. -- callers. you are sticking with the democrats and the communists. you are too young to remember the baldheaded mr. fudge. host: that is howard in pennsylvania. bob in florida, you are next. caller: hello? host: your view of mike pence. caller: mike pence failed to
perform his most important duty. and that was to send the ballots back to the states that were in question. now, what do you think so many people were at the u.s. capitol? i believe that most of them, like myself, would watch fox news. on fox news, i learned that at least one state changed the voting rules, illegally. unconstitutionally. the state supreme court changed the voting rules. if nothing else, send it back to that state. a couple of other states would not let republicans in to
monitor the scanning of the mail-in votes. they even blocked the windows so we could not see it. that is a regular. host: bob in florida. this is john in california. you are next. >> i just want to say that -- can you hear me? host: yes. caller: mike pence did not do his job because he is supposed to stand behind his president. he didn't do that. he knew the agenda trump had for all of the people. he knew that trump was in line. if he didn't want to stand behind him, he never should have taken that job.
mike pence should just be out the door. that's all i have to say. host: if former president trump were to run again, who should he pick as a running mate? do you want him to run again? caller: if he runs again, he should pick the guy from florida. the governor from florida would be just right. host: what do you like about ron desantis? caller: because he stands up for my views. he stands up for the constitution. he stands up for all people of any race. and trump ain't racist, either. democrats try to make it seem like he is racist. they are lying all the time. i want to stand up for trump because he is for god. democrats don't really care for god. they don't care for religion. they don't care for jesus. i'm about people that will stand up for jesus. that's all i'm saying. host: a couple more calls. steve in missouri, go ahead.
caller: i have a couple of comments. i think mike pence did what he was supposed to do. the republicans offered to fix that and the democrats turned it down, because they wanted all of these other voting rights. i am new to the show. i find it odd that almost every color that calls in tells you that you are to the left. when you keep getting repeat calls saying that you are more one side then another, -- another -- than another, you might want to look at that. host: we certainly get criticism from both sides. i feel like if we get criticism from both sides, we are probably doing something right. stick around. you said you are new to the
show, sometimes we do republican only segments and sometimes we do democrat only segments. we split the phone lines differently a lot of ways around here. in waukesha, wisconsin, good morning. caller: i've known mike pence for a long time. i followed him when he was in congress. he became a governor, scott walker had him in the state, giving speeches many times. i met the man three times when he was vice president. i'm in the republican party of wisconsin in waukesha county. i was able to meet mike pence. he is an honorable man and worked great for the country but he was wrong when he came to january 6. there was a couple of hundred people who caused this right. there was -- this riot. there were a million people there. there were so many people who were there, peacefully, as president trump said, going to the u.s. capitol, peacefully and patriotically.
mainstream media does not cover that part of it. they don't show the total crowd sites, they show the rioters. i believe there were instigators there that were hired by the democratic party. who israel apps, we heard ted cruz -- who is ray epps? we heard ted cruz aspect question. there were 500 drop boxes in the state of wisconsin. host: what is mike pence's roll from here on out? does he have a role in the republican party? caller: he can do whatever he wants but he was wrong when it came to january 6. he was wrong because of the theft of an election. host: that is keith in wisconsin. our last caller, stick around. plenty more to talk about. we will do our usual monday look
ahead of the week ahead on capitol hill. we will be joined by christina marcos. later, cathy chase, the president of the advocates for highway and auto safety will join us to discuss the rise in traffic fatalities in the u.s. and efforts to increase safety on the nation's roads. we will be right back. >> >> had 10:00 a.m., live on c-span.org, u.s. general
testifies before the senate committee. on wednesday, at 10 a.m. on c-span3, they will hold the confirmation hearing. wednesday at 10 a.m. eastern, and the c-span now video at, -- app, -- watch this week live on the c-span networks. head over to c-span.org for scheduling information. c-span, your uncensored view of government.
>> we like to spend time to take a look at the week ahead. senior marcos joins us. -- christina marcos joins us. >> the number of republican figures -- i wonder, do you think republican leaders will navigate the story between pence and trump as we start the new week? >> the strategy is to take a middle ground for trump where they do not agree with the mains -- mainstream comments.
-- extreme comments. they also recognize that the president remains popular with the base. it was striking for -- pants to not agree with trump -- pants to not agree with trump. -- on lee county the electoral college votes. that will be more difficult for republicans to talk to democrats. >> are we expecting to see language on where the reforms could go?
>> clarifying that the vice president does not have the authority to intervene and all they really have is a ceremonial role. to make things more difficult -- that is already out there but there is not an -- a timeline established by the democrats or republicans. we could see that in a matter of weeks. since democrats are not looking for somesuch -- some sort of reform in absence of their
voting rights package. >> we have a timeline on the possibility of another government shutdown, looking at that at the end of next week. where are we at with that? >> the top leaders in the house have been in talks, trying to find an agreement on the numbers to set for overall government spending. that is a basic thing that they need to hammer out what could amount for thousands of pages. at this rate, there are a ways to go and so yesterday, an official said it looks like they're going to do a short-term measure.
lawmakers have been trying to avoid a stop gap that goes through the fiscal year so they will try to fight themselves more time. the house is scheduled to be out of session next week and the thinking is that the house could vote as soon as this week on a stop gap measure. host: the senate returns at 3 p.m. today and the president meeting with the german chancellor today and a joint press conference scheduled. you can watch them on the c-span network. christina marcos covering that. you can join the conversation on
phone lines split. republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8003. >> he seems -- it is a moderate cold. he is doing well. regardless, the house has set up a proxy voting system where lawmakers can cast remotely. any lawmaker -- they can still maintain their usual operation.
any absence in the senate can affect the operation. host: an absent right now affecting the senate majority schedule. guest: president biden expected to announce a nominee. it is not like it is -- will impact. it underscores how fragile the senate majority is with a 50-50 split. host: the american competes at focusing on china.
the two versions have to go to congress. what is the schedule for that and is that something that senator louis's absence in best senate could impact? guest: the biden administration is arching to get this done as soon as possible. ship production -- ship production. -- to help ease the supply chain. it is not clear when that can happen but in any event, -- 10 senate republicans will have to get on board. right now, the bill passed to happen on friday.
the house and senate democrats have work to do in whittling this down to a bill that is more bipartisan than what came out of the house. host: i will bring in some callers. all lots of issues happening -- a lot of issues happening. caller: the elections and what needs to be done to oversee them, the one thing that caught my attention, i am a data person. i went to all the official sites and they had the total number of registered voters who could vote and added up the number in the
united states and i looked at the total votes that came in for president biden and president trump and usually, you have a certain percentage of the voters that vote. if 100% of the registered voters, both, --vote, there were 4 million votes that came in at a hundred percent. that is something obvious. i noticed that you were being trying -- trying to be impartial. you were trying hard. someone was saying you are not impartial, they were incorrect. hopefully with the next election, there is a direct count on total registered voters
and the vaults i came in at mail-in ballots -- host: let me set up on what is looking at the electoral reform act and how they can go into those issues in states. can you explain more about what senators are looking at with this effort? guest: in terms of voting loss, -- laws, that is more of an extensive package, which would expand standards for voting which is the number of voting days and things like that. the electoral count act is focused on the process for counting the votes for president
, specifically the electoral college vote the things that they are looking at is clarifying that the vice president doesn't have the ability to overturn the election , because right now it only takes one house member and one center agreeing on an objection to the votes. one of the things that is under discussion is making it so you need a bigger room in the house and the senate to launch an objection. it was nap senate -- in the senate were launching this -- who were launching this objection. they -- the focus on the
discussions is to avoid a repeat on what we saw in the attack last year. caller: i am doing very well. my question is this. liz cheney and adam kinzinger, they censored these two people and i heard that they are not republican anymore. i don't know if that means they will become democrats? guest: in terms of policy
issues, liz cheney's actions are conservative. they are not aligned with democrats. it is in terms of democracy protection and pushing against authoritarianism where they are are aligned with democrats. and not parroting former president trump's false claims that he lost the election. those are the things that have become issues in the discourse. they are not likely to join the democratic party. there is a push among some house republicans in the freedom caucus to kick them out. house republican leaders have not been that interested in the effort.
that would change officially the number of republicans in the house versus democrats. host: that sensor vote based on the work in january 6 committee. what is the latest that you are walk -- watching for with the january 6 committee? guest: they are going through witnesses. they talked about doing more public hearings but there is some indication that they may push that back. they maybe going through a sea of documents. you have documents that came from the national archives from january 6 leading up to it. before -- president trump had a habit of tearing up documents and that is something that he did prior to becoming president
but presidents are obligated to maintain documents under law s. people have to take the documents together and submit them to the national archives. another challenge would be investigators to read through the documents. host: with open hearings, what is the timing looking like with those. when can people see when they have a debate? when will that happen? there are open hearings coming down the road, correct? guest: they haven't announced anything. we could hear something like the opening hearing last summer.
there are more likely to witness -- have witnesses that could have come telling television that can tell -- compelling television that can tell stories. there -- they are selling -- selling on who can be the most compelling witnesses but they could be hearings that could be scheduled in private time to maximize -- prime time to maximize viewership. host: you are on with kristi noem marcos -- christina marcos. caller: the fact that you were criticized -- a person on the
republic came -- republican line cauldron. -- called in. you never said the word overturn but you work criticized for it. people on both sides of the aisle need to have the understanding. they need to listen to the full context of what the commentators say. whenever there is a topic of major importance, i talked to -- talk spent as you are fair -- talk to c-span because you are fair. everyone in c-span deserves -- you are trying to be there for the american people. they need to understand. as far as mike pence goes, you have to understand that he did
what is constitutionally correct. the same way with liz cheney. i think you for what you do -- thank you for what you do. host: less than 10 minutes left. we tried to get a sense on what folks are looking on -- four. what is the story looking like? caller guest: there are a lot of obstacles and the main issue that is concerning whether or not there will be a longer-term funding ban is -- bill is whether or not the republicans
feel it is in the best interest to have a larger spending deal. there are more talks about an increase in defense spending, especially on the ukrainian border that russia might invade ukraine. there are talks about having a more enhanced funding. on the other hand, it is arguably in the republican's interest to have a short-term funding bill so they can have trump error --era spending levels. it boils down to that. right now, it looks like they
will do a short-term -- into mid marks -- march but there is a risk that they will do have more -- have more stock out bills. host: we talked about earmarks coming back in the open procreation -- appropriation process. a lot of work for congress for specific earmarks so what happened to that work? guest: if they do just do more stopgap measures then all that work with adding these earmarked measures and specifically funding that is directed at specific projects, all that work is effectively erased if they keep doing these stopgap measures. there are federal agencies that
cannot move forward with new projects if they don't have altered funding -- bolstered funding that is reflective of current priorities. essentially what they are -- were doing in 20 to -- in 2019. host: member directed spending, is that the term? guest: earmarks do not have the best connotation in the public realm because there were abuses in the past in the funding that was directed for this district. concerns about bribes and in proper -- improper lobbyists and favors from measures -- members of congress.
the house instituted these reforms in the last year to bring back this ending, which they are specifically labeling as member directed spending to make it sound more palatable. they have to post publicly any of these proposals that members submit. it is all publicly available and they have to this goal -- disclose any conflicts of interest. they are barred from posing any -- there are guardrails in place to make sure this is spending. host: kent and michigan.
caller: i was calling about the electoral college. in the past 30 years that i have noticed about voting is that the popular votes went to the democrats so i do not understand how that works because the popular vote doesn't make sense to me. you guys changing stuff doesn't make anything better. host: christina marcos says the reforms with the federal count at that involves any of those changing the electoral college -- guest: build discussions of those reforms don't address the issues that -- where sometimes
be electoral college results are in line with the popular vote. the last time to -- president two when both wes george bush. -- president to win both wes george bush -- wise george bush. it looked like the electoral college vote was closer. that is our fundamental issue in terms -- that would involve amending the constitution. to change that process where the electoral college doesn't always aligned with the popular vote, especially if we are --
democratic voters seem to be closer to cities and not spread out more evenly. that can tilt the electoral college vote in that way. host: two places where you can go see christina marcos's work. c-span.com and give her a follow on twitter. another busy week for you. thanks for starting with us. we turn to the topic of rising traffic in the country. we will turn to kathy chase. we also discussed testing and if the endemic is going to a new phase -- pandemic is going to a
new phase. we will be right back. ♪ >> the upper chamber will also continue work with president biden. on tuesday, live on c-span3, the senate committee holds a confirmation heavy -- committee. at 10 p.m. easter, live on c-span.org, u.s. sergeant general -- surgeon general testifies on shortfalls on mental health. -- with mental health which children -- with children. wednesday at 10 a.m. eastern,
nine months of 2021. 12% higher than the same. -- period. the question is why? guest: it is a good and important question. we are learning the answers for but some of the components causing these pressures are people not buckling up and speeding. the issue of distraction is on the rise. people think they can use their phone and drive. host: your group is the advocate for highway auto safety. let viewers know about how you go about the issues? guest: we try to improve highway laws in congress. we make our case for explaining
how all these loss come down to saving lives and making the roads safer. host: an annual report that came out a couple weeks ago. explain what happened with the report? guest: there was resistance in the state to pass safety loss. it is broken down into five sections. impaired driving and distracted driving and within those components, we have 16 optimal loss. a report shows that -- those states, -- a seatbelt law that requires
everyone to buckle up and what that means if the law enforcement officer sees someone not buckle up, they can pull someone over and site them. -- cite them. host: cathy chase, we are talking about safety efforts that are increasing. if you are in the eastern time zone, it is -- who is the best and having the optimal loss? --laws?
guest: in the red zone, there are 11 states. states like rhode island and delaware, they are doing a good job and they are states like arizona and florida who really need to step up and pass these laws. host: you talk about the optimal laws. what is a bad rating? guest: for a bad rating, you are getting fewer than seven. for green, you need to have between 11 and 16 depending if you have a primary enforcement seatbelt law and if you have removed -- a motorcycle helmet law.
it is based on researching data. host: what is florida missing? guest: i will have to look that up. florida is missing a primary seatbelt law and a helmet law. all of the trial safety loss. --laws. eight under age 18 and impaired -- or distraction, we are missing a cell phone restriction. host: why is florida so far behind other states that have so many more of these laws? guest: sometimes states are
lacking a champion that prioritize health and safety laws. sometimes the process, where laws have to pass a certain date and then they are transferred over to the other legislative body. there are a lot of obstacles but what is really needed in all of the states are a champion. we released our roadmap requests and we had a state legislator who made improving child passenger safety a top priority and when we have someone who is so motivated and was on board to do this and they pull people in and we work with them. we work with emergency nurses and victims who have lost loved ones so bear -- there are a lot
of issues. it is a years long process and you may have heard the u.s. department of transportation secretary put it just -- pete buttigieg released -- a few means there'll fatalities, that is zero room for hesitation and zero room for delay. host: cathy chase with us until 9 a.m.. this is your chance to talk with her and ask her the issues -- the questions and the issues you are seeing. (202) 748-8000 in eastern time
zones. (202) 748-8001 four central time zones. --for central time zones. caller: there are so many reasons why we are seeing fatalities. we do not have enough cops on the roads. we had plenty of traffic cops where people see them and they will slow down. the cops have disappeared. the other thing is they are so many people -- there are no more cops and they drive as pass as fast as they can and people are driving without license plates. so many people have so -- no license -- license tax on the -- tags on their cars. guest: during the pandemic, law
enforcement was pressed. there were challenges in terms of getting sick. the color is correct in saying that our roadways turned into racetracks and people were driving at exceptional speeds and there was a danger to everyone on the roads when people are speeding at that rate. if someone is driving 100 miles brower, -- per hour, that is an address -- disaster. we hope that law forces -- enforcers will be back.
speed cameras can be a very big complement to officers and they are effective in the deterrent effect and gait -- in getting people to slow down. host: you talked about the ratings, about having optimal safety laws. here is the map showing the states so you can see where your state fell in this survey. as we take you to new jersey, this is edward. caller: i am calling to talk about the number one problem and that is drivers on their cell phones while driving. you see them all the time. i have never seen anyone stop
for cell phone use. even at red lights, big get on their conversations and they do not move the light turns green. this is enraging cars behind them who cannot make the like so when you talk about --light so when you talk about road rage, get these people off the phones and fine them. guest: could not agree more about distracting -- distracting driving being a problem and it seems to be growing. a major problem is that it is under audit. -- underreported. those of us who drive have always been in a situation where we are driving next to someone
who is using the phone as a computer. it is a problem and people do not understand how dangerous it is your -- dangerous it is. people say i will try to multitask and those decisions can be deadly and i think that it is critical that law enforcement officers are empowered to pull people over when they see a violation and it should happen more often. host: here is what arizona is missing. we are facing -- rear facing to the age of two loss. supervised driving requirements.
and eight gdl cell phone restriction. this is philip in arizona. your thoughts this morning. caller: i moved from california to arizona about eight years ago and i noticed an attitude in arizona. some of these people drive aggressively and they will drive behind you and aside from all the distractions that you have, it is just -- i work for a delivery company and i learned all the freeways in arizona that i travel around the state. i have noticed crazy driving on the roads.
i have seen people, motorcycles popping wheelies on the freeway. i think that they don't have enough law enforcement to -- they will have to make some different laws but it is the attitude. they are very free might it -- reminded and any restrictions, there is a big push back. guest: i think that it is a nationwide issue and i -- this is one of the many reasons why we are pushing on a federal level for advance driving systems. like lane departure warnings. these technologies that are in newark vehicles but in the
higher end models. not every family can afford that so we have been pushing for those to be standard equipment vehicles. every family deserves a braking system and there will be distracted drivers but the technology to protect people in the videos -- vehicles and to protect everyone. that technology exists. there are no minimum performance vendors. when a consumer -- a consumer goes into a showroom and makes the decision to purchase these technologies, they do not have the assurance from government that these technologies will
meet minimum performance standards and that is why we are pushing for the standards to be issued. host: -- require certain things about new cars? sheila on twitter asks what is the point of a car manufacturer having a speed from 100 miles per hour possibility on your car? guest: one of the first administrators fought against having those higher speeds off road, on the dashboard. to answer your question, unfortunately, we are on the other side of the break effectors. they -- the manufacturers.
somewhat recently, we have pushed cars for nearly an basic cash decade -- and -- a decade. some of the reviewers may not room brett a time where they don't have a car with a rearview camera it was somewhat recent where it was required. manufacturers said they may not work and they were too offensive. our goal but saving lives. -- was saving lives. people will come to capitol hill, telling the worst time of their lives, how they ran over their children and it took us about a decade to get that and we are back again saying that
there are technologies that can save lives. host: hilary, good morning. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2021] caller: i want to talk about speeding through school zones. i will slow down to 35 and they will pass me and look at me like i am crazy because i am slowing down and one of the high schools that i passed by, there are two crosses in front of the school gate where people have killed and one was a student on a motorcycle. i was wondering if there was anything coming from the organization to do something about speeding in school zones.
they are caring a law through south carolina to put extended arms on the bus on the stop signs because they don't stop when the bus puts the stop sign out. guest: last november, there was an infrastructure built that allows federal funding to be used in school zones. we will be pushing hard for that to be implemented. children are our most precious passengers and walking to school should not be a death defying act. children should be protected and free from speeding vehicles. host: how do you feel about automated self driving vehicles? guest: there is no evidence that
these will actually fulfill the promises that are being offered which are improving the environment and making roadways safe. while we may be optimistic, there is no proof of it. we have been pushing in congress to make sure that if there is legislation, there are safeguards. some of these safeguards are minimum performance standards. when a driver is behind a wheel, you are relying on the driver's vision. with the self driving vehicle, the car will take over that responsibility. you have to have a vision test. there should be one for a car. that is one example of the many provisions that we are pushing
for if and when commerce picks up legislation. -- congress picks up legislation. caller: good morning. i think it is the opposite. it is getting better. we have so much more electronics and technology in our cars. you are talking about the backrub cameras. -- backup cameras. the insurance companies tired of paying out 1500, 2000 dollars for someone backing into someone and the excuse of the owner says that they did not see the car. with the backup camera, you cannot say that because see them in your monitor but i think it
is getting better. in tucson, if you get caught driving with the phone next to your ear, that is a hundred dollar fine. that is an expensive line -- fine. now, i think about 99% of the cars being made have a bluetooth capability working do not need -- where you do not need to hold your phone. you can keep your phone in your purse or pocket. guest: our position is that you should not use your phone at all on bluetooth or in any capacity and it is a distraction. your mind needs to be on the driving path. there are many studies that show
that your mind deviates when you are having a conversation or your voice to text is very complicated. people do not realize that driving is something that people take for granted after having their license for a while. it is second nature until there is a decision that has to be made and if you are distracted. if you are on a phone, having a conversation and they -- people do not know when to cause the conversation, people -- it can be date -- dangerous for everyone. it doesn't just impact the driver who makes the decision to
make a text. host: patricia, good morning. caller: i have a comment saying that we have enough laws on the books and if we just enforce those, that is good. as for the cameras and the civilians -- surveillance state, it is an expansion of the surveillance state. i don't trust the government at all. covid taught us that. whenever the government is involved, it is not good. all roads to help are paved with good intentions. guest: we base our decisions on what saves lives and each law that we include in we push for peace and acted on the -- we
push for peace be enacted on the federal level are to save lives. we do so for people who lost loved ones. these are people who are infected and -- impacted and this the laws are so critical. we were created in 1989 and it was by a very unique board of directors that was comprised of some of the leading insurance companies and some reading law enforcement organizations did -- organizations. they want injuries to go down and that is why they joined
porches -- forces in 1989. host: on twitter, one comments, can you talk about the issues of safety? guest: we consider part of the roadway environment, automated enforcement are affected. we are supported -- supportive of a safe system approach. you look at the drivers in the car in the roadway environment -- and he wrote me environment and you take the export -- especially important step to make changes. host: one last call.
caller: if seatbelts are so important, why is there only one seat belt on the school bus? guest: we have been pushing for seatbelt in school buses for years and the national highway traffic safety administration did come out in support of seatbelts and we think that every child in school bus should be buckled up. we wholeheartedly supported and i wanted to encourage your listeners -- viewers, to visit our website which is safe roads.org. host:-- host: if you have been
pushing on this for school buses, who has been pushing back? who doesn't want? guest: the pushback is on the costs. its inexpensive expenditure, to be redundant, there, for counties and cities and municipalities. we are of the mindset of let's get, let's get them into the new school buses as a starting point. there's always resistance to any kind of change. host: kathy chase, the head of advocates for highway and auto safety. thanks for coming back to chat about this issue. caller: thanks, really appreciate it. host: up next, our weekly segment focusing on some aspect of the covid pandemic. today we are talking vaccines and testing. jennifer nuzzo of the johns hopkins security health
administration department will join us. stick around, we will be right back. ♪ >> president biden has nominated the next head of u.s. central command and of confirmed he will replace kenneth mckenzie junior. the armed services committee confirmation hearing will happen tuesday morning and you can watch it live at nine: 30 eastern on c-span three, online at c-span.org, or watch the full coverage on c-span now, the new video app. caller: wednesday morning -- >> wednesday morning, 10 a.m. eastern on c-span through, online, or full coverage on c-span now, you can watch. >> in early 2001, bethany
mclean, at the time a writer for to that -- fortune magazine as to the russian in an article, how does enron make its money? her reporting along with others who wrote articles led to a lot of inquiries that were put to the enron management. within a few months, the company was bankrupt. bethany mclean's subsequent book entitled the smartest guys in the room became a bestseller. next, a successful documentary. since 2008 she has made a career writing about american financial crises. in january she discussed her reaction to the theranos saga in an essay about convicted felon elizabeth holmes, she wrote "for those who believed she was guilty of a great crime, it's a disappointing verdict.
" -- verdict." >> on this week's episode of book notes plus, available on the c-span now apple or wherever you get your podcasts. get c-span on the go. what's the biggest political events of the day live or on-demand, anytime and anywhere on the new mobile video app, c-span now. access top highlights, listen to c-span radio and discover new podcasts for free. download c-span now today. >> "washington journal" continues. host: we devote time to the covid crisis on mondays in this morning we are talking about testing and vaccines with jennifer nuzzo, of the johns hopkins center for health and security. remind us what the center does in the role you have played in
the pandemic there. guest: thank you for having me. we are an academic research center that does research and also spends a lot of time speaking to the public and policy makers and just trying to generally enhance preparedness for all sorts of scenarios, including naturally caused pandemics. host: jennifer joined us early in the pandemic and has spoken to a several times since. parents of very young children are anxiously awaiting news about vaccines for young children. last week we heard that the availability is coming soon. can you take us through what we know about where that is in the process and what the uptake is expected to be for the parents of the youngest kids. guest: i think that parents have had a hard go through the pandemic and i am one of them.
my kids have been able to be vaccinated, but many of the parents, especially with those who have children younger than five, have been waiting and waiting for a new vaccine to become available when it comes to added confidence in their lives. what we know is that things are going to unfold a little bit i would say probably not as straightforward as i would have hoped. in the sense that it turned out some of the initial data didn't look quite as favorable about the protection offered by the vaccine for children ages two to five or just under five or as young as two. pfizer, who submitted the information recently, is also studying the effect of giving a third dose, but in the meantime has been asked by fda to submit four emergency youth authorization -- emergency use
authorizations. we don't yet have the data to fully understand what is going on with the vaccines. we are just hearing reporting from press releases and company statements and i like to approach that level of information with a note of caution. the data will remain available in advance of the advisory committee meeting. so it is a bit like it is too early to tell what is going to happen with these vaccines. i know that many parents are feeling anxious but i personally hope we can have a transparent conversation about the data and the safety that i'm sure everyone is concerned about but also the benefits. in this age group, i think it is a trickier calculation than the older adults who are clearly, you know, at risk for severe disease. so, i would say don't presume any outcome at this point. it's important to fully vet the information and have an open and transparent conversation.
partly because parents are also worried about the vaccines. as i mentioned in the beginning, i have young children who are both vaccinated but i know many parents who haven't yet gotten their children vaccinated and i think that is unfortunate because i have no particular worries about these vaccines, i would not have vaccinated my children if i did. when we see what the uptake is among children five to 11 years of age, the group that most recently became eligible to be vaccinated, it's only about 20% nationally. it means we have a lot more to do to reach parents and talk to them about the vaccines and what their concerns might be and find out why they might not yet have gotten their children vaccinated and i think in some cases they may not have because their children have had covid and it doesn't feel like a priority for them, but i know that there are other parents concerned about long-term side effects and i think we have to have conversations with those parents
because that isn't a concern we have for vaccines and we need to kind of unpack their concerns and bring to them the information that might alleviate that. host: 20% uptake in the children in the five to 11 age range. how does that compare in the next level up where the vaccine has been available longer? guest: it's much lower but it's not just catch up, it's reaching parents and understanding why parents might not have gotten their children vaccinated. obviously if we started vaccinating later you would expect a difference between the age groups that have been able to get vaccinated for quite some time but that isn't really what we are seeing in that age group. we are really seeing just a plateau without any additional
dues gazan or uptick for the vaccine. we have to overcome that and my anticipation is that we may see similar trends in the under five if the vaccines become authorized, so we have to plan for talking to parents and trying to meet them where they are in terms of their concerns. host: what about parents talking to young children about getting the covid vaccine? any suggestions on how to have that conversation? especially with even that youngest age group, the 3, 4, five-year-olds, possibly being eligible soon? guest: talk to that of other feelers -- their fears, but kids get vaccinated all the time and my experience is that they are used to it. many kids, mine included, don't like needles. we found that bringing a stuffy to the appointment and reminding
them what is going to happen, there might be some tears, but vaccines are a regular part of their lives, unlike adults who don't frequent to get vaccinated . we have under appreciated how many adults are actually afraid of vaccines, syringes, needles and other things. our kids are troopers. obviously some level of tears may occur, but i think that equipping your child to understand what's about to happen to him or her is always a good idea. host: jennifer nuzzo from johns hopkins and the center for health security. if you want to call and ask a question, phone lines are open to do so. we have split them regionally. if you are in the eastern or central time zones, jennifer nuzzo. -- time zones, (202) 748-8000. mountain or pacific, (202) 748-8001. jennifer nuzzo is with us until
about 9:40, 945 eastern. testing, explained to us what the johns hopkins covid-19 testing insight initiative is. guest: yeah, so we started tracking testing early in the pandemic because it became clear it was an important operational metric. if everyone can remember where we were in march of 2020, when most of us began paying attention to the pandemic, it was really hard to get tested. the daily case numbers that were being reported were just the people who were able to access the test and in most cases it was people who were very sick, sick enough to be admitted to a hospital. that is where testing was constrained to. it became clear quite early that that wouldn't be sufficient and that there were other people who may not have been sick enough to show up at a hospital who needed to get tested, to understand their status and make sure they
didn't pass it onto others. tracking testing since the beginning of the pandemic has been an important metric. so, we began tracking testing as they started reporting how many tests they did but we started tracking it with regards to how many tests they should be doing. if there were no infections in the country, we wouldn't need to test anybody. our metric was test positivity, a metric that unfortunately has generated some confusion or maybe people have interpreted incorrectly. the way that i view test positivity is it's a measure of if we are casting a wide enough net with testing to identify infections. the answer is yes, test positivity should be quite low, ideally under 5%. what we are seeing now and what we have seen at many points in the pandemic is that testing has been constrained over and over again and we can see that when
we have test positivity's that are very high. 20% nationally means we are missing a lot of people who are likely infected and we are not able to count those people as cases but more importantly those people may not know they are infected. maybe they have used the rapid test at home and that is something that we hope, but maybe they don't and if they don't, they could spread it to others unwillingly. also they may miss an opportunity to be connected to care that needs to be initiated early to help them. testing remains an important thing to track and is a very good indication of how well we are responding to the pandemic and i wish that this far into the pandemic i didn't have to say this, our testing system is really inadequate for the levels of infections that we continue to see and to generate the kinds of information we need to track the virus and whether it is mutating or affecting new populations. it all starts with testing. host: let me stop there and take
some of the several car -- calls we have for you already. john, goldsboro, north carolina, good morning. caller: good morning, i have a simple question. what more can be done to get people to get tested more than now? and getting them to take this vaccine to stop the spread of this? because basically all these people around who are getting misinformation from joe rogan and the rest of them, it's just boggling to the mind if, if you want to keep well, do what you are supposed to do. if you don't care, you don't care and you kill everybody. host: jennifer nuzzo? guest: thank you for that question. i wish i had a simple answer.
the one thing that helps is making it easier for people to access. people shouldn't have to take off work to get a test or a vaccine but unfortunately in many places it is. it's i think unacceptable that people have to wait on line for hours to get tested at a testing site. it's unacceptable that the rapid tests are still really expensive in the stores and just not affordable for most people. i think it we can do more to make it easier on people. but when it comes to testing i think there are other barriers we have not sufficiently addressed. for many people, they simply cannot afford to test positive, it means you will not go to work and you will not earn income. we have not sufficiently addressed that financial aspect of the pandemic. there have been studies and one of the biggest predictors in the u.s. of ability to comply with public health recommendations is income. let's acknowledge that some people just have an easier time complying with others -- than
others. when it comes to vaccines, this is a tricky situation and i really lament how politicized and polarized the conversation has been. i think that for many people, i assume everyone is well-intentioned and for many people it is just easier to find lies than it is to find the truth. it's the way that our information environment is constructed these days. algorithms spread to salacious lies further and faster than the truth, unfortunately. the antidote aside from some policy fixes is just talking to people. talk to your friends and neighbors and the people that you meet. do it with an open heart and an empathetic view. try to understand their concerns. i have found that in conversations with people if you start off from the position of not judging people and giving
them the information that might be helpful, i have seen people change. we can't just write them off, put them in a vox and call them names. we have to just keep having the tough conversations and do it in a loving way. you will not reach everybody, but if each one of us reaches a few people, it will add up. host: to james in texas, good morning, you are next. guest: good morning. i would like to say that regarding vaccines in testing -- host: what's your question? caller: morning, i would like to say that regarding vaccines and testing, we are doing well on the vaccinations however we need to get vaccines and everything out to everybody across the country and worldwide. i'm pleased with the fda for full authorization of the moderna vaccine. for vaccines under five, we are pleased with them. host: that's -- guest: that's
great, good to hear some confidence. host: on the idea of getting vaccines out to the rest of the world? guest: absolutely critical, absolutely critical. glad you brought it up. it's easy to get the national blinders on and think about our own community only, but i tell people that if we want to stop worrying about a variant and every letter of the greek alphabet after omicron, the way we do that is get vaccines to the world. we need to reduce the number of viral particles on the planet. when the virus copies itself, that is how you get mutations that lead to new variants and vaccines do that by making it less likely to be infected but less likely to pass it on as well and we need to make sure that everyone has access to vaccines. it's the morally right thing to do but it is also in our pragmatic rest interests. host: steve, new york city, you are next.
caller: i would like to know why pfizer and the fda are asking to keep the safety data hidden for 55 years if this is safe and effective. guest: the safety data is not hidden. in fact, there is a very, very, very open safety surveillance system that a lot of people love, it's basically an open forum where people can submit their own systems and it is tracked and looked at. it's a little hard to parse. like i said, anyone can go on and type anything, doesn't mean it happened to you, but it is actually used and there is a lot of transparency. the safety data from the trials are shown at time of submission. those data are, you know, publicly shared and discussed. that's why it's critical that we have these advisory committee meetings. it's important for the public to see the data and be able to
understand how experts are parsing and interpreting the data. having that conversation in the public is absolutely critical. i have no concerns and know of no attempts to hide data. i understand that people fear that the process is or has been subverted in some way. i have seen absolutely no evidence of that, but it is one reason why many experts have made that call to the fda to make sure that no submissions are open --. [indiscernible] host: can you talk to ushost: for laypeople about what mrna means and how it works? guest: i love this question, i'm excited about the vaccines and the technology that they use and there has been a lot of misunderstanding about them. essentially the mrna vaccines contain the messenger rna, which
is what your body uses, the instructions your body uses to make things like protein. when you inject those into your arm, if you muscle back will absorb it. there is some oil that helps it get into the cells of your muscles. your arm muscles. those will take up the vaccine, see the mrna and it will instructed the cells to make the spike protein of the virus. not the whole virus. there is no whole virus in the vaccine, just instructions for your cells to make the spike protein. your cells follow the instructions, they bring the spike protein to the surface where your immune system can see it. your system sees it and thinks this isn't enough and it attacks the cells and gets rid of them. so, in a matter of weeks the vaccine, the spike protein and the cells in your muscles are
gone from your body. the vaccine gets taken up into your cells, taken up into the part of the cell called the cytoplasm, which is not the part where your genetic material is. your genetic material is locked away in a different part of the cell called the nucleus. i have to stress that, some people have been worried that these vaccines can interfere with your genetic code but that's not possible because they can't get into the park where your genetic material is. it's a process that i think remarkably is efficient and very quickly over and this is one of the reasons why we don't expect there to be reasons -- don't expect there to be long-term consequences from vaccines because it is just out of your body, all traces of it in a matter of weeks. within two months we don't expect anything that we expect to happen from the vaccine. some people have side effects from vaccination but it's
usually very, it's usually very quickly after they received the vaccine and we don't see side effects or expect to see side effects after two months. i also have to stress that the vaccines don't really circulate around your body. that is why we have confidence that it isn't going to affect other parts of your body like your reproductive system, which is a common misperception or concern, that it might affect fertility, but there is no plausible biological mechanism for that. host: coming up at nine: -- on 9:30 on the east coast with jennifer nuzzo for our weekly covid segment. before we leave the twitter audience for a second, this title, a couple of folks on twitter wanted me to ask about the johns hopkins study on lockdowns. referring perhaps to this story from fox news and other publications as well, reigniting the covid lockdown debate.
what is this study? >> it was done by one of my colleagues at a different part of the university who is an economist. i don't think it was peer-reviewed, i think it is a preprint or a working draft. it is very long, about 60 pages, looking at basically outcomes in countries depending on how hard they lockdown. they ultimately conclude that lockdowns didn't do much to change the outcomes from covid. i'm a little bit puzzled by why this study is generating so much controversy. from my perspective as an epidemiologist, lockdowns are not a great azure. they are very blunt tools. it stands to reason that if you never let anybody leave their house and poke at not interact with each other, we would
potentially stop the virus. we could never do that fully because you couldn't have everybody stay at home. we needed people to go to grocery stores, power the water and the electrical grid. people to be in hospitals to care for the people who are already sick. complete and total lockdown was never a possibility and as long as the virus is still circulating, if you release restrictions like that, what happens next very much matters on the restrictions on your health. if you lockdown and then just open up completely and no one tries to protect themselves, you will see a surge of cases that was just delayed from the lockdown. i don't love lockdowns, they are a very blunt measure the carry harm with them, but if you find yourself where we were in march of 2000 20, with no ability really to test anybody, hospital
systems that were completely unprepared, no idea where the virus was or wasn't in the country because of our inability to test, it didn't leave much time to do all the preparedness work that should have happened probably starting in the end of december when we first heard about the virus, for many places the lockdowns were a last ditch effort to try to hit pause on the virus and try to buy some time. but if that is all a country does and they don't do more targeted interventions like, you know, allowing people to access tests and know their status, so that they can stay home when they are sick, if they don't do those other things it's not surprising to me that we wouldn't just see the cases occur later. host: lawrence, kansas, vicki, thank you for waiting. caller: hello. i have thoughts on that. i know that people in the medical field take an oath that
they would do everything they can to take care of people. i know that is something that you all do. but people who do not take the shot and do not take every measure they can to, you know, prevent this virus from spreading, we only have, we don't have an infinite number of doctors and nurses. if they leave or they pass, what about the other people with other medical issues that cannot get a bed? that cannot go to the hospital because it's full of covid patients? is it fair for the medical field to continue their policy on taking care of everybody, you know, regardless? is it fair to everybody else with other illnesses who cannot get to the hospital who die because of people who will not take the measures and the steps
to help prevent this virus? perhaps we can have people sign waivers where if they don't take the shot to help prevent the virus that they do not go to the hospital? thank you. host: before we go, before we have jennifer jump in, are you hearing about hospitals in kansas being overcrowded? are these sort of decisions happening there? i think we lost the collar. jennifer nuzzo, go ahead. guest: first of all, i'm not a medical worker. i don't want to take credit for the life-saving work that they do and putting themselves in harm's way to do it. i'm in or mislead grateful to them. that said, i think that one of the beauties of medicine is that treatment is offered without judgment. i think it's a very slippery slope once you start deciding who deserves treatment versus who doesn't based on behaviors
and decision-making. it is important for people to have trust in the medical system and part of that trust comes from knowing that people can access medical care without fear that someone will judge them for whatever it is that brought them to the care. maybe you chose to smoke or maybe you chose to drink to excess. there are all sorts of behaviors that are probably not great for us healthwise that some of us do to a varying different degree. i want people to get vaccinated. i think it is absolutely in their best interest. i hope that people do it for other people but i also hope they do it for themselves and their families. i always stressed that to people. if you don't personalize it for people and put it in the context of what it will mean for people they actually know, it's hard for people to make personal medical decisions based on some anonymous person they haven't met. one hopes that they do but we
are not all wired that way and i take a nonjudgmental way and say here is why i think he'll help you and your family. host: what are your thoughts on masking and masks and masks in schools for kids? guest: yeah, i have two kids in schools. my daughter is in kindergarten and has been wearing a mask in kindergarten for years now and i don't love that they are still wearing it, but right now i think it is offering some operational advantages in terms of the fact that our kids schools have not closed down in the recent wave of cases. i'm grateful for that and i'm also grateful for the fact that when i hear about cases in schools, i can take a worry off my list in part because they are vaccinated and impart because they are masked and i can brush it off. i do think it is important to figure out when and how to get masks off kids sooner rather than later but i just think it is not a simple fact as saying
absolutely yes now. we have to make sure that teachers feel safe, that adult staff in the schools feel safe. one because it is nice, but also because it is pragmatic. the magic that happens in the classroom are there because the teachers are there happily and not feeling like they are there under duress. it's really important for us to consider the factors, you know, the feelings of multiple parties in the classrooms. even though my risk tolerance for my kids might be higher than others and i might be ok sending them in without masks, i don't know if there are kids in the classrooms with them who have medical vulnerabilities and it's a more complicated issue than the headlines portray but i think that we as a community and society need to decide when to take off masks and frankly to do it sooner rather than later. >> dave city, florida, you are on with jennifer nuzzo.
caller: thank you for appearing on today's show. you have handled this with very much diplomacy and grace around the anti-sirs. i'd -- anti-vac sirs. -- anti-vaxxers. i wish they would quit politicizing this and feeding off asteria. these vaccines work. we have knocked out polio. we have knocked out host childhood diseases with vaccines. people are using the same old tired excuses then that they are using today. it's like get a life, people. this stuff works. get vaccinated and we will get over this. thank you. guest: yeah, you know, i have spent a lot of time talking to people who are not yet convinced
of the benefits of vaccines and when you spend as much time as i have talking to people, first of all you just connect with them as other human beings. other moms, dads, grandparents, younger adult. you just start seeing them as people who are not that different. they want the same thing and they want to protect themselves and their families and they don't agree on the best way to do that and why they don't agree is, i cannot tell you how frequently i have heard the same exact concerns almost in the exact same wording over and over and over again. for me what that tells me is that there is a common source to the fears that they have. common source to the disinformation and it's true. i have a colleague at the, at the centers for combating digital hate looking at the research and the spread of covid misinformation online and they find about one dozen personalities are responsible for about two thirds of the
misinformation and disinformation online. these are people who are not spreading this because they are trying to exercise their free speech. they are spreading it because they see it as a business and make money off the spread of disinformation. every lie can click that they get, they get income and in some cases they try to sell things as an alternative to the vaccines. these businesses profit off the fact that the algorithm gives them more money the more outrageous the information is, which generally favors lies over truth. so many are honestly trying to do the right thing but they are doing their research in an information environment that has been poisoned by disinformation and misinformation and it is hard for them to find the truth. frequently i ask people -- have you talked to your doctor? when they say to me, we don't know who to trust.
it's a very telling that so many of them respond to me that i don't have a doctor. these are people who many times have not had positive or explored -- supportive experiences from the medical system. if that's you, if you have not been able to get help for all the other things that happen to you in your life, your health conditions, and you don't have someone regularly supporting you in having a healthy life, i can understand why it might be hard to believe that medicine is suddenly therefore you with a tool that is going to help you. i try to understand where they are coming from and hopefully when you get to that place in they feel they are understood, i have found you can have much more productive conversations about the benefits of vaccines. host: these sources of misinformation, are they names that viewers would recognize? guest: sure. i don't spend a lot of time on these sites, but robert f
kennedy junior is a very famous one. his group, it's a fairly sophisticated organization in terms of the amount of profit that they turn in. i don't think that most people recognize or realize that a lot of these sources of misinformation are doing it as a business. not to help people, per se, but to line their own pockets. i find that particularly egregious. another caller said that they were diplomatic. i'm not diplomatic when it comes to political leaders and the purveyors of disinformation who know better but do it anyway. host: sky in bradenton, florida. good morning. caller: i'm so excited, first time calling. i don't want to get yelled at by the guy who says just say hello. but what you have to go through with jason, that first call her today, every day, you guys put in such amazing work.
you, greta, jesse, paul, everybody. especially brian. the ones who really believe in the republic and america, we really do appreciate you being here every day. host: what's your question for jennifer nuzzo? caller: yes, course. i have a twofold question. i myself, i really appreciate what you said today about the misinformation and people having different experiences. myself i have not had that much luck with the medical establishment but i am calling about a friend i have, she has hs, you might be familiar with this immuno deficiency. she is immune compromised and a bit younger. she is constantly dealing with all the misinformation we have been talking about. the first time i brought all the crazy stuff up to her, that i visited her in the hospital and she was, for her condition she was in there in the first thing she said again was -- well, what
about my fertility. kind of the opposite of what you should be worried about. i want to know, as someone who is kind of plugged into this and in a acute sense and worried about being plugged in, what do you say to a friend who you are trying to help come around to the science? could you help me with that? guest: again, i think it starts with empathy. start with concerns. it's common for people who have had chronic issues with their health to be nervous about the vaccines because they are worried about upsetting the delicate balance that is required to help them feel good on a given day. one of the things i like to point out to people that they may not be factoring into their
calculations is that getting infected would do that in a much worse fashion and i don't inc. that people sort of see that side of it. which is that you are worried that the vaccine could, you know, exacerbate a condition that you have, but it, if you think that is the case, imagine being actually infected. i don't think that people also understand that one of the benefits of vaccine is that it doesn't repel the virus. it's possible to get infected after being vaccinated but when your immune system is trained, it goes after the infected cells much faster than what would happen then if you know, you were just infected and not vaccinated and you have a greater chance of limiting -- limiting the number of cells the virus finds. people who get infected and are not vaccinated, it is not uncommon for multiple parts of
their body to become infected with the virus and to have symptoms that are beyond just the runny nose, sore throat, and cough that you may get if you are vaccinated. there are multiple benefits to getting vaccinated. recognizing that your friend is coming from a position of feeling uneasy about your health and giving some space to let her express those fears is a good place to start from. host: phone calls this morning, alvin is waiting in tarrytown, georgia. good morning. caller: good morning. host: what's your question or comment? caller: this news that the cdc has stated that even if you had the vaccine, had the vaccine or don't have the vaccine, the vaccine does not prevent you from catching the virus or
transmitting desirous. guest: that's true. caller: and i'm not vaccinated. my wife is. everyone else in my family is. i got a brother, i got a brother what's got six kids. everyone of them's had the virus. every one of them. and my wife hasn't. but everyone else is. and they are vaccinated. so. telling everybody that you're going to kill the virus, i believe it is, by taking the vaccine, i believe that's a disservice to the country. guest: let me -- and i caller: i appreciate -- let me -- and i caller: i approve -- let me -- caller: i appreciate you answering the question. guest: i will say it again, the
vaccine is not a force field, it doesn't repel the virus from your body. the way the immune system starts to react, when those cells get infected in your immune system got in place, i'm very glad you didn't get covid from your family, absolutely. does that mean that you won't get it in the future question mark no. does it mean any of us who are vaccinated won't get it? no, i'm fully met -- i'm fully vaccinated and i fully expect to get this virus. but it will be a lousy cold at home as opposed to a trip to the hospital. i'm of an age, fortunately not quite old enough, to be in the highest risk group for severe illness, i don't have underlying health conditions. chances are that if i got the virus and wasn't vaccinated i would not have gone to the hospital, statistically, but you never know where you are as a person on a statistical scale. you don't know if you are going to be like most people or kind of the rare case.
for me getting vaccinated was added peace of mind. now i have driven down the likelihood that if i get infected i will have to go to the hospital. it's very low, much lower than it was before i was vaccinated. i'm not here to tell you that you will never get infected. absolutely not. i expect all of us to meet this virus at multiple points in our lives. i am happy to have some protection and to bring my defense systems as trained and ready as possible to that fight. i know a lot of other people feel peace of mind because of that. host: we will have to end this conversation there but we look forward to talking to you again down the road, jennifer nuzzo. if you want to follow her on twitter, it's easy enough, that you so much for the time. guest: thanks for having me. host: just over about 15, 20 minutes left in the program this
morning and we will end as we often do, in open forum. public policy or political issues you want to talk about, the phone lines are on your screen, go ahead and start calling in now and we will get to your calls after the break. >> this week the house and senate are both in session. attempting to pass the february 18 midnight deadline to pass a shutdown. the senate will follow suit in the upper chamber will continue work on the president biden judicial and executive nominations. tuesday, 530 a.m. eastern come alive on c-span3, the armed services committee holds a confirmation hearing for michael parrilla to be the general commander of the u.s. central command. at 10 a.m. eastern live on c-span.org and on the c-span now video app, the u.s. surgeon general testifies before the
senate finance committee on shortfalls in mental health care for children, antique majors in america. wednesday, 10 a.m. eastern on c-span3, the senate commerce committee holds a hearing on heading the federal communications commission. wednesday, 10 a.m. eastern, c-span.org and the video app. the chair of the commodities trading features discusses the powers the agency needs to crack down on abuses in cryptocurrency markets. watch it this week live on the c-span networks or c-span now, our mobile video app. head over to c-span.org for scheduling information live or on-demand any time. c-span, your unfiltered view of government. c-span offers a variety of podcasts that have something for every listener. washington today gives you the latest from the nation's capital
. every week, book notes plus has in-depth interviews with writers about their latest works while the weekly uses audio from our immense archive to look at how issues of the day developed over years. our occasional series talking risks features conversations with historians about their lives and work. many of our television programs are also available as podcasts. you can find it all on the c-span now mobile app or wherever you get your podcasts. "washington journal" continues. host: time for you to lead the discussion. any political or state issues you want to talk about, phone lines are available for you to do so. republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. we were to -- we will take your calls until we end the program,
as we always do. the house in at noon, first votes not scheduled until 6:30 eastern today. over at the white house president biden is set to meet with the german chancellor, olaf scholz. that happening at 130 a.m. eastern, a joint news conference is expected at 3:15 a.m. eastern . the white house press secretary is expected to brief reporters today as well. you can watch all of those events on the c-span networks, check our website for programming if you missed any of those times. but it is now time for callers to lead the show. robert in indiana, republican, it's our open forum, what is on your mind? caller: i'm 84, cancer survivor. i got my two main shots in this last thursday i came up with the covid virus and right now i am under, you know, just taken the
antibiotics. not antibiotics, nyquil and stuff for it. tylenol. i'm, i'm, it's more like what i got right now is more like a head cold. so it's not gotten any worse. they just told me to wear it out and i can get my shot and go back. back to my doctor the 23rd of this month to get my booster shot then. i just want people to know that if they haven't got their shots, take him. it can, you can catch it. even if you done vaccinated. but it is rare. so, i thank god that he has taken care of me for 84 years. host: robert, thank you for calling in, glad you are seeming to do ok with its -- with us.
we take a call a month, give us a call next month to let us know you are doing all right. even grand rapids, it's open forum. caller: good morning, c-span. back to the early part of the segment when you had the people i'm talking about with the formal vice president and what he said about the elections. i just, i cannot get it through my head for the life of me why these people don't think that that was an insurrection that those people performed on january the sixth of 2020. i'm just dumbfounded. you cannot fix stupid. what is going on. host: our question for viewers was what is your view of my print -- mike pence. what is your view of him as a democrat? caller: i would say that he's a
decent man. i say that, you know, he did a lot of twisting with the christian part. i'm a christian, to. he was kind of like, there is a part where if you know something is wrong, you supposed to speak up. you not supposed to just go along with the status quo just because you in a political party . he's a christian and he wasn't supposed to be doing things like that. he did write for being a constitutional vice president. host: that was even michigan. david, edmond, oklahoma. caller: i got through on the general comments line. i was hoping to get through to speak your previous guest.
but i empathize with the woman in that she's essentially attempting to explain microwaves to a caveman when she talks about the science of this vaccine. i wonder if we wouldn't have more success if we spoke a language that we all understood, the dollar bill. if we conveyed to these people the message that their refusal to vaccinate is directly responsible for the supply chain issues that we are having in the united states, is directly responsible for the inflated prices they are paying at the grocery store, the inflated prices they are playing at the gas pump. all of these things were brought on by the virus in their refusal to vaccinate. i had within the last 30 days six family members affected --
infected by the virus. three were vaccinated and three were unvaccinated. the three who were unvaccinated suffered a great deal more than the three who were vaccinated. in fact a couple of the ones who were vaccinated only experienced symptoms for about two days and the others it went on for 10 days in two weeks. -- and two weeks. all the positives outweigh the negatives so much. if we forget about the science and just talk about the economics of this, maybe we would get through to more americans. host: this is larry and chicago. good morning. caller: yes, good morning. thank you for taking my call. i'm calling from northwest chicago. we have some serious mental health issues in this country. i think that we could turn this
around if we study righteousness . that's a biblical concept. we have gotten too much into this touchy-feely chinese stuff. the vaccine, the chinese virus started in that province, where mao's a tongue -- mao zedong was born. host: what do you mean study righteousness question mark caller: back in the revolution everyone was reading a bible. we have taken our values and turned them side down. in chicago right now people are not healthy mentally and you can see it on the street every day. i am betting that when all the broken hearted people leaving -- leading the world agreed, the answer will be jesus. ok? host: richard, missouri, the line for democrats, good morning. caller: yeah i'm talking on the line for democrats. the deal about that lady that
you had on about the virus. i had an acquaintance, you know? he wouldn't take the shop, you know? conservative. he ended up with this virus and ended up in the hospital for about a month and a half. he had insurance, of course. $85,000 that he had to put out. his insurance was going to have to pay $140,000. looks like the insurance companies will not insure you if you are not vaccinated. that is coming out. everybody's got to pay insurance . everybody pays for that. as far as penance goes, he's got different views from what i have, but he's a real american and he did what americans supposed to do. do the law of the land, you know, transfer the power, you lose, you lose. don't cry about it be a baby. take it like a man.
i will let you go, sir. host: that was richard in missouri. anna, good morning, republican line. caller: good morning. i would like to share with you how i came up with jobs that do not require education. our current president, joe biden announced that he's introducing the american people to jobs that don't require education. i came up with three jobs in america that fill that condition to help our president carry his duties. so, job number one is dr., doctor in america needs a lot of patience, -- patients, you can hardly make out that handwriting. and the lawyer, the lawyer, all he needs to know is how much is
two plus two because when a lawyer goes to court, the judge asks him how much two plus two is in the lawyer goes to the judge and says judge, how much would you like it to be. because the lawyer and judge decide what is going to happen in court before it started. job number three is real estate agent. host: sorry, can we get her back? caller: i am not done. you need to have pointing fingers say bathroom to the right, living room to the life, -- left, bedrooms upstairs. host: ok, thank you for the call on those jobs. tony, maine, independent line, go ahead. caller: thank you for taking my call. i'm not republican or democrat. the lady said that all the
records had to be kept for donald trump and he ripped them up that they got them and they are taped together. we never got hilary's phone records or if you emails when she had her computers destroyed, nobody cared about that. i noticed a lot of democrats protested the elections of 2000, 2004, 2016, they talk about ways of overturning it when they thought it was rigged. i'm wondering how many states changed their voting rules so that people could vote not by what their laws were but through the congress of the different states and through the the, through the governor's executive actions and things, making the voting not legal because they try to change it for the emergency but it wasn't by the constitution. host: ok. dennis, iowa, you are next.
caller: please trump supporters that called in, they should ask trump why he is so stupid why he picked people like penance and others that he fired. is that being a smart man? is being the boss who does that two women a smart man? host: ok, independent line. good morning, sir. what is on your mind, tom. got about one minute left. caller: i heard one of the callers mentioned that they were kinda blaming people that didn't get a vaccine for the hike in pricing and the availability of products and such. i would lean more towards inflation being a cause for that. the more money that you print and inject into the economy, the less all of this works. that is kind of the reasoning for counterfeit being illegal in
the first place. it devalues the currency in existence. i would like to see somebody address that. host: thank you for the call there from the land of 10,000 lakes. last caller today, but we will of course be back tomorrow at 7 a.m. eastern, 4 a.m. pacific. in the meantime, i hope you have a great monday. ♪ [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. 2022] ♪ >> the house takes up legislation to pass the deadline to avoid the shutdown. the upper chamber will also
continue work on president biden's executive domination. the senate on services committee holds a committee. at 10 a.m. easter, -- eastern, there a testify on shortfalls on mental health shortfalls. the senate, -- conference committee -- wednesday at 10 a.m., on c-span.org, the chair of the commodities teacher should -- trading commission discusses what powers the agency will make to crack down on abuses on cryptocurrency. watch live on the c-span
claim that the vice president could -- overturn the results of the 2020 election. president trump -- he says, quote, i have no right to overturn the election. here are his complete remarks. [applause] >> thank you all and hello, federalist society. you have a incredible conference. i want to think l.a. -- thank elliott. you read it the way i wrote it. [laughter] i was very humbled by it. elliott, next time you introduce me, it could be shorr.