tv Washington Journal 02232021 CSPAN February 23, 2021 6:59am-10:03am EST
returns for general speeches. at 4:00 members consider the naming of four post offices. on c-span 28:30, the senate natural resource committee hears from deborah haaland, president biden's nominee to be interior secretary. they resume debate on the u.s. -- on c-span3, federal reserve chairman jerome powell delivers his semiannual on military policy report to the senate banking committee. >> dayton, ohio mayor, a vice president of mayors talks about how the coronavirus pandemic has impacted city budgets. later, epidemiologist and
president and ceo of the public health nonprofit looks at the public health response to the pandemic. we will take your calls and you can join the conversation on facebook and twitter. ♪ host: judge merrick garland faced hours of questions on capitol hill from senators at his confirmation hearing for attorney general. the -- covered a myriad of topics and we want to know what your priorities would be for president biden's attorney general. if confirmed, what would you like to see him do? republicans, 202-748-8001, democrats 202-748-8000 and independence, 202-748-8002. you can also text us with your first name, city and state at
202-748-8003. you can send us a tweet @cspanwj or post your comments on facebook.com/c-span. take a look at how republican lawmakers are responding to the nomination of merrick garland for attorney general beginning with the tweet from congressman ken buck who wrote in order to truly prevent any political interference of the white house, merrick garland must commit to appointing a special counsel to investigate hunter biden. ted cruz asked questions of judge merrick garland, he wrote during the obama biden administration we saw the apartment of justice politicized in weaponized. i hope we won't see that repeated if merrick garland is confirmed. senator tom cotton, judge garland agrees it's wrong and immoral to discriminate based on race, i hope you will oppose any
of president biden so-called equity initiatives that treat americans differently based on the color of their skin. here's what democrats are saying. after four years of abetting countless trump crimes, they are using his hearing for made-up scandals under president obama. democratic california, it is stunning to listen to the current confirmation hearing of merrick garland for ag. republicans asking if you will keep politics out of the decision-making. how does that square with their silence on the political and as -- on political antics. it's interesting to hear so many of my republican colleagues ask if merrick garland will follow the rule of law as attorney general. of course he will. what are your priorities for biden attorney general. listen to senator dianne feinstein's questioning of the
nominee over what happened on january 6 the capital. [video clip] >> what steps will you take to ensure the perpetrators of the attack on our capital are brought to justice? >> i think this was the most heinous attack on the democratic processes i've ever seen and one that i never expected to see in my lifetime. one of the very first things i will do is get a briefing on the progress of this investigation, i intend to give the career prosecutors who are working on this matter 24/7 all the resources they could possibly require to do this. and at the same time i intend to make sure we look more broadly, to look at where this is coming from, what other groups there might be that could raise the same problem in the future and that we protect the american
people. i know the fbi director has made the same commitment. host: that was merrick garland at his confirmation hearing yesterday. a theme that ran through the hours of questioning. dick durbin, the chair of the senate judiciary committee told him garland's nomination will be approved i his panel next monday and he expects the full senate will confirm garland next week. senate republicans of agreed not to delay the vote which they can do for one week under the rules. if confirmed, what are your priorities for judge garland? allen in brooklyn. you are a first briton go ahead. caller: good morning. i was watching both live in some of the playback of the testimony. i was touched by the exchange with senator booker where he asked him what in his background motivated him to become the kind
of attorney general we saw and he told us about the grandparents of his family fleeing persecution in europe and being taken in and protected by the united states and his voice was catching with emotion there. it was very clear this meant more to him then nearly -- merely getting a job. i believe he was affected by the connection between his denial of a hearing in 2015 and the reasons for that, the placement of party over national interest that led mcconnell's -- mcconnell to hold up his nomination. and that led like two ends of a tightrope to the attack on the capital which was also placing party over country for the last four years.
i think you could feel the tension of that tightrope in his voice. and hoping we can get to a point where we can get to the other side and return to the kind of democracy we've lived in that his parents fled to as a refuge. it was touching and encouraging we might have someone in office who understands they got level what is involved in keeping our democracy rely -- alive. >> is that a priority for you? democracy and preserving it? >> it is excellent he was able to connect up his families particular motivation for coming to the united states, fleeing a threat and connecting it up with
a positive value of the democracy he is trying to preserve. it is not enough simply to be against something negative, to preserve the good, you must actively be in favor of the good and not just opposing the negative. i think he understands that very well. >> let's show that moment, a question from cory booker yesterday. >> i'm wondering if you could answer the question about your motivation, maybe some of your own family history in confronting hate and discrimination in american history. >> i come from a family where my grandparents fled anti-semitism and persecution. the country took us in and protected us.
i feel an obligation to the country to pay back. this is the highest, best use of my skills to pay back. i want very much to be the kind of attorney general that you are saying i could become and i will do my best to try and be that kind of attorney general. host: that moment yesterday from the confirmation hearing for the senate judiciary committee. you're getting your thoughts on the priorities for president biden's attorney general, and not yet confirmed, but from reports on capitol hill, a judge merrick garland is heading towards confirmation with bipartisan support. jack in new mexico, republican. caller: how are you? host: good morning. caller: it is a great day here in wagon mound. i hate to bother you work like this but did i leave my wallet
on your light -- on your nightstand. host: brenda in houston, texas. caller: that's appropriate of republican to call and ask that. i won't be as generous as the first guy, i'm not in that mood. how are you? host: i'm doing all right. caller: thanks for all that you do. the mueller report. i would like that revisited unredacted in the case opened again. the january 6 insurrection and all their public and leaders who were associated with this revealed and imprisoned. all police departments scrubbed of racist officers, of the list could go on forever that i'm going to be generous and let my other americans come through. thank you so much for taking my call. host: re-investigating the reopening up the mueller report.
george in michigan, an independent. caller: good morning. i wanted to thank you for hosting the january 1 show. i had to do an extra set of push-ups. i'm up to 250 a day modified push-ups. good for you. host: good for you. caller: also, you might want to take biden's press secretary about -- to me she comes across as a little harsh, a pompous. why don't you take her aside and teach her how to be a professional. my priorities are, i ran for mayor a number of years ago and have knocked on a lot of doors and noted in about one in every
four houses has a pet. one of the priorities of my life is now animal-rights regulations. i hope the attorney general will do something about that. we need to give some rights back , we owe a lot of land back to the native americans. we keep justifying we took their land and it just doesn't sit well for me. thanksgiving is a very sad day for me. i don't like what we did to native americans. hunter biden, it smells bad, looks bad, i don't know why they are hiding it. it just bothers me. i don't know. host: so you want that to be a priority. caller: well. it doesn't look good. i don't know if it's right or
wrong, but when they hide details and data, it just doesn't look good. i'm an independent, i'm trying to be kind to both sides because i have values from both sides. host: understood. let's show that moment from yesterday with senator chuck grassley who is the ranking republican of the judiciary committee asked judge garland about investigating president biden son. [video clip] >> my last question will have to deal with the investigation that is underway by some of us in congress about hunter biden. have you discussed the case with the president or anyone else -- and i don't expect you to
discuss your private conversation with the president, but members of this committee always ask judges or other people did you discuss with the president, for instance your position on abortion. so have you discussed this hunter biden case with the president or anyone else? >> i have not. the president made abundantly clear in every public statement before and after my nomination that decisions about investigations and prosecutions will be left to the justice department. that was a reason i was willing to take on this job. so the answer to your question is no. host: that was judge garland yesterday. fox news with their headline about those questionings on hunter biden, merrick garland treads carefully on the durham probe. hunter biden questions.
they raise this. judge merrick garland, president biden's pick vowed to be mindful of the tremendous responsibility of leading the justice department during his confirmation hearing on monday. they grilled them including john durham's russia origins probe and the hunter biden investigation. john in north hills, california. what is your priority for the attorney general? caller: good to talk down -- good to talk to you. i would like to see them empower a special counsel to investigate the media's collusion in perpetrating a false narrative of what happened on january 6. we know from several new sources that black supremacists and agitators were also involved in the insurrection as they were in the insurrection all summer of 2020. we can see from the new york post the john sullivan was paid
$70,000 for his footage of the capitol riot's. that 68 times the national average for footage. i think americans can connect the dots on what's going on here. host: what are the news sources? caller: a new york times post rights there the john sullivan was paid 35,000 dollars by nbc and cnn. host: the other outlets. caller: fox news also reported john sullivan was actively involved in the riots on january 6 and arrested in the capital. we can continue this false narrative that it was just trump supporters. let's come clean. host: have you looked at the charges by the justice department of those who were in the capital? caller: absolutely i have and yes there was an active collusion of the media to suppress the fact were black supremacists and marxist agitators involved. host: so you want that to be a priority? caller: i also want him to
investigate the black are premised riots and insurrection of the summer of 2020. our cities were burning. you had democrat politicians acquiesce in defund the police. where did my tax dollars go? was it given to pay off marxist agitators? it's get to the bottom of it. you want to talk abut insurrection, we sought this summer practiced by democrats politicians when they acquiesce to the demands. host: john, republican california. springfield, illinois, democratic caller. caller: good morning. i've been watching c-span for over 25 years. i think the callers are getting naughty year and nuttier and part of that has to do with -- nuttier and nuttier. i don't think we can counter it
with the time you have to devote. that being said, i don't know if it would be a great priority but i think -- might be something the administration seleka because -- admission -- administration needs to look at. giuliani also had issues with ukraine. i think there might be something there with all the pardons. i also think congress, you have a bunch of congresspeople that were insurrection agitators. i think that's important because if we don't come clean. if you have a party that deceives a large portion of the
population to say it's been fraud and there's an insurrection, everybody has cameras and saw that it was trump supporters. kevin mccarthy said it was trump supporters. the vice president is not even coming to the republican convention. so if this party needs to self evaluate where they are getting that and let's come clean. host: tie this to the attorney general's priorities. caller: i think pardons would be a good investigation. congress members and how they played a part in prior to january 6. and how they involve themselves and bringing them and funding them. giuliani would be another issue.
so there is so much corruption, the most corrupt administration we have and we have 74 million people saying this guy was better than lincoln. so how do you counter that. let's have hearings on donald trump. investigations to bring out the truth. >> host: let's go back to our previous caller and his priorities for the new attorney general to investigate the protesting we saw over the summer, over racial injustice and there was this moment from yesterday's hearing with josh hawley asking judge garland about his position on defunding the police. >> in the midst of this mounting crime wave there has been increasing calls by some
activists, members of the united states congress to defund the police. i think this sends the wrong message to law enforcement who feel very much overburdened, underpaid, under siege and also sends the wrong message to folks suffering the violent crime wave. tell me what your position is on defunding the police. will you supported as attorney general? >> president biden has said he does not support defunding the police and neither do i. we saw how difficult the lives of police officers were in the bodycam videos we saw when they were defending the capital. i do believe, and president biden believes in giving resources to police departments to help them reform and gain the trust of their communities. i do believe, and i believe he does as well, that we need to
put resources into alternative ways of confronting some actors, particularly those were mentally ill and those who are suicidal. so that police officers do not have to do a job that they are not trained for and from what i understand they do not want to do. so those resources need to go to mental health professionals and other health professionals in the community so that the police can do the job that they have trained for and so that confrontations if possible do not lead to deaths and violence. host: at another moment in yesterday's confirmation hearing, senator cory booker asked judge garland about how he would approach grace and bias in the criminal justice system. take a look at this answer. [video clip] >> you are in an agency that was formed to deal with systemic racism that was going on at the time. when you have disparate use of
the law, when you see aplidin americans and charmed in the josh when you see african americans in the african -- african americans in the criminal justice system. when the bar association says they can't get loans from banks, they can get jobs, they cannot get certain business licenses. where it is so dramatic there estimates it costs to african-americans in persistence of a wealth gap in our country where black families have 1/10 the wealth of white families. if you look at the impact of the law and the disparate impact on marijuana, it costs them billions of dollars more. my question to you now is assuming this position where you are called upon for that, what are you going to do about this outrageous injustice that persists and infects our society
with such a toll on black and brown communities? >> there are many things the justice department has to do in this regard and i completely agree that disparate results with respect to wealth accumulation, discrimination in employment, housing and health care availability, all of which we see now and the consequences of a pandemic which effects communities of color in norma slim more with respect to an -- you normally -- enormously more. one set of things we can do is the mass incarceration example. we can focus our attention on violent crimes and other crimes that put great danger in our society and not allocate resources to something like marijuana possession. we can look at our charging policies and stop charging the highest possible offense with
the highest possible sentence. host: merrick garland from yesterday's confirmation hearing. the hill newspaper frames is hearing this way. garland seeks to drop sharp contrast with trump era doj. your priorities for the presidents attorney general. ray in massachusetts, did you watch? caller: i did. host: what did you think of his answers? caller: i want to see what mitch mcconnell -- when he questions the judge. when he held back one of the senate seats that should've been obama, they weren't in it -- they were gone to save it for donald trump. the coward donald trump would kill -- i want to hear his desk him speak with the judge and get his opinion after that. josh hawley, he should be in
jail. all of those republicans for overrunning this country. host: stephen in sarasota, florida. democratic caller. caller: thank you. first of all i love the fact see spanish so neutral. i don't see a bias, i see a videotape of everyone's conversation. my wife is pro-democrat and i'm pro republican. i dared her and myself, we watched both sides of the programs. and we decided during this time we would listen to each other and have a conversation. what we learned was over the
summer she could not believe all the fires and things that happen to the courthouse. she didn't think that was existing and i said this is a video. and at the same time we were watching the news of people breaking into the -- after saying that, it is embarrassing how may people attempted to do this, but mostly they were following the rules set by the news media over the summer. basically the rules of the same. they don't have to worry about getting in trouble for it. they were getting bailed out of jail for damages and things like that because of the courthouses. and there was also black lives matter members proven to be in videotaped in the white house, not just outside the white house. the weights being betrayed by the news, it's not fair to either republicans or democrats because they are being persuaded
by the words being chosen by the commentators. it's not news, it's persuasion. i really like the fact the washington journal and c-span have basic just videotaping of this. i've got some close african american friends and we've talked about violence and prejudice and they said they're more likely to get shot by their other black friends than they are by a white police officer. and they said we don't understand when you're watching the news some of the stories are just -- it doesn't make any sense to them. host: let me bounce this off of you. this opinion piece in the washington post. he writes about senator hawley's line of questioning on defunding the police. he writes garland was not distracted by the station -- seditious sleight-of-hand, he explained using violence to disrupt domestic democratic processes as occurred in the
capital is the messy terrorism while attacking the courthouse at night in portland is not. he said both are criminal, but one is a core attack on our democratic institutions. how do you respond? caller: i believe both people should be charged not as domestic terrorists but with any kind of violence. at the same level -- if someone broke into my showroom there would be a crime involved. if somebody broke into the white house as a crime. the word sedition in these words to inflame the public, it's not logical to me we are inflaming this narrative when there was less damage in the white house, there was more damage at the courthouse. it's not a matter of how much damage, but you still have crazy extremists or people that are just too passionate and riled up making bad decisions in the crime end -- the punishment
needs to fit the crime. host: you're talking of the generous six attack on the capital, not the white house. stephen, your republican right? caller: yes ma'am. host: next time call on the republican line. duane in washington, independent. caller: i would like to see the priority of the ag to push for legislation and investigation into shell companies that these corporations and people like trump have where they tried to hide them -- who is on the board and who owns the company and where they get their money from and what they are doing great -- doing great -- doing.
my concern arose, having read the panama papers, what they have released so far. and other things like that. however, given the person who was just on and several other of your callers, you would think portland had been burned to the ground. i live a few hours from portland and have been there and it is still there and the fires, they did not burn any buildings to the ground. they did not burn any buildings to the ground in seattle. now seattle and portland have for a long time had anarchists group there and they've also -- and the anti-fascists have come along because of the white supremacists and nobody yet has even been indicted or charged
either in anti-fascist -- antifa or a black lives matter member for that -- for storming the capitol building. nor has anybody identified one. immediately afterwards the republicans were saying they were there and they had been identified by desiccant room, the word off the top of my head. host: we will leave it there for now. the front page of the under -- of the new york times reporting
this, justice is denied bid by trump to hide his tax record. the supreme court on monday rejected a last-ditch attempt by the former president to shield of the financial records. the show nuns -- prosecutor's manhattan from poring over his tax returns
investigating financial crimes. they will get access to eight years of financial records because of the supreme court's ruling. the president had this to say in reaction the former president saying for more than two years new york city has been looking at almost every transaction i have ever done, including seeking tax returns which were done by among the biggest and most prestigious law and accounting firms in the united states. the serene court never should've let this fishing expedition happened but they did. this is something which has never happened to a president before. it is democrat inspired in a totally democrat location completely controlled and dominated by a heavily reported enemy of mine. these are attacked by democrats willing to do anything to stop the almost 75 million people, of the most votes ever gotten
a sitting president. in an election many people thought i won.
we will get your reaction to this news in our last hour of the washington journal. on capitol hill today, xavier becerra, of the nominee to service health and human services secretary will get his confirmation hearing beginning at 10:00 a.m. eastern time right here on c-span. you can also watch on our website or download the free c-span radio app. and then also this morning, jerome powell will be testifying on the semiannual monetary policy report before the senate banking committee. watch live beginning at 10:00 eastern on c-span three. online north -- on c-span.org. on c-span.org at 10:00 a.m., a joint oversight hearing to examine the security failures which led to the u.s. capitol breach on january 6. it washington post headline, at
stake, the story of the capitol riot and who is responsible. back to our calls, your priorities for the president's attorney general. betty, good morning. caller: i would like for judge garland or someone to tell me why if america is so racially systemic racist and biased, why so many black and brown people are rushing our borders to get in here. do they want to be punished or what? host: what are your priorities for the attorney general? caller: my priorities for him is to be honest, to be nonpolitical in his office. that's my priority for him. host: ok. the attorney general nominee sat
for a confirmation hearing yesterday. if you missed it and want to watch parts you can go to our website and you will find on our player, gold stars mark the key moment of yesterdays testimony. so you can go through the hour quickly by going to those key moments. there will be a day two of testimony, this will be witnesses of his character testifying on capitol hill. you can go to c-span.org for more details on that. he is expected to get a vote on monday and from reports on capitol hill it looks like he will get a partisan support and be confirmed as the nation's top cop. bill in new york, a democratic caller. what do you think the priorities should be? caller: good morning everyone. i was watching judge judy yesterday. they had a guy caught on video camera with sound scratching
someone's car. judge judy was saying didn't you see the video and he stood there saying i didn't do it. i am giving this example to show the mentality we have today. as far as our justice is concerned, i would like him to focus on justice for everyone. what i mean is where no one is mistreated and everyone -- were no one is mistreated and those who need the most help get the most constructive help. when we say these things we should be talking about justice for everyone. the fact of the matter is we are all brothers and sisters here in this nation. we are the illegitimate children of our founding fathers. on that note i think our justice should focus -- are attorney
general should focus on justice. host: listen to senator ted cruz, republican of texas yesterday and his questioning, what he felt was important to bring out in his questioning of judge garland. [video clip] >> two plus decades on the court , you built a reputation for integrity and for setting aside partisan interests and following the law. the job to which you have been appointed is a very different job. and as i look back over the eight years of the obama biden justice department, in my view the most problematic aspect of that 10 year was that the department of justice was politicized and weaponized in a way that was directly contrary to over a century of tradition of the department of justice of
being apolitical. and not a partisan tool to target your opponents. so it is very much my hope if you are confirmed as attorney general that you will bring that reputation for integrity to the department of justice and demonstrate a willingness to stand up for what will be inevitable political pressure. to once again politicize the department of justice and use it as a tool to attack the political opponents of the current administration. eric holder, before he was nominated as attorney general had likewise built a reputation as being relatively nonpartisan and a prosecutor with integrity and unfortunately his tenure as attorney general did enormous damage to that reputation. as was previously discussed, eric holder described his role
as attorney general as being the wing man for president obama. am i right in assuming you do not view your role as attorney general as being joe biden's wingman? >> senator, i said i do not want to comment on any individuals conduct as any my predecessors or fbi directors conduct in any way. i can assure you i do not regard myself as anything other than the lawyer for the people of the united states. i am not the president's lawyer. i am the united states lawyer and i will do everything in my power which i believe is considerable, to fend off any effort by anyone to make prosecutions or investigations partisan or political in any way. my job is to protect the department of justice and its
employees and going about their job and doing the right thing. >> under the obama administration, the irs targeted the political opponents of the president. it targeted conservatives for their speech, and pro-israel groups, it targeted tea party groups, it targeted individuals perceived to be on the opposite political side is the administration. you commit as attorney general you will not allow the department of justice to be used to target those who are perceived as political opponents because they are political opponents. >> absolutely. >> also under the obama administration, operation chokepoint was used to pressure lawful organizations, lawful institutions, institutions for example that sell firearms to constrain their lawful activity and to use regulatory authority to abuse and force them to comply with the administration's stated policies. we believe it is appropriate for
the administration to use regulatory pressure to force lawful behavior to stop? >> i am not aware of this specific you are giving and i expect you don't expect i would've been aware of that. of course i do not believe as a general matter that regulations should be used to stop people from doing what they are lawfully entitled to do unless the regulation is pursuant to a statute in which congress has given authority to change the rules. host: senator ted cruz's line of questioning yesterday for the attorney general nominee. they are asking your priorities for the president's attorney general. politico is reporting garland is cruising through confirmation with sheet -- as gop support solidifies. following yesterday's session, senator chuck grassley said the muted reactions from his gop
colleagues suggested garland will win approval. i believe so is the quote he told politico. there were people who weren't totally satisfied but i didn't hear anybody get really your attainted. for the most part he answered pretty well. even some of the most conservative senate republicans said garland will get the nod. it seems likely, ted cruz said. it was frustrating that he answered very few questions, he approached it more like a judicial nominee, dodging every question. patricia in danny beach sends us this text saying garland gave the wrong answer about cops, that will perpetuate the destruction of cities. he agrees with replacing them with social workers and at the same as defunding police. he would not bring justice to democratic crimes. joy in state college, pennsylvania. what do you think? what are your priorities? caller: good morning.
i think what is going to happen and has happen from day one under the biden administration, every department, every head of those departments will politicize everything. the justice department will attack second amended rights, our first amendment rights and will go after conservatives. i just don't think garland is the answer. i think he is going to be biden's right-hand man and take advantage and he will not do justice. he does not believe in the constitution and i don't think he will uphold it just like biden has not done from the beginning. it's a sad state our country is in and i just don't feel confident in this administration and i do believe america will be under attack from within. when they can criticize the attack on capital but not criticize antifa and the black
lives matter movement that has destroyed cities, people say they didn't burn it. it is still there. they did, it was on tv, they showed stores including in people destroying but that's fine but the capitol riot, they are terrorists but not the nt for people? i think our justice department is headed in the wrong direction. host: jan, a democratic caller in western pennsylvania. caller: i noticed something. when the democrats are in charge and have the majority in the house and senate, all of a sudden the republicans criticize them doing the right thing or following the law and when trump was in in his attorney general, a session pushed back a few times. but especially the last one, they did exactly what trump
wanted them to do. and they were not a good, honest and trump did not follow the constitution. he thought he was above it. he looked like he was going to dictatorship. and now they come out, ted cruz is pathetic. he comes out and criticizes and keeps bringing up obama and holder. merrick garland is the one for attorney general. another thing, i am sick of hearing -- i've never seen anti-fa. but black lives matter, the people that are truly part of black lives matter, in black lives matter came out for peaceful demonstrations in the summer. some of these areas, a people lived in the areas that were opportunists and use that to go
and loot and do some other things. that were not originally part of that protest. host: so what is the priority for the president's attorney general? caller: corp. -- to clean up corruption in the last administration. the corruption in politics and trying to clean up some of the corruption in the country. host: jan mentioned the former president trump attorney general jeff sessions. he was leading the justice department when the president issued his family separation policy, take a look at the question yesterday by the chair of the senate to sherry committee -- the senate judiciary committee about how merrick garland would deal with the family separation policy. [video clip] >> the inspector general conducted an investigation of the zero-tolerance policy and
noted the justice department the driving force in that policy. there are still a lot we do not know about that policy and the accountability for the officials sponsor before it. let me ask you this. this committee will hold oversight hearings to get to the bottom of it, will you commit to cooperating with those investigations? >> i think the oversight responsibility of this committee is one of its very most important things. it's a duty posed by the constitution and i greatly respected. i think the policy was shameful. i cannot imagine -- i cannot imagine anything worse. we will provide all of the cooperation we possibly can. host: merrick garland from yesterday's hearing. if you miss these moments you can find them on our website, our video player will display the points of interest. the ones we are showing you,
with a gold star. caller: good morning. how are you? host: i'm doing just fine. caller: good morning to all and thank you c-span. the threat from white supremacists is the deadliest domestic terrorist threat facing the united states of america and that is above the immediate danger from even foreign terrorist groups. and this is according to the department of homeland security. so for future attorney general merrick garland, i would like for him to make it a priority of identifying and assuring conscientious prosecution of the systemic disenfranchisement of american residents who do not identify as white supremacists. i am hopeful we all can begin to feel as a nation and hold ourselves accountable and each other accountable as well.
thank you so much to you and your entire staff at c-span for all you do. thank you to the conscientious lawmakers in the halls of congress who continue to fight the good fight. host: thank you for watching and calling in. you tied to issues together in a similar way the new york times does in their front page. farland calls u.s. terror a peril and capital inquiry a priority. he was asked by lindsey graham of the senate judiciary committee about foreign terrorist attacks on u.s. soil. here is the question-and-answer. [video clip] > are you concerned that al qaeda and isis will try and hit us again? >> i am very concerned foreign terrorist organizations will try to hit us again, yes. i do not know enough at this point about the capabilities of those, but it doesn't matter which foreign terrorist that --
the terrible thing is the attack. with all the other things of the justice department has to do, it must always keep its eye on the ball with respect to foreign terrorist attack. i was sitting in my office, arriving at my office as the first plane hit the trade center and i was sitting in my office and could see smoke rising over the pentagon. i can assure you this is top of mind for me. >> one of the reasons i am inclined to support you is i believe what you just said is true. i think you have a very deep understanding of the threats america faces into my colleagues on the committee, al qaeda has been diminished, isis has been greatly diminished but they are out there and they are trying -- they will this year sometime, i hope i'm wrong, let us know they
are still there so it's great to hear the potential future attorney general understanding our nation is very much still under threat. host: yesterday's question from senator lindsey graham. we are asking you your priorities for the president's attorney general. diane in ohio, democratic caller. caller: good morning. i want to concur with the lady from washington, d.c. said and i want them to look into the fact that when it came to the black lives matter, it was not them who did the messing up and destroying property, it was outside agitators and i want the ag to look into this because i know what was said on 60 minutes with these people from qanon in
the northeastern ohio being rampant. we need to start looking at these people and stop talking about how black lives matter doesn't matter. it does matter and i'm tired of this. thank you. host: vicki in ohio. caller: my name is vicki. i want to know what they are going to do with the corrupt police. my grandson was denied medical treatment. for over 40 minutes. host: by police officers? caller: yes ma'am. and then they threatened me and my grand daughter. i do not think that that is right. i feel that my grandson, he was
only 20 years old. he died in vain. and nobody is willing to take the responsibility. >> i am sorry for your loss. lydia in portland, oregon. what is on your to do list for the next attorney general? caller: good morning. i hope that he commits to transparency. i hope he releases the mueller report entirely because the previous attorney general lied to us on the findings and then mueller was very tightlipped about what he could talk about when he was interviewed in congress. i hope you releases that and they also hope you releases the result of the durham investigation, whatever those may be. i hope that he commits to that.
one comment i want to make is while i appreciate you and c-span for what you do, i think repeating donald trump's lies without pointing out that they are lies only amplifies them and makes people believe them. you saw earlier one of your callers said portland burned down because they sought on tv. there a lot of people who believe everything on tv if they repeat lies without explaining that they are lies. host: it is impossible to be an instant fact checker. it is not possible if you're sitting in this chair. >> we know he did not win the election. 60 judges, many of them pull appointed by him. so true we cannot fact-check everything because he lies constantly.
but important things we know are false i think we should say, we should describe what the former president says. that it's been debunked or it's a lie just so we don't continue amplifying his lies. host: that is why we have phone calls from you and others with different perspectives. you can call in and refute what we just heard from the previous caller. another moment from yesterday i want to share that you can find on our website is the moment of silence marking the 500,000 deaths in this country due to covid 19. president biden held a moment of silence, candle lighting ceremony at the white house yesterday and delivered remarks. here is a little bit of what he has to say. [video clip] >> while we have been humbled, we have never given up. we are american, we can and will
do this. in just a few minutes, jill and i, kamala and doug will hold a moment of silence in the white house. we ask you to join us, to remember so that we can heal, to find purpose in work ed. -- work ahead. to show there is light in the darkness. this nation will smile again. this nation will know joy again. and as we do, we will remember each person we've lost, of life they lived in the loved ones they've left behind. we will get through this, i promise you. my heart aches for those of you who are going through it right now. may god bless you all, particularly those who lost someone.
god bless you. host: president biden from yesterday. he and the first lady along with the vice president and her husband at the white house yesterday holding a moment of silence to mark the grim milestone nearly a year after the worldwide pandemic was declared. back to our questions and conversation with you. your priorities for the president's attorney general. raymond in michigan, democratic caller. caller: how are you today? host: i'm doing well. thanks for calling in. what is on your to do list? caller: i'd like the ag to examine more police departments around --.
there was an episode about a black guy coming out of a store and walked across the street and was shot dead by two police officers. i think that's just horrible. host: understood. jane in massachusetts, democratic caller. what are your priorities? caller: just that he continue to report justice. i'm really concerned, i am a sexual support -- sexual assault survivor and victim. i live in northampton and the defund the police movement has really been a problem, there has
been a commission appointed in the summer by the city counselors really sort of driven to just defund not think through what that means for victims of rape and sexual assault. so i'm concerned about it and i hope he focuses on assisting victims and really exploring this because what's happening is that our voices are not at the table and it's very dangerous. the northampton city has just been asked by abolitionists who are anti-police to not allow armed officers to respond and it's very dangerous for people that are victims of the messing violence and i'm really -- domestic violence. i'm hearing a lot of bad things said about our police in general that are very dangerous and i'm just concerned. host: jane in massachusetts.
lawrence in new york, an independent. caller: personally i would like to see the attorney general address some of the things trump had been going after. such as, pedophiles and pedophile rings that had been going on as well as well as domestic. as far as black lives matter, the people that are asking for the ag to investigate the outsider infiltrators, there were infiltrators in anti-thought that went into the white house that needs to be investigating. the whole thing stinks, and i would like to see an honest government for once in the united states, but i really believe that garland will carry
out the things that obama tried -- wanted him to carry out, so not much going out. host: merrick garland is expected to get a committee vote on monday march 1 and from reporting it looks like he will get confirmed with bipartisan support to serve as the nation's top cop. we will take a break and when we come back we will turn our attention to covid economic relief to cities and localities. we will get the perspective from nan whaley, mayor of dayton, ohio and vice president of the u.s. conference of mayors and then we will discuss challenges faced by the public health community after this break. ♪ >> here our live coverage today on c-span at 10:00 a.m. eastern, the senate, ration hearing from javier beck's bank debt --
xavier expanding. on c-span3 the -- c-span2 the vote on tom vilsack and linda thomas-greenfield. at 10:00 a.m. on c-span3, jerome powell with his semiannual -- semiannual monetary report to congress. at c-span.org at 9:30 a.m. the hearing for debra haaland. also on c-span.org at 10:00 a.m., a joint oversight hearing to examine the security failures that led to the u.s. capitol breach. watch live coverage on c-span. c-span2, c-span3, c-span.org or on the c-span radio app. visit c-span's online store at sea -- c-spanshop.org. with the 117th congress in session we are taking preorders
for the congressional directory. every purchase supports our nonprofit operations. >> "washington journal" continues. host: joining us as the mayor of dayton, ohio, mayor nan whaley, and also the vice president of the u.s. conference of mayors. she is here to talk about the pandemic and the impact it is having on budgets. the congress is debating over on the house side, 1.9 trillion in economic relief, and at the same time yesterday, we reached the milestone of 500,000 deaths in this country. what has been the human and economic toll on cities like yours? guest: it is great to be on this morning with you. and i think like most cities across the country, we have seen
human impact, the loss of lives, the fear people have of infecting their friends and loved ones, really hampering how people move all around -- to move around and people who have to work in person, really laying that fear and fear for their own health and of the health of others on their daily lives. coupled with the economic impact that it has had narc communities. which has been significant. you add the social and emotional well-being. human beings are meant to be connected and touched by one another. and the pandemic has wrecked real havoc on our communities across the country. host: included in the $1.9 trillion economic aid package, free hundred $50 billion for states and localities -- 350 billion dollars for states and localities.
how would that be spent? guest: this is the piece of the package that mayors are most focused on. the majority of cities have really been left on the chopping block. in may with the cares funding, only the 38 top cities received funding. when cities get funding we know what we need on the ground, we know what we need for each community and each community has different needs based on its time, so allowing local communities to make those decisions we think are important both for revenue replacement for cities like mine, and then for front-line services like in dayton, without this funding we will not have a police or fire class without federal help. so, making sure that we have the frontline services, which are so needed during a pandemic will be really important. and finally this can really help
the economy overall. when you talk about tpp loans and -- ppp loans and other ways that the federal government has been assisted, we have seen the big companies get that funding, and i always say that the federal government defines small business as 500 or less employees. in dayton ohio, it is 50 or less. 50 to 500 is considered big businesses. small businesses have had a hard time accessing funding sources. so, giving money directly to local communities will help get the money to the ground and get used where it is most needed. host: "the washington post" editorial board takes issue with the $350 billion tagged for states and localities. they write "biden asked what could be cut, here are some ideas" and they write this, "it
is increasingly clear that the pandemic reduced states and local revenue far less than initially feared considering federal aid they have already received. moody's analytics shows that 31 states have enough money to fully absorb the economic stress of covid-19 without substantial budget cuts or tax increases. if the house bill contemplates $510 billion in new aid including $30 billion for transit, 100 $30 billion for public schools and 350 billion in unrestricted funds. by contract -- by contrast, $200 billion would be enough to cover revenue losses and extra school spending." how do you respond? guest: i think they need to get more on the ground like detroit, michigan, and pennsylvania, and dayton, ohio. a lot of our communities have
not recovered from the great recession. dayton before the pandemic had two of its best months on income tax collection in january and february and then the pandemic hit. we have not recovered from the job losses a decade ago. because of that, coming out of this recession will be more difficult, and that is about a quarter of the cities across the country. so, my message back is that we have been the ones on the front lines that have been fighting the pandemic doing whatever we need to do regardless if there has been federal support or not to support our communities and protect our families and we cannot continue to do that without federal help. i understand that when you are in washington, d.c. you can get pretty myopic about these issues, but i can tell you on the ground there are situations where families and communities are in dire situations. finally, if we do not fund cities, we will see this rescue
package go slower and the coming out of recession be a slower economy. economists agree that giving funding to state and local is the best way to really make sure our economy has a k-shaped recovery instead of a u-shaped recovery. i think that is the reason why the biden administration has been so supportive on state and local funding. they know how important it is for our economy to really come out as we open the doors of the pandemic really strong, and you simply cannot do that without strong state and local funding. host: mayor whaley is here to take your questions and comments about policy here in washington, but also problems that you see at the local level and how she is handling it as a mayor of dayton. but also, of what she is hearing from fellow mayors as she serves
from vice president of the u.s. conference of mayors. republicans, 202-748-8001. democrats, 202-748-8000. independents 202-748-8001 --, 202-748-8002. if you live in dayton ohio, your line is 202-748-8003. you can also text us with your first name, city, and state on that number. you say that cities are doing whatever it takes, even with or without federal help. what are some of the creative ways that cities and mayors like yourself are responding to the recession from 10 years ago and then this pandemic recession? guest: for the recession 10 years ago in dayton, we are a manufacturing hub for the world, and the change in manufacturing both by trade and automation have struck dayton significantly. the 2009 recession really did a
number of us -- on us, we lost 50,000 jobs overall and have not recovered because of automation. the work we have done is really an effort to redistribute our economy and invest in entrepreneurs and tech, we are the home to wright-patterson air force base, the largest employer in the entire state of ohio. using the opportunity to really spend in research and innovation in that sector and then off the base. and really grow and leverage those kinds of engineering and tech jobs. that takes time, and i think we were really seeing that coming into fruition before the pandemic. we invested in developing significant entrepreneur hubbs and downtown dayton and have seen quite a renaissance in our community around the small businesses and opportunities.
unfortunately the pandemic it and these are places that are hit the hardest during a pandemic, and so getting funding and getting them to make sure that they can get to pre-pandemic operation as soon as possible after it is safe healthwise is something that is important to us. during the pandemic, we have worked hard on access to vaccination where all mayors across the country are pleased that we were able to do whatever level of offense that we were able to push serious supply issues, of course, like everywhere in the country, ready to receive as many vaccines as the federal government can give us. repurpose sing our convention center and high school gyms and sometimes putting a vaccination clinic in as short as 48 hours when we know that vaccines are available. i think most mayors across the
country will offered vaccines will say yes and figure out how to get it on the ground in places where it is the most needed and then work through an equity lens to make sure that particularly the african-american community in dayton gets first right to these vaccines considering we have such low numbers nationally around african-american vaccination rates. host: going back to the economic investments you made, how much money did the city of dayton spend on those investments? guest: before the pandemic it was right around $10 million for our investment in network. we hope to be paid back from this. it was the largest investment we have made in 20 years around entrepreneurship. and, small business efforts. so, those kind of efforts when you talk about $20 million out of our budget, you cannot do that work, and on -- dayton is a weaj weak market, so it needs
that private sector support. that is why this federal funding is so important to cities. and, i think that is why the biden -- what the biden-harris administration knows and i know that getting the money to the people and to the groups that most need it is the best way to make the economy recover faster. i think president biden learn some of the good things about it when he was a leader with president obama and some of the slower things and we have shared that with the biden-harris administration and we are pleased with the forward formulas they put forward as well as the complete understanding of what cities are going through. i think both democrats and republican mayors support this, and i think we will all say that it has been affirming to have a partner in the white house that wants to lend a hand to help
communities rather than smacking us for any efforts that we have that we have seen in the previous administration. host: our first call from john, in nevada. an independent. caller: this is my question, when i go into debt i have to have a plan to get out of that debt, whether it be a monthly payment or i will sell something. what i would like to know if we will go into this debt, how are we planning on getting out of it? selling our redwoods? host: go ahead. guest: thank you for your question. look, i believe that the federal government has been thoughtless when they did the tax cuts on the very wealthy. right now our taxing system i believe is very unbalanced, putting the weight on the middle classes and the poor rather than the very wealthy, and that is something that congress can change and do the right thing by.
to call for austerity today, considering the tax cuts to the very wealthy has made our country the most unequal it has been in decades is something that i think is really bad policy. now is not the time to say now i am worried about the bottom line. congress can fix that quickly by doing the right thing and ending some of the tax cuts for the incredibly wealthy. host: brad in georgia. democratic caller. caller: i am originally from ohio, so i know a thing or two about dayton. i grew up there during the gm days. things have since changed quite a bit. and, obviously there is no point in arguing that savanna is vastly different in constitution and makeup than dayton. as i look at the stimulus money's going forward, i know that dayton as well as savannah have separate local income and
property taxes where the majority of the revenues are generated. savanna being a tourist town was really hit, and so their shortcomings are looking at just maintaining the public workforce. i wondered what position dayton was in and what the comparison is. is this money going to be stimulus money for infrastructure projects that were unaffordable prior to the pandemic? is this just to stop the bleed? where is this money going to go? guest: it is great to talk to someone from that beautiful town and i've heard a lot about the troubles that the pandemic has had, like you said, because of the lack of tourism and tourism cities have a significant challenge considering that is where most of their funding comes from. our funding mostly comes from income taxes and property taxes more for the school district and has been a more stable funding source because it -- and the
real estate market is one of those places that has not been affected as much unless it is commercial real estate. so, what we will do with the funding depending on the level that it is and we hope it is for the full amount is first that we will put back in place the things that we have cut down budget this year. like i said, those are police recruit class every year, the city of dayton has about one police recruit class that covers the number of police officers that are retiring, and so if we do not have the class last year. this will affect the number of police officers we have on the street. and in the fire class as well. those are two places that we cut. so, should we get the funding from the federal government, those are the first two places to really fill those areas. secondly, we took last year in june, we had 102 people retire
through our voluntary separation program. again, just to stop the bleeding because of the loss of income that we saw because of the pandemic. those have created holes across the organization that are not sustainable so we will be able to fill those back in. and, do some realignment that i think will be important. those will be the top priorities for us. next, there are places that we cut in capital. one-time expenses, and this can be anything from snowplows to police officer cars, we slowed down our capital recovery as well as paving of different streams -- streets. you have a paving regimen to keep streets up-to-date and we slowed that down and when we have had recessions before, and unfortunately dayton had that really big recession where unfortunately we have had to manage with less over and over
again and it caused significant pain for our community that has had to have less because of these incredibly difficult recessions. next would be capital outlays that we can put back in place. and should there be money after that, we have opportunities to get small businesses in a way that the federal government simply cannot. i know a lot of mayors are talking about how they can help small businesses through this. small businesses are the life let of local communities and they have been hit the hardest. when i am talking about small businesses, i am talking about places less than 50 employees. those places that do not have the ability to do the paperwork that the federal government requires. cities can really walk through and handhold those small businesses so that they are successful. they are so important to our communities. i know that a lot of discussion from mayors across the country, we are looking at that. finally, there will be opportunities to galvanize, we
hope, with the funding for economic recovery. we do not think it will be enough to take on the need that we will need to juice the economy, but it will give us a start. all of those things are important. i did mention that this will be used by public health for vaccine distribution and making sure that we come out of this pandemic will help cities be able to do that. we are doing that on a shoestring, but if we had funding we will be able to do that. the other thing i want to mention that the "washington post" said that cities had already received money. in the cares act in may, only 38 cities received direct federal aid. that means like cities like dayton had to get scraps from the state, which we did. and, a lot of that money went to providing masks for our
communities, providing those first ppe for our first responders and citizens. those kind of efforts was what we use the funding for, because like everyone else we were not prepared to deal with the pandemic, so we needed a lot of those changes of our -- the way we do our business every day and the way we provide services to citizens, that was what that funding was used for, and it only came at the very end when the state did not know what else to do with it. it was not really funding that cities could use smartly or as wise with this package coming across to the house and senate today. host: you called it scraps. how much do dayton ohio get? guest: a little less than $15 million and it specifically had to be used for the pandemic itself. dayton has 140 thousand people in the community and we distributed around 375,000 masks. most of our citizens did not
have access and could not find them or made them on sewing machines. i have to say, this is one of the things that as i wander to the coffee shops i will see someone with a dayton mask, so they have been used across the city. we used it for some funding for first responders that had to get help during the pandemic as well. host: elaine, olympia, washington -- a republican. caller: however, i am sitting here looking at the stats for dayton, ohio. and in january 2010 year unemployment rate was 12.7%. in -- it got down to 3% as late as december 2019, and right now
it is at 5%. so, i think it is really misleading that you are giving this pitiful me story to the listeners when the stats do not hold up what you are saying. host: let us get a response. guest: you are right about our unemployment numbers, and frankly there are lots of people that opt out of unemployment numbers as we know, they are one snapshot of a community. the way that we does fun -- we define how people come out of economies, how regions come out of recessions is actually through the total job number. i can tell you about one out of every four regions have not come out the great recession's job numbers. reading that the job numbers are lower than they were when the great recession began. that is how -- that is the
definition that economists take and how we follow as mayors how our economies are doing. we put a report out every year about this number, and i look through and see how dayton stacked up on the job numbers with communities across the country. i can tell you that this is an issue of midwestern middle-class cities. we are not alone. the manufacturing recession, this idea that people will just move where the jobs will come back has really affected our community. further, you talk about the unemployment rate. what happens in dayton right now is the wage is incredibly low. so most people do have jobs, you are right. they usually have two or three because they cannot afford to take care of their families with the low-wage in these jobs right now. and i frankly do not think that is american. i believe that if someone works every day they should have enough money to provide for their family and that is not the
case in most communities across the country. host: what impact would raising the minimum wage as is being proposed in this aid package have on small businesses in dayton, ohio and the residents of your city. guest: it would have a tremendous effect overall. every issue that we have comes back to the wage. i will give an example. in 2019 we put together an eviction task force. dayton is an affordable city. to rent a home is $750, which i know a lot of people would say wow, i can afford that. but because the wages so depressed, most of our folks have a affordable issue -- affordability issue. so, raising the minimum wage is a key to again the places that did not see a recovery from the
recession in 09 and 10 and have seen less. this has been studied by documentaries and the data is there about how unequal this has become. i would like to point out the this discussion about the $15 and our wage is almost sad, because if you take the 1969 wage in america and put it into account of what it would be today it would be $22 an hour for minimum wage. so $15 an hour still will not move a person into the middle class and is still lower-level of really providing for the family. and so, i think this is a quintessential question of what we are about as americans. as ohioans this is our core belief, if you work hard you should be able to provide for your family, and sadly that is not the case today. host: let us hear from mary, in
indiana. a republican. caller: i was curious to the fact that she said that for corporate we need to raise the taxes. here's the thing. you do that you are back to your high unemployment because they pay higher taxes and you lose people. when you go and talk about the minimum wage. most companies start out at eight dollars an hour. the government should be not to to -- should not determine how much a company pays a person. when you go and push it you will use jobs again. -- lose jobs again. you will want people who wants to count on the government. get out there, work, and support your family, always keep in mind that you have to think about what you are going to do for the future. guest: i do not disagree that you should get out there, work, and support your family. i think it is government's role to make sure that you were actually able to support your
family, and that is the situation we have gotten into today. this does not bear out, this whole idea of not taxing the very wealthy and suddenly we get better jobs, it is not going to be true. the federal government has tried this avenue and we have seen people in this quality-of-life get worse and worse. all i am saying is that government should play a role in making sure that if you work you should support your family. that is what people believe in americans. i know what ohioans believe, we believe in working hard, that i do believe when people work hard they should get paid enough to not worry about how to get to the food bank that evening both -- to support their children and making sure they are fed. that is what is going on right now and that is not american and not ok. host: we are talking to the mayor of dayton, ohio, first elected in 2013. greg is from your city. go ahead. caller: here in beavercreek we would like to thank you for
shutting down the two golf courses, and why did you keep the golf course in kettering opening -- open when it is not in the city of dayton. guest: it is good to talk to you. one of the things we did during the pandemic was shut down two of the golf courses that the general fund was funding and supporting. the third golf course you mentioned funds itself. so if it funds itself it came -- we kept it open. these are tough decisions we had to make during the pandemic when we are trying to provide services like police and fire services. you make my point on some of those tough decisions that we have had to make. it was not something that we reveled in doing, but sometimes you have to take a hard look. those golf courses that we had to close were not making enough money every single year. we would split fund dollars from -- into those golf courses and we had to make a decision that we front desk that we thought
our front-line services were more important. host: here's a tweet from one of our viewers who writes "i would love to hear what she has to say on local law enforcement's ability to pick and choose what to enforce. and we enacted a mask mandate, local sheriffs refused to enforce it. how do you deal with a belligerent department in a pandemic? guest: in dayton i am proud of our police officers and the work that they have done to do their best to encourage good behavior. an overall, dayton was the first city in the state to require masks, so we led the state in it. we really worked with the mask ordinance like we do with every other issue with lower-level offenses to get compliance and not carry on in it. dayton police has done a good job. that is not saying i have not had issues where officers have refused to wear masks and we
have had to deal with the issues. but, our police chief is a terrific leader and we have been able to move through that as we learn how important masks are. as i go across the community today, i do not see anyone inside not wearing a mask, and it says a lot about how people respect each other in our community and how they learned to follow the science. for those of you who do not watch, dayton has had a tremendous two years in 2019 in 2020. we have dealt with tornadoes because of extreme weather, a klan rally and then a mass shooting that killed nine people and injured dozens more, and threw it all our first responders have done tremendous jobs and then in 2020 with the pandemic and civil unrest we are undergoing police reform efforts that involve the police, community, and public defenders and 100 people involved to do
this work to see how we can be better with police and community relations. and, i think dayton, because it has done -- gone through such a difficult 2019 and 2020, there is a strength and resilience in our community. host: we asked our viewers their priority is for the president's attorney general. i am wondering what your priorities would be? guest: i am excited about hopefully smooth confirmation for attorney general garland. certainly, i know there will be discussion around how we look at lease reform. i am hoping that the attorney general does engage mayors in cities across the country in that work where we have been on the front lines again doing network, and i think we have a lot of things to say and a lot of opportunities to work together. i think the big issue for me
with the attorney general to really take the politicizing we have seen in the past few years out of it. we have great workers and great people who are committed to the justice department and it is such a cornerstone of our democracy, so really putting the pride back into the justice system of being a place that is fair and nonpartisan will be important. host: john in wilmington, illinois. independent. caller: hello. my question has to do with money. we currently utilize a tax system where we have trying -- people trying to defend corporate interests in and people worrying about how much money we are giving these poor people and everything else. we blame them for reading the rules and acting like rich people are not on welfare programs. i wonder what would happen if we look at our revenue system as a
business and realize that for the 98.6 percent of the country who makes less than congress $1.74, we only pay 70 percent of the income, and that 17% of that income utilizes 67% of the irs resources. now, wouldn't it be more advantageous for everybody if we just implemented a 1% sales tax on the purchase and selling of corporate stocks and commodities . from my investigation, that gives us 3.5 times the revenue we are making right now, freeze up the irs go after the major task golf -- tax golfers and considering more money is lost because of medicare and medicaid fraud because of a lack of investigation system that they actually collect from this 98.6%, it would seem to me that
all of our problems lie in the fact that how we -- in the fact that how we collect our money. if we had public corporations on the stock market having their sales of their stocks be taxed, then we do not have to worry about their income tax level, because their income tax is not being paid anyway because they are utilizing all of the loopholes that we have put in there. if every american knew that they were getting a $250,000 tax-free and if you are married, $500,000 tax-free, it would not matter what our government is spending its money on because we are not paying those taxes. that is something that really bothers me. host: i will leave it there so we can get other voices. guest: you have clearly looked into this more than i have. i am going to take your word for that and look into it. as far as how the tax system is done in the federal government i
have not researched it enough to give a qualified opinion back to you. host: allen in warren, ohio. a republican. caller: i want to talk about minimum wage. this is my opinion. the only one that will make out on this is the government. you are supposed to be helping the lower end people and by raising the minimum wage. ok, when their wages go up, everything goes up around the country, even the people who are not making minimum wage, we have to pay a lot of money, and you are not really going to help the people. everything they purchase goes up . so you are not really helping them out. i want to say thank you, joe biden, gas is up $.50 a gallon and immigration, all my god. somebody has got to help us. thank you, people. guest: this does not bear out.
this whole idea that everything raises a number -- with them and among wage number. economist showed that is not true. there are slight increases in some things, but overall putting more money and people's pockets helps people. i am not saying that this is some sort of free ride. i am saying pay people enough to support their family, and somewhere along the way we lost our way into making sure that we give tax cuts to really wealthy people on the backs of people who are working hard every day that have to really work and receive income to survive. and, even those of us that do it act like it is all right. and i think we need to look at ourselves and say is it ok and are we ok that if someone works 40 hours a week that they cannot support their family, and i am not ok with that. and i think that is a basic question that we are asking we ask about the minimum wage.
all of the data shows that we should wait -- raise the wage. when we show that it started when people were making 22 a dollars an hour in today's money. it is not a that is -- it is not ok to have a system where people who work cannot pay for their food. host: let us go back to the economics investments. what makes for a thriving downtown? guest: certainly, and this is what is so hard, this whole idea of destination building. it is something that i think that most communities long to get back to, the experience of a downtown is a place that is that collision of ideas and different people and that is wonderful and has great spaces for people to explore, and that are unique and local is really important. for us, we really worked in our
downtown to also make it not be priced out for folks, that we can make sure that people can of all economies live downtown. so, half of the housing in downtown is subsidized so we can get that mix of both race and class in our communities. we think that is the best way to really drive new ideas and to really grow our communities. there is this fundamental belief, i think, in cities that diversity is the way towards growth. and, that it also promotes different ideas and creates these collisions but you do not know what will happen. in dayton's history, we experienced that. dayton is known for being the home of the wright brothers who taught the world to fly and they collided regularly with charles
kettering who created the starter engine and the best african-american poet lloyd yet. this is not a new idea over 100 years, but we need to be intentional as we have seen during this pandemic how we can close ourselves off and only talk to who we want to in communities via our devices. downtown and community places that build community are really the breakers of creating the democracy where people can connect and have new ideas and they will not be in their siloed space. host: joseph from houston, texas on our line for democrats. caller: good morning. thank you so much, i appreciate you answering my call. you are the best guest i have been waiting for and i wanted to ask you a simple question that
is maybe economics 101. before the pandemic, businesses had a behavior that was not polite to consumers, and now that we are in a pandemic we are living in a different means of exchange for businesses. my question to you is how can i agree with politicians up and down the list when politicians feel that small businesses are important but our attitude as a consumer feel like they have taken advantage of us as customers and, in the capitalist way that i was taught was let the consumer decide whether the business should be open or not, and it seems like politicians are dictating what we want to
believe. they should be supportive to open their doors. i want to make this clear. i am a democrat and i believe in increasing people's wages, but the business owners have to change their behavior what they used to be. can you tell me that it -- the transition between covid-19 versus beyond covid-19 how consumers feel more privy to be supportive of opening up small businesses and supporting tax funded businesses, small businesses. please? guest: i will try to answer the question the best i understand it. i think what we really have when it comes to small business versus large companies is you want to talk about an unbalanced playing field that exists. amazon has paid no money in taxes. think about that.
this enormous conglomerate that most of us have something that comes to our doorstep is not taking -- paying taxes, and in the small business has a lot of challenges on its front doorstep, paying property taxes and likely it did not get evaded because it was not as large and did not have the attorneys that large companies that were bringing these large numbers of jobs in had. it does have challenges of keeping stock up to make sure that it sells to a community, and certainly when we talk about retail, the pandemic has had incredible effects on retail in small business. i think we have to be cognizant, almost two different worlds we are talking about. particularly with these large companies. that is where i am most upset. they do not pay taxes, they are not paying a decent wage and they are making incredible profits for their stockholders or for the people that are at
the very top, and i think that is the challenge of our country. for us with the small business is, there are -- they are our lifeblood and what makes us unique and supporting them is key, and making sure that they have the resources when we come out of this pandemic and making sure that they can get the ppe and the loans that the companies get very easily is very important. i hope i answered your question. but of course, there will be local businesses that you do not agree with, and again it is your democratic right to decide where you shop or not to shop. one of the things that is becoming so difficult is that some of the businesses are becoming so large it is impossible not to schaller -- not to shop at them and it might be the only place were you can get what you need. that is the concern we have around these really enormous
businesses eating every small business in our small communities. host: you said you would not run for reelection, what is your political future? guest: it has been a bittersweet decision to not run for mayor, this is a great setting and i have had the honor of serving them for eight years and have been at city hall for 16, so i was like 12 when i started. i think it is time to do something different. we are working at three with my family and friends and we will make an announcement in the coming week. host: you wear one of the youngest women chosen for a commission seed. thank you very much for your time, we appreciate it. guest: thank you for the great questions. host: absolutely. coming up next we will talk about public health officials and their engagement in the vaccination programs. we will talk about those challenges with epidemiology -- epidemiologist brian castrucci
who is the ceo of the beaumont foundation. we will be right back. ♪ >> listen to c-span's podcast. this week dr. michael all-star hall, an expert on infectious diseases and one of the leading epidemiologists talks about the road ahead. >> we have a very long road ahead. i can say that without any doubt at this point, expect more curveballs. if we had this interview 10 weeks ago we would not have been talking about variants in the way we are now, and look at where we are at talking about the severe challenges they present. i would expect the unexpected. it is still out there. as much as we can do. at this point, this is not going to be over with anytime soon. >> find the weekly where you get your podcasts.
>> "washington journal" continues. host: brian castrucci is the president and see me -- ceo of the de beaumont foundation. here to talk about the role of public health and the covid-19 pandemic. what is your foundation? guest: good morning and thank you for having me. it is a private philanthropy dedicated to helping communities achieve optimal health. we were founded by pete de beaumont who founded brookstone. brookstone was about practical tools, and we have taken that idea so de beaumont creates practical tools to help communities in the area, policy change, developing partnerships and creating a strong public health workforce. host: how is an organization like yours responding to the pandemic? guest: we have done work in
messaging, supported partners and been very fortunate where we could health our partners at the association of state and territorial health officials and the very important association of public health labs. we were there to kind of support and lift morale among workers and really pitch in where we can. host: a year into this, almost a year, and yesterday marking 500,000 deaths due to the disease. what are your thoughts about the role of public health professionals and -- that they have played in the last 10 months. guest: i think public health professionals have thrown everything that they have at this virus and at the response. the problem is that we did not give them a whole lot to throw. we always knew that this was coming. it was never an if, it was always a when and yet we have
consistently underfunded public health, and so we created a vulnerability to emerging viruses and finally the bill came due. host: you are an epidemiologist by training, what have we learned about preparedness in responding to a pandemic? what needs to happen to combat this one and prepare for the possibility of the next one? guest: i think what we have learned is that our collective safety, security, and economic prosperity is really dependent on a robust public health system. and, most people who are watching do not think about how public health affects them every day. but we are seeing it right now, tobit is shining a spotlight. and so, we need to make sure that we have better partnerships between other sectors and public health, and modernize our public health system. we spend $700 billion every year
on defense, and i cannot think of a nation that has taken that many american lives on american soil. we need to reorganize our spending and make sure we protect the nation against the most challenging threats, and right now, that is emerging viruses. host: as the health debate and the 1.9 trillion more in public -- an aid to combat the pandemic, and the previous bills how much went to public health infrastructure? guest: the bills have given us money in the short term. in a way that we can respond, but it is not building the overall infrastructure. that is going to take a long-term commitment. we definitely are doing things in the short term to help us get through the pandemic, which we have to do.
but when this is over there are some vulnerabilities that are existing and one of them is the public health system and/or chronic underfunding of the public health system, and also, systemic injustice that we are much more acutely aware of now. if we do not address those things through policy change, then we will remain vulnerable and everyone is talking about the vaccine and getting back to normal. getting back to normal is a normal where we were vulnerable to this kind of devastation, and that is partly due to widening racial gaps in income, housing security and paid access to sick leave, and having a public health system underfunded and understaffed to actually fight this virus. we need to reckon with the fact that most of the devastation that happened here was somewhat preventable and we were
unprepared to do it. host: what does the ideal public health infrastructure look like to you? where does it exist in this country? guest: in the u.s. it will be at the state, and in strong coordination with the federal government. what we need, the first thing, we need a better data system and we need the federal government to fund a data system and give that to the states so we have information so that we can make the right decisions and make the right plans and employee the right strategies because right now, the data is spotty as -- at best, and that is not a way to make progress in our -- or prevent a disease or roll out a strategy. we need the information, and then we need train people and we all know that governmental public health may not pay well so we need a loan repayment to get some of the best and brightest people in the nation
going into governmental public health because safety, security, and economic prosperity is what it -- what is at risk. host: we want our viewers to join in, the role of public health professionals in combating covid-19. eastern or central part of the country, 202-748-8000. mountain or pacific, 202-748-8001. public health professionals, 202-748-8002. at the white house, covid-19 briefing yesterday dr. anthony fauci spoke about the next steps in combating covid-19. here's what he had to say. [video clip] >> the bottom line of what we need to do looking forward and the clear need in this is the development of potent antivirals directly acting on sars-cov-2. similar to what was done with the drug development program for
hiv as well as for hepatitis c. and what i refer to is the future development of therapeutics will be based on the identification of vulnerable targets in the sars-cov-2 replication cycle in the design of drugs to inhibit vulnerable targets as i mentioned, we are beginning this and this is the direction of the future. host: brian, your reaction to hearing that from dr. fauci, and explain what he is talking about with these therapeutics and how they would work. guest: dr. fauci is a brilliant immunologist, and i appreciate his dedication to wanting to find medicines that will help us with coronavirus and future viruses, but i really want to talk about public health,
because while we are waiting for medicines to feed -- to be developed, people are still dying, and what we know right now is that vaccination plus mask wearing plus social distancing will get us through this coronavirus pandemic. it will get us back to the economy that we want and get us back to the enjoyable things in our lives. so, medicine is great when it is available, i will be the first to take it. until we get there, we have to focus on public health. host: when it comes to vaccination, what challenges are you saying to the distribution of them -- seeing to the distribution of them because of our public health infrastructure has been built. guest: the distribution has been challenging. i am eligible for the vaccine in maryland, and i just kind of got sick of dealing with the six or seven websites that i have to deal with to get an appointment.
this is not how the rollout should have been. we should be engaged in our communities and public health system. we have this process of going to a website and coming up with an appointment and then going when the appointment comes up, that is a lot of control. i am in a home with two working parents and two kids and that is a little more predictability than i have right now even in my own life. so, this past weekend in philadelphia, physicians held a walk-up clinic to get vaccinated. we need mobile clinics and communities that need it most, communities of color and where there is a high rate of people over 65. we need to help people get the vaccine, and that doesn't necessarily mean that they have to confirm -- conform to a rigid process that is not delivering. host: your group did a survey of people being hesitant about taking vaccines, what did you
find? guest: there are three things that we have to think about when we talk about vaccines. the first thing is that we have to personalize it. we have to talk about people protecting their families. this is not about a national responsibility, it is about protecting you and your family. we have to be positive when we are talking about the vaccine. don't talk about the things that will happen if you do not take it, talk about the things that you will happen -- happen if you take it, hugging a grandparent, going to a vacation, enjoying a holiday with your family. these are things that we can get to if we have good vaccination update. and lastly, we cannot be judgmental. i would even say we need to retire the word hesitancy. when someone says you are vaccine hesitant that can be stigmatizing. we need to normalize concern, this is a brand-new vaccine, we should be engaging people with the simple statement i understand that you may be concerned about the vaccine,
what questions can i answer for you. and i encourage everybody, employers, clergy, girl scout troops, fantasy football leaves, -- leagues, create spate -- safe spaces without judgment where you can share your stories without -- about taking it. if we are not talking about the vaccine there are those who will spread misinformation will fill the void. let us get the conversation going among folks who were somewhat concerned, and that is often people in rural communities, young republicans and young black americans, and young women. host: let us go to new york. caller: thank you for taking my call. i would like to expand on something you said. you mentioned that this is largely preventable and a result of chronic underfunding. i could not agree more.
however, i have been trying to circulate a proposal to address exactly your point, andday comew can we sustainably fund this if we do not see the authority to fund this -- do not cede the authority to fund this to the federal reserve? we do this because there are unexpected downpour -- downturns that are catastrophic. covid has emerged as the new catastrophic event that the fed was designed to prevent. it has increased. it is no longer the 100 euro event it was since 1918. -- 100 year event it was since 1918. there are increasing amounts of
epidemics and pandemics because of climate change and other reasons. and if i could, greta, please. guest: thank you for your support. we are able to fund things that we prioritize, and we are able, across administrations, to fund defense. and we need to prioritize public health in a way that everyone understands what is at stake. coming out of this pandemic, we have to be clear with everyone. if you are on the left and believe in strong hug -- public health support, you should talk about supporting it. if you are more conservative, we have lost 100,000 businesses because of this pandemic, so we need to help everyone understand that health is like the foundation of your house. if it is not working, everything
else is in jeopardy. so no matter who you are, what sector you are in, whatever you do in your life, you cannot do any of it without health. and i mean community health. i think we have to encourage everyone to think about how do we go forward, how do we fund public health, and we have to not make just a one budget cycle commitment. we have to invest in infrastructure over the long term. host: jeffrey, ready for your follow-up? caller: yes. thank you. i would like to follow-up with the questions. i totally agree with your premise and it needs to be funded over the long-term, but as i have mentioned, we have shown historically that we are incapable of doing that. since 2005, hhs plans have been chronically underfunded. we have been warned about it through nearly annualized
pandemic simulations where all of the principals charged with administering a pandemic response have warned lawmakers to fund this appropriately. they have refused to do so. we have seen, even more recently, and perhaps even more critically, the politicization in an age of populism has compounded the problem dramatically. we did not act quickly. as a result, of not acting on the science, this is what has happened. we are among the worst in the world despite the preeminence of our scientists and the excellence of our public health institutions. we need to mitigate the risk of this happening again by funding it from a source that cannot be politicized. and i just wanted to make one more point clear. it does not mean that communities will not be involved.
it will absolutely be a question of providing community support and federalize coordination to harness all of the know-how and all of the resources we have in the most efficient way. host: ok. i have to get some other voices in. brian castrucci, go ahead and respond. guest: you should be here. you are doing my job for me. you are right. if we cannot get past the partisanship in this moment, then i do worry if we will ever get past it, because if we have not learned from covid -- let's be clear, covid bosco mortality rate is not inconsequential, but it is low, and the threat going forward is that the next time this happens, if that mortality rate is 10%, this would be much more devastating.
we need to batten down the hatches. we need to see the threat. if china parked enko aircraft carrier off the coast of georgia, there would be think of immediate response. we need to respond accordingly. host: rick in birmingham, alabama. -- victor in birmingham, alabama. you have to turned on the television. listen and talk to the phone. caller: mi on? -- am i on? host: yes. caller: yes. thank you for c-span. i would like to ask your guest -- host: all right. we will move on to william in emporia, virginia. caller: good morning. i am wondering why you would open up your borders to let everybody in if, when they get here, we have to take care of
them and give them the vaccination. i encountered an article in the newspaper the week before last that biden will give -- $4 billion. we give all this foreign aid to these countries, but they are still trying to get here. host: william, let me tie this back to the topic. brian castrucci, what protocols are in place for delivering this vaccine? the public health officials have any criteria for who they give it to? guest: we know who are eligible, but ultimately, everyone needs the vaccine. i am not an immigration specialist, but i know that if you are in the u.s. or on the planet, infectious disease rarely respects country borders. so whether someone is in mexico coming to the u.s., whether someone is in england, eventually, if we do not have everyone vaccinated throughout the world, this infectious
disease will continue and will continue to dish and we will continue to see death and devastation from it. we have to make sure we have not only a vaccination strategy for the u.s., but a vaccination strategy for the world, and that is where the u.s. rejoining who is important. and it is important to help other nations purchased the vaccine and distribute it. this is all hands on deck. and so even if we had good herd immunity in the u.s., that would not make us invulnerable to economic issues in supply chains or other fassett's -- or other facets when it comes to the virus. so we need a global perspective when it comes to the vaccination. host: did you have a chance yet to read to the world health organization's go report on the origins of this disease? guest: briefly. host: what was your reaction?
guest: i think we need to understand all the opportunities for viruses to grow and develop in our world, and doing that work -- the work and examining what happened and getting in and having a good understanding is going to help us prevent this in the future. we have been saying for a long time that we knew there would be coming colleagues that would actually -- be coming to -- plagues that would threaten the community, so we would identify and mitigate emerging viruses so we can achieve the heights community can. host: how would you appropriately invest in mitigating this type of pandemic? what is needed? guest: greta, i am sure you will be surprised. it is investing in public health.
it is investing in science. it is investing in the infrastructure so that we can more quickly sequence viral variants. it is having surveillance infrastructure that can find viruses before they get too far. we can have an immediate and exacting response so that this does not get to the point it has now. with covid-19, the only solution, really, at the point in which it was endemic throughout the u.s., was a vaccine. what we did not have was good governmental trust. we need to rebuild governmental trust, rebuild public health infrastructure. we need to make sure there are policies in place that protect our society before viruses even land on our shores. we need paid sick leave, livable wages, and partnership between public health and other sectors.
this is the foundation of your house. you always pay attention when there is a crack in your foundation. our foundation is cracked. we are not as healthy as we should be, but we deserve to be, and we need to prioritize that in the biden administration and every administration after. host: what is viral sequencing and why is it important? guest: this is important for finding all these variants. it is looking at, when someone has the virus, what type of virus it was. is it different from what we have been dealing with and seeing? there are many different variants now, so what we have to do is no that those -- is know that those variants are there and that our vaccines might work differently for the different variants. for our strategy, we have to know. i am a kid of the 80's, so i remember g.i. joe telling me knowing is half the battle, and
we have not even won that half. guest: caller in virginia. caller: i have been calling in for 18 years now since i have started my business called virginians for education, which is a custom trailer i pull around to schools and other host organizations that wish to have a fitness prevention program -- a sickness prevention program supplied on site. host: randy, can you tie this to the topic? caller: prevention. the physician just mentioned prevention. pe in schools, we have been playing games with that. we have been worried about children's health and safety. until families have support --
because we are not winning education and health battles with law and order and authority. host: let's talk about physical fitness. brian castrucci, your response. guest: physical fitness is incredibly important and having good pe requirements in schools is a necessary rung in the strategy, but we need to think more broadly. we need to think about communities. even if you have pe in schools, do you have places to exercise in the community? are there places where you can get fresh fruits and vegetables? his housing even affordable? because if you do not have a place to stay, fitness becomes less of a priority. we need to think through how we build communities that support everyone's health. the former cdc director has always asked how do you make
health? it is more conference of them physical activity or pe, but that is one of the things we can look at and work on. it is much broader than that. host: marion, iowa. jody is from there, watching us. good morning to you. caller: hello. thank you. i apologize. i just tuned in after brian was introduced, so i hope i am asking the right question here. i want to say biden should be reaching out to you. you are practical minded. you have touched on points of interest that have spiked my concern regarding the vaccine and so forth, stuff like we do not normally hear, like the foundation of your family being health. absolutely. my father has cancer, etc. besides that, your approach, especially people who have concerns of the vaccine.
i'm not an anti-vaccinator at all, but i am concerned that my grandmother passed away after her second shot of the vaccine, and it really concerns me. right now, my 74-year-old mother just received it recently, her first shot, and she is doing fine, but there are -- what i have heard -- pockets around the world in which some nursing care centers have people that are passing away shortly after the vaccine, and i am concerned and i want someone to address it and you seem like the very person to reach out to, because you brought that to our attention. i think the concerns are valid and they need to be listened to and responded to so that we do not those out-of-the-way and more people get this -- we do knock those out-of-the-way and more people get this vaccine. host: thank you.
i am sorry for your loss and i hope your dad does well with treatment. here is the thing. the more people you vaccinate, the more likely there may be mortality, but it might not have anything to do with the vaccine, and so you are looking at something temporally and saying, ok, grandma got the vaccine and then she did poorly. you actually don't know -- she may have done poorly without the vaccine. and what i know is that the vaccine has gone through safety trials. we have had every study, every phase, with the fda involved. we have ongoing safety monitoring boards and we are constantly looking to see if there is a causal relationship between taking the vaccine and then that subsequent mortality, but we have not found evidence
of that yet, and so what we have been seeing is that the vaccine is safe. severe side effects are rare and are mostly manageable. and there are some normal side effects. that is just her body reacting to it. -- just your body reacting to it. but it is easy to think through correlation as causality. so every time i wear a blue hat, i have never been attacked by a bear. that does not mean that blue hats keepaway bears -- keep away bears, but that is an easy conclusion to draw. i want to push you a bit. your family is in jeopardy. they are older. there is jeopardy from the coronavirus, that we know. for every piece of evidence -- from every piece of evidence we have, the vaccine is safe.
i think you can go ahead and protect your family with this vaccine. host: phoenix is next in missoula, montana. caller: good morning. richard feynman, the physicist, said that, in science, you should always go back to the first experiment and make sure it is correct, and this gentleman has put his faith on pcr testing to come up with the 500,000 death count. a nobel prize winner, the inventor of the method of pcr tests, said you cannot use it to diagnose anyone. and this is the test we used to say that a person dying of cancer has also got this coronavirus. and if you look at the pcr method for isolating viruses, it
is nothing like the old days. what they do is they take a random piece of rna from a patient, they lop off the end, they treat it with foreign dna. it assembles itself into a genetic strand. if they place it in cancerous monkey cells and they die, they say, look, we have a lethal virus. this whole thing is just fake science. pcr is a great research tool. it should not be used as a diagnostic. host: let's get a response. guest: unfortunately, i have not won a nobel prize and i respect those perspectives, but what i know, having spoken to people throughout the u.s., is that we have lost mothers, fathers, sons, daughters, to this virus, and debating whether we are using the right test i think is not getting us to where we need
to be. we have lost 500,000 american lives, shuttered 100,000 american businesses. we are not getting the things -- not getting the things we want -- not getting to do the things we want to do. instead of debating how many deaths, it is too many regardless of what test you use. i want to move our country forward, helping people have confidence in the vaccine, to take the vaccine, to wear masks, and to socially distance. when we do those things, we can be covid. host: mr. castrucci, thank you for your time this morning. guest: thanks. host: we will take a short break. when we come back, we will get your reaction to the supreme court's ruling yesterday that the president's tax returns must
be released to the state of new york. back in a few minutes. ♪ >> with the biden administration now leading the federal response to the coronavirus pandemic, follow the latest at c-span.org/coronavirus. search c-span's coverage of news conferences as well as remarks for members of congress. use the interactive gallery of maps to follow cases in the u.s. and worldwide. go to c-span.org/coronavirus. >> washington journal continues. host: and we are back. here are the phone lines for you to get your reaction to the supreme court decision yesterday on the former president's tax returns. republicans, dial in at (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002.
text us with your first name, city and state at (202) 748-8003 . we will read those comments as well. you can send us a tweet. the handle is @cspanwj. or post your comments on facebook.com/c-span. the washington post headline -- supreme court iends trump -- supreme court end trump's bid. the washington post notes this morning that none of the three justices chose for the court, neil gorsuch, brett kavanaugh, and amy coney barrett, publicly objected to the subpoena seeking his assiduously guarded tax record or concluded that his defeat was tainted. that from the washington post. from the new york times, they write, one focus of mr. vance's
inquiry is whether mr. trump's company, the trump organization, inflated the value of some of his signature properties to obtain the best possible loan while lowballing the value of properties to reduce taxes. prosecutors are also examining trump's statements to insurance companies about the value of various assets. grand jury secrecy laws will keep the records private unless mr. vance's office files chargers -- and enters the evidence into a trial. cyrus, the men had an district attorney, will get access to eight years of financial records of the president. your reaction to that. the new york times notes that
they did an investigation into the president's financial records and they -- their examination showed the former president showed millions of dollars in losses, went years without paying taxes, and faced an irs audit a decade ago. the records reveal that mr. trump had paid just $750 in federal income taxes his first year as president and no income taxes at all in 10 of the previous 15 years. he had written off $26 million in consulting fees as a business expense between 2010 and 2018, some of which appears to have been paid to ivanka trump while she was a salaried employee of the trump organization. the new york times says that the investigation they did a few years back gives some insight into what the manhattan district's office may find when
they look at eight years of financial records. they go on to report that the actual bottom line after losses and expenses was much gloomier. in 2018, while mr. trump's public filing showed $439 million in revenue, his tax returns declared $47.4 million in losses. mr. trump's many golf courses, a core component of his business, empire reported losses. the income from licensing his name to hotels and resorts had all but dried up by the time he entered the white house. in addition, mr. trump has hundreds of millions of dollars in loans, much of which he personally guaranteed coming due in the next few years. gary in newport, kentucky. what is your reaction? caller: not much at all. i mean -- [laughter]
his tax returns do not put any money in my pocket. it is just -- you know, it is what the irs does and i think it should be an irs prbl -- problem. they will handle it. linda in florida. democratic collar. caller: it is about time. we deserve. i did not like the fact that they said it could only be seen by the people prosecuting him. we as the people who paid his check should be able to see those taxes also. thank you. host: here is how the former president reacted. he said this -- for more than new dose years -- for more than two years, new york city has been looking at every transaction i have ever done, including seeking tax returns
done by the biggest accounting firm in the u.s. the supreme court should have never let this fishing expedition happen. this is something that has never happened to a president before. it is all democrat inspired in a totally democrat location, new york city and state, completely controlled and dominated by a heavily reported enemy of mine, governor andrew cuomo. they are willing to do almost anything to stop the almost 75 people -- 75 million people who voted for me in the election, an election which many people feel that i won. i agree. caller: good morning. the only comment i would make is, being an accountant, i do not believe there is any politician that you can look at the tax returns and not find something that you could
question. what is going on now is just nonsense. his tax returns must be three feet high. who has the knowledge to look at them? they talked about values, there's depreciation, accelerated depreciations, to say that someone is going to get tax returns is nonsense. it is just another way -- they will just not let this man alone and that is the way it is. host: what do you make of the new york times examination of the records they were able to get a hold of? you don't think there's some -- go ahead. caller: it should be illegal for anybody to get a hold of his tax returns. it is illegal. that's number one. number two, i do not think there is a bigger enemy to donald trump than the new york times. they have no credibility. they lost their credibility along time ago. host: ok.
john in east troy troy, wisconsin, republican. caller: thank you for taking my call. i don't have any problem with the government looking at donald trump's tax records. what i have a problem with is i want to see joe biden's and. i want to know however vice president -- how a vice president became a millionaire. i am more interested in that than a private sector guy who became a multimillionaire by building things. host: ok. next. caller: i agree with the gentleman's point. donald trump came into office as an outsider. i do not even do my taxes. i pay someone to do them. donald trump pays many people to do his taxes.
he signs off on them. a billionaire does not do his taxes. do you think bill gates does his taxes? of course not. this is ongoing. this is political. and if there is a problem with donald trump's taxes, the irs will be more than up to the job. whether it is knocking on his door or sending the notification that there is an issue. that is what they do. host: if he has not been paying new york state the amount of taxes that he owes, is that a problem? caller: if it is a state income tax issue, yeah. that is a fair point. at the state level, they would have to investigate that, and that is fair enough, but the point is that will not solve the bigger problems with regard to what the gentleman just said about the politicians. politicians like maxine waters, 40 years in washington, lives in
a $6 million home outside of her district in los angeles. i wish about stuff like that. -- wish chuck todd would be curious about stuff like that. host: ok -- "tested the scope and limits of presidential power. the supreme court rejected mr. trump's argument that state prosecutors cannot investigate a sitting president. this time, the court denied mr. trump's emergency request to block a subpoena for his records, effectively ending the case. the ruling is also a victory for the manhattan district attorney, cyrus vance, a democrat. he will have access to mr. trump's tax returns and material that they view as vital to their inquiry into whether the president and his company manipulated property values to
attain bank loans and tax benefits." let's go to carolyn in baltimore, democratic collar. hi. caller: hi. good morning and thank you for c-span. i think he should have submitted his tax returns already. he said this has never been done before. when he says that, it is because presidents have always submitted their tax returns. he is the only one that has not. and sometimes come he plays the victim when they talk about, oh, no one has cover president trump like this before, it is because he was tweeting every day. i think it is great that he is finally being forced to submit his tax returns. i would love to know if he is liable to anyone else so that we could see if he was able to be influenced to cover it up. i mean, everybody should want to know what the president's tax returns are, and if the irs told me they want in my tax return
and i did not give it to them, i would be in jail. host: bill pascrell, democratic congressman, tweets i have been demanding trump tax returns for quattro years -- four years. we continue to be blocked by a trump appointed judge slow walking the case. jimmy gomez, democratic congressman, rates, last year, the new york times found what trump wanted to hide. not only did he spend decades aggressively avoiding paying his fair share in taxes, but he also employed some legally questionable maneuvers, but there is still more to learn. we still do not know the extent of trumps self dealing and his financial ties to foreign adversaries. today, thanks to scotus, we are closer to an answer.
that is from congressman jimmy gomez. brian in brooklyn, democratic collar. what do you think? caller: i have a feeling that there is a lot to be discovered from looking into these tax returns and that it is worth doing for the american people. it is not a political witch or anything like that, that there is a sense of justice that we all feel that this president has something to hide. and that it deserves to be looked at. and for those that disagree, you know, i would say i am trying to understand your point, but you know, it is not like we are asking for his birth certificate or anything, so that is all i have to say. host: brian in new york. the former president will stake
a claim as the 2024 presumptive gop nominee. former president donald trump will reassert himself as the dominant force in the party and stake a claim as the presumptive nominee. when he delivered a speech sunday at the annual cpac conference. he wants to show his unrivaled and undiminished hold on his base. they say the former president will undoubtedly receive a wildly enthusiastic reception at the conference in orlando. his previous addresses to cpac audiences during his presidency were punctuated with standing ovation as he served up red meat and once literally hugged an american flag, the paper says. we will have coverage sunday. they also right in the washington times that this time, trump is expected to lay out an agenda that includes
confronting china, attacking biden's immigration policies, and loosening big tech's grip on political discourse. also speaking at cpac is congressman matt gaetz, republican of florida. he tweets after the art of the deal, the art of the comeback. virginia in daytona beach, florida, republican. hi, virginia. caller: hi. i just wanted to make a statement. the democratic collar like -- the democratic caller like three calls before said her tax dollars went to his salary. he did not get a salary. he had to get one dollar according to the law. he had to get something. i think you took a dollar -- i think he took a dollar, but he
donated all of his money over the last four years to different charity. he never got paid but a dollar a year, and so everybody is going after some kind of tax money, they are looking for --, well, he did not spend any of the tax money in office. none of our tax money went to anything he spent, so leave them in alone. he was in private business. he paid his money. he is back in private. leave him alone. i mean, what good will it do going after him now? host: if he did not pay his full tax bill in 2016 and 2017, federal or state, are you ok with that? caller: yes, because the irs would have done something back then, but now they are going to go back and even look further, which is ridiculous. if they ok'd it, why would they
go back? that is like you are let out of jail and now they are going back and retrying your case because they are afraid he might get elected again. it is all politics. whatever you say, it is politics. they would let anyone else go. if it was anyone else, like the other gentleman said. host: heard your point. rolando in texas since this text saying the american supreme court gave the american people a win. we will get to more of your calls, but first want to share some reporting. the washington post says the president, president biden's choice for omb cheese -- chief, is close to defeat.
it was the person who was formally head of a liberal think tank organization. there are two gop senators who have announced their opposition, met romney and susan collins. -- mitt romney and susan collins. senator joe mansion also -- joe manchin does not support. one senator told me it is basically hinging on murkowski, who has not said how she will vote. sinema of arizona declined to comment as well. eddie in wisconsin, democratic collar. what do you think? caller: he gets away with so much stuff and criticizes everything. he just got away with so much stuff. lake the virus.
-- like the virus. "it is fake. leavitt. it will be gone." these republicans had their heads so far up him that he can do anything he wants -- no. they are trying to rerun in 2024 when he could not even hike knowledge that he lost and still cries about it, ignited a riot, and now he will try to get the support for 2024? no. i think they should go through his taxes. and the woman who said he only got one dollar a year, how the heck does she know? trump got away with lying and deceiving people so much that he has people like that lady from florida -- they have their heads up him so hard that trump could blow a nose and they would believe it. i think he should be
investigated. he did not keep his promises. like with the wall -- host: all right. linda in trenton, michigan, democratic collar. -- caller. caller: i agree totally with the tax returns being released and that should be done with anybody in higher office, including the senate and congress. anybody who aspires to those offices should make their tax returns readily available. if they do not to come it always gives the image that there is something wrong and i think they should be released and when you do not, this is what happens, but concerning trump, i do think that he has done business that has been disreputable.
people say it flies in under the radar. i do think they should investigate those taxes and that, moving forward, anybody else that runs for office also. host: ok. all right. linda in michigan. let's hear from carla in wayne city, illinois, a republican. your turn. caller: if he has to show his tax returns, than any former president should have to show their birth certificate -- returns, then any former president should have to show their birth certificate, tax returns, and anyone in office should do it. let's go to pelosi and schumer, because they are not clear either, and they are not clean. host: members of congress to have to disclose some of their financial information. caller: not all.
there's a big difference. if you're going to make him show his tax returns, then they should have to show there's. -- theirs. host: that is carla in illinois. renee in newport news, virginia says it is time. as far as i'm concerned, al capone can get got -- if al capone can get got for not paying taxes, so can donald trump. caller. caller: i have a question about his tax returns. how does he employ his daughter, his son and be paid by the taxpayers? i have never in my life heard of anybody say anything like that in my life. i do not understand it.
this is the first time in my life that i have ever heard of president be allowed to employ his children as employees in all the history. i have never heard of it. also, why should the taxpayers be paying for his children for their security? they have enough money to pay for their own security. i am very upset about that and i would really like to know why there cannot be a constitutional amendment to our constitution about next presidents to employ their children as employees. why are they still a president? it is unreal. host: thank you. donald trump junior writing the supreme court will allow the persecution of donald trump bite -- trump by vindictive democrats to continue. my thoughts is what he writes.
opensecrets. says this about reporting requirements. -- are required by the ethics in government act of 1978 to file annual reports disclosing their personal finances. disclosing this requirement is overseen by the congressional ethics committee. the ethics offices of government agencies and the u.s. office of government ethics. these forms record earned and unearned income, assets and related transactions, liabilities, contributions made, gifts received, nongovernmental positions held, travel, and various agreements into which the filer has entered.
information relating to the spouse, and dependent children of the filer, is also reported in many cases. janice in colorado springs, democratic collar. we lost her. we will go to don in new mexico, independent. your turn. caller: good morning. i would just like underline a comment made earlier. al capone did not go to jail for his nefarious acts. he went to jail for tax fraud. one of the things that trump did come although he did not take a salary, he also had all of the secret service and everyone use his facilities, golf courses, and the estimate is that the federal taxpayer spent over $148 million. we also have to keep in mind that we got testimony under oath
from cohen when he was appearing before congress. he disclosed how they value and revalue the properties in order to defraud the state of new york, so if i just look at trump, i think he has some really serious legal problems ahead of him. thank you. host: all right. cheryl in alabama, republican. hi there. caller: i wanted to say that they should check everybody that goes to washington, the republicans and democrats. they should not take a financial report. they should have a tax return. that is for everybody. and how in the world could you go and be a representative of this country when you will not
pay your student loan like aoc and she says she is not going to pay it and she makes $174,000 that americans pay her? and nancy pelosi put $1 billion to cybersecurity -- to a cybersecurity company that invested -- investigated president trump for russia and -- everything should be checked. everything. host: all right, cheryl. daniel, tennessee, democratic caller. caller: good morning, greta. host: good morning. caller: thank you for what you do. i want to echo carolyn's comments from maryland. i so enjoy the callers. she pointed out the previous
presidents showing their tax returns when running for office. can you imagine if he had done that? we would not be in half the situation we are in now. we would not be -- ok, let me put this out. my dad was an irs agent in the field for 30 years. i was an auditor in the field for about 30 years. the nut does not fall from the tree far -- does not fall far from the tree. we learned that people do not like to be wrong, to be told that they need to pay their taxes, that they need to follow certain procedures and rules and regulations, and somebody has to do it, but you know?
just think if he would have showed his taxes 4.5 years ago. it is just -- it is mind blowing. i will get off here. thank host: you for listening. ok. elizabeth in washington, d.c., a republican. your reaction to the supreme court's statement allowing them and had an attorney office's access to these records? caller: every president puts their assets in a blind trust. president trump would not step down. i am not quite sure what makes
-- host: in riverside, california, an independent. caller: i was questioning if you would play what he said before he was elected that he would show his taxes. what happened to that statement? why is that not being played back? host: ok. david in albuquerque, new mexico, a republican. caller: check this out. you and everybody out there talking about trump's taxes, but you yourself, greta, know for sure that they will not stop messing around with president trump. did you hear me? host: we hear you. i am not following you. caller: greta, you guys do not stop. you are on a roller coaster ride with outbreaks on this man.
-- ride with outbreaks on this man. you are a democrat, greta. you say you are on both sides, but every time i see you guys in the morning, you guys never stop reeling this man. you do not let him live in peace, but will not talk about the quid pro quo that biden did, what nancy did, where they got their millions. not only that, but in this stimulus, they are giving money to everyone else except for us. what about us that don't have money, greta? host: all right. north carolina come independent. -- north carolina, independence. caller: good morning, greta. i listen to this every day and it surprises me that, just like the last caller, that you are biased. so blind that they will not see.
it shocks me. and this premise of, oh, trump -- you are ragging on trump. that does not mean trump is golden and nothing is assorted -- is authoritative about him -- nothing is assorted about him. trump's first on the menu. host: we are listening, alexis. caller: i am sorry. i thought you had hung up. i am here. host: we heard your point. thank you. we will go to rocky in englewood, ohio. a republican. caller: good morning. i wanted to make a comment in regards to ms. pelosi should be checked out real good because
she is the one who created the situation. it is amazing to me that -- how politicized the whole thing and blame everything on trump. of course, now mr. biden is in there with his kid made millions and his family made millions over the other stuff. i am 70 years old. it is funny. i am just laughing like crazy. i believe they should bring back that -- and open up the oilfields again. host: new york times reports that the case in new york, by getting the tax returns, represents a self-reported accounting of revenues and expenses and often lacks the specificity to know, for
instance, if legal costs related to hush money payments were claimed as a tax write off or if money from russia moved through mr. trump's bank accounts. the lack of that level of detail underscores the other records that mr. vance wants access to. in addition to tax returns, mr. trump's accountants must also produce business records on which they were based and communications with the trump organization. such material could provide context and background to decisions mr. trump or his accounts made when preparing to file. the former chief of the irs criminal investigation division, the tax returns were useful, but could only be understood with additional information attained elsewhere. rick in virginia beach, republican, you are next. caller: good morning. host: good morning.
caller: i agree with a couple of the collars, especially -- a couple of the callers, especially the one saying you keep bashing trump. if he is going to have his taxes looked over, let's look at everybody. we have an incoming president. let's start with him. let's see what we uncovered with his taxes, and especially nancy pelosi. she is a troublemaker. she will just not shut her mouth for nothing. she goes out and buys ice cream and you see her on tmz. why can't we start with them? host: rick, are you there? i guess not. ron in florida, democratic collar. -- caller. guest: thank you for taking my call -- caller: thank you for taking my call. everybody has to pay taxes. it is a matter of honesty.
he promised to show his taxes and he never did. i think most americans learned their sense of morality in kindergarten and i think donald trump has not learned that yet. that is about all i have to say. thank you. host: ok. hugh in indiantown, florida, democratic caller. your reaction? caller: what is the big problem releasing his taxes? everybody has to. you get audited, you have to show your taxes. he should show his taxes. thank you. host: carol, republican. caller: i think it is horrible that the supreme court did that because i do not think it is right. ok, the government sees your taxes but that is a private matter. that is not something that is recorded like deeds. it is just nobody else's business. host: he did not pay the taxes
that he owed -- if he did not pay the taxes that he owed the government, you do not think that is the government's business? caller: it is the government's business, but not the facebook and tweeters, not something to be printed out, unless they find him guilty of something, but just to report his taxes when they do not actually have anything, just for the public to be looking at, that's like digging into people's personal history. they could do that to anybody. and they don't have anything on him, so i think it is just, like i said, some of the big truly nears just wanting -- big truly and heirs -- big billionaires just wanting to keep him out of the computer business as far as tweeting or talking to the public about anything. it is just another way of getting into his business.
a person's taxes -- no. that is like getting into somebody's closet or pocketbook. that is nobody's business. host: you're talking about the new york times obtaining this information and reporting on it? caller: newspapers, computers, being out there from all these people. they did let him on twitter or facebook. i don't even have a computer. yet they want to publish his life. that is what i just think is shady. host: nancy in carmichael, california, democratic caller. caller: i wanted to get back to the point of this, which is the supreme court is allowing prosecutors to examine trump's tax returns for the first time. he has, like the rest of us, been about the law, and no
prosecutor has been able to examine his tax returns. host: so you are saying move forward. caller: i am saying yes. it is about time. the man has been given a get out of jail free card for four years. it is time for him to behave like every other citizen, be willing to have his tax returns reviewed by government prosecutors to see whether there is anything wrong with how he has been handling his finances. host: ok. nancy's thoughts. ending at their. on capitol hill, javier becerra is getting ready to testify this morning at a confirmation hearing before the senate health, education, labor and pensions committee. live coverage here on c-span. you can also watch on your mobile phone on c-span.org or listen with our free c-span radio app.
>> live this morning on c-span, california attorney general xavier becerra is the nominee to be the next health and human services. tomorrow, testifying before the senate finance committee, you can watch that at 2:00 eastern time. we will have that live on c-span3. again, mr. becerra has been serving since 2017. he has filed 100 lawsuits against the trump administration to block policies and rules changes. he is a member of congress and will be the first latino to head the hss.