tv Washington Journal 09162021 CSPAN September 16, 2021 6:59am-10:02am EDT
>> live today on c-span, a discussion on the impact of the taliban takeover in afghanistan with pakistan's ambassador to the u.s. at 10:00 a.m. eastern. at 1:00 p.m., peter meyer and abigail spanberger debates the efforts to repeal the 2001 and 2002 authorizations for use of military force. after that, kristi noem on the role of government in an event hosted by the hoover institution. later, a debate between the candidates of the governor of virginia, terry mccullough, and glenn duncan. live coverage at 7:00 p.m. here on c-span. >> coming up, citizens for responsible energy solutions' heather reams and league of
conservation voters sara chieffo discussed plans to combat climate change and push for green energy investments. then kedric payne talks about ethics pledges made by the biden administration. "washington journal" is next. ♪ host: good morning, it is thursday, september 16, 2021. the senate is set to adjourn for a pro forma session later today. in committee yesterday, olympic gold medalist's -- medalist simone biles and other gymnasts give texts meant -- give testimony against the fbi and jerry nasser -- and larry nasser. we are getting your reaction to
that. if you are in the eastern or central time zone, 202-748-8000. if you are in the western or -- the mountain or pacific time zones, 202-748-8001. you can send a text to 202-748-8003. include your name and where you are from. catch up with us on twitter at @cspanwj or facebook. you can go ahead and start calling in now. as the washington tent puts it, the hearing yesterday march the first official public inquiry into the fbi's failure to investigate the largest sexual abuse case in the history of american sports. this was simone biles from yesterday. >> there can be no keener revelation of a society's solo than the way it treats its children. it is the power of that statement that empowers me to be here today.
i don't want another young gymnast, olympic athlete, or any individual to expense the horrors i and hundreds others have endured before, during, and continuing to this day in the wake of the larry nasser abuse. to be clear, -- >> take your time. >> to be clear, i blame larry nasser and also blame an entire system that enabled and perpetrated his abuse. usaid domestics and be u.s. olympic committee's -- olympic committee knew i was abused before i was aware of their knowledge. in may 2015, the former head of usa gymnastics women's program
was told by my teammate maggie nichols that she suspected i was a victim. i did not understand the magnitude of what was happening until the indianapolis star published its article in the fall of 2016 entitled "former usa gymnastics doctor accused of abuse." yet, while i was a member of the 2016 usa lepic team, the fbi nor the committee contacted me or my parents. while others have been informed that investigations were ongoing, i have been left to wonder why i had not been told. this is the largest case of sexual abuse in the history of american sports. although there has been a fully independent investigation of the fbi's handling of the case, neither u.s. og nor uscp have
been made the subject of the same scrutiny. these are trusted with our sport and our athletes yet it feels like questions of responsibility and organizational failures remain unanswered. host: simone biles yesterday before the senate judiciary committee. the committee scheduled his hearing after the justice department's inspector general report determines the fbi had not adequately addressed accusations from at least 40 women who said that larry nasser molested them over four -- over 14 months. the report said that the top fbi officials knew of the accusations in july 2015 but did not alert officials in michigan where he worked. it'd not respond to the accusations with the utmost seriousness and urgency they were required and the inquiry was inadequate, investigator said in the front page of the
washington times. here is more from the hearing room yesterday. this is maggie nichols. >> while the big dreams ended in 2015 when my coach and i reported larry nassar's abuse. i would try to compete at the university of oklahoma where i was named the all-american and an eight time national champion. i reported my views to u.s. to gnostics over six years ago and still my family and i received few answers and have more questions and by dozens of other little girls and women at michigan state had to be abused after i reported. and sacrificing my childhood for the chance to compete for the u.s., i am haunted by the fact that even after i reported my abuse, so many women and girls had to suffer at the hands of larry nassar. usa gymnastics and the u.s. olympic and paralympic committee and the fbi have betrayed me and
those who were abused by larry nassar after i reported. the cover of my abuse and the fbi's failure to interview me are a well-documented in the oig report. after i reported my abuse, my family and i were told by steve penny to keep quiet and not say anything that could hurt the investigation. we know there was no real investigation occurring. while my complaints with the fbi and larry -- larry nassar continued to abuse girls. from the day i reported my molestation by larry nassar, i was treated differently by u.s. ag. not only did the fbi failed to conduct a thorough investigation, they knew usag created a false-negative where larry nassar was allowed to retire with his reputation intact and return to michigan state university, thus allowing
dozens of little girls to be molested. host: maggie nichols yesterday. asking you to give your reaction this morning, the criticism of the fbi. phone lines split regionally. if you are in the eastern or central time zones, it is 202-748-8000. if you are in the mountain or pacific time zones, 202-748-8001 . we will take you through much more of that hearing throughout this first hour of the washington journal today, but setting aside time for you to call in and let us know your thoughts. dan is up first out of massachusetts. good morning. caller: i know for a fact i had a family member who was taken advantage of and abused and they give her hush money. i don't know how all of these
senators make these decisions when their own friends. two shut kids up. they have their own issues. i don't understand how the fbi director is not called out here. why did they not bring christopher wray in? they should bring these fbi agents to the justice department and say why did you do this? they were as guilty as larry nassar himself. i don't know how the politicians are all involved and now they are going to save the day and they care so much. they have things going on in their own chambers with young children. host: you mentioned christopher wray who took over the at the i in 2017. he did testify yesterday -- took over the fbi in 2017. he did testify yesterday. here's part of his testimony. [video clip]
>> good morning. on behalf of the entire fbi, i want to begin by saying to the brave women who testified this morning, and i gathered there were some others here today who were among the many whom larry nassar hurt deeply. i am profoundly sorry to each and every one of you. i'm sorry for what you and your families have been through. i am sorry that some many different people let you down over and over again. i am especially sorry that there were people at the fbi who had their own chance to stop this monster and 2015 and failed -- this monster in 2015 and failed. that is inexcusable and we are doing everything in our power to make sure it never happens again.
before i became be i director, i was generally familiar with the larry nassar story after his arrest in 2016 and i remember being appalled there were so many people who failed to do their jobs and keep these young women safe. after i became fbi director and i learned there were people at the fbi who had failed these women, i was heartsick and furious. i immediately ordered a special review by our inspection division to try to get to the bottom of it. that review led in part to the inspector general's on a review and i'm grateful to the inspector general for his team's work. the actions and inactions of the fbi employees detailed in this report are totally unacceptable.
these individuals betrayed the core duty they have of protecting people. they failed to protect young women and girls from abuse. the work we do is often complicated and uncertain and we will never be perfect, but the kinds of fundamental errors made in this case in 2015 and 2016 should never have happened. as long as i am fbi director, i am committed to doing everything in my power to make sure they never happen again. host: christopher wray yesterday. in terms of specific actions from the fbi, this from the washington post, "the agent accused of failing to investigate larry nassar and lying about it has been fired by the fbi. michael langman, who is a special agent in the indianapolis field office interviewed mckayla maroney in
2015 about her abuse. he left his job in early september according to those individuals." the ig report that christopher wray referred to specifically singled out for special and -- for special agent in charge, wj abbott, accused of how he handled -- and he communicated about a potential job opportunity with the u.s. olympic committee. he retired from the agency back in 2018. plenty of calls for more action from the fbi going farther from that, including on the front page of the washington post. sally jenkins, the headline, " larry nassar is in prison but why aren't his enablers?
it is time for his enablers to -- in this cover-up." we are getting your reaction to yesterday's hearing. this is charlie out of knoxville, tennessee. good morning. caller: good morning. i noticed that comey did not send in any apologies. i feel sorry for these young ladies. never, ever trust the fbi. host: doug in massachusetts is next. good morning. caller: thank you for updating us on what happened to these last few agents. i think it is clear that the guy needs to be a little bore -- a little more investigative. it is not a trustworthy institution anymore. russia gate, you have the governor of minnesota, january 6, this cover bit -- this
cover-up. can you tell us if those people retired or fired cap their pensions? host: the reporting on the special agent in charge who retired in 2018 does is to have a pension and plenty of outrage about that in some of these columns. caller: that is the scary part. it is no jail time, they resign and keep their pensions and they move alone -- move along and it will be forgotten until the next fbi thing comes up. host: howard in atlanta, georgia. good morning. caller: i think it is pretty much a system that very few people should be shocked about because of the way the fbi conducts investigations. they cover it up like the police .
i am very saddened about the girls and what happened. how did that not reach the top? 130 girls or so, how could it not reach the top? i think there covering up to save themselves. host: the colors talking about the reputation of the fb, -- the fbi, the washington times delved into that saying the fbi is trying to rebuild christopher wray's image. the trump administration begin with the firing of james comey and ended with his guilty plea to falsifying documents. kevin mccabe was fired for media leaks. a scathing report found a slew
of inaccuracies and omissions from the fbi's applications to monitor carter page. just some of the recent stories you might remember regarding the fbi. this hearing yesterday, the fbi taking plenty of criticism for it -- for how it handled the abuse investigation. brenda in new york, did you watch yesterday? caller: yes. i think what happened to these young ladies is horrible. i think the whole government needs an overhaul. not just the fbi but the cia and all the rest. for this to stop, it has to be investigated at the top. i hope that in the future nothing like this ever happens again to anyone, to anyone's child or dr. -- or daughter. host: members of congress
promising changes. more from the hearing, this is the democrat from illinois speaking with horwitz -- speaking, michael horowitz is his name. he wrote the scathing report over the summer asking about the false statements made by fbi agents who were charged with conducting this investigation initially. [video clip] >> any of the fbi employees involved in this case, did they miss resentment -- today misrepresent details to you? >> they did. the person who wrote this report falsely testified to us about what he did in connection to that report as well as other matters we asked him about and special agent abbott made false claims about the steps he made in 2015 when these allegations came in, but also about his
jobseeking efforts with the u.s. olympics committee. >> did his misrepresentations reach the level of criminal violation? >> they violated criminal law sufficiently. what we do is make the referral to prosecutors to assess them because that is needs to make the decision whether or not there will be charges right. host: -- charges brought. host: showing you the committee hearing yesterday. if you want to watch it in its entirety, you can do that at c-span.org. phone lines split regionally setting aside this first hour to hear from you. 202-748-8000 if you are in the eastern or central time zones, 202-748-8001 if you are in the mountain or pacific time zones. this is joanne in new york. good morning. caller: i am so happy i was able to catch this show this morning
because i watched the hearing yesterday. they really need to do something about the fbi. it has been over and over and over again. i have watched everything they have done for the last four years. i am retired and i watch your show and i watched the hearings. the fbi needs to go, period. they should lose their pensions. they really should. what happens to those -- what happened to those girls is a disgrace. they never even sent a female fbi agent to talk to young teenagers. host: who else should have been there yesterday? should it have been the fbi agents -- the fbi director's from 2015 and 2016? did you want to hear from merrick garland, the attorney general? you said comey? caller: comey.
comey is very corrupt, it is a known fact. they're not doing this country a favor. this is terrible what is going on. when you have young girls such as those girls, i have seen what they have done to trump. i have seen what they have been doing all along. it is terrible. for these young olympians to have to go through that, imagine what other people will go through with the guy -- with the fbi? but what they did to roger stone . what did he do? was he a criminal? come on. this is terrible. host: more from sally jenkins in her column for the washington post saying, "christopher wray dithered about improving policies and procedures, but it
was not the policies or procedures that failed, it was the people in charge. they failed to do their fundamental duty. now merrick garland is failing to do his, joining the list of graying government functionaries who think an agency reputation is more potent than a girl's body. after six years of asking where the officials were who knew about the charges against larry nassar and nothing, whose deliberate inaction let him victimize more women even after mckayla maroney told everyone about him." -- told everyone about him?" caller: i feel so site for those young girls. thank you. host: this is darren in baltimore, maryland.
good morning. caller: my comment is, the fbi should not have been trusted from the beginning. i look at things throughout history. he had j edgar hoover running some type of disinformation campaign against the black panther party. the people in charge of these government agencies, there was corruption and -- host: are you still with us? i think we lost to the caller. this is sam in michigan. good morning. caller: they would not have even needed the fbi if the parents of the fbi -- if the parents of the gymnasts had gone into the examination room and oversaw larry nassar. that is what i think.
host: rudolph in los angeles, good morning. caller: i take it a step further, i think that the administration let it go too far. i am not sure how long it has been going on, but they need to go back to find out when was it first reported. it should not take 15 years for this to all come out. the administration has been on notice. it would not have come this far. host: more from the words of the women themselves who testified yesterday. this is aly raisman. [video clip] >> over the past few years, it has become painfully clear how a
survivor's healing is affected by their abuse -- affected by the handling of their abuse. it disgusts me we are still fighting for basic accountability over six years later. in 2015, it was known at least six national team athletes had been abused by larry nassar. there was even one of the athletes abused on film. given our abuser's access to children, stopping him should have been a priority. instead, the following occurred. the fbi failed to interview pertinent parties in a timely manner. it took over 14 months for the fbi to contact me, despite my many requests to be interviewed by them. the records established that steve penny, fbi agent j abbott,
and their corporate subordinates worked to conceal larry nassar's crimes. steve penny arranged with the fbi to conduct my interview at the olympic training center where i was under the observation of usa gymnastics and the u.s. olympic and paralympic committee. the day of my interview, steve penny flew to the olympic training center and made sure i was aware he was there. i felt pressured by the fbi to consent to larry nassar's plea deal. they diminish the significance of my abuse and made me feel my criminal case was not worth pursuing. special agent in charge of investigating larry nassar met steve penny for beers to discuss job opportunities in the olympic movement. another fbi agent worked with steve penny to determine jurisdiction without interviewing this rounders -- interviewing the survivors.
i watched multiple officials at u.s. ag and fbi resign or retire without explanation of how they may have contributed to the problem, some of whom were publicly thanked for their service and rewarded with severance or bonus money. my reports of abuse were not only buried by u.s. ag, u.s. opc , but also mishandled by law enforcement officers who failed to follow their most basic duties. host: gymnast aly raisman yesterday testified before the senate judiciary committee. getting your reaction this morning, this is beth in maryland. caller: i am so glad you played that clip because i feel like it is important that these athletes , how they were treated by the olympic committees and everyone they reported to, i am surprised the could not find another doctor.
simone biles, any athlete at the highest caliber, they could not get another doctor? who is more important to the committee then simone biles? doctors are a dime a dozen. it shows how little they think of these athletes as human beings. i appreciate you taking my call. i am really proud of them for getting up in front of the committee. host: darlene is in oregon. go ahead. caller: i want to say that these girls are being very -- where were the local investigations? this was a crime being committed against these children. to me, the whole committee idea promoting this athletic program
should be totally revised from the bottom up. women do not need to be examined from the age of 14 to 20 years old every year by a gynecologist or a physician at that level. it was totally unnecessary. the people in charge should have known better. host: what does this mean for the u.s. olympics organization? caller: i think it is a shame we have to have such an the organization to encourage our athletes. it has become so much about money and promotion, financial promotion, as opposed to what the true athleticism is. host: you were talking about the local investigation. we read a lot from the jenkins,, and she talks about two local investigations and calls them out for some praise in this
whole story. she says in the washington post, "to date there have been two beautiful law enforcement efforts on behalf of the gymnasts and both were at the local level. if not for michigan state university police, larry nassar would still be molesting women. she builds the case that got him arrested in december 2016 and sent to prison on the testimony of hundreds of victims as well as the 37,000 items of child pornography found on his hard drive. -- on his hard drive." the other investigation she points out was at the local level. "the only other local effort came in walker county, texas, which tried to search a gymnastics center where he committed much of his abuse. doctors were turned away at the
direction of penny who allegedly ordered that the claims with records with larry nassar's name had sent to him before officers could return to texas with the current -- with a search warrant. he has pleaded not guilty there." erica's next out of manchester, new hampshire -- eric is next out of manchester, new hampshire. caller: my heart goes out to these young women with the abuse. god forbid they want accountability. that is one thing we are losing in this country, there is no accountability. there is no accountability with the budget, we have the u.s. spying on citizens under false pretense. i really wonder, it is like the
club. they feel like they can do whatever they want and get away with it. we have not had a budget since 2009. we have continuing resolutions and all of this other prep. the laws are made by special interest groups and staffers. the people have become disconnected from this country and it is because of the power that has accumulated in washington, d.c. host: it is just after 7:30 on the east coast. we will continue to take your phone calls. i want to update you on the other stories we are talking about. we spent the first hour yesterday talking about the revelations in the book "peril" from the washington post, the revelations about mark milley's phone calls with his counterpart
in china during the final days of the trump administration. this is the headline in the washington post, "president biden comes to the defense of mike millie -- of mark milley." that book is expected to be released next week. we are continuing to watch the process here of the very large $3.5 trillion spending bill making its way through congress. a landmark moment yesterday, though plenty more to go before this becomes law. with the sound of one final gavel, they completed the task of translating the vision into a
$3.5 trillion tax proposal marking a major milestone. the fruit of their labors being overshadowed by political reality. president biden getting involved in outreach to some democrats, their concerns about the $3.5 trillion spending bill. in the local news here on capitol hill, the fencing that surrounded the capital in the months after the january 6 attack on the capital going back up last night, at least begin to go back up. here are some photos from the washington, d.c. local media, including nbc for showing trucks -- nbc four showing trucks bringing in barriers and fencing. the construction happened overnight and continuing today. we will show you a couple of those pictures. the first part of that fence
going back up. it is expected to be in a closer ring around the capital than it was after the january 6 attacks. it is going up ahead of a rally that is expected to take place on capitol hill on saturday. some reporting on the rally. that is expected to bring about 600 people to capitol hill. it is being organized as a justice for j6 rally. "our motive is to raise awareness for the civil rights of our fellow americans being treated as political prisoners." so says matt reynard, the organizer behind that rally. the house and senate delegation are not expected to be there, although one candidate is expected to be there.
he is expected to speak at that rally. he said he wanted to advocate for people whose rights he feels are being violated. we will hear more from him tomorrow and give him a chance to answer questions from you, our viewers. that is tomorrow morning. that rally is planned for saturday. that fencing going up and expected to be done today or tomorrow. back to your phone calls this morning on the hearing yesterday, u.s. gymnasts slamming the fbi in that hearing for turning a blind eye to the abuse of larry nassar. james is in south dakota. you are next. caller: yes. i would like to say i watched the hearings.
the resilience of the one young gal was beyond me. if you cannot figure out that this woman is telling the truth, then you don't know what the truth is. here is someone who is so brave in stepping up and turning a blind eye to this would be absolutely, stunningly, harmfully terrible, watch these little girls had to go through. trying to keep my composure here. i don't know how else you can expand the truth. host: this is charlie in new york. good morning. caller: good morning. it was very good to see that
presentation by those girls to the congress. there are probably a number of people in the nation who don't even know about larry nassar. that was an opening at the very least to what goes down, possibly across a lot of campuses. one item that has escaped us lately is the wrestling debacle that occurred, i believe it was ohio state university where wrestlers were abused there, hundreds of them. complicit in turning an eye against them was mr. jim jordan. it is strange this has not become before congress. this is the first of many -- of
an opening in many cases where one woman comes forward for the abuse that occurred, other women came forward as well. mr. jordan has been a bully in the congress for years. for whatever reason, the democrats had their tails between their legs. host: members of congress yesterday at the senate judiciary committee hearing promising to not let this happen again, to hold those accountable among those who spoke to the women yesterday, including senator chuck grassley. [video clip] >> my question to director ray -- director christopher wray, the inspector general's report shows that abbott, a senior official in the indianapolis field office at fbi, was allowed
to retire in 2018 and evade prosecution even though this report describes significant misconduct by him and an agent under his supervision. i have asked that the attorney general reconsider the decision to not file charges against some of the individuals involved in the case and i would like you to provide this committee with a list of all disciplinary actions that took place with respect to fbi personnel who were the subject of this investigation. i believe that you owe that at the very least to the victims of today's hearing. >> we can provide the committee with whatever information we can, certainly. as i have testified already, the special agent -- the supervisory special agent who featured so prominently in the report i can
confirm has been terminated. as to the former special agent in charge, he retired before this review commenced, before we learned the extent of his misconduct, much to my frustration. as to the decision whether or not to prosecute the individual, i would respectfully refer over to the justice department which i think is where your letter was appropriately directed. >> i would like you to cooperate in ensuring that the prosecution of those individuals who failed these victims and give us your commitment that he would go to the justice department again to try to get that done. >> i am happy to do what would ever be appropriate. in this case, the criminal investigation conducted -- in
the case agents were from horwitz's office which i think is appropriate. that is a discussion between his office and the justice department. if i can be a constructive part of that, given how strongly i feel, i am happy to do whatever i can that would be appropriate. host: chuck grassley, his exchange with christopher wray yesterday. taking your phone calls this morning on the washington journal -- on "washington journal." teresa, you are next. caller: good morning. i am so upset to find out that those young ladies did not get their just due. i feel like those people that did that and covered it up should be charged with human
rights -- civil rights. that is a crime against women and they let it go on. that is crime against children. women and children are not valued. we need our human rights stood up for. there is no reason for that. we need to be qualified immunity of these people that take the law into their own hands and junk that. they do not need to be sitting on their retirement. they do not need to be sitting in the backyard wishing they had not done it, they need to be sitting in a cell. it is a crime against women, it is a crime against humanity. the people in the trump administration were the ones who did this.
they swept it under the rug just like they keep pushing everything under the rug. they pushed civil rights, they are pushing our voting rights. host: on the timelines your, the fbi officials did not start their investigation until september 2016. that is two months before the 2016 election. caller: whoever was the head of fbi before them, they should also be prosecuted. host: the prosecution that happened is larry nassar's prosecution, sentenced to 175 years behind bars after pleading guilty in 2018 to seven counts of criminal sexual conduct and child pornography charges. mike is in round rock, texas. you are next. caller: just a quick comment, of
course they want to bring trump and twisted -- bring in trump and twisted it. the head of the fbi was combing, don't let anyone forget that. everybody feels emotional about those girls and i do, too. but this is just another example -- and you will see another one this morning -- another example of how corrupt and rotten the fbi, the cia, and the pentagon are and have been for years. it is not going to change so don't expect anyone to be held responsible. you heard christopher wray, we will take the appropriate steps. he has been saying that for years. i could say more, but i think you get my point. host: pat in washington, you are
next. caller: good morning. can you hear me? host: go ahead. caller: this all goes back to the fbi. doesn't this prove there is a deep state? the problem is nobody is actually holding these people responsible. this all keeps spurring everybody's nerves. one person could have stopped this, the person actually investigating went out of his way to cover it up for a job. mr. penny, you should be put in jail. it is just pathetic this all continues -- and that this all caps continue over and over on so many different subjects with
the fbi and cia. i am very sorry for the u.s. to accept this and it should not be acceptable in any situation, whether it be the athletes, gun running into mexico. nobody is being held responsible, including the judges of the pfizer courts. this is already said. thank you -- this is all really sad. thank you for my comments. host: this is rick in georgia. good morning. caller: i would say the fbi's priorities are really messed up. i remember when they sent 15 fbi agents down to daytona when a race car driver's garage had a
fake news in it but they do not give concern to innocent babies getting molested. the economy -- the comeys and the --, they need to be held accountable. maybe arrest people in the fbi that need to be held accountable. host: the previous caller bringing up stephen penny, the former usa gymnastics president. here is more from sally jenkin'' story today about some of her concerns and how this case could have come to a conclusion much sooner than it did. she says, "no one seems to have placed an investigation on penny. where was the u.s. attorney for
indiana in all of this? the u.s. attorney at the time was josh meckler who had a history of working closely with jay abbott's office on cases. what he has been doing recently, he has been jay abbott's attorney. the justice department has refused to bring charges against abbott who retired in the midst of the investigation and ligament, who recently retired, and the man who was the top official in indianapolis during the investigation is now abbott's lawyer. special prosecutor, please." ben is in connecticut. good morning. caller: it is obvious the
federal government has lost its way and it is time for us to tear the whole thing down and rebuild it. this is not only the fbi, cia, this is also the justice department and everybody who is involved up there from staffers to everything. it goes much deeper than just feeling the committee. i think it is time away rebuild this whole country, everybody who works for the government should be fired and reevaluated. it is time to get back to the constitution and take our rights back. host: here is more from the women who testified yesterday. this is aly raisman speaking about the lasting impact the abuse has had on her life. [video clip] >> i would like to say that i personally do not think people realize how much experiencing a
type of abuse is not something one just suffers in the moment. it carries on with them for some time in their lives. for example, being here today is taking everything i have. my main concern is i hope i have the energy to even walk out of here. i don't think people realize how much it affects us, how much the ptsd and trauma impacts us. healing looks different for every survivor, the aftermath looks very different. for me, to paint a picture, i used to train seven hours a day when i was training for the olympics and processing my abuse affected me so much and it is still something i struggle with. i can remember when i first
shared my story publicly, for a long time i did not have the energy to stand up in the shower. i would have to stick -- i would have to sit on the floor and wash my hair because standing up was exhausting. i cannot even go for a 10 minute walk outside. i've competed in two olympic games. there are times when i would feel like i would forget what i'm saying, i would feel like my mind is not working. i feel like i have no energy at all. i 27 years old and my 80-year-old grandfather has more energy than i do. i have often wondered, am i ever going to feel better? it has affected my health in the last couple of years. i have had to be taken in an ambulance because i pass out and i'm so sick from the trauma. it might not even be until after
a hearing like this, it hits me out of the blue. i think it is important for people to know even though we are not crying, how much we are struggling. host: aly raisman in her testimony yesterday. two minutes left in this segment of the -- of "washington journal." getting your calls split up regionally. 202-748-8000 if you are in the central or eastern time zones. 202-748-8001 if you are in the mountain or pacific time zones. getting your tweets as well, -- your tweets and texts, this is sheila saying the credibility is long gone. and this from our text messaging service, bob in erie, everybody -- "everybody who ignored these girls should be charged with
everything that happened to these girls since 2015." martin is in new mexico, you are next. caller: i want to express my concern and hope that congress begins to take action regarding the action and character of the fbi and the cia. we have a history that goes back since the persecutions in the 60's -- the 1960's of the black panther party and other organizations that were intimidated by the fbi during the civil rights movement. i think it is important people look at the record overall and begin to make some decisions in regards to whether this
organization is deserving of maintaining its presence within the u.s. government. host: marie is next in mississippi. good morning. caller: the caller before me said something that was on my mind. it is amazing to me how long this man was able to get away with this but i think it was because he was white. had it been a black physician, there is no way he would have been able to go this long doing this. i watched the documentary special they had on with these young girls. my heart goes out to them. one of the young women said this dr. moved next door to them so he could keep treating her. he was allowed to go into her house and continue doing these treatments. i don't fault the young women, but i think some of these
parents knew about this stuff but they wanted their children to be so successful they were willing to sacrifice it. i watched the interview with one of the parents and she looked horrified hoping her dr. would not say something that would incriminate her. she knew this was possibly going on. i felt he was able to get away with this because nobody is being painted as a rapist or murderer. they have been told that the black man is a bogeyman, fear him. but these white coaches allowed all of this to go along but they
have been getting away with this for years. host: this is james in texas. good morning. caller: i would like to say i'm not surprised it took them so long for them to get the just do. look at the bigger picture here. for a time, we had a sitting
president who had the same obligations and they have not investigated them yet. he appointed judges that had those same issues. we really need to look deep into our soul as americans and deal with this a lot better than we do. my heart goes out to those young ladies. all of the people in this planet being abused and nothing is being done about it. host: one more clip for you from yesterday's hearing. here is dick durbin, he asked the gymnasts what they would tell
another young person who is being abused. [video clip] >> my question to the panel, anyone who cares to respond, what would you say two other young athletes who may be suffering in silence or wrestling with the decision about whether to speak out?
>> the first thing i would want to say to anybody watching this suffering and assignments or has been through something really traumatic is that i support them. i believe them. just be patient with yourself and be kind to yourself. know that i am struggling to and i'm still navigating how to heal from this. healing is a roller coaster. there are some days i feel better and some days where i feel like i am taking a bunch of steps back. we are all doing the best we can. i would encourage whoever is out there listening to tell someone whenever they feel comfortable. it is so important to have a good support system and a community around you. if you are someone who does not have a good support system, that is okay. sometimes it can take time to find a good support system. i encourage you to not give up until you find the support you
deserve. the -- i believe you, i support you. you are not alone and i encourage you to ask for help. >> anyone else? >> i would say that they need to know their abuse is enough. for so long, we questioned that just because someone was not validating us, we doubted what happened to us. that is always going to make the healing process take longer. when i gave that to myself, i really begin to heal and i began to get my voice back. that took a long time. to reach out to other survivors and hear their stories is what continues to help me heal. hearing these curries -- hearing these girls speak is what continues to make me want to be here today and help others. host: mckayla maroney at aly raisman at yesterday's committee
hearing. if you want to watch it in its entirety, you can do that at c-span.org. that is going to do it for the first hour of "washington journal." stick around, up next, a roundtable discussion on solutions proposed by the biden administration. we will be joined by heather reams and sara chieffo. later, we will talk to kedric payne about ethics -- ethics but is made by the biden administration. stick around, we will be right back. ♪ >> weekends on saturday, former charleston mayor joseph wiley, smithsonian
secretary from the citadel military college discuss the american history museum being built in charleston, south carolina. at 2:00 p.m. eastern, a look at camp david with michael giorgione. he is author of the book the private world from the presidential retreat. how a secret meeting in 1971 it looks at president nixon's decision on the gold standard. book tv includes leading authors discussing nonfiction books. former south carolina governor reflects on his political career and discusses the future of the party.
he is interviewed by former congressman charlie dent. at 11:00, the book not another nation of immigrants. it says america is not a nation founded by four immigrants but a product of simpler colonialism and slavery. watch book tv every weekend on c-span two. >> jason riley on his book maverick, a biography of the soul whose writings on economics, race, and politics have inspired conservatives and libertarians for half a century. >> i think it is quite
unfortunate. individuals like nicole hannah jones, cornell west are better known. i think he has quite frankly written circles around those individuals. it's not simply the volume of his work that is unmatched. also the range, depth, rigor is something i don't think they come close to matching. i want to raise awareness particularly to a younger generation. >> jason riley with his book "maverick" sunday night on c-span's "q&a." you could also listen as a podcast, wherever you get your podcasts. >> washington journal continues. host: roundtable discussion on
climate change and the climate provisions on that massive spending bill make its way through congress. joining us is in sera from the league of conservation voters and heather, the executive director of citizens for responsible energy direction. this being the first time we have had your group on "washington journal." explain who you are and the issue of climate change. >> we are delighted to be here. the organization is focused on engaging republican lawmakers on climate issues. we are not denying the science. we very much agree that it is happening. where we disagree and how the democrats had approached climate change and lowering emissions, we have to help create good policies that will last over administrations.
they have been organized for about eight years. host: remind viewers to the league is, your approach and how you worked here on the issue of climate change. >> it is a pleasure to be on here. thank you for the invitation. we influence policy, we win elections. we are fighting for clean air, clean water, we have safe climate. we also work in partnership with a powerful network with states across the country. we are all in for this historic moment to tackle climate change to scale the science and justice. host: we will talk about these
issues for this hour of the washington journal. democrats, (202) 748-8000, republicans, (202) 748-8001, independents (202) 748-8002. the president's build back better plan has a lot in it when it comes to climate change. give us the broad outline here of the major proposals that are moving through congress. >> we are all in to make sure the build back better act that congress is debating now really fulfills the agenda the president laid out. the investments have to put us firmly on the path. that is the goal the president has embraced that we must put out in this legislation.
the proposal is in play, the build back better act will do just that. it is just two of the main drivers in this package. the first is the robust package of tax incentives. it is deploying between energy like wind and solar. they are making electric vehicles and making those more affordable for consumers across the country. investing in energy storage technology and transmission buildout. we need to revitalize our domestic factor here with the clean energy economy. that package of tax incentives will be paired with a really important come -- provision which is a combination to make sure utilities are taking on clean energy at the scale to meet climate goals. it looks like 80% clean energy
by 2030. those provisions include grants to help make that transition in a way that helps workers and consumers. host: now that the ways and means committee has finished up their work, was there anything that didn't make it in that you were hoping would make it in, does this go far enough? >> we are excited about the package on the electric vehicle space. the package that passed out from a clean energy standard and climate standard is incredibly strong. for us, it is the climate outcomes that we get. we are very excited about that package. it is in line with what the mitt -- ways and means committee could do. host: what do you make of the build back better act? is it a climate solution that will work? >> unfortunately not.
as an advocate who wants to see climate change solve, the build back better act is specifically looking at the climate provisions while there are some excellent tax provisions that we have been longtime supporters of , it is really concerning. overall, the bill is in trouble. it is in trouble because of the spending. the number, $3.5 trillion. it is in trouble because of the politics and dealing with the president's party. we are talking about moderates in both. looking to spend as much as we are. it is alarming about the collaboration or lack thereof. we are talking about overhauling the grid. how we have elected -- we have
transparency and oversight into how that will happen. just not a lot of thinking through what this will be. it seems like more of a political element than policymaking. host: what would be your solution? what would work. what would have the political ability to work and be a climate solution? >> the process is tough in recognizing the political motive where we are right now. we have a moment, we have to capture that. being able to work together, some of the margins are slim. using the process of reconciliation, this is single party.
the reconciliation to be able to to make policy that is a concern. getting to the substance, it really says a lot about what is going on within our own borders. not looking beyond the u.s. borders. to pollute under the paris agreement for the next 10 years, not keeping all of the above. eliminating natural gas in the united states. we do see offshore manufacturing in the united states. manufacturing can't afford to stay in the united states. we only want to emissions. this proposal will make it happen. host: you have been involved in
some of the big climate proposals of the past that did not make it through congress. have democrats learn the lesson here of trying to have the political will on capitol hill to move a very big climate bill? >> i have been at the league of conservation voters in 2009. we had a window of opportunity and they moment in time to pass comprehensive climate legislation. they have learned from the failure 12 years ago. we are all in to win. 12 years ago, climate change was a different -- different threat. the clean i mistreat -- energy industry was a promise.
it is here and thriving. we also have a more robust and powerful climate movement. we are working with environmental justice communities. the toxins released by that economy. they are demanding action. we are all in. we think members of congress are leaders in really unifying the agenda. it is good for the economy and jobs. it is very popular. the build back better act is made more popular. we tell voters about the critical investments. host: there is a very big bipartisan bill.
could you talk about the climate front that is in that bill? >> the energy solutions have been very supportive of the infrastructure built particularly because of the climate provision. one of the key factors we are very excited about is fully funding the energy act of 2020. creating an help to refocus the department of energy on all kinds of breakthrough technologies like energy storage and carbon capture. making demonstrations full-scale that would be used within the next 5-7 years. this is really exciting stuff. we think about the innovation of the united states. the entrepreneurs we have here, the innovators. this is where america is best. the infrastructure peace and funding that is still a long
way. that is where you have -- it is interesting. you have significant bipartisan support from republicans, democrats, supporting a bill. on the reconciliation bill you have solely democrats. that one-sided policymaking is super concerning to me. you see the lessons of 12 years ago. one of the reasons my organization was created is one-sided policymaking is not durable. well happen in two years, four years? the funding isn't necessarily there. we are talking about full-scale changes. these utilities plan 20-30 years
out. not for the electricity before the politics. it is super concerning. we don't want to be in the dark. we want it reliable, affordable. by all accounts, he looks like it will increase costs for american consumers, which is also very concerning. i can't emphasize enough the bipartisan nature and need for working with republicans. unfortunately the reconciliation package for build back better does not do that. host: put some numbers to the climate provisions there. $73 billion to modernize the electric rig, making communities more resilient, $21 billion on cleaning up toxic pollution. 7.5 billion dollars to build
electric vehicle charging section -- stations. >> we appreciate the hard work that went into the bipartisan infrastructure built. there are some important and good investments in that proposal. it is not the climate bill that we need. it does not meet the climate test. it fails to include major policies and investments. we support fully the investments that help enable this transition but when it comes to actually driving emission reductions, it just does not match up. host: callers year to join our session. st. petersburg florida, democrat, good morning. caller: climate change has been going on since the end of the last ice age. during the last ice age, ice was
a half-mile thick. the great lakes were called out -- carved out by glacier activities. host: bring us to 2021 and what you think it needs today. caller: i think it is all just a bunch of nonsense. host: you wouldn't support any new spending on climate solutions? caller: absolutely not. at the end of the last ice age, not one fossil fuel industry existed. host: we will stay on 2021. do you want to respond? >> i think it is important that we look at climate change and trust the scientists. the international scientific experts put out an assessment of
the climate science. scientists are pretty conservative. they put out a call that climate is here and now. we have to act. they called it a code red for humanity. it is important we roll up our sleeves and tackle this crisis. we are already seeing, harmful forest fires, try to do that in a way that helps. caller: good morning. i have several points i would like to ask. is there any type of mandate in this green new deal that ensures the products and what is needed to facilitate this is manufactured domestically? i could drive over the bridge every day and see wind turbine parts being imported from china. is there any type of mandates that will prevent these materials from being
irresponsibly sourced from countries that exploit not only the people but the environments to obtain the products for lithium batteries? finally, is there any push to realize that nuclear energy is probably the cleanest and safest warm of domestic energy and will this be implemented? host: a lot of questions, let's take them before we lose track of how many we've got. >> very important questions. thank you for your call. texas and all of the states generated a lot not just from the wind industry but also gas and oil. one of the problems with this proposal is it actually phases out natural gas. it will not be used. this is a major fuel used to reduce emissions over coal not just in the united states but is at fuel around the world for the next 30-40 years. that is number one.
that means we will be importing other kinds of fuel if needed. in terms of importing from china, the solar panels, that is what is happening right now. in addition to the energy storage people. also sourced from china. now talking about minerals from afghanistan. the problem a lot is they are not looking holistically about global emissions. they are looking at domestic emissions. domestic emissions are important. if the united states is emitting say 12% of all emissions worldwide, what about the other 88%? what do we do about that? what we do about exporting technology overseas? someone will choose having electricity in a developing basin. are we going to tell them, do
they really take -- care where it comes from? they don't. they just want electricity. we need to be clearheaded about what india will do. the same policies we have an indiana have to work in india. a sure bet is to export technology. host: how would you respond? caller: there are a lot -- >> there are a lot of provisions in the bill back better act. making sure that in the space, the country who is leading in clean energy will lead in the 21st century. the provisions make sure that we are supporting domestic clean energy manufacturing in communities that have suffered fromde-industrialization.
making sure create high-quality new jobs and the sourcing responsibly when it comes to minerals we have to have recycling to get this done right. we think this is a huge win for communities across the country and making sure we are putting people back to work in good manufacturing jobs. host: where is the lead on nuclear power? >> thanks for that question. nuclear power as a source of energy that if you look at it just from a climate perspective it looks pretty good. if you look at the whole lifecycle, there are real impacts from the sourcing uranium, to its waste and disposal. we are looking at transitioning to renewable sources that do not pose those threats. clean energy storage technology to make sure that we could support the reliable energy that we need to power our grid.
we can't afford to have existing nuclear going off-line. that is not a win for climate. host: quickly on nuclear energy. >> we support advanced nuclear and also the energy act of 2020. we want to see those investments for additional resourcing and research and development. i think it is interesting, we point to europe a lot of times and said what is europe doing? comparing and contrasting. this is where nuclear is actually strong. it could fuel high-tech industries. key production industries like steel and cement. they are using the energy to do so. it is zero carbon emissions. the idea that we need to take nuclear off-line completely is crazy.
we need to be increasing our energy options. not decreasing them. by decreasing them, we are also increasing costs. the battery technology, we support the research and development in the demonstration of energy storage. the technology is just not there to rely exclusively on renewable energy. host: florida, republican, good morning. caller: good morning, guys. don't hang up on me please. you hang up on people real quick. host: i'm sorry you feel that way. caller: sometimes i get in an interesting conversation and then you on to somebody else. i have a couple of comments i wanted to make. the carbon dioxide -- my point is i am for natural.
this country has a habit of cutting the trees down and cementing the whole country out. you couldn't find a blade of grass if you played -- paid somebody a million dollars with the malls, cities, highways. if you really notice, every time a weather person talks about a flood because it is raining so hard, they stand out in the middle of the cement road with cars floating away. you cut the trees down and put cement there. host: take me to the question. caller: how come they don't get to the wire we cementing the country out? once you get rid of all of the trees, you can't make air out of nothing.
we are done world, actually. the cement, carbon dioxide entries. -- and trees. >> thank you for your passion on this issue. you're raising a very important point. it is how important natural climate solutions are to protect communities and be a part of the climate solution. you'll also point out that overuse of cement in cities also lead to heat islands that pose threats to communities of color concentrated in urban areas. we appreciate your passion in placing more trees as an equity issue as well as a really smart solution when it comes to being part of the toolkit that could help solve climate change and build healthy communities. host: just about halfway through
our conversation on climate change and climate solutions in what is being called the build back better act. join the conversation this morning for democrats, (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001. independents (202) 748-8002. our guest sarah from the league of conservation voters. jeff is in maryland, democrat, good morning. caller: good morning, i appreciate the opportunity to address and alert them to the treacherous nature of astroturf of the citizens for responsible energy solutions. energy, they are not focused. heather is representing individuals or organizations
that are responsible for giving way back in the 2000 campaign for w bush, one million dollars towards their campaign contributions. w bush was campaigning, he included carbon dioxide as going to be a regulated emission from our electrical production. host: i will let heather jump in and speak a little bit more about the group. >> thanks for the question. i am not clear about the george w. bush. the organization was not organize them. it's only been about eight years. i am really unclear about where your findings come from. we are supported by a number of
private investors, individuals all across the country. unapologetically. we were trying to be a validator on the climate is important issue. we need republicans to come to the table and be a part of the solution. they are by a large becoming a part of the solution. the reconciliation bill is being exclusively negotiated by democrats. we believe they have good ideas. just like anything else we see in creating and solving complex issues. whether that is health care, education, and yes, climate change. they want to get the table. they are asking to be at the table. my organization has facilitated that they are. the best answer i could give you to your question. host: how is the league funded?
caller: we have -- >> we have a wide variety of sources from private foundations to supporters. we are proud to be able to bring our whole campaign and scale to this for jobs and justice. host: in vermont, this is tom, an independent. caller: good morning. i wanted to tell you dr. steven kunin, he is a climate scientist. i followed him closely. the global warming, climate change is all a bunch of nonsense. they are using it to divide us. they are using to take money from the taxpayer. it will not do anything to change climate no matter how much money we spend. >> whether or not you are a
believer in climate science, we get caught up in that sandbox of whether or not the climate is changing. we could have our cake and eat it too. we could talk about lowering energy prices. increasing energy choices. reducing global emission but not our economy and exploring american innovation on our jobs. we shouldn't have to sacrifice our economy because we are fighting climate change. we could do both. if you are going to fight climate change, we will then have to deal with reduced quality of life. one of the reasons we are concerned about the reconciliation package, the costs are astronomical. the spending and the ability to get to the goals set in this process are impossible to get to.
the approach tends to be more stick and less caret. that is where we need to be thinking about a new economy, a clean energy economy that sarah talked about. it is very much in hand to be there. it is not sacrificing the quality of life. if we have clean water, isn't that a good thing? host: going back to the build back better act, some of the specific climate provisions in the bill, $150 billion for a clean payment program. clean energy tax incentives, research money, polluter imparts in the idea of a renewed civilian conservation corps. jay sanders asks what share of global greenhouse emissions with
these proposals expect to reduce when they are fully implemented? >> thanks for the question. these really popular investments you just mentioned are at hand in the build back better act. they are what we need to be doing to meet the goals of science. the united states cutting our carbon pollution in half by 2030. this is a huge opportunity for us to leave the globe in the transition to the clean energy economy. to be creating jobs here and dominate the future of the auto industry is just one example. i would wait -- way rather have us be at the head of the pack and be at the head of that flight. host: this is elaine, good morning. caller: i have been waiting so long to talk to somebody.
caller: i have been -- there has been a japanese that runs about three miles per our and it does not kill birds. i don't know what happened to that window. we have not seen it. the other thing is when they talk about globally, termites could use 20 times what cows do. are they going to address that on the global market? the next thing has to do with solar galactic particles. there has been three studies done on that. they know the particles because of the earth's magnetic poles changing, that is having an effect on whether.
solar particles, methane from termites, and windmill technology, do any of you want to take those up? >> on the technology for wind turbines, wind power is incredibly effective when wind blows. we have to story better. we care very much about birds. it has been working closely to protect as many birds as possible. host: you have fred in texas, good morning. caller: good morning. we have oceans full of things that could be extracted from wind and solar power, use the bridge to power fuel cells. low carbon, what could be
better? i haven't heard you mention fuel cells in your talk this morning, thank you. i will listen off-line. >> we think it is important to look at all renewable energy sources. they are making an important role for green hydrogen to play. as heather said, there are significant investments in this legislation that would put money towards those cutting edge solutions here today. host: another question from twitter. linda asking china is the number one producer of batteries for electric vehicles. what is the plan to make those batteries here? >> sure, i am happy to take that one. president biden and his team
across the government has been looking at domestic supply chains and making sure we were revitalizing domestic manufacturing. we are bullish about the proposals from the executive branch side across multiple agencies and in this proposal in the build back better act to help support that domestic building. host: heather, do you want to talk? >> batteries in general, renewable energy is very important in what we are doing. expensive parts. resource from foundations like china, congo, and others. the supply chains are not secure. the memos are primarily sourced from overseas. we need to bring them back to the united states.
however, to be able to get mining is decade-long. we are nowhere near close to be able to meet what the goals are from the biden administration. it is at odds with one another. one of the proposals we have been in favor of is streamlining. it brings it from the rillettes clean energy sector. instead of 10 years, you're talking less than two years. there has been significant environmental reluctance in washington to get common sense regulation to do that. i know of many organizations, many companies waiting on the sidelines dealing with lawsuits and others.
by the way, the united states mines more cleanly than anywhere in the world. we should be miming here. host: new orleans always a focus of climate change. kevin is in new orleans, good morning. caller: both make good points about the situations. the question would be down here to the south of new orleans as everyone knows, a lot of people including myself and my son have financed gas generators that is going on everywhere. it is very expensive. my comment is on the infrastructure plan, the thing i was concerned about, i don't understand why the government is
responsible for that. just like a gas station, i don't know how it worked out. i would think it also would be an economic boost, too. they were built up with restaurants and things of that nature. no technology will change that. people will most likely want to go to rest areas and maybe get a bite to eat. you're both very intelligent and make great points. thanks for answering my question. host: got your question. >> i hope you and your family are safe in the wake of these hurricanes ravaging the gulf coast. we think the havoc being wreaked all made more intense by climate
change make all the more clear that we have to modernize our grid infrastructure and invest in microgrids that are more resilient in the solar generators, generators that don't pollute. we are really excited about some of the innovation when it comes to resiliency made all the more clear unfortunately by the harm these disasters are reeking upon your communities and so much else. i wanted to go back to cost for a second. we talk about the cost of transmission. we don't talk about the cost of inaction. climate change cost taxpayers nearly $100 billion. they simply cannot afford not to act on climate change. host: heather, do you want to talk about the cost of inaction? >> i wanted to talk about the issue of reliability.
most cities unfortunately in that area about losing electricity and how long, just the quality of life, the health issues but they are getting is a complete disruptor. we need to have reliable energy. unfortunately we cannot do that. not today, not now. the idea of keeping it in the ground means that we are cutting off important sources that could keep reliability. we should continue to invest in carbon capture. all of the above is what we are suggesting.
that is the difference of what we see in the build back better act. there's not a place for natural gas in this proposal. the natural gas industry and oil industry are important to the economy. continuing to find a way for natural gas. also thinking about the power that you need. concerned about the devils and the details in some of this. host: harrisburg, pennsylvania, dave is a democrat, good morning. caller: thanks for taking my call. i would like to start off by saying i agree with you on the things that they want to pass. i think in society today, if we
had to build the hoover dam, we would find ourselves in a place. those are gone. ge had about six electric cars on display then, that was in 2000. this has been going on and prolonged by a few people who were controlled by media and politicians. once you try to allude to the black and brown communities, they are the ones who get stuck on land. the one woman said the land is
barren of trees and grass. i'm also agreeing about carbon capture. i'm agreeing that mining has to be less regulated. i understand what it takes to get this with the amount ground. if we could do a better, let us be the one who does it. i had a church member told me one time, our electric bill was $15,000 a year. i sent turn around and look at the charts. how much square footage is on that roof? how many solar panels that you put on that roof? this seems to be an all hands on deck solution. host: you had both of our guests nodding at various comments. >> i think this is the evolution
of the republican and the interesting parts of the politics here. used to be a point where he felt like republicans were simply deniers of the science. the democrats had to be those who are fighting for climate change and addressing it. that is no longer the case. republicans are engaging on climate change. i am looking at the energy act of 2020 has the programs from the department of energy. streamlining permitting was bipartisan and how it was passed. we look at the infrastructure package we just passed out of the senate. lots of good things for clean energy. bipartisan support. even the smaller package from the climate solutions at. 92-eight. there were more republicans that voted -- voted for that build and democrats.
when you are negotiating that type of the aisle, the way we get strong verbal policy, this is about working together. with this reconciliation package , it is taking advantage of a political moment. by doing that, we are leaving a lot of good stuff that republicans could bring to the table that would be more durable. rather than something we are going to be dealing with four transitions every 2-4 years. >> you made a number of important points. voters, the majority of the democrats want the bipartisan infrastructure past.
we need both. couldn't agree more with you that we can't wait too long to tackle climate change and that we have a huge economic opportunity. 8 million jobs created over the next decade. this make sense from an economic perspective. we can't afford not to act and we cannot afford to wait for another moment. we cannot wait another 12 years to open up. this is our moment, this is our time. wildly popular. host: two tony's question on twitter asking why is there such a push for comprehensive legislation? could we get more done if we pass things that both sides agree on and then bring the
problem into more manageable bills? why does it have to be so big? >> that's a great point. is a great point in talking about the build back better plan. looking at that, it is a relatively novel bill. it has not gone through any kind of hearing. going back years ago looking at cap and trades, it did not pass ultimately but we are trying to reduce emissions. stakeholder engagement and understanding the inside of the urban areas to rural communities how the changes are going to impact these stakeholders. yes, i agree jobs could be a big economic growth and driver for
america. it feels like more of a political moment taking advantage of it. it doesn't mean we need to make mistakes. this policy has been embedded. we are changing how our lights turn on. don't you think that deserves some transparency? >> i just want to point out that reconciliation is used by both parties to cast several different goals over the last decade. i think i would take issue with there has not been transparency. we had a comprehensive climate report put out by the house on the climate crisis that had 18 months of hearings and input and
experts. we had dozens of hearings across all of the communities on climate. it was simply not true. we have been debating these solutions for a long time. it is time to act. a lot of the solutions in the build back better act are based on proving policies passed in red states and blue states. i think we have a really winning combination of good policy, good politics, and we are all in to get it done in the coming weeks. >> how does the policy interact with fuel standards and other states? does the department of energy do not? it put them in a quandary. these have not been embedded in these hearings. looking at a very good report
that came from a majority on the house select committee. there's a lot there my organization supports. not saying -- i don't want to say that. radical change in how we do not electricity, it should not be crammed into a political opportunity for reconciliation. host: still plenty of callers. robert has been waiting a while in waldorf. caller: talking about renewable energy. if you remember last winter, the windmills froze up and the people of texas froze to death. now we have hydroelectric dams in california that don't have the water. they don't have water so they
cannot generate megawatts. the lady here in the red communist chinese flag dress -- host: we will just move on. unless either of you wanted to talk to the renewable energy aspect? >> i'm happy to. renewable energy we need to be able to produce reliable power, affordable power every day of the week, 24/7. renewable power is not able to do that at this time. now that this is a reason to throw out turbines, they weren't winterized. it is a vulnerability of renewable energy. as a result and making sure we could store that energy when the
sun isn't shining in the wind isn't blowing. >> i think we definitely support those investments to make sure we have the right solutions so we could pair that with renewable energy sources. i want to debunk the claim that the texas disaster in freezing and harm that was caused was at all caused by the renewable energy on the grid in texas. it is just not true. study after study has debunk that. the fossil fuel-based really failed communities. host: time for one or two more calls. this is dave, good morning. caller: i'd like to point my comment to heather. a couple of years ago that i designed a sketch with an innovative system related to our
measuring system. that is in -- that is gravity. i don't know if i remitted to westinghouse. i thought i would like to have heather look at it and see if i could get a response. host: we are running short on time, what is your question about the climate issue? caller: it is a completely green system. i would like to know if i mail something to hurt if there is way could get back without having a computer. host: do you review inventions with your group? >> i don't review them myself but this is what i am so excited about. american entrepreneur and innovator. we should be helping to unleash that creativity.
use public-private partnerships. tremendous opportunities we have here in the united states. i applaud you for being such a positive force in trying to reduce state -- emissions. i am not an expert on the technology. host: last call is pam in florida, good morning. caller: i haven't heard you talk about the damage of farming. how the earth could solve all of this problem just by regenerative farming. host: do you want to start? >> i'm happy to jump in. thank you so much for bringing this up. it is critically important that our farmers, ranchers, foresters
, and natural solutions are put to work to help solve the climate crisis. farming could really help be part of the solution. the build back better act is being debated. we also have huge opportunities in coastal resiliency in -- and helping our oceans also. host: the final minute here. >> i think farming is overlooked. who knows our land better than the farmers and ranchers and orators? we should be part of the climate solution. our agriculture, precision farming at some of the most accurate in the world. we should be exporting our goods and exporting that technology to other nation so they could use it. this is the same idea of any kind of technology.
all of the above and empower every sector, not by government mandates but by removing barriers. host: cresenergy.com is where you could go to learn about the center for energy solutions. heather is the director there. lcv.org is where you could see sarah. thank you for joining > us this morning. thank you -- thank you for joining us this morning. >> thank you. host: up next we will be joined by the campaign legal centers kendrick pain for that discussion. more of your phone calls on open forum. we will be right back. ♪
♪ >> today, gubernatorial candidates gary mccall of and greg -- greg young kim -- live coverage begins at 7:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. online at c-span.org, or lesson on the free c-span radio app. -- listen on the free c-span radio app. >> watch c-span's "january 6: views from the house," where congress shares what they saw that day. >> representative gosar was objecting to the arizona slate of electors. at that moment i shouted out at the top of my lungs, "this is because of you! " >> capitol police officers were
coming into the chamber and they were being very loud. we were still debating. the doors to the chamber are typically open and you could hear the doors start shutting. >> at some point, someone up in the chambers, in the galley, a member, was yelling at the republicans to call trump and have trump call off his mob. >> we had a lot of freshman that i got to know during orientation that this was their first real experience as a member of congress, and who were kind of watching them and talking to my fellow colleagues about what we could do to try and stop this. >> watch "january 6: views from the house" at 8:00 p.m. eastern. ♪ >> weekends on c-span2 are an intellectual feast.
every saturday, you will find events that explore our nation's past on history tv. book tv brings the latest in nonfiction books and authors. learn, discover, explore. weekends on c-span2. ♪ >> "washington journal" continues. host: in the early days of his administration, president biden had executive orders and said they would execute the most rigorous -- rigorous ethical responsibilities. kedric payne is joining us. start with justin next nation of what your organization does -- just an explanation of what your organization does. guest: we are a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization whose mission is to advance democracy.
we want to make sure government is responsive to the people and we make the public aware of ethics issues and reforms that are needed to make sure our government is responsive. host: take us back to the beginning of the biden administration and the campaign. what is president biden going to do to create "the most rigorous ethics in history" in his campaign? guest: he has one of the most detailed plans of ethics reforms in 20 years. he had a list that would show various gaps in campaign-finance, lobbying reform, conflict of interest, and political interest on the department of justice investigations. host: how is he doing on keeping those promises? guest: you look at whether those
promises have been fulfilled, you see that there are -- there's a lot of work that needs to be done. of those 25 promises, only three have been fulfilled. you have 22 that have not. as a result, it does look as though the biden administration has not established they are truly serious about the ethics reforms that were promised. host: start with what he has fulfilled. guest: what he has fulfilled involves the political influence with the department of justice and agencies. he promised that the white house would not enforce department of justice investigations and litigation, and it looks as though policies that have been implemented by his white house and the department of justice, that that is happening. he also promised the white house would not have involvement in agency decisions. there is a policy that has been
implemented that appears to fulfill that. the other promised that has been fulfilled is he said the department of justice would be able to have more power to enforce the laws, whether voting rights laws, environmental protection laws, and ethics laws. there are signs that is indeed happening. host: for our visual learners, there is a graphic on the campaign legal center website, campaignlegal.org where you can run through these 25 pledges and see which ones have been fulfilled, partially fulfilled, or haven't. the partially fulfilled list is rather large. take us through some of the most important ones, and what more the biden administration needs to do. guest: with the partially fulfilled promises, you see many that involve campaign-finance. i need to explain why those are partially fulfilled. one piece of legislation had most of those promises embedded
into it, and that was the for the people act. many people note that as hr one or senate bill one, and while it looks as though that bill has died in congress, which means that all of those promises in that bill that the president supported may not actually come to be realized. you may soon see the things that are partially fulfilled move to the unfulfilled category. host: the unfulfilled category, what are we waiting on? guest: we are waiting on the key piece of his promise, the admission of federal ethics. he is proposing a new agency that would be a watershed moment in ethics where you have one body that has the existing power that the three existing powers have. the result would be more enforcement and more
transparency because that one agency would provide the public and voters with information and various disclosures involving lobbying, conflicts of interest, or financial disclosures. without that, many of the other promises seem to have less impact. host: ethics pledges in the biden administration is our topic in the segment. if you want to join the conversation, democrats (202) 748-8000. republicans (202) 748-8001. independents, (202) 748-8002. kedric payne is our guest, from the campaign legal center. we've gone through the promises that are partially fulfilled, the ones we are waiting on, and the ones that have been fulfilled. have they broken any? guest: there is no reporting of any violations of their ethics pledges.
so far, the transparency he promised under the executive order that was issued on his first day in august -- office has happened. right now, things look good, but you just never know when things could make a quick turn to the negative. host: explain what ethics waiver is. guest: under biden's ethics pledge, there are certain rules political appointees must follow except when they get a waiver to be not bound by that rule. and ethics waiver is very common. we found a similar waiver in president trump's and president obama's ethics pledge. it allows the administration to make exceptions to the rule in very narrow circumstances, where it is in the public interest or certain expertise is needed from an official who may be in
counsel to support them. someone coming to an agency as a political appointee, because they may bask in their prior privates -- in their private prior sector job they were involved with the company, there needs to be a waiver to allow that person to work with the agency. sometimes it makes a lot of sense because there is certain expertise you need to come into that agency and use for the public interest. in those situations, the waiver may be granted. the key part is the waiver is disclosed to the public so the public then has a right and ability to criticize any waivers they deem not benefits -- not a benefit. host: now is a good time to call in. phone lines as usual. we were talking waivers, axios with a recent story about these.
at least 16 senate confirmed officials have received waivers to ethics laws, according to a review of ethics paperwork. they were excused from portions of a widely publicized ethics pledge on the day president biden took office, restricting work that could be received -- perceived as conflict of interest based on past interest. -- for lockheed martin, in which he was a paid board member. janet yellen -- it does allow her to oversee pie natural policy -- financial policy over organizations that paid her hefty fees. is 16 waivers a lot? how does it compare to the trump administration?
guest: it is a high number, but you have to look and see if they present the type of conflict you would notice in the trump administration. in the trump administration, sometimes waivers are granted where the conflicts seemed to be more extreme. an example of the one you mentioned with the official who formerly worked for lockheed, in that waiver, that official is not involved in any decisions for lockheed. for that former employer, affiliate, that official did not help them get government contracts. that is still the case, yet the public now knows that there is a potential conflict so they can watch it. it seems as though with the biden waivers, many of them seem to comply with the need for transparency and the need for public interest in having experts who are familiar with various industries in the
official divisions. host: two family members of president biden or other presidents have to take ethics pledges about what they can and can't do? guest: the ethics pledges apply only to family members of officials if those people become members of the administration, become appointees of the administration, such as with the trump administration where his relatives and children were involved in the white house. president biden does not have that same issue. nevertheless, i would say that it would be prudent for public officials at all levels to discuss the various rules with their family, because sometimes they can have implications. for example, if a spouse or a child of a public official receives a gift from a lobbyist, that could impact that public official. host: let me stop and let you
chat with a couple of callers. jeff, silver spring, maryland, democrat. caller: thanks for taking my call. my comment is, i'm sure that you provide a good service for providing a scorecard for who is keeping their pledges, but the seems kind of like a micro ethics to me in the larger context. is there a broader score for who is more ethical, when you have somebody who has been impeached, who practices nepotism, whose kids have been trying to hawk their products out of the white house. it seems like on a broader measure, it is not even a close contest, let alone how you measure sort of ethics of presidents overall. do you have a ranking of the ethics of presidents going back to george washington? i will take your answer
off-line, and thanks a lot. guest: thank you for that question. i do need to be clear that this study that we did showing biden's ethics pledges was not designed to show whether he is ethical or not. it is to hold him accountable for the pledges that he has made. so that the public and voters can know whether or not the things they expected from the president will actually happen. the same thing happened with president trump and he mentioned during his campaign, would never actually fulfill. as an organization, we are here to provide that information to the public, for you to decide whether that aligns with what you want to hear from your elected officials. the specific question about whether is an -- whether there is an overall ranking of ethics of presidents going back to george washington, we have not done that, but that may be an
interesting project. host: do you have an opinion yourself on who might have been the most ethical president in history? guest: [laughter] i do not have an opinion on that. based on all of the different factors going into that, i think that is a very good question. host: gerald in michigan, independent, good morning. guest: good morning -- caller: good morning. i just wondered when president biden was going to take responsibility for his actions and stop blaming donald trump for the things he did in his administration. host: kedric payne, take that from an ethics pledge standpoint. guest: yes, so from an ethics pledge standpoint, the question about when will biden stop blaming trump, i look at it from the standpoint of comparing the
promises of both candidates and with regard to ethics, and hold them accountable. i think in biden's ethics pledge, he did not blame trump for anything based on how president biden presents his pledges. but it is for president biden and his administration to show that they are indeed serious about these promises that they've put up. i will point out, some people may wonder about how ethics fall into the priority of a president. so many other things are going on, clearly the pandemic. when does an ethics pledge fall into what they should do? there are steps a president can take to show there are -- there is an interest. one would be to appoint a person
in the white house responsible for the ethics agenda. president obama and president bush did this. the second is a lobby reform task force, a board that will make a suggestion on what should happen. two steps that can happen, even when other priorities are facing the president. host: i want to go to the executive order president biden signed his first day in office and included this ethics pledge that administration officials have to sign. this is the wording of that pledge, and kedric payne, i'm going to have you translate into what this means in practice. this is the pledge they have to sign -- "i commit to decision-making on the merits and exclusively in the public interest without regard to private gain or personal benefit, and commit to conduct to uphold the independence of law enforcement and per crudes -- precludes improper relations. i commit to ethical choices of
post government employment that do not raise the appearance that i've used my government service for private gain, including by using confidential information required -- acquired for the interest of future clients are cover translate that. -- future clients." guest: that ethics pledge is focused on making sure the appointees first do not try to make decisions that influence their personal financial gain. instead, they focus on the public interest. second, that these appointees are not involved in trying to change agency decisions with a political bend. so if you are at the department of justice, white hous -- white house political interests should not influence your decisions. three, it focuses on making sure people don't come into public service the key intent to lead and cash in with a lobbying
career in the private sector. host: if somebody breaks that ethics pledge, what's the enforcement mechanism? can they go to jail? guest: the doj has jurisdiction over the ethics pledge and there are several potentially criminal penalties, not to mention a criminal statute that governs public officials once they leave office and may come up with conflicts of interest and other problems. host: chatsworth, illinois, independent, you are next. caller: -- is being called for the ninth circuit court and i believe she said justice brett kavanaugh will kill people. i just think it is a disgusting comment and number two is, why is president biden making us get
shot but not the illegal immigrants that are coming across the borders? host: we will hold off on the covid discussion, but the caller brings up the supreme court. let's compare ethics pledges across branches of government. what does somebody who works in the administration and their ethics pledge? how does that compare to somebody who works in congress or somebody who works in supreme court, the judiciary, judges around the country? guest: that's a very interesting question to look at the various ethics obligations from the three branches. with the executive branch, that pledge we've been talking about that comes from the president is key, and there are also federal rules that govern the conflict of interest and other ethics requirements for members of the executive branch. similarly, for the congressional
employees and members, you have federal laws that apply but most important you have ethics rules that come under the house and senate rules. when you get to the judiciary, that's when you see a gap. there are small rules that apply to the judiciary, but nothing that is comprehensive. there was legislation recently that would have established more ethical requirements for justices. that's not only for supreme court, as well as the judiciary. there is an argument that more ethics rules are needed in the judiciary. host: lawanda is in alabama, independent, good morning. caller: good morning. host: go ahead, you are on. caller: my question is, when he got to atlanta, georgia, he said vote for me. i pledge i will help the
american people. host: and what's your question? caller: my question is, why is he not helping the american people? the people that he said for child tax credit, and what about the women like me who lost kids? we are still mothers. host: i'm very sorry for your loss, lawanda. are you concerned about the ethics of the biden administration, and how do you think administration officials compare to previous administrations? caller: the only thing that concerns me is it was said that -- i talked to a person that it was said they sent money to the governors. every governor is helping their state except for alabama. if it weren't for my fiance, i would be living in a tent like half these people. i am in a motel and my rent is more than my social security check. there is a lady with kids
sleeping in a car, ain't got no help. if i had money, i would help her. host: thanks for sharing your story. cedric payne, is there anything to pick up on? guest: i think that hearing these calls where people want their government to be responsive to their needs is the key part. we want a responsive government, and if you campaign and it was understood that you were going to provide some type of benefit that you campaigned on, i think the public will hold their elected officials accountable. that's across all elected officials, federal, state, and local. host: john in rhinelander, wisconsin, good morning. caller: i had a question about the ethics with president biden concerning his son hunter's investigation. i had read -- i will say online
that hunter biden and defense attorneys, in january upon taking office, president biden pointed nicholas mcquaid -- appointed nicholas mcquaid to the criminal division of the department of justice, and mr. mcquaid had also been a part of -- who biden hired as a defense attorney. would there be any ethics violations in that situation? host: cedric payne, on hunter biden. guest: this is for the callers that are not familiar with that point, which is that defense lawyers for hunter biden have a colleague who now works in the administration of justice -- or at least that was the reporting from a few months ago. there are rules. there is a clear rule when it
comes to new attorneys at the department of justice, as well as across other agencies, that you cannot take action that benefits your former clients and your former employer. if you are in the situation where there is a conflict and there must be approval that comes from the ethics official at that agency, so the caller is right to flag that. i think there are rules that are intended to prevent any type of conflict. the question is always enforcement. one thing that was in biden's promise was to have this commission on federal ethics that is supposed to enforce these rules more, provide more transparency, so there are no questions about whether these rules are being followed. host: one last question before you go. president biden, this is not the first administration he served in. how would this ethics pledge that we've been talking about in the past half hour, how does it
compare to the obama administration? is it more or less stringent than what obama administration's had to serve and act under? guest: let me make a difference between the ethics pledges and promises. promises are listed during the campaign and pledges are in an executive order issued on the day biden came into office they gave particular rules for his political appointees to avoid various conflicts of interest. to answer your question of how it compares to president obama, it is essentially the same. 's president obama's -- president obama's pledge was one of the strongest in recent memory, if not history. president trump followed it a little bit. president biden followed president obama's place but increased it where he has these restrictions that go to shadow
lobbying, or lobbying that works behind the scenes to help clients once they leave the administration. his pledge is a little stronger than what we've seen in quite some time. host: if you want to learn more about president biden's ethics promises and where he stands, campaignlegal.org is the website you can go to. i do appreciate your time. guest: thank you. host: in the last half-hour of our program today, we turn the phone lines over to you. it is our open forum. let us know what pug -- public policy issue -- is on your mind. the phone lines for democrats, republicans, independents, and texts as well. ♪
>> today, virginia gerber notorious candidates terry mcauliffe, -- gubernatorial candidates, terry mcauliffe, and glenn young kim compete in a debate. that is live on c-span, online at c-span.org, or on the free c-span radio app. ♪ >> weekends on c-span two brings the best in american history in nonfiction books. saturday on american history tv at 8:00 a.m., lectures in history, charlston mayor joseph riley, monty bunch, and professor -- from the citadel discuss the new african-american history museum built in charleston, south carolina. a behind-the-scenes look at camp david.
-- served and is author of the book "inside camp david: the presidential retreat." how a meeting transformed the global economy, which looks at president nixon's decision to remove the connection between the u.s. dollar and gold standard. authors discussing their latest books. former south carolina governor mark sanford reflects on his career and the future of the government -- republican party. at 11:00 a.m. eastern, roxanne dunbar ortiz in her book "not a nation of ortiz," says america was not founded by and for americans but colonialism and slavery.
watch american history tv and book tv every weekend on c-span two. ♪ >> "washington journal" continues. it is time -- host: it is time for our open forum, turning the phone lines over to you. here's how you can call in to let us know about the political policy issue on your mind. democrats can call in at (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001. independents (202) 748-8002. you can also send us a text at (202) 748-8003. keeping you updated on the stories we've been following this week and in the weeks and months passed, including this grim toll that was reached this week. one in 500 americans have died
of covid. "the washington post" noting -- roughly one in every 500 americans have succumbed to the disease caused by coronavirus. the chart to the right noting the death rates by state. in the state of mississippi, one in 330 people have died of covid. also in new jersey. louisiana, one in 350. new york, one in 360. arizona rounding out the top five with one in every 380. new york deaths were predominately recorded in the early months of the pandemic in the densest area, with the first ravaged coronavirus. it has killed one in every 110 people in the bronx and one in 220 in queens. also noting the covid death toll and its deadly effects which
have particularly targeted black, latino, and american indian and alaska native populations. looking at the death rate among younger individuals, working age group 18 to 39 groups, there is a large racial distance -- difference with covid killing blacks and latinos more than whites. we've been tracking the ongoing efforts to pass the democratic spending bills, now known as the build back better act, that $3.5 trillion legislation. and the latest out of the house ways and means committee, they completed their task of translating the president's economic vision into a task and stop's -- spending. the fruits of lawmakers efforts,
though it seemed overshadowed by the political reality, a proposal that would lower the cost of prescription drugs for seniors here in jeopardy after democrats dealt get an early glow in the house. also note -- an early blow from that. president biden getting involved in those efforts. the story that we began our program with this morning, the emotional testimony yesterday in the senate judiciary committee, from u.s. gymnasts testifying about the blind eye the fbi turned in the investigation of disgraced former team usa dr. larry nassar. olympians testifying on capitol hill, including simone biles. here's a bit of her testimony from yesterday morning. [video clip]
simone: there can be no resolution of a society's sole but the way it treats children. it is that statement that empowers me to be here today. i don't want another gymnast, olympic athlete, or any individual to experience that i and hundreds of others endured before, during, and continuing to this day. in the wake of larry nasser. to be clear -- >> take your time. simone: to take your -- to be clear, i blame larry nasser and i also blame an entire system that enabled and perpetrated his abuse. usa gymnastics and the united states olympic and paralympic
committee knew that i was abused by their official team doctor long before i was ever made aware of their knowledge. in may 2015, the former head of usa gymnastics was told by my friend and teammate maggie nichols that she suspected i too was a victim. i did not understand the magnitude of what all was happening until the indianapolis star published its article fall 2016 entitled "former usa gymnastics doctor accused of abuse." while i was a member of the 2016 u.s. olympic team, neither usa g, nor the fbi ever contacted me or my parents. while others had been informed investigations were ongoing, i have been left to wonder why i had not been told until after the rio games. this is the largest case of sexual abuse in the history of american sport, and although
there has been a fully independent investigation of the fbi's handling of the case, neither usa g nor u.s. opc have ever been made the subject of the same level of scrutiny. these are the entities entrusted with the protection of our sport and athletes, and yet it feels like questions of responsibility and organizational failures remain unanswered. host: simone biles testifying yesterday on capitol hill. if you want to watch her testimony in its entirety, you can do so on our website. now to your phone calls, our open forum, where we turn the phone lines over to you and let you lead the discussion on any public policy or political issue you want to talk about. wade in edgefield, south carolina, independent. caller: thanks for taking my call.
had someone asked c-span if they would do a segment on bill democrats are trying to get through. we haven't heard much pertaining to the $780 billion that they want to use for dhaka -- daca and i don't know if we call them illegals or what, but people coming across the border. i would like y'all to do a segment asking what people are there opinions on the $780 billion that they want to put forth to set these people up in the country. thank you for taking my call. host: the immigration proposal in reconciliation is a topic that we've done, i think it was within the past couple of weeks, but certainly a topic we can do again. always appreciate suggestions. it is a big bill and we've been
working our way through various aspects today and since it has been released. today we focused on the climate change aspects. mary in mesa, arizona, democrat. good morning. mary, are you with us? stick by your phone. leonard in bakersfield, california, republican. caller: yes, i'm wanting to -- host: i'm going to put you on hold because you've got to turn down your television. conversation only works if you mute your tv and listen through the phone. caller: yes, i would like to discuss the history of the pledge of allegiance. i read an article on the web that said the pledge of allegiance was written primarily
to sell flags to the schools in 1892. they had their columbus celebration, 400 year, -- 400 year -- host: we have to have you turn down your tv before you get on the line. joe in oklahoma city, democrat. caller: thanks so much for taking my comment. it's been a great broad-spectrum show today. just wanted to touch on the previous caller who said something about $780 billion for illegal aliens. i have one suggestion -- turn off am radio because that's just swill merchants and grievance and hate selling. i wanted to touch on the climate discussion that was on earlier when heather was asked who funds
you? i forget -- can we forget what she said and just know that it is big oil? her whole strategy, these are the same people calling it a hoax 10 years ago. i think we all know that climate change is absolutely wreaking havoc all over the world. it is costing billions and billions of dollars. these weather events that they say, this is one in 500 years, we are having those every year now. so we already know where she is getting her money, despite her name sounding like maybe she worked in adult film at one point. host: we are going to cut the comments like that. if you missed the discussion, heather reames joined us from citizens for responsible energy solutions and she was joined by sarah from the league of
conservation voters. next out of akron, ohio, good morning. caller: good morning, everyone. a doctor is one of three nobel candidates -- or actually prizewinners, in the field of virology who have criticized the vaccine program. he discovered hiv and said the vaccines themselves are causing variants and the experience of israel with 82% vaccinated, and 59% currently in the hospital who have been vaccinated, can secure this out. in addition, there are 23,000 german physicians who are no longer giving out vaccines because of side effects. host: do you mind if i ask if you are vaccinated? caller: i, as a vegan, knowing
there is seven different species of ingredients in the vaccine, i feel that it is morally wrong for me to be getting a vaccination. especially since not only -- host: i wonder what your thoughts are about the death toll in ohio, one out of 550 people in ohio at this point has died from covid. the national death toll exceeding 663,000. caller: there are numerous -- hundreds of articles about the fact that the fatalities are more from the vaccinated than the unvaccinated. host: where do you go for articles like that? caller: i go to democracynow, i go to reuters, the german newspaper. host: they are telling you that
more vaccinated people are dying then unvaccinated? that's not the information that's out there. caller: it's not the information you are getting from the cdc, which is dovetailed with big pharma, or the fda, but it is the opinion of many tens of thousands of decisions around the world. host: alvin in jacksonville, florida, republican. good morning. caller: first of all, good morning, america. on the subject of covid sars virus, i am a five-and-a-half member -- five and a half year member of the united states army, joined in 1978. in the era of biological warfare, this is what this thing did. call it what you want to, but it has been weaponized. it relates to trying to prevent
the covid spread. i'm telling everyone -- and by the way, i got this information 10 years ago in an article concerning two brothers that had died from sars, the first time i heard of this vaccine -- but for the treatment of it, the sterilization of the situation, i have not heard the cdc or the government say anything about not taking a hot shower if you think you've got covid. host: luis, columbus, -- louise, columbus, north carolina. caller: earlier you said turn your phone down. i think you meant turn your television down. host: that's what we always say. caller: i wanted to mention about i think it was the united nations trying to get this money
together to get to afghanistan to help out with their cause. and i'm sort of suspicious about that just because where is this money going to really go? i think -- this is just my thoughts on it -- i'm thinking they are wanting that money to release our americans, it is almost like ransom, but it is not being told that way. i really am suspicious because they've got enough money. they've got weapons. they've got everything they need. we are trying to help the poor people in afghanistan, but i believe that's what's going on with the united nations. that's just my thoughts. host: plenty of discussion on that this monday and tuesday's hearing. antony blinken, secretary of state, before the house on monday and the senate on tuesday. that issue came up in both hearings. in terms of hearings and events
we are covering, in about 15 minutes, we are going to head to a virtual stimson set -- center -- about the taliban takeover of afghanistan. stick around for another 15 minutes or so. and then this evening, on c-span at 7:00 this evening, we will be airing the virginia governor's debate between democrat terry mcauliffe and republican glenn juncker in -- youngkin. jesse is next out of tuscaloosa, alabama, democrat. caller: good morning, how you doing? host: doing well, jesse, go ahead. caller: i just wanted to say how proud i am of simone biles and the other olympians they came
forward with the tragic -- that came forward with the tragic circumstances they had to go through. i am very proud of those young ladies, and i hope we get to the bottom of that. and touching on that, i just wanted to ask how far along are we with the infrastructure bill? i feel as a democrat and citizen of the united states, we've been in long waiting for infrastructure to take place in this country because to be in such a power country as we are, i feel kind of behind -- we are kind of behind other countries when it comes to transportation and things of that nature. how far are the senate and congress on that bill? host: there is a lot of discussion among democrats and criticism from a publicans who say the infrastructure bill should be -- from republicans
who say the infrastructure bill should be moved, but argument from the democrats about the ordering, do they do the bipartisan bill at the same time as the 3.5 trillion dollar build back better? does it help get them votes for one if they move them at the same time? do you have any thoughts on that sequencing? or does it matter? caller: it really shouldn't matter, because overall, the country is in dire need of repair. new york city is a prime example of that. how depleted our infrastructures really are. it seems that it is always -- it takes a catastrophic incident to have them on the lack thereof in this country. it is like a traffic light needs to be in a certain area in the city is not there until there is a catastrophic accident that
occurs. then all of a sudden, the traffic light, now we need to put it there. we need to stop being so reactive and proactive. host: as the flooding in new york catastrophic issue you are referring to? caller: absolutely. a lot of places all over the country probably have the same problem, but it just happened at mother nature's wrath upon them to show how bad the systems are, the infrastructure is. these things need to be taken care of before more people die and more cities are in dire straits. that's the way i feel. all of this weighting needs to be taken care of. -- all of this waiting needs to be taken care of. how long has it been since this country put money into infrastructure? host: we focus in our 8:00
easternhour -- eastern our bang on the climate provisions in that bill. -- $72 million to modernize the electric -- billion to modernize the electric grid. $21 billion to clean up toxic pollution. $7.5 billion to build electric vehicle charging stations. that's just the climate aspects. there's also climate aspects in the larger reconciliation bill, the build back better act. one of the biggest ones we talked about is $150 billion in that bill for clean electricity payment, a system of sort of carrots and sticks to push utilities to generate power using clean power sources.
a lot happening and moving on capitol hill. david in wisconsin, a republican. caller: i just have a comment. i sit and watch with the democrats are doing to this country, and wean to -- we need to get rid of them or we won't have a country. host: humboldt, iowa, larry, independent. caller: good morning. my opinion is on this three point $5 trillion infrastructure bill, if the -- 3.5 different dollar -- three point $5 trillion infrastructure bill, if the republicans want to push taxes on the corporations and the rich, they better be prepared to finance charities, because if they aren't paying taxes, they will not pay the charities the money because they will use it for their taxes.
so government, be prepared to finance charities across the country. thank you very much. host: cheryl, california, democrat. good morning. caller: i just want to weigh in on some of the comments regarding the infrastructure bill. one of the things that concerns me as an american is that we are so willing, just like with the afghan situation, the first thing we cry wolf because they should have gotten more people out. but when it comes to things in our country that are going to make life better for our people, it is always, it is too much money. the democrats are saying, it is all this back-and-forth. the bottom line is, we pay taxes in order for the government to
be able to provide the things that is going to make life better for its people. and all of the politics back and forth is what is getting in the way, because the average person would just stop and think, ok, could your world be better? would you rather ride down the street and drive into a sinkhole , or if a catastrophic situation occurs, wouldn't you want to know that your infrastructure could support and get through that catastrophic situation? as the caller before said, we have been a country. we react to everything instead of taking a more proactive approach and dealing with situations that we know could and may occur. host: this is anita in a gusto,
georgia, independent. -- augusta, georgia, independent. caller: i wanted to make a comment about giving money to afghanistan. [indiscernible] also, what other country will help america, give money to america? this is a country that wants to give to other countries and help them, but we have people here. we have poverty and everything. they are not being helped. if they can spend money for afghanistan, why can't they help people here? that's the comment i want to make. host: anton, out of florida, republican. good morning. caller: i have a simple question . a lot of people start to ask, who really is our president? each and every time joe biden
gives a speech he says, they told me to walk off the stage and not to take questions and who to call on. who really is the president? people are starting to ask questions. host: mary, mesa, arizona, democrat. caller: good morning. thank you for being the most patient man on television. i appreciate you airing the hearing on larry nassar and the failure of the fbi and other oversight entities. i was very proud of simone biles and the rest of team usa. i'm also a survivor, starting at 10. i can tell you that watching chuck grassley and ted cruz -- i've been traumatized by chuck grassley twice, once with the hearings of anita hill and
another with the hearing of brett kavanaugh. watching a committee talk about how they are going to do something when there have been critical accusers before, and there's been no sort of recourse . we know for fact that many other people wanted to come forward for both anita hill and dr. christine ford and i would really love for them to walk a mile in some of these women's shoes to know what it is like to sit in those rooms and have people doubt what you have gone through. i appreciate it. host: mary, thanks for sharing your story. brandy, pennsylvania, republican. caller: thanks for taking my call. a question here in regards to masking mandates in schools -- i'm trying to find out, maybe you can better guide me -- our governor implemented a masking mandate.
we are having school meetings -- school board meetings and choices not to mask our children where there is no data proving the transmission is higher amongst the school-aged children, and that masking down without the choice is making a difference. they are saying, a lot of school districts and school boards are saying their hands are tied and that is by the advice of their school solicitors and legal counsel. they are stating they must follow this mask mandate or their license could be at risk. they are liable for insurance issues and things. i'm trying to find out, after calling all of our state reps and the department of health, and the department of health specifically told me the advisory committee said schools are allowed to accept exemption forms and it is allowed to touch up to them what type -- it is up to them what type to accept. our school is being -- parents
provide documentation that children's have a medical issue or disability. -- children have a medical issue or disability. the department of education is not stating that this comes from them. on the health department faq, it says it is recommended to prove a child has a 504. where is it coming from? where is the fear coming from? host: how old are your kids? caller: six and nine. host: how are they doing with school back in session? where they out of school last year the whole year? caller: our school district was absolutely one of the ones that was in. we took about a month and a half after the holidays and new year because i think it was high covid numbers, but our school
district and superintendent has been good at not going with the commonality of the fearfulness that most of the schools around us. in this particular case, i went head to head but he has explicitly faded. the board agrees they should not be masked, but their hands are tied. who is tying their hands? host: what is the school district in aliquippa, pennsylvania? caller: central valley. we have school districts, butler, slippery rock, who are working with an attorney and filed suits against the department of health to see if the acting secretary has the ability to mandate this, and is it legal or not. case was supposed to go today but the courts put it on hold to see where the legality is before they proceed. host: this is anthony in south carolina, independent, good
morning. caller: good morning. i have a question about what the law for a felony in the district of columbia to find out if these people are responsible for the murder of four people that died on the seventh of january when the insurrection happened? thank you. host: kevin, washington, d.c., democrat. caller: i have a question about equity. there's a federal court case set for hearing in buffalo today. relating to the mayoral election so mayor brown lost the democratic primary and there is a trump appointed judge whose company had a million dollars worth of business with mayor brown who is trying to put him on their ballot under the
buffalo billionaire party. there is an article and it talks about the judge's ties to developers. the judge wants to move the goalpost host:. how did you come to be interested in that? caller: i am a native of buffalo. i followed some of those investigator coasts. -- investigative posts. plus, the media seems to ignore the inequity. joe biden hasn't talked about the playing field.
she was a single mother, a nurse . a trust organizer. she wants to make more public housing. it threatened the developers. buffalo is one of the few places in the country were we have affordable housing and access to the lakes. a beautiful place to live. host: native of buffalo. just a few minutes here as we wait for this event to get underway, discussion with pakistan's ambassador to the u.s. as we wait for that to begin, actually just getting underway now. so we are going to end the program here. we will be back tomorrow morning at 7:00 a.m. eastern, 4:00 a.m. pacific.we now take you to the virtual event, discussion with pakistan's ambassador on the impact of the taliban takeover in afghanistan. . >> i