| Speaker | Time | Text |
|---|---|---|
|
unidentified
|
In the Washington, D.C. area, listen on 90.1 FM. | |
| Use our free C-SPAN Now app or go online to c-SPAN.org slash radio on SiriusXM Radio on channel 455, the TuneIn app, and on your smart speaker by simply saying play C-SPAN radio. | ||
| Hear our live call-in program, Washington Journal, daily at 7 a.m. Eastern. | ||
| Listen to House and Senate proceedings, committee hearings, news conferences, and other public affairs events live throughout the day. | ||
| And for the best way to hear what's happening in Washington with fast-paced reports, live interviews, and analysis of the day. | ||
| Catch Washington today, weekdays at 5 p.m. and 9 p.m. Eastern. | ||
| Listen to C-SPAN programs on C-SPAN Radio. | ||
| Anytime, anywhere. | ||
| C-SPAN, Democracy Unfiltered. | ||
| Democracy is always an unfinished creation. | ||
| Democracy is worth dying for. | ||
| Democracy belongs to us all. | ||
| We are here in the sanctuary of democracy. | ||
| Great responsibilities fall once again to the great democracies. | ||
| American democracy is bigger than any one person. | ||
| Freedom and democracy must be constantly guarded and protected. | ||
| We are still at our core a democracy. | ||
| This is also a massive victory for democracy and for freedom. | ||
| Joining us this morning is Mark Zandi, chief economist for Moody's Analytics, here to talk about the U.S. economy's growing reliance on high-income earners. | ||
| Mark Zandy, talk about your research. | ||
| What did you find? | ||
| What is the headline? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Well, Greta, good to be with you. | |
| Thanks for the opportunity. | ||
| Well, the American economy is very dependent on the spending of the well-to-do, the folks in the top part of the income and wealth distribution. | ||
| I mean, just to give you a stat to make that concrete, the folks in the top 10% of the income distribution account for almost 50% of the personal outlays that we do as consumers. | ||
| That gives you a sense of context. | ||
| And it obviously goes to the strength of their finances. | ||
| Got a job, wage growth is strong, but they've been enjoying record stock prices, record housing values. | ||
| They have any debt at all. | ||
| It's a 30-year fixed rate mortgage. | ||
| They locked in when rates were low. | ||
| So they're sitting in a very good financial spot. | ||
| And folks in the bottom part of the income distribution, the less well-to-do, lower-income households, they're struggling. | ||
| Obviously, they don't own stocks. | ||
| They may not own a home. | ||
| They have credit card debt, consumer finance loans that they took on to try to maintain their purchasing power when inflation was raging. | ||
| They have a job. | ||
| That's really important. | ||
| That's key to keeping things moving forward. | ||
| But other than that, they're struggling with their finances. | ||
| So very large differences between the folks at the top part of the distribution and the folks at the bottom part of the distribution. | ||
| More from your report. | ||
| As you said, the top 10% of U.S. earners, that's people who make $250,000 plus in their households, count for 49.7% of all spending, a record going back to 1989. | ||
| This accounts for about, this was accounted for about 36% three decades ago. | ||
| So that's the change right there. | ||
| Mark Zandy, can you talk about that change? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yeah, that's a very significant change over the decades. | |
| And it does go to the ongoing so-called skewing of the income distribution and wealth distribution. | ||
| Very simply, folks that are doing well are doing better and better and better and taking a bigger share of the economic pie. | ||
| Doesn't mean that wages and incomes haven't been rising for everyone else for middle-income households, lower-income households. | ||
| It has. | ||
| It just means that the share of that income, of that wealth, and of that spending has increasingly accrued to the folks at the top part of the distribution. | ||
| You know, Greta, you know, it also, there's a lot of, you know, obvious concerns about equity, but there's also concerns about what this means for the economy in that if the economy is so dependent on such a small group of folks, and that group of folks is so dependent on things like stock prices and housing values, it does give you a sense that the economy is somewhat vulnerable here if things don't stick to scripts. | ||
| So, you know, when you're looking at the stock market, if it starts to go down, that poses a broader, mortal threat to the broader economy because of the impact that has on the well-to-do and the fact that the well-to-do account for such a large share of what's going on. | ||
| How vulnerable? | ||
|
unidentified
|
I think it's vulnerable. | |
| I think it's a concern. | ||
| That's been brought into clear relief in the last few days. | ||
| I don't know if you follow the stock market like I do, but a lot of red on the screen over the last few days and a lot of concern about the stock market. | ||
| I mean, the market is very highly valued, richly valued. | ||
| Prices are very high to the underlying corporate earnings that support those prices. | ||
| And even in the stock market, the gains there are very concentrated. | ||
| If you look at the stock, the companies that are driving the stock market, it's the big tech companies, the so-called magnificent seven. | ||
| So not only is spending very dependent on a small group that's dependent on the stock market, but the stock market itself is very dependent on a few companies that are kind of driving the train here. | ||
| So in my mind, that is a key vulnerability to the broader economy. | ||
| Mark Zandi, do you see bubbles in the economy that could pop, that could burst? | ||
|
unidentified
|
I don't know. | |
| I go so far as to say it's a bubble. | ||
| A bubble implies speculation that people are just buying simply because the price rose yesterday, therefore it will rise tomorrow. | ||
| Maybe there's some of that creeping in. | ||
| When I see, like, for example, President Trump issued a crypto coin soon after his inauguration, that the value of that jumped significantly. | ||
| It's come back down, but it's still worth, last I look, three, four billion dollars. | ||
| I mean, and there's just no value there. | ||
| There's just nothing. | ||
| So that gives you a sense that things are what I'd call frothy, speculative, maybe bubble-like. | ||
| I don't want to extrapolate that too far because if you go into the stock market, back into the stock market again, those companies I just mentioned, the tech companies that are driving the gains, they're real companies. | ||
| They're joggernauts. | ||
| They add real value. | ||
| They're very profitable, highly profitable. | ||
| The prospects are very good. | ||
| So that's not consistent with the idea the market is in a bubble. | ||
| I think it's more likely, you could argue it's just very highly valued, richly valued, overvalued, maybe bordering on frothy, but speculative probably in a bubble is probably too far. | ||
| We're talking with Mark Zandi this morning, chief economist with Moody's Analytics. | ||
| He's here to talk about the U.S. economy and this new report on high income earners. | ||
| Here's how we've divided the lines this morning. | ||
| If you make under $100,000, dial in this morning at $202,748, $8,000. | ||
| If you make between $100,000 and $250,000, your line this morning is $202,748, 8001. | ||
| And if you make over $250,000, that 10%, call us at 202-748-8002. | ||
| We welcome your comments and your questions this morning. | ||
| Mark Zandi, before we get to calls, let's take some headlines this morning from the papers. | ||
| The Wall Street Journal, U.S. vows to raise tariffs on three countries, Mexico, Canada, China. | ||
| The China move slated to take effect Tuesday, along with the Canada and Mexico actions, doubles up on the previous 10% additional tariff trumps Trump placed on China's products this month. | ||
| There's that headline in the Wall Street Journal. | ||
| And then there's this in the business finance section of the Wall Street Journal this morning. | ||
| Tariff threats hit S ⁇ P and NASDAQ. | ||
| Fresh tariff threats and a tech sell-off drag stocks lower with the S ⁇ P 500 surrendering the last of its gains for the year. | ||
| Are the two tied in your opinion? | ||
| And if so, why? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yeah, indeed. | |
| I do think that the tariffs are starting to spook investors. | ||
| It's taken a bit of time for that to happen, Greta. | ||
| I think investors thought, well, the president, when he was talking about tariffs, he didn't really mean that he would raise tariffs, at least not to the degree he's talking about now or to the extent that he's talking about them now. | ||
| But it does appear with each passing day and each passing announcement that the president's serious about this. | ||
| We're going to see broad-based tariffs on lots of different countries, lots of different products over an extended period of time. | ||
| And that's just really bad for business, bad for the economy. | ||
| You know, it hit is a tax on American consumers. | ||
| So we're all going to be paying more for those things that come from other countries. | ||
| You know, everything from the food products we get from Canada and Mexico to the appliances and game consoles we get from China. | ||
| So we're going to be paying more for that, and that hurts our ability to buy other things. | ||
| It also is hard on businesses that import product to help them do whatever they do, whatever they produce, machine tools and materials and supplies. | ||
| I mean, think, say you're a home builder and you need to bring in lumber from Canada. | ||
| Well, you're going to be paying a lot more for that. | ||
| It makes it much more difficult for you to build a home at an affordable price point. | ||
| Or all the electrical equipment and other tools and things that come from Mexico that go into building that home or the building materials and appliances that come from China that fill the home. | ||
| All those things are now going to be more expensive. | ||
| And then obviously there's going to be retaliation. | ||
| Not clear to what degree. | ||
| Some countries will retaliate tit for tat like China. | ||
| Others not so much. | ||
| Maybe Canada will be a little bit more circumspect. | ||
| But retaliation means that they're going to be raising tariffs on our products, what we send to them. | ||
| They're going to put trade restrictions and that costs American jobs. | ||
| And then Ellen, as you can tell, I can go on and on and on here, but the uncertainty that this creates is really very pernicious. | ||
| It's a corrosive. | ||
| I mean, you know, tariffs on which countries, you know, which products over what period of time, these are done under executive order. | ||
| So the president can change his mind tomorrow and change them. | ||
| And if you're a business person trying to make an investment decision or a hiring decision, you need some clarity around this. | ||
| You need some certainty around it before you're going to make those decisions. | ||
| So, you know, you add that all up. | ||
| It's just bad for business. | ||
| And if it's bad for business, it's bad for the stock market. | ||
| And if it's bad for the stock market, you know, as we were just talking about, it could be bad for the broader economy. | ||
| All right. | ||
| Let's get to calls in our viewers. | ||
| Brian in Albuquerque, New Mexico. | ||
| Good morning to you. | ||
| Making over $250,000. | ||
| Brian, your question or comment. | ||
|
unidentified
|
I wanted to comment on two issues you haven't brought up yet. | |
| And that would be immigration in our housing market. | ||
| We need to solve the housing market because they're not making land anymore. | ||
| So that's part of the problem. | ||
| Where to put the new houses? | ||
| And people can't afford them because there's such a high demand. | ||
| And I also wanted to point at immigration. | ||
| You know, with the combination of globalization, extremely high immigration, we've essentially devalued average working Americans in real terms. | ||
| For devaluing the hourly rate of a worker in America, and people can't make it anymore. | ||
| So I like to hear why we do not control immigration. | ||
| I know we need some immigration is healthy, but too much of it is a problem. | ||
| But we never frame it that way. | ||
| It's always all or nothing, all or nothing. | ||
| Okay, Brian, we'll take those two issues. | ||
| Mark Sandy, before you answer Brian on housing, I just want to share this headline with you. | ||
| Again, the Wall Street Journal: pending U.S. home sales hit new low in January. | ||
| So take what he said and also respond to this headline. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yeah, he makes good points. | |
| Clearly, on housing, we have a very severe shortage of homes. | ||
| This has been a problem that's long in the making, goes all the way back to the financial crisis and the housing collapse a generation ago. | ||
| We just not put up enough homes to meet the demand from all the households that have formed and will continue to form. | ||
| And there's lots of different things going on. | ||
| Part of the problem is zoning and permitting. | ||
| Many communities across the country are very reticent to allow development in their communities, particularly in densely populated parts of the country where there is a lot of demand. | ||
| So we need to work on that. | ||
| Unfortunately, I don't think I've seen any real policy response. | ||
| And I can't glean that from kind of the conversations going on in Washington today. | ||
| It's really not a priority for lawmakers, at least ostensibly, at least at this point. | ||
| That I think has got to change. | ||
| If it doesn't change, it took us a generation to get into this housing shortage. | ||
| It'll take us at least a generation to get out unless we get some support from lawmakers and try to bring down the cost of homebuilding. | ||
| But one thing, just tying us back to tariffs, I would say on the housing front, lists do no harm. | ||
| And tariffs clearly do harm. | ||
| They raise the cost of building a home. | ||
| Just talk to the National Association of Home Builders. | ||
| They're the trade group that advocates for the homebuilding industry. | ||
| They make a very clear case that tariffs are a real problem. | ||
| They add to the cost of constructing homes. | ||
| And if you have to raise the cost, it means it's unaffordable for many Americans. | ||
| People just can't afford to buy them. | ||
| So I do think this is a very significant issue. | ||
| On immigration, I agree. | ||
| I think we need to have a much more rational immigration system and policy. | ||
| I mean, I do think controlling our borders is critical. | ||
| I think that goes beyond economics. | ||
| That's a national security issue. | ||
| I think we've made a lot of progress there, beginning back with President Biden's executive order last summer putting restrictions on asylum seekers. | ||
| And that had a big impact by the time President Trump took office. | ||
| And obviously, President Trump is really clamping down further on that. | ||
| But having said that, I do think we need a lot of immigrants and we need lots of immigrants of all skills across the board from folks that work in the agriculture and food processing industry to the folks that work in the healthcare industry at hospitals as elder and child caregivers to very sophisticated, highly educated individuals. | ||
| I mean, just take going back to those tech companies we were talking about earlier, go take a look at the senior management of those companies. | ||
| Many of them are immigrants that come to this country. | ||
| So we need immigration, but we need a rational immigration policy that aligns the immigrants that come into the country that they have the skills that are needed to drive our economy going forward. | ||
| So there was a good, I'll end by saying there was some good legislation that was making its way through Congress last summer. | ||
| A lot of bipartisan support for it. | ||
| Some very conservative Republican senators were on board with the immigration reform. | ||
| It looked like it might get through, but obviously it got nailed by the election process and never got through. | ||
| But hopefully lawmakers will come back around and address this again because we do need immigration reform. | ||
| All right. | ||
| Let's go to John in Santa Paula, California. | ||
| John, good morning to you. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Good morning. | |
| Such an honor to talk to Mr. Zani. | ||
| I'd like to talk about three points. | ||
| One is I view the stock market similar to the grocery stores. | ||
| The prices in the stock market expanded because there's just too much money in the economy. | ||
| My second point concerns the 49% that do pay taxes. | ||
| And what I see with the Trump tax cuts is that we're creating more billionaires. | ||
| There's more billionaires today and more millionaires today than ever before. | ||
| So you can lower the corporate taxes by 6% because as they would be paying 21%. | ||
| So you add more, you lose 6% and you gain 21%. | ||
| And that's why if you go to the CBO and you look at the budget histories, that's why the Trump tax cuts hit $4 trillion for the first time in revenues. | ||
| They actually created revenues because they added more people who were paying taxes in that 49% range. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| John, I'm going to take those two because we've got a lot of people waiting to talk to Mr. Zandy. | ||
| So Mark Zandy, if you want to start with the stock market and grocery prices, he tied those two together and then move on to the corporate tax rate and the first round of Trump tax cuts actually increasing revenue. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yeah, there are a lot of reasons why stock prices are up. | |
| I mean, one obvious is that American companies are doing well. | ||
| Their corporate profits are very high. | ||
| They did a really good job navigating through the pandemic. | ||
| Sales have been strong. | ||
| Their margins are wide. | ||
| They were also benefiting from low interest rates. | ||
| They locked in the previously low rates, and that's been very helpful. | ||
| So lots of different reasons why the stock market is high as it is. | ||
| It's just gotten a little ahead of itself, which is not uncommon. | ||
| This happens. | ||
| I mean, it is a market and people do take chances and risks. | ||
| And so I think stock prices have gotten ahead of themselves, ahead of those strong corporate earnings. | ||
| But fundamentally, the reason why stock prices are up is because American companies are, certainly the companies that are being publicly traded are doing quite well. | ||
| And on his second point about corporate tax rates being lowered under the first Trump administration tax bill and that increasing revenues to the Treasury Department. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yeah, here I'm not on board with that. | |
| I mean, I like tax cuts like anybody else. | ||
| I have no problem with tax cuts. | ||
| But I do think they need to be paid. | ||
| If we're going to give tax cuts to businesses or to individuals, we need, certainly in the context of our large budget deficits and debt, we need to pay for them. | ||
| And I don't think the corporate tax cuts that were put into place under President Trump in his first term, that they were paid for. | ||
| You know, the caller called out the Congressional Budget Office, the CBO, the folks, the partisan group that does the budgeting for the government. | ||
| And they, if you go take a look at their work, it's not consistent with the idea that those tax cuts were paid for, just the opposite. | ||
| So, you know, I think I'm all for lower tax rates. | ||
| I think they're key, but I think we need to actually figure out ways to pay for them if we are going to provide those kind of tax cuts. | ||
| All right, Jesse and Milwaukee, good morning to you, making under $100,000. | ||
| Your turn. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yeah, I just got one question. | |
| And it goes back to what he was talking about before, which is that the tech stocks are the stock that are really hot and they're making a lot of money. | ||
| But it also sounds like he was going to say there's no diversity within this. | ||
| Can you elaborate a little bit more on that? | ||
| All right. | ||
| Mark Zandy. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yeah, you've heard the Magnificent Seven. | |
| So there's seven technology stocks. | ||
| Everyone from like NVIDIA who's benefiting from selling all the chips related to the boom in artificial intelligence to Apple to Meta, those companies are kind of driving the stock market. | ||
| If you look at the increase in the value of stocks overall, a big chunk of that is those companies. | ||
| Having said that, though, if you look at the rest of the stock market, everybody else and the hundreds of thousands of other companies with publicly traded stocks, they're also doing well. | ||
| It's just not nearly as well as those juggernauts, those large companies, tech companies that have done fabulously well. | ||
| So the market is top heavy. | ||
| The Magnificent Seven is driving the train. | ||
| And that is a risk. | ||
| That adds to the concerns that we were talking about earlier about concentration, relying too heavily on a few companies and the well-to-do. | ||
| But the stock market has done well more broadly. | ||
| If you look across the entire market, all companies, well, at least most companies that have publicly traded stocks have done quite well. | ||
| Business has been good. | ||
| Mark Zandy, what do you make of headlines recently about Warren Buffett hoarding cash? | ||
| And then there's this one. | ||
| Is Warren Buffett selling before a stock market crash? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yeah, well, that goes back to my point about valuation, you know, overvalued, bordering on frothy. | |
| I suspect Warren Buffett's seen the same things. | ||
| And historically, what he's done is when people are really optimistic and driving up stock prices and it looks like stock prices are getting overvalued and frothy and some signs of speculation creeping in. | ||
| You mentioned the word bubble, people start talking about that. | ||
| That's when he tends to pull back, right? | ||
| And raises more cash and this just waits. | ||
| And historically, he's been obviously rewarded by doing that, that patience. | ||
| It's hard to do. | ||
| It's really hard to do because you see the stock price rising every day and you go, you know, you get a FOMO. | ||
| You worry about missing out. | ||
| But he's very good at that, a very disciplined investor. | ||
| And ultimately, the market goes down because if it gets overvalued by definition, it's too highly priced relative to the underlying value of the companies that support it. | ||
| And the market goes down. | ||
| And that's when he buys and he steps in. | ||
| So it's really, as you can tell, many people are up to that ability to do that and have that patience and discipline and understanding and careful, how careful an investor he is. | ||
| But that's what he's telling us. | ||
| He's saying, look, the markets are highly, richly valued. | ||
| And I'm going to step away like I've done in the past. | ||
| And I expect I'll have an opportunity here in the not too distant future. | ||
| Andrew in Ormond Beach, Florida. | ||
| Good morning to you, Andrew. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Hi, good morning. | |
| I got a strange question, actually. | ||
| Does the economy that is relying on high-income earners benefit or detract from people like us, lower-income earners? | ||
| Yeah, Andrew's calling in on the line for under $100,000. | ||
| Mark Zandy? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yeah, not an odd question at all. | |
| It's a great question. | ||
| And I've got a great affinity for Ormond Beach. | ||
| You know, my wife is from Ormond, so great, great, great place. | ||
| Great beaches. | ||
| Well, no, it's not detracting. | ||
| And I'm speaking in aggregate, not for any specific individual or smaller group, but in aggregate. | ||
| All of our incomes have been rising. | ||
| And we got nailed back a couple, three years ago when inflation took off. | ||
| Our purchasing power, many people's purchasing power, all of our purchasing powers declined. | ||
| And it really is very hard on folks with lower incomes. | ||
| But we've made it back. | ||
| We're still paying higher prices for things, but wage growth has been stronger than the rate of inflation over the past couple of years. | ||
| So we're all starting to catch up. | ||
| So everyone is benefiting and participating in the economy's success over the last couple of years, couple, three years, since we've kind of broken free from the pandemic and the ill effects of the Russian war in Ukraine. | ||
| But the folks in the top part of the income distribution, the well-to-do, the folks with higher incomes and more wealth, they've benefited more. | ||
| And if you take, like if you look at the totality of their financial situation, it's improved a lot more than anybody else's financial situation. | ||
| So it's not like their success is diminishing everyone else's success, but they are just much more successful, if that makes sense. | ||
| Mark Zandi, your thoughts on the impact of federal employees losing their jobs and federal freezing of funds. | ||
| This is a headline in the Metro section of the Washington Post. | ||
| DC unemployment claims jump amid federal job cuts, up 25% increase from the previous week and up fourfold compared with the same week a year ago. | ||
| Could this trigger a recession, these moves by the Trump administration, or if not nationally, local recessions? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yeah, it depends on how I'm nervous about what I'm observing. | |
| Look, I'm all for taking a good hard look at what government is doing to make sure that it's doing things well, efficiently, properly, just like every business in America does, you know, continually. | ||
| You know, I'm a business person and I do that in my daily business life. | ||
| I'm looking for ways to make sure that I'm operating as efficiently as possible and everyone's doing the kinds of things they should be doing when they should be doing it. | ||
| And we're all executing. | ||
| That's fair game and that's appropriate and that's what we should be doing in the federal government. | ||
| But I do worry that what we're observing now is just quite haphazard. | ||
| It's not surgical. | ||
| It looks like it's when you pull out chainsaws, that doesn't give you the sense that there is careful thought as to what's going on and how things are being done. | ||
| And it makes people nervous. | ||
| The fact that things seem so capricious. | ||
| And I don't think that's conducive to those folks or to the broader economy or to the regional economies in which these folks are living and working in. | ||
| So I don't, I think it's a great thing that the lawmakers are taking a good hard look at the way we're operating the government. | ||
| We should be doing that all the time. | ||
| I just worry about the way it's being done. | ||
| The other thing I worry about, and here I say this with less confidence, some things I'm very confident in here, I'm less confident. | ||
| But I do worry about, you know, that we cut jobs and funding for things that ultimately are going to be really impactful because we don't have the people that we need or we don't have the funding that's appropriate. | ||
| You know, from air traffic control to food and drug to environmental issues and climate to just tracking the weather systems. | ||
| I mean, these are things that, you know, government does and we absolutely need them. | ||
| And we've got to make sure that, you know, when we strive for efficiency, we don't undermine the ability of the government to provide the services that are necessary for a well-functioning economy. | ||
| And also for the private sector and American businesses, they rely very heavily on good weather reports and making sure the transportation system is safe and works well and all this kinds of things. | ||
| So that makes me nervous. | ||
| I worry about that. | ||
| And I'm not the only one. | ||
| You can tell, you can see it in kind of sentiment out there. | ||
| People are anxious about how this is unfolding. | ||
| Mark Zandi, the chief economist with Moody's Analytics. | ||
| You can go to economy.com. | ||
| You can follow him on X at MarkZandi. | ||
| Learn more about his recent report on the U.S. economy's growing reliance on high-income earners. | ||
| Mr. Zandi, thank you very much for the conversation as always this morning. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yeah, anytime, Greta, I love talking with the folks, so anytime. | |
| All right, we appreciate the conversation as well. | ||
|
unidentified
|
C-SPAN's Washington Journal, a live forum involving you to discuss the latest issues in government, politics, and public policy from Washington, D.C. and across the country. | |
| And coming up Monday morning, NBC News Congressional Reporter Scott Wong previews President Trump's address to Congress on Tuesday. | ||
| And then White House correspondent Philip Wegman of Real Clear Politics discusses the week ahead at the White House. | ||
| Also, Gene Dodaro, U.S. Comptroller General and head of the Government Accountability Office, will talk about the GAO's latest report on federal programs deemed at high risk for mismanagement, fraud, and waste. | ||
| C-SPAN's Washington Journal. | ||
| Join in the conversation live at 7 Eastern Monday morning on C-SPAN, C-SPAN Now, our free mobile app, or online at c-SPAN.org. | ||
| On Monday, local and federal leaders meet for the National Association of Counties Legislative Conference to discuss taxes and budget reconciliation along with disaster preparedness and the impact of the Trump administration's policies at the local level. | ||
| Watch live coverage at 9 a.m. Eastern on C-SPAN 2, C-SPAN Now, our free mobile app, or online at cspan.org. | ||
| Tuesday night, watch C-SPAN's live coverage of President Trump's address to Congress, the first address of his second term, and less than two months since taking office. | ||
| C-SPAN's live coverage begins at 8 p.m. Eastern with a preview of the evening from Capitol Hill, followed by the President's speech, which begins at 9 p.m. Eastern. | ||
| And then watch the Democratic response after the President's speech. | ||
| We'll also take your calls and get your reaction on social media. | ||
| Over on C-SPAN 2, you can also watch a simulcast of the evening's coverage, followed by reaction from lawmakers live from Capitol Hill. | ||
| Watch President Trump's address to Congress live Tuesday, beginning at 8 p.m. Eastern on C-SPAN, our simulcast live on C-SPAN 2 or on C-SPAN Now, our free mobile video app. | ||
| Also online at c-SPAN.org. |