CSPAN - Washington Journal Washington Journal

All Episodes

Previous Next

April 5, 2025 10:06-12:01 - CSPAN

01:54:52

Washington Journal Washington Journal

Participants

Main

tammy thueringer

cspan 22:51

Appearances

amy klobuchar

sen/d 02:01

brian lamb

cspan 00:46

chuck schumer

sen/d 01:17

frank bisignano

00:32

jerome powell

01:40

john thune

sen/r 01:08

maggie hassan

01:44

mark carney

can 00:47

Clips

bill christison

00:24

joel skousen

00:11

john mcardle

cspan 00:17

lee hawkins

00:17

Callers

corona in ohio

callers 00:11

tony in florida

callers 00:12

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Show episode speakers

Speaker	Time	Text
unidentified		Dallas History Professor Susan Hansen on the legacy and cultural importance of the 1918 Pulitzer Prize-winning autobiography, The Education of Henry Adams.
		The author is a descendant of President John Adams.
		Exploring the American story.
		Watch American History TV every weekend and find a full schedule on your program guide or watch online anytime at c-span.org/slash history.
		C-SPAN. Democracy Unfiltered.
		We're funded by these television companies and more, including Comcast.
		Oh, you think this is just a community censor?
		No, it's way more than that.
		Comcast is partnering with a thousand community centers to create Wi-Fi-enabled lists so students from low-income families can get the tools they need to be ready for anything.
		Comcast supports C-SPAN as a public service, along with these other television providers, giving you a front row seat to democracy.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		This is Washington Journal for Saturday, April 5th.
		According to a new Gallup poll, the economy tops the list of Americans' worries.
		Concerns about health care and the environment are up significantly, and worry about Social Security is at a 15-year high.
		At the same time, concerns about crime, drug use, immigration, and the availability and affordability of energy have decreased.
		To start today's program, we are asking you, what's your top concern for the U.S.?
		Here are the lines.
		Republicans 202-748-8001.
		Democrats 202-748-8000.
		And Independents 202-748-8002.
		You can text your comments to 202-748-8003.
		Be sure to include your name and city.
		You can also post a question or comment on Facebook at facebook.com/slash C-SPAN or on X at C-SPANWJ.
		Good morning, and thank you for being with us.
		We'll get to your calls and comments in just a few minutes, but wanted to give you some more information from that recent Gallup poll.
		It says that Americans' top ranking worries are pocketbook issues, including the economy.
		That's at 60% worry a great deal, healthcare costs, 59%, inflation, 56%, federal spending and the budget deficit, 53%, and the social security system, 52%.
		Meanwhile, half of Americans are greatly worried about hunger and homelessness, and 48% each are concerned about the way the economy and wealth are distributed in the U.S. and the size and power of the federal government.
		Crime and violence, the quality of the environment, the possible terrorist attack on the U.S., illegal immigration, and drug use are toward the bottom of the list, while Americans exhibit the lowest concerns about unemployment, the availability, and affordability of energy, and race relations.
		Race relations, the issue evoking the least amount of worry, has been declining since it peaked at 48% in 2021.
		That main issue, the top concern is the economy, and that was the topic for Jerome Powell yesterday as he spoke.
		The Federal Reserve Chair from the Wall Street Journal, the article says, Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell said the U.S. economy was likely to face a period of higher prices and weaker growth than seemed possible a few weeks ago because of larger than anticipated tariff hikes announced by President Trump.
		Says that in 2019, the Fed preempted potential fallout from Trump's trade war with China by cutting rates before weakness was evident in the economy.
		But Powell hinted that the current situation would be different because inflation has been elevated in recent years and because the current round of tariffs is much larger.
		The central bank this time could wait to cut rates until signs of economic weakness are more apparent.
		Powell said the central bank didn't need to be in a hurry to cut rates, repeating language he has often used to signal a rate cut isn't on the table at the Fed's next policy meeting, which is May 6th and 7th.
		Yesterday's policy meeting was where Jerome Powell made those remarks.
		Here is a clip from yesterday.
jerome powell ▲ ● ▼		Looking across many indicators, the labor market appears to be broadly in balance and not a significant source of inflationary pressure.
		This morning's jobs report showed the unemployment rate at 4.2% in March, still in the low range where it has held since early last year.
		Over the first quarters, a quarter, payrolls grew by an average of 150,000 jobs per month.
		The combination of low layoffs, moderating job growth, and slowing labor force growth has kept the unemployment rate broadly stable.
		Turning to the other leg of our dual mandate, inflation has declined sharply from its pandemic highs of mid-2022.
		It has done so without the kind of painful rise in unemployment that has often accompanied periods of tight monetary policy that are needed to reduce inflation.
		More recently, progress toward our 2% inflation objective has slowed.
		Total PCE prices rose 2.5% over the 12 months ending in February.
		Core PCE prices, which exclude the volatile food and energy categories, rose 2.8%.
		Looking ahead, higher tariffs will be working their way through our economy and are likely to raise inflation in coming quarters.
		Reflecting this, both survey and market-based measures of near-term inflation expectations have moved up.
		By most measures, longer-term inflation expectations, those beyond just the next few years, remain well-anchored and consistent with our 2% inflation goal.
		We remain committed to returning inflation sustainably to our 2% objective.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Yesterday, before Jerome Powell's comments, President Trump posting this on Truth Social, this would be a perfect time for Fed Chairman Jerome Powell to cut interest rates.
		He is always late, but he could now change his image and quickly.
		Energy prices are down, interest rates are down, inflation is down, even eggs are down 69%, and jobs are up, all within two months.
		A big win for America.
		Cut interest rates, Jerome, and stop playing politics.
		The economy coming in as the top concern among Americans for issues in the U.S. For this first hour, we want to hear what your top concern is.
		Again, the Lions Republicans 202-748-8001.
		Democrats 202-748-8000.
		And Independents 202-748-8002.
		We'll start with Otis in Orange Park, Florida, line for Democrats.
		Hi, Otis.
unidentified		Hello, good morning.
		Now, my concern is this year.
		The economy.
		President Trump and his Republican Party have gaslit or trying to gaslight the American people.
		And about a bunch of them believe in him.
		You can't say that putting tariffs on the entire world, in a sense, is good for America.
		All they have to do is stop dealing with America.
		But we, they, people saying taking foots, we're going to have to have some pain.
		What type of pain?
		The people with money, they can sustain the pain.
		When you broke, you can't sustain it.
		And most of the people are going to get hurt.
		It's going to be his Republicans who are going to give this guy every inch of rope he asks for.
		And it's not fair.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Otis, how do you think you're personally going to be impacted by the tariffs?
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		What do you think is going to impact you the most?
unidentified		Well, the only thing going to impact me right now is that my family members are going to struggle a lot more.
		I can withstand this pain more so than a lot of other people.
		But my family members are not able to withstand the pain that America is about to feel.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		That was Otis in Florida.
		Ernest in Massachusetts, line for independence.
		Good morning, Ernest.
unidentified		Good morning.
		My top concern right now is the backdoor cancellation of Social Security.
		They're dismantling the infrastructure of Social Security so that they can get rid of Social Security.
		And we know that's what the plan is.
		And after they get rid of Social Security, they will give rich people, billionaires, and corporations a big tax cut.
		In fact, they will pay no taxes.
		And my other concern is about the thousands and thousands of federal workers that have lost their jobs.
		And they're going to depend on unemployment and things like that, which ultimately comes from the states.
		And they're not going to be able to get any benefits at all.
		And I'm really concerned about that.
		I'm concerned about all the people that lost their jobs.
		I'm concerned about Social Security.
		And it's terrible.
		It's terrible what's going on.
		And I'm an independent because the Democrats became too liberal and the Republicans became too corrupt.
		And that's why I'm an independent.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		That was Ernest in Massachusetts.
		Let's hear from Danny, Louisville, Kentucky, line for Republicans.
		Good morning, Danny.
unidentified		Good morning.
		That's a lot to cheer on.
		But, you know, what I worry about is the Democrats getting in power and really destroying the country because they basically almost did this last four years.
		I mean, I can't believe anybody thought that Joe did a good job.
		I don't even believe he was president.
		I believe somebody was behind the scenes doing the stuff, you know, maybe Nancy Pulsey or Barack Obama.
		But, you know, I ain't really worried.
		I think Trump's doing a good job.
		Yeah, it's going to be rough for a little bit, but we've been in such a mess for four years, didn't get really nothing done but going down in the gutter.
tony in florida ▲ ● ▼		You know, I mean, I make less than, I get only less than $1,000 a month, you know, and I ain't worrying about it because really, if you're poor, just trust in the Lord, he'll get you through.
unidentified		He takes care of me.
		He's been taking care of me for years.
		You know, I mean, I lost my sight 17 years ago, but he takes care of me.
		He gives me the strength to get through.
		And if I just trust in the Lord, you have no problem.
		I hope the Republicans stay in power for at least the next 10, 12 years until I'm ready to go.
		You know, so, but I think...
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Danny in Kentucky.
		Let's go to Bob in Utah line for Democrats.
		Good morning, Bob.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I'd like to say But the Republicans seem to be able to think the Democrats the way they want people to look at us.
		And we sit back and not say anything back.
bill christison ▲ ● ▼		I'd say 90% of the Democrats don't believe in late-term abortion.
unidentified		They believe in women's rights when it saves their life.
		And there should be a limit on abortions, and we believe in that.
		And I'd say 99% probably don't believe in men being in women's sports.
		Yeah.
		We don't believe in that.
		And it just goes on and on.
		You know, the Republicans paint us as socialist and communist.
		They don't even know what a social or a communist is.
bill christison ▲ ● ▼		And the Democrats don't fight back.
unidentified		I'll tell you what a communist is.
		Look at Kim Poo-young or Kim Jong-young.
		That's a communist.
		Look at Bernie Sanders.
		Now, there's a socialist.
		That's a socialist.
		And I don't think Bernie's a bad guy.
		Do you guys?
		So, Democrats, come out and say what you believe.
bill christison ▲ ● ▼		Don't just let the far left step out and say what we want because we don't want that.
unidentified		We like social security.
unidentified		We like overtime pay.
bill christison ▲ ● ▼		Every benefit we've got, Democrats and Republicans, have shared it with people.
unidentified		Now, you tell me what a Republican's ever done for a working man.
unidentified		They don't wake up, Democrats, and for God's sake, start fighting.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		That was Bob in Utah.
		Robert and Cincinnati, Ohio, line for independence.
		Good morning, Robert.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I was calling to express my dismay with what I saw going on live on the Capitol floor in the Senate hearing.
		I don't know if that's the correct word that was going on last night where Democrats were bringing amendments to the discussion of the Robert.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Can you turn your television down in the back?
unidentified		Yes.
		Let me mute.
		Okay.
		Is that better for you?
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Yes, it is.
unidentified		Okay.
		The issue that I saw with the amendments being brought to limit what the budget proposal was is that they were attacking the tax cuts that are to be renewed in 2026 for payments going to the most wealthy without saying that,
		you know, you should keep the tax cuts for everybody making under $400,000 a year, but eliminate the tax cuts that are going to those making over $400,000 a year.
		And I would have loved to have seen all the Republican senators get on record with voting down that amendment, which basically is saying, oh, well, you know, the majority of the tax cuts to the wealthy are what are driving up the deficit.
		The majority of the tax cuts to those making less than $400,000 a year is not driving an increase in the deficit.
		So there's a hybrid proposal that the Democrats were trying to make, that independents and Democrats should try to make.
		And the only person proposing some sort of hybrid way of looking at these tax cuts was Angus King.
		And I wasn't on long enough to see Bernie Sanders make his pitch.
		But the bottom line is that the working class of America, those making less than $400,000, should keep the tax cuts that were set up, which allow us like a $16,000.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		So Robert, there's a lot of issues in there.
		Our topic for the first hour is your top concern.
		So how does that amendment that you're talking about, how does that tie into your top concern?
unidentified		My top concern is about how the proposal to hold on to the tax cuts for everyone is going to demand that those tax cuts for the really wealthy are going to have to be clawed out of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		That was Robert in Ohio.
		Another Robert, this one in Virginia Beach, Virginia, line for Republicans.
		Good morning, Robert.
unidentified		Hey, Marlene.
		My top concern for you guys is just the big city violence that we've had since the pandemic.
		And it seems like, you know, the Democrats ignore it.
		I think we have to vote Republican for law and order.
		Just yesterday, Thursday, New York City, we had a pro-life activist was assaulted in the streets.
		There were two Fox News shows that covered that story.
		Again, that's my point.
		Just it's time to stop this big city violence and vote red Republican for law and order.
		Thanks.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		That was Robert in Virginia Beach, Virginia, and Robert mentioning crime and violence.
		That showed up on the list of biggest concerns for Americans.
		47% saying that it was a great deal.
		It was a great deal of concern for them.
		Let's hear from Robbie in Florida, line for Democrats.
		Hi, Robbie.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Good morning.
		Let's see.
		My top concern is I'm trying to figure out what multiverse we're living in right now.
		There is so much going on.
		I guess let me address some of the earlier callers when they're saying, you know, Republicans are this and that and Democrats are this and that.
		You know, Republicans like to say that Democrats are evil.
		They drink the blood of children, you know, do things with kids.
		Two weeks ago, up north, they try to do that TDF bill, and the guy who is proposing it the next day gets arrested for having chats with an underage trans kid who's actually a cop.
		Yet, you know, is that worth projection?
		They try to throw it on Democrats, but it always ends up being on the Republicans.
		Our health issue with RFK.
		I like the guy.
		I think he's a smart guy.
		He has a great housing plan.
		You know, I love his stuff with the whole food stuff.
		But Republicans, come on, this guy doesn't believe in, you know, HIV, AIDS, the whole vaccine stuff.
		You had that kid in Texas with the measles who passed away, and his parents are like, Yeah, we still don't believe in the vaccine.
		You have the tariffs from Trump and this guy.
		I'm sorry, you know.
		First, the penguins try to turn the kids yay, and then now the penguins are screwing us in tariffs.
		Like the multiverse is getting screwed up here.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		That was Robbie in Florida.
		This from Time magazine, the headline is, he's going to tank our economy.
		Trump's tariffs draw strong reactions in Congress.
		The article says that less than a day after President Donald Trump imposed a wave of new tariffs on dozens of countries, members of Congress from both parties are grappling with what to make of a trade strategy they fear could tank the U.S. economy, drive up consumer prices, and destabilize global markets.
		It says that the fears Democrats seized on the market reaction to underscore what they see as a reckless economic policymaking, those fears were fueling a stronger GOP pushback against Trump than seen in his second term thus far, though those speaking out still represented a minority in those parties.
		It says that Trump's tariffs quickly triggered a significant sell-off in the stock market, with major indexes on track for their worst day since 2022.
		It was yesterday on Capitol Hill that Senator Amy Klobuchar spoke about President Trump's imposing those new tariffs.
amy klobuchar ▲ ● ▼		This is devastating for the street.
		They've never seen a market like this.
		It's really bad, but you got to take it from Wall Street to Main Street.
		And what these tariffs do is raise taxes on American families by nearly $4,000 a year.
		What do they do with cars?
		$3,000 increase for average family to buy a car.
		New homes for young people, $20,000 on average for a new home.
		It hits everyone in our economy, but perhaps those that are most scared right now are people who are depending on their savings, not in the long term, but immediately.
		Seniors depending on their savings.
		This might not mean much to Elon Musk, but it means a lot to average families.
		It means a lot to the people I met with in rural Minnesota on my 14-county tour when they would come up, show up at these things, never gone to a political event before and say, because of what's happening with Canada now, I've lost a market.
		I don't think I can make it anymore.
		Our economy is a global economy, and he is cutting us off from the rest of the world.
		Just ask anyone of those 70% of Canadians that have canceled their trips to the U.S.
		It's not just manufacturing and farming.
		It is also our service industries.
		It is people in hospitality.
		It's those small cafes.
		It's those hotels.
		They are all going to suffer.
		That is the impact of the tariffs.
		And all we need is for our Republican colleagues to stand up.
		Four of them stood up when Senator Kaine and Senator Warner and I put forward the amendment and the resolution involving Canada.
		We passed that.
		So they need to stand up to all of this.
		If they truly believe in capitalism, they need to put their votes where capitalism is.
		And that is that competition works, our world relationships work, and Donald Trump is taking us backwards to the Great Depression.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Back to your calls, asking you, what's your top concern for the U.S.?
		Let's hear from Mark in Massachusetts Line for Independence.
		Hi, Mark.
unidentified		Hi, good morning.
		I think Trump's reckless economic tariffs and just his reckless nature in general is by far the biggest.
		You know, this guy on what, day one, he pardons 1,500 felons who everybody saw on TV break into the Capitol.
		They all had trials or pleas or whatever.
		And the fact that people couldn't see this guy, I luckily divested myself because I knew this guy's a complete nutcase.
		But, I mean, this tariff thing, there's absolutely no, I mean, the fact that he says, I'm glad you played that clip from Jerome Powell.
		The fact that he on social media yesterday, while he's on the golf course, well, the market's down 2,500 points or whatever.
		And by the way, they say Monday is going to be a lot worse.
		So like Black Monday again from 1987.
		But, you know, he's saying, don't play politics, Jerome, to lower the interest rates.
		Hey, dude, Trump, you're creating it, you're tanking the market, the economy.
		Like, how's that going to help us?
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		That was Mark in Massachusetts.
		Judy in Illinois, line for Republicans.
		Hi, Judy.
unidentified		Hi, good morning.
		I would like to say, if the Democratic Party knew all this stuff, why weren't they helping us before this all happened?
		Why did they do this to us?
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Judy, what's your top concern?
unidentified		My top concern is the market.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		What specifically is your concern about them?
		Are you invested?
		Oh, we lost Judy.
		We'll go to Henry, San Diego, California, line for Democrats.
		Hi, Henry.
unidentified		Hello.
		My top concern is the middle class.
		I believe it's been for the last 12 years.
		It's getting terrible.
		It's too rich to be poor and too poor to be rich.
		The economy is too expensive for the middle class.
		It's good for the lower class and it's good for the upper class, but the middle class, we are one getting hurt, both the Democrat and the Republican.
		I don't think they care about the middle class.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Henry, do you consider yourself middle class?
unidentified		Yes.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		And that's something that you're struggling with?
unidentified		Yes.
		I did 20 years in the Navy.
		I still work for the Navy as a contractor.
		Me and my wife, we still work.
		We have six kids.
		We got them through college.
		And like my son, my daughter, she's going, my youngest daughter, she's in college.
		And my youngest son, he's trying to get his PhD, you know, and we still, we just barely making it.
		I'm living off, you know, I'm working, and plus I got to live off my pension.
		And, you know, I see all the, like the cuts for people that have low income.
		We don't qualify for low income, but we, they consider us upper class.
		But honestly, living in San Diego, you know, we make over $100,000, but we just barely making it.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		That was Henry in San Diego, California.
		And looking at the Gallup poll way that income and wealth are distributed in the U.S., 48% finding that is a great deal of concern for them.
		24% say it's a fair concern for them, while 14% say they're only a little concerned by it.
		13% say not at all.
		Let's hear from Joey in Atlanta, Georgia, line for Republicans.
		Good morning, Joey.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I just wish that these people that are calling would just take the time and listen to what they're saying and listen to what this president is trying to do for them.
		This country is going into a path that is going to destroy America.
		If people are worried about their social security, they should understand that what this president is doing, he's actually doing to preserve it and to make it strong for all those who need it.
		We need to stop listening to the lies.
		We need to stop acting like evil people.
		We need to start praying for this president.
		We need to start getting excited about what he's thinking about the prosperity of this country.
		We need to stop listening to people who just want to destroy America.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		So Joey, how does that tie it to your top concern?
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Wrap it up into a top concern for me.
unidentified		Well, I'm concerned that there's so many people that are calling and they just have no clue about what they're complaining about.
		They're nervous, they're scared, they're angry, but they're angry and they're scared and they're nervous about the wrong things.
		This country is going bankrupt.
		If we don't do something about our spending habits, if we don't bring in unfair trades with other countries, how is it possible that it's fair for us to have to pay all these taxes while we send our products to these countries?
		And then when they send their products to us, that it's not the same way.
		How could that be fair?
		Just think about that.
		If people would just stop and think about what they're trying to do, it's just, it's just, it's unbelievable how people just can't stop and say, this doesn't make any sense.
		It does make sense when it's a plain, even, fair game for everybody.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Got your point, Joey.
		That was Joey in Atlanta, and he mentioned the budget and federal spending.
		This from Politico says that Senate Republicans adopted a fiscal blueprint Saturday, that was early this morning, that for President Donald Trump's, quote, one big, beautiful bill.
		What comes next is anyone's guest.
		It says the Senate voted 51 to 48 on a budget resolution that unlocks their ability to pass a party line bill this year that will combine an overhaul of the tax code with borders, energy, and defense policies.
		GOP senators Susan Collins of Maine and Rand Paul of Kentucky joined all Democrats and independents in opposing the resolution, though other Republicans still have concern, still have concerns that will need to be addressed before passing the final bill.
		Says now the budget plan needs approval in the House, where Speaker Mike Johnson can only afford to lose three Republicans without having the entire effort unravel.
		House fiscal hawks are displeased with the Senate's framework and are threatening revolt.
		The federal deficit in budget is one of those top concerns for Americans.
		Recently on this program, Bipartisan Policy Center Shai Akabus joined us and discussed the X date and the federal deficit.
		Here's a clip.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Why are we approaching an X date when there are Doge cuts going on, which is said to be reducing government and government spending, tariffs collecting money right now, and we're in tax season?
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Isn't this the time when the U.S. government collects all the money for the year?
unidentified		Yeah, it's important to take a step back and understand that we have a huge fiscal problem as a country.
		That $36 trillion number is far too big for most Americans to comprehend, but it's a lot of money.
		We are paying just an interest on the debt, about $100 million every hour.
		So that's $100 million that are not going to fund all the things that the government does that we want it to be doing, Social Security benefits, Medicare, et cetera, et cetera.
		That is just going to pay the interest on the money that we have borrowed.
		And at some point, it will become a larger and larger drag on the economy.
		It will mean that interest rates are going up because of the amount of debt that we have to borrow.
		That will be felt by consumers across the economy.
		It's already being felt in ways that are more difficult to see, but eventually that will become a challenge that is felt by all and that people can clearly see as a result of the growing debt if we don't get this under control and make the necessary changes to spending and taxes to contain it.
		Now, the way that this affects the debt limit is we are running a roughly $2 trillion annual deficit, meaning the gap between what we're taking in and what we're sending out.
		We're taking in about $5 trillion a year and we're sending out about $7 trillion a year, roughly a $2 trillion difference.
		That means that we are accumulating debt each and every month, pretty much.
		The exception is in April when we do tend to run cash surplus as a result of the tax season.
		So we don't expect the debt limit X date to arrive in April because we'll be taking in more than we're sending out.
		But pretty much every other month, we're sending out more than we're taking in.
		And that eventually means that we will reach a point where we run up against this borrowing limit and Congress needs to act to allow the Treasury to continue borrowing to meet all of our obligations.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Just under 30 minutes left in this first hour of Washington Journal asking your top concern for the U.S. We're taking your calls.
		You can also reach us on social media or give us or shoot us a text.
		These texts coming in for us, Denita in South Haven, Mississippi says, my top concern is the instability of the Department of Education.
		Funding was pulled for teacher training and funding is threatened to be pulled from universities.
		I'm concerned that these issues are causing emotional distress for the students.
		Tammy from Erie, Pennsylvania says, my top concern is how climate change has been affecting the national and global economies.
		I think we need to adjust our expectations.
		I don't see how our GEP can sustain our national debt with natural disasters.
		I think this nation's debt is a lost cause at this point because we have passed a tipping point.
		And Barb in Long Grove, Illinois says, the top concern for the U.S. is the economy.
		Our country is entering a global trade war, which will affect prices and types of products we can purchase.
		Back to your calls.
		Let's talk with Matt, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, line for Democrats.
		Hi, Matt.
unidentified		Hey, Tammy.
		Good to talk to you.
		My major thing is health care.
		My wife's a retired federal employee, and she took her health care into retirement with her.
		And this affects all retired federal civil service and, I might add, postal employees.
		And now the Republicans want to turn my wife's health plan, federal health plan, her federal blue cross into a voucher plan.
		Right now, she's paying self-only standard option about $400 a month.
		I predict by the end of Trump's term in 2028, I could see my wife paying $1,600 a month for health care.
		And that doesn't include, just think of all the federal and postal retirees that have family plans.
		And, you know, this is going to be a disaster for health care in this country.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		You were talking about a change to a voucher program.
		Are some of those changes already going to effect?
		Tell me more about it.
unidentified		Okay, the way it works is like this.
corona in ohio ▲ ● ▼		Let's say you're a single woman and you work for, I don't know, IRS, and you're on federal Blue Cross Blue Shield Standard Option.
unidentified		The total premium is, let's say, $24,000 a year.
		Right now, Uncle Sam pays three-quarters of that, and the federal employee pays a quarter.
		That's going to be reversed.
		Under the voucher plan, the employee is going to be given a voucher for like $10,000.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		And that voucher program has been approved and is moving into effect?
unidentified		It's going to be part of the reconciliation bill that the Republicans are working on now.
unidentified		So it's just a matter of time before it and if it goes into effect.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		That was Matt in Philadelphia.
		John in New Jersey, line for independence.
		Good morning, John.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I'm calling to react to a couple of sort of pet peeves that have turned into talking points.
		On line one is about bringing manufacturing jobs back to the U.S. and pointing to trade imbalance, say, with China.
		I've, in the course of my job, had to visit manufacturing companies in China, and I can guarantee you that U.S. workers would not want to work under those conditions or get the pay that they get.
		So that's number one.
		Number two, you know, the question of why Europeans and other countries don't buy U.S. cars.
		It's because we got gas.
		We got petroleum in the ground.
		We build gas guzzlers.
		They're generally cheaper to manufacture.
joel skousen ▲ ● ▼		Certainly pickup trucks are cheaper to manufacture than a really tiny car with high-tech engine and stuff like that.
unidentified		So we don't build cars in the U.S. that are attractive to people in countries that don't have cheap gas.
		And in fact, U.S. car companies opened European car companies just to build the cars that Europeans are willing to buy.
		That's what's really going on there.
		And I think it's been misrepresented.
		That's all I have to say.
		Thanks a lot.
		And thank you to all the people that call in.
		I love to listen to you guys, even the ones I disagree with.
		I'd love to sit down and have a beer with a few of you.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Well, thanks for listening and thanks for keeping an open mind, John.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		We'll go to Charlie in Superior, Wisconsin, line for Republicans.
unidentified		Hi, Charlie.
		Good morning.
		It's really hard for me to dwindle down my top concern for the U.S.
		But if I were to name just a few, I would say, first of all, national relations.
		I feel like the whole notion that we're going to annex Greenland and, you know, the way we're reacting to the war in Ukraine and the war in Gaza, as a Republican who voted for Trump to erase some of the Biden stuff, it's just it's very I was very disappointed with what I what I saw this late in the game.
		And if I were to give a second one, I would say the economy.
		These recent tariffs that Trump has planned to impose, I don't agree with them, to say the least.
		And I just want to make it a point that sooner or later, we're going to be we're going to when we go to vote, we probably our vote's probably going to be along different party lines, and I think that's okay.
		I mean, I live in Wisconsin, and as a Trump voter, I voted for Susan Crawford personally because I didn't want any influence from Elon Musk to be in the Wisconsin Supreme Court.
		So I will say just on these next midterms, come the next presidential election, just vote for, vote for, we share more policy ideas than we think.
		So just vote for whoever will bring us back to normalcy, bring us back to normal America.
		In fact, I know that across the bridge in Minnesota, there's a Democratic candidate for the U.S. Senate.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Let's go to Dan in North Bend, Oregon, Line for Democrats.
		Hi, Dan.
		Dan, are you there?
unidentified		Yes.
unidentified		Hello.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Hi, Dan.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I'd like to first thank you for the show.
		It's very informational to hear all sides' views.
		I would like to address that I have a question about folks who have been laid off by the Doge cuts.
		I think they can apply for and receive their unemployment, but the folks who've been fired with Sony poor performance reviews, I think they are just completely unable to receive anything unfairly.
		And I just wonder if other people share that view of what has happened.
		And I'd like to just go straight to my top concern.
		I'm a disabled person who receives less than half of what is considered the poverty level to survive.
		And for 15 years, I've managed to keep a roof over my head.
		And if I lose my Social Security disability, I'm living in a 22-year-old car with a serious fluid leak on the exhaust.
		I'm not too happy with the way our government is handling things, especially since there seems to have been a lot of turn-the-blind eye gerrymandering on the Republican side.
		And I'm so sad that to have to have seen that and know that it goes on.
		And my hope is that somehow they can find their hearts, those involved on both sides of the aisle, to do the right thing for the American people.
		And I'm not talking about the wealthy ones it doesn't matter for.
		I'm talking about like people like me.
		Okay, that's all I had to say.
		And thank you so much.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		That was Dan in Oregon.
		Dan talking about Social Security being his top concern.
		That was the top concern for 52% of Americans in Gallup's new polling key issues and 52% finding it's a great deal of concern for them.
		24% saying it's a fair amount.
		They have a fair concern about it.
		While 16% say only a little, 8% say not at all.
		It was during a recent confirmation hearing for President Trump's nominee to head the Social Security Administration, Frank Bizignano, who answered questions about concerns over potential cuts to Social Security.
		Here's that clip.
maggie hassan ▲ ● ▼		Elon Musk has referred to Social Security as a Ponzi scheme.
		That's in quotes.
		And he recently called for cutting up to $700 billion from Social Security and Medicare.
		That could mean cutting one-third of these programs.
		Social Security operates, as you know, on simple math.
		To achieve a one-third cut, you'd either have to take away benefits for one-third of the people currently receiving them or cut the payments that they're getting by one-third.
		So, Mr. Bisignano, which is it?
		Are you going to throw one-third of the people off of the program or cut their benefits by a third?
unidentified		Neither.
maggie hassan ▲ ● ▼		That's good to hear.
unidentified		So, if the President and the Congress decide to cut these benefits, you're going to stand up for the beneficiaries Well, if Congress decides, I mean, ultimately, these decisions get done in the Senate Finance Committee, it's a collaboration, and it's not the Commissioner's job to make that decision.
maggie hassan ▲ ● ▼		So, do you oppose cutting one-third of Social Security benefits?
unidentified		I think the President has made it very clear that he has no objective, and he's made it very clear to cut any benefits from Social Security.
maggie hassan ▲ ● ▼		Yet he has Elon Musk, who, until he was told he couldn't by a court, running rampant through Social Security, and he's making he's laying off staff and making it much more difficult for people to get benefits.
		That's inconsistent with the President's pledge.
		If you are confirmed, will you commit to stand up to Elon Musk and Doge and stop them from cutting one-third of Social Security benefits, which Musk has already said he wants to do?
frank bisignano ▲ ● ▼		Well, I've worked for Tony Tertiano, I've worked for Jamie Diamond, I've worked for Henry Kravitz, I've worked for Sandy Well, I've worked with them.
frank bisignano ▲ ● ▼		I have the ability to lead the agency in the manner that this Senate Finance Committee wants me to do that, and I don't know of any thought that I have about cutting one-third of the benefits of Americans or even entertaining anything of that sort.
maggie hassan ▲ ● ▼		Well, I appreciate that.
maggie hassan ▲ ● ▼		I think I will echo the ranking member's request that we get a commitment from you that you will keep Doge out of Social Security, because one of the things we're seeing since this administration took over is steps that are making it harder and harder for people to plot, to apply for benefits, get benefits, and really working to slow things down, which is one way, of course, of slowing benefits, slowing benefit payments, and reducing costs at the expense of beneficiaries.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Just about 15 minutes left in this first hour, asking you for your top concern for the U.S. Let's talk with Ken and Littleneck, New York, Line for Independence.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Hi, Ken.
unidentified		Mayor.
		I recently heard on C-SPAN that only Congress has the right to establish tariffs, not individual people like the President.
		So given that he's responsible for crashing the Dow 6,000 points in a couple of days, why is no one following up on that?
		It seems to me that it's clearly illegal that he's doing that.
		Why is no one doing anything about it or even talking about it?
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Ken, you said you heard that on C-SPAN.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Do you remember the event or who said it?
unidentified		Not exactly, no, but I distinctly remember that they pointed that out.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		That was Ken in New York.
		Kevin, Princeton, Indiana, line for Republicans.
		Hi, Kevin.
unidentified		Yeah, the previous caller is exactly why I'm calling.
		And my biggest top concern for the U.S. is the uninformed group of individuals in this country that really do not understand what is going on.
		And they are reactionary.
		They're emotional.
		They have no basis of understanding of economics or the world order that's been established.
		You know, real leadership, in my opinion, is disruptive.
		And status quo that we've had for years is destroying this nation a little bit.
		I say a little bit, a lot, $2 trillion a year in deficits.
		It's little bitty knife cuts that are destroying us a little bit at a time.
		And, you know, these Democrat socialists, they just have enough interest.
		If they would have enough interest in the American people to get behind this president and his policies, I think we can right the wrongs created by the global socialists and both parties over the last 50 years.
		You know, this global socialism has devastated our middle class, in my opinion, in the U.S.
		It's been nothing more than redistribution on a global scale.
		And if the U.S. taxpayer and consumer have been providing the world, in my opinion, a hand up, now the world must stand on their own as far as I'm concerned.
		We have no choice as a nation.
		If things don't get straightened out in the next four years, this experiment in self-governing is over and the world will be entering another dark age.
		I think it's preordained.
		It's going to happen.
		We can't sustain this type of debt.
		We have, in my opinion, less than 10 years as a nation before it collapses.
		If things aren't fixed socially and financially in this country, in the next four years, this system will collapse.
		And then all of these people that are complaining, that are uninformed about what is going on, are going to find that all their social programs, all their benefits, all their health care, all of that is going to go away and they're going to be destitute.
		So you can take that.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Kevin, Congress right now is working on the budget, the next budget bill.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		How do you feel about what's in the bill and what the Senate just passed with the tax provisions, extension for tax provisions, things like that?
unidentified		Unfortunately, I can't answer your question because I haven't actually dove into the bill itself, but I can tell you that the basic premises of lower taxes for the American people are exactly what we need.
		We need people to have their own money and be able to spend it.
		They spend it better than the government.
		And that will help sustain our economy and offset some of these tariffs.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		That was Kevin in Indiana.
		And Kevin mentioned tariffs there at the end.
		This in today's New York Times business section, it's a chart showing how much importers will face with the new cost, with the imposed new tariffs.
		It says it will cost an additional $714 billion to bring shoes, TVs, and all other imports into the United States.
		A new analysis of trade data shows as President Trump enacts an expensive wave of tariffs on America's biggest trading partners.
		It says in many cases, new tariffs are being placed on top of other new tariffs, part of one of the most aggressive American trade policies in a century.
		If the new tariff rates applied to everything the United States imported last year, the combined cost and tariffs to bring in all of those goods would be roughly 10 times what companies paid in 2024, according to a calculation from Trade Partnership Worldwide, an economic research firm in Washington.
		You can see the chart.
		It was $78 billion last year, and it is estimated $792 billion.
		That's including $78 billion from those existing $84, an additional $84 billion.
		For China, $61 billion.
		For Mexico, $42 billion.
		For Canada, $61 billion just for autos alone, $52 billion for autumn, bringing in steel and aluminum, and $413 billion in reciprocal tariffs.
		That's what President Trump just announced on Wednesday.
		That's the largest portion at $413 billion.
		Let's talk with Pete in Massachusetts, line for Democrats.
		Hi, Pete.
unidentified		Hi.
		My list is so exhaustive.
		I hope you'll give me a couple minutes, but, you know, top concerns, well, my retirement, the incompetence of this administration, whether it starts with the ringleader, but Elon Musk, RFK Jr., excess.
		Rubio is a little weasel on the foreign stage.
		So those are some of my concerns.
		But, you know, obviously that everything he proposes is unconstitutional.
		I mean, the guy just called, the tariffs, those have to be set by Congress.
		And there are bills pending right now that are trying to make it illegal that it has to be done by Congress.
		But Congress is totally spineless when it comes to standing up to this guy.
		Also, yesterday, for all you MAGA vets, how about he's playing golf while we have the dignified return of the bodies for American soldiers at Dover, Delaware?
		How does that grab you this Saturday morning?
		But so I don't know.
		I could go on.
		My list is so exhaustive, but this is.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		We'll leave it there, Pete.
		We're short on time.
		We'll get some other voices in.
		Edward, Keyport, New Jersey, line for independence.
unidentified		Edward there's a POTUS being so but thank you Anyways, my concern is a POTUS being so unhinged that he's using the word rape in a public address talking about our allies.
		I didn't feel great when I could go to the store and get choose between a wine for $15 from Argentina, South Africa, or Sardinia, or 10 pounds of rice for 15 bucks from Vietnam.
		The main power in America came from letting populist nations use their cheap labor and make goods for us cheaply.
		And then we would brain drain those people.
		The top would come here, and we would have our high-tech sectors that we would profit from from goods and services.
		And my last concern is for all the restaurants and the bars and et cetera that I'm not going to go to because I refuse to support this regime in this nutcase.
		And I'm going to save my money and I'm going to travel outside the United States and buy all the luxury goods that I like.
		So good luck, America.
		Thank you.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Edward in New Jersey, Wesley in Cleveland, Texas, line for Republicans.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Hi, Wesley.
unidentified		How are you doing, man?
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		June Well, Wesley.
unidentified		My concern is, can you hear me?
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Yes, go ahead.
unidentified		My concern is I'm on Social Security.
		I live on $1,200 a month.
		I've got food stamps, $23 a month.
		I get my food stamps in the middle of the month, but what's $23 going to do?
		Nothing.
		Now, I understand the deficit.
		I understand that it's got to be fixed.
		It's got to be fixed soon, or we're not going to be around to worry about it getting fixed.
		But the problem I've got is with all these tariffs and everything going up, my Social Security, I'm barely eating now.
		And now they're talking about cutting Social Security.
		If I had all the money in the world, I wouldn't worry about Social Security either.
		But I don't have all the money in the world.
		I'm one of the poor people in this world that made this nation what it is.
		And the Democrats have gone and carried it to hell.
		Now, the first time Trump was in office, the first thing out of Nancy Pelosi's mouth is, well, time to start the impeachment process.
		He didn't say, congratulations, President.
		Time to start the impeachment process.
		And the whole time he was in office the first time, all he did was fight them.
		They didn't work with him one bit.
		Now he's in office.
		He's mad.
		He's taking it out on them.
		He's taking it out on us because of it.
		Now, I understand the tariffs, but you've got to understand that the people in the United States can't starve to death while everything's getting turned around.
		If he can't help us with a little bit more food stamp, a little bit more Social Security, then what's the native of all this going on?
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Wesley, can I ask you a question?
unidentified		Yes, ma'am.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		How long have you been on benefits and how have they changed over time?
unidentified		I've been on Social Security since I was 62.
		I'm 71.
		I started out at $760.
		Now I'm up to $1,230.
		Now, everything's going up, up, up, up.
		Every time I go to the grocery store, I come out with a list.
		I have chickens to where I can have my own eggs.
		I have a garden where I can try to eat what I can grow.
		But if I can't afford to buy the plants or fertilizer or the water to tend it or the feed to feed my chickens, I'm fighting a losing battle.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Now it's Wesley in Cleveland, Texas.
		Let's talk with David in Florida, line for Democrats.
		Hi, David.
unidentified		Hi.
		Good morning.
		I'm thrilled to speak to you this morning.
		I was just going to say, you know, the thing that is really unsettling to me is you still have callers calling and saying, well, let's give Trump a chance.
		These Democrats, they should just back off or they did all these wrong things.
		People, we're witnessing this in real time.
		He is destroying, deliberately destroying our economy, as well as it's like aligning with our enemies and angering our allies.
		And so this, what he's doing right now is not just this tariff thing, it is injuring our academic institutions, our hospitals, our economy, everything about capitalism is under attack because of Trump.
		And what he's going to do next is pivot.
		Forbes was on one of these shows talking about, oh, we just have to increase the tax cuts for the wealthy people.
		It is insanity to think that you can complain about the debt and not think about these billionaires.
		We have hundreds of billionaires in the United States.
		One billion dollars is a thousand million dollars.
		Bezos Musk, they could use $1 billion annually and get it to their employees for pensions and health care, but they don't because they are hoarding wealth.
		And so the thing that is frightening to me is that you still have people calling in and saying, I'll take it.
		It'll be okay.
		Are you kidding me?
		You're the people who he's going to hurt, not me.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		That was David in Florida.
		And our last call in this hour is Kathy, Iowa, Line for Independence.
		Hi, Kathy.
unidentified		Hi, thank you for taking my call.
		I am an independent.
		I vote for Republican or Democrat, whoever has better policies.
		I will say that I do tend to agree with the last caller more than the gentleman who's growing his own food and depending on Social Security and thinking Trump's going to save the world at this point.
		I am mortified at how we look on the world stage, but we are, he is tearing our country apart.
		And the misinformation out there about what is happening with some people and them continuing to stand behind it and say, okay, please do take away my benefits and give them to the richest people.
		If those rich people wouldn't be living here if the tax did not benefit them, why do they not live in Europe or other places?
		They would pay taxes and there's better distribution of that.
		We need to have our Social Security benefits from somewhere.
		People have paid into those for their entire lives.
		They are not entitlements.
		You are getting something back.
		It was an investment in your future.
		And sadly, people are now willing to say, well, no, if those billionaires, they need money to be able to run their businesses.
		They do not need that much money.
		We have, the mindset in this country has changed to a degree that is frightening.
		And now we have voted in someone who says he doesn't want to leave after this term.
		That scares the hell out of me.
		We are heading to dictatorship and he's crashing our economy in order to get us there.
		And, you know, every step along the way has followed Project 2025.
		Wake up, people.
		Wake up.
		You need to start standing up for your rights.
		Do not lay down and take this.
		Don't go say, I'm going to grow food in my backyard with my $1,000 check and give up anything, give up what you have so somebody else who already has lots of money can take more.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		That was Kathy in Iowa last call for this hour next on Washington Journal.
		Writers correspondent David Shepherdson will join us to discuss the auto industry and President Trump's tariffs.
		And later in the program, Operation Hope founder and CEO John Hope Bryant discusses his organization's efforts to increase financial literacy.
		We'll be right back.
unidentified		American History TV, exploring the people and events that tell the American story.
		This weekend, the Virginia 250 Commission commemorates the March 1775 speech by Patrick Henry, where he spoke his famous words, give me liberty or give me death.
		Event speakers include Virginia Republican Governor Glenn Youngkin, filmmaker Ken Burns, and VA 250 National Honorary Chair, Carly Fiorina.
		Author Bruce Dorsey, with his book, Murder in a Mill Town, talks about an 1832 murder of a young pregnant woman in New England that captivated the country.
		Then watch American History TV's series First 100 Days as we look at the start of presidential terms.
		This week, we focus on the early months of President Barack Obama's first term in 2009, including an $800 billion economic stimulus package and plans to close the Guantanamo Bay Detention Center in Cuba.
		On Lectures in History, University of Dallas history professor Susan Hansen on the legacy and cultural importance of the 1918 Pulitzer Prize-winning autobiography, The Education of Henry Adams.
		The author is a descendant of President John Adams.
		Exploring the American story, watch American History TV every weekend and find a full schedule on your program guide or watch online anytime at c-span.org slash history.
		Book TV, every Sunday on C-SPAN 2, features leading authors discussing their latest nonfiction books.
		Here's a look at what's coming up this weekend.
		At 7.30 p.m. Eastern, Vanda Kreff talks about the founding, graduates, and impact of the Catherine Gibbs School, which trained women for executive secretary positions during the early and mid-20th century in her book, Expect Great Things.
		Then at 8 p.m. Eastern, Arkansas Republican Senator Tom Cotton, author of Seven Things You Can't Say About China, argues that China poses a significant threat and that major American institutions refuse to talk about it.
		And at 10 p.m. Eastern on afterwards, New York Times investigative journalist David Enrich argues the rich and powerful are using free speech laws to suppress dissent with his book Murder the Truth.
		He's interviewed by author and George Washington Law School professor Mary Ann Franks.
		Watch Book TV every Sunday on C-SPAN 2 and find a full schedule on your program guide or watch online anytime at booktv.org.
		The cherry blossoms are in season and we're marking the occasion with our cherry blossom sale going on right now at c-spanshop.org, our online store.
		Save up to 25% on our entire cherry blossom collection of t-shirts, sweatshirts, and drinkwear.
		Scan the code or visit c-spanshop.org during our cherry blossom sale.
		Washington Journal continues.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Joining us now to discuss President Trump's tariffs and the auto industry is David Shepardson, correspondent with Reuters.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		David, welcome back to the program.
unidentified		Thanks for having me.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Been with us many times and we always appreciate it.
unidentified		Thanks.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		President Trump did sign an executive order levying a 25% tariff on all cars and light-duty trucks imported to the U.S. Tell us how much of an impact that's going to have.
unidentified		It's going to be a big impact, right?
		And it's super complicated, right?
		Because first you've got the steel and aluminum tariffs, the 25% that are already impacting the auto sector.
		And then you have the tariffs that first kicked in on vehicles imported from Mexico and Canada.
		So that took place about a month ago, but President Trump exempted USMCA-compliant vehicles, meaning vehicles that comply with the trade rules from the trade deal that replaced NAFTA signed during his first term.
		So that means vehicles that have a certain amount of content from North America, at least 40 to 45% of the materials were produced by workers making $16 an hour.
		The new tariffs that took effect this week are 25% tariffs on vehicles all across the globe.
		And so now you have this two-tier tariff regime on autos that both affects cars from outside the U.S. and as well as the tariffs from in North America.
		And then you have a third bucket of vehicles, which actually is getting hit by a couple different tariffs, right?
		So take a vehicle in Mexico.
		A perfect example is two Infiniti SUVs that Nissan announced this week would no longer be imported to the U.S.
		Those are getting hit by the 25% fentanyl tariff that took effect about a month ago, as well as the new tariff.
		So you'll have about a 52% total tariff on those vehicles.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		And one of the things to note is that the 25% tariffs are on any vehicle not assembled in the U.S. How many cars are actually assembled in the U.S.?
unidentified		So it's about half and half.
		So the United States buys and produces about 16 million vehicles a year.
		Sorry, buys 16 million.
		About 8 million of those are produced in the United States, 8 million outside.
		Of that total, about 4 million are produced in Mexico and Canada.
		The other 4 million come from South Korea, Canada, the European Union.
		So this is going to be a major disruption to the industry.
		And for U.S. vehicles, these U.S. MCA-compliant vehicles, they'll be able to deduct the value of the U.S. parts.
		So we'll reduce that 25% tariff somewhat, but it will still have a significant impact.
		The experts anticipate roughly $4,500 per vehicle once the existing inventory sells off.
		So right now, you're still seeing some discounts on vehicles.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		So that was my next question.
		Ultimately, tariffs are about the consumer and what happens.
		If somebody was getting ready to purchase a new car, maybe researching and looking around, how much time could they have?
		When could we see that existing inventory be depleted and those tariffs kick in?
unidentified		So, we already saw a big jump in sales just before the tariffs took effect, right?
		I think we saw maybe 100,000 more vehicles or some estimates were purchased at the end of March.
		So, auto companies did have a better month than they had thought.
		So, a lot of companies are offering discounts or promising not to raise prices.
		Ford and Solantis are offering employee prices through the month of April at least.
		So, I think, again, for certain very popular models, this might not last as long, but for the month of April, I think you should be able to get the vehicle you want without seeing a lot of price hikes.
		But again, as time goes on, I think dealers are going to be less likely to offer discounts, the same level of discounts that you might have gotten before, given that we all know what's coming, right?
		Higher prices, higher tariffs, as that inventory starts to run out.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		We'll show our audience some graphics that give a better idea of the tariffs.
		10%, these are Trump's tariff plan: 10% tariff on all nearly all imports that went into, that goes into effect today.
		Higher reciprocal tariffs for China, 34%, Japan, 24%, and the EU, 20%, among other countries.
		That will take place.
		Those will go into effect next Wednesday.
		The 25% tariff on imported vehicles that went into effect April 3rd, so this week.
		25% tariff on all steel and aluminum imports, that went into effect in March, and that's something that you also mentioned was going to be affecting the auto industry.
		And also, a 20% tax on Chinese imports that was previously announced in March, which means China now faces a total tariff rate of 54%.
		You have a recent article on Reuters, the headline: U.S. Senators Seek to Rein in Trump Tariff Authority.
		Does President Trump have the authority to put these tariffs in effect?
unidentified		So, the short answer is yes.
		The question is, how long, right?
		So, the president is invoking emergency authority.
		He's declaring a national emergency, and in the case of cars, he is relying principally on a 2019 report that was created during his first term under this section of the trade law called 232.
		And he is saying that the fact the United States imports about 8 million vehicles a year is a national security risk because in the event of a war, that, say, World War II, what happened?
		The United States quickly changed its auto plants to build tanks, airplane engines, other armaments for the war effort.
		Given that the United States is importing a sizable number of vehicles, its industrial footprint is much smaller than it was proportionally, say, during World War II.
		So, you know, so as a result of that, it's clear under the law, he has the authority.
		The question is, how long can these tariffs take effect?
		And so, under the other emergency authorities called IEPA, right, there are a lot of people who argue that this is temporary, that he's only allowed to do it for 150 days and there has to be a specific emergency, and that they're not supposed to be a permanent change in the tariff regime.
		And so, I do think there's a likelihood that you'll see more lawsuits.
		We've already seen one lawsuit about the tariffs.
		And what this proposal would say is we'd return the power of tariffs expressly to Congress, right?
		It's in the Constitution.
		Congress has the power to levy tariffs.
		This bill, which is getting has gotten four or five Republican senators already, would say the tariffs would expire in 60 days absent an affirmative approval of Congress.
		Now, obviously, it would take two-thirds of both houses to overturn a presidential veto, and Trump's, you would think, not going to sign a bill that would constrain his own authority.
		But I do think it's sending a message that a lot of Republicans want President Trump to get to a deal, right?
		They don't want these tariffs to be in place permanently given the huge price hikes you would see over time versus making this into our new way of life where everything's 10% minimum, as you said, and things like everything from China would be 54%.
		Obviously, President Trump views these as a long-term way to prod American manufacturers to produce more goods in the United States.
		The question is, is he and the Republican Party and others willing to tolerate the short-term pain, short-to-medium-term pain, of how long it would take to actually get these goods and the supply chains moved to the United States.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		David Shepardson, Reuters correspondent, is our guest for the next 35 minutes or so.
		If you have a question or comment for him, you can start calling in now.
		The Lions Republicans, 202-748-8001.
		Democrats, 202-748-8000, 8,000.
		And Independents, 202-748-8002.
		David, on Thursday, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney announced his country will impose a 25% tariff on U.S. vehicles.
		We want to show you that announcement.
		We'll talk about it on the other side.
mark carney ▲ ● ▼		Canada will respond to the U.S. auto tariffs.
		And today I'm announcing that the government of Canada will be responding by matching the U.S. approach, by matching the U.S. approach with 25% tariffs on all vehicles imported from the United States that are not compliant with CUSMA, our North American free trade agreement.
		And on the non-Canadian content of CUSMA-compliant vehicles from the United States as well.
		Our tariffs, though, unlike the U.S. tariffs, will not affect auto parts because we know the benefits of our integrated production system.
		And they will also not affect vehicle content from Mexico, who is respecting the CUSMA agreement.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		How is that going to, that Canadian tariff on U.S. vehicles, how is that going to impact the American auto industry?
unidentified		Well, it was really interesting, right?
		Because as you heard the Prime Minister say, he's carving out Canadian auto parts, right?
		And that's one of the hugely important things, right?
		Auto parts production, right there.
		In Michigan, there are a thousand auto parts suppliers, significant ones.
		And Canada, the U.S. relies intensely on those auto parts companies.
		So he doesn't want to do anything that would further incentivize American auto companies to more quickly shift production of parts from Canada to the United States.
		Now, it's interesting.
		I think it's about 8% of vehicles that are not compliant.
		And it's basically aiming to punish companies that have the least footprint in Canada, United States, the ones that are not compliant, the ones that are more bringing things from South Korea, Japan, the EU, and not meeting those value requirements.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		And when could the auto industry see the impacts?
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		When could the American auto industry see the impacts of those Canadian tariffs?
unidentified		I think almost immediately, I don't know if it's not in effect now, it will be effect very soon.
		And again, it gets a similar cadence, right?
		People have inventory, but you will see, like you saw in the case of Nissan, quick companies parking vehicles, not bringing them in, and taking immediate steps because it's very expensive.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Let's talk with some callers.
		We'll start with Robert in Waldorf, Maryland, Line for Independence.
		Hi, Robert.
unidentified		Good morning, ma'am.
unidentified		How are you doing?
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		We're doing well.
unidentified		Okay, look, the media, and this, since this whole thing is broke, I don't think it's fair to just talk about the tariffs that the President is imposing on these countries.
		They never mentioned the tariffs that these countries have been posing on us for the past 30 to 40 years.
		I mean, Trump's basic business mindset is to make it cost-effective to bring these jobs back to the United States.
		The politicians and all these CEOs of these corporations have moved all these jobs away to make it cost-effective for them to be more profitable to screw over the American worker.
		And that's what they've done over the years.
		These politicians have sold their vote to allow these people to impose all these tariffs on us.
		They've allowed China to take all of our jobs.
		They've allowed China to take all of our products.
		And what Trump is doing is just pure, straight-up business that makes it cost-effective for these companies to move their business here to make it profitable for them to do it.
		If they want to keep them overseas, it will not be profitable.
		So for the media to sit here and say Trump's evil, Trump's, let's mention the tariffs that China's put on us, that Europe has put on us.
		Those numbers, look at those tariffs.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Okay, go ahead.
		Got your point, Robert.
		We'll get a response from Dave.
unidentified		I think the caller really accurately sums up President Trump's position, and there's a lot of validity to this argument.
		It's true that with the ascension of China and the WTO and NAFTA and USMCA, we saw a significant shift of auto production, especially auto parts production, to lower-cost countries, notably Mexico, and then obviously China and other countries in Asia.
		And so, and the caller's correct that the United States imports about half of its vehicles.
		This is the most profitable auto market in the world, and there are very few markets that have the same level of openness that the United States does.
		And certainly many of the countries have significant non-tariff barriers as well as some tariffs to U.S. vehicles.
		Now, it's worth mentioning: the United States has a 25% pickup truck tariff that has protected the United States market for more than 60 years.
		It's called the chicken tax.
		It was put in place temporarily in the 60s in response to West Germany putting taxes on our frozen chicken, and it's still there to this day.
		But I do think the fundamental question here is: President Trump's goal is, as the caller said, to more level the playing field and to make it more economically incentivize American companies, auto parts, and manufacturers to build their vehicles here.
		The question is, it will be more expensive, and it will take a long time to move factories, potentially two, three, four years.
		Is the White House willing to tolerate significant pain, lower sales, higher costs, economic disruption for this longer-term goal of moving more production here?
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Nancy, Bowling Green, Kentucky Line for Democrats.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Hi, Nancy.
unidentified		Hey, good morning.
unidentified		How are y'all?
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		We're doing well, Nancy.
unidentified		Okay, great.
		No, my question is: I'm 65.
		When this began, I worked for a company called Fruit of the Loom.
		And we were getting, they were manufacturing stuff in, you know, like El Salvador.
		And we were cutting out the El Salvador label and sewing in a made in the USA.
		And these were Army contracts because we were making t-shirts for the United States Army.
		So I'm a product of this long ago.
		I could see this coming, but the people that wanted to make the monies, I mean, they've already made money, you know, doing this outside the country years ago.
		Now, Mr. Trump is trying to give them more money with the tax bracket.
		And when I hear that Social Security is an entitlement, that was my 401k, the Social Security was, but it was the FICA.
		I was only making minimum wage, so I didn't invest.
		I didn't take more money out to invest in anything.
		I was barely making it as is.
		And now that I've gotten older, I'm making even less.
		So I always thought that there would be a better time where you could maybe get ahead and move ahead.
		But the older I get, the more I know that's not going to happen.
		Well, again, I think this caller makes some really good points about the fact that the dichotomy is American consumers benefit from these low-cost consumer goods, right?
		We don't make, we only make 2% of the clothes that we use in this country.
		Sneakers, televisions, right?
		You know, toys.
		You mentioned fruit of the loom.
		So the question is, at one point in the United States, about 40% of jobs, maybe 35, 40, 50 years ago were manufacturing jobs.
		Say that number is 8% or 9%, right?
		So our economy has shifted dramatically away from producing goods.
		And there have been many sectors of the economy, many areas of the country that saw substantial declines in employment.
		Certainly Michigan is an example, my home state, of where there was an enormous economic disruption and you saw a huge number of jobs go away.
		The question is now, are we willing to pay much more for these goods if they're shifted here?
		And if a car was built in the United States, as auto committees have pointed out to the Commerce Secretary, it might cost three, four, five times as much as it does here.
		That's separate from this issue of tariffs, which are going to raise prices.
		So how do you thread the needle between finding ways to incentivize companies to build more here while also not overly increasing American prices?
		And so it's a hard balancing act, whether you're President Trump, Democrats, and Congress.
		And I think that it's still left to be determined where it all shakes out.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Another headline of yours, Stellan, is to temporarily lay off 900 U.S. workers as tariffs bite.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Tell us what temporary means and how others in the auto industry are reacting.
unidentified		This is a really interesting anecdote because it got a ton of attention because it was the first example of a negative impact on American workers, right?
		So because of these 25% tariffs that took effect, Stellantis, which used to be Chrysler, used to be Fiat Chrysler.
		This is a company that's been bought and sold multiple times at one time.
		Dimore owned it.
		It was called Dymo Chrysler.
		That's off the subject.
		So Stellantis decided to temporary close the plant in Windsor, Ontario, just across the river from Detroit, that makes minivans for a few weeks, as well as a plant in Mexico because of the tariffs.
		And as a result, it decided to temporarily lay off 900 workers at five transmission and other plants that provide parts for those factories.
		And so it's a good example of how the integrated supply chain, and a lot of Democrats said, see on day one, the Trump tariffs are hurting American workers.
		That's certainly true.
		And will at least be, Stellantis has said, as long as those two plants are closed, we don't, I mean, this two to four week period could be extended.
		On the other side of the ledger, you have Nissan, which we talked about earlier about stopping the infinities.
		Well, they had planned to go from one, so from two to one shifts in Smyrna, Tennessee, building the Nissan rogue, and then take or backfill the need for rogues with rogue SUVs produced in Japan.
		Well, as a result of this, they're not going to do that.
		They're going to keep those two shifts in place.
		Now, a lot of workers already accept early buyouts.
		It's not clear what the employment impact of that is.
		But I think the big thing to remember is there's no easy answers.
		There's winners and losers, and the economic disruption of this is going to be way more complicated than just tariffs equals more U.S. manufacturing.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Rick in Hayward, Wisconsin, Line for Independence.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Hi, Rick.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I don't know.
		This is kind of a complex subject, and I'm for the workers and all that stuff.
		But my message is to Ford.
		I've never owned a foreign vehicle.
		I don't know much about Nissan, but, you know, whatever's going to be the affordable vehicle.
		My question is this.
		Why do we have a backup?
		Every vehicle has a backup camera, a dashboard full of who knows what technology.
		Isn't there, what's the point of making all that stuff?
		Why don't they make a vehicle that doesn't have a backup camera and power windows and all these things?
		I don't need any of that.
		I'm on my third Ford F-150 since the late 90s, probably.
		And fortunately for me, I was able to buy, you know, two of them new.
		The one I have now is getting very old, but I can't afford a $50,000 vehicle.
		There's no way.
		So I wonder what you have to say about that, the technology aspect of it and how much that's costing.
		Thank you.
		Per question.
		So first on your auto safety question, because I also cover that.
		So that was mandated by Congress, something called the Cameron-Gil-Branson Act, that because a little boy was killed by a driver backing up in a driveway, mandating these backup cameras to try to reduce deaths of pedestrians,
		especially children and senior citizens, you know, who are slower and shorter and aren't able to be seen as well, especially from drivers like the F-150, if you're sitting up a lot higher, it's harder to see a smaller child behind a car.
		So it is mandated in all vehicles.
		In terms of pricing, you're absolutely right.
		The average new car price is $47,000 a year.
		The average income of a new car buyer is, I think, $115,000 a year family income.
		It's almost twice the median family income.
		So affordability of vehicles is a very big issue.
		And it does, it is a question here.
		And one of the reasons that the car companies are very nervous is not just that those new, people who can afford to buy a new car won't be able to pay that extra money, but it's about the perception of your wealth.
		If your 401k is going down, even though you're not going to spend that money for 10, 20, 30 years, you feel less wealthy, you might be more reluctant to buy that vehicle.
		And as a result, and again, this goes to tariffs.
		The other issue is people are going to put off buying a new car if they can, right?
		So I don't get six more months, a year out of my old clunker.
		I don't know.
		I'll get it repaired.
		And so as a result, you're going to see fewer used cars entering the market.
		I mean, the day the tariffs got announced, Hertz's stock price went up about 20% because they sit on such a big, you know, big inventory of used cars.
		And so this could have downstream effects.
		Fewer used cars equals higher used car prices, equals fewer prices for replacement parts, higher prices for insurance, for your repairs.
		So the entire ecosystem of autos could see a dramatic impact in these tariffs, not just at the new car lot.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Let's talk with Chris Stowe, Massachusetts, Line for Republicans.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Hi, Chris.
unidentified		Hey, how's it going?
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		We're doing well, Chris.
unidentified		Awesome.
unidentified		So what are we talking about today?
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		We'll go to Deborah in New York, Line for Democrats.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Hi, Deborah.
unidentified		Hi.
		My concern is that, you know, with these tariffs going on, the market going down, I am retired.
		I live on Social Security and a small IRA, which probably after this week is non-existent.
		But how does somebody my age who was looking at, okay, I can make it, all of a sudden, you've turned this into, and I will hang up as soon as I finish saying this, where I don't know where my money's going to, you know, how far my money's going to go.
		I know the price of tomatoes went up 20 cents in one day at my local grocery store.
		And so I mean, you know, what do we just keep taking things out of our diets?
		Is maybe the government going to come out with some ways for us to, you know, okay, well, if you're on a limited budget, eat, you know, dirt or something like that.
		I don't know.
		I'm going to hang up and let you respond.
		Thank you.
		Well, I've got three kids, so I am certainly very cognizant of the grocery prices.
		I spend a lot of money.
		Our family spends a lot of money on groceries, too.
		And your caller's right.
		One of the first impacts are going to be the price of produce, tomatoes, bananas, avocados, coffee, other vegetables.
		We don't produce enough, especially in the winter months in the United States.
		So there will be very fast impacts.
		And obviously, there's not a lot people can do.
		I mean, if you want fresh produce, people can buy things ahead.
		And I do think we are seeing Costco's, Walmarts, and others are reporting some level of people trying to buy non-perishable goods ahead of time that are concerned about the prices.
		But long term, there's a lot of uncertainty.
		We don't know are these tariffs going to stick, right?
		And if they do, if there's a 10% tariff across the board, right, for all countries and higher in some places, there's certainly going to be higher prices that people are going to pay.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Tom in Habertown, Pennsylvania, Line for Independence.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Tom.
unidentified		Good morning.
		My point is that there was a time for protective tariffs in the United States.
		And we had industry to protect back in, let's say, the late 70s, 1980s, when all of the manufacturing started disappearing from the United States.
		And I believe it was President Reagan who said we could become more of a service economy than a manufacturing economy, and that that would be fine.
		And it wasn't fine.
		And it's the mess that we're in now.
		But now is not the time because especially the way that these tariffs are being rolled out.
		And Peter Navarro was on TV saying this is not for negotiation.
		These are permanent tariffs that are not going to go away.
		And a half hour later, the president said, well, let's see what China says they're bringing to the table.
		And maybe we can negotiate if it's something really good.
		That kind of chaos and mixed messaging is going to make any responsible CEO unwilling to invest the kind of money and time it takes to rebuild infrastructure for manufacturing in the United States back.
		Because it would be stupid to invest the planning and the money if these.
		tariffs are not permanent and going to be bankable.
		I think the caller hits on a good point.
		So auto companies want certainty, right?
		They want to know what the rules of the road are.
		And we've had in recent years sort of this shifting back and forth beyond tariffs.
		And I think this is right, that before companies are going to invest, they want to know what the tariff landscape is, but also about the environment, right?
		So right now, the Congress is considering repealing the California waiver, which is something the Biden administration gave them to allow them to impose a requirement that by 2035, about a dozen states want to ban internal combustion engine-only vehicles, right?
		We have electric, hydrogen, and plug-in hybrid.
		They got at least 50 miles of battery power range alone.
		So there's a push in Congress to repeal those now.
		It's not clear if they'll be able to or whether it's legal given the rules under the CRA.
		But I do think if auto companies get more certainty about where we're going in terms of electric vehicle policy, you could see some shift in production, maybe increasing some of the internal combustion production in the United States.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		The current average, we heard a caller earlier talk about he doesn't have $50,000 to spend on a new vehicle.
		That's about right.
		The average cost of a new vehicle is $48,000.
		Bank of America estimates that the tariffs could cause those prices to go up as much as $10,000.
		Do we know if the automakers would pass everything on to the consumer?
		Is there any hope?
unidentified		I think the answer is no, not all of it, probably, because it is a hyper-competitive market.
		I mean, what other industry can you go and get so many different options, so many different cars, right?
		I mean, there's so many permutations of vehicles, right?
		So it's very, very competitive.
		However, the auto companies have a relatively thin profit margin normally.
		I mean, they can't eat that level of cost.
		So they're certainly going to pass on some.
		There are some estimates that say the U.S. could see a $1 to $1.5 million reduction in auto sales if this went on indefinitely.
		So, you know, we don't know the actual numbers.
		We know directionally prices will go up and sales will go down to some level.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Andrew, Middleton, New Jersey, Line for Independence.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Hi, Andrew.
unidentified		Hi, good morning.
		David, I want to know: is this cease tariffs, which to me is nothing more than a tax, is this going to have a ripple effect through the whole economy?
		Because not only people buying new cars, but let's not forget if you have a car that's 10 years old like I do, and you have to have it repaired in an auto shop, when he gets the ports for this, like they said, for instance, brake pads will go up as high as $35, $40.
		So he's going to pass that on to you.
		Now, one thing that we cannot have is just the service industry in this country.
		This country one time had manufacturing, technological jobs, and I don't think this is right.
		And we had a president, he's not my president, come on TV yesterday and says it's time to get rich.
		Well, who's going to get rich?
		People like Trump, people like Elon Musk.
		And right now, people are struggling with high food prices in this country.
		Go into any supermarket, go into any store.
		You're going to see higher prices.
		And I don't think this is right to play a tax game or a tariff game for China since 60% of the stuff coming into this country is coming from China.
		So look, on the one hand, we do protect the United States market from China, right?
		Unlike, say, for autos, you're right that the caller's right that so much of what we get here is produced in China, but not cars.
		That's in part because of a series of actions, tariffs, other regulatory actions designed to prevent nearly all Chinese vehicles from coming to the United States.
		In fact, there's basically only a handful, the Buick Envision, the Lincoln Nautilus that are actually assembled in China and produce here.
		But I think the caller, again, keeps hitting on this fundamental sort of two opposing ideas.
		We want low prices.
		We want, you know, consumers want to pay as little as possible.
		But if that's what the United States wants, then everything would be produced outside the United States in low-wage countries, right?
		Because it's almost every place cheaper to produce outside the United States, absent tariffs.
		Other countries have less strict environmental rules.
		It's easier to build plants and so on.
		So there is this question about how do we ensure that the United States continues to produce goods, essential goods, and at the same time provide consumers with lower prices.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		We talked about Canada placing reciprocal taxes on parts of the auto industry.
		China also announcing that they are placing reciprocal taxes on the U.S. in response to President Trump's announcement.
		How is that going to impact consumers?
unidentified		Not so much on the auto side, at least not yet, but it's certainly going to start to hit across various sectors, right?
		People talk about like, we had a story where it was about maybe the $2,500 iPhone, right?
		I mean, as a result, they said, I mean, so there are a lot of consumer goods.
		I mean, so much of what we consume from China, consume comes from China, right?
		There's socks, right?
		There's so many different sneakers, right?
		There's so many different other industries that have moved to China.
		So I think obviously, like in so many things, you see inventory, like in some places, might last two, three, six months.
		But again, those prices are going to start to go up as time goes on.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Jerry in New Jersey, Line for Democrats.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Hi, Jerry.
unidentified		Hi, good morning.
		I have a couple of questions for you.
		One, I just want to bring up something.
		Yesterday I heard that they said that when the interest rate comes down, because supposedly we're at 10% or something, and when the interest rate comes down, I think Trump's goal is to refinance the debt.
		Does that sound right to you?
		Because I think there's a couple of things going on here.
		It's not just about the tariffs for the country.
		I think he's trying to bring the interest rate down in order to refinance the debt to make it easier for our country.
		Now, the other question I have for you, I hear the news media, and this is C-SPAN and everybody, prices could go up, might go up.
		This could happen.
		That could happen.
		Everybody panic.
		And what if it doesn't happen?
		What if he succeeds in getting everything corrected?
		I see that Israel's going to zero.
		Vietnam's going to zero.
		I think Argentina's going to go to zero.
		So what if it reverses?
		Is the news media going to change all this?
		I don't quite understand.
		And the other question I have is, you know, the prices have been extremely high with Biden for four years.
		So what exactly are we talking about with prices going up?
		I never saw them come down.
		No, I think one of the reasons President Biden lost the election was voter frustration with high inflation, high prices.
		So that's certainly true.
		And I think the question is, is this the start of a negotiation?
		I mean, President Trump likes shock and awe.
		If you go back and read the Arden Deal, he likes to come out with a very aggressive position.
		And the caller is right.
		I mean, if he's successful and opts to negotiate and gets tariff rates down, that would certainly lead, you would think, to higher U.S. exports.
		The question is, though, does he want that?
		Or does he really want to sort of completely restructure the U.S. economy around more U.S. production and make us much more self-sufficient rather than have a market where we're exporting more as opposed to necessarily producing more for our own market?
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Andrew, Rockville, Maryland, Line for Independence.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Hi, Andrew.
unidentified		Hi.
		I guess following up what the previous callers have both spoke about, the prices will need to be absorbed somewhere.
		The increased cost for the tariffs.
		Does the Trump administration think the tariffs will be affected in the short term?
		Or does he think that are they going to somehow argue that the government will absorb these price changes?
		Because if things then, and then my next question is, when the things get to be produced here, won't they still continue to be higher?
		Because you're going to be paying an American wage with benefits that are attached to it.
		And then my last question is, do you think that the Trump administration is actually committed to manufacturing, or is it simply part of his ploy to bring companies and countries to the table?
		Great question.
		So certainly on the question about pricing, you're absolutely right that shifting production here is going to result in people making higher wages and sort of directionally going to lead to higher prices.
		In terms of what the money is going to be used for, obviously President Trump wants to use some of this tariff revenue to offset the cost of tax cuts that Congress is considering.
		But if you go back to the first term, a large chunk of the money, tariff revenue was used to provide farmers relief because they lost access to export markets, notably China.
		So you're right.
		In terms of whether Trump's truly committed to manufacturing, I would say yes, only because he's been talking about this issue for decades, right?
		He, you know, going back to the 80s, he really believes he wants to see more manufacturing.
		I think it goes back to a lot of states that voted for him, like notably Michigan, my home state, where when I was in high school, all my friends' parents, dads, primarily could go to the Chevy factory in town and the day they graduate from high school and get a job.
		And so there was this idea that if you worked hard, you didn't need a lot of skills, you could graduate from high school and get a well-paying job.
		And I think part of this is about trying to appeal to people who have felt like they lost out over the last 20, 30 years as the U.S. economy shifted away from manufacturing toward more services.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Michael in New Kensington, Pennsylvania, Line for Republicans.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Michael.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Thank you for taking my call.
		And thank you for your guest.
		I think it's good that we have somebody with a little bit more of an optimistic view of what's going on here.
		But I think that we get too many doom and gloom around here, focusing on one thing, which is the price of the stocks.
		And I think that's a bad thing.
		I mean, it's obviously hurting me and a lot of people, you know, a lot of other people.
		But there are so many good things.
		If you look at what, if you look at some, if you look behind the curtain, Trump's trying to do a lot of good things here that if they come to fruition, and he's got a track record to prove that, he's a guy that seems to know how to captain the ship.
		And I think that if you look at the possible advantages of a permanent tax cut, that's going to help consumers.
		If you look at what they're doing with those, try to get rid of wasteful government spending.
		If you look at refinancing the debt, which was something that somebody else pointed out, he can do things in a hurry.
		And already those tariff prices have come down significantly in other countries, already 25 countries.
		And so we're seeing results.
		And you see all these companies coming back to the United States to improve our manufacturing base.
		I think it's true that President Trump has had some wins.
		There are so many examples of auto companies that have shifted some production back.
		I think the stock market reaction is in part because of just the deep uncertainty.
		And their fundamental question remains, is this a negotiation?
		Is this about getting deals?
		Or is this about a permanent change in tariff relief?
		There's so many industries like aerospace, like airplanes, right, that rely on free trade.
		And that if we get rid of the existing free trade rules so abruptly, we're going to face enormous amounts of pain in the short term.
		And are people, you know, are industries willing to tolerate it?
		Is the White House willing to tolerate it?
		As the caller said, a lot of it relies on getting this big tax cut bill done, which probably won't happen for a few months.
		And so will people be willing to tolerate the pay of tariffs for some period while Congress tries to get some sort of big tax relief bill done.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Jim in Idaho, line for Republicans.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Jim.
unidentified		Good morning, and thank you for taking my call.
		I'd like to say one thing that nobody seems to bring up is go ahead, Jim.
		One thing people don't seem to care about is our federal government's bank account is $30 trillion in the hole.
		And China owns that.
		And then you got Canada letting China's military do winter maneuvers here.
		We got China buying up farmland here in the U.S.
		So hopefully the taxes this year will help build that $30 trillion home in the bank account.
		Certainly the accrued U.S. federal deficit is a huge issue for both parties.
		And it's sort of undergirding this whole debate on Capitol Hill about how much money can be used to pay for the existing Trump tax cuts that are set to expire.
		A lot of new tax cuts.
		Remember, President Trump wants to ban taxes on Social Security and taxes on new car loans and taxes on tips for service workers.
		So this is very expensive.
		And you're right, at the same time, lawmakers are grappling with an enormous amount of debt and enormous large interest payments on that debt that come due every year.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		We have one last call for you.
		We'll talk with Reba, Marilyn, Line for Democrats.
		Good morning, Reva.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Boy, did I come on at the right moment.
		So we do hear lawmakers talk a lot about the deficit.
		What we don't see is them saying they are going to appropriate the tax revenues that come in to the deficit, to the debt.
		We don't hear that.
		We hear them say that they're going to apply it to tax cuts.
		So I think this is a huge, huge shell game because most of the tax cuts are for the wealthy.
		There'll be some that's for the upper middle class.
		It's really interesting to look at charts about this.
		And any tax cut I get will be eaten up by higher food cost, higher goods cost, and the tanking of my investments.
		And we don't even know what's going to happen with Social Security.
		It's a shellgame.
		If they are really concerned about the deficit, they will take this double tax revenues from the double taxation and add it and pay off some of the deficit.
		So everybody watch out for that shellgame.
		One final comment.
		I wish when people talked about on showing factories, they wouldn't just talk about the number of factories, they would talk about the number of jobs.
		Because a lot of factories have very, very few people working in them.
		They're all robotic and they're all light foul.
		And it's just like we're not in the 1950s anymore, people.
		Absolutely right.
		factories don't employ nearly as many people.
		American workers are much more productive in part because of robotics.
		You're right.
		And I think in terms of the deficit, right, it's easy for both parties to say, you know, let's give tax cuts or let's spend more money on programs that help people.
		It's a lot harder to make people feel pain, right?
		Cutting spending means cutting programs that people rely on, right?
		So in general, politicians are it's easier for them to give people the carrots rather than the sticks of deficit reduction.
		So there have been many times, you know, across both parties where people have talked about taking more difficult steps to pay down the debt.
		And, you know, it's a lot easier to, it's a lot easier to cut taxes and spend money than it is to take things away from people.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		David Sheperson is a correspondent with Reuters.
		You can find his work online at Reuters.com.
		David, thank you so much for being with us this morning.
unidentified		Thanks for having me.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Still ahead this morning on Washington Journal, Operation Hope founder and CEO John Hope Bryant.
		We'll discuss his organization's efforts to increase financial literacy.
		But first, it's open form.
		You can start calling in now the lines, Republicans 202-748-8001, Democrats 202-748-8000, and Independents 202-748-8002.
		We'll be right back.
unidentified		Sunday night on C-SPAN's Q&A.
		Journalist and musician Lee Hawkins, author of I Am Nobody's Slave, talks about the impact that slavery and Jim Crow have had on his family through multiple generations.
		Mr. Hawkins examines the relationship between the past violence experienced by family members, often at the hands of white people, and the way his parents raised and severely disciplined him.
lee hawkins ▲ ● ▼		All I knew growing up was that if I asked too many questions, if I said no to my parents, if I question any aspect of upbringing, and if I fell short of excellence, the price was going to be physical violence.
unidentified		Journalist, musician, and author Lee Hawkins.
		Sunday night at 8 Eastern on C-SPAN's QA.
		You can listen to Q&A wherever you get your podcasts and on the C-SPAN Now app.
brian lamb ▲ ● ▼		As a follow-on to Stuart Banner's History of the Supreme Court, this week's Book Notes Plus podcast features a 2002 interview with Dennis Hutchinson, a University of Chicago law professor emeritus.
		The subject matter, the forgotten memoir of John Knox, a law clerk to former Justice James McReynolds, a native of Kentucky.
		Knox's year was the term beginning October 1936.
		In history, it is very rare that a law clerk at the Supreme Court has published an insider's view of the court or of a justice.
		Professor Hutchinson gives the background on where he found the memoir, which hadn't been published before.
		Justice McReynolds, as you will hear, was according to historians, arguably one of the most disagreeable justices ever to sit on the bench.
unidentified		An interview with University of Chicago law professor Dennis Hutchinson on the forgotten memoir of John Knox on this episode of Book Notes Plus with our host Brian Lamb.
		BookNotes Plus is available wherever you get your podcasts and on the C-SPAN Now app.
		Democracy.
		It isn't just an idea.
		It's a process.
		A process shaped by leaders elected to the highest offices and entrusted to a select few with guarding its basic principles.
		It's where debates unfold, decisions are made, and the nation's course is charted.
		Democracy in real time.
		This is your government at work.
		This is C-SPAN, giving you your democracy unfiltered.
		Washington Journal continues.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Welcome back.
		We are on open forum for the next 25 minutes or so.
		We'll get to your calls and questions in just a few minutes, but wanted to give you some news.
		Last night, or I guess early this morning, about 2:30, the Senate adopted a budget blueprint for Trump's agenda, but hurdles loom.
		That is the headline from Politico talking about that the latest on the budget, efforts to pass a budget.
		It says Senate Republicans adopted a fiscal blueprint Saturday for President Donald Trump's, quote, one big beautiful bill.
		What comes next is anyone's guess.
		It says the Senate voted 41, I'm sorry, 51 to 48 on a budget resolution that unlocks their ability to pass a party line bill later this year that will combine an overhaul of the tax code with border energy and defense policies.
		GOP Senators Susan Collins of Maine and Rand Paul of Kentucky joined all Democrats and Independents in opposing the resolution, although other Republicans still have concerns that will need to be addressed before passing the final bill.
		It says now the budget plan needs approval in the House, where Speaker Mike Johnson can only afford to lose three Republicans without having the entire effort unravel.
		House fiscal hawks are displeased with the Senate's framework and are threatening to revolt.
		Last night, after the Senate passed that bill, Senate Majority Leader John Thune talked about it as well as Chuck Schumer's Democratic leader.
		Here are their remarks.
john thune ▲ ● ▼		We have this deficit, and you know, the way we're going to have to deal with that is to get more growth in the economy, generate more revenue because the economy is growing and expanding.
		People are creating jobs, people are working, they're taking realizations, and they're paying more taxes.
		And that's what happens when you reduce taxes.
		And that's why it's so important that we extend and make permanent the 2017 tax law.
		This is what we're talking about here today.
		This is what this conversation, frankly, is all about.
		Now, Mr. President, one of the things that has been interesting in this debate, because I heard lots of conversation from my colleagues on the other side about massive new tax cuts for billionaires, but let me tell you what, if you vote against this budget resolution, you will be voting for.
		You will be voting for a $4 trillion tax increase on our economy and on the American people.
		Of that $4 trillion tax increase, $2.6 trillion will fall on people who make less than $400,000 a year.
chuck schumer ▲ ● ▼		In voting for this bill, Senate Republicans sided with billionaires against the middle class in total obeisance to Donald Trump.
		The odds of a recession in America are surging because of Donald Trump's tariffs, and Senate Republicans have gone along.
		In fact, they are aiding and abetting it.
		It's a brutal Republican pincer move.
		Donald Trump's raised costs on the one side, and Senate Republicans are cutting Medicaid and pushing billionaire tax breaks on the other.
		Tonight, Senate Democrats gave Senate Republicans the chance to hit the kill switch on Donald Trump's tariffs on Doge, on the attacks against Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid.
		At each opportunity, Republicans refused.
		If Republicans ever chose to snap out of their Trump hypnosis for even a minute, they could immediately use this Senate procedure to halt the tariffs, halt Doge, halt all of Donald Trump's chaos.
		They know deep down his policies are a disaster, but instead, Senate Republicans are chaining themselves to the MAGA anchor and leaping into the ocean.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Cy in Durham, North Carolina, Line for Democrat kicks off our open forum calls.
tammy thueringer ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Cy.
jerome powell ▲ ● ▼		How do you do?
unidentified		Just call him because I really missed the days when Republicans understood facts.
unidentified		Matter of fact, I remember when Reagan gave a nice speech about tariffs and the truth of the matter.

▲