CSPAN - Washington Journal 04/21/2025

All Episodes

Previous Next

April 21, 2025 07:00-10:04 - CSPAN

03:03:57

Washington Journal 04/21/2025

Participants

Main

mimi geerges

cspan 35:25

Appearances

amy klobuchar

sen/d 01:23

brian lamb

cspan 00:39

chris van hollen

sen/d 01:29

donald j trump

admin 01:01

doug collins

01:24

james comer

rep/r 00:40

jonathan karl

abc 01:12

pope francis

04:44

tom homan

01:02

Clips

barack obama

d 00:02

bill clinton

d 00:02

george h w bush

r 00:02

george w bush

r 00:04

jimmy carter

d 00:03

louie gohmert

rep/r 00:14

paul craig roberts

00:06

ronald reagan

r 00:02

Callers

marianne in unknown

callers 00:22

steven in florida

callers 00:17

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Show episode speakers

Speaker	Time	Text
unidentified		Coming up on Washington Journal this morning, your calls and comments live.
		And then former Trump Administration Veterans Affairs Secretary David Shulkin discusses proposed cuts to the VA.
		And Axios politics reporter Brittany Gibson previews the week ahead at the White House and News of the Day.
		Also, Scott Kennedy of the Center for Strategic and International Studies will talk about escalating trade tensions between the U.S. and China.
		Washington Journal is next.
		Join the conversation.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		About 60 million in the U.S. Pope Francis was known for his advocacy for the poor and marginalized.
		We're getting your comments this morning on the passing of Pope Francis.
		Our phone lines are regional, so if you're in the Eastern or Central time zones, you can call 202-748-8000.
		If you're in Mountain or Pacific, it's 202-748-8001.
		You can also text us at 202-748-8003.
		Include your first name in your city-state.
		You can also post to social media.
		It's at facebook.com/slash C-SPAN or X at C-SPANWJ.
		Well, welcome to Washington Journal.
		This Easter Monday, we are talking about the death of Pope Francis.
		We will start with the official announcement from the Vatican that they released.
		It says this: Dearest brothers and sisters, with deep sorrow, I must announce the death of our Holy Father Francis.
		At 7:35 this morning, the Bishop of Rome, Francis, returned to the Father's house.
		His entire life was dedicated to the service of the Lord and his Church.
		He taught us to live the values of the gospel with faithfulness, courage, and universal love, especially for the poorest and most marginalized.
		With immense gratitude for his example as a true disciple of the Lord Jesus, we commend the soul of Pope Francis to the infinite, merciful love of God, one and triune.
		Well, Pope Francis was in the United States in 2015.
		He addressed a joint meeting of Congress.
		That's the first time a Pope has done that.
		And here he talks about immigration.
pope francis ▲ ● ▼		In recent centuries, millions of people came to this land to pursue the dream of building a future in freedom.
		We, the people of this continent, are not fearful of foreigners because most of us were once foreigners.
		I say this to you as the son of immigrants, knowing that so many of you are also descendants from immigrants.
		Tragically.
		the rights of those who were here belong before us, were not always respected.
		For those peoples and their nations, from the heart of American democracy, I wish to reaffirm my highest esteem and appreciation.
		Those first contacts were often turbulent and violent.
		But we know that it is very difficult to judge the past by the criteria of the present.
		Nonetheless, when the stranger in our midst appeals to us, we must not repeat the sins and the errors of the past.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		That was in 2015.
		We'll show you more clips from that visit to the United States and that address to Congress.
		And here is Thomas on Facebook who posted this.
		A champion of the poor and downtrodden in these challenging times, may he rest in peace.
		And Jake says, way too young.
		Have they determined the cause?
		And here is John Michael who says, I thought he was kind of cool.
		I hope the next Pope is just as progressive.
		He seemed progressive to me.
		Rest in peace.
		And Josie says he lived as Jesus did.
		And we'll go to calls.
		Here's JD in Mobile, Alabama.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Yes, been waiting for this day for quite a while.
		Traditionalist Roman Catholic lifelong, and I want to say unequivocally, Pope Francis has been an absolute unmitigated catastrophic disaster for the Catholic Christian faith and for the world at large.
		I will elaborate, and I've been waiting for this moment for quite a while.
		The Pope himself, with subtle Jesuitical casualistry, flight of hand, very, very pernicious, and insidiously, has endorsed and condoned sodomy, that is, so-called same-sex marriage blessings.
		One cardinal got it right.
		One bishop in the Vatican got it right.
		He said, we can't bless same-sex unions because God cannot bless sin.
		That man was sent to the gulag, just as the metaphorical gulag in Catholicism, just as the Soviet Union used to do to dissenters like Alexander Solzhenitsyn.
		He has permitted idolatry, where he picked up the Pakamama idol in South America and essentially endorsed pagan deities.
		He has sanctioned sacrilege in the sense that he allowed communion, people who are living in adultery.
		This was one of his big so-called achievements.
		He endorsed adultery by allowing married and divorced, without an annulment, Catholics to go to communion.
		He has crushed tradition, and this is one of the points I want to emphasize loudly, and I pray to God that some of these cardinals are listening now.
		Not that my voice matters much, but they know it.
		He has horribly crushed the traditional faith of the church.
		And what I mean is, we people who, Catholics, who have been faithful to pre-Vatican II novelties, that's what Vatican Council II was, the church was supposed to not conform to the world.
		What you're seeing in the United States of America and the world at large is you're seeing an attempt.
		It's going to fail eventually, but they're making an attempt to change the unchanging Roman Catholic Christian church founded by the Lord Jesus Christ in 30 AD.
		They're trying to change it to conform to the novelties and the wickedness of our world.
		And that is not the role of the church.
		The church is supposed to be an unchanging bride of Christ.
		So to say it, I would say that where do we even start?
		He made underhanded deals with the People's Republic of China, selling out faithful Catholics in China.
		He did an ostentatious, phony display of simplicity in which he drove around in a little fiat car.
		This subtly undermined the dignity of the papacy.
		We're called upon.
		His most important legacy will be who am I to judge.
		I want to address that lastly.
		Who am I to judge?
		The key word there, another subtle nuance of casuistry.
		That's deception, sleight of hand.
		We're not to judge the soul, but we can judge the actions.
		We are called upon in the corporal works of mercy to admonish the sinner.
		Instead of that, he greenlighted same-sex marriage.
		He greenlighted adultery, married and divorced cases.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Maybe we got that point.
		Let's go to Roberto in Houston.
		Good morning, Roberto.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I'd like to do just the opposite from when the previous caller did to the Pope.
		I think this very short prayer is in the spirit of Pope Francis, which I think will be declared a saint.
		Dear God, please help and protect the poor Palestinians.
		Deliver them from evil.
		Amen.
		Thank you very much.
		All right.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And this is the front page of, well, let's say digitally, front page of the Associated Press.
		Here's Pope Francis.
		It says, Pope Francis, first Latin American pontiff who ministered with a charming, humble style, dies at 88.
		And the Washington Post, Pope Francis dies at 88.
		As first Latin American pontiff, his openness and empathy for the disenfranchised reshaped the papacy.
		The Wall Street Journal, Pope Francis, advocate for economic and social justice, dies at 88.
		The pontiff urged grassroots activists around the world to bridge the gap between rich and poor while calling on wealthier countries to protect the environment.
		And the New York Times, Pope Francis dead at 88.
		And this is Robin in Texas.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Yes, the only thing I had against the Pope, it wasn't a big deal, but in a way it was, was the fact that he was like a hypocrite.
		He came to the Americas and he said we should take illegal aliens while he was in the Vatican and we shouldn't build a wall.
		He's got like a 40-foot tall wall around the Vatican and he will not allow anyone a legal entry into where he was living.
		And I just thought it was like hypocritical of him.
		That's all I got to say.
		Thank you.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Robin.
		And let's take a look at another portion of that address to a joint meeting of Congress back in 2015.
		Here he addresses the war or wars across the world.
pope francis ▲ ● ▼		Being at the service of dialogue and peace also means being truly determined to minimize and in the long term to end the many armed conflicts throughout our world.
		Here we have to ask ourselves, why are deadly weapons being sold to those who plan to inflict untold suffering on individuals and society?
		Sadly, the answer, as we all know, is simply for money.
		Money that is drenched in blood, often innocent blood.
		In the face of the shameful unculpable silence, it is our duty to confront the problem and to stop the armed stride.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And here is the New York Times writing this.
		It says, Francis worked to make Catholic Church more inclusive.
		Pope Francis sought to make the church more welcoming, global, and collegial after his predecessors adopted a more doctrinaire and traditional approach.
		It says that the cardinals who will choose Pope Francis' successor face a critical decision.
		Will they follow his path toward a more welcoming, global, and collegial church or restore the more doctrinaire traditional approach of his predecessors?
		That will be the subject of intense debate among the cardinals.
		And Francis leaves behind a complicated legacy for them to argue over.
		Early hopes that a quote Francis effect would bring the faithful back to the pews mostly failed to materialize as church attendance continued to fall in the secularized West, even as it grew in the global south.
		Pope, although Francis made considerable strides in addressing the church's sexual abuse crisis and tackled its murky financial culture, the path he put the church on for the future will be the most contentious issue.
		Wonder what you think about that?
		We'll hear from Willie in Little Rock, Arkansas.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Yes, ma'am.
		Well, we got too many people walking around like the Christian.
		But we got a bunch of devils walking around with the Bible in their hand.
		He got one particular party that every time you turn the TV on, they holler about God, and they some of the most bitches people in the world.
		And that is a bit of a Republican party.
		I just, I mean, you've got people that think that Trump is our God, and then they act like they're Christians.
		In the world, you don't go act like you're a Christian and support a man like Crow.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Sorry, Willie.
		And more comments on Facebook coming in.
		Salvatore says, Adios woke Pope.
		And on X from Seriously, God bless him and may he rest in peace in Christ's embrace.
		He was far too progressive for me.
		Outlawing the Latin Mass, embrace homosexuality, giving more pastoral authority and a larger role in the mass.
		It's outrageous.
		And BC Venice says, Pope Francis wasted his last breath preaching compassion to JD Vance.
		That's an exercise in futility.
		Let's take a look at another portion of the address that he made to the joint session, the joint meeting of Congress in 2015.
pope francis ▲ ● ▼		All of us are quite aware of and deeply worried by the disturbing social and political situation of the world today.
		Our world is increasingly a place of violent conflict, hatred, and brutal atrocities committed even in the name of God and of religion.
		We know that no religion is immune from forms of individual delusion or ideological extremism.
		This means that we must be specially attentive to every type of fundamentalism, whether religious or of any other kind.
		A delicate balance is required to combat violence perpetrated in the name of a religion, an ideology, or an economic system, while also safeguarding religious freedom, intellectual freedom, and individual freedoms.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And a reminder that Pope Francis has died this morning, local Vatican time at 7.35 a.m.
		He was 88 years old.
		We are taking your calls about that, and we are also going to open it up to other topics that might be on your mind regarding anything that might have happened over the weekend, anything public policy or politics-wise that you would like to call about.
		Our lines are switching over to a party.
		So, Republicans are on 2028-8001, Democrats on 202-748-8000, and Independents 202-748-8002.
		You can also use our line for texting.
		That's 202-748-8003, and also on social media.
		On social media, Congressman Max Miller said this on X. Pope Francis leaves behind a legacy of compassion and humility.
		May he rest in peace.
		And this is on CNN saying this, Francis, the outsider pope who faced fierce resistance to his reforms.
		It says that he was a pope of first, the first pontiff from the global south, the first Jesuit to be chosen as leader of the Catholic Church, and the first to call himself Francis.
		Before taking up office, he had never lived or worked in Rome, a disruptor and outsider to the Church's establishment.
		His reforms faced strong resistance from powerful minorities within Catholicism and political forces without.
		Francis spent his final days in service of the Church, participating as much as he could in the celebration of Easter, the high point of the Christian calendar.
		He was unable to lead the main holy services, but appeared in a wheelchair on the balcony of St. Peter's Basilica in Rome to wish worshipers a happy Easter Sunday.
		And this is Carrie in Washington, D.C. Democrat, good morning, Carrie.
unidentified		Yes, hi.
		I just want to say I'm really sorry to see this Pope go.
		I'm not Catholic.
		I'm not even, I was raised very loosely Christian.
		And I feel like he was headed in the right direction.
		The church needed to become more progressive and more, I guess, open to things that are happening now.
		They were stuck in the past.
		And a lot of us that aren't Catholic really had an affinity for him.
		It was just a good example of how to live.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Carrie, and this is Stephen, West Palm Beach, Florida, Republican.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Thank you.
		And happy Easter Passover ending.
		What a man, what a leader, and who lived by the true gospel, the Bible.
		And Axios is what the Orthodox Christians say, worthy.
		And I just don't know what to say, but wow.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Are you Orthodox, Stephen?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Are you Catholic?
unidentified		I'm Roman Catholic, but I'm Orthodox Catholic.
		I was schooled in the Russian American Orthodox Seminary, yeah, here in the States.
		All right.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		And this is Elizabeth from on Facebook who says, in this world, surrounded by evil, Pope Francis was the one constant man of goodness and a true nobility.
		A man who respected and loved our earth, all people.
		He puts most so-called leaders to shame.
		It's sad to try to understand a world without his goodness and strength.
		We are left with rots, especially in the U.S.
		And the Washington Post reports this.
		Francis engaged with modern issues such as immigration and climate change.
		You can visit the Washington Post if you'd like to see pictures.
		He was the 266th pontiff.
		He's also the second oldest pope.
		This has a couple of some information about him.
		First pope from the Americas.
		His name was Jorge Bergoglio.
		He's an Argentine.
		Also, he refused to wear the signature red shoes, and he is the first pope to refuse the Apostolic Palace to make Domas Casa Marta his home.
		Also, he loves to tango.
		But we are taking your calls.
		We are in open form.
		If you'd like to continue to talk about the passing of Pope Francis, you can do so.
		But over the weekend, Democratic Senator Chris Van Holland was responding to criticism after advocating for the return of Kilmar Abrego Garcia.
		He's a Maryland resident, deported for alleged gang ties despite a court order.
		Here it is.
jonathan karl ▲ ● ▼		Obviously, everybody in this country, even those undocumented immigrants, have rights.
jonathan karl ▲ ● ▼		But are you concerned about standing so forcibly with somebody that has, you know, at least a questionable record?
chris van hollen ▲ ● ▼		I am not defending the man.
		I'm defending the rights of this man to due process.
		And the Trump administration has admitted in court that he was wrongfully detained and wrongfully deported.
		My mission and my purpose is to make sure that we uphold the rule of law because if we take it away from him, we do jeopardize it for everybody else.
		And I do want to point out, Carl, yes, the Trump administration is trying to change the story.
		They're trying to detract attention.
		Here's where they should put their facts.
		They should put it before the court.
		They should put up or shut up in court.
		Because Judge Zinnis, who's the district court judge in this case, said, and I quote, they put no evidence linking Abrego Garcia to MS-13 or to any other terrorist activity, unquote.
		She says that a couple times in her decision.
		So, Mr. President and Republicans and anybody involved with this, take your facts to court.
		Don't put everything out on social media.
		As to his wife, his wife is the one who is asking us all to bring him home so his rights can be respected.
jonathan karl ▲ ● ▼		And in fact, even if he is a gang member, that doesn't mean you don't have rights, due process rights.
chris van hollen ▲ ● ▼		Well, exactly.
		But again, the place to litigate that is in the courts, and they've not put the evidence before the judge in the case.
		So again, put up or shut up in court.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And we are in open forum.
		The Washington Post reports this.
		House Democrats traveled to El Salvador to meet Abrego Garcia.
		It says the four lawmakers aim to keep the spotlight on a wrongly deported man as well as the administration's increasingly aggressive deportation tactics.
		Those four lawmakers are Representatives Robert Garcia of California, Maxwell Frost of Florida, Yasmin Ansari of Arizona, and Maxine Dexter of Oregon.
		And this is Gloria San Antonio, Democrat.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Yes, well, I wanted to just make a big notation.
		The first guy that called, he said that he was so ugly about the whole thing.
		He said that Pope, the Pope married homosexuals.
		He did not.
		He blessed the union.
		I ought to know because I had married somebody that had been married before in the church, and we were not able to get married in the church.
		Our union was blessed.
		Big difference, big, big difference.
marianne in unknown ▲ ● ▼		And the person that also said that he had started, he took away the church and made it where you couldn't, he took away the traditional church from being able to speak or do it in Latin.
unidentified		That's not true.
		It was Pope John Paul that did that.
		Anyway, thank you.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Gloria.
		And we also have for you Borders are Tom Homan.
		He was on ABC this week yesterday speaking about that Kilmar Abrego-Garcia case.
		Here he is.
tom homan ▲ ● ▼		And we have followed the Constitution.
		We have followed law.
		I am confident that everything we've done is follow laws within the constitutional construct.
		Absolutely.
jonathan karl ▲ ● ▼		And so that right of due process is something the Fifth Amendment right of due process extends to everybody who would be deported.
jonathan karl ▲ ● ▼		They have a chance to have a hearing on this.
tom homan ▲ ● ▼		The length of due process is not the same under the Alien Enemies Act.
		That's why the Alien Enemies Act was created.
		President Trump invoked the authorities he had of the Alien Enemies Act, an act written and passed by Congress and signed by a president.
		We're using the laws on the books, the statutes on the books, to secure the border and remove significant public safety threats and national security threats to this country.
jonathan karl ▲ ● ▼		But let me get more specific on this.
		The Supreme Court has long held that constitutional rights extend to every person in the United States.
		Justice Scalia, a majority opinion that he wrote back in 1993, wrote, It is well established that the Fifth Amendment entitles aliens to due process in law of law in deportation proceedings.
		Are you saying that by invoking the Alien Enemies Act that undocumented immigrants are not entitled to those due process rights under the Fifth Amendment?
tom homan ▲ ● ▼		Well, I'm saying the procedure under Alien Enemies Act is less than it is during a Title VIII removal proceeding.
		And we're following the rules of the Alien Enemies Act.
		Again, I think this administration has followed the law.
		They've used the statutes enacted by Congress, signed by a president, to remove the terrorists from this country.
		I'm not saying, you know, I'm not saying, I'm not arguing over here that nobody should get new prizes.
		I'm just saying there's a different process under Alien Enemies Act, less of a process, and you see through Title VIII.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		We are taking your calls this morning for about the next half hour in open forum.
		If you'd like to talk about the news of Pope Francis' death, you can do so.
		Other things happening around town.
		Our numbers are on your screen.
		Republicans are on 202-748-8001.
		Democrats are on 202-748-8000.
		And Independents, 202-748-8002.
		You can also reach us on text or on social media.
		And Kristen in Portland, Maine, sent us this text.
		The breaking news of the Pope's passing is lucky timing for Pete Hegseth, who once again is caught sending sensitive intelligence information on a signal chat with his wife, brother, and others.
		And this is what Kristen is talking about here.
		CBS News reporting this.
		Pete Hegseth shared details of Yemen's strike in another signal chat, including his wife and brother.
		According to sources, it says that the Defense Secretary shared the details about impending U.S. strikes in Yemen with a private signal group.
		It included his wife, his brother, and personal attorney.
		The messages were sent on March 15th, included flight schedules for FA-18 Hornets tasked with striking Houthi targets.
		The messages were sent the same day.
		Hegseth shared similar operational details in a separate signal chat that inadvertently included the Atlantic editor-in-chief, Jeffrey Goldberg, sparking widespread concern over how senior officials handle sensitive military information.
		Let's talk to Gary, who's in Sterling, Virginia, Republican.
unidentified		Hey, Gary.
		Hi.
		Good morning, Mamie.
		Could I ask you to have your resource department look up the February 29th, 1980 press release by NOAA and the Washington Post?
		I believe it was below the fold center right, as I recall.
		And read that.
		It's only a few short paragraphs.
		I got a couple comments I'd like to make about that.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		We can't get it that fast, but tell us what's in it.
unidentified		But I'd like to say, I'm sorry that Pope died.
		I like that Pope.
		I thought he was a good man.
		The other thing I'd like to say is what were you going to tell me about that?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		The February 1980.
unidentified		Hold till you find it, because I got a couple statements about that press release.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Tell me what's it about?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		It's about climate change?
unidentified		Yes.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
unidentified		We had a big freeze back in the 77, 78 era.
		Somebody parked their Volkswagen underneath the Key Bridge.
		That's how the ice was 16 inches deep on the Potomac.
		They were thinking about beat up.
		We're going to get a big Zamboni so they could drive across the Chesapeake Bay.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And what do you think of that, Gary?
		Are you saying that the climate has warmed and that will never happen again?
		Or what are your thoughts?
unidentified		Oh, well, I was just listening to what they were saying about it.
		They said that, you know, no, we're not going to have another ice age that we're more likely to get warmer.
		But one thing, you can be certain, that weather will become more erratic and extreme.
		And both of those things have happened.
		And people are still calling in here saying there's no climate change.
		That's a big hoax.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Okay, Gary, let's try to look for that.
		Actually, it says, this might be it.
		So stay on the line with me.
		It says, and now the weather, remember the winter of 77 and the snowstorm of 79?
		Are you ready to read this?
		It says, the past four years, Washington has endured everything from the coldest winter and the second greatest snowstorm.
		To many folks, it seemed as extreme weather has been the norm.
		Some are already gearing up.
		It says, no one can offer absolute guarantees, but weather forecasting has progressed to the point that even the cautious among us are willing to go out on a limb.
		Is that what you're looking for?
unidentified		No, it was February 29th, 1980.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Oh, this says November 15th, 1980.
		Sorry.
		Okay, we'll try again, Gary, but we'll have to move on to other calls, okay?
		Catherine, Old Beth Page, New York, Independent Line.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I think you're marvelous.
		I want you to know that.
		I waited my lifetime to make this call right now.
		I'm going to recite this thing that I wrote.
		This is what the Catholic Church did to me.
		It's not long, okay?
		So just please bear with me.
		I will never see my child's face.
		You with the white collar and black uniform.
		500 of you lured me into that space, down on my knees, a medieval torture, where you locked up my mind and my emotions in a straitjacket of what was your eternal sexual perversion.
		I will never see my child's face.
		My father was sent up to be a priest in the 1900s in the city of Yonkos coming off a boat from Ireland.
		They put him on an estate with German men that sexually abused him.
		The Catholic Church so much didn't want what my father knew about them getting out that they fed me sexually to my own father through the confessional booth.
		This church has got some holy nerve.
		They more than know about me.
		When I was in middle school, none told me it'd be okay if I killed myself.
		Because of her, I made a suicide attempt when I was like 21 years old.
		They know about me.
		They are homosexuals.
		Who are they to decree what's what in this world?
		My father suffered the hammers of hell.
		He called our house the house of bondage.
		His children and his great-grandchildren, his great-great-children, were all still suffering to this day because of what they did to him.
		It's ridiculous what's still going on, how everybody's admiring this madness.
		Sinead O'Connor got it right when she tore up the priest, Pope's picture on national television years ago.
		Thank you for letting me do this this morning.
		I've been waiting my whole life to be able to tell this story, and I've been being kept from telling it.
		They more than know about me.
		They don't want the truth coming out of who they are.
		And when I watch children go into the confessional move, because I've interviewed those priests as an adult woman, and one priest says to me, What are you telling me?
		I have a girl right now, and if she doesn't have sex with her father, he won't give the money to the mother for all the other young children in the family for food.
		What do you tell me?
		You think I should tell her to go to the police?
		This is who people are putting their children into the confessional booth to talk to?
		Yeah, well, they spoke to me from 8 to 17 and sent me sexually to my own father because they didn't want getting out what he knew about them.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Catherine, I'm sorry you've dealt with that, and I'm sorry for that pain.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Jim in Illinois, Democrat, good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
unidentified		Are you aware of St. Malachi?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		No, tell me.
unidentified		St. Malachi did the prediction of the Poles.
		And like he predicted John Paul II would deal with the eclipse.
		And he was born on the eclipse and died on the eclipse.
		And he was about 80% right on his predictions.
		But his last prediction was for this Pope.
		So I don't know what's going to happen to the Catholic religion or what this St. Malachi meant by his prophecy.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		You mean his prophecies stopped at this pope?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		There are no more after this one?
unidentified		No.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
unidentified		He predicted 112 popes.
unidentified		Are you aware of the red heifers?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		The red heifers?
unidentified		Yeah, the red heifers.
		That had to do with Israel and possibly the Hamas issue.
		What's happening is the Red Heifers, they found five pure heifers in the United States.
		They shipped them through commercial to Israel.
		And they're going to use this red heifer, perfect red heifer, for a sacrifice for the third temple that Israel wants to build.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And here's another Jim, this time in Hudson, Florida, Republican.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Jim, you're next.
unidentified		Good morning, Amy.
		I'd like to make one statement.
		All I hear about is the people that are here illegally, you get put out of the country, didn't get due process of law, but they didn't use due process of law to get into our country.
		That's all I've got to say, and thanks for taking my call.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, and here's Sean in Indianapolis, Democrat.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
unidentified		Hello, good morning.
		I am Irish Catholic American.
		And morning of our passing of our Pope Father.
		Thank you very much.
		Thank you.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Here's Richard, Minneapolis, Republican line.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
unidentified		Oh, yes.
		Good morning.
		I wonder if you could look it up on your internet.
		There was some kind of trouble in England where the steel factory that was used to be owned by England, but now China took it over and they locked out the English authorities from taking it back.
		And that's the insidiousness of the Chinese.
		They'll try to take over everything in the country.
		They try to take over the Great Britain's steel industry.
		I wonder if you could look that up.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Okay, we'll work on that, Richard.
		And if we find it, we'll share it with everybody.
		Over the weekend on Sunday, Senator Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota was on CNN, and she talked about the issue with Trump calling for the termination of the Federal Reserve Chair, Jerome Powell.
		Here she is.
amy klobuchar ▲ ● ▼		The law is very clear on the chair of the Federal Reserve.
		It says that he can only be fired for cause.
		That has been defined as things like malfeasance or criminality.
		You're not going to find that with Jerome Powell.
		So he stays in office as chair of the Fed until a year from now, until next May of 2026.
		He gets to then stay on the board until 2028.
		There's a reason we have an independent Fed, and it has served us well through many crises, through downturns, through depressions, through the pandemic.
		They're able to respond and stabilize things.
		And what Jerome Powell is doing right now is warning that these tariffs are having a huge destabilizing effect on our economy and hurting everyday people.
		And that's going to affect decisions that the Fed make.
		That's his job, and he's doing it.
		And the president is looking for a scapegoat to distract from the fact that it's his actions, his administration's actions, his tariffs that has caused what was a stabilized economy that was dealing with inflation but has made it worse.
		As we've seen groceries go up, the predictions on his tariff: $4,000 a family for all costs, $200 a family a year just for the groceries alone.
		And I just bought eggs, of course, with this, our Easter weekend.
		And I can tell you, we are still seeing high egg prices out there.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		That was on CNN, and this is on the Associated Press.
		Zelensky says Russia is trying to create an impression of a ceasefire as attacks continue.
		You recall that Putin had announced a temporary ceasefire over the Easter break.
		It says, Zelensky wrote this on X. As of Easter morning, we can say that the Russian army is trying to create a general impression of a ceasefire, but in some places it does not abandon individual attempts to advance and inflict losses on Ukraine.
		It says Zelensky said Sunday morning that Ukrainian forces had recorded 59 instances of Russian shelling and five assaults by units along the front line, as well as dozens of drone strikes.
		Here's Joyce in Texas, line for Democrats.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I'm a senior citizen, and I was calling to find out if you could tell our people what President Trump said yesterday with his Easter address.
		I just thought it was terrible.
		But thank you so much for listening.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		What did you think was terrible about it, Joyce?
unidentified		His Easter address to the nation, right?
		So as I was terrible for Easter to say some of the things he said.
		Thank you so much.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And here is Mike in Massachusetts, Republican line.
unidentified		Hi.
		So, you know, all this talk about climate change has got me thinking about when I was in college.
		And it was actually around today, this week.
		We had a thing called Earth Day, and everybody shut their lights off and didn't use electricity, did not use their phones for an hour.
		It was Earth hour, something to that effect.
		And it was pretty incredible.
		And I just would love to see the country come back to common sense, where we don't need to leave lights on.
		We don't need to, you know, just like certain things.
		Like, we can just, you know, we can let darkness happen.
		In other words, we don't need, because there is a thing called light pollution.
		I don't think a lot of people realize that it affects habitats, it affects animals.
		It would be kind of neat to see places that, you know, just turn off the lights, like even everyday municipalities.
		And then another thing that I wanted to mention was snow removal, you know, in terms of the faults and stuff like that.
		That's really bad they're finding for the environment, for the water.
		And if they could, you know, use something more environmentally friendly so that it doesn't go into water supplies and damage the environment.
		Just small changes, I think, that are necessary.
		And a lot of times people will say, well, you need to cut down in water usage.
		I don't advocate that.
		I think people should be allowed to use as much water as they want.
		But what I would like to see is changes within American culture of littering.
		You know, just I mean, we talk all about, you know, climate change and yet there's so much trash on the ground.
		Instead of throwing trash and throwing plastics, you know, just no longer relying on a lot of these products, like turning away from these processed foods, you know, eating meats and vegetables and just better diets and just to cut down on the litter, but also not throwing away the stuff and polluting and being able to be resourceful.
		So in other words, if instead of detention or instead of like sitting there aimlessly, have a bunch of kids go out and clean and get rid of the trash in the parks.
		And I just feel like the focus should not be no more water and reduce showering or things to that, but more so just let's go out and take away the trash and enjoy what we have.
		I think the messaging needs to change.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Mike.
		We got that.
		And the previous caller was asking about the President's Easter message.
		Of course, Easter was yesterday.
		This is CBS News.
		Trump takes aim at Biden, radical left lunatics and the courts in Easter Sunday message.
		It says President Trump slammed former President Joe Biden, the, quote, radical left lunatics and the courts in a message Sunday while wishing them, quote, with great love, sincerity, and affection, a very happy Easter with three exclamation marks.
		Minutes after sharing a more traditional Easter message on True Social saying he and First Lady Melania Trump, quote, would like to wish everyone a very happy Easter.
		The president posted a longer, grievance-filled message.
		And this is Annie, St. Petersburg, Florida, Democrat.
unidentified		Hey, good morning.
		Happy late Easter.
		I'm just calling because I just like what you just said, the comment you just made about what the president posted for us.
		I mean, you know, for the people.
		Have we just become comfortably numb?
		Is that what it is?
		And as far as putting up with what this man's going to do, I think it's amazing that the country's standing up and protesting.
		And I just really hope it goes somewhere because I think a lot of us are pretty much fed up.
		And I think it's wild that JD Vance had a sitting with the Pope before he passed away.
		And I really hope JD Vance listened to the Pope as to what he said.
		I really do.
		I just really want nothing but the best for everyone.
		And I think it's just upsetting to see that the president is posting such awful things on a holiday when, and I mean, what's going on?
		I mean, really, what's going on, America?
		I just hope everybody gets heads up and starts trying to do some more positive things.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Annie.
		Here is Stephen in Quincy, Illinois on the line for independence.
		You're next, Stephen.
unidentified		Good morning, Mimi.
		Two items.
		I'm saddened by the passing of Pope Francis.
		He was a great man and a hero to me.
		Number two, this past week, the U.S. government released 10,000 pages of classified information in regard to the investigation into the assassination of the late Senator Robert Francis Kennedy,
		who was killed the night of June the 5th, 1968 in Los Angeles after he had won the Democrat California primary for presidency.
		The investigation showed absolutely that Sir Hans Sirhan murdered him.
		He acted alone.
		Some of the information included a diary Sirhan had kept indicating he was planning to kill the late senator.
		The problem is that a couple years ago, Senator Kennedy's son, Robert Kennedy Jr., met with Sir Hans Sirhan, and Sir Hans Sirhan convicted the Kennedy boy that he, Sir Han, was innocent, that he didn't kill his father, and that he had been framed by the CIA.
		Kennedy took this and believed that Hook Lyon and Sinker and later conducted several news conferences and presentations where he represented that the CIA had killed not only his father, but also was uncle of late President Kennedy.
		I know he suffered a lot of trauma as a result of the assassinations, but this is just lunacy.
		The fact that he was appointed and now was the Secretary of Health and Human Services is ridiculous.
		He obviously is susceptible to suggestions, and the fact that he's susceptible to the suggestions that vaccines are bad is another idiotic idea.
		In addition, I don't mean to go on and on, but about a week ago, your sister station, C-SPAN2, had a nut on making a presentation in regard to the same facts, that the CIA was responsible for the assassinations and that Sir Hans Sirhan was a patsy.
		I wish I'm a conservative on some issues and a liberal on some others, but there's no place for the news media allowing nuts with no information to present idiotic ideas.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Thanks, Stephen.
		And this is Manfred in New York, Republican line.
		Go ahead, Manfred.
unidentified		Hello.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Yes, hi.
unidentified		I just would like to come across because I'm a legal immigrant from 1956, and I had to follow the laws of the land.
		I had to have a sponsor, and I have to have a clean bill of health.
		Everything was examined.
		I had to have an interview with the American Council in Europe, what my intentions are when I want to immigrate, if I have occupation, everything was scrutinized.
		And now I had to look and have to be insulted with all these hoodlums coming across the border, illegal, and they call them immigrants.
		People are pregnant or ought to come across the land to come across the border and causing havoc in this country.
		And all the victims, they should sue Mr. Biden and company for the heartache and for the damage they cause.
		That poor woman with five children had to be murdered from this illegal guy coming across the border and causing her death.
		And the poor children didn't have no more mom.
		They should sue the hell out of Biden and company for causing this problem and taking money so the children have the life to live after their mom is gone.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right.
unidentified		That's my point.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Here's Joan in San Jose, California, Democrat.
unidentified		Yeah, my name is Joanne.
		Amy, what I can't understand, I call the cops and I have the cops to come out here at 3671 Greenlee Drive, Apartment 3.
		I got illegals just living here.
		What they do, they don't have PG ⁇ E, they don't have running water, they don't have anything, but they ask the flaphouse.
		This is about 15 of them that comes in.
		All they do is say, oh, dope.
		I've been here 22 years in the same duplex I'm in.
		They've been here so much.
		I've had a heart attack.
		The cops come out here.
		They won't open the door.
		And the cops can't get in.
		Who can I see to talk about this here?
		Because all they do come here, this is the black house where they come and wait for the family to come and pick them up.
		And they're aging.
		And they feel like they're untouchable.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Here's Tina in Gorham, Maine.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Republican?
unidentified		No, I'm a Democrat.
		Okay.
		I think I called, I thought I called on the right number.
		I'm a Democrat.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
unidentified		Okay.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Go ahead.
unidentified		Yeah.
		A quick comment regarding the guy from Massachusetts about Earth Day, picking up the litter and so on.
		And yeah, I'm 64 years old.
		And even in Maine, I think the litter's been coming up to us.
		We had a very clean state, but it's all over the roads.
		And we've created a group called Gorham Cleans Up.
		And we do a big cleanup in our town every month, every year, around Earth Day.
		So I think this year it's the last Sunday of the month.
		People get together.
		It's wonderful.
		And we pick up so much trash.
		It's been increasing every year.
		But yeah, there's plastic and crap.
		And a lot of, I think people just throw out.
		You know, this is a town.
		It's not a big area outside of Portland, Maine.
		People drive and they just throw out their trash where, you know, in the fields and in the woods where there's no houses, of course.
		So it's people driving.
		And, you know, and I go out on my own all the time to pick up trash.
		So it's like, why are we doing this to our earth?
		And this is like everything we should recycle and put things in the trash.
		And so we do this every year, five years now.
		And we make videos and take pictures.
		It's a wonderful gathering.
		But a lot of communities do sometimes many, many pickups during the summer.
		We live next to the ocean with Scarborough, and there's a big marsh, Scarborough Beach.
		I participated in that one time.
		And that, you know, it's a big, it's a big mosh.
		So people do clean it up multiple times per year.
		So I don't know.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Tina.
		And we do have a statement from Vice President JD Vance on the BBC.
		He says, my heart goes out to Catholics after Pope Francis' death.
		He says this.
		My heart goes out to the millions of Christians all over the world who loved him.
		I was happy to see him yesterday, though he was obviously very ill.
		That he posted that on X.
		He converted to Catholicism as an adult and had diplomatic meetings with the Vatican officials over the weekend before he left Rome for India.
		And here's Glenn in Madison, Illinois, line for Democrats.
		Good morning, Glenn.
unidentified		Good morning, Glenn.
		Good morning.
		I got a couple things, and I don't know where to start with it.
		One of them is nobody's saying anything about this oil spill off of the Keystone pipeline that they all thought was just so great.
		It dumped 17 truckloads of oil in Minnesota.
		I was happy yesterday, though.
		Next thing is all the money that was made on the Easter egg roll at the White House.
		And here's one of the things that I've got.
		Another thing.
		Illinois.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Okay, so wait, let me just update people on what you're talking about.
		This is two weeks ago.
		Cleanup underway of the Keystone oil pipeline spill in North Dakota.
		It says that the pipeline ruptured Tuesday, so this would have been earlier this month in southeastern North Dakota, was shut down within two minutes by an employee who heard a mechanical bang.
		Aerial photo released shows a black pond-like pool of oil suspended in a partially snowy field that's traversed by tire tracks.
		And there's a picture there of that spill.
unidentified		Okay.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So then you wanted to talk about the Easter egg roll on the White House lawn?
unidentified		Yeah, sure.
unidentified		The Easter egg hunt that the White House had for all the money for the ones that wanted to get involved in it.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So, okay.
		So I have here the NPR about that White House solicits corporate sponsors for its Easter egg roll event.
		Is that what you wanted to talk about?
		That aspect of it?
unidentified		Yeah.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Go ahead.
unidentified		Where's all that money going?
		Okay.
		Okay.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Here's DeAndre in Baltimore, Republican.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
unidentified		Hey, good morning.
		Thanks for taking my call.
		I just want to take advantage of Open Forum and just kind of deliver some important stuff to the American people and everybody that's listening.
		There's a website called FRACAPAC.com.
		That's FRAC AIPAC.
		Just on one website, and then it can outsource it to all the other PAC groups and lobbying groups that essentially has spot out all the Democrats, Republicans, well, majority of them, you know, in order to push foreign interest before American interest.
		And I think it's important that everybody in the country know who their elected officials are and who's paying them, you know, and what are they paying them for to pass what type of legislation and why.
		And I think this is something extremely important people should know about.
		And AIPAC should be registered under FARA as a foreign entity.
		So, yeah, there shouldn't be like dual loyalty to any nation.
		You're either 100% America or nothing.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Dondre.
		And that's the time we've got for this portion, but we'll have more time later in the program for your calls.
		Up next, we've got former Trump Veterans Affairs Secretary David Shulkin, who'll discuss the planned cuts at the Department of Veterans Affairs and how it could impact care.
		Later, Scott Kennedy from the Center for Strategic and International Studies discusses the trade war between the U.S. and China and which side might blink first.
unidentified		We'll be right back.
brian lamb ▲ ● ▼		British writer Phil Tenline has written a book titled Ghosts of Iron Mountain.
		The publisher Scribner calls it an investigative masterpiece for readers curious about the surprising connection between John F. Kennedy, Oliver Stone, Timothy McVeigh, QAnon, Alex Jones, and Donald Trump.
		In his introduction, author Tinline says the book is the true story of a hoax, a hoax that shocked the nation in the late 1960s and that once created, seemed impossible to extinguish.
		Those involved in the hoax include Victor Navaski, E.L. Doctorow, John Kenneth Galbraith, and the author, the writer, Leonard Lewin.
unidentified		Author Phil Tinline with his book, Ghosts of Iron Mountain: The Hoax of the Century, Its Enduring Impact, and What It Reveals About America Today.
		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.
		C-SPAN Shop.org is C-SPAN's online store.
		Browse through our latest collection of C-SPAN products, apparel, books, home decor, and accessories.
		There's something for every C-SPAN fan, and every purchase helps support our nonprofit operations.
		Shop now or anytime at c-spanshop.org.
		Looking to contact your members of Congress?
		Well, C-SPAN is making it easy for you with our 2025 Congressional Directory.
		Get essential contact information for government officials all in one place.
		This compact, spiral-bound guide contains bio and contact information for every House and Senate member of the 119th Congress.
		Contact information on congressional committees, the President's Cabinet, federal agencies, and state governors.
		The Congressional Directory costs $32.95 plus shipping and handling, and every purchase helps support C-SPAN's nonprofit operations.
		Scan the code on the right or go to c-spanshop.org to pre-order your copy today.
		Washington Journal continues.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Welcome back to the program.
		We are joined now by Dr. David Shulkin.
		He's the former Veterans Affairs Secretary during the first Trump administration.
		Dr. Shulkin, welcome to the program.
unidentified		Glad to be here.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So I want to start with the news of a U.S. veteran, a U.S. Navy veteran, highly decorated.
		He shot and killed himself in front of a VA hospital in San Antonio last week.
		And his father says this on Facebook: I lay the blame for my son's death on the VA system and the psychiatrist who drugged him instead of helping him.
		Your reaction to that?
unidentified		Well, first of all, it's always horrible to hear about these types of incidents.
		Unfortunately, veteran suicide is at an all-time high.
		Last year, the rate of veteran suicides rose by 11%, and there's been over 6,000 veterans who take their own life each year since 9-11 in 2001.
		So this is a real national crisis, and it's the reason why the VA has made veteran suicide the single highest priority.
		But too often we are failing our veterans the way that this father feels.
		And I can just imagine the grief in that family.
		And so we just need to be doing a lot more than we currently are.
		And we need to keep at this very, very stubborn problem until we can find a way to help these veterans that are suffering.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So this isn't a new issue.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Why hasn't it been addressed to the point that at least veteran suicides, you know, each one is tragic, but at least it would be not increasing year over year?
unidentified		It's a very complex issue in the fact that the majority of veterans who are taking their own life are not getting care.
		They're not in an ongoing therapeutic relationship.
		They're not even in the VA system.
		Now, this Navy veteran appears to have been treated at the VA, and certainly there are veterans that are being treated like this Navy veteran who do take their own life, but the majority of veterans are out in the community isolated, not seeking the right type of care.
		So this is a problem that needs to be addressed within the VA system, as this father points out, but also in the broader community by partnering with local governments, not-for-profit agencies, the churches, the mosques, the synagogues to be able to connect with veterans that are not getting the help that they need.
		We also need to be taking a look at new types of therapeutic interventions because the ones that we are currently using are not always effective.
		And so this is an area where we need more research and we need more effort being put into the problem to try to find the underlying causes why veterans are taking their own life.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		This comes, of course, as current Secretary Collins of the VA is looking to cut about 80,000 jobs at the VA.
		It's part of an overall effort to reduce the federal workforce, as you're aware.
		What do you think of those cuts and the impact they could have on veterans care?
unidentified		You know, I certainly believe that the Secretary is coming in with a mandate to not keep things the way they are, to be able to figure out how to improve government, how to make it more efficient.
		But my belief is that you start with what you're trying to solve.
		You start with the problems that you're trying to address, how you're trying to make this system better for veterans.
		This issue of veteran suicide is just one example that we need to do better in.
		Unfortunately, where the administration has now started is in reducing the cost of care solely.
		And when you focus on reducing the cost through job cuts, canceling contracts, and you're not focused on what you're trying to achieve, it's hard to understand how you're going to leave this system in a better place than it is.
		So, what I think that we should be doing is stating the objectives, reducing veteran suicide, reducing the wait times so that veterans can get the care that they need when they need it, reducing veteran homelessness, making sure that we improve the health outcomes of our veterans, and then figure out how do we make the workflow better?
		How do we use technology to make the system more efficient?
		That will result in less cost.
		But most importantly, it will result in us honoring our commitment to serving our veterans, to making them delivering the type of care that we all think that our veterans deserve.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		I want to play for you a portion of Secretary Collins on CNN last week.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		He was asked where they are in the process of cutting staff at the VA, and then I'll get your reaction.
doug collins ▲ ● ▼		Well, the first thing is no jobs have been cut yet.
		We're still in the process of looking at that.
		And as I told you then, it was a goal that we're looking at to reduce force.
		But also, you have to understand, I think that everybody has to understand where we're at with the VA right now.
		And that is since 2015, we've added hundreds of billions of money in money, and we've also added hundreds of thousands of positions, but yet we still have what we've added to as a bureaucracy and not at many times into the condition of handling patient care at the front end.
		So, there's a lot of jobs that no one would even know is at the VA that has nothing to do with our patient care and nothing to do with disability claims that are frankly clogging up the system in many ways.
		The bureaucracy at the VA is a little bit more than just rampant.
		So, there's many ways that you can look at this because if it was just simply adding people and adding money, Jake, I tell this story all the time.
		If I was to tell the VA leadership 10 years ago in the hospitals and benefits that here's what your budget would look like in 2025 and here's what your number of employees will look like, they would have all jumped up and down on the table thinking that we were going to be in some type of grand scenario where the VA would be able to solve everything.
		Well, guess what?
		We're 10 years later and still on the GAO, GAO high-risk list.
		So, we've got to do better with what we've got and we've got to focus it.
		And one of the things we did, and since we've talked last time, is I was actually able to take some of the cuts from contracts, $360 million that we actually moved into our community care veteran health care outreach.
		So, we are moving money back to where it's more on the target for our veterans.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Dr. Shulkin, the Secretary says that the bureaucracy itself is negatively impacting veterans' care.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Do you agree with that?
unidentified		I do agree with Secretary Collins, and I said when I was Secretary, that this is not a matter of that the VA doesn't get enough money.
		The VA budget is fairly generous, and I do believe that it is the responsibility of the head of the agency to look at doing things better, doing things more efficiently.
		But I don't agree with Secretary Collins that there haven't been reductions.
		There have been many VA employees that have been fired, and I hear from them every day.
		I've heard from hundreds of them.
		And this is beginning to affect care.
		And more importantly, this anxiety and uncertainty about the future is beginning to significantly affect the morale of the workforce.
		I've never seen the morale this bad in the VA.
		And I think that's natural when people are uncertain about the future of the agency.
		I do believe that the Secretary would be better off talking about how he's trying to make this system better for veterans.
		You do not cut your way to an excellent health care system.
		And prior to being in government, I ran many health care systems.
		So I understand that sometimes you do need to do a reduction in force or you do need to cut your budget, but you have to make sure that you're cutting it in a smart way.
		You're not letting your very, very best employees leave the organization.
		You're essentially replacing the things that you're cutting with better ways of doing it using technology or new ways of delivering the type of care.
		And so this is a very complex system that you can't just cut your way out of it and expect that there aren't going to be harmful results to our veterans.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		If you'd like to join our conversation with Dr. David Shulkin, he was the Veterans Affairs Secretary in the first Trump administration.
		You can do so.
		Our lines are biparty.
		So if you're a Republican, you can call us on 202748-8001.
		Democrats are on 202748-8000.
		Independents are on 2028-8000 and two.
		We also have a line set aside for veterans.
		So if you're a vet, please call us on 202-748-8003.
		You can use that line as well for texting us.
		Dr. Shulkin, I want to ask you about the PACT Act.
		It was passed in the Biden administration in 2022.
		Remind us of what that does and the impact that that is having on the VA, on the budget, and on the staffing.
unidentified		The PACT Act is often referred to as the Burn Pit Act.
		It is the ability to recognize the harm that has been caused by a generation of veterans that have gone to defend our country overseas and have been exposed to toxins and then come back home and can't get the benefits and services that they've earned.
		And rather than fighting their own government, the PACT Act recognizes that many of these conditions were caused by toxins and give the veterans the health care and the benefits that they deserve.
		And so when this was passed by President Biden or signed by President Biden during his term, we saw the largest expansion of veterans' benefits since World War II.
		We've seen several hundreds of thousands, more than actually a million veterans enter the system and will continue to enter the system over the next decade to be able to get that type of care and benefits.
		And so it's a very positive legislation that allows veterans to get that care.
		What it's doing is it's putting a significant stress on the VA system because we're having so many new people enter the VA system, which is a good thing.
		But when you're doing these types of budget cuts that we've seen and you're reducing staff, you're not hiring new staff to come in.
		We're seeing these veterans that should be getting the care and benefits actually seeing a delay in receiving that care.
		And that, of course, is very concerning.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		This is Govigzek writes this.
		The VA plans to lay off as many as 83,000 employees this year.
		And this is a leaked memo that calls for the VA to slash its workforce to 2019 levels that were in place before millions of veterans became newly eligible for care.
		That, of course, is talking about the PACT Act.
		So what happens to all those people coming into the system?
		You know, Secretary Collins is saying that he's not laying off people directly involved with patient care.
		These are all what he calls bureaucrats.
		What's your impression of what could happen as far as wait times or quality of care?
		And is there another way that those vets can be cared for that doesn't cost the government so much money?
unidentified		You know, I do have some concerns about labeling everyone who is being laid off as a bureaucrat.
		Look, I'm a physician, and not only that, but have run many health systems, including the VA.
		And what you know when you do that is that a clinician just can't show up and see a patient.
		The veterans have to be scheduled.
		There has to be people that are supplying the medical supplies.
		There has to be people that are cleaning the rooms.
		There have to be nurses and assistants and all sorts of other people that many are behind the scenes that result in the ability to care for these veterans.
		So it's a system of care.
		It's not individuals that can be labeled bureaucrats.
		And I do think that we are seeing an increase in wait times around the country as a result of this.
		And so that's concerning.
		Now, there is a system of care called the community care network.
		When veterans aren't able to get care in the VA system, they should, by law, be able to go outside into the community.
		But we are still seeing barriers to veterans getting that type of access to the community care system.
		So something has to give here.
		We either have to adequately staff the VA system so that veterans can get good access to care without long wait times, or we have to open up the community care system as that outflow so that veterans can get care by private physicians and go to private hospitals if the VA is not going to be staffed at the levels that are required.
		But right now, we're in this middle land where I think the veterans are experiencing trouble in getting the care in a timely manner.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, let's talk to calls.
		Tom is in Pittsburgh, California, on the line for Democrats.
		You're on with Dr. David Chulkin.
unidentified		Thank you.
		First of all, thank you for taking my call.
		Dr. Sir, I am a former or retired VA employee.
		I'm also a Vietnam veteran.
		And this has been an ongoing problem for decades.
		During the Vietnam War, we came home.
		We weren't getting the services that we needed.
		They cut back back then.
		They were cutting back on services.
		And that's the reason why a lot of Vietnam veterans committed suicide, became alcoholics, drugs.
		Now you have a whole new generation of veterans.
		And the issue is this.
		It's a two pro.
		The situation is this.
		You can expect, when I was working for the VA, when you're paying the employees who work for the Veterans Administration, who are taking care of patients, that when you look at the outside, they're making more money than we are.
		Well, what's happening, a lot of qualified people are saying, well, I can make more money this way, and they leave.
		So again, the situation is that not only is patient care, but the employees have to be paid the wages that meet the surrounding area.
		I lived in the Bay Area.
		We were way behind.
		The patient care isn't there.
		If they don't come to us, the employees, the veterans, what can we do to what can we do to help the veterans?
		I'm a veteran.
		And I tell you, the problem with this is that when you've got a veteran that's waiting six months, six months for someone to see, there's something wrong.
		And this has to be addressed.
		And this problem is still going on today.
		How are we going to fix this problem?
		And you're talking about cuts.
		Yeah.
		Well, first of all, thank you for your service, not only in Vietnam, but also for your service to veterans after you came back and working at the VA.
		And you're certainly right.
		These problems have existed for decades.
		Fortunately, I think that there have been changes to the system that, if used properly, are addressing those issues.
		We've seen increases in pay to our employees in the veteran health care system so that they can begin to keep up with the private sector.
		Not that they're equivalent, but my experience putting on a white coat and taking care of veterans myself is that some of the very, very finest healthcare professionals that I've ever worked with are working in the VA and are very dedicated for the same reason you went back to work at the VA because they're continuing their commitment to our veterans and to their fellow brothers and sisters,
		as many of them like you did serve in the military.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Dr. Shulkin, about how much, what's the percentage of vets that are working for the VA?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Do you happen to know that?
unidentified		Yeah, it's been reported recently in the press as 25%.
		It's not 25%.
		It's much closer to 40%.
		And, you know, we see it in the people that are applying to the VA.
		And of course, there's a veteran preference in hiring employees that many people, when they transition out of the military, $250,000 a year, many of them choose to want to continue that service and preferentially seek employment at the VA.
		The VA actually has not had problems in general in bringing on new employees.
		Last year, the VA hired much more than actually they had originally planned to do.
		So now, of course, it's different in seeing budget cuts and reductions.
		But the VA is a very good place to work and employees know that.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Mark is in Stittville, New York, a Marine vet.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I'm a Marine Corps combat vet from Beirut.
		I also am afflicted by the water contamination on Camp Blajoon.
		I was wondering why we only got letters for the last so many years.
		I think the first letter went out in 97 telling us we were contaminated.
		But go away, you don't have cancer.
		Here recently, I was diagnosed with cancer.
		I'm starting the VA process.
		But how come our government finds more need to support illegal aliens instead of us veterans with all the health care expenditures that they've wasted on these people that don't even belong here is ridiculous.
		And, you know, we all serve for the Constitution.
		And Article 4, Section 4, Clause 2 of the Constitution calls for the federal government to use all means of resources necessary to repeal foreign invaders.
		That's what these people that have come here for.
		I've worked my entire life working against these people at my detriment.
		When do we get support for our health needs for the government?
		When do we get our rights actually respected?
		Well, first of all, I do think that, as we talked about before, you are one of those veterans that is eligible for care and services because of the PACT Act, and that did involve Camp Lejeune.
		For those of us who fought to get the PACT Act for years and years, it is exactly for the reason that you talked about.
		People come back, were exposed.
		In this case, this was actually domestic exposure, Camp Lejeune, and yet have to prove their case to the government and have to wait often decades for the science to be able to show that there was harm.
		And of course, we saw this all the way back to World War II with mustard gas in Vietnam with Agent Orange, in the Gulf War, with Gulf War syndrome, and certainly, you know, in every generation of men and women that have served.
		And so what the PACT Act is saying is we don't need to wait anymore.
		We need to get the care and services right away for people just like you and make it an easier process.
		Now, I think you're going through that process right now, and it's not always that easy, but stick with it because the system should work to be able to get you that care that you need and the benefits that you have already earned.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Dr. Shulkin, can you remind us what happened at Camp Lejeune?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		This would be in North Carolina, right?
unidentified		Yes, that's right.
		And exposure to the water, toxins that leaked into the water supply, so that people that were there over decades long, including not only those that served, but their families and their children who lived on base, were exposed to unsafe water supplies.
		And that is recognized in the PACT Act.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Here's Will, a Vietnam vet in Massachusetts.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
unidentified		How are you this morning?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good.
unidentified		I'm glad to hear that.
		Okay, I'm a permanently entotted disabled vet, but I'm calling about my girlfriend.
		She was a whack.
		She was in service in 1971.
		She served at Fort McClellan, Alabama.
		And this poor little sweetheart was exposed to Agent Orange, white, blue, the entire rainbow of herbicides.
		She was exposed to mustard gas.
		She was exposed to plutonium.
		Anybody who was at that time, whoever went to Fort McClellan, was exposed.
		They were exposed to all these things.
		And at one time, they had a sign up over the water supply.
		Do not eat the fish caught here.
		Monsanto Chemicals, they stocked one of these streams that the Fort and Anderson, Alabama used jointly for water supply.
		And they stocked the stream with gamefish.
		Within 30 seconds, the gamefish were all disoriented.
		Within five minutes, the last one died.
		I'm just giving a heads up to anybody who went to the chemical school, the MP school, the WACS, anybody who served there, anybody, even people who live there as dependents, civilian workers.
		I'm just giving them a heads up.
		You have been exposed.
		I want you to know.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Thank you.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Dr. Shulkin.
unidentified		I do think that there are many people that do not recognize that they were exposed.
		And so thank you for getting that word out.
		The VA does work hard to bring that message out to people that have served to let them know that this is something that they should be aware about.
		And if they are concerned, to reach out to the VA and to enter that process.
		So I think the caller is absolutely right.
		Many, many people are unaware of these exposures and frankly do need to look into this to make sure that they're getting the type of help that they need.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Dr. Shulkin, I want to ask you about an opinion piece that you wrote for Military Times about the budget shortfall at the VA at $15 billion and your ideas to address that.
unidentified		Yeah.
		Well, the VA did during the last fiscal year experience a significant budget deficit.
		And one of the reasons for that was the PACT Act: that so many new veterans were seeking care and coming into the system.
		And of course, any healthcare system would need to staff up for that level of new services being in demand.
		And so the VA has had a significant increase in budget deficit.
		But like Secretary Collins had said, there are ways of getting this system more efficient.
		The VA budget is large, and one does need, rather than to always seek more and more funding, to look for more efficient ways of doing things.
		And that's the job, whether you're running a healthcare system for the government or running a healthcare system in the private sector.
		And so I have suggested a number of ways that the system could be far more efficient.
		But these are ways that, frankly, would not result in significant job losses.
		These are building the facilities, the VA facilities, much more efficiently rather than doing it through government contractors.
		These are sharing facilities with the Department of Defense that has many underutilized facilities.
		This is standardizing the supplies and services across the VA system and putting in a standard electronic health record across the system.
		So there are many more efficient ways of running this system.
		And I applaud the Secretary for looking for those.
		I just don't think the way you do this is by cutting your way out of this problem, but you have to do this in a smart way in improving the way that care can be delivered.
		And frankly, a lot of that is by replacing old government technology and putting in new technology that's now available, including artificial intelligence.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Let's talk to a vet in Riva, Maryland.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Jim, you're next.
unidentified		Hi.
		I'm just called in to mention about the community care that I heard him speak about: about when the VA cannot handle it, they'd send you out to community care.
		I'm waiting to try to get a hip replacement.
		A year ago, I was in need of one.
		They had me come back and take more x-rays.
		I took the x-rays.
		I went down to Orthopaedics to schedule an appointment.
		And then you wait and you wait for them to call you.
		And if you miss the call, you're out of luck.
		So you basically got to sit by the telephone hoping that they're going to call you in a reasonable time.
		It interrupts your whole life.
		And this is what you go through with the VA.
		And I'll say this about the VA.
		They're probably one of the finest medical outfits out there.
		And they deal with a lot of different issues.
		I heard him speak about the Agent Orange, the Gulf War syndrome.
		You have to prove these cases.
		And when you're fighting for mental health issues, you have to prove that you have these mental health issues.
		And the way you have to do that is by proving your stressors.
		And this opens up more wounds to people.
		But I'm very proud of the VA.
		I think they do a wonderful job.
		They are compassionate.
		But when you're going to cut their funds, you're cutting the throats of these veterans that have already suffered a great deal.
		And it's just not right.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Jim.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Go ahead, Dr. Shulkin.
unidentified		I think you're hearing what I hear on a regular basis from so many veterans, which is that the VA is an incredible resource and very important that we have a VA to be there because of that compassion and care and understanding of veterans' issues.
		But it's not a great place if you can't get in there and if you can't get care scheduled or if you're waiting a year for that care.
		So I think a couple things.
		One is under President Trump, when I was secretary, the law was passed called the Mission Act, where it is put into legislation that veterans should not be waiting for specialty care like orthopedics more than 28 days.
		And if they are waiting more than 28 days to get into the VA, then that should allow them access to the community care network.
		Also, if a veteran lives more than 60 minutes from a VA, that should allow them access to the community care network.
		So the intent of the VA system is veterans should not be stuck waiting for care in what we're hearing on a regular basis.
		And, you know, we're hearing that directly from this veteran.
		The other thing that we're hearing from the caller is that they feel like they have to fight their own government just to get the services that they've already earned and that they deserve.
		And again, that's not a system that is intended or that we want.
		And we know that our veterans deserve much better.
		So this is what I mean.
		Rather than focusing solely on the cuts, we need to focus on what is the system that we're designing and how do we get there to be more efficient.
		And look, I do believe we can probably get there with a smaller budget, but it's going to take the fortitude to design the new system and to put in the support tools to allow us to get there to be more efficient.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		We have a question for you on X, who says, is it the expectations of veterans that everything is covered and free?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Should some co-payment be required?
unidentified		The VA does have co-payments.
		The way that the VA system works is there are eight priority groups for veterans.
		When they leave the military, they get an examination.
		And if you are in prior to group one, which is severely 100% disabled, think about veterans who came back from Iraq and Afghanistan, missing legs and arms or in wheelchairs.
		Those veterans don't pay co-pays.
		Those veterans get the highest level of service and don't have to pay for it.
		But if, on the other end, you're in priority group seven or eight, which means that you're not service disabled and you have a higher income, you actually don't even get access to VA health care services.
		Those that are in between have some level of co-payment depending upon their service connectedness or their service disability.
		So the system does take into account whether you can afford to pay your level of service disability, and there are co-pays associated with those that don't meet the requirements.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Let's talk to Myron, a Vietnam vet in Hancock, Wisconsin.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Hi, Myron.
unidentified		Good morning.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Morning.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Go right ahead.
unidentified		How are you doing?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good.
unidentified		Well, I appreciate the VA.
		I just can't say enough about the health care.
		I think it's some of the best in the United States, maybe the best.
		My wife does not go to the VA.
		She has terrible health care.
paul craig roberts ▲ ● ▼		And when I compare my health care to hers, it's unbelievable.
unidentified		I have taken advantage of community care and got great community care.
		I can see today because of community care.
		I am very appreciative.
		Yeah.
		And, you know, this is so common.
		It's one of the reasons why when I got to VA, I became a strong advocate to support the VA and to make it a better system because of exactly what I hear from veterans, which is this is the best care or some of the best care that they've ever received.
		And, you know, when I would put on my white coat and stethoscope, even though I was secretary, I would see that personally, the type of care and caring that occurs in the VA.
		And that's why I fought for that system and why I continue to fight for the system.
		There are efforts underway to privatize the VA to essentially reduce its importance and scope.
		And I'm not in favor of that.
		I actually wrote a book called It Shouldn't Be This Hard to Serve Your Country about all of the reasons why this system is an incredible system and important for our national security and why I think it's important that we all stand up for the VA.
		But, you know, there are people who I think don't share that belief and don't want to see the VA succeed.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Here's Ed in Jacksonville, Florida, line for independence.
unidentified		Yes, good morning.
unidentified		I'm Iraq and Afghanistan and also Vietnam veteran.
louie gohmert ▲ ● ▼		And I would like people to know that, you know, especially the military people when they get out, unless they're service connected, that they are going to get a bill, which you already address.
unidentified		But also you don't address that if you're a veteran that served and got a retirement from the military system, you got under the TRICARE system, you file for that for your insurance for the VA bill, that they will not take TRICARE.
		Yes.
		We have a very siloed system of care.
		What this caller is talking about is two different systems that are essentially treating the same population, which are people who have served our country.
		Some are covered under the TRICARE system.
		Those tend to be those that have put in a lot of years and have retired with a pension through the military and also their families, where the VA system is a broader system.
		But both are systems designed to treat populations who have served our country.
		And one of the ways that I think that we can become more efficient as a country and serve our veterans and those retirees better is to actually look at ways of bringing some of these systems together because there's duplication.
		And so those are things that I think are worth exploring and seeing whether we can design a better, more efficient system of care.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		We've got a question for you on X from Ajika, who says homeless veterans in Los Angeles are still waiting for 1,800 units of permanent housing per court rulings.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Why is the VA appealing this decision?
unidentified		Yeah, veterans homelessness, when President Obama first set out to eliminate it more than 10 years ago now, is still a major problem.
		About 40,000 homeless veterans, you know, each night do not have a safe place to sleep or to call home.
		And California, especially Los Angeles, Santa Monica area, tends to be the area where we see the single highest level of veteran homelessness.
		The VA has been involved in many legal struggles, largely related to the Westwood campus in Los Angeles, which is about 300 acres of property in Westwood, right?
		Right, some of the most expensive property in that region where there is veteran homes for homelessness people being built.
		And the issue is whether there should be more built there.
		And I'm not exactly aware of this current legislation that's going on.
		I know that this has been an ongoing issue all along.
		Of course, many of us, Secretary McDonald and myself and others, have supported using that campus to house homeless veterans and to build that type of housing.
		And we obviously have a shortage, particularly in California, where landlords will not take the vouchers for veterans that are given to them to provide them homes.
		So more homes do need to be built in that area.
		And I certainly hope that VA is on the right side of that issue.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Tom is a vet in Arkansas.
		Hi, Tom.
		You're next.
unidentified		Oh, good morning, and thanks for taking my call.
		And thanks, Dr. Shulkin, for your service and your advocacy.
		I'd just like to say that I absolutely agree with the caller from Wisconsin.
		I think the VA healthcare system is the equal of the private system, if not better in many cases.
		I've never waited for an appointment for over two weeks or three weeks or something like that.
		I'm a Vietnam-era service connected veteran, and I think the health care is excellent.
		I do compliment the VA on changing their engineering support to the Corps of Engineers, which used to be done by the VA.
		I think that was a good move and probably will overall improve the facilities.
		Kudos to the VA.
		That's all I've got.
		Thank you.
		Yeah, thank you.
		And thanks for that.
		I'm particularly fond of the care in Wisconsin.
		My grandfather, who was a World War I veteran, was the first full-time pharmacist at the Madison, Wisconsin VA.
		And when I grew up, I remember how proud he was of being able to provide pharmacy services for our veterans.
		And when I visited the Madison VA, they actually showed me the mortar and pestle that my grandfather used to compound medications.
		So that is a great VA.
		And I couldn't agree with you more that having the Army Corps of Engineers help oversee. construction projects in the VA is certainly going to be helpful.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Jerry is in Long Beach, Washington, a Vietnam vet.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Hi, Jerry.
unidentified		Hey, good morning.
		I can say nothing but great things about the VA.
		I've had great service from them.
		I'm part of the system where I'm two hours away from any facility.
		And so I use what they call TriWest.
		It's right here next door to me in Astoria.
		I've had no problem whatsoever.
		Here's my only issue that I think should be changed.
		I have a veterans card.
		And my wife and I are retired.
		And so we travel quite a bit and we'd be gone for five or six months.
		Well, I got real, real sick here a year ago with COVID.
		And I went down to San Antonio, Texas to the VA Center.
		They wouldn't service me because I wasn't directly connected to them.
		And so I went over to, believe it or not, lo and behold, into an emergency room thing.
		And guess what?
		They service vets and the veteran administration pay for it.
		I can't have no complaints about that.
		I thought that was strange.
		The other thing I thought was strange is I can't get my medications from anywhere other than the Portland VA clinic.
		It does seem strange to me.
		I should be able to get that no matter where I go, but the systems aren't connected at all.
		And that just seems really strange to me in this world.
		By the way, I also think there's a bit of a red herring about timing because my wife just recently got an appointment.
		Guess what it is?
		It's in September.
		She couldn't get into a facility.
		And she's not a veteran, but she's in the regular system.
		She couldn't get an appointment until September.
		Anyway, beyond that, I love the VA and thank you for taking care of us.
		Yeah, I think what we're seeing is a consistent theme that veterans do care a lot about the VA because they know the quality of care that they're getting.
		That example of not being able to get your care in Texas, though, is not a good thing.
		You should have been able to go to any VA to get that care.
		And that is some of the bureaucracy that we're seeing that prevents it.
		So you went to an emergency room.
		The VA, the federal government, wound up paying a lot, lot more money because they wouldn't have seen you in that clinic because they're going to pay the emergency room a hefty fee for going to the emergency room.
		But that is part of the benefits, that if a veteran can't get care and they go to an emergency room, that is a covered service.
		But that's the fastest growing area that the government's spending money on, which is veterans going to emergency rooms because they can't get care.
		So that clearly needs to be fixed.
		The other point about your wife in the community, you know, people who say, well, let's shut down the VA and just give veterans care in the community solely, you know, that the government would pay for, don't understand that it's not always easy for people to get care in the community, that they often have to wait months like September before they can even get an appointment with a primary care doctor or with mental health specialists.
		So the VA system is an important system to be able to maintain, but not if the VA is not willing to see you like you experienced in Texas.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		We got a text from Richard in Minneapolis who's asking, does the PACT Act give you a disability check?
unidentified		Yes, if you go through the process and you are approved, that would include disability benefits.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Here's James in Kansas, also a vet.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, James.
unidentified		Good morning.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Go right ahead.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		You're on with David Shulkin.
unidentified		My question to you, sir, and I thank you for your service.
		And I have a question for you.
		My question is, why doesn't more landlords take the vouchers?
		Landlords, and I've met with many of them, often say that the voucher is not enough for the specific locality.
		So that in Los Angeles, where housing prices are very high, the landlords often say that they would need to have a higher amount to accept the voucher.
		Other landlords are concerned about housing homeless people, even if they're veterans, that they often are difficult tenants.
		I don't think that either of those issues are particularly valid.
		I think the VA has worked with the Department of Housing and Urban Development to increase the check size of vouchers, particularly in areas where real estate costs are high, like California, and that veterans, particularly when put into housing that have supported services, are very good tenants.
		We do not see higher levels of problems than we do with other types of housing projects.
		And so we try to find landlords that are willing to work with the VA, landlords that are committed to helping our veterans.
		Unfortunately, in areas with housing shortages, there just aren't enough of those landlords.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		It's Dr. David Shulkin.
		He was the Veterans Affairs Secretary during the first Trump administration between 2017 and 2018.
		Dr. Shulkin, thanks so much for being on the program.
unidentified		Glad to be here.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		In 30 minutes here on Washington Journal, we'll talk to Scott Kennedy from the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
		He'll discuss the trade war between the U.S. and China and which side might blink first.
		But first, it's open forum.
		You can start calling us now.
		The numbers are Republicans, 202748, 8001, Democrats 202748, 8000, and Independents 202748-8002.
unidentified		Watch our signature interview program Q&A all week on C-SPAN 2.
		Today, Kentucky Republican Congressman James Comer, House Oversight Committee Chair and author of All the President's Money, talks about his committee's 15-month investigation into the business practices of then President Joe Biden and members of President Biden's family.
		In this interview, Representative Comer argues that the Bidens have benefited financially from corrupt financial dealings involving Ukraine, China, and other countries.
james comer ▲ ● ▼		Six different banks had filed 175 suspicious activity reports against the Bidens, most of which were while Joe Biden was Vice President of the United States, and then they were subject to another 50 suspicious activity reports.
		So let me put that in perspective.
		No bank would file a suspicious activity report against the son of a prominent politician unless they were darn sure that a financial crime had been committed.
		Because when you file one of those, the bank examiners roll in your bank and it causes a lot of problems.
		The banks knew that there was some bad things going on here.
		And that's when the investigation really took off.
unidentified		James Comer with his book, All the President's Money.
		Watch QA today at 7 p.m. Eastern on C-SPAN 2.
		You can listen to QA and all of our podcasts, wherever you get your podcasts or on our free C-SPAN Now app.
		Looking to contact your members of Congress?
		Well, C-SPAN is making it easy for you with our 2025 Congressional Directory.
		Get essential contact information for government officials all in one place.
		This compact, spiral-bound guide contains bio and contact information for every House and Senate member of the 119th Congress.
		Contact information on congressional committees, the President's Cabinet, federal agencies, and state governors.
		The Congressional Directory costs $32.95 plus shipping and handling, and every purchase helps support C-SPAN's non-profit operations.
		Scan the code on the right or go to c-spanshop.org to pre-order your copy today.
		Get C-SPAN wherever you are with C-SPAN Now, our free mobile video app that puts you at the center of democracy, live and on demand.
		Keep up with the day's biggest events with live streams of floor proceedings and hearings from the U.S. Congress, White House events, the courts, campaigns, and more from the world of politics, all at your fingertips.
		Catch the latest episodes of Washington Journal.
		Find scheduling information for C-SPAN's TV and radio networks, plus a variety of compelling podcasts.
		The C-SPAN Now app is available at the Apple Store and Google Play.
		Download it for free today.
		C-SPAN, Democracy Unfiltered.
		Non-fiction book lovers, C-SPAN has a number of podcasts for you.
		Listen to best-selling nonfiction authors and influential interviewers on the Afterwords podcast and on QA.
		Hear wide-ranging conversations with the non-fiction authors and others who are making things happen.
		And BookNotes Plus episodes are weekly hour-long conversations that regularly feature fascinating authors of nonfiction books on a wide variety of topics.
		Find all of our podcasts by downloading the free C-SPAN Now app or wherever you get your podcasts and on our website, c-span.org/slash podcasts.
		Washington Journal continues.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Welcome back.
		It is Open Forum.
		We are going to take your calls for about 20 to 25 minutes on anything related to public affairs, to politics, to what's happening in Washington.
		Of course, Pope Francis' death early this morning at the Vatican.
		If you'd like to comment on that as well.
		And we'll start with Larry in Denver, Colorado, Independent.
		Hi, Larry.
unidentified		Hi, good morning.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Morning.
unidentified		You look nice, Mimi.
		You don't get that much, but you look nice.
		You should take pride in that.
		My comments won't be very long, but I'm just sitting back watching how this country is being driven down this bad road that's of no return.
		And I just can't imagine how this country voted for a convicted felon to run the country after the past that he's shown that he is not worthy of holding.
		He started out with the birtha issue.
		He showed that he was a racist then.
		Then when he became down that elevator and that escalator in 2015 and he trashed Native, not Native Americans, but Mexican Americans, he's been doing it ever since.
		It's just hard to understand why he couldn't get convicted, two impeachments, and he could not get convicted by the Republican Party, who are basically co-partners in this trashing of America.
		I'm just sorry to see it, but I'm just waiting and see how far down we're going to go because he's not worthy of this position.
		He's got the position, and he's going to show that this white nationalist group that he is being pushed on by is going to just continue on.
		We watch this.
		There's nothing we can do about it.
		He's ruining the government.
		Everybody, I don't understand how he got elected, but I mean, he's there.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Larry.
		And regarding the death of Pope Francis, we do have a page dedicated to him on our webpage.
		So if you go to cspan.org, you'll find a link to a page that has a lot of video highlights, his visit to the White House, his address to a joint meeting of Congress, his address at the UN General Assembly.
		You can see all of that on the website, and you can peruse that at your leisure.
		Let's talk to Carlos, who's in Omaha, Nebraska, Independent Line.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Yes, ma'am.
		I'm calling to give kudos, big kudos to all the vets and to the gentleman that you just had on your panel taking questions.
		I wanted to commend the VA system for all they do for us because we do not want that privatized.
		I'm 100% PNT, disabled vet, Gulf War veteran, and just wanted to send my support to all the vets and to the VA system.
		Please do not allow them to privatize the VA.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And here's Bill in Florida, Republican line.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I agree with that last gentleman about the VA not privatizing anything.
		Also, I would like to see if the VA could do more on the dental work.
		To Robert Kennedy, if having bad teeth can give you a heart attack, shouldn't dental be covered under health care?
		I really think that the American Dental Association ripping people off.
		$1,800 for a root canal and a crown, and it falls out two or three years later.
		I mean, it's ridiculous what they charge to go get a set of teeth.
		They're talking $20,000 for a set of teeth.
		People can't afford this stuff.
		I think it should be covered under the health care, under the Medicare program, so NVA, so we can get dental care at a lower cost, and everybody will be a lot healthier.
		Thank you very much.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And here's Bob in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, Independent.
unidentified		Hi, Mamie.
		Thanks for taking my call.
		I appreciate it.
		I was calling in reference to your last speaker.
		And I wanted to, I think it was great that the PACT Act was passed.
		There were some things that my brother was in Vietnam.
		He died five years ago with Agent Orange.
		He was never married, but he was never compensated for his death.
		And that was just something really terrible.
		I think about him every day.
		That's the only thing I wanted to say.
		But kudos to all the veterans, whether they were in combat or not.
		God bless you.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Thanks, Bob.
		And this is M. Dika in Bronx, New York, Democrat.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Hi, miss.
unidentified		Could you hear me?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Yes, I can.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Go ahead.
unidentified		I have two grandsons in the military.
		One, when he graduated from school, the Air Force people went to the school where he was going and they were studying space.
		He was the one who took the sample.
		They gave him the sample to take to the spacecraft.
		He was the one when he graduated from the Air Force.
		When President Obama was in office, he, I went there where he was, I saw things that on tele on the television in space.
		I'm an Indian.
		We study Indian culture.
		He sent sample into the space in the spacecraft.
		I have the document and the picture where we take the sample to the spacecraft which was going out of space.
		Now, he is teaching cyber security.
		Now, my grandson's coming, he just graduated.
		He just, they informed him that he's a major.
		He had saved troops in Iraq.
		I have my fifth grandson who just graduated with cybersecurity.
		We are Indian.
		I entered this country through document that to travel from the country that I came from, legal to Kennedy Airport.
		The immigration officer, the lady there, kissed me.
		He said thank you with my wife and three kids.
		I asked my kids, then, what do you want to go to America for?
		They want to go to school.
		My small daughter is, she has her master's degree.
		He, all her students graduate.
		My second daughter works to help people who need help.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, M. Dika, we will move on to Danny in Jamestown, South Carolina, Republican line.
unidentified		Yes, ma'am.
unidentified		I'd like to say thanks to the VA for doing a good job for the veterans.
steven in florida ▲ ● ▼		And thanks to all the legal immigrants that have come in this country to contribute.
steven in florida ▲ ● ▼		As far as the caller that called in earlier about Mr. Trump being a convicted felon, yeah, we voted for him because the previous president was never convicted of a felon.
unidentified		Him or his son or his brother, Comey, Hillary, none of them.
		They weren't none of them convicted.
		And that's how the system was kind of set up when the wrong man's in power.
		And y'all have a nice day.
		Thank you.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		And we will pause on our calls, come back to them.
		But first, we'll talk to Brittany Gibson.
		She's politics reporter at Axios about the latest from the White House.
		Brittany, welcome to the program.
unidentified		Thank you for having me.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So there is a legal and political standoff about the possible return of Kilmar Abrego Garcia.
		His fate, he's still in El Salvador.
		What is the White House saying about that?
unidentified		The White House is mostly making the argument that they have the right to deport Mr. Garcia, who was living in Maryland before, as I'm sure your viewers know by now.
		And they have the right to do it under the Alien Enemies Act because they're accusing him of being a member of the gang MS-13, which the president has now designated as a foreign terrorist organization.
		So they believe they have the authority under these existing laws to act in this way.
		What we're seeing from the opposition, mostly on the Democratic Party side and from senators like Chris Van Hollen, who went to El Salvador just last week, is that they're arguing for more due process in this entire situation, honestly, for Mr. Garcia and other people sent to Seacot, the prison in El Salvador.
		It's really two arguments where people are kind of talking past each other.
		The White House wants to focus on the right to deport, and the opposition wants to focus on the right to due process.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So what are you going to be watching this week as far as that topic specifically?
unidentified		I think I'll be watching and everyone following this case are going to be looking at the court paperwork.
		What the administration says in its court filings, how it tries to combat this in a legal argument, this legal framework is maybe the most important.
		You can say anything in an interview or in the rhetoric from the White House, but what they write in court filings is going to be most important.
		The Supreme Court intervened in this case in what I understand is a bit of an unorthodox way for the court because they move so quickly to prevent additional deportations or transfers, I should say, to the Seacott prison over the weekend.
		And so that'll be a continuing part of this back and forth.
		And what the administration says in its court filings will be what I'll most be watching.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Now regarding the war in Ukraine, the president said that he would, if one of the two parties makes it difficult, that he would move on from the U.S.'s involvement in that war.
		What does that mean?
		Do you know what he meant by move on?
unidentified		It's hard to predict exactly what that'll mean in a literal sense, especially just within the coming days.
		But I think you can think of the foreign policy of this White House as many spinning plates at once.
		And so you have the war in Ukraine as one where the president is trying to make a deal.
		He's also trying to make a deal with Iran, potentially a new version of the Iran nuclear deal from many years ago, which President Trump withdrew from in his first term.
		And then you have Israel and Gaza as well, where the president also wants to make a deal, wants to reinitiate the ceasefire that he was able to have a phase one of in January when he was first getting into office, but phase two a little bit fell apart.
		And so when it comes to foreign policy, there are a lot of balls in the air to continue the metaphors here.
		And I think the president means when he says that he might move on is that there are other global issues he wants to look at.
		But what that literally means, will it literally be off the table?
		Will the U.S. withdraw?
		Those details are not clear.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		The president also said that he would be signing a rare earth minerals deal with Ukraine.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Is that still going on?
unidentified		Well, that negotiation has been going on for many weeks, you know, starting from, I believe, even a little bit before President Zelensky came to the White House for his Oval Office visit with President Trump.
		And that's something that the other aides and staffers have been continuing since then.
		Again, the timing of that deal and the details of it, the logistics of it, are less clear and have not been shared from the White House yet.
		But that has been a priority of the president since coming into office and has been a continued part of the negotiation when it comes to the U.S. relationship with Ukraine since President Trump has come into office, both the peace deal and diplomatic relations in general.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And what are you hearing about any possible talks or negotiations with China?
unidentified		What is interesting about that is that mostly revolves around the tariff and trade war debate.
		President Trump has been, and the entire White House has been really vocalizing about the number of countries calling to make deals.
		We saw the Japanese government meeting with White House trade officials just last week, progressive deals being talked about.
		But with China, it seems to be a bit of a stalemate.
		The Chinese government has been going around Asia to other countries, other potential allies to renegotiate and reaffirm their trade relations, but we've not heard of any concrete back and forth between the White House and Beijing on trade and tariffs yet.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And the White House correspondence dinner is a Saturday evening.
		We will be covering that here on the C-SPAN networks.
		The president is not attending.
		Have you heard of any possibility of some counter-programming coming from the White House?
unidentified		That's correct.
		The president is not attending, and neither is the press secretary, from what we've heard so far.
		We've not been told specific counter-programming.
		There's been some reports that there'll be a kind of counter-dinner or celebration around First Lady Melania Trump's birthday, which is also this weekend.
		But this would not be new for President Trump.
		Well, viewers will probably remember from his first term, he did several different kinds of counter-programming events during the White House correspondence dinner, which is the Saturday of this weekend, including holding rallies and other events.
		He's also made a habit of being out of Washington on weekends since he's been inaugurated for the second term.
		So I think a lot is still on the table.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Brittany Gibson, the politics reporter for Axios.
		Her work is at axios.com.
		Thanks so much for joining us today, Brittany.
unidentified		Thanks for having me.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And we will jump right back into open forum and take your calls.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Here is Mary in Floral City, Florida, Democrat.
unidentified		Oh, good morning.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Hi, Mary.
unidentified		Hi.
		I was calling about the VA serviceman.
		I'm 86 years old.
		When I was very young, I was about eight or nine years old.
		There was a serviceman in our neighborhood.
		It was just me and him.
		And I wanted to go shake his hand and tell him thank you for making me safe.
		And I didn't.
		I hope you can hear me now.
		I'm sorry.
		I'm cheering up.
		Thank you for taking my call.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Mary.
		And we are in open forum.
		The lines are Republicans 202-748-8001.
		Democrats are on 202-748-8000.
		And Independents 202-748-8002.
		Here's an article in the Washington Post.
		The federal quote five things emails have fallen apart as Elon Musk readies exit.
		It says, after the Doge leader demanded federal workers' list accomplishments, agencies applied an inconsistent patchwork of policies.
		You can read that at the post.
		And here is Brian in LaGrange, Georgia, Independent Line.
unidentified		Yes, good morning.
		I want to take maybe just a moment and walk through this case and the situation with Mr. Brego Garcia.
		And maybe if I'm incorrect or inaccurate about any of the things that I've got to say, can we kind of clear some things up?
		So, Mr. Brego Garcia came to the United States illegally in 2011.
		That's correct.
		And in 2019, he had a case in front of an immigration judge.
		He had applied for asylum.
		That claim for asylum was denied because he didn't file it until more than a year after he had been in the country.
		And a deportation order was given and signed by the judge.
		However, because of his alleged gang ties and because he claimed fear of retribution from a rival gang in El Salvador, his deportation to El Salvador was delayed or stopped.
		Now, even though it was stopped or paused at that time, does not change the fact that he has an order of deportation.
		My understanding is that because the administration now has come in, declared the MS-13 to be a transnational terrorist organization,
		that that order of deportation or hold for deportation does not apply because they're a terrorist organization and also because the gang that he allegedly was fearful of being sent back to an El Salvador is no longer in existence.
		So my question, I guess, is what is the proposal?
		What do people think should happen to this gentleman?
		I'm not saying that losing a family or losing a wife, losing any of those things is not, doesn't pull on people's heartstrings, but this is very awkward that people are questioning whether or not he received due process when he did receive due process.
		He was put in front of an immigration judge.
		That order for deportation was already signed.
		And so now, as he is brought back to the United States, would not he be held in front of or in a detention center only to be immediately deported again?
		So please, if you would correct me if I'm wrong, and you don't need any of that.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Brian, here's Paul in Virginia, Independent Line.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Yes, first I wanted to make a comment about a call several calls back, the gentleman, I believe, from Massachusetts who referred to Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
		And, you know, the information he gave, as far as I'm concerned, how does he know that, what he said about Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
		And as somebody that grew up in the 60s and 70s, I'm finding out through my own research that most of what I thought was the truth isn't.
		And there are a lot of problems with vaccines that's been covered up.
		And why aren't they not telling the truth about these COVID-19 vaccines and the number of injuries?
		According to the government website, the VAYERS website, there was approximately 38,000 or more deaths associated with these COVID-19 vaccines, for example.
		So why isn't somebody doing something about this?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		And here is Hawthorne, Arlington, Virginia, Independent Line.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Thanks for taking my call.
		I just want to respond to the caller from the Republican caller where he said that Hillary Clinton and the son of Biden were not convicted.
		They were not convicted because they found that they didn't have any basis for accusing them.
		So it's not because of the administration at the time, but with Donald Trump, he was accused.
		There was a hearing, several hearings, and he was found guilty.
		That's the difference.
		So I just want to correct that caller.
		Thank you.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Here's Rebecca in Edgewood, Maryland.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		My call is about Donald Trump's tweet on Easter Sunday that was so disrespectful on this holy day.
		He could not even just wish the American people a happy Easter.
		He had to go into talking about the radical left and Joe Biden and all kinds of really nasty tweets.
		I mean, it was a long paragraph that I thought was so disrespectful for our leader instead of just tweeting the country and wishing everyone a happy Easter.
		I just, that's just my call.
		I just hate the disrespect.
		And thank you for taking my call.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		And this is a few things for your schedule.
		Later today, the Supreme Court hears oral argument in Kennedy v. Braidwood Management.
		It's a case challenging a part of the Affordable Care Act that requires private insurers to cover certain preventative health services at no cost to consumers.
		We'll have live coverage of that at 10 a.m. Eastern here on C-SPAN, so right after this program, also on our app and online.
		At 10.30 a.m. this morning, President Trump and First Lady Melania Trump are hosting the annual Easter egg roll on the White House South Lawn.
		That tradition dates back to 1878 during the presidency of Rutherford B. Hayes.
		Live coverage of the president's remarks to attendees over on C-SPAN 2.
		And as always, you can watch that at C-SPAN Now, which is our app, and also online at c-span.org.
		Well, that's all the time that we've got for open forum, but we will go to, we'll hear from, we'll talk about the trade war between the U.S. and China.
		We'll have a conversation with Scott Kennedy.
		He's with the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
		That's right after this break.
unidentified		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.
		There are many ways to listen to C-SPAN radio anytime, anywhere.
		In the Washington, D.C. area, listen on 90.1 FM.
		Use our free C-SPAN Now app or go online to c-SPAN.org slash radio on SiriusXM Radio on channel 455, the TuneIn app, and on your smart speaker by simply saying play C-SPAN Radio.
		Hear our live call-in program, Washington Journal, daily at 7 a.m. Eastern.
		Listen to House and Senate proceedings, committee hearings, news conferences, and other public affairs events live throughout the day.
		And for the best way to hear what's happening in Washington with fast-paced reports, live interviews, and analysis of the day.
		Catch Washington today, weekdays at 5 p.m. and 9 p.m. Eastern.
		Listen to C-SPAN programs on C-SPAN Radio anytime, anywhere.
		C-SPAN, democracy unfiltered.
jimmy carter ▲ ● ▼		Democracy is always an unfinished creation.
ronald reagan ▲ ● ▼		Democracy is worth dying for.
george h w bush ▲ ● ▼		Democracy belongs to us all.
bill clinton ▲ ● ▼		We are here in the sanctuary of democracy.
george w bush ▲ ● ▼		Great responsibilities fall once again to the great democracies.
barack obama ▲ ● ▼		American democracy is bigger than any one person.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Freedom and democracy must be constantly guarded and protected.
unidentified		We are still at our core a democracy.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		This is also a massive victory for democracy and for freedom.
unidentified		Washington Journal continues.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Welcome back.
		And here to talk about trade tensions between the U.S. and China is Scott Kennedy.
		He's Center for Strategic and International Studies, Senior Advisor and Chinese Business and Economics Trustee Chair.
		Scott Kennedy, welcome to the program.
unidentified		Thanks for having me.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So Trump has raised the tariffs on Chinese imports to 145%.
		The Chinese have responded with applying a 125% tariff on U.S. goods.
		How big of a deal is this to the economies of both nations?
unidentified		This is huge for both the U.S. and Chinese economies and for the global economy.
		Exports from China to the United States are about 14% of Chinese exports.
		U.S. exports to China are probably about 8% to 9% of American exports.
		But they're also connected to investment in both countries, to global supply chains.
		There are geostrategic elements to this.
		Levels of uncertainty are higher than they've been in a long, long time as a result of the tariffs.
		There's still a lot more that can be done to escalate.
		An off-ramp is hard to see.
		And so this could have major ramifications for us, for the Chinese, for everybody.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Let's talk about the Chinese economy.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		What's the status right now of the strength of their economy?
unidentified		And how long, I mean, how much the Department of Defense, sorry, sorry, sorry, sorry about that.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		How much staying power power do they have in their economy right now and the likelihood that they could blink, so to speak?
unidentified		Sure, sure.
		China's economy has been a juggernaut for several decades, but it is slowing down.
		It's been slowing down the last 10 years, and particularly since the pandemic.
		Official Chinese growth was around 5% at the end for 2024, and that's probably an exaggeration.
		The first quarter of this year, about 5.4%, they reported last week.
		Also, probably not that much.
		China's depending increasingly on exports for growth.
		They have significant debt.
		They have a demography problem with the graying of the population.
		On the other hand, they have a lot of strengths as well.
		China is still the manufacturing floor for the world.
		In tech, they have caught up a lot in a lot of different industries.
		They have a lot of savings.
		They are the number one trading country for over 100 countries around the world.
		And for China, this is not just a trade spat anymore.
		This is about an existential crisis for the Communist Party.
		And so they're going to push all their chips into the middle of the table for this.
		They are not going to back down unilaterally.
		They still could reach a deal with the U.S., but both sides are going to have to compromise.
		And finding that space where they both can agree on something, that's going to be very hard to do.
		But they're in this regardless of how weak their economy is.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		When you say that this is an existential crisis for them and that they're going to put all the chips on the table, what are the chips that they have?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		What could they do right now?
unidentified		Sure.
		Well, the Chinese, it's a protectionist economy.
		They still have a lot of non-tariff barriers directed towards others.
		So just as the Trump administration is negotiating with the Japanese, the Europeans, and others, Xi Jinping is doing that as well.
		He was in Vietnam, Malaysia, and Cambodia last week.
		He's going to have the president of Brazil in soon.
		Chinese diplomats are traveling everywhere.
		They can reduce their barriers to trade and investment across a whole variety of industries to offer others.
		They also can stimulate their economy.
		They've been very hesitant to increase their fiscal deficit because they don't want to balloon their debt any further than it is.
		But if they needed to, they could expand spending quite a bit for domestic consumption.
		And that wouldn't totally replace the income they generate through exports, but it would stabilize the economy long enough to get through this fight with the United States.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Well, President Trump was asked about his conversations with China, and here's a portion of what he said last week.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		I have a very good relationship with President Xi, and I think it's going to continue.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		And I would say they have reached out a number of times.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		He or they?
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Well, the same way.
		I view it very similar.
		It would be top levels of China.
		And if you knew him, you would know that if they reached out, he knew exactly.
		He knew everything about it.
		He runs it very tight, very strong, very smart.
		And yeah, we're talking to China.
unidentified		So they've reached out recent days or recent weeks.
unidentified		They've reached out since the 145% tariffs.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Oh, yeah, sure.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Do you believe that?
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Do you believe?
		A lot all the time.
		We're talking.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Have you already talked directly to President Xi?
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		I don't want to say that.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		It's just not appropriate.
unidentified		But you're speaking.
unidentified		Sorry, has he called you directly, President Xi, or reached out and tried to facilitate a conversation?
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Well, you'd think it was pretty obvious that he has, but we will talk about that soon.
		It's not that important because honestly, we're going to have a deal.
		I believe we're going to have a deal with China.
		And if we don't, we're going to have a deal anyway because we must set a certain target and that's going to be it.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		What do you think of that, Scott Kennedy, about the president's comments there?
unidentified		Well, certainly the U.S. and Chinese governments communicate with each other even in times like this.
		You have the Chinese embassy here in Washington, the U.S. Embassy in Beijing, junior-level officials that are communicating on basic things.
		Are we in the midst of a negotiation with the Chinese?
		I don't think so.
		I don't think that has started.
		I don't think we've decided who's going to represent either side, what the agenda is going to be, what the timeline will be.
		They're still setting it up.
		And, you know, the U.S. right now is focused primarily on negotiating with everybody else because their goal now is to isolate China, and they need those other negotiations to go well to build additional leverage against China.
		At some point, I think there probably will be a negotiation between the U.S. and China.
		But I think we're a month or two away from that really kicking off.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Is that isolation actually happening, given that, you know, as you mentioned, President Xi has been visiting all kinds of countries around the area, making deals with Vietnam, et cetera?
unidentified		Not yet.
		Not yet.
		The Chinese are still the largest trading and investment partner for most countries around the world, certainly in East Asia, but also Africa.
		Even in Latin America, their presence has been growing dramatically.
		And the Trump administration has yet to conclude any agreement with any country, let alone having any of those agreements focus on those countries limiting their business with China.
		Of course, in addition to the 145% tariffs the U.S. has, we have a range of anti-dumping and countervailing duty measures imposed against the Chinese.
		We have a variety of export controls in which other countries such as Japan and the Netherlands have been collaborating.
		And the Trump administration will try to expand those kinds of restrictions.
		But still today, at this moment, as we're talking, the Chinese aren't isolated at all.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		The President has talked a lot about the trade deficit with China, the unfair trading practices.
		The Chinese are known to engage in economic coercion with other countries.
		Can you drill down on what those unfair practices might be and how these future negotiations with China could address those?
unidentified		Sure, sure.
		So as much as China has reformed its economy over the last four decades and moved in a market-oriented direction, the level of state intervention has remained quite high.
		And actually, under Xi Jinping's leadership has expanded significantly.
		The amount of industrial policy spending that goes to various industries is much higher than just about anybody else, about 1.7% of Chinese GDP.
		No one else gets even close to 1%.
		China also protects a whole variety of sectors with regulatory bans to investment, government procurement, a whole bunch of different kinds of rules that make it difficult to sell in China, invest in China in certain industries, for example, in services.
		And China competes aggressively in third markets.
		So those are real, the U.S. trade representative, others in the U.S. government have published long reports about this, as have other governments such as the European Union.
		The U.S. has a large trade deficit with China.
		It's had one for a long time, but that trade deficit really isn't a good reflection of how open or closed China's economy is.
		The economy has not gotten more open in the last six years, yet the U.S. bilateral deficit in goods with China has gone from about $418 billion in 2018 to about $295 billion in last year.
		So the deficit has gone down considerably over the last six years, but Chinese industrial policy hasn't changed very much.
		So the U.S. government has to focus on finding ways to reduce these barriers and obstacles and the level of Chinese state intervention in their economy.
		The result will not be necessarily a change in the bilateral deficit.
		It will be greater market opportunities, profits, employment opportunities for American companies, regardless of where the deficit goes.
		So if we use the deficit as the metric for success, I don't think that's actually going to be equivalent to figuring out whether or not we handle these real problems that China's economy is posing to us.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And if you'd like to join our conversation with Scott Kennedy of CSIS, we're talking about U.S.-China trade relations.
		You can do so.
		Our lines are Republicans, 202-748-8001.
		Democrats are on 202-748-8000.
		And Independents, 202-748-8002.
		You can start calling us now.
		So Scott Kennedy, if the trade deficit is not the measure of success, what would a win look like for not just you, you mentioned a couple of things for the United States, but also for China.
unidentified		Sure.
		Well, I think everyone who follows China's economy closely recognizes that their economy is imbalanced.
		They depend way too much on exports for growth.
		Also, they've depended way too much on investment in real estate and infrastructure.
		The way to improve China's economy to make it more balanced and to reduce frictions with the rest of the world is to shift toward depending on domestic household consumption as a much larger portion of their growth.
		That would open up China to more imports.
		It would reduce the pressure to depend on exports to others for growth.
		And that would also raise wages in China.
		It would make domestic politics in China better.
		So that's actually a single solution that solves both their domestic and international economic problems at the same time.
		They've not wanted to do that for a couple of reasons.
		One is that China believes they are in a strategic competition with the United States and that controlling the commanding heights of tech is the source of their growth.
		And so they've put a lot of their economic eggs in the tech basket.
		In addition, if they give, if they raise wages substantially, depend more on domestic consumption, they're going to have to spend a lot more on education, on medicine, health care, the social safety net.
		That's going to empower Chinese households relative to state-owned enterprises and others.
		And that shifts China's domestic political economy.
		That's who Xi Jinping has not been depending on for his sources of power.
		So the economics pointing toward the need to shift make good sense, but the domestic politics, the international politics, do not.
		And that's why we're in this mind.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		The Chinese have also mentioned rare earth minerals and limiting exports to the United States, things that are critical to things like computers and cars and things like that.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Can you elaborate a little bit about what that could mean to the U.S. economy?
unidentified		Sure.
		Well, in the 1970s and 80s, the U.S. actually was the world's leading producer of rare earths.
		We dug a lot out of the ground and processed them here, but they're environmentally very dangerous and expensive.
		And so as the U.S. began to reduce its investments in rare earths, the Chinese expanded them and became dominant.
		By the 2000s, the Chinese accounted for 95 plus percent of raw rare earths that were dug out of the ground and 99% of processed rare earths.
		In 2010 and 11, they imposed some restrictions on the Japanese because of a dispute between their waters adjacent to each other.
		And that raised alarm bells that they might cut off things for everyone else.
		So since then, the U.S. and others have invested.
		And now China controls about 70% of raw rare earths, but still over 90% of processed rare earths.
		Those go into the kind of goods that you mentioned, computers, as well as in a lot of military-related technology.
		So if the Chinese, you know, they've just decided to add all of these rare earths to their export control list and are starting to restrict exports to the United States, that will, over the next few months, really pinch different parts of the American commercial economy and maybe parts of our military.
		That's a real chokehold that they have.
		It puts it's a real incentive on the U.S. to try and find a way to resolve this relatively soon, but also to find alternatives to Chinese rare earths.
		We have stockpiles, but they're not going to last us very long.
		Over the long term, we know, though, that we're going to have to find other sources than China for these materials.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Well, speaking of getting them from other places, could they come from Ukraine?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		I mean, because there's a rare earth negotiation going on with them.
unidentified		Over the long term, yes.
		The Ukraine, even the United States, Australia, they are other sources for rare earths.
		Actually, rare earths are not that rare.
		They're all around the globe.
		The problem is it takes a long time to build these mines and just as long to build the capacity to process rare earths.
		So that's a decade-plus-long project.
		It doesn't get us out of the scrape that we're currently in.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, let's talk to callers and we'll start with Tyler, a Democrat in Evansdale, Iowa.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Tyler.
unidentified		Good morning.
		How is everyone?
		Good.
		Good.
		So I was just curious how this administration is able to kind of justify what it's doing, given the nature of everybody being able to collect things and get more information and share information in real time,
		and why we're taking the tact we are when we should be reinforcing our position through our soft powers like our USAID and other programs that are currently being eliminated as they're kind of being classified as fraud or financial abuse.
		What can we do as citizens to shore up the soft powers that we're losing through these erroneous doge cuts?
		So that's a great question.
		And the Trump administration is moving on a lot of different directions at the same time, including not just tariffs with others, but through reforming our government, reducing many of the elements of our foreign policy through the State Department, USAID, and elsewhere.
		If we are in a strategic competition with China, then we need to make our economy as strong as possible, our international trade position as strong as possible, and raise our voice.
		That seems to what they're doing in some ways seems to cut against that.
		But I think their view is that it's a hard power fight, and our success on the economic front is measured in trade balances.
		There are a lot of economists who disagree on the economics of that and recognize that there are unfair trading practices from the Chinese and others that need to be addressed, but the trade balance and tariffs isn't the way to get to that.
		And that USAID, other elements of our soft power are also important in raising the U.S.'s reputation and getting others to go along with us, whether they are allies or others.
		And so the Trump administration is focusing on very specific elements of our relationship with others and very specific elements of our power.
		They're also not depending on our alliance relationships.
		And so in some ways, we are going into this conflict with the Chinese with fewer points of leverage than we might otherwise have.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And Scott Kennedy, do we know how the Chinese people are reacting to this?
		Are they in support of their government, you know, standing strong against the United States?
		Do we know?
unidentified		Sure.
		Yeah.
		Well, I travel to China a lot, including I was there in March for 10 days, and I spent a lot of time talking to Chinese from different walks of life, academics, business people, friends that I've had for a long time.
		And certainly over the last several years, the views of the United States have soured in China, just as views of China have soured in the United States.
		At the same time, there's also been great concern amongst many Chinese about their own government, particularly post-COVID, as growth has slowed, as tensions with the rest of the world have risen.
		But in the past few months, as a result of the trade war and the imposition of these extremely high tariffs and changes in domestic politics, even liberal Chinese, people who are friendly toward the United States that have worked in the U.S. or send their children here to study, they're increasingly worried about the U.S. and more supportive of China defending itself.
		They not necessarily want a Xi Jinping China to continue in all the directions it's gone in with greater government intervention in the economy and daily life, but they are supportive of standing up to what the U.S. is doing on a policy front.
		At the same time, China's economy, as we mentioned earlier, is not super strong.
		So this is going to have an effect on employment in China, on other elements of its economy.
		I don't think enough to get the Chinese leadership to back down from this.
		But as this trade war drags on, you're going to see signs of complaints in China, as you would in any economy going through this kind of struggle.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Let's talk to Ralph.
		He's a Republican in Henderson, Nevada.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Yes, hi.
		I believe Mr. Trump has it wrong.
		He talks about us not needing things from trade partners.
		It's not that we need them.
		It's that we want them.
		And if we want something, we'll go all the way to a place like McDonnell Island to get it.
		And China's our biggest partner.
		He's just got it wrong.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Scott Kennedy.
unidentified		Sure.
		Well, global trade is a central part of our lives and our companies, our households.
		And we trade for a lot of different reasons.
		From producers, we're trying to be more efficient.
		And so we've invested abroad to produce certain kinds of goods that are more competitive when they're produced elsewhere.
		And that has brought a lot of benefits.
		But there's mixed outcomes from this.
		The U.S. has moved a variety of factories, particularly from the central part of the United States, which has cost jobs to those.
		We've seen some job increases in services, particularly along the east and west coast in the U.S.
		And so I think the reason why there is this domestic disagreement in the U.S. and such conflict over this is that there are winners and losers from globalization, even if on net, the U.S. is doing better overall.
		And so finding ways to make it so that there are a lot fewer losers in globalization, I think, is a motivation for the Trump administration.
		I think there's a lot of disagreement about the way they're going about it, but that there needs to be some additional manufacturing in the United States, that we need to reduce our overdependence on China, that we need to raise wages.
		We need to make people feel across the country that they have a secure future.
		Those are reasonable motivations for trying to improve our economy and where we sit globally.
		The question is, what's the best way to go about that?
		And so we're seeing a significant amount of disagreement within the U.S. and, of course, with our trading partners around the world.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		We have a text from Mike in Boston, Massachusetts, who says, do you see the value of the dollar dropping?
		Why?
		And how does China play a role in that?
unidentified		Sure.
		So we've seen the value of the dollar drop a little bit over the last few weeks.
		And that is probably mainly caused by people's worries about the long-term strength of the American economy in the context of a trade war that looks like it has no end.
		So on Liberation Day, when the U.S. imposed extremely high tariffs on countries around the world, that raised alarm bells from investors in the U.S., not just in our securities in stock market, but also in our bond market.
		And so I think that's the main reason we've seen the dollar weaken.
		It doesn't mean that over the long term, we are going to see a weaker dollar, but at least for right now, I think the Trump administration has talked about trying to adjust the value of the dollar relative to other currencies to make it more competitive, weaken it, but they've not gotten any conversations like that.
		Actually, enforcing some kind of deal like that would be very difficult.
		That might show American power.
		But right now, the dollar is softening because of these concerns and the unpredictability of where things are headed.
		That's not a good thing, I don't think, but we'll just have to wait and see because there are a lot of ways in which the dollar could strengthen if the U.S. economy grows stronger.
		And so I don't think one can make a one-way bet on currencies right now.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Dylan is a Democrat in Columbus, Mississippi.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Hi, Dylan.
unidentified		Hey, good morning.
		I just have an understanding of tariffs that I hope others will understand.
		And I just want to know if that's correct or not.
		But say, for instance, you have a coffee shop, they got cups, you know, they sell coffee at a certain price and they get their things from China.
		If the cost of those things increase in China, obviously that means the cost of the cup increases.
		That gets passed on to the consumer.
		And I just want to make that point so that others can understand.
		And I just want to make sure that's the proper way of looking at it.
		So we don't think tariffs are just a way to make a bunch of money for the country.
		And then, let's see, my second thing, I just wanted to shout out to Cindy Hyde-Smith, the senator of Mississippi.
		She's not returned my calls.
		It's been about 45 times this month.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		What have you been calling about, Dylan?
unidentified		Oh, tariffs.
		I've also called about veterans.
		I've called about many other topics.
		I call probably every other day, but I just wanted to make sure if she's listening, she gets that message.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Sorry.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Go ahead, Scott Kennedy.
unidentified		Sure.
		Well, I think in the question of who pays tariffs or who suffers, there's some debate.
		And certainly we've heard from President Trump many times that when U.S. imposes tariffs on others, Americans don't pay.
		The other countries pay.
		And I think what he is saying is that those countries have fewer business opportunities in the U.S., their income goes down, or they have to lower their prices so much that when they do export, they also take on a loss.
		I think the evidence for that, there's a limited amount of evidence for that.
		Certainly, the Chinese exports to the U.S. are going to go down.
		On the other hand, they're not going to totally lower their prices dramatically.
		In some cases, they will force the Americans that they're selling to to pay more.
		In addition, all of the tariffs that are imposed are paid by the American importers.
		And so either those companies that are importing those products are going to pay all of the tariffs, or they are going to raise prices and have the ultimate American consumers pay for those tariffs.
		So if the U.S. is going to be increasing its revenue dramatically through tariff revenue, either American businesses or American consumers are going to be paying 100% of those tariffs.
		Now, that doesn't mean that the Chinese and others won't suffer, but it is going to mean that all of that additional revenue is coming from the U.S. and that U.S. sources, and that isn't going to be good for U.S. economic growth either.
		And in addition, a large proportion of those new revenue sources that come through tariffs are going to be paid by middle and lower income Americans compared to those that are wealthy.
		And so tariffs tend to be regressive with more pain imposed on lower and middle income Americans relative to others.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		If these trade tensions are not resolved, could this escalate into other areas, such as discussions about TikTok, about Taiwan, the South China Sea?
unidentified		Could it get worse?
		It definitely could get worse, Mimi.
		Certainly, there are a range of industries where individual companies could be attacked and targeted.
		There's also other deals and negotiations that are going on on TikTok.
		I think TikTok's the chance for that deal is extremely small right now, regardless of where things go, because now the Chinese see that the American pressure on the sale of TikTok is extortion as opposed to a reasonable economic security issue.
		This also could move into the financial realm.
		The U.S. could kick off the 286 Chinese companies that are listed on American securities markets.
		It could pull the licenses of Chinese financial institutions that operate in the United States.
		They could try to kick China off of SWIFT, which is the global interbanking messaging system that allows financial institutions to do business in U.S. dollars.
		The Chinese could kick American financial institutions and insurance companies and others out of China.
		The Chinese could radically devalue the renminbi.
		Also, as you mentioned, this could go into the security realm.
		I think that's less likely, but the South China Sea has been an area of tension for a long time, as has the Taiwan straight.
		I don't think the Chinese want to escalate this into the military realm.
		I think actually they'd like to find an off-ramp to make this issue go away.
		But nevertheless, as both sides are seeking leverage on the other, where this goes is unpredictable.
		So we have to be prepared for escalation as much as even if we hope that there's some kind of resolution.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Here's Veronica, an independent in Oxnard, California.
unidentified		Hi.
		Now, America is going bankrupt.
		And why isn't more people delivering that message that we do need drastic change?
		Because otherwise, we're not going to have a country.
		And we have a $2 trillion deficit each year, mostly fraud and abuse.
		And we all know our government is way too big and way out of control.
		And, you know, why aren't more media people and politicians addressing the fact that everybody needs to address the reality that we're all going bankrupt?
		That's my question.
		Well, thanks for the question and the comment.
		And I think, yes, at $35 trillion and growing, American debt is quite high.
		I think the debate that people are having isn't about whether or not the U.S. needs to lower its annual budget deficit or address its debt problems, but how to go about doing it.
		A tariff war with the rest of the world is probably not going to raise American growth.
		It's probably not going to generate more revenue.
		It probably is going to end up requiring the U.S. government to intervene and bail out a variety of economic interests that are suffering.
		Those farmers in different parts of the country that sell soybeans typically to China are no longer going to be able to do that.
		They're going to be replaced by soybean farmers from Brazil and from Vietnam.
		And they're going to need to be helped as a result of this.
		So I'm not sure that the trade war, raising tariffs, helps address the annual deficit problem or the long-term issues that we face.
		In terms of restructuring the U.S. government and reducing spending on different parts, there are probably a lot of places in the U.S. federal government that are inefficient, that aren't achieving their goals where there needs to be drastic changes.
		But how you go about that matters as well, because some elements of the federal government that engage in foreign policy, for example, help American companies sell products abroad, improve America's reputation, strengthen the economies of other countries, improve health care abroad, which turns those countries into potential consumers for American goods, make them more likely to support the U.S. in a variety of different circumstances.
		So the solution to the problem that you correctly identified isn't super straightforward.
		I think that's why we've seen Washington, both parties bicker about this for a long time.
		I understand the Trump administration's frustration with that and trying to move as rapidly as possible.
		But let's, I think, make sure that we operate as smartly as possible, that we get good solutions for the kind of problems that we face and not make things worse.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Let's talk to Graham in Due West, South Carolina, Independent Line.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Graham, you're next.
unidentified		Hi, Scott.
unidentified		Can you hear me?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Yes, we can.
unidentified		Excellent.
		Scott, I studied Chinese in college, and I sort of put all my eggs in one basket.
		And in that generation, I graduated college in 2015.
		So when I first started studying, it was in the Obama administration.
		And the U.S. and China were on really good terms.
		And there was kind of an idea that if you study Chinese very well, you would have a very successful career, whether it be in think tanks or in government or in business.
		Unfortunately, when I graduated college, you know, around 2015 and then later 2016, 2017, Donald Trump starts campaigning and the trade war starts.
		And a lot of the really good China jobs just completely evaporated.
		And so I continued to study Chinese.
		I lived in China, but after the trade war started, I moved to Taiwan and I've been living here for about seven years.
		I'm actually, it says I'm from South Carolina because you have to give them your zip code when you call C-SPAN.
		But I'm actually in Taiwan right now.
		I'm an American expat.
		And I've worked for Taiwanese companies.
		And, you know, my career has just floundered.
		And you're someone I've really respected for many, many years.
		When I first started visiting China, I would subscribe to the Bill Bishop newsletter and read the CSIS reports and ran reports about China.
		And I always wanted to model my career after people like you.
		And it's increasingly hard to do that.
		I mean, with Doge cutting all the government jobs, you know, there's not as many China-related government anymore unless you have a military background and you can do something in the entire agencies.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Graham, let's try to get you some career advice.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Go ahead, Scott.
unidentified		Sure.
		Well, I don't think you should throw in the towel quite yet.
		I think it's really important that Americans know as much about the world as possible, study other countries' languages, live abroad.
		That is extremely important for being able to be a superpower at the global level.
		It's also important for the American economy, for our foreign policy.
		And so I still, even though it's hard, the number of opportunities have been declining, it's still really valuable and essential.
		It's essential that the U.S. has international students from around the world, including from China, on our campuses.
		That makes us smarter, makes us more influential as well.
		Hopefully, you will find a path that works for you.
		And if the U.S. and China are able to figure out how to end this trade war in a mutually amicable way, then there will be further opportunities.
		As difficult as the U.S.-China relationship is and the number of real differences that we have with each other, there should be a way to find to manage those differences so that we can address the national security concerns that we have, the economic security concerns that we have, and still do business with each other.
		That may sound idealistic at this moment, but I think one of our responsibilities is to try and prevent the worst outcomes from occurring and see if we can make things a little bit better.
		So again, don't throw in the towel.
		Let's see where things go.
		And, you know, you may need to plan for the worst, but still try and hope for the best.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		We got a text from Corey in Florida who's asking for your comment on the administration possibly restricting educational visas to Chinese national students to place more pressure on China.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		What do you think of that, Scott?
unidentified		That's been something that we've heard and discussed in Washington for a while.
		There's several folks on Capitol Hill that have raised that as a possibility.
		Usually they've done so in the context of concerns that some Chinese students may not be students or may be recruited to spy for China.
		Those concerns have been there for a while.
		The FBI and universities have worked extremely hard to try and make sure that doesn't occur.
		And there have been a variety of cases.
		Most watching from outside the government believe those concerns have been overstated.
		But nevertheless, the U.S. government and local authorities, universities have to be vigilant.
		At the same time, I think we need to recognize the huge positives that students from around the world bring to American campuses, to Our science and technology to our labs, who then may end up working and living in the United States and helping American society.
		We've seen a lot of innovation in healthcare and many other science and technology fields as a result of having a country open to international students, including from China.
		That is a huge source of American strength.
		And I think to the extent that there are real risks, I think they're mitigatable if we're vigilant.
		At the same time, I think closing the doors is a very bad idea for the United States.
		And once you do close the doors, if you were to do that to try and raise leverage in the short term, if you got a deal and then open the doors again, I think it'd be hard to expect a lot of students would come back to the United States because they would making a choice where to study, where to live, requires some sense of predictability about the future.
		So although I recognize that may be a point of leverage, I think pulling that lever could be extremely risky for the United States.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Let's talk to Bill, a Republican in Albany, New York.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Hi, Bill.
unidentified		Hi, good morning.
		Mr. Kennedy, what I'm calling about is regarding pharmaceuticals and prescription drugs.
		How do you feel it's going to be if, from what I understand, China produces 97% of the generic ingredients for all our prescriptions, most of ours.
		We get some from Ireland, I guess, and some from India.
		But what's going to happen if China shuts us off?
		Because we don't have the manufacturing companies, and it'll take a good five to ten years to get up and running in the United States.
		How much in trouble are we if we can't fulfill our prescriptions or resell our prescriptions at the pharmacy?
		What do you think about that?
		Sure.
		It's a good question.
		I think that the data is not as quite clear as that.
		There's disagreements about how much we depend on China for generic drugs or some of the active pharmaceutical ingredients that go into drugs.
		It's pretty high, but these come from around the world.
		I do think if the Chinese were to shut that off, as you mentioned, that would have certainly a short-term effect on the availability of certain kinds of drugs and probably the price.
		In addition to that problem, Chinese pharmaceutical companies are now very active.
		They used to only do clinical trials for Western pharmaceutical companies in China, but now they're developing their own drugs.
		And sometimes they license those to Western drug companies who then market them globally.
		And those are very important sectors of medicine that have aided health outcomes.
		Those are both real big potential challenges if the U.S., for example, were to cut off the ability of American and Chinese pharmaceutical companies to cooperate with each other.
		So there are big risks.
		On the other hand, the Chinese want to continue to develop their pharmaceutical industry and collaborate.
		They aren't looking to cut off this relationship.
		And I think the solution to the trade problem is probably going to come in other industries where China can make concessions, where they do need to open things up.
		But yes, if the trade tensions escalate, and this is one area where the Trump administration tries to impose more costs on China, that will also have a negative effect, at least in the short term, on Americans.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		I want to ask you about a New York Times article that has this as a headline.
		China warns countries not to team up with the U.S. against it on trade.
		It says that curbing trade with China to curry favor with the U.S. would be, quote, selfish and short-sighted, and they promise to retaliate.
		It sounds a bit ominous.
		What could they do to other countries that make deals with the United States and team up, as they're calling it, against China?
unidentified		Sure.
		Well, I think this conflict is multi-sided.
		To some extent, the U.S. and China are imposing costs on each other, also investing in their own economies to give them more staying power.
		But the other side of this is the competition for the middle.
		It's making sure that they aren't isolated.
		So the U.S. is going around trying to negotiate deals with other countries, with the Japanese, Europeans, and others, to try and have them lower the barriers, not only towards U.S. goods, but potentially impose barriers against China.
		And the Chinese are trying to head that off.
		Xi Jinping was in Southeast Asia last week.
		They are negotiating also with others.
		Being isolated is the exact worst outcome for China.
		And so they're trying to avoid that.
		And so they have a bunch of carrots they can offer other countries.
		They can open up market access to China.
		They can promise Chinese investment in those countries, but they can also threaten them.
		China is not shy about using economic coercion if it deems necessary.
		The Philippines, Lithuania, Vietnam, South Korea, Taiwan, they've all faced a whole variety of economic restrictions with China as a result of political and security differences.
		And so the Chinese do have a lot of levers they could produce.
		I think it's probably not the smartest idea to announce that they could threaten people with these because they want voluntary compliance and threatening folks means that they must be worried a little bit that the Trump administration might be successful.
		And so this is a central part of where we're going to see this conflict go and who has the upper hand over the other.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		We have a text for you from Dave in McKinleyville, California.
		Who will fill all the jobs tariffs are supposed to bring to the U.S.?
		We don't have enough workers to fill the jobs we already have.
		What do you think of that, Scott Kennedy?
unidentified		Yeah, so, I mean, one of the challenges of this ongoing conflict is, yes, we recognize, or many people recognize that the U.S. has reasonable worries about how other countries treat the U.S. in terms of their economic policies, non-tariff barriers, and that those need to come down.
		On the other hand, we need to recognize the U.S. employment unemployment rate is about 4%.
		We've had reasonably good growth over the past several years.
		So from a macroeconomic perspective, the U.S. has been in a good place, even though its trading relationships with others have been not as fair as they ought to be.
		And the tariff war may make our macroeconomic situation even worse.
		And if we restrict students, if we restrict legal immigration, that is even we may not have enough people to work in the kinds of jobs that we need for a 21st century economy.
		So the anxieties that Americans have about international trade and globalization, totally understandable.
		The solutions to fix those challenges aren't straightforward.
		They can't occur in a matter of weeks or months.

▲