CSPAN - Washington Journal 05/22/2025

All Episodes

Previous Next

May 23, 2025 06:59-10:02 - CSPAN

03:02:54

Washington Journal 05/22/2025

Participants

Main

pedro echevarria

cspan 36:15

Appearances

benjamin netanyahu

isr 01:22

brian lamb

cspan 00:50

josh brecheen

rep/r 00:53

judge jeanine pirro

fox 02:07

karoline leavitt

admin 01:09

rand paul

sen/r 00:34

robert f kennedy-jr

admin 01:03

Clips

donald j trump

admin 00:02

hakeem jeffries

rep/d 00:10

jason smith

rep/r 00:07

jim mcgovern

rep/d 00:05

marty schachter

00:08

mary gay scanlon

rep/d 00:10

mike johnson

rep/r 00:07

patrice oneal

00:10

patty murray

sen/d 00:04

rachel maddow

msnow 00:07

steve scalise

rep/r 00:04

susan cole

00:15

Callers

leo in minnesota

callers 00:22

louise in virginia

callers 00:13

nathaniel in south-carolina

callers 00:09

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Show episode speakers

Speaker	Time	Text
unidentified		Markers appear on the right-hand side of your screen when you hit play on select videos.
		This timeline tool makes it easy to quickly get an idea of what was debated and decided in Washington.
		Scroll through and spend a few minutes on C-SPAN's points of interest.
		In a nation divided, a rare moment of unity.
		This fall, C-SPAN presents Ceasefire, where the shouting stops and the conversation begins in a town where partisan fighting prevails.
		One table, two leaders, one goal to find common ground.
		This fall, ceasefire on the network that doesn't take sides, only on C-SPAN.
		Coming up on Washington Journal this morning, your calls and comments live.
		And then Sarah Chiefo from the League of Conservation Voters on whether clean energy initiatives enacted by President Biden could be changed if Republicans approved their 2026 budget bill.
		Also, Julie Kirschner of the Federation for American Immigration Reform on the Republican budget bill's provisions related to immigration and border security enforcement.
		Washington Journal is next.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		join the conversation this is the washington journal for may the 23rd The White House, members of Congress, and world leaders all issued concerns and warnings about the rise of anti-Semitism and attacks connected to it after the murder of two Israeli embassy staffers in Washington, D.C. this week.
		A recent YouGov poll points reflects those concerns.
		And to start the program today, we'll ask you about your level of concern of politically motivated violence related to anti-Semitism, especially considering the most recent attack here in the nation's capital.
		Here's how you can let us know your thoughts this morning.
		202-748-8000 for Democrats, 202-748-8001 for Republicans, and Independents 202-748-8002.
		You want to share your thoughts about anti-Semitism and politically violence, political violence attached to that in the United States.
		You can do so at 202-748-8003 to text us.
		You can post on Facebook at facebook.com/slash C-SPAN and on X at C-SPANWJ.
		It was the polling organization YouGov that took a survey.
		This was before the attacks of this week, but asking relevant questions concerning the topic.
		And here's how they phrased it.
		One of those things they asked, how serious of a problem do you think anti-Semitism is in the United States?
		Of all adults they said that were surveyed, 29% said it was a very serious problem, 33% a somewhat serious problem, with 17% saying a minor problem, 5% saying it was not a problem, 16% not sure.
		Also asking the question about how big of a problem do you think political violence is in the United States today.
		40% saying it's a very big problem and that also that number somewhat of a problem with 10% saying not very much of a problem, 2% saying not a problem, and those who are saying not sure, 8%.
		And then YouGov also asking the question, do you think the current political climate makes politically motivated violence more or less likely than normal or the same as normal?
		63% saying it is more likely, 8% less likely, 15% saying same as normal, and then 14% saying not sure.
		Of course, these polls taken before the incidents this week of that shooting in front of the Israeli embassy, many people commenting on it from all across the world, including a statement from President Trump read by the press secretary Caroline Levitt at the White House yesterday.
karoline leavitt ▲ ● ▼		President Trump is saddened and outraged over the brutal murder of two Israeli embassy staff here in Washington, D.C. last night.
		Yaran Leshinsky and Sarah Milgram were a beautiful young couple.
		In fact, we learned that Yaran was planning to propose to Sarah next week in Jerusalem.
		Iran's father, Daniel, spoke about the young couple's devotion for one another this morning.
		He said, They were in love, one for the other.
		The embassy told us they were like a star couple at the embassy.
		I never expected something like this.
		He had his whole life before him.
		These words, especially every parent knows, are heart-wrenching.
		The evil of anti-Semitism must be eradicated from our society.
		I spoke to the Attorney General this morning.
		The Department of Justice will be prosecuting the perpetrator responsible for this to the fullest extent of the law.
		Hatred has no place in the United States of America under President Donald Trump.
		Everyone here at the White House is praying for the victims' friends and families during this unimaginable time.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		That statement coming from the White House yesterday, also a statement being put out by the Council on American Islamic Relations.
		It reads as such, We condemn last night's deadly attack on Israeli embassy employees in Washington, D.C. While millions of Americans feel extreme frustration at the sight of the Israeli government slaughtering Palestinian men, women, and children on a daily basis with weapons paid for with our taxpayer dollars, political violence is an unacceptable crime and is not the answer.
		Such violence only undermines the pursuit of justice.
		Peaceful protests, civil disobedience, and political engagement are the only appropriate and acceptable tools to advocate for policy change in our nation, including an end to U.S. support for the Israeli government's genocide in Gaza.
		Those are some of the reactions to the event that took place in Washington, D.C., to the larger issue of political violence, its connection to anti-Semitism.
		Again, if you want to give your comments, it's to start Democrats 202748-8000, Republicans 202-748-8001, Independents 202-748-8002.
		You can also send your thoughts via text at 202748-8003.
		In North Dakota, this is Susan, Republican line.
		Go ahead.
unidentified		Yes, sir.
		I would like to say that we need to really look at this whole issue because it is our federal city, and then freedom of movement is very important in our federal city.
		People come from around the world to Washington, D.C.
		And there is this tone of intolerance, perhaps.
		I mean that to say that we as a society will not allow this type of behavior.
		That yes, we do have freedom of speech, but there's limitations.
		And it's just imperative that we, right from day one, let it be known that this kind of behavior will not be tolerated, that people who behave in this way to threaten people at gunpoint, to shoot people, is unacceptable in our society.
		And I've lived in D.C. I've lived there at times with drive-by shootings, and that's just a random crime.
		This is a perpetration against a religion that we've even had here in Fargo, and we've handled it well, where people can talk, they can debate, and then you separate where your mission is going.
		What do you stand for?
		What can you contribute to society?
		And so whether you're a Jewish person or a Catholic person, what can we do as a society to work together?
		And that seems to help us in Fargo.
		And I believe that it will help us in Washington, D.C.
		And hats off to you playing earlier today.
		Attorney Pirow, Mayor Bowser, the FBI person.
		It was a wonderful place.
		It lets me know I will come back to Washington, D.C.
		I will know that I'll be safe.
		Okay.
		And thank you.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Got your thought.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		This is William in Ohio, Independent Line.
unidentified		Yes.
		Hello.
		How are you today?
		I'm talking about political violence that happens.
		What about when somebody pardons 1,500 criminals?
		What about somebody who's a criminal in the White House himself?
marty schachter ▲ ● ▼		And he has vicious, vicious ICE agents going around beating up people and busting out windows and really tearing people up.
unidentified		He's really being a real jerk.
		And, you know, then he yells about something like this, keeping kids out of college from other countries because what's he trying to do?
		Dummy the country down?
		So when it's political violence, I mean, the man on top has got a lot to answer for.
		And Donald Short Johnson Trump is not a very good person.
		And I think.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
		Got your thought.
		Will in Maryland, Democrats line.
unidentified		Good morning, Ceaseband.
		Thank you again for taking my call.
		Both Arabs and Jews are Semite people.
		So why does anti-Semitism only apply to Jews and not Arabs?
		No.
		You come up with a man-made word, Islamophobia.
		No, it's anti-Semitism.
nathaniel in south-carolina ▲ ● ▼		I'm more concerned about the anti-Semitism against the Palestinians and the genocide that's taking place in Gaza and the illegal sentiments in the West Bank.
unidentified		You're trying to eradicate a whole people.
		And the United States is behind it all.
		Wake up, America.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		When it comes to violent attacks, anti-Jewish violent attacks in other parts of the world, the New York Times picks up the story with some perspective worldwide, saying in France there were 1,570 anti-Semitic incidents in 2024, down slightly from the year before, but still a 260% increase over 2022, according to the latest Tel Aviv University report.
		It says in Germany, the number of cases involving expressions of hatred against Jews doubled in 2023 to 5,671, the study found, and fell to 5,177 in 2024.
		In Britain, the number of anti-Semitic incidents in 2024 was 112% higher than it was two years before, rising to 3,528 from 1,662, according to data compiled by the Community Security Trust.
		It highlights also the United States in the sense that in the United States, the New York Times says, the war and the pro-Palestinian movement have amped up tensions and fears about anti-Semitism.
		The shooting at the museum is the type of development that many Jews, as well as some Jewish scholars and activists, have been worried about and warning about.
		They argue that the explosion of anti-Semitic language has already led to violent personal attacks.
		To that violence, that political violence, possibly concerned to anti-Semitism, your concerns about that.
		Again, pick the numbers that best represent you on the lines.
		Jesse, Republican line in New Mexico.
unidentified		Good morning.
		So I just wanted to agree with the first caller for sure.
		I saw that press briefing with Pierrot and Bowser, and I thought they did a really good job.
		And also, I saw the interview with Pam Bondi, and I thought she did a really good job also just explaining how all people right now and all religions really need to communicate that we do not agree with violence against any other religion.
		And, you know, I was just going to say, I'm a teacher, and I recently created a business called Pencil Pals, pencilpals.com.
		And my exact mission is to help everyone try to express themselves the best they can.
		And I just hope we can all come together and try to make this next school year the best that we can ever have in American industry.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Moving to Steve in Philadelphia, Independent line.
unidentified		Hi.
		Morning.
		From what I'm hearing and seeing, it's all caused by when we let all our adversaries come into this country and they were invented, and colleges are teaching our students that anti-Semitism is right and it's good.
		And then you have House members out there egging them on, telling them how Palestine should be free.
		And these people are really not, they don't embrace America.
		They're looking to destroy it within.
		And as for the Goldbendome.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Well, let's stick to the topic of your concerns about violence in the United States.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Are you worried about a rise, particularly what we saw in Washington, D.C. this week?
unidentified		Oh, yeah, a big rise.
		And it's got to be stopped.
		So instead of building the Golden Dome, he's got to start on the ground here.
		This violence on the ground against Jewish people, against especially Jewish people, these Palestine people that hate America is bad.
		And you have all got your point, Steve.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Let's go to Gerald.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Gerald in Ohio, Democrats line.
unidentified		Hi.
unidentified		I'm totally against anti-Semitism.
leo in minnesota ▲ ● ▼		And I'd like to know the Jewish Nethu Yahoo, the prime minister over there, is eradicating all the Hamas and over there, Palestine.
unidentified		And they need to pay more attention on there.
		And I think the president is a cause of all of this anti-Semitism because, and I applaud the Jews community for coming together on the spur of the moment.
		And okay.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Gerald, there in Ohio, it was the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Yetanahu yesterday giving his own statement about the embassy shootings.
		And not only that, drawing it back to attacks back to October 7th.
		Here's the Israeli Prime Minister.
benjamin netanyahu ▲ ● ▼		Yaron and Sarah weren't the victims of a random crime.
		The terrorists who cruelly gunned them down did so for one reason and one reason alone.
		He wanted to kill Jews.
		And as he was taken away, he chanted, free Palestine.
		This is exactly the same chant we heard on October 7th.
		On that day, thousands of terrorists stormed into Israel from Gaza.
		They beheaded men.
		They raped women.
		They burnt babies alive.
		They butchered 1,200 innocent people and took 251 innocent people hostage to the dungeons of Gaza.
		A short time afterwards, Chancellor Schultz of Germany visited Israel.
		And after he saw the horrors, he said to me, These Hamas terrorists are exactly like the Nazis.
		He was right.
		And if they could get away with it, these Hamas terrorists would have slaughtered every last Jew on earth.
		For these neo-Nazis, Free Palestine is just today's version of Heil Hitler.
		They don't want a Palestinian state.
		They want to destroy the Jewish state.
		They want to annihilate the Jewish people who've been in the land of Israel for 3,500 years.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Comments from the Israeli Prime Minister.
		We're taking your comments as well about anti-Semitism in the United States, concerns about political violence.
		Again, we offer you the phone lines if you want to give us a call and give us your thoughts as well.
		Bernard joins us from New York.
		Republican Line, you're next.
unidentified		Yeah, good morning, C-SPAN.
		The real hatred in America, and I will prove it to you in my next sentence, is coming from the Democratic Party.
		The hatred against conservatives in this country, especially our president now, Walsh, this ex-governor that ran to be vice president, made the following statement.
		The Gestapo, Donald Trump's ICE people are the new Gestapo in America.
		So he's calling Donald Trump Hitler and saying that he, the ICE people who are protecting our border and wonderful people, are being called Gestapo.
		This goes unreported in general by our press.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Well, exactly.
		How does that relate to the shootings that took place this week and the larger issues of violence connected to anti-Semitism?
		How does that directly relate?
unidentified		Yes, okay.
		There is a Jewish hatred.
		Yes, anti-Semitism is coming from the left.
		Look at your college campuses.
		Where is it coming from?
		It's coming from the Democrats.
		Sir, you're interrupting me, okay?
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		No, I just want you.
		You're talking about an entirely different thing, and I wanted you to relate it to the topic at hand.
		So go ahead and finish your thought.
unidentified		Well, my thought is simple.
		We're talking about hatred in America.
		Anti-Semitism, yes, it exists.
		It is coming from the Democrats when a person dropped dead.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Let's go to Dale.
		Dale in North Carolina, Independent Line, you're next up.
		Hi.
unidentified		That colour you just had, he was half right.
		He was half right on the news media is provoking the violence.
		Just think of this.
		We had a president win the election with 92% negative coverage, day after day after day, slamming him.
		And he still wins.
		But all they can breathe is hate.
		Hate.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Okay, so I'll ask you the same to direct it to the comments and the shootings this week and the larger issue of anti-Semitism.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		How does that relate?
unidentified		I'll talk it about political violence.
unidentified		Okay.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		But so make the connection.
unidentified		That's all you got to do.
		All you got to do is turn on the TV and watch it.
		Watch the news.
		They're down at him, down at him, down at him.
		Everything he does is 20 times bad when they get done with it.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Okay, Mary up next in Kentucky.
		I'm sorry, in Maryland, Democrats line.
		Go ahead.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Look at the hate just coming through the phone calls.
		The shooting was horrible, horrible.
		But I feel deep in my heart that person reacted because of the genocide going on in Gaza.
		And Netanyahu, to me, is a war criminal.
		And what his speech was was total propaganda.
		And he's trying to go against his allies now because we don't agree with him.
		And he's saying 1,200 Israelis were killed.
		That was horrible.
		But there were 60,000 civilians killed for him trying to get a hold of Hamas.
		And until this war stops and Congress can stop it anytime, it's going to be more violence.
		And I hope it's not.
		But people are being driven to the brink of insanity right now in this country.
		And a lot of it is because of number 47, who is a felon, by the way.
		and things that he's doing, he's going to create more pain.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Okay, that's Mary there in Maryland.
		It was Democrats who went to the site of the shooting members of the Congressional Jewish Caucus appearing at that Capitol Jewish Museum where the shooting took place.
		And it was their co-chair, Illinois Democrat Brad Schneider, speaking about the deceased kids, the young people, and the larger concerns he had in statements that he made on Thursday.
unidentified		There is a real fear.
		So as we gather here today, we are overwhelming, overwhelmed by emotions.
		Emotions of grief at the loss of two beautiful young people who were prepared to make a life together, heading to Israel to become engaged, to make a promise to each other for a future, united, and to have that future cut short last night.
		And instead, their families, rather than gathering under the chupah, will be gathering beside a grave, saying a kaddish instead of seven blessings.
		We have grief We have fear.
		But we're not surprised at what happened, and we are not going to back down.
		The resolve of all of us standing here, the resolve of every American Jew, the resolve of Jews around the world is that we will hold on to who we are with pride and defiance.
		We know our place is in this city, in this country, for us within the governing halls of the United States, and we will not let anyone tell us we don't belong.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Again, that full comment, the full comments of the Congressional Jewish Caucus from the site of that shooting available to you.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		If you go to our website and our app, if you want to see more there, we will hear from Kathy, Kathy, in Virginia, Republican line.
unidentified		Yes, good morning.
		Yes, I am concerned about anti-Semitism and political violence in our country.
		And I believe that the only way we will see a marked change is for the voters to vote out these extreme representatives,
		mostly in the House of Representatives, a few senators, the same way that they sent a message in voting President Trump in for another term because they were tired of the direction that this country is going.
		But now it's time to bring in more and more sane voices into the House of Representatives and not have these people that openly hate and despise America and their interests are abroad and they hate Israel.
		Israel is not perfect by any means, but there is nothing on this earth that gives someone the right to go murder people.
		Nothing.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Stephen, up next in Kentucky, Independent Line.
unidentified		Yeah, thank you for your time and thank you for having me.
		I think there's a big discrepancy when thinking Jewish people and then the government of Israel.
		I think the government of Israel just umbrellas everybody that lives in Israel as Jewish.
		And that's not the case.
		There is more than Jewish people that live in Israel.
		So we love Jewish people.
		We love the Jewish religion.
		It's the hatred that the Israeli government has for the Palestinians.
		It's the Israeli government.
		Those were ambassadors for the Israeli embassy and such.
		That person was not aiming at them because they were Jewish.
		It's because they were pro-Israel government and the destruction of Palestine.
		So it's too easy for Netanyahu to just use the word the Jewish people.
		He just umbrellas everything.
		And that is not fair because it's not the people.
		It's the government.
		Just like I love Republican citizens, but I despise Republican politicians.
		There's a huge difference here.
		And people need to separate that.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Democrats line.
		This is Ernest, who joins us from Philadelphia.
		Go ahead.
unidentified		Yes, I believe all life is precious.
		I mean, you know, they killed 1,200 people in that attack.
		But Israel has killed how many people in Gaza?
		I mean, there's no comparison.
		I mean, we need to just eliminate hate, period, from the world.
		You know, it's crazy.
		Like now, George Floyd's five-year anniversary, you know, they're getting ready to try to pardon the guy that kills him.
		You know, they're suggesting that.
		So it's like it's double standards in this world.
		And once we can eliminate double standards and say that all life is precious, you know, babies, hospitals being bombed.
		I mean, how can that be righteous for Israel to bomb hospitals with people already injured?
		So I think that, you know, we need to have a moratorium on hatred.
		That's my statement.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Time magazine, as of this morning, posted something on their website, the rise of anti-Semitism and political violence in the United States.
		Just to read just some of it, you can find it online at time.com saying it was in September of 2024 that FBI data showed that anti-Jewish hate crimes increased by 63% since 2023, despite Jewish Americans making up just 2% of the population in the United States.
		Reported single-bias, anti-Jewish hate crimes made up 15% of all reported hate crimes in 2023 and 68% of all reported religion-based hate crimes.
		Talking to Time magazine, experts highlighted three key areas they say have contributed to the rise of anti-Semitism in the United States.
		They start with the impact of social media saying that the rise in the incidents followed a wider trend.
		According to the anti-defamation lead surveys, show that anti-Jewish sentiments are at an all-time high globally.
		According to a report published in 2025 of this year, January of this year, found that 46% of the world's adult population harbors deeply entrenched anti-Semitic anti-Semitic attitudes, equating to an estimated 2.2 billion people worldwide and a reversal of previous trends.
		Younger Americans are showing higher rates of endorsing anti-Jewish tropes.
		In 2024, ADL surveyed that younger Americans were more likely to endorse anti-Jewish tropes with the highest rate among millennials.
		Baby boomers had the lowest rate regarding this type of endorsement.
		More there if you want to read that.
		It's at time.com, the rise of anti-Semitism and political violence in the United States.
		You can make comments to those directions as well, those areas as well on our phone lines.
		Democrats 202-748-8,000.
		Republicans 202-748-8001.
		Independents 202-748-8002.
		Let's go to Samuel in Wisconsin, Independent Line.
unidentified		Yes, good morning.
		On the topic today of political violence, I find it highly suspicious that the former director of the FBI finds those seashells on a beach walk, and here he's selling a book a week later.
		We must be at this time, Americans must follow Mark Twain.
		We must have courage.
		His courage is resistance to fear, mastery of fear, not the absence of fear.
		God bless America this Memorial Day weekend.
		Thank you.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		From John in Illinois, Democrats line.
unidentified		Hi, good morning.
		Yeah, I do think the rise of anti-Semitism is a problem in the United States, but I also think the conflation of anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism is a problem too.
		I mean, the ADL and their definition of anti-Semitism include any criticism of Israel.
		But in the last 24 hours, the state of Israel has killed more than 50 Palestinians, including 29 children and elderly people who died from starvation-related deaths.
		And the number of groups calling the Gaza War a genocide include major human rights organizations like Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and Doctors Without Borders.
		Now, Brad Schneider, who gave a long speech about these two murdered people, obviously it's sad, but he received over $267,000 from APEC.
		Now, this is the real issue, in my opinion.
		And Washington Journal is spending so much time asking people, is anti-Semitism the problem?
		Well, they're just manufacturing consent here.
		You guys are part of the problem in this instance.
		But thanks.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Leah, up next in South Carolina, Republican line.
unidentified		Hi.
		Hello.
		Yes.
		I just can't understand, folks.
		They want to blame Donald Trump for this.
		And these people have hated each other and falled each other since the days of Methuselah.
		And I feel like, like the guy that shot this beautiful couple, if you feel so strong for your people, go to Gaza, go to Palestine, go feed people, go help people, go murder people if that's what you feel is right, rather than doing it here on the American soil.
		And one more thing: there's one power that's over this whole situation over all the Democrats, the Republicans, and races, and it's Jesus Christ.
		And get ready because he's getting ready to come back.
		Thank you.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Independent Line in California.
		Kim joins us from Sacramento.
		Hello.
unidentified		Hello.
		Good morning.
		Well, first of all, when I think of anti-Semitism, the first thing that doesn't pop in my mind is the Palestinians.
		I want to say that, like, you know, let's take, I think when, you know, Trump was his first term in office, the Jews were walking down the street saying Jews will not replace us.
		It's the Proud Boys, it's the KKK, it's white supremacist groups throughout this country for years and years that have been pushing this kind of hate towards Jews.
		And, you know, that's a fact.
		And staying free Palestine does not make you anti-Semitic.
		I believe that it's horrible, the violence that happened to that young couple.
		I believe that the violence that happened on October 7th in Israel was horrible.
		But I also believe that the horrendous violence that is happening in Palestine is more than just violence.
		It's a genocide.
		They're starving children.
		And what is making people crazy here in the United States is it is our money.
		Without us, Israel doesn't even really exist, and they surely wouldn't exist with the weapon tree.
		And we have no voice and no say in it.
		We asked them to bring in the food, even just to put a ceasefire, to bring in the food.
		And they're not doing that.
		And we're standing by watching it.
		I don't know that young man.
		I have no affiliation with the man that killed that person.
		But I wonder, like when people go and shoot up schools, people say they're mentally insane, right?
		Well, maybe that's what this man is.
		Maybe watching a genocide on your phones because the news media, including C-STAN, does not cover this genocide.
		It is making you, I feel like, I feel so much pain and anger inside myself every day because of this.
		It is horrible watching children starve around this world, around this world that is happening in Congo, in Sudan, all these places.
		We have to do better as a human race.
		We are killing each other.
		This is wrong.
		It is horrible.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Okay, that's Kim there in California.
		Again, we'll carry on with this topic.
		And if you want to give your thoughts, 202-748-8000 for Democrats, 202-748-8001 for Republicans.
		Independents, 202-748-8002.
		More from that Time magazine article that I showed you earlier under the category of political violence is on the rise.
		The author writes that the rise in U.S. anti-Semitism is not an isolated trend.
		To look at the recent history of political violence in America is a major cause of concern.
		In October 2024, Reuters found that since the January 6th Capitol riots in 2021, there have been at least 300 cases of political violence, the biggest increase in the United States since the 1970s.
		Over the past year, Pennsylvania Governor Josh Apiro saw his home set on fire in an artisan attack, and Elon Musk's Tesla company has seen multiple attacks on its showroom since he started to lead the Department of Government efficiency.
		Most notably, it cites that it was the president himself, then candidate Donald Trump, surviving an assassination attempt during the election campaign in 2024 with a bullet grazing his ear.
		Dennis is next in Iowa.
		Hello.
unidentified		Hello.
		Simple question.
		Why should anyone obey the law when you have Trump pardoning people that attack the United States Capitol?
		When Biden was president, Trump comes to Iowa and he made news in Iowa, not for attacking Biden.
		He may lose in Iowa because he attacked the Republican governor because she had the gall to be for DeSantis.
		Trump's an idiot, and that's my opinion.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		From William in Maryland, Republican line.
unidentified		Hello.
		Hello.
		I'm not a professor, but I'm going to tell you one today.
		This whole word, anti-Semitism, that's not even what it is.
		You have Jewish people that are in New York and other places that dislike this war.
		So how can that be Semitism?
		Number two, if the people originally from the area are Semites and they don't like it, then it's not Semitism.
		It is anti-Zionism.
		Thirdly, the people that actually run Israel, run Israel, right?
		They are not even from that area.
		Most of them are from Ukraine, Serbia, Yugoslavia, Poland, and those areas.
		They get into office and then they change their name into a Jewish-sounding name and they make everything worse.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		And out of all those particulars, what does it say overall about your views on political violence, particularly when it's connected to anti-Semitism?
unidentified		I think it's going to get worse because saying the word anti-Si-Semitism instead of anti-Zionism is like putting on blinders or something.
		And what that is actually doing is actually making it more dangerous for Jewish people because it's simple.
		Instead of focusing on what the actual problem is, you're putting on blinders and saying, okay, I don't want to hear about that, which makes those people that have something to say act in a more violent way because they can't get their voices heard or their point out.
		And that case is easily made by on campuses and colleges.
		They're saying that they're doing violence when they're not.
		They're peacefully trying to protest.
		And when they shut that down, the peaceful protest part is gone out the window.
		So what else is people to do except for to try to get violence to try to get their point across?
		Because no one is actually listening.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Okay, Mark and Merrill and Independent Line.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
unidentified		Yes.
unidentified		Hi, how are you guys?
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Fine, you're on.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Go ahead.
unidentified		Hear me there.
		Yes, in regards to rise of anti-Semitism in the United States, I think we have to kind of look at the correlation.
		You know, I'm a Jewish man from Montgomery County, and what I've brought up to realize is that hatred begets hate.
		And for many those that have been watching the imagery come through their social media, whether they be Christian or Jewish or Muslim across America, there's a certain point where mothers, if they see children buried under rubble and they see lives being stripped at a very young age, that begets more hatred.
		So I would ask, is it safer for us as a Jewish people today to walk around our cities because of the war we are currently fighting?
		Has our overzealous approach to Gaza and the punishment post-October 7th led us to a world where we have to walk around in fear?
		It's important that most America knows that we as a Jewish people, not everybody supports it and not Yahoo.
		There are multiple political parties in every country, and sometimes overly conservative or nationalistic parties win.
		But that does not define our nation or that does not define us as a people.
		So what I would say to the rest of America is please, please do not cast an ill light on all Jews due to the tyranny of very few in the process of saying never ever again.
		I fear that the bombardment and the callous approach we have had will only make us look to the rest of the world as if we have become the monsters we never wanted to be.
		Thank you very much for hearing my point.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		From D in Ohio, Democrats line.
unidentified		Hi.
		Hi.
		Good morning.
		Pedro, are you listening?
		Am I on?
		You are.
		Okay, thank you.
		The other guy stole my thunder, actually.
		What is being the Republicans, and I'll get to the point.
		The Republicans use projection all the time.
		What they're doing is what they blame the Democrats for doing all the time.
		They're full of hate, so they say we are.
		I mean, you know, that kind of thing.
		But as far as the couple that got killed, that is, this is almost systemic to me because when you go down a slippery slope, Pedro, these are the things that end up happening.
		You have a man in the White House.
		I don't even want to go there.
		He's not capable of ruling.
		He's not diplomatic.
		He's just horrible to me.
		But anyway, the Jews, the person who called and said when they were marching up there, talking about Jews won't replace us and blacks, this and that, and all that, all of that has got this country going straight down the tubes.
		And you all are selling out America for one man.
		You can say whatever, but I'm going to tell you right now, in four to six months, you all are going to have buyers' remorse.
		And it's not, I don't hate Donald Trump.
		And you guys are going to be talking about it.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		How exactly, to your thoughts overall, how exactly does the president relate to the events of this week in Washington, D.C.?
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Let's start there.
unidentified		Here's my bottom line: the Palestinians on those campuses are not intimidating Jews.
		Jews are upset because Netanyahu were not killing those women and children in Palestine.
		You do not have to like Palestinians, but don't keep blaming them for what's going on.
		It's not true as the Republicans.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Okay, DeVer in Ohio, one of the editorials from the Wall Street Journal this morning, you say you want to intifad a revolution is the headline.
		And some of the editors make these thoughts this morning, saying many Americans don't realize it, but Jewish schools, synagogues, and the like in the United States have long required serious security.
		It's only getting worse.
		A study of 63 Orthodox Jewish schools found that the average security cost in 20 to 22 to 23 was $184,000 a year.
		That has risen to $339,000 in 2024 and 25.
		The editors finish by saying, We don't know to whom the shooter listened to or listened or whether he had a history of mental illness.
		But the rise of Soviet-style anti-Zionism, including enthusiasm for the total destruction of Israel and efforts to ostracize its domestic supporters, is corrosive to America and is stirring up old dangers for Jews.
		Americans of all faiths and political views have share a share of the responsibility to push back.
		That's the editors from the Wall Street Journal this morning, if you want to read it online.
		You can make your thoughts known on the phone lines: 202-748-8000 for Democrats, 202-748-8001 for Republicans, and Independents, 202748-8002.
		Text if you want to text your thoughts, 202-748-8003.
		And as always, you can post your thoughts on our social media sites, facebook.com/slash C-SPAN and on X at C-SPANWJ.
		In New Jersey, Katie is next.
		Independent line.
unidentified		Yes, Hi, thank you for having me.
		I believe anti-Semitism is a real problem in the United States as well as globally.
		And this is the first time in my lifetime, and I am in my 60s, that anti-Semitism is being addressed in such large numbers.
		As far as the war in Gaza goes, I pray for those innocent people that have surely been affected.
		However, no one seems to mention Hamas.
		Hamas is stealing the food.
		Hamas is holding your own people prisoners because they want to kill Jews.
		What people have to understand is anti-Semitism is real.
		There are people in the world that just want to kill Jews.
		And until we all recognize that and all religions come together to fight that, then we can decide and go on to the next topic: do we believe in this war or not?
		Or do we believe in the political leaders in Israel?
		But until we all band together and make it a point to address anti-Semitism without combining it with political hatred or any other kind of hatred, I mean, it's look at all lives can't matter until Jewish lives matter.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Katie in New Jersey.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Katie in New Jersey there, Belial in California in Los Angeles, Republican line.
unidentified		Yes, I would like to address this anti-Semitism.
		There is no anti-Semitism.
		Europeans cannot be Semites.
		The only Semites are Arabs and Africans.
		The Europeans, European Jews or European Christians, dominate other people.
		There was peace in Palestine before the European Jews came to dominate and take over the land, just like the Europeans did in America and exterminated the Indians.
		It is domination they believe in.
		And what they're doing in Palestine is genocide, killing innocent women and children, shooting grandmothers in the back.
		This man who killed these two people is put on TV, and we're supposed to feel sympathy for these two people, but the news media doesn't show any sympathy for the 50,000 Palestinians that have been slaughtered by the bloodthirsty Jews.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Why not?
		Hold on, Collar, hold on.
		Why not feel sympathy for those two people?
unidentified		I said they want us to feel sympathy.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, but why don't you feel sympathy for those two people, personally?
unidentified		The question is: why don't they want us to feel sympathy for the 50,000 Palestinians that have been killed?
unidentified		That's the question.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Aren't those two equally related as far as death overall is concerned?
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		An instance?
unidentified		Can two people equal 50,000?
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		I'm not talking about numbers.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		I'm just talking about the event itself for the extermination of Leidas, life itself.
unidentified		Almighty God says for us not to kill each other.
		So anyone taking somebody else's life is wrong.
		But when you have a government that is bent on exterminating the Palestinian people, this is total evil.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Okay, another California California.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		This is John, Democrats line.
unidentified		Morning.
		Yeah, thanks for C-SPAN.
		I'm not an anti-Semite.
		I really didn't understand what the word meant.
		And we have Google these days, so we can just Google it pretty quick.
		And it was coined by a guy named William Marr in 1879, who was a German publicist and agitist, popularized the term anti-Semitism, German for anti-Semitism.
		Through his pamphlet, The Way to Victory, Journalism over Judaism, he also founded the League of Anti-Semites.
		So he legitimized it by using Semite, which is a linguistic term borrowed from linguistics to describe a language group including Hebrew and Arabic.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		And how does that relate to the topic at hand?
unidentified		Well, it relates to the topic at hand because it's either religious hatred or it's racial hatred.
		I don't live in that part of the country, the world, and it's a very different environment over there.
		So we had the White House this thing with the South Africans the other day, where he was hatred comes from people that are spewing stuff from a position of ignorance and intolerance.
		And when he was trying to say that this is in the White House, that this was a racial issue where white people, Afrikaners, were being slaughtered and there was a genocide going there.
		I don't know that he used the word genocide.
		The African, South African president tried to correct him on that, that more black Afrikaners were, listen, racism is a horrible thing because in the Ukraine, they're pretty much from the same language, the area.
		I was married to a Japanese woman, and she has got more racism than I think.
		And I lived in New York City.
		And, you know, when you're black, you're going to be, you know, profiled as somebody from Africa or some other place.
		And then when you're, you know, so.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Okay, I think we got your point there, John.
		In California, this case in Washington, D.C. that you've heard a lot this week will be handled by the interim U.S. attorney, Janine Pirro.
		She appeared before cameras yesterday to talk about the approach she will take concerning the investigation of the case.
		Here she is from yesterday.
judge jeanine pirro ▲ ● ▼		This is a horrific crime, and these crimes are not going to be tolerated by me and by this office.
		A young couple at the beginning of their life's journey, about to be engaged in another country, had their bodies removed in the cold of the night in a foreign city in a body bag.
		We are not going to tolerate that anymore.
		And I am not unaware, based upon my own background, of the repercussions of this kind of case.
		This is the kind of case that picks at old sores and old scars, because these kinds of cases remind us of what has happened in the past that we can never and must never forget.
		I want to mention one thing.
		The Capitol Jewish Museum in Washington, D.C., where this young couple had been at an event, was built around a brick building.
		That brick building was previously a synagogue called Addas Israel.
		It was one of Washington's first synagogues, a congregation that was created in 1869.
		And Ulysses S. Grant, our president, actually attended the dedication of that synagogue.
		And so to this day, that synagogue and that area remains a cornerstone of the Jewish community in D.C. Let me also say that violence against anyone based on their religion is an act of cowardice.
		It is not an act of a hero.
		It is the kind of case that we will vigorously pursue.
		Anti-Semitism will not be tolerated, especially in the nation's capital.
		And we're going to continue to investigate this as a hate crime and a crime of terrorism.
		And we will add additional charges as the evidence warrants.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		The interim attorney for the District of Columbia, Janine Pirro, comments yesterday, more of those comments available at the website and our app if you want to read and see several of the comments that were made in light of the shooting that took place in Washington, D.C. yesterday.
		Let's hear from our Democrats line, Roger in Massachusetts.
		Hello.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I'd like to comment on our president and a couple of things he's done regarding these issues.
		He chose to go to, on his first world trip, and meet with a former lieutenant of al-Qaeda and visit a country that has given hundreds of millions of dollars to Hamas.
		Regarding political violence in the United States, he showed a video of President Biden hogtide is bloodied in the head.
		And he's also suggested that Liz Cheney go before a firing squad of nine people and get killed and take away the security from Hillary Clinton.
		And then we'll see what happens to her.
		Most recently, he showed a video of him shooting a yacht ball at Bruce Springsteen.
		It all starts from the top.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Gary up next.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Gary in Virginia, Republican line.
unidentified		Thank you.
		Pedro, I admire and appreciate the way you deal with these people that call in and mischaracterize other moderators.
		I want to say thank you for that.
		I've seen you do it four times this year.
		So that's four stars on your mother goose chart.
		This thing about political violence, I worry about that a lot because I see it, you know, in these people like the kid that drove over those people in Charlottesville.
		He killed that one girl.
		If you see the picture of him, you ought to show that picture of him right after the Justice of the Peace read the charges against him.
		He's saying bye-bye to every anniversary, every graduation for the next 40 or 50 years.
		Every beach trip, road trip, hang liden, fishing trip.
		He's saying bye to all that.
		You know, same with that guy killed those two people down D.C. and a kid down in that church down in South Carolina.
		It's terrible, this people drinking this jingo juice.
		You know, anytime somebody's telling you that you're better than somebody else because of your race or your color or your religion or your ideology, don't be drinking that stuff.
		It's really not good for you, I guarantee you.
		But thank you for the time, Pedro.
		Have a good day.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Sharia, North Carolina, Independent Line.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Yes, I'm very concerned with anti-Semitism and political violence in the United States.
		But this has been going on for a long time, and it's all because I know people aren't going to agree with me.
		It's all because of this MAGA and Trump.
		They're the ones that really intensified hate in this world.
louise in virginia ▲ ● ▼		If you go back 2016, when all these people like Green, all these political people in the House of Representatives got elected, hate, hate, hate.
unidentified		So what people need to do, first thing, is vote.
		Second, wake up every morning and you say, I'm not going to hate anybody.
		I'm going to love somebody today.
		And the third thing, read your Bible.
		In Revelations, it says, a great man will come to power and try to change things and bring hate.
		So Jesus is on the way, everybody.
		Just wait.
		Thank you for having me.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Elaina from Arlington, Virginia, Democrats line.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
unidentified		Hi, good morning.
		I just wanted to say I think people need to be very careful about articles they read and books they read and everything in terms of knowing who's writing it and knowing where the information is coming from.
		Because there's so much stuff out there that people are reading and imbibing that is not accurate or kind of skewed.
		And I want to make a comment about Project Esther.
		I noticed that the media isn't covering it so much.
		People covered quite a bit Project 2025.
		And Project 2025 also has Project Esther, which is designed to sabotage the voice of the Palestinian people, the ability for people to express themselves in a legitimate way at a protest, etc.
		And, for example, the idea of calling all the protesters Hamas supporters, not pro-Palestinian supporters.
		And I feel this is very big problem.
		Also, I would like to say, Time magazine, the article that you read, it had some skewed things in there.
		And the more that you read about Palestine and what goes on, the more you understand the actual situation.
		I'd like to recommend a book called 10 Myths About Israel by Elon Pape, who is an Israeli.
		And I think that's a good place for people to start if they want to learn the Israelites.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		So why do you think he's worth reading?
unidentified		I think it's worth reading.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		So why do you think he's worth reading?
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		What is it about specifically about him?
unidentified		Well, I think he's somebody who's a very thoughtful person.
		He has studied the situation for a very long time.
		He's easy to understand.
		And I also would like to say.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Okay, okay.
		I've got to move on to some more calls.
		Mark in New York, Independent Line.
unidentified		Hi.
		Good morning, Pedro.
		I'm a 75-year-old Ashkenazi Jew.
		When I was 10 years old, my parents gave me a dollar a week to give to Israel.
		They're a Zionist.
		I'm a Zionist.
		I think some of your callers should know the history of Israel before they start telling us that you're not part of the tribes of Israel if you're an Ashkenazi Jew.
		I just don't understand it.
		They have to understand the history of Israel.
		I said to my mother, why are we giving money to Israel when we live here?
		She said, son, the history of the Jews, no matter where we lived, there was always a problem or we were run out.
		So we now will have a place to go back to in case we're oppressed.
		Well, what we've seen October 7th in Israel and what we've seen the other night here, that's one of the reasons I think the viewers should understand the history of Israel.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Okay, Mark in New York, one more call.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		This will be from Butch in Illinois, Republican line.
unidentified		Go ahead.
		Yes, sir.
		I was just kind of wondering.
		Does Hamas have an army that they're fighting back?
		Or are these Hamas people dressed like just regular Palestinians?
		I mean, I don't understand how Israel can keep attacking them when you can't tell if they're they could probably walk right by them and you wouldn't know if they were Hamas or whatever.
		I mean, they all look the same, right?
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		But as far as political violence in the United States, connections to anti-Semitism, what are your thoughts on that?
unidentified		I think it's terrible.
		I think it's terrible.
		You know, yes, sir.
		It's just wondering.
		For me, you know, there's so many people now who don't even believe in God in the Bible.
		And you know, there's stories in the Bible where God told people to go and kill whole tribes for some reason.
		I don't know.
		I'm just really upset about this hatred.
		And one more quick thing, sir, is why don't there's they need more punishment.
		They need more punishment for people who do this stuff.
		Anybody that murders sure gets a death penalty.
		That's my opinion.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Okay, Butch in Illinois, finishing off this hour of calls.
		And for those of you who are participated, either you can still make your thoughts on our social media sites, too, if you want to keep the conversation going when it comes to these topics.
		This week, the House of Representatives passing their legislative bill, which includes several big priorities for the Trump administration as well as House Republicans.
		We'll examine two of those priorities with guests during the course of the morning.
		Later on, we'll hear from Julie Kirshner.
		She's with the Federation of American Immigration Reform.
		She will break down the immigration and border security enforcement priorities advanced by the House approved GOP budget bill.
		Up next, Sarah Chiefo of the League of Conservation Voters.
		She'll talk about the clean energy initiatives enacted during the Biden administration and how they would be impacted if Republicans passed the budget reconciliation bill.
		That coming up on Washington Journal.
unidentified		But I want to rise in strong support, Mr. Speaker, of this one big, beautiful bill.
unidentified		This bill that's going to deliver on so many promises that the American people asked us to do for them.
hakeem jeffries ▲ ● ▼		Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to this reckless, regressive, and reprehensible GOP tax scam.
unidentified		No other network covered Congress's action on the tax bill this week like C-SPAN.
		No breaks, no spin, just the work of democracy unfiltered.
		18 hours of the Ways and Means Committee meeting.
jason smith ▲ ● ▼		Democrats who vote against this tax relief will be voting for the largest tax hike in American history.
unidentified		18 more hours of the House Rules Committee.
mary gay scanlon ▲ ● ▼		I also want to welcome our dedicated C-SPAN viewers and rules aficionados.
mary gay scanlon ▲ ● ▼		You know who you are.
jim mcgovern ▲ ● ▼		What the hell are you so scared of that you guys are holding this hearing at one o'clock in the morning?
unidentified		And when the final vote came, we were there.
mike johnson ▲ ● ▼		On this vote, the Yays are 215, the Nays are 214, with one answering present.
mary gay scanlon ▲ ● ▼		The bill is passed.
unidentified		All night, overnight, gavel to gavel.
		C-SPAN, bringing you democracy unfiltered.
		American History TV, Saturdays on C-SPAN 2, exploring the people and events that tell the American story.
		This weekend, at 4.45 p.m. Eastern, hear from Vietnam and Afghanistan Medal of Honor recipients Dwight Birdwell and Clinton Romasche about their wartime experiences after receiving the nation's highest military award for valor.
		And then at 8 p.m. Eastern on Lectures in History, Hillsdale College history professor Mark Moyer explores the various schools of thought on the Vietnam War, focusing on debates over the war's necessity and whether the United States could have achieved victory.
		At 9 p.m. Eastern on Real America, watch a 1960 Federal Emergency Management Agency film on how to build a fallout shelter in your home.
		It was produced with the National Concrete Masonry Association and was originally titled, Walt Builds a Family Fallout Shelter.
		And at 1145 p.m. Eastern, House Speaker Mike Johnson presents the Congressional Gold Medal, the nation's highest civilian honor, to the 6th 888th Women's Army Corps Battalion for their contributions during World War II.
		Known as the 6th 888, they were the first all-female, all-black unit to serve overseas, sorting male in Europe.
		Exploring the American story.
		Watch American History TV Saturdays on C-SPAN 2 and find a full schedule on your program guide or watch online anytime at c-span.org slash history.
		Washington Journal continues.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		A discussion on the House passed a budget bill, how it could affect clean energy programs in the United States with Sarah Chiefo of the League of Conservation Voters.
		She serves as their government affairs vice president.
		Good morning to you.
unidentified		Good morning, Pedro.
unidentified		Thank you so much for having me and the League of Conservation Voters on this.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		For those who don't know about the organization, tell us about it.
unidentified		Yeah, so the League of Conservation Voters has been around since 1970, and we build power for people and our planet.
		And we try to influence policy, hold elected officials accountable, and also win elections.
		And we do that to make progress on essential issues in this country at the intersection of the environment and democracy.
		We also are proud to do this work in close coordination with over 30 state partners who mirror our federal work at the state and local level.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		I suppose that intersection came into play this week with the passage of the Republican bill.
unidentified		It most certainly did, and the two issues are deeply, deeply interrelated.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		How so?
unidentified		We cannot have the environmental progress that we need without a functional democracy that values the input of all of our citizens and makes sure that we are having maximum participation throughout both the voting process as well as civic engagement and advocacy.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		When it comes to that progress you talk about, I suppose you're talking about specific clean energy efforts or energy-related efforts.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		What were your concerns most as this bill was going through and being debated, particularly with programs put into the Biden administration?
unidentified		Sure.
		So let's just take a step back, Pedro, because this is an over a thousand-page mega bill that gives multi-trillion dollar tax breaks primarily to the wealthy and the powerful in this country.
		And it pays for a portion of that by going after really bedrock essential programs in this country.
		You know this.
		Spanning health care, spanning social safety net, but also spanning environmental progress and clean energy action.
		And so we've been involved in an intersectional way with a lot of these issues, but obviously our bread and butter issues are the threats that this bill places to our environment.
		And I think it hasn't been covered enough that this actually could be the most anti-environmental piece of legislation passed in our nation's history if it is not changed.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		If it does, now that it's passed the House, it goes to the Senate, it goes to the President's desk.
		One of the things that of concern with groups like yours is that what it would do for wind, solar, and geothermal power tax credits.
		Can you talk about how they work?
		What's eventually impacted if those things come to pass?
unidentified		Sure, happy to.
		So, to be clear, there's over 80 anti-environmental provisions in this legislation spread across all of the jurisdictions that it covers, which is over 10 committees in the U.S. House of Representatives.
		You're speaking to a really important part of what this bill goes after headlong.
		And there was a lot of talk in the crafting of this House bill from Speaker Johnson, are we going to take a sledgehammer approach or a scalpel to these credits?
		Let's be crystal clear.
		What the House just voted on is a full repeal of the clean energy tax investments.
		Those are investments that have unleashed a huge amount of economic revitalization across this country.
		In fact, over half of the investments that have been unleashed are in Republican-held districts.
		And so, what this legislation would do is it would make those tax credits unworkable through both fast phase-outs, adding in unworkable supply chain requirements, and making them less marketable in the marketplace.
		And let's be clear, this is all being done to help polluters and the fossil fuel industry.
		Clean energy is cheap, it's affordable, and in fact, last year, over 90% of the new energy brought online was clean energy.
		And so, we're seeing an attempt to really raise electricity prices here for families and businesses, to shutter manufacturing facilities across the country, and create the loss of good-paying jobs, all while we're making ourselves less competitive.
		And this is being done at a time when our country needs more energy, not less, right?
		Energy demand is increasing through things like artificial intelligence, data centers, manufacturing, electrification.
		So, why are we even considering blocking the cheapest, most affordable form of energy on the U.S.?
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		So, the green businesses, so to speak, get off the ground, but when it comes to measurable impact on reducing the amount of dependence we have on petroleum and other things, how would you argue that?
unidentified		Yeah, so we have seen, you don't have to take my word for it, clean energy businesses, manufacturing, developers, labor unions like the North American Building Trades Association, and also energy experts really say that this is existential threat to our ability to transition to clean energy, which let's be clear, that's where the global marketplace is going.
		And so we are making ourselves less competitive and doubling down on fossil fuel production.
		We haven't even talked yet about how much this bill mandates drilling on our public lands and waters.
		It gives sweetheart deals to polluters.
		This is beyond the pale, Pedro.
		It lets polluters pay a one-time fee to skirt environmental review, to skirt public input, and to shield them from any kind of challenge in court.
		Also, they can jam through massive drilling pipeline and LNG or methane gas export facilities.
		It reeks of corruption, to be frank.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Sarah Chifo is our guest.
		And if you want to ask her about some of the energy provisions that are in the House Republican bill that was passed this week and now goes to the Senate, 202748-8000 for Democrats, 202748-8001 for Republicans, 202748-8002 for Independents.
		And then if you want to text us your thoughts and questions this morning, you can do that at 202748-8003.
		One of the big things that were debated upon before the passage, the future of electric vehicles and what this bill does.
		What happens?
unidentified		Yeah, so, you know, what we are seeing in this country is a transition to popular clean energy sources, both to power our homes, also how we get to and from our work and our play.
		And when we look at the transition to more fuel-efficient and electric vehicles, we're actually talking about creating good jobs here in onshoring of battery manufacturing and vehicle manufacturing.
		We're also talking about saving families money in operating their vehicle, their vehicles.
		And that's really important.
		We know families are really concerned about costs.
		And what we're seeing here is a threat to people having more affordable and better choices on how they can get to and from where they need to go, whether it be work, soccer practice, you name it.
		And what we saw this week was, unfortunately, we saw a really extreme attack from Senate Republicans to permanently roll back the ability for California to set standards that limit pollution in its state that other states follow.
		They broke the filibuster to do it.
		It's called going nuclear.
		And we are here in the long-haul fight to make sure we can transition our transportation sector.
		But this is a really extreme overreach by congressional Republicans that was all backed by the American Petroleum Institute and the polluting interests.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		You, this is the Wall Street Journal this morning talking about that Senate vote.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Explain to our viewers why a decision concerning a state's EV mandate should affect the United States as a whole so much that the Senate had to act on it.
unidentified		Yeah, so I think it's helpful to ground us in the history here.
		Since the creation of the Clean Air Act, California has had the authority to go above and beyond because of their unique air pollution challenges, right?
		This has actually been supported by both Republican and Democratic administrations, and they've had the ability under the Clean Air Act to seek waivers or allowances to go above and beyond the federal standards.
		This has been a hugely important part of California cleaning up its own air, protecting its own constituents.
		And then other states have chosen to follow California's model and they've been able to follow their sort of North Star level of ambition that they're setting forth.
		And what we saw here is a, unfortunately, with the extreme use of the Congressional Review Act resolution, a permanent overturning of that authority, which is very harmful in the context of the transition we need in transportation, but it also blows open the door for the filibuster to be overturned in the Senate for other measures and for other state waivers on K through 12, Medicaid, drug approvals to be in the mix here in a way that is really, really sweeping.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Were EV sales enough to have they been increasing over the past few years?
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Have people been buying into them even because of the tax credits and does that go away without the tax credit?
unidentified		Yeah, so this transition is underway and it deeply threatens the business model of the big oil industry.
		And so people are buying EVs.
		Sales are actually quite high in the latest numbers we've come in.
		And this transition is happening globally.
		It's where the global marketplace is.
		And so by sort of cutting off our own progress here through going after the tax credits and also the fuel efficiency standards, which the administration is trying to do legislatively paired with going after the state standards, what you're really seeing is us in the U.S. ceding any ability for us to lead in the global marketplace for the autos of the future.
		And it's going to have far-reaching implications for our competitiveness and for consumers to be able to choose affordable cars that they like to drive, that are fun, and that also lower their costs to operate.
		Raise your hand if you don't want to ever go to a gas station again, right?
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Sarah, Chief of the League of Conservation Voters, joining us for this discussion.
		Again, if you want to call and ask your questions, 202-748-8,000 for Democrats, 202-748-8,000 for Republicans.
		Independents, 202748-8000.
		Before we go to calls, how are you funded?
		How are you financially supported?
unidentified		Yeah, so LCV is really proud to be funded through a number of different streams, philanthropic endeavors, individual gifts.
		We have a really well-balanced mix of support.
		And our organization has been growing extensively.
		I've been there for 16 years now.
		And we started, when I started, we had 40 staff, and now we're close to 200.
		And so we're really proud to be supported.
		And I think that's a recognition of the incredible work we're doing, how necessary it is, and just excited to be part of it.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Let's hear from David.
		David's in New Jersey, Republican line for our guests.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Yes, thank you.
		I just want to say that your guest seems to be a very nice person, but her ideas are anti-American in my view.
		Why, if I live in California, which I've thought about moving to at some point, should I not be allowed to buy a gasoline car because Newsom and all the other insane lunatic liberals say, oh, no, you cannot buy a legal product that you can buy in Nevada or Arizona or New Jersey or anywhere else.
		And this is what is wrong.
		It's top-down.
		And look at the sale of EVs.
		I'm talking about plain EVs, not hybrids.
		No one wants to buy them.
		So, you know, this is, again, stuff brought up in the liberal ideology that you want to impose upon the rest of the country.
		And California will have a big impact because they have such a large car market.
		So I am so happy the Senate did what they did.
		And I just hope the House follows through because this top-down ideology imposed on people has got to go.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Got your point, Color.
unidentified		Thank you.
		Thanks for the question.
		I should have mentioned my home state is also California.
		So Home State Pride here.
		Thank you for calling in.
		I think it's important to note here a couple of things.
		One, the House has already acted, so this is going to the president's desk in terms of this overturning of California's authority.
		And I think it's also important to note that this is about vehicle choice, right?
		A lot of consumers do want to buy EVs for a whole host of reasons.
		And so nothing about the standards that are in place or had been in place would mandate a person buy a certain type of car.
		I also think it's important to note that these are about American manufacturing jobs.
		And so I don't think it's un-American to talk about making sure we're globally competitive in the transition to EVs, which is where the global trends are going.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		The Energy Information Administration tells us that nearly 300,000 new electric vehicles sold in the first quarter of this year.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		What does that number tell you?
unidentified		Yeah.
		You know, I think it tells you that people are still looking to buy EVs.
		I think they're less interested in supporting Mr. Musk's Tesla, right?
		You saw some of those numbers dip, but other models are coming online.
		And auto companies need a long lead time, at least five years for their model years.
		And so we're going to see in the next two and three model years a lot more and a lot more affordable electric vehicles come online.
		And I encourage folks to, you know, look past the rhetoric, test drive one.
		They're pretty darn fun.
		And we're also helping, you know, helping ensure that we can breathe cleaner air.
		And so I think, and save dollars, right?
		If you're not going to the gas station, you're just plugging in at home.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		I should mention that's an 11.4% increase year after year.
unidentified		It is.
		It is.
		And I think that speaks to the durability here of this transition.
		And so again, we can't put our heads in the sand.
		The auto industry did that in the 70s, and it hurt them for a long time.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Let's go to John.
		John is in Virginia.
		Democrats line.
unidentified		Hello.
		Thanks for taking my call, Diezer.
		I just want to tell you guys that I think people are very uncomfortable.
		The technology is changing so fast.
		And the reality is, if you look at the other countries, China did how and Japan, how they're improving their environment, we are way, way behind.
		I think that this administration, as you are aware, they don't care about the environment.
		They've been cutting everything that you can imagine.
		And I think that even though you try to do something good, we have a long way to go because this administration's got four years to go.
		And by the time you're ready for the next four years, we will have more problems.
		And I appreciate that we have to take care of our environment.
		Our people are not well educated to understand how environment works.
		And I hope you educate us more.
		Thank you for taking my call.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Senator Chief, how do other countries compare to the United States when it comes to using these other sources of energy besides petroleum?
unidentified		Yeah, so I think what taking a step back on the caller's question, I think when we talk about the environment, I think it's important really to start with what does that mean for people at the kitchen table?
		It means clean air, it means clean water, it means lower bills, lower electricity bills, it means improving your home to making it more energy efficient, more comfortable, healthier for your family.
		And so I think sometimes the environment can seem less tangible, but really this impacts everyone's daily lives.
		If you can't be confident that the tap water you turn on is safe to give to your kids, that is a real problem.
		And so I point that out to say that the caller is absolutely right.
		The damage that the Trump administration is doing, the first administration was the most anti-environmental administration we'd ever seen.
		This administration makes the first one look like child's play.
		They are gutting environmental protections that have been in place in some cases for decades, even including on things like mercury pollution.
		They're rolling back standards to protect our water from forever chemicals and PFAS that are causing cancer rates to skyrocket and dealing with, you know, people are born with these microplastics and chemicals in their bodies already.
		So I think we have a lot of work to do to put the environmental issues front and center for people, but what this administration is doing on the environment is incredibly unpopular.
		Support for clean air and clean water and public lands crosses all partisan lines.
		And it's important to tell the American people why are they doing this, right?
		On the campaign trail, Trump said, give me a billion dollars to the big oil industry and I will do whatever you want.
		We are seeing him follow through very sincerely on that commitment.
		And he's trying to ban clean energy, which again is the most affordable and the fastest energy to bring online.
		And he's saying there's an energy crisis, but what in fact he's doing is creating one by his extreme agenda that is far out of step with the American people and they're going to have to be held to account for that.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Now that it goes to the Senate, what's the possibility that the proposals in the House bill either get softened or intensified once the Senate's done with it?
unidentified		Great question.
		So this barely jammed through the House, this bill through the House, and now we head to the Senate, right?
		And so from the legislative standpoint, the two chambers have very different views on what this reconciliation bill should look like beyond the environmental and clean energy provisions, but certainly including those.
		So immediately after seeing the House text come out on these full repeal of the clean energy tax credits, we had at least seven Republicans raise their hand in the Senate to say that sledgehammer approach is not going to fly in our chamber and we have to change it.
		And we have to change it.
		Why?
		Because we need to make sure we're getting our energy online.
		We need to make sure we're protecting the billions of dollars in economic investment that have already been unleashed.
		We're protecting electricity bills from skyrocketing for our customers, our consumers, I mean, or constituents, the other C word.
		And then we're also making sure that we are remaining globally competitive.
		This is in our nation's best interest to keep these investments on the books, and we're going to make sure that we are watching and holding those senators accountable for delivering on those commitments.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		I suppose because they're also thinking statewide versus district-wide in the House of Representatives.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Who are the ones you're watching, Republican-wise, that could sway how this bill gets shaped, particularly when it comes to the energy provisions?
unidentified		Yeah, so Senator Lisa Murkowski and John Curtis led a letter in April with four senators really calling on a thoughtful approach to how we look at these clean energy tax credits and really putting in place a concern about leading to disruptions for our energy sources and weakening our position as a global energy leader.
		And that was very direct on the clean energy tax side of the ledger.
		They were joined last week by Shelly Moore Capodo of West Virginia and John Hoven and Mr. Kramer of North Dakota in saying what the House has done is far too extreme, and we're going to need to really take a much different approach here.
		So we're going to keep pushing there.
		This legislative fight is far from over.
		We're going to be keeping educating the public and also organizing on the ground and making sure that the House members who just voted against the constituents' interests to cut jobs in their districts and to skyrocket electricity prices by as much as $110 starting next year.
		We're going to make sure that those members of Congress who voted the wrong way on this hear from there.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		I think I read a press release to that effect that this is the first time you're going to actually score the bill, or at least what does that mean and what does it mean for those legislators?
unidentified		Yes, thank you for bringing that up.
		One of the major ways we hold elected officials accountable when I ran through the tools, major tools we use, is our national environmental scorecard.
		So we put that out every year.
		We have a great interactive website going back to 1970.
		It's in both English and Spanish on our website.
		And we send up scorecard letters during the legislative session saying key votes for us.
		What are we watching?
		In very rare instances, do we say we are definitely going to score that.
		And because of the sweeping nature of this legislation and the scope of the harm it would do, we took the unusual step of saying we will definitively score this on our national environmental scorecard for 2025.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		This is Sarah Chief for joining us of the League of Conservation Voters.
		Let's hear from Sean in Colorado, Republican line.
		Good morning, Sean.
unidentified		Good morning, Pedro.
		Yeah, again, the crisis is the plea of evil tyrants.
		This lady's a WES mouthpiece.
		But first of all, the wind.
		Have you ever stood under a wind tower and seen the slaughter of eagles and birds and raptors?
		The Chinese now have a kill switch for our solar panels so when they attack us, they can kill or power.
		Biden's electric buses, they were a complete failure.
		They caught on fire.
		The whole thing's a scam going back to Obama.
		So Lindra, it's just a money-making operation for Democrats.
		And this lady is the fourth branch of government that just talks crap.
		Goodbye, Peter.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Okay, she's our guest, so we're going to let her answer.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Go ahead.
unidentified		Yeah, well, I'm going to show respect to the caller.
		We're all allowed to have different opinions, but I think we should all look at the same facts.
		And the facts are here that the kind of transition we're unleashing is really important for economic drivers.
		It's really important for good manufacturing jobs.
		This president and Republicans talk a lot about onshore manufacturing jobs with the fights around the tariffs.
		We are actually seeing these clean energy investments onshore manufacturing and be a more comprehensive industrial policy than we've had in decades.
		So I am really excited about this transition.
		And I think it's unfortunate how much misinformation is out there, especially that that's being peddled by the fossil fuel industry.
		And so, you know, these solutions are popular.
		You pointed out the EV purchase rates this year.
		People want to be making their homes more energy efficient and saving dollars.
		And people also want investments in protections for their communities from the disastrous impacts we're seeing of climate change, whether that be fires, floods, more intense hurricanes.
		So this is a unifying issue, and I'm honored to be working on it.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		That said, the Energy Information Association tells us that in 2023, when it comes to U.S. energy sources, petroleum's still up there with 38%, natural gas 36%, renewable energy at 9%.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		When you see those ratios, what's the point of, how do you make the case that these efforts eventually are going to help us out when we're still so dependent on other sources of energy like petroleum and natural gas?
unidentified		Yeah, I mean, you know, we have a long way to go.
		And the investments we've put in place, I think, are helping unleash the kind of transition we need.
		But we have to go farther and faster.
		Climate scientists came out with a massive report in 2018 that said to meet our climate change goals, we have to invest in solutions that change our economy at a pace and scale we haven't done ever, certainly not since the Industrial Revolution.
		It takes every sector, right, to deal with climate change.
		We have to change our homes.
		We have to change how we get to work.
		We have to change how we build our buildings.
		This is a massive undertaking that is absolutely critical.
		And I think we need to change those pie wedges you just ran through, Pedro, for sure.
		But I think you have to look at what is happening now.
		And last year, again, over 90%, 9-0, 90% of the new energy that came online was from wind, solar, and battery.
		And so that's the cheapest form of energy to bring online.
		And so we need to invest in ways to ramp up that build out and make sure those electrons come online because we have increased energy demand for the first time in a long time.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		It was during the House Energy and Commerce markup of this bill that Representative Josh Breesian talked about wind credits, and particularly he had criticisms of that.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		I want to play you a portion of what he had to say about it and get your response to it.
unidentified		Sure.
unidentified		We've got a measure that says start date for ending is four years from now.
josh brecheen ▲ ● ▼		And we also have elements of this as it currently stands that says you can enter a project in 2031 as a wind production entity and still be receiving taxpayer subsidies by 2040 to be a person of truth.
unidentified		I know what's going to happen.
		I know there are going to be lobbyists that are going to descend on this building.
		We'll get the savings up front.
josh brecheen ▲ ● ▼		And years from now, when President Trump, who rightfully so is a champion for Indian, as he calls it, the green new scam, is no longer in office.
unidentified		This is designed.
		I'm sorry, but I think it's purposely designed.
		And I'm not challenging anybody's character.
		I am grateful to a speaker.
		I am grateful to a chairman of this committee.
		I am grateful to a leader that's engaging with us right now to try to figure this stuff out to get to the truth.
josh brecheen ▲ ● ▼		But I just want for my committee members to know my consternation because as Patrick Henry once said, I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided.
unidentified		It's the lamp of experience.
unidentified		I know no other way to foretell the future than by the past.
josh brecheen ▲ ● ▼		And until we get these timelines corrected to where it's a true repeal of wind and solar that is undermining our electric grid, 60% of all new generation in the last two years, according to the Energy Information Administration, is wind and solar.
josh brecheen ▲ ● ▼		And the super majority of components on solar, it's 61% of it's solar, and the super majority of those components are coming from China, undermining natural gas jobs all over this country.
unidentified		We have to fix this.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		That's one legislator's perspective.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		What's your response?
unidentified		Well, there's a lot in there to respond to, Pedro, so I'll try to take it piece by piece here.
		So since that clip was shared, or since that comment was shared, the tax credits actually have gotten worse, right?
		When they went to the floor, they had a last-minute even gutting further of the clean energy tax credits, and they totally upended it.
		And I think it's important to contrast how the fossil fuel industry tax credits are being treated and the clean energy tax credits, right?
		So they did not go after any of the tax credits for the fossil fuel industry.
		They didn't apply any of the same restrictions that they're trying to put on solar and winds for foreign energy of concern and making sure supply chains don't come from countries like China.
		They didn't apply any of that to fossil fuel-based energy sources.
		So I think it's a little bit inconsistent here what we're seeing from Mr. Bashin.
		But I also want to point out that if you take it at face value that he wants to see more energy online, why is he trying to ban the most affordable and fastest source of energy to come online?
		His number said we're bringing on solar and wind.
		Why is he trying to head that off?
		We're also trying to onshore the manufacturing of those components and we're seeing that.
		So why is he trying to head that off?
		I think you've got to look at the oil and gas influence in his district.
		And Oklahoma itself has a huge clean energy industry.
		And so he really is arguing against the best interests of his constituents, both from a jobs perspective and a cost perspective.
		And I just think you're seeing a really tunnel vision view of what our future should be.
		We can't drill our way out to lower energy prices.
		And we also can't be overly reliant on fossil fuels.
		The president himself has said energy dominance, well, that includes clean energy.
		And so he's actually arguing against, I think, what arguably would count as energy dominance.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Let's hear from Chuck.
		Chuck is in Georgia, Independent Line for our guests.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		The rare earth metals that are needed to create solar panels and all that, I've seen planes where they're being mined by little children in Africa and places like that.
		For pennies a day, they're paying them.
		And then China is building coal plants, I've heard two or three a week.
		And yet, you don't say anything about the pollution that China is creating to sell us these solar panels.
		And, you know, that pollution is worldwide.
		So, you know, how do you square those things?
		You know, that's what I'd like to know.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Chuck in Georgia.
		Hello.
		Thank you.
unidentified		Thank you so much, Chuck.
		I think when we look at the full life cycle of producing the inputs that we need for clean energy, there are costs, right?
		And I think Chuck points out a really important point.
		This is why we need responsible mining.
		We need to be doing it with environmental and labor protections.
		And we need to also be thinking about how do we set up systems, especially in the United States, we're thinking about recycling and reusing materials so that we're having less impact on the environment and less pollution that Chuck spoke to.
		So we think that is incredibly important part of getting the clean energy transition right is responsible mining and making sure that we're building in a thoughtful recycling from the front end.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Democrats Line from Florida.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Eileen, good morning.
unidentified		Hi.
		Good morning.
		I just wanted to, I don't have a question.
		I just wanted to support what you're doing because we own a farm in Iowa.
		We've owned it since 1898.
		And recently, well, not recently, about five or six years ago, we were approached by a solar company and we now have three wind turbines on our farm.
		And it's a little farm in Iowa near Denison.
		And now everybody in that area has wind turbines on their farm and it's producing energy for all the little cities and towns.
		And it's been fabulous.
		And I'm just calling this morning to support it.
		And I think that if California was a red state, I think that all these Republicans would probably be for it.
		I think it just boils down to politics, oil versus common sense.
		And that's just my opinion.
		Anyway, go keep fighting for solar energy and have a great day.
		Thank you.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Eileen, thank you.
unidentified		Thank you so much, Eileen.
		I think, first of all, congratulations on building your alternative energy on your farm.
		I think you raise a really important point.
		Farms are under a lot of stress and they operate with really small margins.
		And this voluntary ability to put another income source on your land in terms of wind and solar panels, and they actually can be done in a way that provides good cover cropping and you have better habitat.
		And so I think this is really a win-win solution that Eileen is bringing up.
		And it's really encouraging to hear somebody in farm country, right, in rural America, that has a lot at stake, both from a climate impacts perspective, but also being part of the solution.
		And that's part of a big wedge of what we were fighting for in the Inflation Reduction Act, making sure that every community across the country, urban, suburban, rural, has a part of this transition.
		And it makes both good sense from helping protect our climate and our kids' future, but also sense from your bottom line.
		And so, really happy Eileen shared that story, and I'd love to come see it sometime.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		You mentioned this before, but one of the aspects of the bill is that it would expedite federal approvals for oil and gas projects in exchange for fees.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Elaborate on that, please.
unidentified		Yeah, so I think fees is probably too diplomatic of a way to put it, Pedro.
		This is a pay-to-play scheme.
		So, if you look, for example, just at the LNG exports process right now, they have to go through a review of whether or not those export projects are in the national interest.
		What Republicans in this bill are proposing to do is to skirt that process, pay an upfront million-dollar fee that they then get approved for their exports without any review of whether or not that harms U.S. consumers or businesses, let alone the frontline communities being polluted and the workers threatened by explosions from these very dangerous supercooling facilities necessary for the LNG exports, or our climate goals.
		And so, if you're really confident that this project is in the public interest, why would you create a scheme where you can pay millions to get rid of environmental review and whether or not you're in the national interest?
		So, it really is, even for those that support a fossil fuel-first agenda, it really is concerning to put in place this kind of system for corruption.
		I mean, it is nothing we've done in our country and nothing that I've seen.
		This pay-to-pollute scheme, it is truly beyond the payment.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		I was going to ask you if this is a truly new kind of setup.
unidentified		Yeah, I mean, we also see that it is a really new setup.
		We also saw in the natural resources side of the bill a reverting to sweetheart deals for oil and gas companies, for mining companies, making them pay bottom market rate, reducing the royalty rates they have to pay to American taxpayers, and really leaving them footing both the bill financially as well as the impact on local communities.
		And so, again, it is just whose side are you on with this legislation?
		It is clear that these polluting interests are being put above people and communities.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Our guest service is the Government Affairs Vice President for the League of Conservation Voters.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Our next call for Sarah Chifo is from Oklahoma.
unidentified		This is John, Republican Line.
unidentified		Here, I'm called to ask you: how many solar pails and windmills would it take to run New York City for a year?
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		I'm sure there's a follow-up there, John.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		So, why don't you ask that as well?
unidentified		Nope, no follow-up.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Okay, thanks.
unidentified		Okay, very specific question from John that I do not have the exact answer to.
		I do know New York has put in place some of the strongest climate and clean energy policy in the country, including making polluters pay for the climate disasters that we're seeing.
		Because right now, taxpayers and families are on the hook.
		And so, there is, you know, we, between a combination of solar and wind, and battery, and also demand-side solutions, and making our energy grid a lot smarter, I'm confident that this transition to clean energy is really a solid one.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Maury in Michigan, Independent Line.
unidentified		Hi.
		Good morning.
		I've been listening to this lady for, I don't know, 15 minutes or less.
		The only thing she's doing is advocating for a parasite industry.
		Parasites are normally what government does best at.
		They add to the cost of government by supporting parasites.
		And that's what she's protecting.
		She's pretending or saying that this clean energy is saving us money.
		It is not.
		It's a government-paid waste.
		That's it.
		Bye.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Okay, Maury there in Michigan.
unidentified		Appreciate your opinion, Maury.
		I respectfully disagree, and I think it is telling that this bill does not touch the very massive giveaways that the fossil fuel industry has had for decades.
		And I think what we're doing here with clean energy is investing in American-made energy, investing in manufacturing, investing in good jobs.
		And don't take my word for it, the energy experts say if we repeal these tax incentives and these investments in this economic revitalization and this U.S. manufacturing, your bills will go up as much as $110 next year and rising over the decade.
		So that's the facts.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		The Energy Secretary says he plans to launch audits of money that was given out during the Biden administration for energy projects, and he makes this justification.
		He says, with this process, the Department will ensure we are doing our due diligence, utilizing taxpayer dollars to generate the largest possible benefit to the American people and safeguarding our national security.
		Any reputable business would have a process in place of evaluating spending and investments before money goes out the door, and the American people deserve no less from their federal government.
		What do you think of that type of oversight of money previously given out?
unidentified		I look forward to Secretary Wright applying that to fossil fuel projects.
		If he's serious, he should do it across the board.
		Again, we're seeing attempts to single out clean energy, to ban clean energy.
		And listen, the investments that were made through the Inflation Reduction Act went through very thorough review processes, whether that be the Loan Programs Office that the DOE oversees, or it be the greenhouse gas reduction fund that the EPA administers.
		All of these programs went through rigorous review processes, in some cases, very competitive processes with multiple legal and otherwise reviews.
		So, again, I think unfortunately we're seeing these endeavors advanced from a very cynical perspective of trying to head off a transition to protect the bottom line of the polluting industries that funded President Trump's campaign.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		On our Republican line, we hear from Janet.
		Janet joins us from Pennsylvania.
		Janet, good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I have a few things to discuss about this.
		I want to start off because I would end with this, but I might be cut off before then.
		You need, in order to have a prosperous country, you need a cheap source of energy.
		Oil is a cheap source of energy, which we have an abundance of.
		And her talking about electric bills going down during Biden, our electric bills went up 32%.
		And the other things are that California, which she obviously lives in, wanted to protect the darter snail, two-inch darter snail, which took water away from farmers and probably contributed to the fires in California.
		But they want to put the wind turbines in the ocean, and they've already killed 22 whales just trying.
		They haven't even put these projects up.
		It's just the sonar down there, it's disrupting the whales.
		And the other thing is, she said you could have a cheap source for your car because you could have it plugged into your house.
		Well, she didn't tell you that it's at least $2,500 to get a charge, a line into your house because if you only plug in to your house power, it's just a trickle, just like you would do with a battery.
		And you couldn't go to the nearest stop sign on what energy you're going to get in a day for that electric car, because I know I have a family member who has a car who has done it both ways.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Gotcha, Janet.
		Thank you.
		Let's start with the first point she made about this idea of you need a cheap source of energy.
unidentified		Yeah, I, you know, listen, we showed the pie chart.
		We still have a lot of oil use in this country.
		We're not talking about getting off of that oil tomorrow.
		But the fact of the matter is, oil is a global commodity that the price is not set.
		We can't drill our way to lower prices of oil.
		And it's a very volatile market, right?
		And so what we're talking about here is giving people options to no longer rely on volatile oil and gas.
		And I think there was unfortunately a lot of misinformation that the caller just put forward, whether that be from offshore wind.
		And listen, change is hard.
		I get it.
		But I think we need to make sure that we are dealing in facts and not misinformation.
		And it is unfortunate that I think so much of these issues has become partisan.
		And I will state, I will share that we have seen incredible progress at the local level in a much less partisan way.
		In deep-red states like Idaho, Nebraska, South Carolina, these transitions are being invested in transition to clean energy and 100% clean energy in those states and that being supported.
		So I just think the partisan temperature level here in D.C., where I do live, I was born in California, I don't still live there.
		But I do think it's important for us to really look at what's happening at the local level, which is far, it can be far less partisan than what we're seeing here in D.C.
		And it's just unfortunate that so much of that misinformation has taken hold.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Paul joins us from Indiana, Independent Line.
unidentified		Hi.
		Hi.
		Just two points.
		First one is: I think that we need to emphasize that this lady is talking about EVs and windmills and solar panels, but she's not talking about the national grid.
		And all you have to do is take a look at the recent events in Spain to see what happens if you don't have a grid that's designed around intermittent power sources.
		The second thing is we need to get over this idea that if the United States stopped emitting CO2, then all the hurricanes would stop and we wouldn't have any more floods and all that.
		If we stopped today and decided we would all freeze in the dark till we starved to death, the CO2 in the atmosphere would still be going up faster and faster because China and India are piling on the coal.
		And in the case of India, some of the dirtiest coal in the world.
		So, first of all, you have to limit the expectation of what our sacrifices mean.
		And first of all, you have to get the grid fixed.
		We have to get more transformers made.
		We need to get more transmission lines.
		And those are being opposed by Sierra Club, et cetera, in almost every case.
		Without that process being streamlined, we're just never going to get anywhere.
		Thanks very much.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Paul NMDN, he mentioned the electric grid.
		Representative Breachen mentioned the electric grid.
		Do you want to comment on that?
unidentified		Yeah, thank you so much for the question.
		I totally agree that our electricity grid is woefully inadequate for our needs today and our needs tomorrow.
		We should be making a far bigger investment in modernizing our grid, making it smarter, and also making it be able to interconnect so that we don't have these islands of energy in our country where they're less resilient because of their exposure to things like extreme weather and blackouts and brownouts.
		I do want to point out that if you are pushing for better interconnection of clean energy sources, a more stable grid, why would the Republicans include repealing funds to invest in transmission and these kind of investments?
		So, which they do in the energy and commerce section of this reconciliation bill.
		So, I would welcome a very thoughtful conversation around a massive investment in our grid, but it has to be done in a way that is thoughtful and rebuilds for the long haul.
		And we are on the ground organizing around clean energy in states like Nebraska, as I mentioned.
		So, we need to do this fast.
		We need to do it right, but we also need to involve communities in the projects in their backyards.
		You'll see time and again that when developers of projects engage communities on the ground and create community buy-in, the projects get built faster.
		No community wants to be told what's going to happen in their backyard.
		And so we are excited to be part of meeting our state-level clean energy commitments.
		In fact, 40% of the country now lives in a jurisdiction committed to 100 Cent Clean Energy.
		And that means we actually have to build these projects and do them right.
		And we're excited to be part of that build out.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		The website for the League of Conservation Voters is LCV.org.
		Sarah Chiefo, their government affairs vice president.
		Thanks for your time today.
unidentified		Thanks for having us on.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		We're going to talk about another aspect of the House pass bill in a little while from now looking at immigration and border security issues.
		Joining us for that discussion, Julie Kirshner of the Federation for American Immigration Reform.
		But first, open forum if you want to comment on matters of politics.
		202-748-8000 for Democrats, 202-748-8001 for Republicans.
		Independents 202-748-8002.
		Go ahead and call.
		We'll take those calls when Washington Journal continues.
unidentified		He was on C-SPAN 1.
		That's a big upgrade, right?
		But I've read about it in the history books.
		I've seen the C-SPAN footage.
steve scalise ▲ ● ▼		If it's a really good idea, present it in public view on C-SPAN.
rachel maddow ▲ ● ▼		Every single time I tuned in on TikTok or C-SPAN or YouTube or anything, there were tens, if not hundreds of thousands of people watching.
unidentified		I went home after the speech and I turned on C-SPAN.
unidentified		I was on C-SPAN just this week.
patty murray ▲ ● ▼		To the American people, now is the time to tune in to C-SPAN.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		They had something $2.50 a gallon.
unidentified		I saw television a little while ago in between my watching my great friends on C-SPAN.
		C-SPAN is televising this right now live.
		So we are not just speaking to Los Angeles, we are speaking to the country.
		He's being scared to death and saddling up anyway, as John Wayne said.
		Y'all made it.
		You climbed that mountain.
		Take the risk, push yourself onto a new challenge.
		Next week, watch commencement speeches from across the country featuring inspirational messages from political leaders, sports personalities, and celebrities.
		Hear remarks by Veterans Affairs Secretary Doug Collins at Piedmont University, Maryland Governor Wes Moore at Lincoln University, New Hampshire Governor Kelly Ayot at Nashua Community College, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz at the University of Minnesota Law School, singer and songwriter Usher at Emory University, rapper and record producer Snoop Dogg at the University of Southern California Marshall School of Business, and former basketball star Carmelo Anthony at Syracuse University.
		Watch 2025 commencement speeches next week, starting Tuesday at 8 p.m. Eastern on C-SPAN 2 or online at cspan.org.
		In a nation divided, a rare moment of unity, this fall, C-SPAN presents Ceasefire, where the shouting stops and the conversation begins in a town where partisan fighting prevails.
		One table, two leaders, one goal to find common ground.
		fall ceasefire on the network that doesn't take sides only on c-span washington journal continues This is Open Forum.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Again, call the lines if you want to participate.
		Pick the line that best represents you if you call it in the last 30 days.
		Hold off from doing so today so that others can get in.
		202748-8000 for Democrats.
		202-748-8001 for Republicans.
		Independents.
		202-748-8002.
		This coming across the Wall Street Journal's website that President Trump launched new broadsides in his tariff campaign, threatening to impose a 50% rate on the European Union within days, warning Apple that foreign-made iPhones could face significant levies.
		The fresh tariff threats are aimed at core pillars of global commerce, one of the world's most valuable companies and one of the U.S.'s biggest trading partners.
		The initial market response reflected revived fears that tariff policy could drive economic growth sharply lower.
		Stock futures, bank shares, and oil prices fell.
		Investors sought shelter in government bonds and haven currencies such as the Swiss franc and the Japanese yen weighing in on the dollar and this adding that gold leapt.
		Again, more there from the Wall Street Journal.
		If you want to comment on that or other matters of politics, you can do so in this open forum.
		Let's hear from Mike in South Dakota, Independent Line.
		Your first up.
		Go ahead.
unidentified		Yes, good morning.
		I want to make a couple comments on your last guest, Sarah.
		When she was speaking with the farmer in Iowa, she made it sound like this gal was going to get all of this clean energy on that farm.
		All that farmer did was take an annual lease from the wind company.
		All of that energy was either going to Illinois or Texas.
		She made it sound like this young farmer was going to collect all that energy and make his farm greener.
		That's not what happens.
		The other remark I want to make is that how much money is she getting from China?
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Alone, Mike, or you got something else?
unidentified		Nope.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Okay, thanks.
		Let's go to Al.
		Al in Texas, Republican line.
unidentified		Hi.
		Yes, he stole some of my thunder.
		Down here in Texas, like South Central Texas, they put up thousands of acres of solar panels.
		And for one, if it was so great, why did you have to have subsidies to make these things work?
		And also, the damage when we have hailstorms down here is unbelievable.
		There's a lot of farms, solar farms that were destroyed and are not up and running because they cannot get the parts to fix it.
		So it's not as great as they make it to be.
		Thank you.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Kenneth joins us on our line for Democrats.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		He's in New York.
unidentified		Hi.
		Hi, how are you doing?
		Yes, I'm calling concerning about, we're going to do a little bit of math.
		The bill that just passed, it was 215 to 214.
		The congressman, who the congressperson who just passed away about a week ago, that makes it 215.
		And the two seats that Greg Abbott won't let these people have a representative, that's 217.
		So this bill failed.
		So I wouldn't be so gloaty about Mike Johnson.
		He's smiling, he's cheesing up, he's straight up kiss ass.
		Right then he did.
		The bill lost.
		He should be happy that Greg Abbott didn't pick those two seats up.
		That's right there.
		That's 217 right there.
		With the congressperson, that bill would have been shot down.
		So I tell Mike Johnson, don't get too happy.
		And about the solar panels, I'm looking at my room.
		A lot of these houses are making building solar panels on their roof.
		If I had a house, I'll put a solar panel on my roof.
		You know, if it's saved anyway, and I got to deal with Kern Edison up here in New York, and they're always going up on their rates.
		Always.
		All right, that's my comment.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		That's Kenneth there with the passage of that bill in the House.
		The Washington Times takes a look at what happens in the Senate, particularly among those holdouts that you heard our previous guests talking about.
		Kerry Pickett from the Washington Times writes this morning that three Republicans can sink the measure if they vote against the measure, that Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkurski of Alaska have taken issue with the legislation's position on Medicaid.
		And Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri has said he would not support any bill that slashed that program.
		Other Republicans are looking to make changes in other places, including Senator Tom Tillis of North Carolina, who said he was seeking to make relief on business expensing permanent.
		And Senator Ted Cruz said he was pleased with the measure, specifically the provisions on school choice and Invest America, calling them both transformational.
		That's the Washington Times.
		You can read that.
		Let's go to Nevada, Republican line.
		This is Harold.
unidentified		Hello.
unidentified		Is this Harold?
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Yep, you're on.
unidentified		I'm on.
		We talk about birthrights.
		You're always talking about the baby, but you forget about the mother.
		The mother was not born in the United States, is not naturalized or under the jurisdiction.
		So she does not get all the benefits of a citizen.
		So when they talk about we the people, we're talking about only the citizens.
		So the Bill of Rights starts the thing that we're only talking about the Bill of Rights, which is the citizen.
		So a lot of people button and say we the people mean everything, but doesn't.
		Now, the due process, you cannot take away the citizenship of a baby.
		It belongs to the mother.
		There's no Bill of Rights for that.
		The mother's citizenship is hers, and the baby is hers.
		And so you can't say birthright.
		Is it her baby born in the United States?
		She was not legal to start with.
		So she does not get the benefit of the dues process or any other laws.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Okay, Harold in Nevada there.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Let's hear from Melissa in Ohio, Democrats line.
unidentified		Hi, thank you.
		I just wanted to comment on the last segment.
		I just found it a little disheartening that a lot of the callers, instead of addressing your last guest with any respect, just commented like lady and things of that nature, which I felt was using in a way to not show her any respect for the position that she holds and the knowledge she holds.
		So that was just something I just wanted to comment on.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Okay, Melissa there in Ohio, the Associated Press reporting that an exchange of prisoners between Russia and Ukraine from their three-year-old war was underway today.
		According to a senior Ukrainian official, it's one of the few signs of progress in international efforts to halt the fighting.
		The swap was not yet finished, according to the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly.
		Moscow did not immediately confirm the exchange was underway, the AP adding that the Ukraine and Russia agreed to the exchange of 1,000 prisoners from each side a week ago in Turkey and their first direct peace talk since the early weeks of Moscow's 2022 invasion of its neighbor.
		This is from Ken, Republican line.
		Ken, good morning.
		Go ahead.
unidentified		Hi, sir.
		Thank you for taking my call.
		I'm a 74-year-old retired aerospace engineer, and I also voted for Trump, but I don't agree with everything he's doing, especially when it comes to these tariffs.
		Now, I'm kind of divided on it because I understand in the long run, it will provide opportunities for jobs here in America.
		But the thing that they're not talking about is as a retired citizen and living on a minimum Social Security income, although I am pretty well off.
		I own my home.
		It produces a load that we normally, the retirees, would not experience economically because we have to pay more for products that would normally cost less, and we're not getting any allowance, especially if you don't file because you're below minimum.
		You end up being taxed when you weren't taxed before through the tariffs.
		And I think that's really unfair.
		And there should be some kind of amendment that allows retirees like a discount card where they are given a lesser price to offset the tariffs.
		And that was my main concern.
		No one's paying attention to that.
		In addition, I do believe Trump will pull us out of the great crevasse that we are economically in.
		But it's going to take at least his hold to do it.
		And that was my comment.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Gotcha.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		David joins us next in New Jersey Independent Line.
unidentified		Oh, good morning.
		Thank you.
		I just wanted to say in regard to Medicaid, one of the worst ideas ever was to put Medicaid into private insurance companies.
		And in terms of waste, fraud, and abuse, the biggest waste fraud and abuse in Medicaid ever committed was by HIP Health Plan of New Jersey, which was so greedy and took in so many Medicaid patients when they were allowed to.
		And they couldn't manage them.
		They couldn't control them from visiting the ERs.
		And I worked there.
		We were told to lie to doctors.
		We were called into a meeting and told to lie to doctors when we were going bankrupt.
		We lied to the New Jersey Department of Insurance and Banking, who did not do due diligence.
		And there are multi-millions of dollars still owed to doctors and hospitals all over New Jersey.
		And I think New Jersey should still go after the former CEO, COO, and everybody director level up for their personal assets.
		This was a real crime.
		And HIP Health Plan of New Jersey ripped off people everywhere here.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
unidentified		Thank you.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		David in New Jersey, the head of health and human services is Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
		He putting out a report from his agency yesterday, so-called Maha Report, the acronym Make American Health, acronym, Make America Healthy Again.
		It slams processed foods, pesticides, and vaccines as harmful to kids, according to an analysis by USA Today.
		That report, by the way, and its findings in a press conference that took place yesterday at the White House, you can see the whole thing on C-SPAN.
		But here's a portion of the remarks made by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. about the report.
robert f kennedy-jr ▲ ● ▼		This report is a call to action for common sense.
		We've relied too much on conflicted research, ignored common sense, or what some would call mother's intuition.
		It's common sense that ultra-processed, nutrient-poor food contributes to chronic disease.
		It's common sense that excessive screen time and isolation lead to anxiety and depression, especially in children.
		It's common sense that exercise and healthy food should come before prescriptions and surgery.
		It's common sense that not all calories are equal in nutritional value.
		It's common sense that over-medicating kids is dangerous.
		It's common sense that we can celebrate the innovations of modern life while also demanding fearless inquiry into ameliorating the negative effects of medication, agriculture, and environmental practices.
		It's common sense that research funded by corporations deserves more scrutiny than independent studies.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Again, that full report available at our website.
		You can also go to the app too if you want to see more of it.
		This is the time of year where college graduations take place.
		Many members of Congress and political dignitaries speaking at these.
		This is a shot of what's going to happen in a little while at the U.S. Naval Academy.
		Their graduation ceremony is today.
		Their speaker, Vice President JD Vance, will give the keynote address at that event at 10 o'clock this morning.
		And if you want to see what the Vice President has for the graduates, you can watch that 10 o'clock at C-SPAN, C-SPAN now, and that's the app.
		And by the way, and the .org at c-span.org.
		Concerning the president, he is set to give a commencement at West Point.
		We'll have live coverage of that from New York.
		It's this Saturday, starting at 10 o'clock.
		Again, our main channel, the app, the .org available if you want to see the president's comments to West Point graduates.
		Jim is next.
		Jim is in Maryland, Democrats line.
		Hi.
unidentified		Hi, are we still on open forum?
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Yes, sir.
unidentified		Okay.
		The only thing I wanted to mention was every time I seen you have guests on there that the Republicans want to seem to slam these individuals and insult them.
		And I don't go along with that.
		I'm a Democrat that votes on both sides.
		And when I hear stuff like the windmills in the ocean killing whales, I ask myself, are the whales flying?
		Are they running into the rigs?
		And if they are running into the rigs, what about your oil rigs out in the Gulf?
		How much marine animals are they killing?
		I think it's time for all of us to settle down and talk intelligently to one another and not insult each other.
		And that's all I have to say.
		Thank you.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Tony up next.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		And Tony's in Virginia, Independent Line.
unidentified		Yes, I'd like to touch on tariffs.
		I work in the heavy manufacturing field myself.
		And in this part of the country I'm at, every major manufacturer has problems with manpower.
		And, you know, the tariff thing sounds wonderful.
		You know, let's build everything in the United States.
		That sounds great.
		You know, I wish we could.
		But the fact of the matter is the manpower issue is one of the main problems that nobody's talking about.
		For some reason, people have decided not to work.
		And we need really, that doesn't speak well for the future of our country because we really need to find out what's going on because all these jobs we have around here, major manufacturers, are good paying jobs, great benefits, and they cannot fill the positions.
		And that's the real problem we need to start looking at in this country is how are all these people not working?
		And, you know, like I said, the tariff thing sounds wonderful, but it's not going to work until we figure this thing out.
		And that's just what I wanted to say.
		Thank you.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		That's Tony there in Virginia internationally.
		The Wall Street Journal reporting on its website saying U.S. and Iran officials began a fifth round of nuclear negotiations today with Tehran warning that talks could collapse if the two sides can't overcome a pivotal clash over the shape of a deal.
		Washington insists that Tehran can't continue to enrich uranium under a deal, warning that Iran's ability to do so opens the way for the country to ultimately attain a nuclear weapon, which President Trump has vowed to prevent.
		Iranian officials presented a united front this week, insisting that Tehran won't bend its long-standing red line, that it retained domestic enrichment.
		Iran spent days wavering over whether to attend the talks in Rome at all.
		Eileen from Pennsylvania, Republican line, hi.
unidentified		Hi, Pedro.
		I was listening to the earlier open forum on the discussion of political violence and the murder of these two young people in Washington, D.C.
		And I was really struck by the difference between how people respond to political violence on the right and the left.
		And it's really shocking to me when there's political violence that would be committed by someone that's on the right.
		It's immediately immediately say it doesn't represent us and we don't want that.
		But these people on the left that were calling in and talking about Gaza and talking about blaming Donald Trump for political hatred, they are a problem and they're a big problem in our country and they need to wake up and look at themselves.
		The CEO, the healthcare CEO that they made a hero, that was a bad thing to do.
		And now we have people that are looking for hero status and arrogant enough to believe that their political beliefs can actually take another person's life.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		That's Eileen in Pennsylvania.
		We got several, we keep going for it with the open forum.
		If you want to participate, 202-748-8000 for Democrats, 202-748-8001 for Republicans.
		Independents, 202748-8002.
		The New York Times reporting that President Trump gathered Thursday evening at his Virginia Golf Club with the highest paying customers of his personal cryptocurrency, promising that he would promote the crypto industry from the White House as protesters outside condemned the event as a historic corruption of the presidency.
		The gala dinner was held at the Trump National Golf Club in suburban Washington, where Mr. Trump flew from the White House on a military helicopter, turned into an extraordinary spectacle as hundreds of guests arrived, having flown from the United States overseas.
		At the club's entrance, the guests were greeted by dozens of protesters chanting shame, shame, shame.
		There's a link there on the website of the New York Times if you want to click that and see what that looked like.
		The New York Times covered saying it was a spectacle that could only have happened in the era of Donald J. Trump.
		Several of the dinner guests in interviews with the New York Times said they attended the event with the explicit intent of influencing Mr. Trump and U.S. financial regulations.
		That's the story.
		There's the link to the website if you want to read more.
		We will hear from Leonard in Virginia, Democrats line.
		Hello.
unidentified		Good morning, Pedro.
		Thank you for taking my call.
		I worked at Van River Mills for 17 years.
		And as far as Van River Meals coming back to Virginia or wherever, as far as his turret, I don't know if it's terrible right here.
		It's terrible right here.
		We're getting the stuff from China.
		I mean, the guy that came on and asked the lady how much money was the excuse, no mind got a little mixed up here.
		China paying her.
		That's what I'm trying to say.
		Okay, so I guarantee you, some of the clothes that he wears, Walmart, you go to everything in Walmart.
		It's come from China.
		That's about everything in Walmart.
		Okay, end of the day here, as far as jobs are concerned.
		You right here on the street, you look at these people out here on the street.
		There's Mexicans out here.
		You don't see anybody out here on the street here except Mexicans out here holding signs on.
		And then you see people working on roofs, on houses in Mexico.
		Okay, so as far as this is crazy, because people over here don't want to work.
		People don't want to work.
		So as far as jobs coming back to America, it's not going to work like they think it's going to work.
		It's going to take years, years.
		Trump will be gone, dead and gone, before he can get stuff back over here in America, like he's talking about, like make Build in America or whatnot.
		That's not going to happen overnight.
		So people can just forget that right there and just go on back to where we were going, getting stuff from China like we were doing in other countries.
		That's what we need to do.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
		Gotcha, gotcha.
		Kevin in Connecticut up next, Republican line.
unidentified		Hi.
unidentified		Hello.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		You're on.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Go ahead.
unidentified		Hi.
		I just have one question I haven't been able to get answered.
		I'm trying to figure out what these people are planning to do with all the batteries from the electric vehicles when they are dead.
		How are we going to dispose of them?
		Thank you.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Kerry is in New Hampshire, Independent Line.
unidentified		Hi.
		I was just wanting to comment on the economy before Trump put in and started talking about the tariffs.
		He tanked the economy or the stock market, which is really affecting our economy.
		And he did it on purpose for no reason at all.
		What he should have done, you know, he might have some legitimate reasons for looking at the tariffs that affect all of us all around the world, our allies.
		And I really feel like he should have gone about it in a different way with our allies.
		And he's just, he's hurting everybody.
		And his tactics are ridiculous for an American president.
		That's all I have to say.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		The back and forth between the president and Harvard University continues as of this morning with Harvard filing a lawsuit this morning against the Trump administration, challenging the abrupt federal revocation of the school's ability to enroll international students.
		It was on Thursday that the Department of Homeland Security revoked Harvard University's certification to admit foreign students, escalating the president's pitched battle with the Ivy League School.
		Their revocation was the latest in a series of government actions to retaliate against Harvard University.
		President Alan Garber said in a letter to the campus community Friday morning, quote, for our refusal to surrender our academic independence and to submit to the federal government's illegal assertion of control over our curriculum, our faculty, and our student body.
		Carol, let's hear from her in Missouri, Democrats line.
unidentified		Yes, I'm calling about these tariffs also.
		And the one you just announced where the stock market dropped and the dollar is dropping.
		Don't you think some of the incentive for that with him and his family is to sell his Bitcoin?
		I mean, come on, you know, safe investment, put it in my Bitcoin, then this stuff won't drop, you know.
		It's just, I'm so sad.
		Okay, thank you.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Owl is in Georgia, Republican line.
unidentified		Hi.
		Yes, I'm telling you, the Democratic Party, the media, and these colleges is 82% liberal.
		They're destroying this country.
		And I don't, and I don't see how you can have a straight face to be a Democrat anymore.
		I used to be one, but it ain't the same Democrat used to be.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		One more call, and this will be from Vicki in North Carolina.
		Democrats line.
unidentified		I don't know.
		I just don't understand why everyone can't see the projection that our country is going in.
		It was not set up to be this hateful and to go against parties.
		And what Trump is doing is wrong.
		I do not dislike him, but I do not like his policies.
		He's getting rich off of us, the American people who he claimed to make America great again.
		But everything he's doing, if you look at it, he is profiting from it.
		And you're going to hold a dinner for your crypto coins while you're the president of the United States, which means you're using your position to advance yourself, not the country.
		And we need help.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		That's Vicki in North Carolina.
		Last call on this open forum.
		To those of you who participated this morning, thanks for doing so.
		The House passing their budget bill with the president's priorities in it.
		And one of those priorities looks at immigration and border security issues.
		Here to join us next to talk about it and talk about the larger issues there.
		Julie Kirschner of the Federation for American Immigration Reform.
		And we'll have that conversation.
		Washington Journal continues.
brian lamb ▲ ● ▼		On November 17, 2002, 23 years ago, Rich Atkinson appeared on the Book Notes television program to discuss his book, Army at Dawn.
		This was the first of three books Atkinson called the Liberation Trilogy, a full history of the European theater of World War II, which is a total of 2,512 pages, including notes and indexes.
		Beginning in 2019, Rick Atkinson switched trilogies.
		This time, it's the history of the American Revolution.
		In this episode of Book Notes Plus, we are repeating the 2002 interview, which has substantial background on Rick Atkinson's life and writing experience.
		Next week's episode, we will talk with him about his second book on the revolution, The Fate of the Day.
unidentified		Rick Atkinson with his book, An Army at Dawn, on this episode of Book Notes Plus with our host, Brian Lamb.
		BookNotes Plus is available on the C-SPAN Now free mobile app or wherever you get your podcasts.
		Book TV, every Sunday on C-SPAN 2, features leading authors discussing their latest nonfiction books.
		Here's a look at what's coming up this weekend.
		At 2:45 p.m. Eastern, Book TV presents coverage of the 2025 San Antonio Book Festival.
		You'll hear author discussions on the Uvalde school shooting, Texas history, the impact of Jose Cuervo Tequila on America-Mexico relations, and more.
		And at 8 p.m. Eastern, attorney Christine Menitis, author of Why the World Doesn't Make Sense, argues that Americans are unknowingly giving up their freedom and sovereignty to the government, private institutions, and global organizations.
		And then at 9 p.m., Jonathan Cohen with the American Academy of Arts and Sciences looks at the downside of legalized sports gambling, dominated today by companies like FanDuel and DraftKings, with his book, Losing Big.
		Watch Book TV every Sunday on C-SPAN 2 and find a full schedule on your program guide or watch online anytime at booktv.org.
		Washington Journal continues.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Joining us now is Julie Kirshner with the Federation for American Immigration Reform.
		She serves as their executive director in one of the many roles that she had at the Department of Homeland Security.
		She was the former senior advisor in the Office of Immigration Detention Ombudsman in the Trump administration from 2017 to 2019.
		Julie Kirshner, thanks for joining us this morning.
unidentified		My pleasure to be here.
unidentified		Thank you for having me.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Can we talk about your organization first?
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		What positions or generally, how do you approach the positions of immigration and border security?
unidentified		Well, FAIR has been around for 45 years.
		We've been in the business of immigration probably longer than almost any other organization in Washington.
		And, you know, we believe that our immigration laws should serve the American interests first and foremost.
		So we look at what the greater interests of the country are, what the interests of Americans are, what helps us in terms of our overall economic needs, our workforce needs, what it takes to avoid overcrowding, you know, things of that sort.
		And we believe strongly in the rule of law, having our immigration laws enforced.
		And so these are the principles, you know, we seek to share with our members on Capitol Hill and with all Americans.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		I suspect that from that position and from your organization, you were keeping a keen eye on what was going on in the House, particularly when it comes to the budget bill, particularly when it comes to efforts on immigration and border security.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Overall, what did you think of the final package on the House side?
unidentified		Well, I thought we made excellent progress.
		We made excellent progress.
		The bill contains, it adds a lot of money for border security, but not just border security, interior immigration enforcement and things, you know, more ICE agents, but also immigration judges.
		Because when you have a system as complex as ours, and, you know, love it or hate it, a lot of it is a byproduct of the post-9-11 world and all the agencies were divided up.
		And all of the aspects of the system have to work.
		So whether it's Border Patrol right at the border or ICE in the interior in the country or the courts, you know, all of these components of the system have to be operating well.
		You know, you can get a bottleneck.
		And I'm sure your viewers have heard a lot about the bottleneck in the courts.
		And it can bring the entire system to a halt.
		So it's really important.
		And this bill addressed a lot.
		And so we're excited.
		There's still some work to be done.
		We're already working with our friends over in the Senate to see if we can improve the bill a little bit more.
		But, you know, it's a fantastic start, and we're excited to move forward.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		One of those segments, those pieces that you talk about, represented the bill 46 billion plus when it comes to border barriers itself.
		I assume that means walls and the like.
		How do they fit into the overall effort?
unidentified		Well, it's one, you know, it's a big tool, but it's one tool in the toolbox.
		You know, the FAIR was one of the first organizations.
		You know, we helped draft the Secure Border Act back in 2006.
		And it's something we've supported since the 90s.
		Again, FAIR has been around a long time.
		We have supported, there was border wall built.
		It started in California in the early 1990s.
		And FAIR was supportive of it back then.
		But what the wall is meant to do is to slow down the traffic.
		Obviously, nothing will prevent all illegal alien traffic going across the border, but it slows down traffic.
		It slows down smugglers enough to give the Border Patrol time to do their job.
		You can imagine, you know, if anyone has gone down to the border, the landscape is, well, it's breathtaking, but it's so barren.
		I mean, you go miles and miles and miles without seeing a building, without seeing any signs of life.
		And the Border Patrol, you know, no human can cover that much territory.
		So the wall is really essential in slowing down the traffic.
		You need to install technology within the border wall system so that there's lighting, their cameras, their sensors, so that agents in remote stations can say, oh, something's been tripped.
		We're going to go out and take a little look.
		And we might focus our patrol in a certain area.
		So this is really an important thing.
		And like I said, people think this is all new.
		We've been building border wall for years, for decades, and we did it under Clinton.
		We certainly did it under Bush and Obama and the first Trump administration.
		Even Biden built a little bit of the border wall.
		So this is a continuation of that process.
		And we're thrilled to see the money finally allocated to actually, by my count, they have enough money for over 700 miles of border wall, and that's fantastic.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		And side by side, I think you kind of hinted at it, the hiring of new agents, $4 billion set aside for that.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		How does that complement what's currently on the border when it comes to customs and border protection?
unidentified		Well, it's a good increase.
		It allows for several thousand Border Patrol agents.
		And certainly, you know, if they're roughly at 19,000 or 20,000, I haven't looked at the exact number lately.
		We certainly saw a lot of attrition over the last four years, so it could be a little lower.
		But it's certainly a very substantial number of the total.
		And it's really important.
		I was reading the other day that there are more people applying to be Border Patrol agents than in decades.
		So that's exciting news.
		We need all the help we can get.
		And what greater job is there than protecting your country?
		So it's very important.
		But like I said, it's not just Border Patrol agents.
		They've added money here for, they're called OFO officers.
		So Office of Field Operation Officers, those are the men and women who staff the ports of entry.
		And those are very important too.
		They help facilitate all the legal traffic that comes through, all the legal immigration that comes through.
		But also when asylum seekers come and present themselves at ports of entry, you know, they manage that illegal flow.
		So it's really important to have resources there as well.
		And in addition to that, you know, the money allocates, listen to me, the bill allocates money for thousands of ICE agents.
		And those are the ones who enforce the laws in the interior of the country.
		So like I said earlier, this bill does a really good job of addressing all the components that make up our very complex immigration system.
		So, you know, we're thrilled.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Julie Kirshner with us until 10 o'clock.
		And if you want to ask her questions about the House bill when it comes to immigration enforcement, border security, 202748-8000 for Democrats, 202748-8001 for Republicans, Independents, 202748-8002.
		And Texas questions or comments at 202-748-8003.
		Julie Kirshner, you had said at the beginning you were interested in working with the Senate to make other additions to the bill.
		What would those be?
unidentified		Well, we want to see, we're concerned about benefits going to illegal immigrants.
		It's, you know, our opinion is, and I know not everyone agrees, but our opinion is that we should not be using taxpayer money to give benefits to illegal aliens.
		Now, some of the part of the problem is our federal tax laws weren't written with immigration in mind or at least mass illegal immigration, the kind that we've seen lately.
		And there are illegal aliens in many cases can receive the earned income tax credit, the child tax credit, and other tax benefits.
		And we think those should be reserved for lawful aliens, aliens with legal status.
		So those are some of the loopholes that we hope to close.
		There's some others that get kind of in the weeds.
		But I think for most of your viewers, you know, this is, you know, money is tight and everyone is struggling to get by.
		And it is unfair for illegal immigrants to profit off of a system.
		When they illegally came into the country, many, if not most, are working illegally.
		Some have work permits.
		The ones who came in over the last four years probably have work permits.
		But, you know, they shouldn't be allowed to abuse the system and abuse the generosity of the American people.
		So those are the kind of things we want to tighten up.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		How much do you think the Senate Republicans receive that idea or at least be open to making those changes?
unidentified		Well, we certainly, as we certainly have support already, and we have support in great places.
		You run into some complications with the reconciliation rules, and obviously the Senate needs to follow those line for line.
		But we're hopeful.
		It's going to be a tough fight just because the bill is so big and there's so much other stuff.
		I mean, non-immigration stuff.
		And everyone has something they love in the bill and something they hate in the bill.
		And so I think it's going to be difficult just to make sure we keep everyone, everyone who already supports the bill on board.
		And then we need to win over a few more people.
		So we're optimistic, but you never take anything for granted.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Julie Kirschner of Federation for American Immigration Reform, our guest.
		Edward is in New Jersey, Independent Line.
		You're first up for our guest.
		Good morning, Edward.
unidentified		Thank you.
		So the GOP was all up in arms about the IRS agents, but yet they've got no care about this idea about tens of thousands of this domestic Gestapo asking everybody for papers, led by a POTUS that's so unhinged you can't even take a question from a reporter without giving dehumanizing rhetoric and calling them silly and stupid.
		Now, I can wholly see where once they're done with this immigration thing, who are they going to come after?
		They're going to come after all of Americans with this Gestapo-like force.
		And it's plain as day.
		So thank you.
		That's Edward in New Jersey.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Julie Kershaw, any response to that?
unidentified		Well, I would object to calling our law enforcement agents Gestapo.
		I understand their differences of opinion, of course, but we certainly believe in the rule of law.
		And I hope most Americans believe in the rule of law.
		And that means you have to follow our immigration laws, too.
		So I'll leave it at that.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Republican Line from Joe in Missouri.
unidentified		Hi.
unidentified		Yeah, is this for Joe?
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Yes, you're on.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Go ahead.
unidentified		Okay, Julie, I seem to really like your organization.
		I'm glad that there's more money going towards stopping all this illegal immigration.
		I'm glad of that.
		So is it true that that bill that was out last year from the senator from Oklahoma was going to let 5,000 a day come into the country?
		That would not be a good bill.
		No, it would not.
		Thank you for your question, Joe.
		It allowed a So let me see if I can get a simple answer.
		It allowed a certain number of aliens come in before the restrictions went into effect.
		So yes, in that sense, it could have conceivably allowed thousands of illegal aliens to come into the country before all the restrictions went into effect.
		And you know, that bill, we objected to it for a variety of reasons, but one of the biggest reasons we objected to the bill was that it required the release of asylum seekers.
		And by law right now, even asylum seekers, when they cross the southern border illegally, they claim asylum, but they are supposed to be detained during their proceedings.
		And once you start releasing asylum seekers, you know, so many economic migrants want to come because they want to work.
		And once they get released, and when you apply for asylum, you can get your work permit and you release them, everyone would claim asylum.
		There would be a massive rush for the border.
		So in many ways, we thought that bill just incentivized more illegal immigration.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Ms. Kersher, you talked about those asylum seekers, and one of the sections of the bill talks about proposed fees that would be put in place.
		One of them would directly apply to asylum seekers.
		For the first time, we charge $1,000 to apply for the protection.
		There's other fees too.
		Can you talk about the fee structure?
		Is this a new thing that's being proposed?
unidentified		Well, we've had fees for USCIS forever, and it's based on a long-standing principle that the foreign nationals, and legal and illegal, who avail themselves of our immigration system should support that system.
		And what's frustrating for people is that you have a lot of asylum seekers coming to the southern border.
		They'll pay $10,000 or $15,000 to the cartels, and then they apply for asylum for free.
		But, you know, aside from that, the system, you know, it doesn't run on fumes.
		The amount of asylum officers it takes to process all of these things, the fingerprinting, the background checks, everything that goes on, it all requires money.
		The judges, I mean, it's amazing, but USCIS needs to be funded.
		So the bill contains fees across the board.
		USCIS has been running into funding shortfalls for years now.
		And so what you're seeing now, I think, is more a cumulative effect.
		Some of there probably should have been more fee increases over the years.
		And certainly with inflation, the way it's been going, you know, this, I think what we're seeing is sort of a catch-up effect.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		We've been showing a list of some of those fees that I mentioned.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Does it also, I guess, put skin in the game for those who want to come into this country?
unidentified		Yeah, absolutely.
		And again, with asylum and with some other applications for benefits, you will get people who fill out, and we've seen it a lot, you get people who fill out asylum forms halfway, and they don't put any of the details of their claim, right?
		They'll say, oh, well, we'll provide those later.
		Just a skeleton form.
		They turn it in, and once they turn it in, then, you know, in a few months later, they can get their work permit, which is what they really want.
		And so, again, you're right.
		It makes them think twice about do I really want to file this application because I have to, you know, put some money in.
		So it's also a fraud deterrent.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		From Pete.
		Pete's in Georgia, Democrats line for our guest.
		Pete, good morning.
		Go ahead.
unidentified		Hey, y'all.
		Like, how y'all doing this morning?
		I just want to say that no matter what question concerning the budget, and this is about the budget that they just passed, no matter what questions you ask these MAGA supporters, Trump supporters, and their only answer is going to be coming back with immigration.
		Okay.
		And like you asked her about, you know, these Medicaid and Medicare cuts, she immediately ran to illegal aliens.
		Okay.
		Okay.
		See, these people in Mississippi, these people in Alabama, Tennessee, and those rural countries, they are really going to get a spash with this budget.
		But their answer to them is, you know, they're not going to explain it in their districts.
		Of course, these Republicans are not going to go and hold town halls, you know, in front of their consumers.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		So, Pete, Pete, you're on with our guests.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		So, since you want to ask, do you want to ask her a question about anything related to immigration or border security?
unidentified		Okay, okay, no, no.
patrice oneal ▲ ● ▼		This is okay, but it has to do with the budget.
patrice oneal ▲ ● ▼		Okay, explain the cuts in Medicare and Medicaid, which has to do with the budget, which has a direct effect on what's going down at the border.
unidentified		Can you answer that?
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Okay, that's Pete's question, Julie Kirchner.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Is there a direct correlation there between Medicaid?
unidentified		As far as Medicaid and cuts and immigration as he proposes, well, certainly we think that American taxpayers shouldn't be subsidizing illegal immigration.
		I mean, that's just the general principle that we believe in, and not everyone maybe believes that.
		But we don't think the taxpayers should be funding it.
		So, to the extent that Medicaid covers illegal aliens, you know, we want to eliminate that.
		You know, we are not talking about there are other laws out there in TALA, which provides emergency care for everyone who comes into an emergency room regarding regardless of immigration status.
		We're not talking about that.
		We are talking about the long-standing benefits that should be reserved for legal immigrants.
		So, you know, that's really basically our principle: that it's unfair for people to come into the country who have never, you know, paid a dime into the system to suddenly be taking money out of it at our taxpayers' expense.
		So, and we take no position.
		FAIR is strictly limited to immigration.
		We take no position on any of the other financial moves in the reconciliation bill.
		So, I can leave it.
		I think I'll leave it at that.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		And I'll ask you about the reconciliation bill because $45 billion of what's been proposed would be used for purposes of detention.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Can you elaborate on what that $45 billion will do over and above what's currently being done?
unidentified		Well, it's a wonderful addition.
		We've been asking for it for asking for more detention beds.
		That money will fund about 100,000 detention beds.
		Right now, roughly speaking, we have about 41,000, give or take a few hundred, 41,000 detention beds.
		So it's a really significant increase, and we need it because the first step to deporting illegal migrants is detaining them, right?
		If you detain them, most people are not going to voluntarily get on a plane by themselves and leave.
		So you need to detain them, do the proper paperwork, make sure they have documents to go back to their home countries, and then you deport them.
		So detention is an extremely important part of this system, this multifaceted system that I was talking about.
		So we're very excited to see all that money going in there.
		100,000 beds is great progress.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		I imagine given your experience at DHS, what do you think is the perception of detention that people may generally think?
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		And what's the reality of what happens?
unidentified		Oh, that's an interesting question.
		I think that the perception is that when you enter a detention center, it's basically like going into a black hole.
		And it really isn't.
		The detention centers are based on standards that are set.
		There are multiple agencies.
		Trust me, I led one of them.
		There are multiple agencies that audit those facilities, that make unannounced visits, that check to see that everything is operating in accordance with the performance standards.
		And, you know, they may not be glamorous.
		Some of the ones for family facilities, which some of them were closed, but they'll have little playgrounds for children.
		They'll have toys and things.
		Some of them have libraries.
		You'll be given access to law books.
		And even in some places, you'll be given access to iPads or other things that allow you to go online, converse with your attorney, things of that sort.
		But the truth is, the thing about detention is that the system works ideally when people stay in detention for only short periods of time.
		So this goes back to what I was saying, is that all the components within our immigration system have to work seamlessly, smoothly, and be well funded.
		Because if the system is well funded, people will only be in detention for a short period of time.
		And then it's not that, you know, it doesn't cause the same kind of problems as if you're there for, you know, months on end.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Let's hear from Mary.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Mary's in Florida, Republican line for our guests.
unidentified		Go ahead.
		Hi.
		Yes.
		Thank you.
		I just wanted to make the comment that, I mean, it was mentioned that the bill is a very big bill.
		And, you know, I'm assuming, maybe incorrectly, that it all has to do with, you know, the immigration issue.
		But if the bills could be made simplified so that a lot more bills could be passed and we wouldn't have all this fighting and this is for you and this is for you.
		Basically, that's my point.
		I really would love to see the bills that are put forth are for the American people, for our country, for everyone.
		So why is it always like a war between the Republicans and the Democrats?
		It's like the Republicans have no heart for immigrants.
		Well, that's baloney.
		Of course we do.
		We want people to come into our country and especially legally.
		That would be wonderful.
		But anyway, to simplify the bills is, I think, would be helpful to everyone in the House and the Senate and all American people so we know what's going on.
		Thank you.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Mary in Florida.
unidentified		I totally agree.
		It's frustrating that we're in this position with Congress that we can't get simpler bills passed.
		I am optimistic.
		However, we saw in January that the Lake and Riley bill passed and signed into law.
		It was the first bill that President Trump signed in his second term.
		So it can happen when there's motivation.
		Part of the problem is, and our viewer just pointed, put her finger on it, was that there's a lot of horse trading that goes on in Congress.
		And the bills sometimes are big on purpose.
		Sometimes it's just because everyone knows a bill is going to pass.
		And so they want to blob on their pet project to it.
		And that's one reason these bills get so big.
		But there's also a lot of horse trading that goes on.
		Members will say, you know, I'll vote for your pet project if you vote for mine, whether they really support these things or not.
		There's a lot of that that goes on.
		I've seen over the years, I've had members promise to do one thing and then do the opposite, and it can get very, very frustrating.
		So I think it would, I agree, it would be better for all Americans if the bills were simpler, were straightforward, and people could understand what's in there.
		There'd be better transparency.
		Unfortunately, that's not quite the political world we live in, but we are always promoting the best policies, we think, for Americans.
		And, you know, our job too at FAIR, and this is one of the reasons we exist, is to make sure that we are here to tell you what is going on regarding immigration.
		So we can be your eyes and ears about all the immigration provisions in the bill and tell you about them.
		And you may love them all, you may hate them all, but you will get the facts from us.
		So we're here to help.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		There was a hearing this week featuring the Homeland Security Secretary, Christy Noam, in the Senate.
		And it was during that hearing that Senator Rand Paul talked about immigration but talked about price tags overall, particularly when it comes to specific aspects.
		I want to play you a little bit of what he had to say, get your response to it.
rand paul ▲ ● ▼		I think one of the problems I've always had with the discussion of the border is that people who often are conservative and talk about fiscal conservatism, once we start talking about the border, then it's all out the window.
rand paul ▲ ● ▼		So the estimates on the wall, I think, are important.
unidentified		I don't think it's a very conservative estimate.
rand paul ▲ ● ▼		It's more like $30 million a mile as opposed to CBP says six, you said 12 for current.
unidentified		It's somewhere in there.
rand paul ▲ ● ▼		But I also would say that you're controlling 95% of the border without a wall right now.
		So that's an argument that maybe you don't need a wall, you need willpower.
		And I give President Trump great compliments for what he's done and what you have done.
unidentified		I mean, 95% of the control.
		No new bill, no new money.
		I'm not saying no new money is needed.
		I think you need more border patrol and you're going to need more money for that.
		But I think it should be within reason.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		So, Ms. Kirchner, you talked about the wall specifically, but this idea of just the overall spending towards immigration.
unidentified		Well, ideally, you'd have the system working so well that you could ease up on some spending after you get the infrastructure in place.
		You need to maintain that, of course.
		And ideally, if the system works well and our laws are consistently enforced, you would be able to ease up on some of that spending over time.
		That's not where we are right now.
		I know estimates on the wall have varied widely.
		I do think it's needed.
		We can, you know, it's hard when you're on the outside to know exactly what the penny amount is.
		But this initial investment is needed.
		But I don't think we will need to keep this kind of investment at the same level for, you know, in perpetuity.
		We have to enforce our laws.
		And if we do that, I think we'll see overall costs come down at the border.
		And certainly we should be taking advantage of technologies now.
		I mean, they can really help reduce the need for manpower.
		So there's some investment that's going on that's new, but you may be able to save some money elsewhere.
		So, you know, there's a balance here, I think, to be struck.
		But I certainly think this money was long overdue.
		And it's going to put us on the right track.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		A conversation with Julie Kirshner of the Federation for American Immigration Reform.
		She's their executive director.
		Let's hear from Nate in Virginia, Independent Line.
unidentified		Hey, Julie, how are you doing this morning?
		Appreciate your Telling us as far as what's in the bill in relations to Border Patrol and immigration enforcement, I think it definitely makes sense that we should increase funding for Border Patrol so that they can do what they need to do and help with the enforcement.
		What I'm curious about is does the bill does it allocate any funding to hire more, to get more judges, to get more immigration lawyers in order to help just the backlog of paperwork.
		The way I see it, part of the problem with our immigration system is the fact that to do it legally, it takes a very long time.
		Paperwork stays in there for like 10 years, which is why you have people who just can't afford to wait starting to do a legal thing or do a risky thing crossing the border.
		So my question is: does Congress, specifically the GOP, did they allocate additional funding to kind of address the issues of the backlog of immigration's paperwork?
		And then overall, as far as your organizations, I understand your positions.
		It's the fact that we shouldn't spend money on illegal immigrants, which I can kind of see the point there.
		But it seems to me like the broader question is, again, obviously we have issues with illegal immigrations in our country.
		But from what I've seen in the past 10 years, past 20 years, any time when it comes up when there's a pathway, when there's a bipartisan agreement in Congress to reform immigrations, nothing ever comes out of it, you know, because some wants because the GOP always tries to try to kill it.
		So what is your organization as far as what do you think is the path forward for improving immigrations besides just okay, Nate, thank you very much.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Let's start with the first part.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		And you hinted at this at the beginning, the legal framework needed.
unidentified		Yeah, so the bill does provide $1.25 billion to the immigration courts for immigration judges, support staff, expanding courtrooms and infrastructure.
		So that's fabulous.
		And that will help reduce the backlog.
		You know, the impact won't be immediate.
		It takes a while to hire and train, obviously, immigration judges, although they're usually pretty seasoned attorneys.
		So it won't be instantaneous, but wow, what a great improvement.
		And like I said, it'll put us on the right track.
		So over time, we will see a reduction in this backlog.
		So that's excellent.
		And as for the second question, it's an excellent question.
		I think, so I actually, I worked at FAIR back in 2006 and 2007, certainly in 2013 when there were all, I guess, comprehensive immigration reform packages moving through Congress.
		I worked on all of them.
		We opposed all of them.
		And part of the problem is that all of these bills contained mass amnesty programs, legalization programs, whichever word you want to use, that's fine.
		And our position is that we should never be rewarding illegal immigration.
		And while some people might say, well, you have to, there's no way to get them out.
		You know, we actually went down that road in 1986.
		Again, FAIR has been around for 45 years.
		So we did this in 1986.
		We supported the amnesty in 1986.
		And what happened?
		In the 90s, you saw one of the largest waves, at least at that time, of illegal immigration in history.
		And the amnesty program that went through, they expected maybe 1 million illegal immigrants to apply.
		3 million got amnesty under that program.
		The fraud was rampant.
		And you know what?
		didn't solve the problem.
		So there have been a variety of reasons the bills failed.
		Actually, interestingly, back in 2006 and 2007, a lot of the reason that those bills failed was because the massive expansion of guest worker programs.
		And there were a lot of Democrats, I worked with them, Democrats who said this isn't fair to American workers.
		You know, we should not be importing huge numbers of foreign labor when we have Americans who are here and willing to do the jobs, foreign workers and illegal labor, they depress wages.
		They take, in some cases, they outright displace American workers.
		But when they're not displacing workers, they're bringing down wages.
		And there should not be a race to the bottom.
		Americans should have a livable wage where they get, where work is respected and they're paid decently and they can live a life, send their kids to school, and have a good middle-class lifestyle.
		So there are a whole variety of reasons that these bills have failed.
		I personally think what is needed in order before we get to any point where we're seeing any sort of compromise bill, we have to have the system running well.
		I think after what we've seen in the last four years, I think there are very few people who are going to say we have the system under control and we can now look at what we do with the millions of illegal immigrants who are in this country.
		So we need to get the system under control and it's not.
		And the last four years proved that.
		And we also need to tighten up the law so we don't repeat what happened over the last four years.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		From New York, let's hear from Mary, Republican line.
unidentified		Yes, good morning.
unidentified		Can you hear me?
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Yep, you're on.
unidentified		Go ahead.
		I don't have a question, but I want to support that this is a necessary bill.
		My parents and I were immigrants and we could not get into this country unless we were sponsored.
		So we had to go to Canada first.
		And my mother had approved that she spent or saved $500 in order to get down to New York.
		And America is a wonderful country.
		I was raised as a Democrat.
		You know, it provides opportunity for everyone, but this needs to be addressed and pulled back.
		And I am glad to see that it's starting to be.
		It's not going to be perfect, but it has to start somewhere.
		It's gotten way out of control.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		That's Mary in New York.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Ms. Kirschner, if you had a response.
unidentified		I think I agree completely.
		It's the system's out of control.
		And what is amazing to me, actually, having worked in immigration now for decades, is that we actually need to close loopholes and laws that we never thought would be used.
		I mean, who ever thought that the government would give out work permits to illegal aliens in the millions?
		I went back through actually all the data, the spreadsheets in the government, and in 2024 alone, they gave out over 2.1 million work permits to aliens with no legal status.
		And, you know, if you do that roughly over four years, you know, 8 million, you can be conservative and say, okay, maybe 7 million.
		But that's, no one ever anticipated that our statutes would be used to give these work permits out like candy.
		And so now we have to go back into the laws.
		Now that we see that, yes, indeed, we have politicians, leaders who are willing to abuse the laws that way, we need to go back and fix them.
		This bill starts doing that.
		It provides money to the agencies.
		It closes some loopholes in the benefits.
		We need to do more, but it is a great start.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		When it comes to efforts by Mexico and the government of Mexico, what are they doing to stem immigration into the United States, illegal immigration into the United States?
unidentified		That's an excellent question.
		Claudia Scheinbaum, who's the president of Mexico, has vowed to continue the policies of her predecessor.
		And we'll see.
		They started, they start, what's interesting, especially in 2000, in 2024, the election year, some thought it was politically motivated to help President Biden win re-election, but I'll let people decide that for themselves.
		The president of Mexico started removing people from Mexico faster and actually it was called sort of this recycling where they would take migrants who'd gone to the north of Mexico and then transport them down to the south.
		So then they would have to go through the route all over again.
		And it was meant to wear out migrants, to discourage them.
		They offered to send them home.
		There were a variety of programs that were put into place.
		And we believe that a lot of those are being continued.
		But, you know, we don't always have great insight into what's going on in Mexico.
		A lot of things go on behind the scenes there that aren't made public.
		So we're hopeful they'll continue.
		But there's certainly a lot of diplomatic work to be done there and certainly in Central America as well.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		We have this from a viewer off of X, Ms. Kershaw, saying, why they ask you, but I think meant the government overall are not going after employers who hire illegal immigrants.
unidentified		Excellent question.
		And we need to be doing that.
		We're seeing a little bit of it now.
		And I think it takes some time for the administration.
		You know, I worked all four years in the first Trump administration.
		And when you have a new president come, and I don't care whether it's Democrat or Republican, when you have a new president comes in, it takes a while for all the policies to shift.
		You know, for all the appropriate legal memos to go out, all the guidance to change.
		You might rescind or rewrite regulations, things of that sort.
		And it just takes time to get the system moving again once there's been a real change in policy.
		We've seen some work site enforcement operations.
		I hope there are a lot more because, again, most of the migrants that cross our southern border want to work.
		They just want employment.
		And it's unfair to Americans.
		So we need to choke that off by penalizing employers.
		It's already illegal to hire illegal migrants, illegal aliens to work.
		That's already in the law.
		That was part of the compromise of 1986.
		We need to enforce that because if we don't force that, enforce it, the law means nothing.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		The House coming in for a pro forma session in just a few minutes.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Let's hear from Valdez in Illinois, Independent Line.
unidentified		Good morning, William Diaz.
		I worked in law enforcement, grew up in California.
		I did 23 years there.
		I was one of the few Mexicans that they had hired at that time in the early 80s.
		I dealt directly with the Border Patrol.
		It's a miserable job, by the way.
		The conditions were terrible.
		And it's classic American to go and complain about a problem that we've created.
		And Ms. Kirshner, you are from the Midwest, and so you don't have an idea what it was like in California.
		We are the biggest agriculture producers in the country.
		And what they're talking about, guest worker, was called a Bracero program.
		And what they didn't do is that they didn't monitor the people coming in.
		And what they did is allowed them to get outside of the fields where the conditions were miserable.
		You wouldn't put animals in the housing that the big branchers house them.
		And I can tell you now that it's a little late.
		You don't see Mexicans in the field anymore.
		You see Central Americans.
		Mexicans are now prosperous like we were.
		And unfortunately, you're going to try to fix a problem that never should have happened in the first place.
		So I would suggest that you just sit back and relax because it's going to happen whether you like it or not.
		So I hope you can keep trying if you like, but it's a little late.
		So thank you for that.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		One person's assessment, Ms. Kirchhner.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		What do you think?
unidentified		Well, I appreciate everyone's opinion.
		And it is true that Mexicans who have been here longer, as soon as there is another opportunity to move up the economic ladder, everyone, well, I don't care where you're from, everyone takes it.
		And so there is, sadly, this shifting that goes on.
		But FAIR has been in this fight for 45 years.
		And even if we don't make the system perfect, we are determined to make it better.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		George from Maryland joining us now on our line for Democrats, for Julie Kirschner.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		George, hello.
unidentified		How are you doing?
		Hi, George.
		Okay, here's the situation.
		Our book on the books says through Medicare and Medicaid that they do not give anything to illegal immigrants.
		That's what they say, begin with.
		So you made a statement that illegal immigrants are getting Medicare and Medicaid, which evidently goes against what the Medicare and Medicaid says is the facts.
		Then on top of that, people just touched on it a second ago that the employers hiring people.
		If they're hiring people, they're illegal.
		They should be fine or imprisoned or whatever the case is.
		And that needs to be enforced.
		But on top of that, there's such thing as the Republicans claim that the evangelicals, of course, who are supporting Trump are going against their religion.
		So that makes them hypocritical.
		There's such thing as empathy and the teachings of Christ that says that you teach, you treat all people with empathy.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Okay, George, thanks.
		Ms. Kershaw, what about this idea of empathy versus enforcement?
		I suppose that's a tension that has always existed in the line of work you've chosen.
unidentified		I actually, I'm not sure that I see it the same way, and I respect George's opinion.
		And I know that certainly I have family members who feel the same way as George does.
		So I really truly do respect that.
		We look at it differently.
		We see that providing an immigration system that is enforced, and George talked about employers.
		I totally agree with him on that.
		That is enforced, that is measured, that is uniformly applied across the board, actually helps all Americans.
		It helps lift everyone up.
		So you can look at immigration.
		There is a certain amount of empathy that's involved, and we have humanitarian programs, certainly that FAIR has always supported.
		The problem with those programs, though, is they're being drowned out by economic migrants.
		And that is really the sad part about this: people are abusing the asylum system because it is the quickest way, in many cases, maybe not all, it is the quickest way to getting your work permit.
		And so, all the people who truly need help are getting drowned out.
		Just imagine if you are truly persecuted and you have to wait in line for 10 years because 99% of the other asylum applicants are economic migrants and they've just taken a number ahead of you.
		So, there are a variety of ways to look at that.
		And, you know, I just, you know, we just see it differently.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Julie Kirschner is with the Federation for American Immigration Reform.
		She serves as their executive director.
		If you want to see more of their work, their website is fairus.org.
		Julie Kirschner, thanks for giving us time on the program today.
unidentified		Thank you, Pedro.
unidentified		I really appreciate it.
pedro echevarria ▲ ● ▼		Don't forget some of the things to watch out for today on our networks is J.D. Vanch is about at this hour, except to give a commencement address.
		You can see his thoughts.
		There's the preparations going on.
		But now, as I told you, we've got to take you to the House of Representatives for a pro forma session.
		The House will be in order.
unidentified		The chair lays before the House a communication from the Speaker.
susan cole ▲ ● ▼		The Speaker's Rooms, Washington, D.C., May 23rd, 2025.
		I hereby appoint the Honorable Adrian Smith to act as Speaker Pro Tempore on this day.
		Signed, Mike Johnson, Speaker of the House of Representatives.
unidentified		The prayer will be offered by Chaplain Kimmen.
		Would you pray with me?
		Holy God, as we find ourselves looking forward to parades and picnics and pool openings this Memorial Day weekend, remind us that above all else, we are obliged to give the heroes of our country the honor of remembrance and sober reflection for their ultimate sacrifices.
		We lift our hearts in gratitude for those who chose to give their lives in the fight for right and freedom, for the integrity of this country, and for the preservation of its noble ideals.
		May we never take for granted the countless sacrifices that were made to defend our liberties and uphold our democracy.
		These noble men and women have stood firm.
		In the face of war's alarms and exposed to the assaults of the adversary, they would not be moved.

▲