CSPAN - Washington Journal 07/09/2025

All Episodes

Previous Next

July 9, 2025 07:00-10:00 - CSPAN

02:59:52

Washington Journal 07/09/2025

Participants

Main

mimi geerges

cspan 30:49

Appearances

benjamin netanyahu

isr 01:29

brooke leslie rollins

02:02

chuck schumer

sen/d 01:46

donald j trump

admin 03:50

greg abbot

01:17

john thune

sen/r 01:12

kathy castor

rep/d 01:00

kristi noem

admin 02:10

Clips

barack obama

d 00:04

bill clinton

d 00:02

george h w bush

r 00:02

george w bush

r 00:04

jimmy carter

d 00:03

larry nichols

00:04

patty murray

sen/d 00:04

rachel maddow

msnow 00:07

ronald reagan

r 00:01

sherry peel jackson

00:05

steve pieczenik

00:20

willie nelson

00:07

Callers

donna in west virginia

callers 00:06

doug in kansas

callers 00:08

russell in wyoming

callers 00:06

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Show episode speakers

Speaker	Time	Text
unidentified		Giving you a front row seat to democracy.
		Coming up on C-SPAN's Washington Journal, we'll take your calls and comments live.
		Then Richard Spinrad, former administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, discusses the Texas floods and disaster preparedness.
		And the Tax Foundation's Daniel Bunn talks about provisions in the One Big Beautiful Bill.
		WASHINGTON JOURNAL STARTS NOW. GOOD MORNING.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		It's Wednesday, July 9th.
		The 90-day pause on President Trump's reciprocal tariffs were set to expire today.
		But on Monday, the White House said that the deadline has been extended to August 1st.
		The president sent letters to several countries outlining a new tariff rate, some as high as 40%, that would go into effect on that day if a deal is not reached.
		This first half hour, we get your thoughts on President Trump's trade and tariff policies.
		Do you support or oppose them?
		You can call, text, or post to social media.
		Democrats call us on 202-748-8000.
		Republicans 202-748-8001.
		And Independents 202-748-8002.
		You can send a text to 202-748-8003.
		Include your first name in your city-state.
		And you can post your comments on social media, facebook.com/slash C-SPAN and X at C-SPANWJ.
		Welcome to today's Washington Journal.
		This is the front page of the Wall Street Journal.
		It says, President plans copper tariffs, sends metal to a record high.
		It says that the president said on Tuesday yesterday he plans to impose a 50% tariff on all copper imported into the U.S., sending prices of the metal to an all-time high while threatening a levy of as much as 200% on pharmaceutical imports.
		That story is also on the front page of the Washington Times.
		Trump orders 50% copper tariff to kick in by August.
		Signals gearing up for levies on drug makers on The Washington Times.
		Well, the President did have a cabinet meeting yesterday and before that meeting, he talked about his renewed deadline on tariffs.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		August 1st, they pay.
		And everybody pays.
		Everybody has to pay.
		And the incentive is that they have the right to deal in the United States.
		If they don't want to, they don't have to pay and they don't have to deal here.
		But if they want to buy and make a lot of money and sell in the United States, they have to do that.
		You know, if you go back and look at some of the good presidents, our country was the wealthiest, proportionately the wealthiest, from 1870 to 1913.
		It was an all-tariff country.
		We didn't have income tax.
		That came in in 1913.
		We had tariffs.
		And we had so much money we didn't know what to do with it.
		We had, I mean, we had a couple of presidents that were very, very strong.
		McKinley, I guess more than anybody, he was the tariff king, but he was very, very strong.
		So to say it, he made a fortune for this country, became very rich.
		And then Teddy Roosevelt went out and vice president and he spent the money.
		And they said Roosevelt was a great president.
		And let's say he was a great president, but the money was paid by McKinley with tariffs.
		Tariffs are charged by other countries at levels that are ridiculous.
		And you know, I call those other countries.
		And every one of them is willing to give us everything now, by the way, just so you know.
		Sir, we'll charge you no tariffs, nothing.
		We'll give you everything.
		We'll give you access to our markets.
		We'll give you everything.
		Is that a correct statement, Scott?
		If they're Howard, would you say that's a correct statement?
		Exactly correct.
		It's like they just don't because they're very spoiled because for years they ripped us off and we didn't have a president that understood it or Secretary of Treasury or Secretary of a lot of different secretaries are involved.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And here is the headline of the Washington Post that says, Japan and South Korea scramble as Trump threatens to raise tariffs.
		It says that the U.S.'s closest security allies in Asia, along with several Southeast Asian countries, have been given another three weeks to negotiate trade deals or face higher tariffs.
		And we are taking your calls on that topic for this first half hour on whether or not you support or oppose the president's trade and tariff policies.
		We'll hear from Rob in New York, New York, Democrat.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Hi, good morning.
		Thank you for C-SPAN.
		Love the job that you do.
		You know, this president punishes our friends around the world and rewards our enemies.
		And I'm not sure that I don't believe he actually knows what he's doing.
		I think he's just making up a lot of stuff, perhaps from that may have been relevant 40 years ago with Pat Choate and Agents of Influence and what went on back then and all that idea and thinking.
		But now I think it's obsolete thinking.
		I don't think there's any strategy.
		I don't think there's any plan.
		And as long as these big mood swings bring attention to the Oval Office and the Occupier, it fits into the idea of the Trump show, where it's the reality show.
		It's the apprentice all over again on a global scale for the world to see, for the world to be up in arms about this decision, that decision.
		Look at Japan and Korea, our allies now.
		I don't think there's any plan.
		I don't think there's any knowledge.
		I don't think there's any real strategy behind it.
		And I think it just, as long as it brings attention, it serves its purpose.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Rob, let's talk to Ben next in Belfonte, Pennsylvania, Republican.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Ben.
unidentified		Hi, good morning.
		Thank you so much for taking my call.
		So I 100% support the tariffs.
		With the tariffs, I'm not an economist or anything like that.
		I won't pretend to be on this call.
		But generally speaking, I see a lot of positive potential outcomes for the tariffs.
		I mean, you can see some negatives, and I know that's discussed on cable news a lot.
		I mean, I watch everything from Fox to MSNBC, everything in between.
		So I get a full perspective of the comments that are being made.
		But my general thought is it'd be one thing if other countries weren't levying tariffs on us, but that's simply not the case.
		The previous caller alluded to the fact that this is like a reality show or something, probably going back to an insult towards Trump that he used to host the apprentice, right?
		But I actually see that as a positive as well.
		I mean, at least these countries are being put on notice, you know.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		And this is William in Baltimore, Maryland, Republican.
		Hello, William.
unidentified		Hello, and I absolutely support the president's plan on tariffs.
		I think he's being fair.
		And the American public has been deluded, probably with all of the CIA because they worked for it for years.
		But I absolutely support it.
		And I think if the whole country really knew the truth, they'd all be behind it, like most of them are.
		So, yes, I'm hard 100%.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, and let's hear more from the president on the nature of the trade deals that he's looking for from other countries.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		But the deals are mostly my deal to them.
		We're picking a number that's low.
		We don't want to hurt them and fair.
		We're picking a number that's lower than, in most cases, lower than what they charged us.
		But it's amazing when you've paid all this money for years and they get one president that's a little bit different and a little tougher on this subject, and they're willing to drop everything they've been charging us for years and years.
		I mean, we have countries going, we will have no, you don't have to pay any tariff to come in and do business.
		They're giving us total access to their countries.
		They gave us no access to the country.
		They say, well, you cannot go into our country.
		Okay, then now it's, we will give you total access and you don't have to pay any tariffs.
		But please don't charge us tariffs.
		And we don't like that deal.
		So the letters I send out are, we have made some deals.
		We can make a lot more deals.
		It's just too time-consuming.
		It just makes it more complicated.
		And we can do things over the years too.
unidentified		You know, we're going to, we're not going to, we're not hard line.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		But it's about time the United States of America started collecting money from countries that were ripping us off, ripping us off and laughing behind our back at how stupid we were.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And this is a post on X by Representative Don Beyer.
		He is a Democrat of Virginia.
		He says, spamming our allies with ransom demands that will again create uncertainty.
		Clearly, nobody, including Trump's top advisors or even the wildly incoherent president himself, knows what Trump will do at this point.
		But if he imposes these tariffs, Americans will pay the cost.
		Also, this is Representative Greg Stanton who says, enough of this chaos.
		It's time for Congress to reclaim its constitutional authority over tariffs.
		This is Congresswoman Susie Lee, who says, blanket tariffs, especially on our allies, will skyrocket the cost of goods and working families will pay the price.
		Wonder what you think.
		And this is Aaron, South Hill, Virginia, Democrat.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Will someone please explain to the American people who pays the tariff taxes?
		That comes on the American consumer.
		Other countries don't pay the tariffs.
		It falls on the consumer.
		Please have someone explain what it means when they impose tariffs on products coming into America.
		The Americans pay that tariffs, not the people that send in products here.
		It's us receiving and buying from them that pays those taxes.
		It's going to be imposed on us.
		Can you have someone please explain what tariffs is all about?
		Other countries doesn't pay that.
		We pay those taxes.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Aaron, and here's Joyce, a Republican in Marion, Virginia.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		What I have to say today about the tariffs is that We've been paying them terrorists for years and years and years, and they are now refusing to give us, even though money has the price of money has dwindled, they refuse to give us more money.
		As for me, I say there's more than one way around this cat.
		I think that if they refuse to pay the terrorists, that we can take away the mercy ships and all the things that we do overseas for people like that.
		We do a lot of intervention for these people.
		We have a lot of food products that go to them.
		We also have a lot of medicines.
		A lot of our food, yes, does come from across the seas.
		But back in the 70s, we had the top machines going in the United States having to keep ourselves up.
		We were more productive then.
		Now they want us to rely on them.
		No, they don't want to give us anything in return.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Joyce.
		Here's Guy, Instagram, Oklahoma, Independent Line.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Hey, good morning, Mimi.
		Yeah, I completely support Trump's tariffs.
		Going back to Liberation Day, I believe he called it.
		Before Liberation Day, we were losing $5 billion a day in a trade deficit nationwide.
		And just since then, in a short time, now we're recuperating $15 billion a day.
		So it's gone from a $5 billion a day negative to a $15 billion a day positive.
		I can't wait till all these negotiations are settled and we have a fair trade practice around the world that he's going to impose.
		It's going to be a great thing for not only America, but for the world.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		And here's Sal in Sewell, New Jersey, Republican.
		Good morning, Sal.
unidentified		How are you doing, Amy?
		Good morning.
		I mean, the president went to the best business school in the country, Wharton School of Business in Pennsylvania.
		How the heck do they think the Democrat people, these politicians, think he don't know what he's doing?
		Already he's making accomplishments and getting the economy rolling, making these countries pay, like he says, to begin ripping us off.
		How can anybody in America agree with letting the countries rip you off?
		If they have businesses and people are coming and taking their products and they just let it go for a year and year, you kidding me?
		They won't be complaining and screaming bloody murder.
		You're nuts.
		This country's got to get paid for people that owe us the money that fair trade.
		And they want to talk, the Democrats want to talk nonsense.
		They let all these millions of people in this country.
		What do they think that's going to have a positive effect?
		We're so far behind in debt with all these people here draining the economy in our country.
		And now they want to talk about the President Trump.
		He's trying to get things on an equal playing field, trying to make us, you know, everybody be prosperity, everybody do good in our country.
		So I support everything President Trump does.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And here's Stan in Donellian, Florida, Independent Line.
unidentified		Yeah, that's why he went bankrupt six times.
		That's paid by the American taxpayer.
		He doesn't know what he's doing.
		And as far as the school of Wharton or the school, his teacher said he was one of the dumbest dudes that they ever had.
		That's paid by the person.
		That's why Walmart has to raise prices now.
		He doesn't know what he's doing.
		One day it's this, one day it's that.
		That's why nobody wants to invest there.
		Canada doesn't even want to come to this country because he keeps saying that a 51 state.
		He knows what he's doing.
		I guarantee there's no money in FEMA because he swiped it all out.
		$160 million for the border wall.
		God, he added $8 trillion to the debt last time, and this time he's going to add four.
		The guy doesn't know what he's doing.
		He changes his mind like the weather.
		I guarantee he's not going to help Texas because he said he doesn't believe in climate change.
		He said he doesn't believe in FEMA.
		He wants to take all the money out of FEMA.
		This is Project 25.
		Take all the money out of public education.
		That's what he's doing.
		He's got the worst cabinet ever seen.
		McMahon's running public education.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So, but back to tariffs, Stan.
		Do you think that any of, I mean, would you support any of the president's tariff policies?
		What do you think of that specifically?
unidentified		Sometimes tariffs are good.
		10% here, 10% here.
		Well, you go 40% and 50%.
		Every Peaceon says the worst thing, you put 56% tarp on something that comes in.
		If it's $100, it's 50% more.
		And he doesn't pay that.
		The consumer doesn't take that out.
		They add it to the product.
		He doesn't know what he's doing.
		As far as Wharton School, this teacher was on many times saying he's one of the dumbest students ever had.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Stan.
		We got that point.
		And this is Axios with this article that says, Trump says August 1 tariff deadline is firm.
		Hours after saying it wasn't, it says that President Trump on Tuesday insisted the August 1 tariff deadline set this week in letters to U.S. trading partners is firm and won't change.
		It is the opposite of what he said Monday night.
		Quote, there has, this is what President Trump wrote on Truth Social: quote, there has been no change to the state and there will be no change.
		In other words, all money will be due and payable starting August 1.
		No extensions will be granted.
		It says that Trump was asked at the White House Monday night if the deadline was absolute.
		He told reporters it was, quote, firm, but not 100% firm, depending on the kinds of offers countries made.
		This is John in Newark, New Jersey.
		Democrat, good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Yes, I don't support this terrorist because a lot of these Republicans who is calling you and say they support Trump terrorists.
		They don't know.
		They don't do no business.
		They don't do nothing.
		They just sit at home.
		They are holy just like I am.
		And they did not make no money.
		Trump has been ripping off this country even before he has been in politics.
		He has been ripping off this America.
		He has been ripping off the USA, all these money he holds in back toxicity.
		You don't even talk about that.
		Let him come out and tell him that he's going to pay his taxes that he owes to government.
		He's not talking about that.
		He's talking about terrorists and he's making the poor people suffer.
		And I don't agree with him because, you know, it is bad.
		He's all he's doing making money.
		With all these laws and things that he's making, he's making money to Trump and his family.
		And that's my comment.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And here's Kevin, Republican in Marshall, Texas.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Kevin.
unidentified		Good morning, Amy.
		First, I got to say, I support free trade.
		I mean, I do.
		I always have.
		I think that's what's best.
		But I'm not sure that's what we've been having.
		I mean, different countries, they do mistreat the U.S. in certain ways.
willie nelson ▲ ● ▼		So I just got kind of a sit back and watch kind of attitude and see how it plays out.
unidentified		But I do want to say about the cost, who pays for these tariffs.
		You know, all you're hearing is all consumers pay for it.
		But really, it depends on the supply and the demand of the certain product.
		I mean, yeah, that cost has got to come from somewhere.
		That can be higher prices, or it could be less employees, less investment, less profit.
		And really, the supply and demand of it's going to kind of balance it out.
		When they talk about corporate taxes, same thing, same thing.
		They were going to raise corporate taxes.
		I didn't hear them crying about the consumers are going to pay for it.
		But really, someone's got to pay for it.
		And it really depends on the product itself.
		So I guess I'm saying just calm down, America.
		Sooner or later, hopefully, the dust will settle.
		The markets will adjust, and we'll be back to growth again.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So, Kevin, what do you think of the copper tariffs that were announced, the 50% copper tariffs?
unidentified		Are they going in yet?
		Are they happening right now?
		Because, see, that's what's affecting the whole thing right now.
		It's just the uncertainty.
		You know, Trump will say, yeah, we're going to do this.
		But then he backs down.
		You know, so he'll call it negotiating.
larry nichols ▲ ● ▼		But, you know, it's the uncertainty of it.
unidentified		When they go into effect, maybe we'll see.
		We'll see what happens to it.
		That's my stand.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Kevin.
		So this is the Wall Street Journal's editorial page.
		And they say this: the tariff damage in profile for the energy sector.
		It says that President Trump keeps firing his tariff gun, and Tuesday's salvo was 50% on copper imports.
		This is a tax on the industries that use copper, such as housing and especially energy.
		Copper prices hit an all-time high.
		The copper levy highlights how tariffs harm some industries more than others, and energy will be one of the hardest hit.
		It says costs for oil and gas producers, utilities, and power plants have already surged amid overall inflation.
		Quote, offshore projects had seen 20 to 40 percent cost increases due to market price hikes from 2020 to the fourth quarter of 24.
		According to a report adding, the industry was looking directly at additional 10 to 20 percent increases.
		Now they face the added wallop of tariffs.
		So that's in the Wall Street Journal editorial page if you'd like to read the rest of that.
		Here's Mick in Demote, Indiana, Independent Line.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I was I wanted to make the point that these tariffs are nothing more than national sales tax.
		They've been imposed to basically collect the money to pay for a lot of the things that were in this bill that was just passed by the House and the Senate.
		And these 10, 20% tariffs on countries are going to do nothing to bring back jobs or build factories in the United States.
		They're only going to be used to collect a sales tax On the people who are already taxed the most of us, the poor people, the heaviest, they'll have the most to carry.
		There's if you want to bring back jobs, this isn't the way to do it.
		You can't squeeze the working class people to death, try and then, you know, tell them it's good for you.
		But it seems like a lot of people believe it.
		But these tariffs are not going to bring back jobs, and they're not going to go away.
		Once the government gets used to collecting this money, they're going to continue to collect it.
		And it's just going to be a big tax bonus for them.
		That's all I have to say.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Mick.
		And in a recent interview, House Commerce Committee Member Kathy Caster, she's a Democrat from Florida.
		She told Bloomberg her concerns about the president's renewed efforts on trade.
		Take a look.
kathy castor ▲ ● ▼		Tariffs can play a very important role when they're targeted and strategic.
		The problem is that the president is all over the map.
		This is chaotic.
		Businesses do not know how to grapple with them and respond.
		And these recent tariffs announced today against our allies, Japan and South Korea and other Asian nations, you know, we were trying to build a wall to counter China and everything, all of their malign activities when it comes to trade.
		So I really, this is a head scratcher why you build up these tensions with our best trading partners and allies and business owners here across the state of Florida are wondering that as well.
		Why are they facing higher costs at a time when now with the big ugly bill, you're adding almost $4 trillion to the national debt that's also sure to fuel inflation.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And John in Ventura, California sent us a text.
		He said, tariffs only affect certain goods and services, not all items.
		Overall, inflation is falling because of President Trump's economic policies.
		On a positive note, tariffs will bring back taxpaying corporations.
		That's by text.
		You can reach us that way if you'd like.
		And Abigail is on our line for independence in Nashville, Tennessee.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		The rule has always been: follow the money.
		Trump and most of the people sitting in that cabinet room table are just cleaning up, making tons of money.
		If you look at with all this tariff nonsense, he's been doing the fluctuation of the stock market has allowed them to just make a fortune.
		And that's what Trump has been doing.
		And when the Republicans say he knows what he's doing, he knows what he's doing.
		Yes, he knows what he's doing.
		But it's not about the tariffs.
		It's about making a killing off of the fluctuations in the stock market.
		And this business of he and Netanyahu, the two of them are the two biggest crooks in the world, to clear out Gaza of all the Palestinians so they can develop it.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		I mean, it's Abigail, we'll get to that in open forum, but we've got just a few more minutes left on this topic of tariffs, and we'll hear from Rory in Rancho Santa Margarita, California, Republican.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I go for the tariffs because it will help American citizens of the United States.
		And we give jobs.
		People on welfare won't be able to do it.
		Other countries will suffer, but we will prosper.
		And that's the point of the president.
		They've been ripping us off, and now they get to live with less.
		And no more aliens in America.
		So that's it.
		Tariffs will help us get rid of aliens, and that's the end of it.
		Bye.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Tim in Rochelle, Illinois, Independent Line, you're next.
unidentified		I think that the thing that I see is that neither one of the political parties want to even say the slightest good about each other.
		So we have to look at the fact that all these other countries are imposing tariffs on us and have for decades, and we have not imposed tariffs on them.
		So the fact of the matter is, we're not looking at this thing in a calm, like even manner.
		It's like if you're Republican, Trump's great.
		If you're Democrat, Trump's horrible.
		So in this kind of thing, tariffs are imposed on us from all sorts of companies, countries, on all sorts of things.
		We impose tariffs on them.
		It'll be good to pay for what we need to pay, like with Medicare and Social Security.
		And all the things we have to pay for have to come from somewhere.
		They're either going to raise taxes on us, individuals, on everything we do, from our homes to our gasoline, like they do in Illinois.
		They tax the living garbage out of the individual human being.
		Our gas taxes are insane.
		They're like 50 cents a gallon.
		So we're getting harmed.
		Tariffs are to balance trade.
		Bringing companies into America cannot be a bad thing.
		We have to pay for the future of America as well.
		And I think the Democrats have to have some people in the Democratic Party that agree with Trump.
		And the Republicans have to have some people in the Republican Party, which they do, who disagree with Trump.
		You just don't see an even party-party thing.
		You just see, I hate this guy, I love this guy.
		But the Republicans have more people that challenge this guy than the Democrats do and their particular party.
		So I support the tariffs because I think we need to think in long term.
		Other countries have done this forever.
		We need to start doing this now.
		It'll bring companies to America, which it already has.
		And I don't think that can be a bad thing.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Got it.
		And one more call on this topic before Open Forum.
		Susan in Milford, Pennsylvania, Democrat.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I do not support Trump's tariffs because they are not real tariffs.
		They are more taxes on the people when I feel that the Project 2025 bunch, the Koch brothers, the billionaires, have been waiting for decades to set this up.
		Trump came along.
		He does, so the American people are being taxed.
		And watch out.
		If you don't have money to pay for these multi-taxes and tariffs, what's going to happen to you?
		I think it's very unfair, and I'm very unhappy with what he's doing because it's going to be the rich against the poor.
		American people, watch out.
		Trump is there with waives more taxes, calling them tariffs.
		And it's so obvious.
		A tariff is a tariff.
		These are not tariffs.
		They are more taxes on the working class, lower people that do not have money.
		Look what he did to the Medicaid.
		Medicaid and SNAP, gone.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Susan.
		And we will change over now to Open Forum.
		We're going to take a very brief break.
		You can, of course, continue to talk about the tariffs and the trade policies if you'd like, or anything else on your mind public policy-wise.
		The numbers are on your screen.
		Democrats are on 20248-8000.
		Republicans 202-748-8001.
		Independents 202-748-8002.
		start calling in now, and we'll take your calls after a brief break.
unidentified		America marks 250 years, and C-SPAN is there to commemorate every moment, from the signing of the Declaration of Independence to the voices shaping our nation's future.
		We bring you unprecedented all-platform coverage, exploring the stories, sights, and spirit that make up America.
		Join us for remarkable coast-to-coast coverage, celebrating our nation's journey like no other network can.
		America 250.
		Over a year of historic moments.
		Only on the C-SPAN networks.
		Democracy.
		It isn't just an idea.
		It's a process.
		A process shaped by leaders elected to the highest offices and entrusted to a select few with guarding its basic principles.
		It's where debates unfold, decisions are made, and the nation's course is charted.
		Democracy in real time.
		This is your government at work.
		This is C-SPAN, giving you your democracy unfiltered.
		Washington Journal continues.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Welcome back.
		We are taking your calls for almost half an hour until 8 o'clock Eastern Time.
		And this is the front page of the Washington Post headline, at least 161 missing in Texas floods.
		You see here a helicopter is over Camp Mystic along that Guadalupe River.
		That picture taken yesterday, and Senator John Thune was on the Senate floor talking about the victims and the first responders.
john thune ▲ ● ▼		I just want to say that I join Americans around the country in praying for the victims of the torrential flooding in Texas this weekend.
		More than 100 have been reported dead, among them at least 28 children.
		It is a moment of unfathomable pain for so many.
		And my prayers are with the grieving parents and the grieving families.
		I'm grateful for the efforts of the rescue workers, military members, and volunteers who've put themselves in harm's way to rescue flood victims.
		And it would be wrong to acknowledge rescuers without also mentioning the everyday Americans who died in the floods trying to save others, like Camp Director, who died trying to get his campers to safety.
		The scriptures say that greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.
		These are the people we would all hope to be at the moment of our testing.
		Again, Mr. President, my thoughts and prayers are with all the victims of these deadly floods and with those who continue to work to rescue them.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Also yesterday on the Senate floor was Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer talking about the victims of the floods and criticizing the actions of the Trump administration.
chuck schumer ▲ ● ▼		To see the pictures of those children, the little beautiful faces, which I saw published in one of our New York papers this morning, just breaks your heart and stays with you.
		And the agony, of course, of those and their families who survived.
		Of course, the search continues for many more, and we hope and pray more will be found alive.
		I thank all of the first responders on the ground, and we all hope for the best in the ongoing rescue and recovery efforts.
		Now, when a tragedy as devastating as the one in Texas occurs, the American people deserve to know what happened, what more could have been done to minimize the tragedy, and what we can do better to prevent this from happening again.
		And that means taking a close look at what went wrong, if anything, at the agency level.
		So yesterday I asked for an investigation into what role, if any, the administration's staff cuts to local National Weather Service stations played in preparedness and response to the Texas tragedy.
		We also must look forward as communities rebuild, as families mourn, we must ensure the federal government has all the resources in place to aid those in need.
		And that means holding off against devastating cuts to agencies like FEMA.
		As recently as last month, Donald Trump talked about, quote, weaning off FEMA and has toyed with eliminating the agency entirely as soon as this year.
		That has been a mistake.
		That would be a mistake at any time.
		But in light of these horrible floods, it's unthinkable that Donald Trump would do something like put FEMA's future in doubt.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Also, this is on the front page of the Washington Post.
		Rubio imposter used AI voice to call top officials.
		It says an imposter pretending to be Secretary of State Marco Rubio contacted foreign ministers, a U.S. governor, and a member of Congress by sending them voice and text messages that mimic Rubio's voice and writing style using artificial intelligence-powered software.
		It says U.S. authorities do not know who is behind the string of impersonation attempts, but they believe the culprit was probably attempting to manipulate powerful government officials with the goal of gaining access to information or accounts.
		Let's talk to Steve, West Terre Haute, Indiana, Democrat.
		Good morning, Steve.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I'm really sorry and pray for all people in those places.
		But as far as tariffs, I think that corporate greed has moved a lot of our businesses out of this country.
		And that's why we don't have nothing here no more.
		And that's all really I've got to say.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And here's Matt in Stevensville, Maryland, Republican.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Hi, Matt.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Thank you for taking my call.
		I'll echo the previous callers' condolences for everybody in Texas, what a tragedy that is.
		And I pray that our country can rally around that and create something positive as a result.
		I did want to call in.
		I've been listening for the past while and just listening to all the different perspectives between Republicans and Democrats.
		And I just, I don't know, I wanted to share some personal sort of lessons that I'm learning from this, all these cuts in our federal government.
		Being here in Maryland, we've got a lot of neighbors that have been negatively affected by these cuts.
		However, for me, as a contractor in this area, I will tell you that we're seeing the government affect, or excuse me, just streamline and serve us at a much more efficient level.
		It's funny, where our customer service is better.
		People seem to care more.
		Our permits are issued much faster.
		Everything seems to be working a little bit better.
		While I am heartbroken for, like I said, some people that I actually know that have lost their jobs, I do think it's important for people to step back and look at how maybe inefficient some of our government facilities were.
		And this is a good opportunity for us as a country to get better, to learn lessons and become more streamlined and just provide better for our citizens.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		And, Matt, there was a ruling by the Supreme Court.
		This is the headline in the New York Times.
		Justices, pave way for Trump to fire federal workers.
		The administration may proceed for now, and there's no ruling on the plan's legality.
		It says that the Trump administration can move forward with plans to slash the federal workforce and dismantle federal agencies, according to the Supreme Court.
		Decision could result in job losses for tens of thousands of employees at agencies, including the Department of Housing and Urban Development, State, and Treasury.
		Here's Rob, sorry, Bob in Amsterdam, Ohio, Democrat.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		In the fine print of Trump's big, beautiful bill, hidden way down in there is like $300 million for added security for him to go play golf.
		On top of that, I think he's just trying to make everybody so mad that they start going after the government so he can say, okay, martial law is into effect.
		There's not going to be no more elections.
		That's about all I have to say.
		Thanks.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		There was an announcement yesterday by Homeland Security Secretary Christine Noam about passengers no longer having to take their shoes off when they go through TSA at airports.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Take a look.
kristi noem ▲ ● ▼		We have some very exciting news to announce that today we have started a new no-shoes policy with the Department, the Transportation Security Administration.
		TSA will no longer require travelers to remove their shoes when they go through our security checkpoints.
		This is something that I know for quite some time people have talked about and discussed.
		And we know that when President Trump was elected, he pledged to make life better for all Americans.
		And that includes those who are travelers going through our busy airports.
		We want to improve this travel experience, but while maintaining safety standards and making sure that we are keeping people safe as they go to take their vacations, travel for work, or spend time with their families.
		So we took a hard look at how TSA does its business, how it does its screening processes, and what we do to make people safe, but also provide some hospitality as well.
		Now, this is especially important to streamline the process and look at efficiencies that we can build in as we build up for some big events that are going to be coming here in the next 12 months here in the United States of America.
		As you all know, right now, we have the club championships going on.
		A lot of travelers and visitors are coming into the country.
		But next year, we will also have the Olympics that will be in the United States of America.
		The World Cup matches will be happening, as well as many America 250 events.
		All of those will bring us record travelers to the United States.
		Many, many people will be on airlines traveling in and out of our airports, and it's important that we find ways to keep people safe, but also streamline and make the process much more enjoyable for every single person.
		TSA first implemented the no-shoes policy in 2006, almost 20 years ago.
		And in those 20 years since that policy was put in place, our security technology has changed dramatically.
		It's evolved.
		TSA has changed.
		We have a multi-layered whole of government approach now to security and to the environment that people anticipate and experience when they come into an airport that has been honed and it's been hardened.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Back to your calls.
		This is Lou, Tampa, Florida Republican.
		Hello, Lou.
unidentified		Hello, Mimi.
		Hello, America.
		Good morning.
		Listen, I appreciate being on the TV.
		We pray definitely for this nation.
		Here's a guy in the White House that's trying to fix things, the tariffs, the NAFTA, all that.
		And they're saying this guy is no good, no good, no good.
		Every day, every day.
		And he's telling the American people how it is if people have C-SPAN and, you know, like the other guy was fishing around seeing different points of view.
		I think that's a good idea.
		And so, you know, he was inundated by Pelosi and all these other people.
		They just want to, you know, create more chaos and dysfunction in Washington.
		That's the way it is.
		And anyway, other people made a lot of money off of NAFTA and insider trading and all that stuff.
		There's plenty of blame to go around in Washington, and Trump speaks about that.
		So the one more thing I want to say is that I hope things go well with these negotiations in the Middle East.
		And we're all praying for that in the nation because peace is better than war.
		Thank you so much, Mimi.
		God bless you.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Lou.
		This is Philip, an independent in Jackson, Mississippi.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Thank you.
		Racism, militarism, and materialism, Martin Luther King warned us about those issues.
		When you listen to the audience of callers, you get the opinion that a lot of people do not understand that these things are not positive.
		So our economy is built on a negative way of keeping us all satisfied.
		And basically, the puppeteers tell us what and where to do.
		Everything basically comes from what they're teaching us about the economy and about our basic survival.
		Now, the number one problem is climate change.
		So if we're not going to build an economy, why don't we go at the root of what is causing many of our issues of weather patterns to just go awry?
		So I'm just suggesting that we turn all of those positive energies of telling us what to do into realities of what is actually happening that we tackle the economy issues.
		And one last thing.
		I've learned several things this week.
		Maybe it may help others.
		We have an issue called Christian Zionism.
		Please look it up.
		Take the time out to analyze it because it may give you some answers to what is really actually happening to us.
		And I just want to leave it at that.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Well, Israel's Prime Minister Netanyahu spoke to Capitol Hill reporters yesterday after his meeting with Speaker Johnson.
		And he talked about the efforts to reach a Gaza ceasefire and a deal with President Trump.
		Here he is.
benjamin netanyahu ▲ ● ▼		Well, we're certainly working on it.
		I can't speak in advance.
		You need several parties to tangle.
		It's not even two here.
		But we're working on it diligently as we speak.
		In fact, on the way over here and on the way from here, we're not going to let up.
		We have a goal.
		We intend to achieve that goal.
unidentified		Minister, are you open to the Hamas counterproposal to allow more widespread peace?
benjamin netanyahu ▲ ● ▼		We accepted a proposal that came from the mediators.
		It's a good proposal.
		It matches Steve Witkoff's original idea.
		And we think that we've gotten closer to it.
		And I hope we can cross the line.
		That is our purpose.
		But I think the less I speak about it publicly, the more likely that we might get it.
unidentified		President, what do you think of the Qatari role right now in the negotiations?
benjamin netanyahu ▲ ● ▼		Look, I think the important thing is to get the result.
		We'll talk about the process later.
		I have a lot to say about it.
		But right now, I'm totally focused on the result, as is President Trump.
		And we're working together.
		It's very important to understand that.
		We're working together because we have learned, and the whole world has learned, that when Israel and America stand together, great things happen.
		And it's never been like that.
		In the entire history, for almost 80 years, we're 77 years now.
		In the entire 77 years of Israel's history, there has never been the degree of coordination, of cooperation, and trust between America and Israel as we have today.
		And I credit President Trump with this extraordinary achievement.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		That was yesterday.
		If you'd like to see the entire exchange, you can see that on our website, cspan.org.
		This is Marvin Redford, Michigan, Democrat.
		You're on Open Forum.
		Marvin, good morning.
unidentified		Oh, yes, good morning.
		First, I'd just like to pray for all the people that are from Texas and the flooding and for all the people in the world to have some peace in this place that we're living in now.
		And I listened to some of the callers how they complain about the Medicare and all these cuts and stuff.
		But these are the same people that voted for that gentleman.
		And also, I'd like to, I'm a retired gentleman, and I've been retired going almost 15 years.
		I've done 30 vested years for the International Labor Union.
		And I always bring up when are the retirees ever going to get a raise?
		We haven't had a raise in over 100 years.
		I hope our international guys are listening to me on this.
		Everyone else is getting cost of living and all kinds of other benefits.
		Our benefits are getting cut, like our supplemental benefits got cut.
		Totally $1,200 for me got taken away and other members.
		So I just want to know: could they consider giving the retirees some kind of raise?
		Because they get all kinds of bonuses, cost of living raises, guaranteed everything.
		And the working guy that's been working out in the field that builds that foundation is like they just forgot about us.
		I'm praying for peace in these other countries, too.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Marvin, and here's on the Republican line in Wayne City, Illinois.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Carla, you're next.
unidentified		Good morning, Mimi.
		And my prayers go out to Texas.
		I have an issue with Mr. Trump.
		I voted for him, and I don't regret my vote.
		But I watched the interview with him yesterday, and I know they're worried about Texas and everything, but the Es-Team files.
		Now there's nothing to be seen or heard.
		And you go on for four years preaching that we were going to get truth and transparency on the Escene files.
		I'm absolutely enraged with what they told us.
		I do believe that the Republican Party, if they don't start pulling their heads out, they're going to lose the 28 election because they've already enraged a bunch of Republicans with this Esting file crap.
		So I hope President Trump is watching this today, but the American people will not forget about it because they forgot about those children that he abused.
		You know, I'm worried about Texas.
		I'm upset about that, and I can't believe that this happened.
		But we also can't forget about those children that were abused by this pedophile.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So, Carla, this is I was going to show you the New York Times article about that.
		It said, confronted over Epstein files, Trump and Bondi tell supporters to move on.
		It says the president and the attorney general once suggested they would expose the hidden potentially sinister truth about Jeffrey Epstein's death in 2019.
		On Tuesday, they had a message to supporters, incensed by the decision to close the case once and for all, get over it.
unidentified		Mr. Heidi.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, Mr. Trump said, you still talking about Jeffrey Epstein?
		Visibly exasperated, asked a reporter at a cabinet meeting.
		Yeah, go ahead, Carla.
unidentified		Very upset with that because Mr. Trump was the one that ran on this.
		And there's more to this story that I want to know who's hiding what, because somebody's hiding something.
		I'm not just losing my mind here and just going to move on.
		A lot of people are upset with this.
		Why is Delaine Maxfellow still in jail?
		Why didn't they give Prince William his titles back?
		This doesn't make sense.
		People are not thinking with their heads right now.
		They're thinking with their hearts.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Carla.
		And here's Harvey, Independent Line, Santa Monica, California.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I'm sorry to hear this stuff about Texas.
		100 people dead, maybe 160 missing.
		This is climate.
		I have an environmental background.
		I worked in solar for 50 years.
		In Santa Monica, we had the fires here and the Palisades and over by Pasadena, Al Pedena.
		That's climate too.
		We had these winds and they were 80 to 100 miles an hour.
		And that's new and never happened before.
		That's climate as well.
		Now you've got this split between Musk and Trump.
		And Trump, it says drill, baby, drill.
		But Musk says we've got to convert to solar.
		They're talking primarily about the tax credits on electric vehicles.
		But this is significant.
		And basically, we've got to live off our solar income versus the savings and all of the crap that comes mixed in the soil that we're burning and breathing in the air.
		There's a big body count on this, and the numbers are hidden from us.
		So there was an interview with Musk on Rogan, number 2054.
		And at 35 minutes, they were talking about electric cars and stuff.
		Musk says to Rogan, you know, if we've got 100 miles by 100 miles, we can power all of the United States with solar.
		So Rogan goes, oh, you're surprised.
		And he goes, well, I never heard that before.
		He goes, is that 24-hour?
		He goes, yeah, we could do it with storage too.
		We could put in storage.
		This is significant.
		We use maybe a quarter of the energy in the world.
		And I've worked in public solar power and gone to the air district here for decades talking about this.
		And there was a sunshot program, Department of Energy, under Obama from 10 to 20 to make solar cost-effective.
		And it worked, and it's taken over the market.
		But that market is controlled and owned by fossil fuel companies, 60%, 70%, according to the International Energy Agency.
		So, the issue of who's going to control it and decision-making.
		So, Trump says this is a Chinese conspiracy climate.
		They put in more solar last year than all the solar in the United States.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Harvey.
		Let's talk to Phil, Democrat, Jewett City, Connecticut.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I actually agree with President Trump that we need to lower interest rates, but bullying the independent Federal Reserve, and it is independent, it's designed that way for a reason, isn't going to do that.
		What they need to do is get rid of this big, beautiful bill, which I know they already voted for it, so that's not an option.
		But this big, beautiful bill raises government borrowing.
		It's all about supply and demand.
		I teach economics.
		So the demand for vulnerable funds is going up to the $2 trillion a year budget deficit.
		And I told my students five years ago under President Biden that having a $2 trillion budget deficit was ridiculous.
		Our budget deficit should be 3% of our economic output or less.
		That puts it right now at about $1 trillion, is what it should be.
		I told my students $2 trillion is way too high.
		It was too high then.
		And we're all these Republicans.
		Republicans are the ones that are supposed to be supporting fiscal responsibility.
		Having a $2 trillion budget is not, or budget deficit is not fiscally responsible.
		And it's going to increase.
		It's not going to go down.
		It's going to increase.
		And I called in about six weeks ago, and I said that having this budget deficit was too high.
		And I also said that the Congressional Budget Office scoring was too low.
		They scored it at 1.8% GDP growth.
		They should have scored it somewhere around 2.25% GDP growth.
		And if they had done that, yes.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Based on what, Phil?
unidentified		But the Republicans under Jason Smith, who's the head of the Appropriations Committee, he actually is assuming 3% growth, which is a little bit too optimistic.
unidentified		So this big, beautiful bill is going to increase your interest rates that you pay for mortgages, student loans, business loans, and that's going to be very harmful to the economy.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Here's Nikki in Independent in Rockaway Park, New York.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
unidentified		Hi, I guess that's me.
		So let me begin by saying, well, I was promised the great, big, beautiful Titanic tax, tariff, tremendous wealth for this country.
		And I know that we have a ship of state.
		It's called a ship of state.
		And I would compare this ship of state to the Titanic.
		We are promised the best of everything, luxurious guest rooms, bands playing.
		But I couldn't afford.
		So I'm sitting on the shore and I watch the launching of this Titanic, Trump's Titanic tax.
		So I'm watching this ship.
		I watch it being launched on January 20th of this year.
		And I know that some of the lifeboats are gone.
		I know I've seen that.
		But I would compare this administration.
		And remember, there's only one captain to the ship.
		Joe Biden's not the captain.
		Obama is not the captain.
		There's only one captain to the ship.
		So what I would suggest, before we hit another unforeseen iceberg, I would suggest that you know what they do?
		Sometimes people mutiny.
		And I hope if you have family in the military or in ICE or any of these abusive situations that Donald Trump himself has caused, use your influence to your military personnel, to your police, to your ICE agents, and ask them, do you really feel comfortable doing this?
		That's all I have to say.
		And enjoy the ride on the Trump title.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And here's John, a Republican in Georgia.
		Last call for you, John.
		Go ahead.
unidentified		Hey, good morning.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Morning.
unidentified		In reference to firing of federal employees, the Constitution and the founding fathers set it up that the bureaucrats of the federal government report directly to the president of the United States.
		And that's because of accountability.
		If they didn't report to the president, who would they report to?
		The president is accountable to the American people.
		He is responsible for the actions of the bureaucrats.
		If you go and study the Federalist Papers, Madison and Alexander Hamilton make that very clear.
		He is responsible and he is the only one that they report to.
		I just read an article on the AT about a judge agreeing with the Department of Justice that they could cancel some of these grants.
		And what the judge said was, it's shameful that they don't want to do this.
		But the plaintiffs basically said that, you know, they didn't have a constitutional basis here to cancel it.
		Well, think about it.
		The judge didn't like it.
		So if the Supreme Court had not stepped in, she would have let the grants stay in place.
		I don't understand how these district judges can say that the President of the United States doesn't have the ability to fire the federal employees.
		Clinton fired 177,000.
		All right, so I don't know.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Got your point.
		And later on in the Washington Journal, we'll have Daniel Budd of the Tax Foundation, sorry, Bunn of the Tax Foundation.
		He'll discuss tax provisions in the One Big Beautiful Act.
		But first, we'll have Richard Spinrad, former director of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
		He'll discuss the Texas floods and disaster preparedness.
		We'll be right back.
unidentified		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 6.45 p.m. Eastern, Financial Times San Francisco correspondent Patrick McGee shares his book, Apple in China, that looks at Apple's relationship with China and the impact of locating so many factories there.
		Then at 8 p.m. Eastern, Joseph Churichian talks about his biography of Chinese President Xi Xinping's father, Zhi Shangzhun, a leading figure in the Chinese Communist Party, in his book, The Party's Interests Come First.
		And at 9.15 p.m. Eastern, from this year's Freedom Fest, Ludlow Institute founder and president Naomi Brockwell, author of Beginner's Introduction to Privacy, talks about the lack of privacy in the digital age and recommends ways for people to preserve it.
		Watch Book TV every Sunday on C-SPAN 2 and find a full schedule on your program guy.
		Or watch online anytime at booktv.org.
		As Mike said before, I happened to listen to him.
		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.
		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 on television a little while ago in between my watching my great friends on C-SPAN.
unidentified		C-SPAN is televising this right now live.
brooke leslie rollins ▲ ● ▼		So we are not just speaking to Los Angeles.
brooke leslie rollins ▲ ● ▼		We are speaking to the country.
unidentified		Washington Journal continues.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And joining us to talk about the Texas floods and disaster preparedness is Richard Spinrad, former National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Administrator in the Biden administration and former Commerce Undersecretary for Oceans and Atmosphere.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Rick, welcome to the program.
unidentified		Thanks for having me, Mimi.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		First, tell us the mission of NOAA.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		What is it meant to do?
unidentified		Yeah, so NOAA I like to think of as being our nation's environmental intelligence agency.
		And basically what that means is NOAA is responsible for collection, interpretation of information about the environment, about the oceans, about the climate, about the atmosphere, as well as managing our nation's marine living resources.
		Think of the National Marine Fisheries Service.
		So it sits within the Department of Commerce, and part of its responsibility is to take environmental information and help with economic development.
		But in a nutshell, I believe what NOAA is about is protecting lives, livelihoods, and lifestyles through the use of environmental intelligence.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So let's go to Texas, the Texas floods.
		There was 10 to 12 inches of rainfell in a few hours.
		The river, the Guadalupe River, swelled more than 26 feet in less than an hour early that morning.
		How unprecedented was that specific flood?
unidentified		So this area is known as Flash Flood Alley.
		So they do have a history of having very severe flash floods.
		And in fact, back in 1987, they had a very similar kind of flash floods.
		So it's not unprecedented, but a flood of this magnitude is unusual.
		Some people describe it as a 1% or less than 1% probability event.
		This kind of thing can happen in this area, does happen in this area, and will happen in the future as well.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		At this magnitude?
unidentified		Perhaps, yes.
		And of course, with the impacts that we're seeing with climate change, we're seeing more severe storms.
		So consequently, we can expect to see similar kinds of floods, whether it's next year, 20 years, 50 years from now.
		I can't tell you that.
		But we do know that this kind of event will most likely happen again sometime in the future.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So let's talk about the warnings that were issued for this particular event.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		The first flood watch had been issued the day before, so on Thursday in the afternoon, and then a warning was issued at 1.14 Central Time in the middle of the night on Friday.
unidentified		What's your opinion of that and how that rolled out?
		So this is the National Weather Service doing their job and their job is to provide as much lead time.
		And I would add, in addition to the watch and the warning that you alluded to, several days beforehand the Weather Service indicated that there was a higher probability for this kind of event.
		So the watches, warnings, and alerts are formal notifications.
		The weather service did their job.
		Clearly that warning you alluded to, not only did it go out some three to four hours before that wall of water went down the river, but it also used terms like catastrophic and life-threatening.
		So if you received that warning, you would have known that this was an anomalous event, an extreme event, and should have been prepared to take action.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		But that's if you're awake at 1.15 in the morning.
unidentified		Well, yeah, I mean, it also went out as what's called a wireless emergency alert.
		You probably know those on your phone.
		Some people consider them those annoying screeches that you get when there's lightning.
		It's the same system used for amber alerts as well.
		So yes, if your phone is on, you'll get that we.
		You would be awakened.
		You'd have the opportunity to take action.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Now, when you say take action, is there actionable information there?
		Does it say evacuate or go to higher ground or anything like that?
		Are you supposed to know what to do when you get that alert?
unidentified		So the system is one where the weather service provides the information, the forecast.
		The emergency management community, including FEMA, including local sheriffs and fire departments and emergency managers, are the experts at knowing what exactly should I do with this information.
		But the Weather Service, NOAA, works hand in glove with the emergency management community to make sure that those people, those experts know, okay, in this case, we want to evacuate, you want to go to higher ground, or you want a shelter in place in some situations.
		NOAA is not the emergency management expert.
		NOAA and the Weather Service are the experts in providing the information the emergency managers can then interpret as to what actions people should take.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		I want to share with you what Secretary of Homeland Security Christine Noam said at a press conference Saturday.
		She said this, we know that everybody wants more warning time, and that's why we're working to upgrade the technologies that have been neglected by far too long to make sure that families have as much advance notice as possible.
		What's happening with the technology?
unidentified		So the technologies that the Secretary alludes to could be any number of things.
		Speaking for NOAA and the National Weather Service, the technologies that are central to this capability are things like radars, things like high-performance computing.
		But the other technologies that are part of this whole system are the communications and emergency warnings technologies.
		And I think we've seen a lot of attention to the issue of were there sirens, were there adequate sirens.
		So certainly in the assessments that are going to be done, both at the state level, local level, and within NOAA and the Weather Service, there will be some attention to the full spectrum of technologies that were used from the very earliest stages of developing the forecast to how the warnings were received and acted upon.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So what, in your opinion, what went wrong?
		Because clearly we have over 100 people dead at this point.
		There's people still missing.
		So that number is expected to rise.
		What could have been done to avoid that?
unidentified		Yeah, and this is heart-wrenching, isn't it, to see the loss of life and the fact that we're still doing recovery efforts to find the bodies.
		That, I think, has to be addressed from the sense that how were the warnings received?
		We know the warnings went out.
		Why was it that emergency managers felt they didn't get the information, felt they didn't have what they needed to move on?
		We're going to have to assess the last mile.
		That's really where I think the problems were.
		The warnings go out from the weather forecast offices.
		Are they or are they not being received?
		Is there enough redundancy in the system?
		So if you look, for example, at what happens in the Midwest with tornadoes, a lot of the towns and communities there have access to these WEAS, the wireless emergency alerts, but they also have sirens and they have other mechanisms of getting information to people.
		Is it a matter of having redundant systems, emergency systems to notify people?
		Is it a matter of having enough emergency management experts?
		There's also a question of whether there was adequate connectivity between the warning coordination meteorologist at the Weather Forecast Office, whose responsibility is to work with emergency management and the emergency managers themselves.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		If you'd like to join our conversation with Rick Spinrad, you can give us a call.
		Our lines are Democrats 202748-8000, Republicans 202748, 8001, and Independents 202748-8002.
		We also have a line set aside for Texas residents.
		That's 202748-8003.
		Well, some Texas officials and meteorologists are saying that the recent layoffs, the Doge cuts, impacted this situation in some way and handicapped the response and the preparation efforts.
		What do you think of that?
unidentified		Well, there's no question that the Weather Service is understaffed right now.
		The Weather Service is operating at about 80 percent of staffing as a result of these terminations and the resignations that Doge has induced.
		Now, the good news is that in the case of these weather forecast offices, there are two that were directly involved in the floods in Texas, they were able to surge staff to make sure they were staffed up.
		However, as I pointed out a minute ago, one of the positions that was vacated as a result of these cuts was the warning coordination meteorologist at one of these weather forecast offices.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		What is a warning coordination?
unidentified		The warning coordination meteorologist is the person who is a trained meteorologist who is in direct connection with the emergency manager, who can say, the flooding is going to start here.
		We think it's going to be this intense.
		You might want to make sure the evacuations start over there.
		It's probably going to hit at 5.33 in the morning.
		All of the information a meteorologist has that an emergency manager needs.
		And more importantly, that there is an open line of communication between the emergency managers.
		So they can say, hey, we've got a situation here.
		We need to make a choice.
		What's your recommendation based on the meteorology?
		So that person is dedicated to what we call decision support, helping the emergency managers, while the forecasters are busy doing their thing, improving the forecast.
		So the WCM is the liaison with the emergency management system.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And that WCM was not there?
unidentified		That person left the agency as a result of the administration's push for early retirements and voluntary separation.
		The position was vacant.
		It had been filled by somebody with over 30 years' experience.
		Now, they may have had somebody acting in that capacity, but that says nothing to the experience.
		So you can have somebody covering the responsibility, but if they don't have the 30 years of experience in emergency management, you're losing a critical link, in my opinion.
		So consequently, the assessment will give us the true understanding of where links may have been broken, where they may have been shortcomings in how the process worked.
		But I'm convinced that the staff cuts were a contributing factor to the lack of coordination, if you will, with emergency management.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Let's take a look at NOAA's FY 2026 budget, and I'll get your take on it.
		The cuts it cuts approximately 17% of the workforce after recently firing the probationary employees, shrinks the current workforce of more than 12,000 full-time employees down to 10,000, and it cuts about $1.8 billion from its annual budget.
		That's almost 30% of a reduction, and it eliminates the Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research.
		What do you think?
unidentified		Well, that last part, all of those are greatly damaging.
		When I was the administrator, we were making the argument that the 12,000 personnel was less than what was needed for the full mission.
		And in fact, again, when I was administrator, we had 12,000 federal employees and almost the same number of contractors working side by side with federal employees.
		That alone tells you that the agency was already understaffed.
		So now saying, hey, let's cut even further starts compromising the ability for the agency to do its mission.
		The last piece you alluded to, the elimination of NOAA's research capability, means basically shuttering, shutting down, rather, the 10 laboratories that NOAA operates, including labs like the National Severe Storms Lab in Norman, Oklahoma.
		Many people may remember that one from the Twisters movies, but that's the laboratory that created the latest and greatest capabilities for predicting extreme precipitation events like the one we just saw in Texas, like we're seeing now in other parts of the country.
		So as we cut the research capability, what that basically translates to is you are guaranteeing that you will never get any better weather service than what you currently have right now.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So when you say that these cuts in general, not just the closing of that office, but the cuts in general, are damaging.
		Break that down for us.
		What does that mean for me on a day-to-day basis?
unidentified		Well, it means things like think about how we've made improvements in weather forecasting as they affect air travel.
		Right now, last year I just checked, less than one-third of the delays or cancellations in air travel were attributable to weather.
		That's half the percentage it was, say, 20 years ago.
		So for everyday people who are traveling all over all the time, you can pretty much guarantee that you'll see more delays, more cancellations in air travel.
		The quality of the forecasts for things like hurricanes, tornadoes, wildfires in the Pacific Northwest, droughts in the upper Midwest, floods, heat waves, the quality and the accuracy and the timeliness of those forecasts will be compromised.
		No question about it.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Let's talk to callers and we'll start with Rich, a Republican in Marion, Ohio.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Rich.
unidentified		Yeah.
		Boy, we need every good idea coming out to solve this problem.
		It seems like if we had different alarm systems, just weren't radios, but lights connected into where we hit different levels of emergency, like we have yellow level, high level, because it's hard to sort out which one they really need to do.
		The other thing is we've got to learn from the past.
		We just don't learn the lessons.
		From Chicago, they learned when you build a city from one end to the other with wood.
		You've got big problems.
		Well, we still have big problems in our woods.
		We don't have fire breaks in our woods.
		When we do have a fire, we don't have the water to put them out.
		Look at California.
		All the smoke that that caused and the chance to eliminate that and to log out that dead wood.
		The other things in volcanoes, we could get geothermal off that to get that.
		We can't solve every problem.
		There's still going to be big problems.
		The other thing is getting good alerts.
		I'll hang up, listen to your answer.
		Yes, thank you.
		I think your first point with respect to emergency systems, not only having easily understandable systems, but you implied that we should have redundant systems, and I couldn't agree more.
		It's the belt and suspenders approach, if you will.
		So, yes, there should be NOAA weather radios.
		You should have cell phones that can pick up these WIA alerts, but you also should have sirens.
		So, I think the concept you alluded to, Rich, is one we're going to see in future developments.
		Your other point about learning from the past, that actually is the concept behind the use of AI.
		And I am an advocate for use of AI in improving our weather forecasting.
		And part of what AI does is it takes a look at all the history of storms.
		How does this storm look compare to something we might have seen 20 years ago?
		And can we use that knowledge effectively?
		So, I think both of your comments are spot on.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Let's talk to Thomas, Humble Texas, Independent Line.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Thomas.
unidentified		Morning, everyone.
		I'm sorry to hear about the kids here in Texas, and I hope we feel the same way that we feel about the kids in Gaza.
		That being said, remember, hey, Rich, remember back in the day, you had Forest Rangers, and everybody had a CB radio.
		You know, hey, man, weather's getting bad, so on and so forth.
		How easy to get to issue CBs?
		I mean, everything else is down, but you have to be CB radio.
		But listen, the people in Iowa and Ohio who've been hit by hurricanes and tornadoes is getting worse.
		September is not even here yet.
		And then you're cutting employees from NOAA.
		I mean, please explain to these people what NOAA actually does.
		Thank you.
		Oh, listen.
		Do we still have the European models?
		Thank you.
		Yes, your last comment, Thomas.
		We do have the European models, and we work closely with the European Center for Medium-Range Weather Forecasting, which is the generator of those models.
		And quite honestly, one of the most important things in weather forecasting is having many models.
		This is not a competition to have just one.
		You want to have many so that you can look at the combinations and see if one is picking up something, another one might not.
		So, yeah, the European model is still an active component of the ensemble, if you will.
		You talked about CB radios.
		Cell phones, obviously, are the technology that a lot of people are relying on right now.
		Most people have cell phones or are near someone who has cell phones.
		Certainly, all emergency managers have cell phones.
		So, part of this wireless emergency alert WIA that I alluded to is a system that was set up years ago, a very effective system for making sure that everyone can get that alert.
		And again, most of the listeners here have probably heard an alert like that in your area when you've had hail or lightning or again an amber alert.
		So, I think the point is between NOAA weather radio, between cell phones, between sirens, having multiple kinds of alert systems is how we're going to get to a better place and lose fewer lives.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		You said before that that area of Texas is called Flash Flood Alley.
		Should there be, I mean, camps in Flash Flood Alley?
		Should there be, you know, people allowed to camp or have to build homes there?
		I mean, is that maybe part of the solution that you don't have people around there?
unidentified		Well, I certainly am not an expert in the sort of regulations as to where people can build, but one of the things we argued for heavily in NOAA is that we make sure to work with community planners, zoning commissioners, civil engineers to make sure they understand that.
		And the interesting thing, maybe I would say, is that if you look at what's happened in hurricane-prone areas of the country, because of NOAA's contributions to understanding peak winds and storm surge, building codes have changed.
		And all of us have seen the imagery from areas where hurricanes have hit and some homes survived and some did not.
		So our job at NOAA historically would be to advise the experts on building codes, on construction materials, on civil engineering as to what should or should not be allowed in a particular area based on the propensity for storms.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Chris is in San Antonio, Texas, a Republican.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Chris, good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		You know, I know that river.
		I've swam in that river.
		I've seen that river get high.
		The gentleman's not shooting straight, and I don't appreciate him not shooting straight.
		First of all, in 1987, I was a lifeguard back in the day, and those poor girls that drowned that day, they went through a low water crossing in a bus.
		And there was rain out there, and it causes flooding.
		It always happens.
		A bigger flood was in the 70s, the late 70s.
		Canyon Lake was lower, and more water came down that Guadalupe than the 87 flood he was talking about.
		And that's the problem.
		When you trust people at the federal government that are more concerned about political points than really fixing the job, that's the whole problem.
		I was up that night and I watched the radar and you saw all the rain fall in that area.
		And right there, if anybody watching the radar, NOAA or local officials, right when they saw that water, this is what happens when 8, 10, 20 inches falls at one time on that river.
		Someone's got to get down there to the river to see if it's rising and then send out the alarm.
		But to sit there and say Doge cuts and this and that, this river's always done it.
		It's always going to do it.
		And you can't blame it on whoever's president.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Chris, let's get a response.
unidentified		Yeah, and Chris, I actually agree with you, especially when you talked about getting the information to the people who are in harm's way.
		And what I'm saying is that for some reason, the best forecast, the best information, that warning went out three and a half hours before the major part of the flood hit.
		Why did the warning not get received?
		Why did somebody not go into the area and start ensuring evacuations?
		Your experience is exactly the valuable contribution.
		There are people who have experience like you who ought to be able to say, hey, when we see a warning like this three hours beforehand, we need to make sure that line of communication with the emergency managers, the sheriff's office, the police department, the emergency responders is there so that those kids could safely evacuate.
		So I think we do need to learn from the experiences in the past.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Let's talk to Dan in Severn, Maryland.
unidentified		Democrat, good morning.
		Good morning.
		I would like to ask, given that you mentioned there will be cuts in the funding and the cuts in personnel of NOAA and the National Weather Service.
		And also the data collection is being done less often in order to reduce costs.
		Wouldn't that impact in the future the quality of the forecast?
		And what are we doing to prevent events like this in the future?
		Thank you.
		Yeah, I want to make sure I understand because I would argue that the politics issue should be separate from the science and the technology and the operations of weather forecasting.
		I am one of the very few people who served as a political appointee as the head of NOAA, but more importantly, I'm a trained environmental scientist.
		I'm an oceanographer and I was a scientist at NOAA for 20 years before I became the administrator.
		It's the 11,975 scientists and technologists and engineers at an agency like NOAA who are going to make the difference, not the 25 political appointees.
		And so the fact that the weather service has been around for about 140 years is evidence of the fact that we can continue operating regardless of which administration is in place.
		With respect to how do we keep this from happening in the future, I think a lot of it depends on the kinds of improvements in technology, improvements in communication mechanisms, taking lessons learned from other disasters elsewhere in the world and in the nation and saying how might this be applied in a place like Texas.
		So learn from the past, apply the latest technology, and make sure you've got the best communications with the emergency managers.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So would the National Weather Service, the researchers there, know how bad, like at what point would they know how bad this flood is actually going to be?
		Was it three hours before it hit?
		Was it before that?
		And would they know, for instance, okay, if people don't evacuate, they're going to die?
unidentified		So the way the system is set up, it's sort of a tiered.
		The first thing is that watch, and the watch is kind of warning, hey, pay attention.
		A lot of people say I get information regularly on my phone.
		I do too.
		Do I pay attention to every bit of information I get?
		Probably not.
		But when I see a watch, it tells me I need to pay closer attention.
		The warning, which came in three to four hours beforehand, that's the red flag.
		That's the time to start planning to take action, time to take action.
		And the fact that terms like catastrophic are included and the fact that the wireless emergency alert was sent out, that puts you at a whole different level.
		This is not unlike if your kids at a softball game on a Friday afternoon and you get a watch that there might be thunderstorms.
		You ought to prepare to know where your car is parked so you can get back to your car.
		When a warning hits, you haul out of there.
		You get the kids out of there because that's the indication that the threat is imminent.
		So the structure that's been put in place of watches, warnings, and alerts, the warnings and alerts in this case, about three hours beforehand, the watch, about 18 to 24 hours beforehand.
		And as I said, even a couple of days beforehand, there were indications that there could be a higher probability for flooding.
		So I think the timeframes are different.
		Obviously, for tornadoes, we're talking minutes, not hours in most cases.
		So it depends on the kind of storm.
		For hurricanes, it's days.
		Depends on the kind of threat that we're seeing.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		I want to play you, Texas Governor Greg Abbott, a portion of what he said at a press briefing about whether Texas officials were ready for the flood.
greg abbot ▲ ● ▼		So your question is about what local officials knew.
		You'd have to ask that.
		What the state was aware of, the state was aware that there was a possible serious flooding event days in advance, and we pre-positioned assets and resources and personnel.
		And remember, the flood began on Friday morning.
		We originally positioned those assets, resources, and personnel on Wednesday.
		Then when greater clarity was discerned on Thursday, we moved them closer, added, and made sure that we had adequate supply going into Friday.
		So we were ready with the resources on the ground to be able to quickly respond.
		Some people say, well, we responded so fast.
		One reason we did respond fast is because we had assets here already.
		That said, we didn't know the magnitude of the storm.
		We knew that there was a flash flood warning.
		And if you heard a flash flood warning, no one would know that that would be a 30-foot high tsunami wall of water, I don't think.
		But all I can tell you is what we, the information we had, the state had, and that we acted on, was information that catalyzed us to begin putting assets and resources in place two days before the event happened.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		What do you think of that, Rick?
unidentified		Yeah, so I think the important point that the governor made was they did have several days warning for pre-positioning assets, and that's an important factor.
		You don't want to be calling up the emergency managers just before the event saying, hey, send trucks, send water, send rescue workers.
		So that's an important point.
		The other point the governor made was that they were able to localize with when the watch came on Thursday afternoon at 1 o'clock and then be even more specific by the time the warning came at 1 in the morning on Friday.
		The question of the magnitude, a flash flood warning is a flash flood warning.
		And so consequently, knowing that you are going to have a threat, certainly to all residents, all campers who are right on the river, should be sufficient to start taking action.
		But again, only if the emergency managers receive the information.
		And the part the governor implied and alluded to there was that some managers did get information, some did not.
		That's what an assessment is going to have to sort out.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Let's talk to Nick in Albany, New York.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Republican, good morning, Nick.
unidentified		Hi.
		Just to preface my knowledge of the flooding and all that, it's a little very sparse, so forgive me if I make any mistakes.
		But I had a question about opinions on public alerting.
		I have a little bit of knowledge in that field.
		I'm not sure what kinds of messages were sent by local emergency managers, whether they were WIA or IPAUS messages.
		But what I have known is, I do know, is that many local municipalities are either inexperienced with the software, whether it be from one of the many vendors for sending the messages.
		I'm a fan of the work of Dr. Jeanette Sutton.
		A lot of them have trouble from what I've seen on PBS Warren, you know, following what we've seen as recommended best practices.
		And I think also the specter of that Hawaiian missile alert haunts a lot of them where there's kind of a reticence at the local level to send these warnings on top of a lack of engagement from the public, especially from voluntary sign-up IPOS services.
		Do you think some kind of national framework to improve best practices for public alerting is needed?
		And I guess as a secondary appendix question, if you have time, do you think the embedding of meteorologists in state and perhaps even local emergency management agencies would that have a benefit to more accurate response and alerting?
		Yeah, thank you, Nick.
		With respect to public alerting, you've really hit on what we've learned in the last 20 years is a critical component.
		And it boils down to behavioral science.
		That is, what do people do with these alerts?
		And in many cases, a false alarm causes great problems.
		You alluded to the problem in Hawaii.
		So one of the things the federal government writ large, NOAA specifically, has done the last few years, is try to bring in more behavioral scientists.
		This is part of the research effort.
		How is it best to send a message?
		What kind of message resonates best with people?
		Who should send the message?
		A lot of folks may not necessarily trust a federal employee working for the Weather Service, but they do trust that sheriff's office in their town.
		So how do you make sure the Weather Service and the Sheriff's Office are well connected?
		So there's a lot of work to be done with respect to behavioral sciences and how to get that warning and alert out to people in the most effective manner.
		Your second question on embedding meteorologists, Weather Service does that.
		They have a program called Incident Meteorologists, or IMETS.
		These are meteorologists who are trained to go sit in the command center.
		They are most typically used these days for wildfires, and that's for a few reasons.
		Wildfires create their own weather.
		It's best to have a meteorologist in the command center.
		For something like this, there are plenty of meteorologists, well-qualified forecasters in the local forecast offices.
		But having them, if not sitting in the command center, certainly in live, constant communication with the command center and the emergency managers, is a critical component of the success of the operation.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So right now at NOAA, there is currently no confirmed administrator.
		However, Dr. Neil Jacobs has been nominated and his hearings are actually going to happen right after this program.
		What do you think of him?
		I mean, do you know who he is?
		What do you think of his background and his qualifications?
unidentified		I know Dr. Jacobs.
		I've worked with him and he's actually been involved in a number of NOAA programs as a highly qualified meteorologist.
		He is a world expert in weather forecasting and development of models.
		He was also the acting administrator in the previous Trump administration.
		So the really good news is he comes in with a full understanding of the agency, where all the knobs and dials are, and has a very good understanding of the full range of NOAA's mission responsibilities and specifically great familiarity with the National Weather Service.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And as I mentioned, we are covering that hearing live.
		So that will be right after this program at 10 a.m. Eastern, the nomination of Dr. Neal Jacobs to head NOAA.
		Here is Robert in Tampa, Florida.
		Democrat, good morning, Robert.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Thank you for taking my call.
		Thanks for being there, sir.
		I just have actually just a comment.
		It just seems like I'm listening.
		This seems like overall the main problem is like this communication.
		If they could just go ahead, I mean, even if you know when something is coming, there's no such thing as a false.
		I'm in Tampa, so we get notifications all the time about possible flooding and stuff like that.
		I decided if they had like more communication, more open communication, that it might help to alleviate some of these floodings and stuff like that.
		I just thought it was just a comment for that.
		That's all.
		Thanks for taking my call.
		Yeah, thank you, Robert.
		I'll just simply say one of the statements I used to make all the time as administrator is that you can't over-communicate.
		And I think that's right in line with your comment.
		There needs to be very strong communication mechanisms.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Bob is a Republican in Baldwinville, Massachusetts.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
unidentified		All right.
		Good morning.
		Good morning.
		I suppose someone else stole my thunder, so I'm going to have to ask a different question.
		Have you ever heard of the Carboniferous Age, sir?
		Yes, I have.
		Okay, well, I just saw a chart the other day starting from the Carboniferous era through the Jurassic and all of it.
		And today, the global warming, it's actually at the coolest it has ever been in all time.
		So that's one thing I'd like to know.
		How come you guys always talk about global warming?
		And another thing I'd like to know is when you're taking your temperature standards for all around the globe, why are all of your thermometers set up in the middle of Corn Creek cities?
		Because it's well known that they are.
		You're recording your temperatures in the middle of the city in the hottest days of the year.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, let's get a response, Bob.
unidentified		Yeah, thank you for that, Bob.
		And I would say this is not the coolest period in the Earth's history, and it's certainly not the period with the lowest CO2.
		There is very clear climate change.
		One element of that is warming.
		And your comment about where the temperature, temperature measurements are made is not correct.
		Temperature measurements are made all over the world in the most remote locations, in the South Pole, in the Arctic, as well as in cities.
		Now, certainly there are consequences of making measurements in concrete areas, but the temperature measurements are made all over the world, including in the ocean and in the atmosphere.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Speaking of the ocean, Buddha Rolo asks you on X about the ocean current changing.
unidentified		Yeah, I think what Buddha is alluding to is there are a lot of questions about basically the currents, especially in the North Atlantic.
		So without getting into all of the details, there's a big, what's called conveyor belt of circulation in the ocean, and there are some concerns that with increased warming in the ocean, that that conveyor belt of circulation could be shut down or diminished.
		And the consequences of that, many scientists are looking into that, are quite significant.
		This is not likely to happen in a short amount of time.
		It would happen probably over centuries, but it could result in ice-locked cities in Great Britain, for example.
		But there's a lot of good research right now looking at how the circulation, especially in the Atlantic, is changing.
		And NOAA is part of a global effort with many of our partners around the world in making measurements throughout the North Atlantic, the South Atlantic, and the Southern Ocean to try to get a better handle on whether that's happening and if it is, how fast.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		On the Republican line in Allison Park, Pennsylvania.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Janet, you're next.
unidentified		I feel that the primary fault with this flooding and people not being aware was the fact that some time ago, I don't know whether it was the Texas state legislature, whether it was the municipalities, but the blaring sirens were voted down.
		And that would have really alerted people in time for them to get out.
		They have that in Tornado Alley.
		I have had a family member who lived in Tornado Alley that heard the sirens when initially they're saying, what does this mean?
		Everybody's running.
		That is a fault.
		And your guest had alluded in redundancies.
		He kind of glossed over it with a lot of other things about a siren.
		And that's what they needed.
		All those communications were good.
		They were overstaffed as far as the meteorologists, knowing that that was going to happen.
		But the one thing that was missing were the blaring sirens.
		And that was voted down, which should be implemented now that this tragedy has occurred.
		Yeah, Janet, thank you.
		I think we're in violent agreement on that, actually.
		I had indicated that I thought sirens, which work well, as you indicated, in Tornado Alley, could have been an important contribution to the emergency warning system here.
		I suspect the Texas state legislature will revisit that at this point.
		But having redundant systems with sirens with electronic alerts is critical.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Let's talk to Ken in Golden Valley, Arizona, Republican.
		Good morning.
		You're next.
unidentified		Yes, I think that Texas could take a lesson from Rapid City, South Dakota, where they had a similar flood back in the 70s, I believe, where several hundred people were killed.
		And what they did was create a green belt through the city on Rapid Creek, which no houses were allowed to be built back within that area.
		And so now that area is all a green belt.
		There's no houses there.
		Nothing was rebuilt.
		I think the biggest problem with life lost in floods and other natural disasters in the U.S. is often just due to population increase and people building in areas where they're prone to floods.
		So that's my comment.
		Yeah, thank you, Ken.
		And I think the comment you made is something that can be stated about, for example, coastal areas.
		We see a lot more damage from hurricanes because of development.
		Certainly flooding is another example.
		Wildfires, now homes are being built in places that have wildfires.
		So the good news there is that local governments are now more aware of how the environment needs to be taken into consideration when they're making decisions on zoning and on building codes.
		So we just need to, as voters, we need to let our legislators know that the environment is an important consideration.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And this article, just for people's awareness, three dead after floods sweep away homes in New Mexico.
		The governor there has declared a state of emergency for an area that was scarred by wildfires last year.
		And this is, we have this on X from Ajika who says, if we continue to have diminished disaster services, what can we do to protect ourselves and our families?
unidentified		Yeah, it's a great question, and I ask myself that question a lot.
		And I think part of the answer is learn about the abilities to get these watches and warnings.
		So take a minute.
		If you don't have a NOAA weather radio, consider getting one.
		Take a look at how your cell phone operates.
		Look at the last WEA that you got and say, okay, now I understand what that is.
		Make yourself the first recipient of the emergency alerts, and that would be enormously helpful.
		In this case, certainly at the camp, the kids and the counselors did not have phones, so they would not have received that.
		But others in the area might have been able to receive that information and communicate the threat accordingly.
		So help your neighbors out.
		Learn about the systems that you already have.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Let's talk to David in Chicopee, Massachusetts, Independent Line.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		My question is this.
		What makes humans think we can outthink Mother Nature?
		This has been happening for years and years and years.
		Mother Nature just comes down sometimes and does something with tornadoes and everything that are unexpected.
		Can't get away with it.
		I can't stand that there blaming this one and that one and this agency.
		Things happen.
		Things happen that we will never ever be able to control.
		So what, my question is, what makes them think they can control Mother Nature?
		Yeah, I mean, your question gets to this whole issue of behavior as well.
		I think we're in agreement that these things will continue to happen, and we're not suggesting that we can do things to stop tornadoes or stop these kind of floods, but we need to do two things, one of which is get as good in understanding and as long a lead time as possible on the magnitude and timing of these events.
		And then as I stated a little bit earlier, understand how people behave.
		Understand what they will or won't do in response to these events.
		So it's complicated and we just would like to be in a situation where the kind of devastating loss we saw in Texas doesn't repeat itself.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		That's Richard Spinrad, former National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Administrator and also former Commerce Undersecretary for Oceans and Atmosphere.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Thanks so much for joining us today.
unidentified		Thanks for having me, Mimi.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Up next, we will have Daniel Bunn, President and CEO of the Tax Foundation.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		He'll join us to break down the tax provisions in the one big beautiful bill that is now a law.
unidentified		We'll be right back 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.
		There are many ways to listen to C-SPAN radio anytime, anywhere.
		In the Washington, D.C. area, listen on 90.1 FM.
		Use our free C-SPAN Now app or go online to c-SPAN.org slash radio on SiriusXM Radio on channel 455, the TuneIn app, and on your smart speaker by simply saying, play C-SPAN Radio.
		Hear our live call-in program, Washington Journal, daily at 7 a.m. Eastern.
		Listen to House and Senate proceedings, committee hearings, news conferences, and other public affairs events live throughout the day.
		And for the best way to hear what's happening in Washington with fast-paced reports, live interviews, and analysis of the day, catch Washington today, weekdays at 5 p.m. and 9 p.m. Eastern.
		Listen to C-SPAN programs on C-SPAN Radio anytime, anywhere.
		C-SPAN, Democracy Unfiltered.
		Get C-SPAN wherever you are with C-SPAN Now, our free mobile video app that puts you at the center of democracy, live and on demand.
		Keep up with the day's biggest events with live streams of floor proceedings and hearings from the U.S. Congress, White House events, the courts, campaigns, and more from the world of politics, all at your fingertips.
		Catch the latest episodes of Washington Journal.
		Find scheduling information for C-SPAN's TV and radio networks, plus a variety of compelling podcasts.
		The C-SPAN Now app is available at the Apple Store and Google Play.
		Download it for free today.
		C-SPAN, Democracy Unfiltered.
		Non-fiction book lovers, C-SPAN has a number of podcasts for you.
		Listen to best-selling non-fiction authors and influential interviewers on the Afterwords podcast and on Q ⁇ A. Hear wide-ranging conversations with the non-fiction authors and others who are making things happen.
		And BookNotes Plus episodes are weekly hour-long conversations that regularly feature fascinating authors of nonfiction books on a wide variety of topics.
		Find all of our podcasts by downloading the free C-SPAN Now app or wherever you get your podcasts and on our website, c-span.org slash podcasts.
jimmy carter ▲ ● ▼		Democracy is always an unfinished creation.
ronald reagan ▲ ● ▼		Democracy is worth dying for.
george h w bush ▲ ● ▼		Democracy belongs to us all.
bill clinton ▲ ● ▼		We are here in the sanctuary of democracy.
george w bush ▲ ● ▼		Great responsibilities fall once again to the great democracies.
barack obama ▲ ● ▼		American democracy is bigger than any one person.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Freedom and democracy must be constantly guarded and protected.
unidentified		We are still at our core, a democracy.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		This is also a massive victory for democracy and for freedom.
unidentified		Washington Journal continues.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Joining us now to talk about the tax provisions in the One Big Beautiful bill is Daniel Bunn.
		He's the president of the Tax Foundation.
		Daniel, welcome to the program.
unidentified		Thank you for having me.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So the Tax Foundation, what point of view does it take on fiscal matters and taxes?
unidentified		So Tax Foundation is the nonprofit policy organization based here in DC.
		And we look at policies from the perspective of what's pro-growth, what's not, what's principled, what's not.
		And from the principled point of view, we're looking at policies that increase simplicity, transparency, neutrality, and the stability of the tax code.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So talking about the One Big Beautiful bill, it has been signed into law.
		Now, you've called it, you know, the good, the bad, and the ugly.
		Yes.
		So let's talk about the good.
		What do you see as the potential upside for taxes in that bill?
unidentified		So the biggest thing that you see out of this legislation that is good is permanence.
		So when I talk about principled tax policy, including stabilities, permanence is part of that.
		So for individual income taxpayers, for business taxpayers, there's a lot of permanence in this tax bill that allows them to plan their decision making, think about different investments, think about choices that they might make.
		And that's really the big positive.
		In addition to that, there are some provisions that are permanent that are really good for business investment and therefore really good for growth.
		So the treatment of research and development expenses, treatment of capital investment, treatment of investment and structures, a lot of these things move the needle in the right direction to support long-run economic growth.
		And that's really valuable to have in the tax code.
		So with permanence and with some of these boosts to business investment, you get a lot of the good out of the bill.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So the proponents of the bill are saying that those taxes are paid for by enhanced economic growth.
		How is that measured?
		How do you know how much economic growth is going to come as a result of these tax provisions?
unidentified		So at Tax Foundation, we have a model called our taxes and growth model that we utilize to look at policy changes and their impact on taxpayer decision making and the broader economy.
		And we're able to identify that when you have a tax policy that supports growth, you end up with a larger economy that can feed back into some additional revenue.
		Now, it's not true that this bill pays for itself with growth, but because of some of the policies that were made permanent, some of the growth-oriented policies, you get positive revenue feedback that covers roughly 20% of the cost of the bill, the revenue cost of the bill.
		And that's important, but clearly 20% is nowhere near 100%.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So what's your estimate of how much this will add to the deficit?
unidentified		Yeah, so over the long term, this is certainly going to increase the debt.
unidentified		Over the next 10 years, which is a number that a lot of lawmakers think about because the Congressional Budget Office uses a 10-year budget window, we are looking at a roughly $3 trillion increase in the debt over the next 10 years, and that's after accounting for the additional economic growth.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So let's take a look at some of the taxes and as to who will benefit the most from these taxes.
		So current income tax rates and brackets would become permanent.
		The standard deduction would increase.
		It will eliminate some personal exemptions.
		The child tax credit maximum becomes permanent.
		Talk us through some of that.
		It's a lot of numbers.
		Who really benefits from this and what is the benefit?
unidentified		Sure.
		So on the individual income tax side, I think it's important to think about what policy is currently and what the bill changes.
		So one of the things that we know based on recent evidence and based on IRS data is that the U.S. income tax code is very progressive, which means that higher income taxpayers pay more as a share of their income.
		And what this bill does is it extends current tax rates into the future so that the vast majority of the distribution of the tax code would go unchanged relative to what it is today.
		Now, there's different ways to look at this.
		The tax code was expected to expire at the end of the year.
		So if you assume that those expirations would have come in, then you look at this slightly differently.
		There are some provisions, like you mentioned, the child tax credit, the standard deduction.
		There's also some elements of the state and local tax cap that will increase the or will change some of the distributional elements.
		But I'm expecting going forward the progressivity of our tax system to roughly remain intact relative to where it is today.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And it will eliminate some personal exemptions.
		What does that mean?
		What exemptions are eliminated?
unidentified		Yeah, so way back in 2016, 2017, even before the changes were made in Trump's first presidency, taxpayers were allowed to claim exemptions for themselves or for their dependents.
		And policymakers decided to switch from that to a broader standard deduction for lots of Americans and to bring in a larger child tax credit.
		And this policy in the Big Beautiful Bill continues on that theme with a larger standard deduction, leaving personal exemptions in the dust and doubling down in some ways on the child tax credit policy, which moves from $2,000 to $2,200.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So does this make taxes more complicated or less complicated?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Tax when somebody's just filing their taxes.
unidentified		That's a great question.
		So there's a lot of elements of this bill that make taxes more complicated.
		And it really depends on the type of taxpayer you are.
		We haven't talked about some of the provisions that President Trump championed, including no tax on TIPs, no tax on seniors, no tax on auto loan interest, and no tax on overtime.
		Those are some things that will complicate this.
		There are other provisions connected to the state and local tax deduction cap and itemized deductions that might create a little confusion for some taxpayers, but it's not a clear move in a simpler direction for the tax code at all.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		If you'd like to join our conversation with Daniel Bunn of the Tax Foundation, you can give us a call now.
		The lines are bipartisan.
		So Democrats are on 2028-8,000.
		Republicans 202-748-8001.
		And Independents 202748-8002.
		So we talked about the good, now the bad and the ugly.
		You have said that there's too much money spent on, quote, political gimmicks and carve-outs.
		What did you mean by that?
unidentified		So I meant specifically these no tax on tips, no tax on overtime, the reduction, the special deduction for seniors, even the Trump accounts, all of these things create special constituencies in the tax code.
		Now, the tax code is riddled with a lot of special exclusions or deductions, and this just adds to that.
		And it's not really good policy.
		In fact, it would be better policy to use the revenue for those special carve-outs to provide broader base tax cuts.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So talk about the SALT deduction.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		This is state and local taxes.
unidentified		Yes, so the state and local tax deduction cap was brought in in 2017 as a sort of trade similar to the trade I was talking about earlier with the personal exemptions for the standard deduction.
		The alternative minimum tax was removed for a lot of taxpayers, and that had embedded in it a cap on itemized deductions, including state and local tax deductions.
		Transparent $10,000 cap on state and local tax deductions.
		Members from high-tax jurisdictions, high-tax states resisted that, were very upset with that, and we're looking over the course of the last eight years to change that.
		And what is now in law is a $40,000 cap on the state and local tax deduction and some phase outs for higher income taxpayers.
		But that's only temporary.
		It moves back to $10,000 after 2029.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		There is a provision in the bill for senior citizens.
		So that's people over 65 years old.
		There's also confusion about taxes on Social Security.
		Can you lay out everything for seniors and for Social Security?
unidentified		Yes.
		So there's a lot of confusion around here because of what the campaign promises were versus what Congress was actually able to deliver in this process.
		So in the campaign promise that Trump made was no taxes on Social Security.
		That is not in this legislation.
		In fact, what is in this legislation is a special $6,000 deduction for seniors that does eliminate, I would say, additional tax liability connected in theory to Social Security.
		But the process that Republicans used to pass this legislation would not allow them to touch Social Security policy, so they couldn't directly get to eliminating taxes on Social Security, which I think would have been bad policy anyways.
		But this $6,000 deduction is available to seniors with some income phase outs.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And one more question for you, which is the Trump accounts.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		What is that?
unidentified		Yes, so this is a new account that allows families to save for their children.
unidentified		The real benefit for families is a $1,000 contribution from the government for children born over the next several years.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		When you say contribution, that's a tax cut.
unidentified		Essentially, I mean, it's a direct payment.
		It's just cash that is required to be held in those accounts until children hit an appropriate age to be able to withdraw from those accounts.
		So after age 18, there's some ability to withdraw and then up through the next several years, able to withdraw more.
		And parents or employers could contribute additional money to those accounts.
		But relative to other savings vehicles in the tax code, it's not necessarily advantaged other than the fact that the government is putting $1,000 in that account.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And that is to be used for children only.
unidentified		Yes.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		But this is not a 529 account.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		It's not an additional account.
unidentified		No, this is an additional tax-preferred, well, not even all that tax-preferred account, but an additional savings vehicle for families.
		So different than a 529 account, different from an HSA.
		So this is another thing that when I look at the bill, I think, well, you could have simplified some of these savings vehicles for families, and instead they created a new one.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, let's talk to callers.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And Jay is up first, Independent, in Walnut, Mississippi.
unidentified		Yes, sir.
		Mamie asked you a question about Social Security.
		And you said that the seniors would get a $6,000 deduction or whatever.
		Is that just on Social Security?
		Is that on anything?
		Or is that $6,000 per person?
		I appreciate it.
		And I'm a little bit concerned with that, you know, because I think taxes on Social Security is already being paid anyhow.
		It's just rip off by the government.
		But anyhow, I appreciate the tax.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		We'll get you an answer, Jay.
unidentified		Thank you for that question.
		So yes, it's a $6,000 deduction, but it's not related to your Social Security income or taxes directly paid on Social Security.
		It's a separate deduction and it's available for the next several years.
		But this policy, again, because of the procedure that the Republicans used, they were not able to directly touch taxes on Social Security.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So that's a 6,000 deduction on any income regardless of whether it's coming from Social Security or from another source.
unidentified		Exactly.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
		And here's Margaret in St. Augustine, Florida, Republican.
		Good morning, Margaret.
unidentified		I'm a volunteer, AARP tax person that does taxes for people.
		So I can picture exactly how taxes work when we fill in the form.
		You just answered, you confirm what I had understood about Social Security.
		So it's why we try to be educators.
		So when people believe they're not paying tax anymore on Social Security, it'll be really interesting for me to be able to explain to them that no, whether you get Social Security or not, you're going to get this extra $6,000.
		My main question now is about tips because I have a grandson.
		So I'm trying to picture how that will work on his tax form.
		So he gets his salary and then there's that place for tips.
		And if I understand correctly, again, that the, if I understand correctly, that tips will be paid into Social Security.
		He won't ruin his opportunity to get more Social Security when he's older.
		Correct.
		I believe that is the case.
		There is a $25,000 deduction for tips that would be available, but I do not think that impacts the taxes that would go into Social Security.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Does that answer it, Margaret?
unidentified		Well, what's really important about that is the way they make it sound when you, oh, you're not going to pay tax on that for people to truly understand.
		If people assume that the lowest income people are the ones that are getting tips, and then they wouldn't pay Social Security, Psycho taxes on that, my gosh, when they're older, their Social Security would be so low.
		It just bothers me so much the way that people are misinformed about what taxes are really doing.
		So I appreciate the details.
		Thank you very much.
		You're welcome.
		Now, there may be some differences for people who are self-employed, who pay their Social Security taxes on their individual income tax forms because they do not have an employer withholding those.
		But for folks who have their taxes withheld by their employer, I don't believe there should be a change in what goes to fund those programs.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		On the independent line in Calvin, Pennsylvania, Tina, good morning.
unidentified		Hi, good morning.
		I have a couple points that I'd like to make.
		The first one with the last caller, what I told my son to do was go ahead and just take an extra $25 a week and stick it in that column, just in case.
		Number two, the Social Security, the SSI specifically.
		Is that ever going to be revamped?
		Because if you look at the columns, SSI, the state-level SSI, you have anywhere from 18 to 30-year-olds that are able-bodied citizens that can work, that are living off of, you know, Section 8, SNAP, Medicaid.
		They are on TikTok daily telling us they're getting child support from seven, eight different baby daddies, making $15,000 a month.
		When is that going to be investigated?
		And my last point is the baby tax.
		I've had two grandbabies born this year.
		So will that money be put into a, I call them savings bonds because that's what my daddy did for me.
		So can you kind of give me some guidance as especially with the SSI because my husband is on SSDI and now they're making him wait for Medicare, which I think is totally unfair.
		He has to pay $500 a month premium.
		He got the COVID shot, threw him into end-stage pneumonia, and now he's on oxygen 24-7 with the 12% lung capacity.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Tina, let's get a response.
unidentified		Thanks so much for that question, Tina.
		So on SSI, there have been bipartisan concerns about some of the things that you've mentioned, but it takes a lot of work to get consensus to move legislation.
		And I haven't seen enough effort to give you an answer to say that that's in the near term or long term, but I understand the problems that you're identifying and the challenge for getting those issues addressed.
		With respect to the other pieces of your questions, I think it's important to recognize that in this legislation, there was a focus just on the tax side and some changes on Medicaid and SNAP as well.
		But for this legislation, the motivation was avoiding the expiration and the tax cliff at the end of the year.
		For the child provisions, there is a $2,200 child tax credit in this legislation.
		And then the Trump accounts that I was mentioning earlier, the $1,000 contribution from the government, we have to wait to see how those are going to be set up, what the guidance is, and what financial institutions are going to be offering those.
		But this will be funds that are available to be invested in the market.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And William in Glenclove, New York said this by text.
		Please speak specifically to the fact that a good many of the hyped benefits are temporary.
		When do some of them expire?
unidentified		Yeah, so this legislation addresses certainly a tax cliff that would be happening at the end of 2025, but it creates a new tax cliff at the end of 2028 for a lot of these provisions.
		So when Republicans were looking to add some of these new features to the tax code, they put them in temporarily rather than permanently.
		So the no tax on tips, no tax on seniors, or the $6,000 deduction for seniors, no tax on overtime, auto loan interest, those sorts of things are temporary.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Let's talk to Willie in Little Rock, Arkansas, Democrat.
		Good morning, Willie.
		Willie, are you there?
		In Little Rock?
		Ken in Little Neck, New York, Republican.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Hi.
		I'm wondering, my wife and I are both seniors, and regarding the $6,000 credit the government is going to offer, is that $6,000 for each of us, or is it just for the return, one credit?
		Thank you for that question.
		I believe it's for $6,000 for single and then $12,000 for married filing jointly.
		But that is something that is, again, temporary in this legislation.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Here's Kyle in Honolulu, Hawaii, Independent.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Hi, Kyle.
unidentified		Aloha Hamimi.
		Aloha, Daniel.
		How are you guys?
		I have three points.
		I'll be real quick.
		Daniel, I think the bill has it backward with regard to the deduction.
		I usually, well, I almost always file standard deduction because if you itemize, if you get a refund, you got to claim that refund on next year's taxes.
		I'm wondering what your take is on that.
		Second point I have is of the earned income credit.
		You seem to need to have children to take advantage of that.
		This is kind of ridiculous.
		The third point is Social Security that here we go again, that $6,000 deduction.
		If you don't, if you're a senior getting Social Security, if you don't already have federal taxes taken out of your yearly or monthly, could you conceivably get a refund because of that such high $6,000 deduction?
		And I'll listen off the air.
		God bless Aloha.
		Thank you for those questions.
		So on the standard deduction, this legislation extends the policy of having a higher standard deduction for single individuals.
		It's going to be $15,750,000, $31,500 for married filing joint, and those will be indexed to inflation.
		Regarding the earned income credit, this legislation doesn't adjust what you're talking about with the treatment of children for the earned income credit.
		And the earned income credit is, I think, ripe for reform, but this legislation does not address that.
		On the Social Security, so the impact of this on your tax refund is something that you will have to talk to your tax accountant about, but it is a $6,000 deduction.
		It is not a $6,000 credit or even a refundable credit.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Let's talk to Bernard, New York, New York, Democrat.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning to you.
		So I have two questions.
		The first concerns different effective dates for the kick-in of the various provisions, and what is the policy reason behind that?
		And the other is, what are the likely behavioral effects of the exemption for tips?
		And over time, is that likely to distort the behavior and introduce opportunities to game the system?
		So on effective dates, one of the things that you see often with tax legislation or budget legislation in general is policymakers trying to make the budget numbers work, utilizing different effective dates and saying, well, some things are temporary, even though the intention is permanent policy, but it changes the budget numbers the way the official scorekeepers look at the policies.
		With respect to the behavioral impacts, I have been impressed by the way legislators have circumscribed these benefits, the no tax on overtime, no tax on tips.
		But I do think that there will be interest for folks to take advantage of those as much as possible.
		The no tax on tips is geared towards kind of traditional tipped employment.
		So it's not necessarily that you're going to have lawyers and accountants all of a sudden classifying all of their income as tips.
		And then overtime uses some Department of Labor regulations to identify overtime.
		But there will be some behavioral impact.
		Anytime you see a policy change that people have the ability to react to and change their behavior to get a benefit, then there will be some behavioral impact.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		What do you think of the IRS's ability to react to these changes in the tax code?
		Are they staffed enough?
		Do they have the technical resources to be able to deal with these changes?
unidentified		So that's a great question.
		So one thing that lawmakers did that I think helps the IRS is they passed this legislation mid-year.
		A lot of people were expecting this legislation to pass very late in the year, which would have required the IRS to shift a lot of things very quickly in order to prepare for the next filing season.
		So the IRS has some time to adjust and put out guidance and put out new information for taxpayers and people that are going to be auditing the tax returns within the IRS.
		There is a concern that I have for the complexity that this bill adds without looking at additional resources for the IRS.
		The IRS needs to modernize a lot of its systems, needs to focus on customer service.
		But in general, I think this bill doesn't necessarily put the IRS in a horrible position, but it's always nice to see the IRS to have a little bit more flexible resources to be able to enforce the code as written.
		And the code is really darn complicated.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Here's Mo, Hyattsville, Maryland Independent.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		How are you doing?
		Can you allow the guests and I to go back and forth if I have a follow-up question, but mine is related to rideshare, Uber Lyft, DoorDash, those sort of things.
		We get tips, but we file a 1099 at the end of the year.
		We're not paying into Social Security, et cetera.
		So if I make $30,000 and $5,000 of that is in tips, do I not have to claim that $5,000?
		I mean, what's your opinion on that?
		And I would like to hear your response while I'm still on the phone, in case I have a follow-up.
		Thanks.
		Sure, that's a great question.
		I think the intent is for those tips to be eligible, but we will have to see further guidance from the IRS and the guidance from different tax advisors on how to actually comply with the guidance from the IRS.
		So I think at this point where we are today, I think you should expect to be eligible for this, but we'll have to wait for further guidance to really see how this works out as far as compliance and reporting is concerned.
		Thanks.
		No follow-ups.
		Appreciate that.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Here's Jim, Cairo, Missouri, Democrat.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Jim.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I'm on Social Security.
		I pay no income tax on my Social Security.
		Tax cut doesn't do me a bit of good.
		Now, the idea of paying less taxes, although it doesn't apply to me, I can see how that's really popular.
		On the other hand, that's how the government gets their money to operate.
		You cannot cut the budget enough to do anything about the debt.
		You know, tax cuts like throwing a paycheck away.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So Jim is saying that the tax cuts don't benefit him.
		Is that true?
		Does he not get anything?
unidentified		So there's a lot of individuals like Jim who pay no net liability to the federal government every year.
		And that means that if you're trying to cut taxes, it's unlikely for those people to benefit.
		So if your liability is zero this year, it's likely that your liability will be zero next year if your income doesn't change or if your circumstances don't change.
		There are some features of the tax code that provide a refundable credit that says even if your net liability is zero, the federal government is going to give you some money, but that's not the way this deduction for seniors works.
		It is really only limited to a few pieces of the tax code, including things like the child tax credit and the earned income credit.
		And that point that he's making about the impact of this on him personally and then the broader question about, you know, how does the government finance itself?
		The government finances itself primarily off of higher income individuals.
		There's a large portion of the population that pay no net income tax.
		Now they may pay payroll taxes and that certainly funds some of these larger entitlement programs.
		But the large majority of income taxes paid are by higher income people.
		So when you think about the impact of this bill and how future legislatures might be interested in funding the government in different ways, a lot of times those policies are focused on the people who are currently paying, not on the people who don't pay.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Now, what about the taxes paid by small businesses and LLCs?
unidentified		Sure.
		That's a great question.
		So one of the things that this bill does that extends policy from the 2017 bill is it provides a 20% deduction for pass-through businesses.
		Now, these pass-through businesses are not all small businesses, but they are businesses where the taxes are paid on individual income tax forms.
		So the 20% deduction was meant by policymakers to be an adjustment to pass-through taxation at the same time that the corporate tax rate was coming down.
		I disagree with that policy, but that was the intent that lawmakers had.
		And this extends that 20% deduction and makes it permanent.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Here's Robert in Independent in Gaylord, Michigan.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Robert.
unidentified		Yes.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Go right ahead.
unidentified		Thank you.
		My question is, I have several friends who are CPAs and do taxes, and I was curious about the upper 10% or 1% of the wealth in this country that they talk about, the CEOs and personal ownership for businesses, that sort of thing, that these folks don't claim an income, but rather their revenue stream comes from their ties with corporations and that sort of thing.
		And they basically, their life expenditures are based on like stock.
		I'm not real clear on the actual understanding of this, but they don't basically pay an income tax.
		Is that true or not?
		So a lot of CEOs have their compensation in stock options or equity in their companies rather than in a salary.
		What that means is that their performance in leading the company and increasing value in the company is directly tied to that company's stock price.
		And the income tax that they would pay is through capital gains when they exercise those stock options.
		So they would not draw a salary and pay maybe every year, but they would certainly pay when they exercise their stock options.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Jim in Middletown, Delaware, Democrat, you're on with Daniel Bunn of the Tax Foundation.
unidentified		Would the $6,000 deduction for seniors be in addition to the $15,000 standard deduction?
		Yes.
		Thank you.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		That was quick.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Don, Dripping Springs, Texas, Republican, you're next.
unidentified		Yes, Daniel, in regard to the gentleman from Hawaii who was talking about earned income tax credit.
		As far as I'm, my understanding of that is there is an earned income tax credit for a single person or a person without children or even a family without children, as long as they are between the ages of 25 and 64, they can still get earned income tax credit.
		It's not a great amount, and I think maximum that they can earn is about $19,000 and something.
		Would you please clarify that for me?
		Thank you.
		Yes, you're correct.
		So the earned income credit is available for folks without children, but it's much smaller for those families.
		I don't have the specific phase-out range in my head, but yes, you're right.
		It is for lower income individuals and families.
		It's much larger for families.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Here's Brian, Democrat in Miami, Florida.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Hi, Brian.
unidentified		Hey, how are you doing?
		Doing well.
		Yeah.
		So, yeah, I mean, look, I see, you know, the thing is, I hear a lot always, and I'm a Democrat, but even from the Democrats, you know, I despise the argument of rich versus poor, right?
		What I want to know every time there's a tax bill presented is how much I'm going to pay less, right?
		Me.
		And I, you know, I don't consider myself, you know, a business owner necessarily.
		I do have a business, but it's just a one-man shot, right?
		I don't employ anybody.
		And so when I realize that the tax deduction of this law, you know, yeah, it gives me an extra, it increases the exemption, but it deletes the, I mean, it increases the standard deduction, but decreases, I mean, it eliminates the exemption.
		And on top of that, because I have kids, all my child support payments are now not tax deductible.
		And so now I'm giving somebody else income that I have to pay taxes for.
		And to me, as a matter of just constitutional principle, it is not right because taxation should be a right for representation.
		And how am I paying somebody else's taxes?
		How does that make sense?
		Yeah, thank you.
		Thank you for those questions.
		Yeah, so on the standard deduction change with the personal exemption, again, I think most taxpayers were made better off by that swap, including the additional child tax credit for a lot of families.
		Now for the tax treatment of payments for your children, you're right.
		There is double taxation there, and that was a policy choice that lawmakers made.
		That doesn't make it the right principle on tax policy grounds, but that is the choice that lawmakers made.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		On the independent line, Tim is in DeMont, Indiana.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
unidentified		Overall, does the SALT tax benefit people under 65 or over 65?
		So the SALT cap change really benefits individuals and families in higher tax states.
		It doesn't really have an impact by age.
		So if you're in a state or city that has high taxes, then you might benefit from the higher SALT cap, but it doesn't discriminate or focus on age for its benefits.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And those are only up to a certain income level.
unidentified		Right.
unidentified		After that income level, you just start phasing out and goes, and it actually is another one of these provisions that's temporary and goes back to 10,000 after a few years.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Here's Jeff in Minnesota independent line.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Jeff.
unidentified		Good morning.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Go right ahead, Jeff.
unidentified		Okay, the question I had asked was basically, I've yet to see any definition of what the work week will actually consist of, whether it will be 30 hours a week or 40 hours a week, 50 hours, in reference to determining overtime, because of the fact that, and the other with that is Social Security payments.
		Will they be taking the 7.5% from that overtime and sending it into the IRS?
		And will the employer be sending in the 7.5% on the overtime?
		Because of the fact that if all of a sudden you have an employee that's working 30 hours a week and then he has 30 hours of overtime and there's no need to pay Social Security on that overtime, that's a big change.
		Yeah, that's a great question.
		So I believe this is focused on a 40-hour work week based on Department of Labor regulations.
		So we'll have to see further guidance on that for how employers are actually supposed to withhold taxes from those additional payments.
		But this legislation does not change the way Social Security or Medicare taxes would impact that additional income.
		So I believe that it would be the case that those Social Security and Medicare taxes would come out of even those overtime payments.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		On the Republican line in Newport, Kentucky, Gary, you're next.
unidentified		Good morning.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Morning.
unidentified		I just want to try to clear things, clear one thing up.
		A lot of people seem to be confused about this no tax on Social Security.
		If you're not paying taxes on Social Security now, the way I understand it, you won't be paying them in the future.
		But if, like me, I have a pension, and so it puts me in, I have other income, and I do pay taxes on Social Security every year.
		And I pay big on Social Security.
		Now, is there a cap on that?
		I'm talking about $70,000 a year, and I draw $30,000 from Social Security.
		So I still pay taxes on my Social Security.
		So it is a limited benefit to $6,000.
		So that wouldn't wipe out your complete tax liability.
		And the goal of the policy is not to do that, but to provide a tax cut for seniors.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		On the line for Democrats in Exton, Pennsylvania, Connie, good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Go right ahead, Connie.
unidentified		Okay.
		And my question is, I have been curious for years as to why the government has not paid back the loans to Social Security that they made in the past.
		That's a great question.
		So Social Security has been on an unsustainable financing path for many years.
		And the trust fund is set to be exhausted in the early 2030s, which would lead to an automatic benefit cut.
		So for many years, it's really general funds that are being utilized in some way to support some of these benefits.
		And that will be the case if the trust fund truly gets exhausted.
		But the borrowing back and forth, ultimately, if you think about the governance balance sheet as a whole, it's, in my view, relatively meaningless and something that a lot of people focus on when really the policy matter at hand is thinking about the long-term sustainability of Social Security.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And Jeff in Acton, Massachusetts, Independent.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Jeff, good morning.
unidentified		Hi there.
		How are you?
		Good.
		Daniel.
		I don't know if the question had been answered already, but I had a question about Irma and whether or not that is negatively or positively impacted.
		Could you explain?
		I'm sorry.
		IRMA.
		Oh, IRMAA.
		It is a tax that you pay on, well, it's an additional amount that you pay on Medicare if you make over a certain amount.
		Sure, sure.
		So that has not changed in this legislation.
		Okay.
		And I guess the second question, and I'm not sure this is in your purview, but given all the tariffs, presumably there's income from that.
		And I'm just wondering whether that money going?
		Is it going to the manufacturers as a, you know, to ease the cost of the increase in price of goods coming in?
		Or is it going into Trump's slush fund?
		Where's this money going?
		That's a great question.
		So, in the last Trump administration, we saw a lot of the tariff revenue that came in ended up going back out the door to subsidize farmers that were facing higher prices abroad due to retaliatory tariffs from other countries.
		It's not clear whether that will be the case again this year.
		When we model out the tariffs and we look at the long-term impact, if the tariffs were in place for several years or through the next 10 years, we're looking at about $2 trillion in additional revenue.
		That's our conventional estimate.
		When you look at the dynamics and the impact of retaliatory tariffs abroad, you end up with the smaller number.
		But there is significant revenue coming in from the tariffs, but you're absolutely right that it's increasing costs for manufacturers, it's increasing costs for a lot of our imported inputs to our manufacturing processes, and that's really concerning.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		One more quick question for you before we end on text: How permanent is permanent in this bill?
		Can a future Congress revoke or change these permanent provisions?
		That's from Peter in Texas.
unidentified		That's a great point, Peter.
		So, any future Congress could change the way this bill addresses tax policy.
		You would need, of course, majorities and a president to be able to sign that legislation into law.
		But the pieces that are permanent are permanent, subject to future legislation.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, that's Daniel Bunn, president of the Tax Foundation, and you can find out more at taxfoundation.org.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Thanks so much for coming in.
unidentified		Thank you for having me.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And we'll wrap up today's Washington Journal with Open Forum.
		You can start calling in now.
		The numbers are Democrats 202-748-8000, Republicans, 202748-8001, and it's 202-748-8002 for independents.
		We'll be right back.
unidentified		America marks 250 years and C-SPAN is there to commemorate every moment.
		From the signing of the Declaration of Independence to the voices shaping our nation's future, we bring you unprecedented all-platform coverage, exploring the stories, sights, and spirit that make up America.
		Join us for remarkable coast-to-coast coverage, celebrating our nation's journey like no other network can.
		America 250.
		Over a year of historic moments.
		Only on the C-SPAN networks.
		C-SPAN shop.org is C-SPAN's online store.
		Browse through our latest collection of C-SPAN products, apparel, books, home decor, and accessories.
		There's something for every C-SPAN fan, and every purchase helps support our nonprofit operations.
		Shop now or anytime at cspanshop.org.
		Looking to contact your members of Congress?
		Well, C-SPAN is making it easy for you with our 2025 Congressional Directory.
		Get essential contact information for government officials all in one place.
		This compact, spiral-bound guide contains bio and contact information for every House and Senate member of the 119th Congress.
		Contact information on congressional committees, the President's Cabinet, federal agencies, and state governors.
		The Congressional Directory costs $32.95 plus shipping and handling, and every purchase helps support C-SPAN's non-profit operations.
		Scan the code on the right or go to c-spanshop.org to order your copy today.
		It isn't just an idea.
		It's a process, a process shaped by leaders elected to the highest offices and entrusted to a select few with guarding its basic principles.
		It's where debates unfold, decisions are made, and the nation's course is charted.
		Democracy in real time.
		This is your government at work.
		This is C-SPAN, giving you your democracy unfiltered.
		Washington Journal continues.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Welcome back.
		We are in open forum until the end of the program.
		And at the end of the program, assuming they start right on time, we will take you to the Senate.
		And they will be holding a hearing for nominees of the Department of Commerce, including the administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, known as NOAA.
		And that is going to be the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee.
		Again, that's live coverage right here on C-SPAN.
		You can also watch it on our app, C-SPANNOW, and online at c-span.org.
		Well, President Trump was talking about how he was unhappy with Russia's President Putin.
		This is CNBC with the headline, Trump not happy with Putin, accuses a Russian leader of throwing bullshit.
		And sorry for the language, but here is the President talking about that.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		People are dying, and it should end.
		And I don't know, we get a lot of bullshit thrown at us by Putin for you want to know the truth.
		He's very nice all the time, but it turns out to be meaningless.
unidentified		Do you want to say something?
		Lindsey Graham has a sanctions bill on Russia.
		Do you want him to move on?
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		I'm looking at it.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, no, I'm looking at the Senate is passing and passed a very, very tough sanctions.
unidentified		Yeah, I'm looking at it.
kristi noem ▲ ● ▼		Can you sign up?
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		It's an optional bill.
		It's totally at my option.
		They pass it totally at my option and to terminate totally at my option.
		And I'm looking at it very strongly.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And also on that, this is some news from Newsweek.
		It says Donald Trump threatened Putin and Xi he would bomb Moscow and Beijing.
		There's audio of that.
		It said that Donald Trump said he had separately warned both Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping that he would bomb their respective capitals if either of them invaded their neighbors.
		Its newly released audio is broadcast by CNN.
		It says that the U.S. President was recorded speaking at a private fundraiser in 2024 about his conversations with Putin and Xi.
		We're in an open forum, so we'll go right to the phones.
		Independent Line, East Islip, New York.
		Rob, you're on the air.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
unidentified		Thank you for the venue.
steve pieczenik ▲ ● ▼		To see the Democratic Party whine about cutting spending, regulations without an alternative solution is very disingenuous.
unidentified		I'm sure the vast majority of critical thinking Americans feel the same way, and I just don't understand how people do not want to see some kind of movement and change in the way our government is spending money.
		If my household had a debt proportionally equivalent to our country's 36 trillion, the sledgehammer would come out.
		We need to get back to basics.
		Politicians need to return to being representatives of us.
		The media needs to be honest and balanced and informative.
		We need old-fashioned debates.
		All I see is the complaints back and forth, whether it's left, right.
		It's just pathetic.
		We need to straighten this country out.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		We need old-fashioned debates.
		What do you mean, Rob?
		Between who?
unidentified		Between the parties.
		We do not see.
		It's nothing but vitriol.
		It's nothing but people go back and forth with whether it's untruths or bending the truth.
		You know, President Trump, he says a lot of stupid things.
		And, you know, sometimes I shrill at it.
		But we need our representatives to sit down.
		You have something coming up in the fall.
		Yes, he's fired.
steve pieczenik ▲ ● ▼		And I hope, and I think I will see, some clear back and forth that will address the issues and not all of the noise.
unidentified		That's all we hear now is noise.
unidentified		Thank you.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And here's Robert, Republican, in Pittsfield, Massachusetts.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
unidentified		Hi, yes.
		Good morning.
		Thanks, Dak.
		First time I called, too.
		I got through.
		I just want to say I think Trump's upset what went on, like with all that court hearings and whatnot, that he probably like a scorned person.
		I've been through a lot, too, with my family, where you just, you know, you build a shell up, and it's, you know, you don't, sometimes you don't get over it.
		I think he feels hurt from all that.
		I think he's doing a good job.
		I've been working since I was 10 at my father's butcher store, and prices are always going up.
		I was slicing Colquets when they were like a dollar a pound.
		Now they're six, seven, eight dollars a pound.
		You know, and I heard all this back then when I was a little kid.
		Oh, this is too much.
		Nothing's changed.
		You got to do the best you can and try and try to get along with people and believe in God and make the best of what you have.
		But this whole thing, things aren't going to change.
		We could have come back in 15 years.
		I could call you in 15 years, and it's going to be the same conversation.
		This is high.
		I just read Medicare is going up to 205 $206, I think, next year, or I forget one.
		I believe next year.
		Yeah, I was just reading it this morning.
		So increase like another $20.
		I mean, things go up and up.
		People have to adjust, and you have to do the best you can.
		And I think Trump's doing the best.
		And, you know, what can you say?
		This is the president we have.
		I think he's definitely better than Biden.
		But, you know, to me, that was a lot.
		The guy couldn't even stand up.
		I mean, come on.
		You can't have that.
		That's absurd.
		Okay.
		Thank you.
		Thanks for taking my call.
		Thank you.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Robert.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And on the line for Democrats in St. Louis, Missouri, LaRuth, good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		This is what I was calling about.
		I'm a senior.
		And this is the worst president I have ever seen before.
		He had so many seniors so upset when they were constantly talking about doing something with Social Security.
		Plus, he talks like no other president before.
		He talks so stupid.
		He uses the language no other presidents use.
		And I'm sick and tired of everybody always bringing up by his name comparing him to Trump.
donna in west virginia ▲ ● ▼		Another thing, I do not understand how a 34-times convicted felon was even allowed to be on the ballot.
unidentified		Thank you for accepting my call.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Here's Michael in Wyoming, Michigan, Independent Line.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I would like to thank you for taking my call, first of all.
		And I'm disagreeing with what I hear from most of the people.
		Donald Trump is not doing a good job.
		The tariff and everything.
		And if you are paying attention, your grocery bill is getting higher and higher.
		And so some people just can't some people just can't stand to absorb it.
		So we need a change.
		And people need to come together and realize what's going on in the United States.
		And I think that's about to happen.
		Thank you.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Let's talk to Susan next in Ohio, Republican line.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I wanted to make just a few quick fast points.
		From Business Insider, they said that Trump is the only living president whose family never owned slaves.
		The next point I wanted to make is that if you go to the Boston Herald, maybe you can look it up on your computer there, and look under Boston Herald, $30,000 to illegals over two years to buy a house.
		And the LA Times, the state legislature passed $150,000 for illegals to buy a house.
		And Biden set aside billions of hundreds of billions of dollars for illegals to set up businesses, get cars, and get housing.
		And my point is, so many of your people of color who call talk about reparations.
		Well, yeah, I think the government is giving out reparations, just not to American citizens.
		They're giving reparations to these people here illegally.
		And I think that if some of your people knew some of these things, that it would help them understand how important it is that the people here illegally who are breaking our laws, who are not coming in the correct way.
		What about all the other people in the world who want to come to America?
		They can't come because they can't just walk across and get in.
		So those people have to wait and do it properly while these other people here illegally, do we want to become South America or do we really want diversity?
		And I think you have to ask yourself those questions.
		And one other quick point.
		The rage from the Democrats, they seem to feel that because they're upset, their level of rage entitles them to destroy things and disobey the laws.
		I was one time working with a pro-life group and went to colleges, and the liberals would come and the Democrat, they would throw stuff all over our paperwork.
		They would destroy our tables.
		They would upend our tables and they would spit on us and throw things on us.
		Well, I have free speech too.
		And I don't deserve to be treated that way by somebody who feels that because they are outraged, it entitles them to destroy my things.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Susan.
		The Secretary of Agriculture, Brooke Rollins, announced yesterday a multi-agency plan to ban sales of farmland to Chinese buyers over concerns about national security.
		Here's a portion of that.
brooke leslie rollins ▲ ● ▼		With this announcement today, we are taking this purpose and our American farmland back.
		American agriculture is not just about feeding our families, but about protecting our nation and standing up to foreign adversaries who are buying our farmland, stealing our research, and creating dangerous vulnerabilities in the very systems that sustain us.
		Reshoring and near shoring our food and agriculture supply chain is essential for our nation's security.
		In coordination with the White House, the Departments of Treasury, Defense, Homeland Security, and Justice, as well as state governors, state agriculture commissioners, local tribal, and territorial governments today, we announced the USDA's National Farm Security Action Plan.
		This plan includes seven key action items, and there's a lot of people here that I want you to hear from, so I'm not going to go one by one, but just very quickly, it's on our website.
		The press has gotten a preview of it, and we can ask some questions once we finish the main program.
		But very quickly, and perhaps the most important, the first of the seven is securing and protecting American farmland ownership, actively engaging at every level of government to take swift legislative and executive action to ban the purchase of American farmland by Chinese nationals and other foreign adversaries.
		Standing on the shoulders of great governors, three of whom are standing behind me, who have already been leading the way on this issue.
		And at the federal government level, working to do everything within our everything within our ability, including presidential authorities, to claw back what has already been purchased by China and other foreign adversaries.
		Additionally, working with the Treasury of the Secretary of the Treasury, along with our Defense Department on memorandums to ensure that moving forward, there is a much more intentional look at who is buying what in this country and from where they are in the world.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And you can watch that whole conference on our website at c-span.org.
		We're an open forum and we're talking to Martin now in LaGrange, Kentucky, Democrat.
		Good morning, Martin.
unidentified		Good morning.
doug in kansas ▲ ● ▼		I called because of the conversation regarding tariffs, and I wanted to just explain something.
unidentified		First of all, importers pay the tariffs when the items reach the port of entry in the United States.
		So, for example, if you imported something for $100 from whatever country, when it reaches the port of entry in the United States, they have to pay $125.
		Now, the question is: who collects that money?
		Well, the United States government collects that money.
		So, the importer has a choice.
russell in wyoming ▲ ● ▼		He either eats the $25 that he paid or he passes it on to the consumer.
unidentified		So, the question is: who is actually paying the tariffs?
		And that's the American consumer.
		And recently, the President of the United States stated that they've collected over, I think, a trillion dollars that's gone to the United States Treasury.
		And so, the point is that the American consumer is actually paying that tax.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Martin.
		This is Albert in Stockton, California, Independent.
		Good morning, Albert.
unidentified		Good morning, Washington Post.
		I'll keep it real short on the Trump issues.
		I believe it's going good.
		I don't want to bash nobody, Democrats or Republican.
		I have the luxury to sit and be on vacation for a week, get paid.
		America is just like awesome.
		Stockton, California has a new mayor.
		We have levies, they're trying to clean.
		And I don't want to disrespect the outside humans.
		Hopefully, we can help them.
		But I just want to leave with one thing: I travel a mile or a hundred miles from right where I stand, north, south, and east, and it is the most beautiful agricultural state in the world.
		And my Hispanic brothers are out there working, and we are not tough.
		It is the texture of our skin and our spirit.
		And so, I just want to thank America for everything.
		All my family has good jobs.
		Everybody's safe in Texas.
		My family's in Texas.
		Two bus drivers aren't driving bus because of, you know, everybody's safe.
		So, I just want to Think America and just wish everybody well today.
		And I don't believe there is any prejudices in America.
		It is all about just being free and everybody gets a chance.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Albert, this is David now, Republican in Jacksonville, North Carolina.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
unidentified		Yes, good morning.
		Just a couple quick points.
		I do believe that Donald Trump is doing a great job.
		I think many of our people that, well, I retired after 27 years in the Navy as an officer.
		They don't know what direct leadership is.
		And when you take care of your own people, I mean, any person, if they don't take care of their own family, they're going to go broke.
		Well, the job of the president as the executive is to direct the legislation to come the country in ways which protect the people so that we are safe and we don't go broke based upon outside influence.
		So I just think that's important.
		One other thing about Social Security, everybody talks about it going broke.
		It was under Lyndon Baines Johnson, remember, a Democratic president, who took the Social Security out of its own fund and placed it under the general fund about 1964-65.
		I remember that.
		And so after that time, they say, well, the money is there, but it's IOUs.
		So if the problem with Social Security, people are saying it's going to go broke, it's because the federal government can't keep its hands off of lucrative as well as profitable money supplies, which were designed to keep us retired people with an eternal, with a lifelong, stable income.
		Of course, you also have other resources of income, and I think people that rely only on Social Security, that was a losing gambit at that because you're you.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, David.
		And this is an article in the Associated Press.
		It says Trump caught off guard by Pentagon's abrupt move to pause Ukraine's weapons deliveries.
		It says that the president's decision to send more defensive weapons to Ukraine came after he privately expressed frustration with Pentagon officials for announcing a pause in some deliveries last week, a move that he felt wasn't properly coordinated with the White House.
		It says the Pentagon announced last week it would hold back some air defense missiles, precision-guided artillery, and other weapons pledged to Ukraine because of what U.S. officials said were concerns that American stockpiles were in short supply.
		Trump said Monday that the U.S. will have to send more weapons to Ukraine, effectively reversing the move.
		Here is Maggie in Hepzabah, Georgia, Democrat.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Yes, good morning.
		Actually, Martin, I believe was his name, took my thunder about the tariffs.
		There isn't money coming in from other countries that have tariffs levied against them.
		It's the American people that are paying the tariffs because it is applied to products that come in through the port, and then we pay.
		It comes out of our pockets.
		So I just really wish that somebody would call President Trump.
		I mean, just call him.
		I can't even talk now.
		Just let him know, hey, you're not right.
		You're lying.
		People are, American people are the ones who are paying the taxes, not the country.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Maggie.
		And on the independent line, Nikolai in Cantonsville, Maryland.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I just want to say that I'm really frustrated with the Democratic Party right now because that big, beautiful bill passed, and what it is quintessentially is austerity.
		It cuts all of the social programs which help poor people, whether that be SNAP or Medicaid or anything else.
		It also cuts Planned Parenthood, which does more than just abortions.
		It does primary care.
		It's my primary provider.
		I'm worried to hell that I might have to switch providers and switch to something more expensive.
		It's awful, completely unearth, and I am dissatisfied because Democrats aren't being aggressive enough in their opposition.
		They're being weak.
		The only thing I've been seeing when they were in Congress trying to prevent the bill from being passed was just weak speeches.
		I want to see more than weak speeches.
		I want to see a real opposition.
		I want to see you organize with the unions that are Democratic and do strikes, something.
		It's frustrating.
		It's really frustrating.
		And that's all I have to say.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And this is Delane in Pinkard, Alabama, Republican.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Delaine.
unidentified		Good morning.
		First, I want to compliment Albert with his positive attitude, more of what we need, and David with his common sense, more people we need to sit down and listen to.
		I'd like to talk about the ICE Ages.
		I'm just totally coming from a law enforcement family, totally concerned about the Democratic rhetoric where they're literally threatening our federal law enforcement officers.
		Also, tariffs, yes, I think that we might have some of the responsibility, but also the companies are going to have some of the responsibility of the increase.
		And also, what's going on in Texas?
		I thought I would have heard more about it today, how horrible the situation is, and I know that you believe that too.
		I know America believes that.
		Maybe we can come together over one thing, and that's the America Strong.
		America can instead of America can't.
		Thank you.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And here's Gene in Kingsford, Tennessee, Democrat.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Gene.
unidentified		Yes.
		This call is being recorded.
		He's been in cahoots with all those dictators ever since he's been in there even the first time.
		And he needs to be worrying about his own people and his own country.
		And I think he's autistic, really.
		He may have a mad case, but I think he's really autistic.
sherry peel jackson ▲ ● ▼		And we don't need somebody like it in the White House, running the country.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Here's Virginia in Florida, Independent Line.
		Good morning, Virginia.
		Virginia, are you there?
unidentified		Hello.
		I would like to talk about two things.
		First, Social Security.
		It should be off-limits in the budget.
		There was $259,000 borrowed by Bush, the father, to give tax cuts to the rich, number one.
		Number two, we all saw all the three tanks gathering at the border of Ukraine for weeks by Putin.
		Putin started that war, and he should be stopped by us.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Okay, and this is Charles in Manhattan Beach, California, Independent Line.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I just want to follow up on the call from Georgia about the tariffs.
		It's the fact that tariffs are paid by the consumers here in the United States.
		Yesterday in the cabinet meeting, Trump said that billions and billions were pouring into the country.
		They're not pouring into the country.
		The money's here.
		It's our money, and we will be paying for it.
		So I'm not concerned about much more than the fact that why would he lie to us about something that is so obviously obviously a lie, and he continues to lie about it.
		So we have to be concerned about someone who would lie about such a fundamental issue and lie repeatedly.
		So I appreciate you taking my call.
		Thank you very much.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And here's Dick in Illinois, Line for Democrats.
unidentified		How are you doing?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		What are you thinking about today?
unidentified		Think about Trump's crime family, you know?
		I don't know.
		He's messing up everything.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Like what, Dick?
unidentified		Illinois Democrats.
		What's he messing up?
		When you go buy something at the store, it's more money, auto parts, everything.
		All right.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And here's Becky in Massillian, Ohio, Republican.
unidentified		Hey.
		I think we're doing really good.
		Our stuff is going down here in Ohio.
		Gas last few days has been like 288, 277 a gallon.
		We can see that the tariffs are working.
		And these people that are thinking everything is going up, it's not.
		Our economics and everything's been really good the last couple times.
		I just wanted to put that out there for everybody.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And we are in open forum.
		Last few minutes of the program.
		Here's the New York Times.
		This is on the front page.
		White House botches swap of detainees.
		It says conflicting U.S. efforts in Venezuela talks.
		This is, it says that Trump administration's top diplomat, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, was overseeing a deal to free several Americans and dozens of political prisoners held in Venezuela in exchange for sending home about 250 Venezuelan migrants in the United States that the United States had deported to El Salvador.
		But the deal never happened.
		It said part of the reason President Trump's envoy to Venezuela was working on his own deal, one with terms that Venezuela deemed more attractive.
		In exchange for American prisoners, he was offering to allow Chevron to continue its oil operations in Venezuela, a vital source of revenue for its authoritarian government.
		You can read the rest of that at the New York Times.
		That's on the front page.
		And here is Ron in Cokeville, Tennessee, Republican.
		Good morning.
barack obama ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
unidentified		This country needs to stop and think of what they're doing here.
		We've got different countries around here that want to take us over.
		We are wealthy.
		We are blessed.
		And it's going to take a little time for Trump to get these things turned around and give us the money back.
		He's a good man.
		He don't need our money.
		He's not taking our money.
		Stop and think of what's happening here.
		It took four years to get us into this mess.

▲