CSPAN - Washington Journal 07/19/2025

All Episodes

Previous Next

July 19, 2025 07:00-10:02 - CSPAN

03:01:52

Washington Journal 07/19/2025

Participants

Main

mimi geerges

cspan 32:17

Appearances

brian lamb

cspan 01:08

chip roy

rep/r 01:56

donald j trump

admin 00:39

jeff merkley

sen/d 01:35

karoline leavitt

admin 01:59

mark rutte

00:35

mike johnson

rep/r 00:42

nancy pelosi

rep/d 01:20

Clips

bev harris

00:16

patty murray

sen/d 00:09

rachel maddow

msnow 00:15

Callers

charles in louisiana

callers 00:15

doug in south carolina

callers 00:14

james in texas [2]

callers 00:05

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Show episode speakers

Speaker	Time	Text
unidentified		Then Dominic Lett, budget and entitlement policy analyst at the Cato Institute, will talk about Congress and the Trump administration's deficit reduction record.
		And National Urban League president and CEO Mark Morreal talks about the organization's 2025 State of Black America report.
		C-SPAN's Washington Journal is next.
		Join the conversation. July 19th.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		This morning, we're asking for your top news story of the week.
		Several items may have caught your attention this week.
		President Trump has filed a lawsuit against Rupert Murdoch over a Wall Street Journal story on the Epstein birthday letter.
		Congress approved $9 billion in cuts to foreign aid and public broadcasting.
		The Supreme Court allows the dismantling of the Education Department, and President Trump approved the sale of weapons to Ukraine and threatened Russia with new sanctions.
		That all happened this week.
		Give us a call and share your top news story.
		Democrats 202748-8000.
		Republicans 202-748-8001.
		And Independents 202-748-8002.
		You can send us 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.
		We're glad you're with us.
		We'll start with an article about a new story that I didn't mention, and that is this.
		On the front page of the New York Times, migrants in El Salvador swapped for Americans detained in Venezuela.
		It says that 10 Americans and U.S. permanent residents who had been seized by the Venezuelan authorities and held as bargaining chips were freed Friday in exchange for the release of more than 250 Venezuelan migrants whom the Trump administration sent to a prison in El Salvador.
		The release of the Americans and permanent residents was described by the State Department while the release of the Venezuelans was announced by the President of El Salvador, Bukele on X. Secretary of State Rubio said in a statement that the 10 U.S. citizens and permanent residents had been arrested and jailed in Venezuela, quote, without proper due process, and called for the restoration of democracy in Venezuela.
		That is one story this morning.
		Also regarding Jeffrey Epstein, this is CNBC that says this.
		Trump sues Murdoch for $10 billion over Wall Street Journal story on Epstein birthday letter.
		It says that President Donald Trump sued Rupert Murdoch for libel after his Wall Street Journal published an article saying Trump sent Jeffrey Epstein a, quote, body letter for Epstein's 50th birthday.
		The journal reported that the letter allegedly sent in 2003 was among documents included in evidence assembled by federal criminal investigators as part of their probe of Epstein.
		So here is the article itself in question, the Wall Street Journal headline.
		Jeffrey Epstein's friends sent him body letters for a 50th birthday album.
		One was from Donald Trump.
		The leatherbound book was compiled by Gillene Maxwell.
		The president says the letter, quote, is a fake thing.
		It says this, it was Jeffrey Epstein's 50th birthday and Gillene Maxwell was preparing a special gift to mark the occasion.
		She turned to Epstein's family and friends.
		One of them was Donald Trump.
		That's at the Wall Street Journal.
		Let's take a look at what the president himself said in comments to press on Wednesday about this topic.
unidentified		Will you ask Attorney General Pambani to release more documents to finally put this controversy to bed?
unidentified		Yeah, whatever's credible, she can release.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		If a document is credible, if a document's there that is credible, she can release.
		I think it's good.
		But it's just really, it's just a subject.
		He's dead, he's gone.
		And all it is is the Republicans.
		Certain Republicans got duped by the Democrats, and they're following a Democrat playbook.
		And no different than Russia, Russia, Russia, and all the other hoaxes.
		They're started by the Democrats.
		And some Republicans, in this case, I was surprised, but they got duped.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		You'd like to talk about that.
		You can give us a call.
		Other topics this week is this Axios House sends cuts to foreign aid, PBS, and NPR to Trump's desk.
		The House voted early Friday to approve President Trump's requested clawback of $9 billion in federal funding for PBS, NPR, and foreign aid programs.
		It says that Democrats fear the victory for the White House following on Doge's massive cuts opens the door for more rescissions packages, negating bipartisan spending deals.
		Let's take a look at what Republican Chip Roy of Texas said about defunding public broadcasting.
		This was on Thursday.
chip roy ▲ ● ▼		Fact of the matter is they know it's true.
		And right now, what they don't want to do is have the American people focusing on the Republicans in Congress who are doing the thing they sent us here to do, which is end wasteful spending, to stop the ridiculous spending of a bureaucratic government that has been weaponized against the people.
		Dollars that are being used and wasted being sent around the world for $32,000 for transgender comic books in Peru.
		That's how they want to use taxpayer money.
		We're over here trying to make sure we're saving that money instead of having $5 million to fund tourism or $6 million to fund tourism in Egypt or $2 million for sex changes and LGBT activism in Guatemala.
		Why should the people of Texas be paying for that instead of paying to clean up the flood in Texas?
		The fact of the matter is the people of Texas want their money to be used for the things they care about.
		But we listened to the minority leader come to the floor and lecture us about the virtues of public radio and public broadcasting.
		Yet, nevertheless, the truth is it took NPR through Texas Public Radio 19 hours, 19 hours to post anything about the flooding on its social media pages after the floods hit in Texas.
		What was NPR and Texas Public Radio doing that morning?
		They weren't breaking to talk about what was happening in Texas.
		They were running ads saying people should call Congress to fund them.
		But the private stations in Texas were breaking to release reports and to tell people what to do, because that's what private stations can do.
		Because they respond to the people because they're locally owned, they're locally run, and they're not run by the bureaucrats from this town.
		The fact is, we're going to save money for the American people and end the absurdity of this leftist propaganda being put out under public radio.
		I yield back.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		That was Chip Roy of Texas.
		This is what the Corporation for Public Broadcasting said in a statement.
		The vote by the U.S. Senate and House to eliminate federal funding for the Corporation of Public Broadcasting will have profound, lasting negative consequences for every American.
		American taxpayers rightly expect and deserve public media to be reflective of and responsive to the local voices it serves and deliver accurate, unbiased, and nonpartisan news and information.
		Rather than dismantle public media, we should fund and strengthen it.
		The path to a better, more trusted public media is only achievable with continued federal support and constructive reforms.
		That is a portion of their statement from June of this year.
		And we'll go to the phones now.
		Tim Rochester, New York, Democrat, what's your top news story of the week, Tim?
unidentified		Doing a lot of cutting on these programs and everything.
		And I am a Democrat, but Trump, I agree with.
		But the migrant thing sends some of them back.
		And with the cuts, cut more and let's give tax to the rich.
		So let him do his four years out, see where everything goes.
		If he do good, hey, I'll pray for him.
		I'm going to pray for him because he's the president.
		But I am a Democrat.
		I don't got nothing against him.
		So let him do him.
		Thank you.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Al in Plymouth, Massachusetts, Republican.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		We can always tell the Epstein situation where it points to, and those that are silent, we're not hearing a word from the Clintons.
		It was the Clinton administration, FBI, that ignored the pleas, and magically, Hillary Clinton received donations from Mr. Epstein.
		So how come we're not starting there?
		Where is the press?
		Listen, we have been through this a thousand times.
		Russia collusion, Harris up by 5%.
		Remember the Iowa poll.
		I mean, come on, folks.
		You're just not getting it.
		The Democratic establishment is at an all-time low.
		Why?
		You have lost credibility.
		All those Democratic operatives monitoring this this morning, you have lost credibility.
		So where are you going to go now?
		To Epstein?
		Let's start with the Clintons.
		It was the Democrats that said sex is personal business.
		It was the Democrats that said it was the economy, stupid.
		These were their talking points.
		These are their standards that they set that now they don't like.
		They went after George Bush Sr. because they did not like the third, the fourth term, potentially, of the Reagan-Bush era.
		That's when the press sold its soul to the devil.
		Good luck with this.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		This is the Wall Street Journal opinion piece by Peggy Noonan with this.
		It says MAGA's Epstein fault line.
		It says, we just witnessed a bit of political history.
		The Epstein story is big, and though it will be, it will quiet eventually, it won't go away.
		It will stay as a fissure and may widen over time.
		It says, the Trumpiest part of President Trump's base showed him and showed itself that it can buck him.
		Push back in unison.
		He seemed startled.
		Maybe they are too.
		It struck me as not just a political event, but a psychic one for his movement.
		Mr. Trump has never spoken of his supporters the way he did this week with disrespect and baiting insults.
		On Wednesday on Truth Social, he called the Epstein uproar a Democratic Party scam and said, quote, my past supporters have bought into this BS hook line and sinker.
		Those demanding the government produce all files in the Epstein investigation are ungrateful and don't deserve him.
		Quote, I have had more success in six months than perhaps any president in our country's history.
		Let these weaklings continue forward and do the Democrats' work.
		Don't even think about talking of our incredible and unprecedented success because I don't want their support anymore.
		That is in the Wall Street Journal's opinion.
		That's Peggy Noonan.
		If you'd like to read the whole thing, here's Lester in Alabama, Democrat.
		Good morning, Lester.
unidentified		Good morning, Mamie.
unidentified		How are you?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good.
unidentified		Mamie, I tell you, this week, matter of fact, ever since he's been in office, Trump loved to get on national TV and trying to play the American people stupid.
		Everybody knows about Trump.
		Epstein Trump name is all over those files.
		He got this little club he got called to be his cabinet.
		Those people are unqualified.
		Trump is unqualified.
		And Trump loves to lie, get on national TV.
		He hasn't done anything for the American people since he's been in office.
		It's all about him.
		You see that fake gold he got in that room that he loved is hit by.
		American people, especially Republican.
		I thought America was smart, but I see why foreigners come in this country and just run rapid because the American people fall for anything, especially with a loser like Trump.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, we got it, Lester.
		And here is a reaction to the Supreme Court's decision about the Department of Education.
		This is a reaction from former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Wednesday.
nancy pelosi ▲ ● ▼		Mr. Speaker, the Supreme Court's ridiculous decision this week to allow the president to proceed with mass layoffs at the Department of Education is a grave blow to the rule of law and defies congressional authority.
		Justice Sotomoyor's dissent warns that the court is enabling the executive branch to undermine Congress's power of the purse, and she is absolutely right.
		Perhaps the Republicans in the House and in the Senate and the White House do not understand that nothing brings more money to the U.S. Treasury than the education of the American people.
		Early childhood education, K-12, higher education, post-grad, and lifetime learning for our workers.
		They're cutting education to give tax breaks to the richest people at the expense of America's future, the education of the American people.
		The court's disregard for the authority of the legislative branch empowers executive overreach at the expense of accountability and democracy.
		My colleagues take pride in being a member of the House, support this institution and our constitutional right with the power of the purse.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And also on the front page of the Washington Post, Israeli strike on Gaza Church draws swift condemnation.
		This is a picture on the front page.
		It says a delegation of top Christian clerics visits Holy Family Church.
		It's the only Catholic church in Gaza.
		On Friday, a day after it was hit in an Israeli strike, killing three people and causing extensive damage.
		It says the Israel Defense Force said an initial inquiry, quote, suggests that fragments from a shell hit the church mistakenly.
		Paul in Idaho, Republican line, good morning.
		You're on.
unidentified		Yes, good morning.
		I'm sorry I had to hear Speaker Pelosi before I came on.
		I have a bone to take with her in her retirement package.
		She named Bill Gottenley, I guess, would be the right word.
		But yeah, there's plenty of news about Epstein.
		I guess he can run that one over and over and over for the next 10 years.
		And it doesn't take.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Run what over and over?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		I didn't hear you, Paul.
unidentified		You could run the story about Epstein over and over and over for the next 10 years, probably, and get interest in it.
		There was a thing that happened probably close to 25, 30 years ago now that it was called the Lolita, Long Island Lolita.
		And it was a Joey Brother Pucco.
		It was quite a case that happened.
		It was about the same type of thing: that men love younger women for whatever reason.
		They find themselves untouchable, and yet they go out over any lengths to go get one.
		And then they do what they wish to do with them, basically.
		And it's a never-ending story.
		It's been going on for centuries.
		And I presume that the real story is that it's not that men can't keep their hands to themselves.
		They desire something that they know they shouldn't be having.
		And so they go after it anyway.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		And the Washington Post reports that the Justice Department asked the court to release Epstein grand jury testimony.
		It says Attorney General Pamboni had vowed to ask a court Friday to unseal pertinent grand jury records amid a political outcry over the Trump administration's actions on the case.
		Larry, Gates County, North Carolina, Independent Line.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning to you as well.
		I've been retired for seven years now, and I think that my story of the week is the evolution of C-SPAN.
		And I've enjoyed your program and done my 30 days before phone calls and respect that.
		But some of the things that I wish you guys would stop doing is repeat.
		When you say open forum, stop repeating the numbers to call.
		You must say it five times within the open forum.
charles in louisiana ▲ ● ▼		Also, when you do open forum, you seem to do four or five articles, and every once in a while you have a representative come in to where the open forum unfortunately becomes three phone calls within that half hour.
unidentified		So that's kind of strange.
		Plus, the Trump scenario.
		My gosh, you guys should change your call letters from C-SPAN to T-Bed.
		Trump bashing every day.
		Thank you for your time.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Darren, Colorado Springs, Colorado, on the line for Democrats.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		What's your top news story of the week?
unidentified		Hey, good morning.
		Mamie, I'm past my 30 days, too, so I thought I'd call.
		Maybe a few things.
		The reason you would be called Trump bashing is because Trump finds a way to get himself in trouble every week or do something stupid.
		I'm just at a loss why we're treating this thing like a big calculus problem.
		Trump's, he met his wife at the Kit Kat Club.
		He's been charged with sexual abuse.
		We've seen him googling over women.
		He says he can grab them by their private parts.
		It's, I just don't know how far these people will go on the road to support this man.
		And also, which is surprising, and it's really the elite that play us like fools.
		Alan Dersiewicz, who's been on the show before, swore his hand.
		I was never, I never knew anything about what's happened at Epstein's house.
		Well, he went to Epstein's house to get a massage.
		Who goes to somebody's house to get a massage?
		And he says, oh, he kept his underwear on and everything.
		They just lie to us and lied to us.
		And no one's talking about the victims.
		I don't know if you've seen the clip of she's using an alias, Katie Johnson, who is working for Epstein at age 13 years old, who said she had to give President Trump oral sex.
		You know, do we listen to her or is that a lie?
		Is there all the women lying, and it's just Trump that tells the truth, people?
		Wake up.
		He's a sexual abuser.
		You've been played.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Darren.
		This is Patrick, Republican, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		You know, it's stunning the amount of money that the American people are being leeched out of, but not just by the money going for a one-sided media system relating to PBS 1A and other publicly funded venues.
		These companies, these cable companies, are stealing money from the people who are paying these subscriptions.
		So you paying money, which is, and the costs are absolutely horrendous, and you're taking your money.
		It's like a second tax in addition to the billions of dollars that the U.S. government is handing over to DEI, you know, woke ideologies and an obscene structure that is designed to brainwash our citizenry.
		And finally, the people have woken up and said enough is enough.
		How many Republicans work for PBS?
		How many Republicans work for 1A?
		How many broadcasters who are Republican have been hosting on C-SPAN and Washington Journal?
		I mean, the reality is you brought this on yourself.
		And as far as Epstein's concerned, I don't care about.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So before you get into Epstein, just to make sure that you're clear on C-SPAN's funding, there is no federal funding.
		We do not take government funding.
		We have not, and we will not.
unidentified		Yeah, but you do get money from corporations that are subscriber-based.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		We don't have a subscription.
		I'm sorry, Patrick, you're mistaken.
		We don't have any subscriptions.
		This is Joanne in Facebook.
		The loss of government funding for NPR and PBS is her top news story.
		This Republican administration is afraid of any public service they cannot control or into which they cannot feed their ignorant propaganda.
		This is Jim on Facebook.
		Being a Trump administration supporter, I am very disappointed with the handling of the Epstein files.
		There is only one reason to Keep this files from the people, and that is to protect the most powerful people of the world.
		And finally, Carl on Facebook, the Epstein cover-up, the accusations towards Biden about transparency, and now Trump does this.
		It's not promises made, promises kept.
		It's sheer lies and BS.
		And here is Randy in Rochester, New York, Democrat.
		Good morning, Randy.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Thank you for taking my call.
		I wanted to tell one thing: in the last administration for the Trump, that I was a participant and speaker for the March for Science coming from Rochester to Charlotte to talk about science and that there's not an alternate science that was, you know, Trump's word of the day.
		It's not surprising to me that he's attacking education across the board, you know, in every aspect possible, because I don't think he really truly believes in education.
		He doesn't understand the value of education.
		He doesn't understand the value of the research that's going on within these institutions that have basically helped the United States citizens and citizens around the world with the science that has come out from the grants that are being done by some of the smartest people in the world to try and help with the United States and people around the world so that way they can live better lives.
		I wish there would be someone from the Republican Party that would stand up and say, you know what, I've been educated.
		I'm in Congress.
		I understand the value and actually say no to some of these things.
		It's really sad that the Republicans have given up their responsibility as member of Congress and have allowed these programs that have been funded and have been set aside for funds by bipartisan Congress and the power of the purse, and now they're being pulled back or eliminated.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Well, Randy, take a look at Speaker Mike Johnson, who talked about the administration's actions to dismantle the Department of Education, and he says that it doesn't infringe on Congress's authority.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Take a look.
unidentified		You've previously been asked whether Congress will assert its constitutional authority and pass legislation closing the Department of Wish, of course, was created by an act of Congress.
		When exactly does that moment arrive?
		Does the president, having, quote, ultimate authority over the Education Department, as was Secretary McMahon's interpretation of the order, not conflict with Congress's legal and constitutional power?
		At what point does this become a separation of powers conflict?
mike johnson ▲ ● ▼		It may not surprise you.
		I haven't had a chance to digest the Supreme Court opinion from yesterday, whenever it was.
		I've been a little busy, but we'll look into that.
		I'm a constitutional law attorney.
		I'm a jealous guardian of Article 1 authority, but I also know that for decades, the Department of Education since its creation, the Department of Education wielded by the executive branch.
		I think that was the intent of Congress, as I understood it back then.
		We have a large say in that, but we're going to coordinate that with the White House where I'm not going to get a vision on how to reform education at the federal level.
		Secretary McMahon has done an extraordinary job thus far, and we're going to follow their cues on how to do that.
		If we see that the separation of powers is being breached in some way, we'll act.
		But I haven't seen that yet.
		So, yes.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And here's a portion of a statement by the National Education Association President Becky Pringle.
		She says this, nothing is more important than the success of students.
		America's educators and parents won't be silent as Donald Trump, with the support of the MAGA Supreme Court, strips our students, our families, and our communities of protections and funding that Congress has mandated.
		Gutting the Department of Education has already harmed students and communities.
		Today's ruling, withholding relief that the lower courts ordered, will only compound the harm.
		Alicia, Independent in Flint, Michigan, what's your top news story of the week?
unidentified		Well, unlike most of your callers, I think I may be the first female caller of the day at 726, which I just don't understand why your callers are allowed to skew so male and so old.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		If you guys want to streaming, you know that we can't control who calls us, right?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		I mean, I would love for there to be more women calling us.
unidentified		Can set up lines for female callers and male callers.
		Anyways, my top news story is I can't even watch you guys during the week because I'm tired of listening to old men.
		I watch the economic channels.
		I watch CNBC now for the three hours in the morning and Bloomberg.
bev harris ▲ ● ▼		And let me tell you, my top news story is the fact that NVIDIA, who I would guess 80% of the people watching you on television right now have never heard of, reached a market cap of $4 trillion.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		That didn't happen this week, Alicia.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		That was last week.
unidentified		Yeah.
unidentified		But you're right.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		They did.
unidentified		Last week.
unidentified		Yes.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		They reached $4 trillion.
		There's also the news that they are going to be allowed to send their most powerful chips to China.
		Did you see that?
unidentified		That's exactly the point I was getting to.
		Is that the Trump administration has now decided, after the meeting with Jensen Wong and Jensen Wong doing his whole media tour with Barid Zakaria on CNN last Sunday, et cetera, et cetera, getting all these high-profile interviews.
		Now the Trump administration has decided to allow them to send one of the most powerful chips that runs AI to China again.
		That is what the American public needs to be focused on, not some damn sexual predator.
		And that's why I said I just can't even listen to C-SPAN Monday through Friday anymore.
		I watch the economic channels because that is the key to our society.
		All right.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So Alicia, let me make sure everybody is up to date on what you're talking about.
		NVIDIA CEO Jensen Wang wants to sell more advanced chips to China after H-20 ban is lifted.
		It says that the U.S. reversed a ban that restricted NVIDIA from sending its export control compliant chip known as H-20 to China.
		Wang has trod a fine line between praising U.S. President Donald Trump's policies while also lobbying for change on curbs to China.
unidentified		Yes.
unidentified		All right.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Carmen, Florida, line for Democrats.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Carmen.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Thank you for taking my call.
		You know, I was sitting here listening and I'm thinking to myself, what is my top story?
		Well, I had one, but then I had another one.
		Then I had another one.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, there's a lot going on, but share some of them with us.
unidentified		And it keeps going back to Epson.
		I wanted to talk about the people who really don't really realize this bill that came out, how much it's going to be devastating to the American public.
		I'm calling you as an American today.
		The other thing is, I wanted to point out to the Christians, when you vote for somebody that's corrupt and has a tainted pass, this is what's going to happen.
		So instead of talking about all these major topics like Stephen Colbert, that has nothing to do with financials.
		Anyone with common sense can see that that was political.
		So that tells me that pretty soon on TV, I will be watching stuff that certain groups of people are controlling, making sure I watch, rather than having the freedom to watch a comedy show that I choose to use, whether it's Colbert or any other comic or whatever, because that person is joking about the president.
		And I think that is completely wrong about the freedom of being able to watch TV.
		And then again, TV is becoming corrupt.
		But going back to the Christians, the reason we're talking about Epstein, and that's the top story, is because you voted for somebody that had so much of a tan past and so corrupt in its businesses that this is definitely going to keep coming out for the next three and a half years, whether it be Epstein or some other corrupt story.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So Carmen.
		So since you brought up the news, what do you think of President Trump suing Rupert Murdoch over that Wall Street Journal article?
		What do you think is going to happen?
unidentified		You know, I don't know.
		I'm still thinking, I hate to, I'm not a conspirator person, but I'm thinking there's some kind of connection between these two.
		I can't believe he's doing it, but I'm wondering who's going to wind up paying this lawsuit in the end.
		But my biggest story with the Epstein thing, two things before you let me go, is I didn't know a lot of this stuff about Epstein.
		And every time I'm concerned about the people dying on the other side of the world because of USAID, blah, blah, blah, I hear on the news, oh, Epstein's girlfriend now talked about the one she was groped.
		And Epstein was walking down the street, not even thinking about Trump, just say, yeah, let's stop it and see him.
		And next thing, you know, the man's all over her.
		And then, you know, two days later, I hear on the news, Epstein's brother stated that Epstein told him if people knew about Trump, that the election would be canceled.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Now, Carmen, since you mentioned Stephen Colbert, will bring this up.
		This is front page of the style section of the Washington Post.
		What's the truth or truthiness?
		In axing the late show, it says the facts are these.
		The highest rated show on late night was nominated for an Emmy on Tuesday.
		On Thursday, Paramount CBS announced its cancellation.
		Stephen Colbert announced at the Thursday evening taping of the late show with Stephen Colbert that he'd found out only the night before that his show would be canceled at the end of the season in May 2026 and that no one would be replacing him.
		Quote, it's the end of the late show on CBS, he said.
		This is all just going away.
		It was a shocking announcement.
		It feels, for one thing, like an institution ending.
		Juan David Letterman helped define in reaction and opposition to the Tonight Show in 1993.
		It continues, it's hard to ignore a larger troubling pattern here with potential implications for far more than late night TV.
		On July 1st, the announcement came that the network's parent company, Paramount Global, which needs Donald Trump's administration to approve the pending sale of the company to Skydance Media, was settling, rather than fighting, the president's lawsuit over a 60-minutes interview of then-candidate Kamala Harris.
		They will be paying the president $16 million.
		Chris in Ellicott City, Maryland, Republican.
		Hi, Chris.
unidentified		Good morning.
		You know, I watch CNN every day, and I'm disgusted by the Trump arrangement syndrome.
		He has so many callers on.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		On CNN?
		You said CNN.
		Are you talking about us?
unidentified		Oh, yes, Washington Journal.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Okay, that's C-SPAN.
unidentified		C-SPAN.
unidentified		Yeah.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So is that your top news story?
unidentified		It continues to be every week.
unidentified		I listen to the vitriol from these Democrats that are calling in, and they make statements that are just so outrageous, and you don't call them out on it.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Okay, give me an example.
unidentified		Well, they call him a liar, and they say he doesn't love America, and there's a thousand of them.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So he doesn't love America is an opinion which can't be fact-checked.
unidentified		There you go.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		There I go.
unidentified		Okay.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		I mean, that is your opinion, so I'm not going to go back on that.
		But if somebody calls and says, I don't believe President Trump loves America, I can't say no, that's not true.
		Because that's an opinion.
unidentified		Why do you have so many of these callers that call in and go on and on with all this vitriol against Donald Trump?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Because they're allowed to do that on this program.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And we had people go on and on with vitriol against former President Biden when he was in office.
unidentified		Well, it's just the numbers that I listen to.
		Why don't you have more Republicans on?
		You have 10 Democrats on, and then you have Barbara Pelosi on, and you have all these left-wing Democrats.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And we have right-wing Republicans on as well.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Kathy and Iowa, Independent Line, you're next.
unidentified		Hi.
		Just listening to your last caller, I guess that's the exemplification of what I'm calling about.
		And as part of my top news story, it's Epstein, just like a previous caller said, it's Epstein.
		It's education.
		It's Stephen Colbert.
		It's chaos with this administration.
		And anyone who seems to support Trump, just if you have an argument or present facts, they say you have Trump derangement syndrome.
		And I guess I look at Trump and I've seen him do nothing to better anyone else but himself.
		He usually is his largest concern.
		I have tried to get information from all sources, including podcasters that would be considered far-right podcasters, so I can kind of get information to like what are they thinking.
		And watching them turn against him to some degree at the beginning of this week regarding Epstein was, I don't know, I guess a little shocking to me because usually there is no questioning of anything that Trump says.
		When they did, I guess the shocking response for me, well, not shocking, but saying that his own supporters are stupid and that he doesn't want their support anymore.
		I guess I would ask anyone if someone I support said, you're stupid and I don't want your support anymore, why are you still making excuses and supporting him?
		He is defunding education and he's defunding education so he can keep people uneducated and stupid so they can be manipulated.
		He is defunding any kind of news source that provides alternate information that he can control the funding through Congress to PBS and NPR.
		He can't control the funding of CBS, but he can certainly file a lawsuit as he did and as part of his little side deal, silence someone like Stephen Colbert who speaks out against him.
		People wake up.
		Your rights are being stolen little by little each day with what's happening here.
		Court cases, the far right packed the court, not just the Supreme Court, lots of federal court appointments for years under Mitch McConnell.
		We are now seeing the ramifications of that.
		You please wake up.
		Don't be the stupid people that Trump is.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		We got your point.
		Another article here for you to be aware of.
		ABC News, Trump diagnosed with chronic venous insufficiency after swelling.
		According to the White House, it says that it is not considered a serious medical condition.
		Here is White House Press Secretary Caroline Levitt on Thursday addressing those concerns.
karoline leavitt ▲ ● ▼		On another note, I know that many in the media have been speculating about bruising on the president's hand and also swelling in the president's legs.
		So in the effort of transparency, the president wanted me to share a note from his physician with all of you today.
		In recent weeks, President Trump noted mild swelling in his lower legs.
		In keeping with routine medical care and out of an abundance of caution, this concern was thoroughly evaluated by the White House medical unit.
		The president underwent a comprehensive examination, including diagnostic vascular studies.
		Bilateral lower extremity venous Doppler ultrasounds were performed and revealed chronic venous insufficiency, a b9, and common condition, particularly in individuals over the age of 70.
		Importantly, there was no evidence of deep vein thrombosis or arterial disease.
		Laboratory testing included a complete blood count, comprehensive metabolic panel, coagulation profile, D-dimer, B-type, natriotic, peptide, and cardiac biomarkers.
		All results were within normal limits.
		An echocardiogram was also performed and confirmed normal cardiac structure and function.
		No signs of heart failure, renal impairment, or systemic illness were identified.
		Additionally, recent photos of the president have shown minor bruising on the back of his hand.
		This is consistent with minor soft tissue irritation from frequent handshaking and the use of aspirin, which is taken as part of a standard cardiovascular prevention regimen.
		This is a well-known and benign side effect of aspirin therapy.
		And the president remains in excellent health, which I think all of you witness on a daily basis here.
		So the president wanted me to share that note with all of you.
		I'm happy to take further questions on it.
		We will provide the memorandum from the president's physician to all of you, as we always do.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		That was Caroline Levitt talking about the president's health.
		Here is Angela, a Democrat in Conowingo, Maryland.
		Angela, what's your top news story of the week?
unidentified		I have two.
		I could go through them real quick.
		I'd start with the cryptocurrency bill.
		You had a lady, you interviewed a lady this week, a woman from cryptocurrency.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Amanda Wood.
unidentified		Yeah, you asked her a great question.
		You said, how much does the legislators know about what's in this bill?
		And she laughed and she said the lawmakers don't know anything about crypto and neither does their staff.
		And yet they just passed that bill.
		And I will guarantee you, this will hurt my 401k.
		This will hurt banks because I guarantee you that legislation has a bunch of holes in it.
		And so who wrote it?
		The industry.
		The industry is a bunch of international terrorists and scam artists.
		That's who just wrote that bill.
		And this is going to be the next financial collapse, mark my words.
		And second.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Why do you think that, Angela, before you get to your second point?
unidentified		Okay, well, first of all, this went too fast, this bill.
		I mean, everything with them, they're just pushing bills through the big beautiful bill.
		They should have slowed down on that one, too.
		They don't know anything about it.
		I mean, even she admitted it.
		That's why my main reason.
		But I already knew they didn't know anything about it.
		Because crypto is basically a scam.
		Even Donald Trump called crypto a scam before he got in on the scam and started his own cryptocurrency.
		It is a scam.
		And you cannot regulate scams.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So that's my main point.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		What's your second one?
unidentified		Second one is, of course, the ongoing tariff.
		I mean, this guy is picking our pockets.
		The inflation has ticked up slightly.
		It's almost at 3% now.
		And that was only with the 10% tariffs.
		He recently put 40% on China recently, 20-some percent on Taiwan, South Korea, Canada, Mexico.
		And then they might even go up more August 1st.
		This is crazy.
		And he keeps, I don't want to say lying.
		Maybe he doesn't know, but he keeps saying that countries are paying these tariffs.
		No, businesses, American businesses are paying these tariffs, and they're passing it on to the consumers.
		Everything I bought had gone up.
		Maybe not a lot because it's only been the 10%, but that's just going to keep going up.
		Prices aren't going to be going down.
		And I don't know why.
		And it's a national sales tax, really.
		And he's very proud of the $100 billion he's already brought in to the government from these tariffs.
		And it isn't about manufacturing jobs.
		We have right now 450,000 open manufacturing jobs, jobs apparently people don't even want.
		So how are we going to make everything in this country when right now nobody wants to work in manufacturing?
		This is a national sales tax.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		That's all it is.
		Angela.
		And following on her comments about the crypto bill that has been signed into law, here's Fox News that says this.
		Trump vows to make U.S., quote, crypto capital of the planet, signs Genius Act into law.
		The House passed the Genius Act on Thursday by a 308 to 122 margin.
		That's at Fox News if you want to learn more about that.
		Lisa in Shreveport, Louisiana, Republican.
		Hi, Lisa.
unidentified		Hi.
		What I wanted to say is how fair y'all are is that could you put on about Tulsi Gabbard who just said that Obama committed treason on the Russian hoax and that James Clapper, John Brennan were involved in that.
		They had a meeting.
		Also, hold on, hold on.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Wait, let me try to find it.
		Yes, about Tulsi Gabbard.
		Let me pull that up.
unidentified		Can you please put that up?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And then I'll let you continue.
		Hold on.
		So it says this, Politico.
		Gabbard threatens prosecution against Obama administration officials for, quote, treasonous conspiracy.
		It says the Trump administration has repeatedly targeted critics of the president and has sought to re-litigate the 2016 and 2020 presidential elections.
		DNI Tulsi Gabbard called for several Obama administration officials to face criminal prosecutions for participating in treasonous conspiracy surrounding the 2016 election on Friday afternoon.
		Latest example of Trump administration targeting critics of the presidents.
		In a newly declassified report, Gabbard on Friday alleged the officials, quote, manipulated and withheld key intelligence from the public related to the possibility of Russian interference in the election.
		Okay.
		So that's there on Politico for people that want to see it.
		Go ahead, Lisa.
		You wanted to say something else?
unidentified		Yeah, about the sex and all this, since y'all are talking about like Epstein.
unidentified		Is there any way maybe you could put on Tucker Carlson and Larry Sinclair about President Obama and his lover, about him and Obama having sex in a taxi, about oral sex?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Mike in Rockford, Illinois, Independent Line.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Mike.
unidentified		Good morning, Maimon.
		Good morning, C-SPAN.
		As I was writing down my top stories, it seems like every day is January 6, 2020.
		In this big, beautiful bill, we had 28 presidential actions rolled into that legislation.
		I cannot find the 28 laws that president wrote out and slipped into the big, beautiful bill.
		That is pretty big.
		The other thing is 700,000 migrants, Donald Trump brought in in six months and handed them work permits.
		I think he's jiving unemployment numbers with what he's doing.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Wait, you said he brought in migrants?
unidentified		Over 700,000 migrants and handed them work permits.
unidentified		This is Bloomberg News reported this, and they're the only ones who did.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Okay, let me look for that, Mike, while you're talking.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Go ahead.
unidentified		Okay.
		Also, the selling of weapons to the U.N. by Donald Trump is 100% profit.
		The taxpayer has paid for all these weapons, and now he's going to sell them.
		This has been going on for years selling our weapons that the taxpayer paid for, and then they come back to us to replenish them.
		Also, if you Google tariff negotiations, are they treaties?
		And you will find out Google will say yes.
		In our Constitution, it says specifically how to handle treaties.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So, Mike, sorry, I am not able to find anything that Bloomberg is reporting about President Trump bringing in migrants.
unidentified		Bringing in migrants?
unidentified		Can you find anything on hanging out 700,000 work permits?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		I'm not seeing that.
		Well, I'll have the producer continue to look for that, but I did a quick search and I did not find Bloomberg reporting on that.
		Sorry.
		Gio in Washington, D.C., line for Democrats.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		My concern this past week has been about MAGA and them turning on Trump.
		I believe that what has finally happened, they've been able to decipher that big, beautiful bill.
		And they see that no one stands to gain from this, at least no average working mode like ourselves.
		And that was their only way of getting at him.
		With Epstein, I mean, he's gone.
		He's dead.
		The man was a pimp.
		He serviced all of them, just like Diddy.
		But if that's the means of getting to him, and that's the only way they can do it, they're going to do it.
		And another thing, I believe they're also trying to offset him firing Powell.
		If he fires Powell from the Federal Reserve, all hell is going to break loose with the stock market and everything else.
		America's now they're finally realizing what trouble we're in.
		But I think we're in so deep that we can't be dug out at this point.
		And that's just my point I wanted to make.
		Thank you for taking my call.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Gio.
		And regarding Jerome Powell, this is an article here on CBS News.
		Trump asked GOP lawmakers if he should fire Fed Chair Jerome Powell.
		It says that the president asked on Tuesday, he asked a group of House Republicans if he should fire Fed Chair Jerome Powell, and people in the room voiced approval.
		Several sources said Mr. Trump indicated he will do it.
		Mr. Trump on Wednesday confirmed to reporters in the Oval Office that he spoke to lawmakers about ousting Powell.
		Here's the quote.
		I talked to them about the concept of firing him.
		I said, what do you think?
		Almost all of them said I should, but I'm more conservative than they are.
		Here is Roy in Wake Forest, North Carolina, a Republican.
		Hi, Roy.
unidentified		Hey, Mimi.
doug in south carolina ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, a lady called in earlier about this, but the whole damn show ought to be on this this morning about new evidence of Obama administration conspiracy to subvert President Trump's 2016 victory and presidency.
unidentified		You remember Trump saying they spied on me?
		And you guys carry the, that's not true.
		Nobody spied on Trump.
		You guys said that Russia, Russia, Russia was all Trump's big deal.
		That turned out to be a lie, but you carry it anyway.
		Hunter's laptop, that turned out to be true, and it had evidence on it of not only him being a sick young man, well, older man now, but of the China business that Biden was doing with China.
		The Gen 6 thing with Ray Epps.
		You guys carried that crap.
		Ray Epps, he's the one that spurred that thing on.
		He had got something to do with the CIA.
		The media covering up that the border was wide open the past four years.
		They wouldn't even do stories on it and said that we were just exaggerating, that Biden was a sick man.
		No Democrat believed that until they saw it when you guys couldn't cover up.
		So you need to go back and talk about this conspiracy that happened with Obama and Hillary and Clapper and Brennan to try and steal this country is basically what was happening.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Roy.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Maria in Westville, New Jersey, Independent Line, you're next.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Mime, I hope you can hear me.
		I can.
		I have several points on the Ahmetan Yahoo visit.
		When he came over, there were two days of closed hearings.
		And after they were done, he began talking about the union between our country and his, and he put Israel first.
		Also, DLenn Maxwell's father, Robert, was an Israeli agent.
		I just wonder if there's going to be an onslaught of some kind through that blackmail.
		Also, Pam Bondi came out right after that and said, oh, there's nothing to see here once you promised the list.
		And I think they're doing it a sell game with these files moving it around at testimony.
		That list has to be published.
		And one last thing.
		When everything broke the first time with the Epstein files, there was some film on television of President Trump referring to somebody on the Lolita Express as somebody who liked them young.
		And then he said he likes them very young.
		And he laughed and laughed.
		So I'm sure he knows all the people that are involved.
		And he better come clean.
		And I think we deserve a full explanation.
		Thank you.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Jack, a Democrat, Davenport, Iowa.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
unidentified		Morning to you.
		Two or three years ago, noted economist Murray Roubini said 80% of Bitcoin belonged to Chinese Bitcoin miners.
		Normally, I would hate giving that much financial support to Chinese computer programmers.
		What's interesting to me, though, and I think this is the story of the week, is that both parties supported that new cryptocurrency bill.
		I think the fact that they're both working together says there's a problem there.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		You think a bipartisan agreement is problematic?
unidentified		No, I think the fact that they're working together is good because they're recognizing the trouble that the Chinese are posing to our financial economic system.
		So are you in support of that crypto bill?
		I think they're doing probably what they have to do.
		I don't know whether the bill is good.
		Normally, I wouldn't like seeing a bunch of money plowed into a bunch of Chinese people that are programmers and involved with crashing websites and extorting money.
		But they're doing something.
		And I think the fact that they work together is the important part.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		And other pieces of news that happened this week was the announcement about Ukraine, that the president will be selling weapons to NATO.
		And here is NATO Secretary General Mark Ruta in the Oval Office on Monday reacting to that information.
unidentified		And this is building on the tremendous success of the NATO summit.
mark rutte ▲ ● ▼		The 5%, but also the decision to keep Ukraine strong and the decision to increase our defense industrial production.
unidentified		So based on that, that was Europe stepping up.
mark rutte ▲ ● ▼		This is again Europeans stepping up.
unidentified		So I've been in contact with many countries.
		I can tell you that at this moment, Germany, massively, but also Finland and Denmark and Sweden and Norway, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Canada.
		They all want to be part of this.
		And this is only the first wave.
		There will be more.
		So what we will do is work through the NATO systems to make sure that we know what Ukrainians need so that we can make packages.
mark rutte ▲ ● ▼		Of course, in a way, we discussed it this morning, as Pete Heck said, at the Pentagon in a way that, of course, the U.S. will put on its talkpiles necessary to defend this country.
unidentified		That's absolutely clear.
unidentified		But it will mean that Ukraine can get its hands on really massive numbers of military equipment, both for air defense, but also missiles, ammunition, etc., etc.
mark rutte ▲ ● ▼		So if I was Vladimir Putin today and hear you speaking about what you were planning to do in 50 days and this announcement, I would reconsider whether I should not take negotiations about Ukraine more seriously than I was doing in the moment, if others Vladimir Putin.
unidentified		But when I'm Ukraine, I think this is really great news for that.
unidentified		That's right.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		That happened on Monday in the Oval Office.
		And we are getting your top news story of the week.
		Last few minutes of the program.
		Bob Humble, Texas Republican.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning, Mimi.
		I just wanted to start by saying I think you're probably the best moderator.
		You interact with guests.
		You make very thoughtful comments.
		And I just want to praise you for that.
		I do want to call something out.
		It's fairly ironic that this morning one of the callers complained about Mr. Trump being vilified with horrible language.
		And you explained that that has to happen or be allowed to happen.
		And then just maybe 10 minutes later, you had a caller that called in saying pretty vile things about President Obama.
		And you quickly dismissed and hung up on the caller.
		So I think it is a little ironic to say that there's not some bias.
		But let me tell you, my story of the week is the fact that the Obama administration, along with Hillary Clinton, did with the CIA or with the intelligence agencies, it's been reported that they did have some kind of a cabal going on.
		And I think that's a much higher story than the Epstein story.
		Okay.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Caroline in Alliance, Ohio, Democrat.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Carolyn.
unidentified		Good morning.
		My top story of the week is a local story.
		It came from the Firm and Dairy, which is a weekly paper.
		I think it's published in Salem, Ohio.
		Anyway, the headline is Simply Slavic concert canceled after Czech musician denied entry, okay, of Youngstown.
		Simply Slavic was forced to cancel his upcoming concert with Trio Mete on July 20th after a Czech Czech clariton, a man who played the clarinet, and I'm not sure if I'm pronouncing his name correctly, Jarislav Sukka, was detained and denied entry into the United States at the Detroit Metro Airport last week.
		According to an email sent to the firm in Dairy, Sutka had his phone and personal devices taken away to immigration officers.
		What followed, quote, what followed was one of the most humiliating and traumatizing experiences of my life, end quote.
		Suka said an email, he was interrogated for five hours and then deported back to Prague.
		Now he was going to join this group.
		They were doing several concert, probably small events in the U.S. Do we know why he was sent back, Carolyn?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		What was the reason given?
unidentified		It does not exist in this article why he was sent back.
		He was going to embark.
		Oh, yeah, it does.
		He was going to embark on a summer chamber concert in a series of states.
		But anyway, they said, I think it was something about it, right at the end of this.
		It was a short article that's something about it.
		He didn't have it.
		They said disbelief and mistrust.
		Let me see.
		He said something about.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Well, Carolyn, we got your story and we are out of time for this segment.
		But later on this morning on the Washington Journal, National Urban League president and CEO Mark Moriel discusses the findings of his group's 2025 State of Black America report.
		But first, after the break, Congressional Republicans pushed through $9 billion in spending cuts this week.
		So is Washington finally getting serious about deficit reduction?
		We'll ask Dominic Lett, who studies the federal budget and entitlements at the Cato Institute.
		We'll be right back.
unidentified		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 mike said before i happened to listen to him he was on c-span one 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.
		C-SPAN is televising this right now live.
		So we are not just speaking to Los Angeles, we are speaking to the country.
		Nonfiction 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 QA.
		Hear wide-ranging conversations with the non-fiction authors and others who are making things happen.
		And BookNotes Plus episodes are weekly hour-long conversations that regularly feature fascinating authors of non-fiction books on a wide variety of topics.
		Find all of our podcasts by downloading the free C-SPAN Now app or wherever you get your podcasts and on our website, c-span.org/slash podcasts.
		Washington Journal continues.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Welcome back to Washington Journal.
		Joining us to discuss deficit reduction is Dominic Lett.
		He's budget and entitlement policy analyst at the Cato Institute.
		Welcome to the program.
unidentified		Thanks for having me.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, so we'll start with that $9 billion spending cut bill that Congress just passed.
		It cuts funding for foreign aid and public broadcasting.
		How significant is this one bill in deficit reduction?
unidentified		This bill has some good policy changes.
		I think that given the state of the deficit in this country, we need to be looking everywhere we can for cost savings.
		But ultimately, it's a drop in the bucket.
		We'll need much larger reforms if we want to put the budget on a sustainable path.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And it's called rescission.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So just remind us about what rescission means.
unidentified		Right.
		Rescissions is rescissions eliminates funding for that Congress has already allocated for this current or future fiscal year.
		So it claws back funding that hasn't been spent yet, which saves money and prevents the deficit from increasing.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And he has to go back to Congress because that money has already been allocated and authorized.
unidentified		That's correct.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		To be spent.
unidentified		Congress has the power of the purse, so they need to pass legislation to formally rescind that money.
unidentified		But once the president signs it into law, it's by the books.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And how common is rescission?
unidentified		Rescissions are actually presidentially initiated rescissions like the bill that we're talking about are actually relatively uncommon.
		The last time we passed a rescissions bill was the 90s.
		They used to be more frequent part of the budget process, but they've kind of fallen out of favor.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Why did they fall out of favor?
unidentified		I think there's been a general trend, a bipartisan trend, if you will, of both parties kind of running up the debt and not managing the budget in a responsible way.
		I think one optimistic outlook of this particular rescissions bill is that it's a small, if symbolic, return to fiscal responsibility.
		But we'll need much larger and much more frequent rescissions if we want to actually see major savings.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		If you'd like to join our conversation with Dominic Lett of the Cato Institute and talk about the budget and rescissions and deficit reduction, you can give us a call.
		The numbers are Democrats 202-748-8,000, Republicans 202-748-8001, and Independents 202-748-8002.
		You can also text us or send us social media posts.
		You've encouraged the President and Congress to do more and use this tool even more.
		Why do you think that?
		Why explain your rationale?
unidentified		The U.S. is running $2 trillion deficits at this point every year.
		That's basically a wartime deficit during peacetime when the economy is growing.
		We need to find, we need to make major adjustments to the way that we run this country.
		Spending is driving the U.S. towards a fiscal crisis, and we need to be more responsible with taxpayer dollars.
		Part of that process should be reassessing our priors.
		That means looking back at money that we may have already authorized to spend and clawing back what we can.
		But ultimately, this should be part of a broader package of reforms to major entitlement programs like Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		I want to show you, I want to ask you about the bipartisan nature of spending bills.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And I want to show you Democratic Senator Jeff Merkley last week making this point, and then I'll get your reaction.
jeff merkley ▲ ● ▼		Democrats and Republicans together made those spending decisions and now they're being undone in a purely partisan fashion.
		They're breaking the deal.
		They're going back on the agreement.
		They're breaking their word.
		That is pretty shameful.
		And it's why my colleagues have been saying, don't do it, because it's wrong.
		And it has a huge impact going forward.
		Once somebody you've made an agreement with breaks their end of the bargain, are you going to make a second bargain with that same individual knowing that they bailed on the first deal?
		The answer is probably not.
		So how will we come together and continue what we did a year ago, 11 out of 12 bills passing out of the Senate committee in a hugely bipartisan fashion, if one side comes back and breaks the deal?
		I would invite my Republican colleagues come to the floor and explain to me how breaking the deal that you were participating in a year ago is an honorable thing to do.
		And explain to me how we're going to do future deals if you're breaking the existing deal.
		Now, never in the history of the Senate has there been a partisan repeal.
		Never.
		This is the first time.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		What do you think of that?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So first thing I wanted to get your reaction to was the partisan nature of the repeal.
unidentified		When rescissions, presidentially initiated rescissions, were more frequent, they were used by presidents, both Democrat and Republican, with Congresses that were divided and unified.
		This rescissions package isn't particularly unique, except that it is, this process hasn't been used in a very long time.
		I will say that it's common sense to reassess your priors.
		And if the money is for wasteful priorities or low priority spending, then that money should be cut.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		But in a partisan way.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		In other words, all Democrats voted against this rescion package.
unidentified		I'll note that I think the environment has gotten increasingly polarized.
		In the 80s and the 90s, rescissions were used, and bipartisanship, I would say, is much stronger than it was today.
		But I'll note also that Congress goes back on the deals that it makes with itself all the time.
		The 2023 Fiscal Responsibility Act, which was a law that for a short period of time set spending limits on a portion of the budget, was before the ink was even dry, Congress was violating the terms, the spirit of that agreement, and increasing spending beyond what the enforceable caps should have allowed.
		So I think that Congress will violate these rules if given the opportunity.
		But in this context, I think that it's important that we walk back spending, particularly given our fiscal situation.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Now, Senator Merkley said in this portion that we just played that it was such a partisan rescission, then why should we work with you in a bipartisan manner for the funding bill that needs to be done before September 30th?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		That requires 60 votes in the Senate.
unidentified		Correct.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		What do you think of that?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Do you think that's going to be less likely that Democrats are going to make deals with Republicans given that they can just come back and claw that funding back?
unidentified		I'm sure this will factor into those sort of negotiations.
		These annual appropriations are always often pretty contentious.
		There are a variety of reasons why the parties disagree with each other, both in terms of substance but also for sort of other surrounding political issues.
		But broadly, Congress will need to come to some type of deal.
		They usually do in the past.
		And I don't think this rescissions bill fundamentally changes the overall calculus, because this is a small fraction of the overall budget, a very, very small fraction.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		You've said that Elon Musk's Doge efforts, quote, over-promised and under-delivered on verifiable spending cuts.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		What was your issue with those Doge efforts?
unidentified		When Elon Musk was originally on the campaign trail with Donald Trump, he claimed that Doge could save around $2 trillion from the budget annually.
		That's an enormous sum.
		And that sort of savings figure target was walked back pretty quickly.
		If you look on the Doge website, they claim, I think, less than $200 billion in savings for this year.
		That itself is very difficult to verify.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		I mean, were you able to take a look at those cuts and verify?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		I mean, how much were you able to verify?
unidentified		So the wall of receipts, as they call it, on the Doge website contains about a third of the actual claimed savings.
		And within that wall of receipts, some of the contract savings, for example, are overinflated or they make mistakes when they're reporting the actual contract savings they gain from eliminating some of these grants and contracts.
		In sum, the likely savings from Doge is less than Elon Musk claimed.
		But it's worth noting that the Doge project has elevated wasteful spending and the sort of fiscal problem this nation faces to the kind of highest levels of discourse in this country.
		And that's worth pursuing.
		This rescissions package locks in some of those savings through a formal process with congressional approval, which I think is more desirable than unilateral action by the executive.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Let's talk to Jay in Anniston, Alabama, Republican line.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Jay.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Thanks for having me on.
		I'm curious how somebody gets into Cato Institute these days with so many local problems we have.
		You know, you're talking about the big beautiful bill and things like that and the Doge spending cuts.
		If you ask me, probably a lot of Americans think so, is that every dollar I give should stay here locally.
		Our representatives and politicians don't represent us.
		They're over there representing one big lobby.
		Both of them, probably the same lobby controls both of them.
		So what is it, Dominic, you're going to do about us here, how our streets are better, how our community is better.
		Everything is rising.
		Prices are out of control.
		Even people that make $150,000 a year, I can relate to that, are having a hard time.
		So what are you going to do, Dominic?
		What motivated you to get into Cato?
		You know, are you going to uphold this rotten system that seems to be all right, Jay?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Let's get him to respond.
unidentified		The federal government sends trillions of dollars and money back to states.
		States are more in tune with local priorities.
		They're more capable of responding to the concerns of their citizens and localities.
		And more responsibility should be in the hands of states to govern themselves and make decisions that best suit their constituents' needs.
		In practice, that means reducing the amount of federal spending across a wide variety of programs.
		And I will note that, for example, in the One Big Beautiful bill, although it did increase the debt significantly, it did contain some positive changes in that direction.
		For example, by making some reforms to the way that Medicaid is governed and so on.
		All of those things I think are worth looking at and expanding upon.
		And, you know, federalism is a cornerstone of this country and something that we should work towards preserving.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Gabriel in Dover, New Hampshire, Democrat.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Gabriel.
unidentified		Hi, thanks for taking my call.
		And you're great, Mimi, and thanks for C-SPAN and everything you guys do.
		So I have three big issues.
		How much money are we spending on corporate subsidies?
		I always hear about how much we spend for energy corporations, funding people like who to keep places like McDonald's and Walmart going.
		How much money are we sending to Israel and foreign countries?
		And then someplace like Norway, their sovereign wealth fund.
		How do they accomplish something like that?
		Is there a reason?
		Are they using their natural resources to generate that?
		Are they using taxes?
		Can we use our natural resources?
		Can we use, I mean, is there a reason we don't tax people more to generate a sovereign wealth fund instead of a huge national debt?
		And I think that's generally it.
		A pretty significant portion, we're talking in the hundreds of billions of dollars, is spent each year providing corporate welfare subsidies from the federal government to corporations.
		That money should be clawed back.
		The government should not be subsidizing corporations.
		In terms of foreign aid, I'm not sure for the exact figure on Israel, but I believe that the annual appropriation for this fiscal year was about $60 billion across different foreign aid programs.
		This rescissions bill rescinds about $8 billion of that total.
		As far as the sovereign wealth fund, the U.S. is really, really deep in the fiscal hole.
		We have $36 trillion in debt.
		We have $2 trillion deficits and rising.
		The time where the U.S. might have been able to establish such a fund has long since passed.
		And I think that it's sort of unavoidable that we have the difficult discussions about reforming entitlement programs and putting the budget on a sustainable path.
		The U.S. cannot grow our way out of this problem.
		We need to make substantive changes to programs like Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		You called the One Big Beautiful bill a, quote, fiscal disaster.
unidentified		Why is that?
		It's a simple math problem.
		The One Big Beautiful bill, or as I like to call it, the One Big Beautiful blunder, has too many tax cuts that are not sufficiently offset.
		So, in sum, on the books, the bill costs $3 trillion before considering interest costs, which elevate the cost further.
		It contains a number of budget gimmicks that hide the true cost, which pushes the price tag higher.
		And it has a variety of economic effects, which also change the sort of final price tag of the bill.
		In sum, by my estimate, the One Big Beautiful bill will raise the debt over the next 10 years by $6 trillion.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So, explain the budget gimmicks that hide the true costs.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Drill down on that for us.
unidentified		So the One Big Beautiful bill has a variety of different tax changes, for example.
		So it locks in the tax rates from the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, but it also has several new tax provisions.
		So for example, no tax on tips, no tax on overtime, and so forth.
		A lot of these newer tax provisions expire shorter within the 10-year window.
		So for example, those provisions I mentioned, the no tax on tips and overtime, expire after at the end of the Trump administration, after he leaves office.
		In all likelihood, politicians will extend these tax cuts, which raises the true cost of the bill higher than some have reported.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Well, I mean, proponents of the bill and proponents of these tax cuts are saying that that's going to stimulate growth in the economy.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So that these numbers of like $3 trillion, adding $3 trillion, adding $6 trillion are way overblown.
unidentified		There are absolutely positive growth effects from some of the changes in the bill.
		For example, permanent expensing, lowering the tax rates.
		These things will stimulate economic growth.
		But it's also important keeping in mind we have a massive debt.
		High debt slows economic growth.
		It reduces American incomes.
		And it raises interest rates.
		All of that kind of bite back against the positive growth effects of the bill.
		So in practice, if we use a dynamic score, is what the budget analysts call it, the cost of the bill may actually increase if you consider the growth effects because the interest costs swamp some of the beneficial gains from this bill.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Walter, Republican, and Butler, Indiana.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Walter.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Thank you very much for taking my call.
		Thank you for C-SPAN.
		The good thing about being old and being astute on mathematics, like two plus two is four, is in the 60s we went off the gold standard.
		Politicians came up with a great idea.
		In order to get elected, we're going to promise you free stuff.
		And the American people have become more gullible and more gullible through the years.
		And well, now we have idiocracy live and in color.
		We're not going to pay this back.
		We're not going to pay this back, and we're not going to pay this back.
		And it's over, it's done.
		The politicians are in Vegas and they're using our credit card and putting it all on black, but it's going to come out on red.
		There's no way we're going to pay this stuff back at all.
		We're never going to do it because politicians get elected by keeping their promises of giving free stuff away and entitlement.
		So once an entitlement gets into the government, it just grows.
		It just keeps manifesting itself.
		My question is, when can we just come out with the politicians that turn around and say, you know what?
		We're declaring bankruptcy.
		We're not paying any of the you people back anymore.
		Forget about it.
		And we're going to grow our own wheat and make our own steel and our own vehicles.
		And we're just going to just quit on the debt and say we're not paying it back.
		What's the worst that can happen?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Walter, let's get a response.
unidentified		If there's one bipartisan success in Washington, it's raising the debt and increasing the deficit.
		You're right to be concerned about paying this back.
		If history is any guide, Washington won't make the responsible choices.
		And they may even kick that can down the road.
		For example, the One Big Beautiful bill has a variety of positive cost-saving measures.
		Like I said, changes to Medicaid.
		It's very possible that politicians will walk this back, which increases the sort of final cost of the bill even further.
		But what's important is that we can't just default on this debt and sort of wish it away.
		American institutions are the largest holder of U.S. debt.
		It will be Americans that will primarily be affected if the United States faces a fiscal crisis.
		And the implications can be pretty catastrophic.
		We're talking a recession, mass economic pain, and pretty catastrophic economic damage.
		So if at all possible, we need to avoid that outcome.
		And that means working kind of across party lines to pursue sensible fiscal policy.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		You mentioned Medicaid in the One Big Beautiful bill, and you wrote in a blog post, quote, Americans deserve a sustainable safety net, not one built on borrowed money and political cowardice.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Explain what you mean by that, and if you are in support of those Medicaid provisions.
unidentified		Absolutely.
		I think a lot of the Medicaid provisions in the One Big Beautiful bill are smart, and we should absolutely build on them in the future.
		I'll note that there's been a lot of concern about some of the changes to Medicaid and other programs.
		The U.S. is living on borrowed time, fiscally at least.
		In the future, as we kind of the deficit increases and debt mounts, at some point, rubber will have to meet the road and the U.S. will need to make difficult decisions.
		So if people think that the changes to Medicaid are draconian now, wait until we are in a fiscal crunch and we need to make difficult decisions about how to balance the budget.
		In all likelihood, the more we kick this down, the more painful the changes of these programs will be, both in terms of spending reductions, but also possibly in terms of tax increases.
		And all of that's something that we should avoid by being prudent now.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		It's Dr. Robert in Greenville, Texas, Independent Line.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Hi, Robert.
unidentified		Morning.
		Hey, my point is going to be kind of a little hard to follow here, and I apologize.
		If we were to cut the federal spending in half, let's just pretend, and we were saving $3.5 trillion a year, how long would it take to pay off the deficit?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		The debt.
unidentified		12 years?
		Okay, we're not going to go through that.
		We don't want a 12-year recession.
		Okay, so my question is, why have we gone from a point in time when we had a progressive tax system that people that were making absorbent amounts of money paid a higher percentage of tax, not, you know, in today's world, all they make money on is stocks.
		Okay, pretty much.
		Why have we not included that as income and had a more progressive tax system to reduce the deficit?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Robert.
unidentified		Let's take those up.
		The U.S. already has a very progressive tax system.
		But the history kind of demonstrates that when it comes to fiscal consolidation, putting the budget on a sustainable path, the most effective and long-lasting way to do that with the least economic damage tends to be prioritizing spending reductions over the longer term.
		It's unlikely to imagine Congress immediately cutting sort of half of federal spending in a single day.
		But it might be easier to sort of think about it in terms of stabilizing the debt.
		That is, making sure the debt stops growing relative to the economy.
		So the debt would still be increasing in this scenario.
		It would just stop outpacing economic growth.
		In those terms, the reductions in spending are actually much more manageable.
		You can graduate them over time, so you kind of minimize their negative impacts and maximize their positive impacts.
		But it's important to note that the U.S. has a spending problem.
		Spending is outpacing revenues.
		The programs that I've discussed, Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, these will continue to outpace revenues far off into the future.
		According to the federal government, about 100% of our unfunded obligation, that is the difference between what we've committed to spend and our revenue, stems from Social Security and Medicare.
		So those are the programs that we need to make reforms to.
		Without making reforms to them, we'll kind of remain on this unsustainable path.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Lizzie in Bloomington, Indiana, Democrat, good morning.
unidentified		Hello.
		Thank you, Cease and Mimi.
		Thank you, Dominique.
		I believe this administration is taking our economy down.
		We have him putting on the tariffs.
		We have him giving the richest a tax break.
		And the rest of us are going to pay for it.
		Well, that debt, he just added to the debt.
		Biden just paid some of the debt down, and things were going decently, considering we had the COVID until this Donald J. Trump came in and is trying to destroy us, actually.
		And I believe our Supreme Court is doing the same thing by giving him all the permission to tear down everything.
		I mean, my husband just retired.
		We have, you know, things in Lizzie, you said that former President Biden paid down the debt.
		Yeah, he did some.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Let's get our guest to comment on that.
unidentified		I definitely wouldn't characterize this current administration as being exceptionally fiscally responsible, particularly with the passage of this one big, beautiful bill.
		But I wouldn't characterize the Biden administration as being particularly fiscally responsible either.
		The Biden administration didn't pay down the debt.
		Deficits increased significantly over the Biden administration.
		That actually resulted in very painful inflation that Americans felt.
		And I think that partially informed their decisions in the latest elections.
		So it's worth noting that fiscal irresponsibility is a bipartisan problem.
		And it's incumbent on the American people to kind of hold politicians accountable regardless of their political affiliation to make fiscally responsible decisions.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Do you think that there is the political will on either side to take on entitlement reforms?
unidentified		I think that right now, no.
		It doesn't seem like most politicians in Washington are willing to make the tough decisions necessary to put the budget on a sustainable path.
		But at some point, they will have to make that decision.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		At what point?
		What do you think?
		Like, how long do we have on this path?
unidentified		So it depends on how you measure what we call fiscal space.
		But there are a couple metrics that you can measure this by.
		For example, the Social Security Trust Fund, which is basically an accounting ledger for the Social Security Trust Fund, is scheduled to go insolvent in the early 2030s.
		That's sort of a hard point at which Congress will have to take action on Social Security or benefits will automatically be reduced by a certain amount to make the trust fund solvent.
		So within the next few years, Congress needs to take the steps, the necessary steps to prepare to have that discussion.
		I think one of the ways forward on that would be an independent and neutral fiscal commission.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Harold, Melbourne, Florida, Democrat, good morning, Harold.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Hi, Dominic.
		You know, you say we have a progressive tax system, and it is true.
		But our progressive tax system has been cut drastically over the decades.
		We used to have a high marginal tax rate, up into the 90% tax for earnings over a million dollars.
		Now we have a big reduction in tax revenues.
		And I keep hearing you talk about having to cut expenses, reduce our spending.
		But really, we're taking in less tax dollars today than we did in the 80s.
		And I just want to address one easy, not easy, but at least a possible solution to the Social Security Trust Fund.
		Why not lift the cap off of earnings over $180,000 or whatever the current cap is so that those earning massive incomes would continue to provide Social Security funding to the trust fund?
		That would help to shore up the Social Security Trust Fund without cutting the services to Social Security.
		And if we really got serious, we'd also do some sort of means testing for those multi-millionaires that maybe they don't get Social Security because they don't need it.
		Okay, let's take that up, Harold.
		The kind of latter idea you point to is actually a pretty sensible policy change.
		Social Security was originally an anti-poverty measure.
		So I think targeting the program more effectively to Americans who need it most, that means reducing benefits over the long run for the highest earners, could be a sensible change that could make the program more solvent.
		But I'll note that, you know, tax increases have economically damaging effects.
		It reduces economic growth.
		It changes work incentives.
		So ideally, what the U.S. needs to do is to reduce the growth of these benefits.
		Social security benefits grow faster than inflation and part of because of the way the benefits initial indexing is designed.
		So if we can change the way.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Explain that.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		What do you mean, the indexing?
unidentified		Sure.
		So when Social Security determines the benefit that you get, your initial benefits are set based on wage growth as opposed to inflation.
		And then those benefits grow based on inflation, albeit one that doesn't accurately reflect the inflation in this country.
		So if we more accurately track that inflation growth, but also make sure benefits don't grow faster or more generous year over year over time, we can still preserve the Social Security system while reducing the amount of spending in the program.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Alexandra, Seattle, Washington, Independent Line, you're on with Dominic Lett.
unidentified		Yeah, I just wanted to ask about the cuts to foreign aid.
		I've heard that in Africa they're digging their own graves right now because they know, you know, once their drugs are gone, they'll be gone.
		Personally, I think the drug company should kick down that money.
		All the money that's going back to that's so heavily weighted towards the rich.
		And the poor will actually end up paying more money because of the address of them.
		That's okay.
		They'll end up paying more money because they'll have the tariffs, but they don't pay taxes, so they get nothing back.
		And the rich, I think they generally, you know, save that money, invest it in something, and they're not going out and getting something they couldn't afford before.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Alexandra, let's take those two things up, the cuts to foreign aid and the tariffs.
unidentified		Sure.
		So on the foreign aid note, I think in a perfect world, foreign aid is laser focused and maximally efficient.
		That is not the world that we live in.
		Foreign aid can often have conflicting goals.
		It can be for low priority measures.
		It can be wasteful or even ideologically driven.
		I'll note that the rescissions package primarily targets that low priority, wasteful spending.
		So the U.S. spends, will spend $60 billion or thereabouts this year on foreign aid.
		The rescissions package cuts about $8 billion of that.
		And the specific programs, some programs will still exist that will provide these various services.
		Ultimately, though, I'll note that civil society and the free market can provide for these folks better than the U.S. can.
		And it's worth considering: is this the money that we should be spending, given that we are running $2 trillion deficits?
		Is this the most effective use of taxpayer resources?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And tariffs.
		Are you in favor of tariffs?
		Where do you fall on that?
unidentified		I'm not in favor of tariffs.
		Tariffs have growth-damaging effects.
		They reduce trade.
		They're a tax on Americans.
		And they won't solve our fiscal situation.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And she said that it's the poor that are going to suffer the most from tariffs.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Do you agree with that?
unidentified		I think that's true.
		When Americans go to the store, they will have to pay a higher price for certain goods that they're used to paying a lower price for, and they shouldn't pay that price.
		They should, you know, pay the lowest price they possibly can.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		On the line for Democrats in St. Paul, Minnesota, Alicia, you're next.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Morning.
		Thank you for C-SPAN.
		Mr. Lett, my question has to do with how the Congress is responsible for all of the spending and where that money goes.
		But when it seems like our back is against the wall and we need someone to help clean up the mess that they've made, it seems like the poor people in this country take the burden, the biggest burden of that financial snafu or whatever you want to call it.
		And I'd like to know why it is that the Congress seems to be able to spend the money willy-nilly without any sort of recourse for the citizens.
		Why we can't tell them that we don't want money spent a certain way and hold them to it.
		Thank you.
		I think it's on Americans to hold politicians accountable for fiscally irresponsible decisions.
		As the debt grows, it will hurt American incomes.
		It will increase inflation.
		It will increase interest rates.
		And all of that reduces the quality of life in this country.
		It's up to voters to punish politicians who are fiscally irresponsible and demand real solutions.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Kurt in Cocoa Beach, Florida, Republican.
unidentified		Good morning, Kurt.
		Good morning.
		I had a question for you about a previous caller discussing people paying more into the Social Security Trust Fund when they make over $180,000.
		Well, I just started on this Medicare, and it actually does force you to pay more, quote, into Social Security by an act they invented a couple, I don't know how long ago he might know, called Irma.
		So if you make over 200 and something 210, you'll get $79 a month, me personally, less, $74 a month less, in my Social Security check.
		So in effect, you are paying for the Social Security fund to be funded on higher income people.
		I'd like to know if he had any, and it goes up as you make $300, they take more, $400.
		It keeps going up.
		There's a step function.
		It's not gradual.
		And then the second question is the debt.
		People ask about it.
		I thought I knew a little about it, but to me, my understanding of the debt is treasury bills that are issued in order to fund things the government needs to do.
		And those bills are bought by mainly, I think, pension funds and things like that.
		So the interest rate is directly related to the amount of debt that keeps going up.
		We have to keep paying these bonds, Treasury bills, they come due every two years, 10 years, and 30 years.
		I wonder if that logic I'm expressing here is close, and if it's not, if he could explain to it a little bit better.
		Thank you.
		I think the case that you're making about the Medicare program is actually an interesting one.
		So Medicare, the way it's financed, is different from Social Security.
		It is mostly financed via general revenue.
		So that is just the sort of general funds that the U.S. collects, but it also has some payroll taxes.
		Note that even though it's uncapped, Medicare is growing much faster than every other program in the federal government.
		Medicare is primarily responsible for the sort of long-term fiscal picture in the U.S.
		So, you know, higher taxes are not a sort of silver bullet to this problem.
		If politicians have more money to play with, in all likelihood, they will increase benefits more and be more fiscally irresponsible.
		So from my view, it's unlikely that we can simply tax our way out of this problem, in part because politicians will be irresponsible, but also because it has sort of growth-damaging effects.
		Regarding, you know, sort of how borrowing works, you're pretty close.
		So when the U.S., you know, borrows, it's borrowing from bondholders are buying up U.S. debt, and then the U.S. pays interest on that debt.
		Something important to note is that as the U.S. gains more and more debt, the amount of money that we have to pay on those bills increases because bondholders demand higher interest rates to compensate for the increased risk.
		The consequence of that is that interest costs are the fastest growing part of the budget.
		And at some point, the U.S. will enter a debt spiral where interest costs are growing so quickly that we can't dig ourselves out of the fiscal hole anymore.
		That is a major reason why we need to make these decisions now rather than kick them off in the future, because at some point, the debt growth will simply be unsustainable and we won't be able to dig ourselves out of the problem anymore.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		On the line for Democrats in Brentwood, Maryland, Richard, you're next.
unidentified		Good morning to you both.
		And thank you for the wonderful information you're providing us, sir, this morning.
		During the 2020 campaign, Elizabeth Warren had a wonderful, I thought wonderful, deficit-specific idea of taxing stock trades 25 cents on a dollar.
		I thought that was a little low.
		I would like a more even number of 40 cents.
		And it never became of anything.
		No one ever picked it up.
		And was that because of the Wall Street lobby so strong that they laughed it away?
		Or do you think that would have been a good idea?
		Something not too abrasive, I didn't think, and something that people wouldn't see.
		And it would be deficit-specific.
		And I think it would have made a dent in the deficit.
		And that was it.
		I would like your opinion on that.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		What do you think of that?
unidentified		I'm not familiar with this particular proposal.
		The idea of taxing those stock trades, though, would probably have growth-damaging effects.
		And there are less harmful ways that we can increase revenue by, for example, closing tax loopholes, reducing corporate welfare, and so forth.
		But I'll emphasize here that I'm not sure what the estimated revenue generated from that proposal would be, but it's not going to close the deficit.
		Like I said, there's no silver bullet solution to this problem.
		It will require a sort of comprehensive set of reforms, and those invariably will have to cover things like Social Security and Medicare.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, that's Dominic Lett.
		He's a budget and entitlement policy analyst at the Cato Institute.
		They're at Cato.org.
		Thanks so much for joining us today.
unidentified		Thanks.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Up next, National Urban League President and CEO Mark Moriel discusses the findings of his group's 2025 State of Black America report that's coming up after a break.
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.
		Book TV continues the celebration of America's 250th anniversary with two author conversations on the American Revolution.
		At 4:15 p.m. Eastern, Shirley Green talks about free blacks William and Benjamin Frank, who joined the 2nd Rhode Island Regiment during the war.
		And at 6:30 p.m. Eastern, Richard Brookheiser discusses Revolutionary War-era painter John Trumbull's time as an aide to Generals George Washington and Horatio Gates and his work documenting the conflict.
		Then at 7:30 p.m. Eastern, historian Martin Dugard looks back on the Battle of Midway in June of 1942, highlighting U.S. and Japanese intelligence operations before the engagement and how the battle changed naval warfare in his book, Taking Midway.
		And at 8 p.m. Eastern, Isabel Allende speaks about identity and resilience in her historical novel set in the 19th century against a backdrop of civil war breaking out in Chile in her book, My Name is Emilia Del Vallier.
		Watch Book TV every Sunday on C-SPAN 2 and find a full schedule on your program guide or watch online anytime at booktv.org.
		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.
brian lamb ▲ ● ▼		Dave Barry's memoir is called Class Clown.
		It is at least his 46th book.
		On the front of his book, he makes an important declaration, quote, how I went 77 years without growing up, unquote.
		For 30 years, Dave Berry wrote a weekly humor column published in newspapers, mostly on the weekends.
		He retired that column in 2005, but has kept writing.
		On the back flap of his memoir, the bio says he has more bestsellers than you can count on two hands.
		Barry won the 1988 Pulitzer Prize for Commentary.
		He lives in Miami.
unidentified		Author Dave Berry with his book Class Clown, How I Went 77 Years Without Growing Up on this episode of Book Notes Plus with our host Brian Lamb.
		BookNotes Plus is available wherever you get your podcasts and on the C-SPAN Now app.
		C-SPANshop.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 mike said before i happen 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.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So we are not just speaking to Los Angeles.
unidentified		We are speaking to the country.
		Nonfiction book lovers, C-SPAN has a number of podcasts for you.
		Listen to best-selling nonfiction authors and influential interviewers on the Afterwords podcast and on 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.
		Washington Journal continues.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Welcome back to Washington Journal.
		We're joined now by Mark Moriel.
		He's president and CEO of the National Urban League to talk about their latest report.
		It's the 2025 State of Black America report.
		Mark Moriel, welcome to the program.
unidentified		Hey, good morning.
unidentified		Good to be back.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Just remind us about the National Urban League, your funding, and if you have a political bent.
unidentified		So we are a nonpartisan legacy civil rights organization founded in 1910.
		We've been on the front lines of the battle for equal justice and civil rights with a focus on economic empowerment since 1910.
		We operate in 92 communities across the nation and the District of Columbia.
		And we also, very importantly, are unique in that we are a direct provider of services.
		So we have a very large platform where we provide after-school job training, homebuyer education, small business assistance, health education programming, civic engagement work.
		We served in 2024 6.4 million people.
		So we are nonpartisan, but we are a strong advocate for civil rights and economic justice.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Well, your report, the State of Black America report, has just come out.
		It's the 49th annual report.
		Why do you put this report out?
		What's the goal of it?
unidentified		So in 1976, our president at the time, Vernon Jordan, the legendary late Vernon Jordan, heard President Ford deliver his State of the Union address.
		And at that time, President Ford did not mention America's cities, America's poor, America's black or marginalized communities once in his State of the Union address.
		Vernon Jordan saw that there was an absolute need to speak to the specific challenges that Black Americans faced.
		So he created the report.
		And we have issued the report every year since then.
		I added a focus on statistics and numbers.
		We created an index that helps us compare the status of blacks with the status of whites and the status of Latinos in America.
		We compile numbers every other year.
		In this year, this is a year where we didn't compile a fresh set of numbers.
		We'll do that next year.
		And it'll give us a good sense of the impact of the Trump policies on Black America.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And I just wanted to ask about those numbers.
		Where do you get your data?
		Where do you get your numbers?
		Talk about the logistics of putting together this report.
unidentified		So we use lots of publicly available sources from the Census Bureau, the Department of Labor, a lot of sources that are from the government, some private sources as well.
		We use 300 sets of data.
		That data is compiled into an index, and it gives us a comparative of the economic and social status of blacks versus the economic and social status of whites.
		We index whites at one.
		Black conditions are a percentage of one last year.
		African Americans indexed at about 74%, roughly 74, 75% of where white Americans are.
		So think the home ownership rate or think the unemployment rate or think the median income for families black versus white.
		Those are the kind of numbers we look at.
		And we think it's important because this discussion about the challenges we face with respect to race in America needs to be rooted in facts and numbers, not just in hyperbole, not just in opinion, not just in rhetoric.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Well, the report is called State of Emergency, Democracy, Civil Rights, and Progress Under Attack.
		And I'll just say that that report is found at stateofblackamerica.org if anybody wants to look at it.
		But talk about some of the main topics that you discuss in that report.
unidentified		So we call it a state of emergency.
		And I would offer this perspective.
		While it's the State of Black America report, this year's report is really about the state of the union.
		When it comes to democracy, there's been continuing efforts to whittle away, reduce the import and the impact of the 1965 Voting Rights Act.
		Federal departments whose job it is to enforce the Voting Rights Act have been defunded.
		The Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department has made it clear that they're not going to be aggressive in enforcing the civil rights laws.
		And this is a shift away from the way every single president since the 1950s and the 1960s indeed operated.
		And then there is a pandemic of laws being offered in state legislatures across the country.
		Indeed, I'm here in Ohio, and there are a number of laws yet in the Ohio legislature that are simply designed to make it harder for people to vote.
		These laws target African Americans, disabled Americans, younger Americans, Latino Americans, to simply make it more difficult for people to vote.
		We see that as an attack on American democracy.
		Secondly, there's been an attack on economic opportunity.
		When you think about diversity, equity, and inclusion, don't think about the term, think about what it's designed to do.
		It's designed to make the playing field for jobs, for job promotions, for access to college, for home ownership and bank loans, for equity, participation in businesses.
		Try to make that playing field level.
		And since 1906, 65, the country has made substantial changes, substantial progress, not complete progress, but substantial progress.
		These executive orders and this effort to use the regulatory power of the government to crack down on universities and private companies is nothing other than an effort to close the door for economic opportunity.
		Really, I say the majority of Americans, because when you include women and African Americans and Latinos and the disabled, that's a majority of the American population that would be impacted.
		Already, we see in jobs numbers from just recent months a rise in the black unemployment rate.
		While the white unemployment rate is not rising, we also saw a record number of African American women laid off from their jobs in March of this year.
		So we're beginning to see the impact of these policies on numbers that count and on people.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		I want to ask you about a couple of things that you brought up.
		But first, I'll mention to our viewers: if you'd like to join our conversation with Mark Moriel, you can do so.
		Democrats are on 202-748-8000.
		Republicans 202-748-8001.
		And Independents 202-748-8002.
		You can start calling in now.
		Regarding DEI initiatives, Mark Moriel, you said that it was essentially leveling of the playing field.
		Well, as you know, opponents of DEI say that it is favoring less qualified people based on their race or their ethnicity or what have you.
		What's your response to that criticism?
unidentified		They cannot point to a single case, a single study, or any evidence.
		It's a lot of hot air and rectivisit rhetoric, is what it is.
		It has no merit whatsoever.
		I've looked painstakingly for any set of quote EEO complaints, lawsuits of any magnitude that make that assertion or where that case has been proved.
		It's just not the case.
		Again, it's an effort to create a false narrative to divide the American people to create the sense that for people, what I view, equal opportunity is giving everybody with merit a chance, everyone with merit a chance.
		Historically, we did not give everyone with merit a chance.
		We confined it the best jobs, the best positions.
		Confined into white men.
		And I could see, yeah, many of those white men are qualified.
		They're not the only qualified people in America.
		Many women, many African-Americans, many Latinos are as qualified, in some cases, more qualified for the very same jobs and the very same opportunities.
		What I've got to challenge is false narratives, lack of evidence, lack of facts.
		It sounds like what people said when they opposed school integration.
		It sounds like what people said when they opposed African Americans and women coming into the workforce in the late 1960s.
		Well, they're not qualified.
		Well, the experience of America of the last 60 years has demonstrated there is an abundance of talent in communities that historically have been locked out.
		So what I say is you can make the argument, but you have no facts to back it up.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And we'll get to calls.
		Just one more question, though, about what you said about the Department of Justice and the changes the Trump administration has made at that department.
		Can you elaborate a little bit more on what impact you are seeing from those changes?
unidentified		The great bipartisan Civil Rights Act of 1964, the bipartisan Voting Rights Act of 1965, which were high points in American history, placed in the hands of the Department of Justice the responsibility and the power and the ability to enforce these civil rights laws, just like the Department of Justice enforces criminal laws,
		our anti-corruption laws, our antitrust laws.
		That was a responsibility.
		So it's nonsensical to me that the Justice Department would, notwithstanding its obligation to enforce those laws, would simply say, well, we're not, we're going to pause all civil rights cases.
		We're not going to prosecute bad corrupt cops or police departments that have systemic issues.
		We're not going to bring voting rights cases.
		We're talking about selective choices by government officials to enforce some laws, but not other laws.
		This is not consistent with democracy and the rule of law.
		The executive branch has a responsibility to enforce all laws that the Congress passes, faithfully and aggressively.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		And our guest is the president and CEO of the National Urban League, James, a Democrat in West Point, Mississippi.
		You're on with Mark Moriel.
unidentified		Go ahead.
		Good morning, Mr. Moriel.
		James, I would like to know what specific action you are taking to help offset the anti-black legislation that is occurring across some red states and other states.
		And also, what specific action you're taking to help offset the advantages that the federal government actually gave to white people compared to black folks in terms of housing and other economic development.
		And to debunk, lastly, the DEI talking points that indicate that black and Hispanics have profited from DEI when the government's own statistics indicate that it is the white female that has gotten 70% of the jobs under DEI.
		Could you please address that?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So, James, before I let you go, you're in a red state.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		What specifically anti-black legislation are you talking about that's being put forward in red states?
unidentified		Such things as preventing African-American AP history from being taught in Florida and other states.
unidentified		The idea of maintaining Confederate monuments were put up to demonstrate white superiority.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Let's get an answer for you.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Go ahead, Mark Moriel.
unidentified		Yeah, he's certainly offered a number of questions.
		Let me try to answer it this way.
		I think the real question is what is the civil rights community and what is this broad growing coalition of people who are opposed to these policies doing?
		So we've been involved in and we've brought litigation against the anti-diversity executive orders.
		We have worked very hard to bring persuasion and pressure to corporate chief executives to encourage them to maintain their commitment to equal opportunity, to maintain their diversity, equity, and inclusion, and maintain their commitment to these equal opportunity initiatives.
		I think there's no doubt that, and the facts are clear, that white women have benefited significantly from civil rights, and they were historically included as well.
		I think why it is so discouraging and really makes me indignant that these programs are being attacked is that we have not come all the way to parity in this country.
		We've not come all the way to a level of playing field with this country.
		I think in those states that quote unquote may be red states, I think that people have to vote with a vengeance.
		I think people have to vote and make their voices heard, indeed, at the ballot box in a very powerful way.
		This big, ugly bill that Congress has passed, where they've backloaded these cuts till after the election in an effort to trick people into thinking that it has no impact, will devastate healthcare, devastate education, devastate veterans in a profound way, a massive shift.
		So there should be an opportunity in this moment for there to be a growing, and I think it is a growing coalition of people across all races, creeds, colors, and religions in America today to push back against these policies.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		To Los Angeles now on the Republican line.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Kathleen, good morning.
unidentified		Oh, hi, good morning.
		Listen, I feel like I'm listening to a discussion from 1960.
		We've been talking about the same issues.
		First, let me address the first two points that he made.
		Point number one, he's nonpartisan.
		That's not true.
		They've been pushing, pumping the Democratic Party for decades.
		And black Americans have been rolling with the Democratic Party for decades.
		And we are now facing zero median wealth by 2025.
		Also, you said that your focus, your organization's focus is on economics.
		Well, that's not true, because if we were focused on economics, black American intellectuals, academicians knew in the 1800s that mass immigration is the economic issue that adversely impacts black Americans.
		So you don't even focus on mass immigration slash illegal aliens, which has displaced or replaced black Americans' issues economically.
		And we realize this now.
		We've learned this now.
		Black Americans were hoodwinked, are gaslit by black American institutions and organizations since the Civil Rights Act, because the year after the Civil Rights Act in 1965, the Democratic Party pumped, pushed the Immigration Act of 1965.
		So for every 10% increase in immigration, black Americans lose a certain percentage of their wealth.
		Black Americans in the 1800s knew this.
		Frederick Douglass, Booker T. Washington, W. Du Bois, Marcus Carter, they knew that in the 1800s.
		Yet today, in 2025, black Americans are at least on so-called leaders and organizations.
		In fact, they pump mass immigration and illegal aliens.
		The Democratic Party, black American Democrat politicians pump mass immigration and illegal illegal aliens.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Kathleen, we got that point.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Let's get it right.
unidentified		I'm not here to defend nor to promote the Democratic Party, but in our work, we have no permanent friends, no permanent enemies.
		We only have permanent interests.
		And maybe in this instance, the Democratic policy point of view aligns mostly with ours.
		In the past, in 1920 and 2006, we worked closely with George W. Bush on a very significant bill called the Extension of the Voting Rights Act.
		In 2017 and 18, I worked closely with Jared Kushner and a bipartisan group to pass the First Step Act.
		So I think it's important.
		You've got to get facts straight and not rhetoric.
		Secondly, it's a misnomer that immigration is a Latino issue.
		15% of, quote, those undocumented in this country are black people from the Caribbean and Africa.
		And in some cases, they are blended families where an African-American father and a mother from the Caribbean and an African-American father and a mother from Africa, they're blended families in terms of this.
		So we need to deal with certain facts.
		Final thing I'll say, our economist, Dr. Bernard Anderson, I asked him 10 years ago to conduct a study on the impact of, quote, immigrants on African-American jobs.
		He found that the impact was not significant.
		African American women have moved from being housekeepers.
		African American men have moved from being farm workers into other parts of the American economy.
		And so it's just divisive rhetoric to try to pit black people against immigrants.
		And there's no evidence to the fact.
		Are there impacts here and there?
		Yes, that's the case.
		So we have no permanent friends, no permanent enemies, and only permanent interests.
		And I will dance with whoever dances with our policies and what we believe is best for the community.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Randy is calling from Michigan, Line for Democrats.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Hi, Randy.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Thank you for taking my call.
		Mark, I got some facts here to tell you.
		Here in the United States, we had 178,000 deaths from alcohol last year, 2024.
		All drugs together, we had 83,000.
		Here in Michigan, marijuana is legal.
		We're averaging 9,003 accidents on the road from alcohol, 2,230 from all drugs, illegal and legal.
		Now, this here, this system of this First Step Act that you were talking about, that's the biggest scam I ever saw.
		Our drug laws are directed to do one thing.
		It's about religion.
		White people like me, I'm a Christian, evangelical.
		We drink alcohol.
		Black, brown, and red people's religion was smoking pot.
		That's why we made it illegal.
		That's why we started a drug law.
		We didn't want them Mexicans in 1941 that controlled 70% of the world's pot to make money on it.
		It was worth more than all the grain, all the corn, everything that we had for produce in the United States at the time, Mexico's pot, was worth more than that.
		That's why we made it illegal.
		How about you come out and tell some of these statistics that we treated 29,000 drunks in the state of Michigan last year all together?
		All drugs, we treated 4,125.
		That's 264 million for alcohol, 36.4 million for all drugs.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Grandi.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Go ahead, Mark Muriel, your comment.
unidentified		Well, I didn't really hear a question, but I agree that drug and alcohol abuse is a problem in America.
		And I agree that the criminalization of marijuana use never stopped or reduced in any way, shape, or form the use of marijuana.
		What we do not have in this country is a stronger commitment to health education, a stronger commitment to making people more aware of what I would call the risks to their health, the risk to themselves for abuse and excessive use of alcohol or recreational drugs.
		And that is a commitment we need to make as a nation.
		That is a commitment we champion, we believe very, very strongly about in this instance and in this case.
		And as someone who's had family members struggle with drug and alcohol abuse, I've seen the way in which it can tear apart families.
		I've seen the way in which it can debilitate people.
		I don't know if stricter laws are always the answer to that problem.
		There's got to be a different approach.
		And I think that is what's been lacking.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Mark, I want to ask you about the 2024 election.
		Pew Research says that Trump won 15% of black voters.
		That was up from 8% four years prior.
		So first, I want to ask you about why you think that was.
		Also, we've got the USA Today indicating that black voter support for Trump is sinking according to polls.
		But first, if you can explain why you think black support for President Trump went up over the last four years.
unidentified		15% is not a significant number when 85% may have voted the other way.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		But as far as percentages go, it did double from the election prior.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So that is significant.
unidentified		I think it's anti-incumbency.
		For the first time since the 1800s, the last three elections, the party in power lost the presidency three times in a row.
		And I think frustration with some black voters may have caused them to say, well, maybe I'll take a shot.
		But that vote has now been betrayed with the big ugly bill, with the attacks on voting rights and diversity, equity, and inclusion.
		I don't think those African-American voters may have voted for that.
		They thought what he's going to focus on is affordability.
		What he was going to focus on is jobs and economic issues.
		But the first six months have not been about that.
		And that is why that support, I think, is sinking.
		I think there were those who were willing to take a shot and maybe do something different, but they had a different expectation level.
		I also think that there's a great deal of frustration with politics and both political parties, Democrats and Republicans, and people out there searching for something different and searching for something new.
		And I think that that is one of the reasons why you may have had.
		Now, go back in history.
		The Bushes, for example, even Reagan, they were able to pick up 8%, 10%, 12% of the African-American vote.
		I think it's only in recent times that the African-American voters voted 90 plus percent for the Obamas and the Bidens and the like.
		But historically, you know, there's been, I think what has happened, though, is Republican candidates have not, in many ways, aggressively competed for the African-American vote.
		And I'll give you an example.
		We have a policy conference each year.
		Before 2010 and 11, Republican leaders and Democratic leaders always came and spoke to the 400 to 500 people who were at that conference.
		Since 2011, Republican leaders, I've got a stack of letters to every Republican speaker and every Republican leader in the Senate inviting them to come, with the exception of Mitch McConnell, visiting on a few occasions.
		Republican leaders have not availed themselves, even, and Steve Scalise came one time, the willingness to come and engage in a conversation with the African-American community and hear what we have to say and we listen to what their views are.
		That to me is a change in how American politics.
		Ronald Reagan came to the Democratic, the National Urban League Convention and the NAACP Convention way back in the early 1980s.
		Daddy Bush came, Bush 43 came.
		The history was that the Republicans did come and work to engage.
		The recent history is they simply have not.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Here's Georgia in Gonzalez, Louisiana, Independent Line.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Georgia.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Good morning.
		I'm a native of New Orleans, okay?
		My question to you today is: what are you doing about the real ID what we will need to vote with?
		We need to get on this program early because everyone has to have a real ID because there's a law underlaying.
		So, what are you doing about that?
		So, let me state for the record.
		Yeah, state for the record that I've never been a supporter of ID cards.
		I think that your ability to verify your identity by signing your signature was a system that worked well for a long time.
		Notwithstanding that, what our message to voters is, is to know what you need to vote in your state.
		If you need an ID, go get that ID, right?
		If that ID has to match the address that is on your quote-unquote voter registration, go get an ID that matches.
		Some of these requirements are non-illogical, right?
		They address a problem that did not exist.
		There's just no evidence of people walking into the voting poll and saying, I'm somewhat other than who I am.
		And that is just absolutely the case.
		Have there been some cases?
		Yes, nothing is perfect, but our election in 2024 and even in 2020-20 was error-free for the most part, for the most part, right?
		And these voter ID laws, once again, and many of these draconian requirements that are being passed in states to make it harder for people to vote, are basically a solution looking for a problem.
		Now, having said that, we all have to comply, follow, educate ourselves on what these requirements are, get ourselves ready, and be prepared to vote.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And, Georgia, if you're still there, I just want to make sure that you know that I looked it up, and in Louisiana, you do need to show a photo ID, but it does not have to be real ID.
		So you can still use a regular driver's license to vote in Louisiana.
		Bob in Illinois, Democrat, good morning, Bob.
unidentified		Mimi, you're good.
		You're good.
		What I want to ask, Mark, is this.
		We were in slavery at one time, and now we've come up to being mayors, senators, congressmen, you know.
		And my assessment that it will be about three generations before we come up to money, power, and institutional racism.
		My question is, how many generations do you think it'll be?
		I think you should agree with me.
		So we're behind in that area.
		And I'll listen to you all there.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Okay, Bob.
unidentified		Yeah, so it's a very important question that we answered last year in our State of Black America report.
		We said we looked at the pace of change, the narrowing of the gap from 2000 to roughly 2024.
		And then we said, if the gap continues to narrow at that pace, how long will it take for us to get to parity?
		And it was almost 200 years.
		So the narrowing of the social and economic gaps is slow, very, very slow, because African Americans tend to be like the caboose on a train.
		When America speeds up, when the economy speeds up, African Americans speed up as well.
		However, we remain the caboose on the train.
		Think jobs, the unemployment rate goes down on an overall basis.
		Then the unemployment rate for black people goes down as well.
		But still, it's almost twice as high as that for white Americans or home ownership or wealth creation or business capital access.
		All of these things, even when progress is made, African Americans tend to remain behind because that progress is also benefiting white Americans.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Mark Muriel, I want to ask you about one of the chapters in your report, State of Black America, and that is the second one.
		It says how the war on quote woke is fueling systemic oppression and the assault on civil rights.
		Can you explain what you mean by that?
unidentified		Project 2025 was a blueprint to assault American democracy.
		It was a blueprint to assault what I would call the expansion of the role of the federal government in alleviating the difficult problems of poverty, homelessness, housing, and the like.
		Think just about the policies of the 1940s and 50s, the GI Bill, the FHA, the VA, the interstate highway system, and what they did to really improve America.
		Project 2025 wants to dismantle substantially that entire infrastructure.
		That's the war on woke operationally.
		The rhetoric is that somehow woke, and I'd rather be awake than asleep, is something detrimental to the American future.
		Being aware is detrimental to the American future.
		So we've got to look at Project 2025.
		And now the architect of it is at OMB.
		And they are systemically through executive orders and through legislative actions and through administrative actions working to implement this plan, which is really a war on civil rights and a war on the role of government.
		The role of government in 1963, 50% of America, of black Americans were in poverty, 25% of white Americans were in poverty.
		Today, America is stronger economically.
		Yes, we've got stresses and affordability crises, but the extreme poverty we face in those times is not what we face today.
		If we dismantle the infrastructure to help people have health care, help people have education, help people buy homes, help people towards the road to prosperity, then the long term is we could be back to where we were.
		And that is the crux of the challenge of America.
		And that is what this report seeks to do.
		It seeks to raise awareness.
		It seeks to let people know that in politics today, there's so much rhetoric and false narratives that what the National Urban League tries to do is put out a report that's fact-based, that's fact-based.
		And so we can debate and have differences of opinion, but we need to have an understanding that the facts are the facts and the truth is the truth.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Let's talk to Laverne in Converse, Texas, Line for Democrats.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning to you all.
		Thank you, Mr. Moriel, for your cogent and thoughtful remarks this morning.
		I just have a couple of comments I'd like to make.
		I think that I've heard to the top of my head these people talk about DEI.
		Well, we have the most unqualified cabinet in the history of this country, led by the most incompetent, mean, corrupt leader that this country has ever seen.
		I am disappointed, but I'm not discouraged.
		I see now that churches now have the opportunity to go and preach not only about God, but also about preaching how their church, the ministers of these churches, should lead their flock to the votes and give them direction on how to vote.
		We have this mass deportation, all this foolishness.
		I am astounded that the only people who seem to be in the eyes of this deportation situation are those who have melanin in their skin.
		But what about those Italians, the Irish, the Russians, the English, the Germans, the Asians, the Scottish, all of those who are here illegally?
		We have to do something about this.
		And I want to applaud my brother, Corey Booker, although I was saddened to see that Grassley turned his back to him.
		What we need to do now, what the people in power, what the Democrats need to do now is to do a, although I think he's one of the most unqualified people to be in the Congress, do a Tupperville move.
		Block every appointment that comes up.
		Everyone, everyone that comes up, do the Tupperville move.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Laverne.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		What do you think, Mark Moriel?
unidentified		I'll say this.
		I think there is a school of thought that people want to see the opposition and the Democrats be much more assertive, much more aggressive, and much more forceful in their opposition.
		And I do think people should not underestimate the power of the MAGA movement.
		And it is indeed a movement.
		And sometimes to face a movement head on, you've got to put on your helmet and buckle up, put on your shoulder pads, and really get down.
		And it's going to be a fight.
		And this fight is a fight for the future of this country.
		What kind of country we really, really want to have, which is why it is something that everyone should be engaged in.
		There's a political dimension to it.
		There's an economic dimension to it.
		There's a cultural dimension to it.
		And it is indeed a fight about what kind of America we indeed want to have.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Kenneth is in Radford, Virginia, Republican line.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Hi, Kenneth.
unidentified		Hey, well, really, it's Lexington, Virginia.
		Me and you got your hands full.
		I'm telling you that right now.
		Now, this guy says he's nonpartisan.
		I mean, he's just about as far left as you can possibly get.
		And these people that call into this show have got to be the product of public education because I tell you what, this show tells how we've disintegrated into a mess because people don't think they don't read.
		They believe anything they hear.
		And it's just, we're in a sad shape.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And, Kenneth, do you?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Okay, that's it.
unidentified		It's a mere question, though.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Dee, Silver Spring, Maryland, Independent Line.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
unidentified		Hi, good morning.
		Thank you for C-SPAN.
		My question is to the guests.
		Your report, how does it filter out?
		What major organizations does it touch first?
		And the problem really is it comes down to money.
		And the Democrats are a poor party.
		Their constituents are poor.
		The issue in this country right now is trying to get the budget under control.
		So what do you do?
		How do you do it?
		Okay.
		Let me just offer this thought.
		The biggest contributor to the federal deficit are the Bush tax cuts and the Trump tax cuts.
		That's a fact.
		Go back and look.
		And then you add to that the spending on the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.
		That's what's driven the deficit.
		Not spending on education, not spending on Medicaid.
		Those are not the things that have driven the expansion of the debt in this country.
		And politicians always want to avoid sometimes the facts.
		Number two, this report, the state of Black America, is available at stateofblackamerica.org.
		We make it available.
		We make it free.
		We make it available to the public.
		It's downloadable.
		We want people to read it.
		We hope it spurs debate and discussion, like the discussion we're having here this morning.
		And that's why I always appreciate C-SPAN and Washington Journal, because it's a great opportunity to engage with people who may agree with us, those who don't necessarily agree with us.
		And I don't shirk from a discussion with those who don't agree with us.
		That is part of American democracy.
		That is part of the debate and the discussion that we've had since the founding of this country.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Frank in Birmingham, Alabama.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Democrat, good morning, Frank.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Good morning, Mr. Mayor.
		How are you doing, sir?
		Good morning.
		Great to see you, Frank.
		See you on the face.
		Say what?
		But I can hear you.
		Okay, great.
		Look, your speech there in Cleveland, one of the most awesome tutorials basically you've done on any radio.
		I was just so proud being a Clevelander myself, stuck down there in Birmingham.
		But here's the deal: I look at statistics in 1776 when the Constitution was accepted.
		There were a little more than 2.5 billion, I mean, excuse me, 2.5 million white people in America at that time.
		And it was a little over 500,000 of blacks, and a few of them were free.
		So when we look in the 21st century, I'm astounded that the population of the whites have gotten close to over 300 million.
		And we are now, as a black race in America, we are trending at 48.7 million, and the Hispanic population is at 61.7 million.
		What are the kind of things that shape?
		Well, we were the quarter almost of the population when the Constitution was accepted.
		But here in the 21st century in 2025, we in third and study declining.
		Now, let me share something with you as far as Birmingham.
		Mr. William Parker, your executive that you have over the Birmingham.
		Yeah, William Barnes.
		William Barnes.
		Yes.
		William Barnes.
		I'm sorry.
		Yeah, we think William Park was a councilman got that wrong yeah, but William Barn, he's doing an excellent job.
		But my question is: how many real exercise I'm going to be through in something one second?
		How do you guys audit them?
		How do you do as it relates to your finance?
		You know, 501c3 organizations, you know, could be at any time.
		Their finances and I love Mr. Barnes.
		He's a champion.
		I've been knowing him ever since he's about 18 years old.
		But there's too much spending unnecessarily, I would suppose, as it relates to too much entertainment type things and not more social things to really get effect and bringing artists in.
		No problem with that.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So, Frank, let's wrap up, but go ahead, Mark.
unidentified		Just your last comment.
		In our system, our affiliates have independence, but we have an oversight mechanism where we evaluate them through a performance assessment process roughly every other year or so.
		But they have independence.
		They have their own board.
		They're separate 501c3 organizations.
		But we certainly want them to be accountable to align with the mission, but we don't micromanage how they carry out their work.
		That responsibility is with the board of directors and the local CEO.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		That's Mark Moriel, President and CEO of the National Urban League.
		They're at NUL.org.
		The report we were talking about is at stateofamerica.org.
		Sorry, stateofblackamerica.org.
		Thanks very much for joining us today.
unidentified		Thank you for having me.
		Good morning to all.
		Thank you.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And coming up next, more of your phone calls.
		It's open forum.
		Give us a call on any topic that's on your mind related to public policy.
		Democrats 202-748-8000.
		Republicans 202-748-8001.
		And Independence, 202-748-8002.
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.
brian lamb ▲ ● ▼		Dave Barry's memoir is called Class Clown.
		It is at least his 46th book.
		On the front of his book, he makes an important declaration: quote, How I Went 77 Years Without Growing Up, unquote.
		For 30 years, Dave Berry wrote a weekly humor column published in newspapers, mostly on the weekends.
		He retired that column in 2005, but has kept writing.
		On the back flap of his memoir, the bio says he has more bestsellers than you can count on two hands.
		Barry won the 1988 Pulitzer Prize for Commentary.
		He lives in Miami.
unidentified		Author Dave Berry with his book, Class Clown, How I Went 77 Years Without Growing Up on this episode of Book Notes Plus with our host Brian Lamb.
		BookNotes Plus is available wherever you get your podcasts and on the C-SPAN Now app.
		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.
		Washington Journal continues.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Welcome back to Washington Journal.
		It's Open Forum, and we'll start taking your call shortly.
		About 15 minutes ago, President Trump did put out a post on Truth Social about Jeffrey Epstein.
		He said this: I have asked the Justice Department to release all grand jury testimony with respect to Jeffrey Epstein, subject only to court approval.
		With that being said, and even if the court gave its full and unwavering approval, nothing will be good enough for the troublemakers and radical left lunatics making the request.
		It will always be more, more, more MAGA.
		And let's go to Glenda, Dallas, Texas, Democrat.
		Hi, Glenda.
unidentified		Hi, good morning.
		How are you?
		Good.
		I just want to remind the American people that, excuse me, the American people that during candidate Trump during his campaign on national TV, he called out for Russia for the emails on Hillary Clinton that they would be, he would reward them greatly.
		I just want to remind the American people what Candidate Trump did during his campaign, during the Obama election, and for him being investigated for something concerning his actions calling out Russia for the Clinton Hillary emails.
		He should have been investigated because he called out for Russia to give him information on his opponent, which is, I suppose, legally or whatever, against the rules of our government for him to ask a foreign person for information on his opponent.
		But he did that on national TV.
		All right, Glenda.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And on the Republican line in hometown, Illinois.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Bob, you're next.
unidentified		Good morning, Mimi.
		Love C-SPAN.
		Thanks for having me.
		My topic is the sanctuary states, sanctuary governors, sanctuary mayors.
		I'm here on the south side of Chicago.
		And our governor Pritzker claimed that President Trump foisted upon him all these troubles.
		I would recommend if they get rid of the sanctuary status and didn't spend any money, any taxpayer money on the migration problem, let the feds handle all of that and let the feds come in and get the bad guys out, make streets safer.
		Businesses will stop fleeing.
		The mayor here in Chicago, he's got so much money spent on the migration problem.
		All his regular citizens are going against him because he's not servicing them.
		He's preferencing everybody else except the locals from New York to LA, all of these sanctuary cities.
		They got to start cooperating with President Trump and make this country safe again.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		And this is Bobby, Independent Line, North Carolina.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Hello.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Hi.
unidentified		Go right ahead, Bobby.
		Yes.
		The man was talking to me.
		I couldn't get it all understood.
		I just wanted to say that even though this may sound crazy, Epstein did not kill did not kill himself.
		There's no way he thought too much of himself.
		And I don't understand how all of the things that happened have somehow managed not to be there, according to Trump.
		And I don't think that he's really paying the right saying the right thing because he's made a lot of mistakes and I'm frightened of him to even continue.
		I really am afraid of that man.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Stephen in Baltimore, Maryland, Democrat, you're next, Stephen.
unidentified		Yes, I'd like to tell the public that Donald Trump replaced the Martin Luther King brought a facial statue, and he took it and he replaced it with Witcher Churchill.
		And I like to say also that I finally figured out who Donald Trump was talking about when he said that Latinos were taking black jobs because if he deports all the Latinos who were working in the fruit picking in the fields, he was expecting to replace those people with black people.
		And I can't understand the black idiots who vote against their own interests.
		My grandmother, who passed away a while ago, used to cry about when she used to pick cotton and how she was mistreated.
		And furthermore, they just do little things like rename the forts that were that he tried to change the name to rename them back to those southern plantation slave owners.
		So that's all I have to say right now.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Horace in Ohio, Line for Republicans.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Horace.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Just wanted to know.
		When Russia was well into the war, they kidnapped all the children in Ukraine and sent them to Russia.
		And I just wonder if anybody's looking for them there or anybody keep track of them or anything.
		When they raided, I say they raided this marijuana farm, they found about 20 of these kids that were lost.
		They rescued them.
		But then another thing on the ice, all these senators want to unmask the ice.
		They did that when they first started picking them up, and people got their pictures and all their history and started harassing their families.
		So you got to keep them covered up.
		But all these protesters, thousands of them, you got all these masks, and they won't, nobody wants to unmask them.
		So that's all right.
		Thank you.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Evie in Albany, Georgia, Independent Line.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Evie.
unidentified		Good morning, and good morning to C-SPAN.
		Thanks for the coordinated messaging that you allow us to do.
		And good morning to Mr. President, President Mark Moriel, who also represents for us as a country.
		A sharpening of our viewpoint.
		You actually, with the state of the state, and I did too, want to thank you for the wonderful conference that I virtually got to watch, many of us that we were able to see and hear.
		You stated there was a twist of fate, a torturing of common decency, that inclusion had been smeared, though it meant something obnoxious, and that we as black people now have to earn our rights, our privileges that, of course, are afforded under our democracy and declaration and constitution to all people.
		And that is, of course, what you represent with the National Urban League.
		I remember, and I grew up in Southwest Georgia, I remember when former America's President Vernon Jordan used to come to Albany when C.B. King, the civil rights attorney there, and he and his wife, brokered out trying to break single districts and primaries, closed primaries and things of that nature.
		You gave us a coordinated messaging to the people who want to know what it is that you are going to do about dissemination.
		Well, the state of the state of America sharpens that focus with the information and data that we now have to coordinate our voicing and our messaging, as you stated, to disseminate to the country.
		You also talked to us about in your speech, you gave us the understanding of where we are at this moment, this urgent moment where we now have to face the conclusion that we now stand on the rights and privileges and policy arena that now presents to this country a regression.
		And so if you could, Mr. President, please, if you could talk to the country about, as you stated, the twist of fate, the torturing of our civil rights, the taking away of what that civil rights division means, that civil rights was put there to elevate housing.
		Civil rights.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So Evie, I got to move on.
		And Mr. Moriel is not with us anymore, but hopefully he's still listening and heard your comments.
		Monty and Providence, Kentucky, Democrat, good morning, Monty.
unidentified		Yeah, thank you for taking my call.
		I just want to go back and offer my condolences to the flooding people in Texas and in Houston and all that.
		Thank you for all that.
		But I think it's terrible that Governor Abbott has put those chicken wires and things down in those barricades up under the water.
		What about those people that died trying to get over here?
		That's terrible.
		You know, you don't hear nothing about all the people that got caught up in that razor wire and them things, but all you hear now is about the people that died in that flood.
		Yes, I feel sorry for them.
		There was children and families.
		But what about the families that's caught up in that chicken wire in Texas and all the flooded people and chicken wire and all that?
		You don't hear nothing about that as much.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Monty.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And on the Independent Line in Columbia, Maryland, Lynn, good morning.
unidentified		It's unfortunate listening to C-SPAN that I get to sample the cognitive destruction that's going on among the American population.
		And I blame the media for a lot of it, but I also blame the political leadership.
		The Declaration of Independence references something called self-evident truth.
		It says we hold these truths to be self-evident.
		For example, the collapse of American cities and the crime that's completely out of control in the streets of American cities and decaying infrastructure and the corruption.
		That's a self-evident truth.
		You want to know what else is a self-evident truth that you and I could both agree on?
		I know a controlled demolition when I see one.
		Without a doubt, whether it's a skyscraper destroyed or an economy destroyed deliberately by design, I know a controlled demolition when I see one.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Do you?
unidentified		That's the question I'm asking everybody out there.
		Do you all know a controlled demolition when you see one?
		Because you sure know how to roll over for them and pretend that you don't.
		Are you being gaslighted or are you just a bunch of cowards?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Michelle in Los Angeles, Democrat.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Michelle.
unidentified		Good morning.
		My topic was Jared L. Weiss, a former January 6th rioter who was charged with encouraging the mob to attack police officers, has been appointed as an advisor to a Justice Department task force for Trump's administration.
		And that task force, excuse me, excuse me, my voice is researching the weaponization of the president's enemies, particularly those involved in investigating January 6th.
		So this means that a man who broke into the Capitol in a face mask and called for the deaths of police officers is now playing a key role in an agency that is attacking those who criticize and question the events of that day.
		So that's my issue.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And here's another Michelle in Orlando, Florida, Republican.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I wanted to know what in the report addresses the condition of the black family, because it just seems to me that with the institution of entitlements, that the black family has really deteriorated over time.
		I just saw a report that said that something like 71% of black women want to be single and are single.
		63% of black men don't want to get married.
		And I think so much has been done to destroy the black family.
		And I'm wondering what successful black men like your guest are doing to penetrate that problem and provide demonstration for young black boys and men about a positive future.
		So that's my question.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		On the Independent Line in Newfield, New Jersey, Bill, you're on Open Forum.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I've called before, and I want to say the same thing that I've said in the past.
		The national debt is one of the biggest problems this country has.
		And I have a solution for the national debt, and it is the social security system.
		It'll also strengthen the social security system.
		Right now, you only pay Social Security on earnings up to $170 some thousand dollars.
		Once you pass that threshold, there's no Social Security collected from the worker or the employer.
		Right now, if they made everybody pay Social Security on their earnings, the amount of money going into Social Security would probably triple or more.
		If they did that, my suggestion would be that for the next, however many years it would take, somebody with the better access to the facts and figures would have to figure out how many years it would take.
		The employers Part of the social security for over $170,000 would go directly into a fund to pay down the national debt.
		The workers' part would go directly into Social Security.
		Once the national debt was paid down to a certain point, they should pass a bill and say it should never be allowed to go above this amount of money unless there's a national emergency like a world war again or something.
		If they did that, it would eliminate the national debt and the interest that we're paying that we get nothing for.
		And they could lessen the tax burden on the people of the country.
		Now, I should.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, got it, Bill.
		And in Sacramento, California, Line for Democrats, is it Kent?
		Hello?
unidentified		Yes, it's Kente.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Kente, go ahead.
unidentified		Yeah, the way that America is going to suffer until the end of time that it has because of the way that black people has been treated in this country, yet all factions that have gained from the civil rights movement is owed to black people.
		Yet, they're the ones who get less in America.
		So, because of that, America's going to suffer.
		You know, and it don't need to be any more said.
		America's going to suffer.
		That's embarrassing.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Stephen, Wilmington, Illinois, Line for Democrats.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
unidentified		Thank you.
		My problem was that for years, the right complained that Biden failed to unite the country, and yet two weeks ago, Trump comes out and said he hates half the country.
		He said he hates Democrats.
		And then he chose to declare war on the state of California.
		And I don't understand how a president can pick states that he's just going to destroy.
		Thank you.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Barry is in Hopkins, South Carolina, Independent Line.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		You're on Open Forum, Barry.
unidentified		Yes, my comment is: I've heard a lot about DEI and diversity.
		And I was wondering maybe some of the Republican callers, maybe a guest that you can get on, can explain to me when we look at these college football games and basketball games, the teams are predominantly black.
		And so to me, the teams should reflect the enrollment at those universities.
		If you only have 10% black enrollment at a white, predominantly white university, your football team should only have 10% of the players as blacks or minorities.
		So I would like to see if we're going to be true and hold true to DEI.
		Let's go ahead and take this to the college teams.
		Let's file lawsuits and force them to only have whatever their enrollment is, only 10% of their enrollment is black.
		That football team, that basketball team, whatever sports team it is, should reflect that number.
		If you're serious about DEI, I think that, and I just want to make that point.
		That is something that has been bouncing around in my head.
		And I would like to hear others' opinion on this DEI movement.
		Otherwise, if we don't do that, then the people that promote DEI are hypocrites.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And on the line for Democrats in Memphis, Tennessee, Allie, you're on the air.
unidentified		Thank you, Mimi.
		I just want to say that the state of black America is gloomy at best.
		We have high unemployment rates for your government jobs, fewer black businesses, but fewer government contracts.
		I want to know, I really wanted Mark to answer this question, is how do we improve the bleakness under this disrespectful president and administration?
		And in addition to that, I want to say, as it relates to the name image likeness that colleges provide to their student athletes, I think we need to ask the president and his administration to take his hands off of it.
		Allow the colleges to do what they're doing for those student athletes because many years those student athletes have been taken advantage of.
		This is the perfect time for them to earn their money and leave it alone, Trump.
		Please.
		Thank you, Nimi.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Walter, Staten Island, New York, Republican.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
unidentified		Hi, good morning.
		How are you?
		I've been listening to the program all morning, and we got a lot to unpack there.
		But I just have one observation.
		I'm a blue-collar worker from New York.
		I'm an auto mechanic.
		And, you know, on the ground, talking to people every day that's working, it doesn't reflect exactly what you're hearing on TV.
		Yeah, we have a lot of stuff to take care of politically with blacks, browns, whites, and everything.
		But just one point.
		The Mexican population, when it came over here, there's a big labor force on Staten Island for years, for years.
		And we watched over the years that the Mexican population with the landscaping and stuff, you know, where they started out where you can go down and get a laborer for $7,500 a day, now they own their own landscaping companies and stuff and people cleaning houses.
		Oh, we're not going to go back to cleaning houses anymore.
		Well, the people that clean our houses have businesses now, and they're all doing very well.
		They have people working for them.
		My question is, why can't black America do the same thing?
		If you're going by people coming here, legally, illegally, and flourishing, how come the black public hasn't done that?
		Do they think that it's beneath them to cut grass or anything?
		Someone's got to do it, but you can excel at it.
		And I just think there was a perfect platform for them there to excel.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Walter.
		Larry is an independent, Burnsville, Minnesota.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I'm calling by Epstein.
		And what I believe is that Americans should look for a third party because obviously Epstein was murdered while he was incarcerated.
		I mean, this guy's worth, what, close to $100 million, private island, private plane.
		The most he was looking at was 18 months in prison.
		Obviously, this is not the kind of person that commits suicide.
		He was murdered, and that's all there is to it.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Larry, regarding your comment about a third party, what do you think about Elon Musk's party that he's talking about?
unidentified		You know, I really looked into it enough to know about his third party.
		But, I mean, at some point, people in this country have to look at third parties as a solution to their problems because obviously they aren't getting them.
		They're constantly being gaslit by the parties that are out there.
		And they definitely need to look to a third party.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Got that point, Larry.
		This is Rudy Georgia, Democrat.
		Good morning, Rudy.
unidentified		Mimi, I'm 73 years old, and in 19, I mean, 2014, former President Obama wore a tan suit at a press conference.
		And the Republicans went out for pressing saying that that was disrespecting the office of the presidency because he wore a tan suit.
		And I thought he looked very devonier with that panto.
		So we're in a situation now in this country where truth is on life support.
		White evangelicals are not saying anything about moral misconduct.
		I never thought I would see this level of bold hypocrisy to the point where we can ignore the negative because of a political party.
		It say it.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Robert in Florida, line for Republicans.
		You're on Open Forum.
		Robert, you there?
unidentified		Yes, I'm here.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Yep, go ahead.
unidentified		Okay.
		Yes, I love your show.
		C-SPAN, I think you're great.
		All I've got to say is that I'm with Trump.
james in texas [2] ▲ ● ▼		He does not walk on water, but having the audit for this country should be audited all the time.
unidentified		I come from long-term care, health care.
		We self-audit ourselves.
		And it's about time this country has an audit and it should continue on.
		And that's all I have to say.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Claude in Orland Park, Illinois, Democrat.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Claude.
unidentified		Okay.
		Oh, thank you for taking my call.
		My question is: is that Donald Trump has separated our country so badly.
		I really appreciate what C-SPAN is doing.
		I watch C-SPAN 2 and 3, and I always just kind of wondered, why is it that when we are looking at the TV, when you look to the left, there are the Democrats.
		When you look to the right, they're the Republicans.
		Why is it that they never communicate?
		There's so much tension.
		It is a dividing line.
		They never come across.
		Democrats do not go to the Republican side.
		The Republicans don't go over to the Democrat side.
		And this is a shame.
		And I can see why we can't get anything done.
		Thank you for the call.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Thank you.
		And thank you to everybody that called in.
		That does it for us for today's Washington Journal.
		We're back again tomorrow morning at 7 a.m. Eastern time.
		Thanks for watching, everybody, and have a great Saturday.
unidentified		Coming up Sunday morning, Beyond the Polls podcast host Henry Olson of the Ethics and Public Policy Center talks about the week's top political news, including President Trump's agenda and political standing.
		And then New York Times columnist Jamal Bowie also talks about the week's top political news, including New York City mayoral candidate Zorhan Mamdani's meeting with Democratic lawmakers in Washington, C-SPAN's Washington Journal.
		Join the conversation live at 7 Eastern Sunday morning on C-SPAN, C-SPAN Now, our free mobile app, or online at c-SPAN.org.
		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.
		Book TV continues the celebration of America's 250th anniversary with two author conversations on the American Revolution.
		At 4.15 p.m. Eastern, Shirley Green talks about Free Blacks William and Benjamin Frank, who joined the 2nd Rhode Island Regiment during the war.
		And at 6.30 p.m. Eastern, Richard Bruckheiser discusses Revolutionary War-era painter John Trumbull's time as an aide to Generals George Washington and Horatio Gates and his work documenting the conflict.
		Then at 7.30 p.m. Eastern, historian Martin Dugard looks back on the Battle of Midway in June of 1942, highlighting U.S. and Japanese intelligence operations before the engagement and how the battle changed naval warfare in his book, Taking Midway.
		And at 8 p.m. Eastern, Isabel Allende speaks about identity and resilience in her historical novel set in the 19th century against a backdrop of civil war breaking out in Chile in her book, My Name is Amelia Del Vallier.
		Watch Book TV every Sunday on C-SPAN 2 and find a full schedule on your program guide or watch online anytime at booktv.org.
		C-SPAN, democracy unfiltered.
		We're funded by these television companies and more, including Comcast.
		The flag replacement program got started by a good friend of mine, a Navy vet, who saw the flag at the office that needed to be replaced and said, wouldn't this be great if this was going to be something that we did for anyone?
		Comcast has always been a community-driven company.
		This is one of those great examples of the way we're getting out there.
		comcast supports c-span as a public service along with these other television providers giving you a front row seat to democracy july 19th This morning, we're asking for your top news story of the week.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Several items may have caught your attention this week.

▲