CSPAN - Washington Journal 11/03/2025

All Episodes

Previous Next

Nov. 3, 2025 06:59-10:01 - CSPAN

03:01:51

Washington Journal 11/03/2025

Participants

Main

daniel bush

newsweek 13:01

daniella diaz

notus 09:41

daryl kimball

26:47

john mcardle

cspan 40:07

Appearances

brian lamb

cspan 00:57

donald j trump

admin 02:28

hakeem jeffries

rep/d 00:57

john fetterman

sen/d 03:01

karoline leavitt

admin 01:13

norah odonnell

cbs 01:02

red beckman

00:41

scott bessent

admin 01:04

sean duffy

admin 01:08

Clips

david grann

00:21

david rubenstein

00:12

dennis lawrence cuddy

00:03

elizabeth price foley

00:06

jake tapper

cnn 00:29

luke rudkowski

00:17

paul steinhardt

00:13

peter gorman

00:08

Callers

albert in austin

callers 00:24

victoria in montana

callers 00:11

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Show episode speakers

Speaker	Time	Text
unidentified		Honored to be here.
		All Q&A programs are available on our website or as a podcast on our C-SPAN Now app.
		C-SPAN, Democracy Unfiltered.
		We're funded by these television companies and more, including Charter Communications.
		Charter is proud to be recognized as one of the best internet providers.
		And we're just getting started.
		Building 100,000 miles of new infrastructure to reach those who need it most.
		Charter Communications supports C-SPAN as a public service, along with these other television providers, giving you a front-row seat to democracy.
		Coming out this morning on Washington Journal, along with your calls and comments live, we'll talk about day 34 of the government shutdown with Newsweek White House reporter Daniel Bush and Notice Congressional Reporter Daniela Diaz, and then Arms Control Association Executive Director Darrell Kimball on President Trump's decision to resume U.S. nuclear weapons testing.
		Washington Journal is next.
		Join the conversation.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		U.S. history.
		Meanwhile, President Trump this weekend sat down for an extended 60-minutes interview and then took to his true social page last night to call once again for the elimination of the Senate filibuster to allow Republicans to reopen the government through a simple majority vote.
		We're talking about all of it this morning on the Washington Journal and doing so on phone lines split as usual by political party.
		Democrats, it's 202-748-8000.
		Republicans, 202-748-8001.
		Independents, 202-748-8002.
		And that special line we've kept open for federal workers, 202-748-8003.
		You can also send us a text or catch up with us on social media.
		On X, it's at C-SPANWJ.
		On Facebook, it's facebook.com slash C-SPAN.
		And a very good Monday morning to you.
		You can go ahead and start calling in now.
		This is the front page lead story in today's Wall Street Journal.
		The headline shutdown reaches Key Week.
		As each party seeks an edge, Democrats call for Trump to engage as the impasse is felt in food aid and airports.
		President Trump sitting down with 60 minutes over the weekend.
		This is what he had to say about the shutdown.
norah odonnell ▲ ● ▼		We are now approaching the longest shutdown in American history.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Democrats' fault.
norah odonnell ▲ ● ▼		Under your presidency, we're talking about more than a million federal workers who are not getting a paycheck, including our air traffic controllers.
		You see, there's traffic snarls out at the airports now.
		This weekend, food aid for more than 42 million Americans is set to expire.
		What are you doing as president to end the shutdown?
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		All we're doing is we keep voting.
		I mean, the Republicans are voting almost unanimously to end it, and the Democrats keep voting against ending it.
		You know, they've never had this.
		This has happened like 18 times before.
		The Democrats always voted for an extension, always saying, give us an extension.
		We'll work it out.
		They've lost their way.
		They've become crazed lunatics.
		And all they have to do, Nora, is say, let's vote.
		And you can open the economy could open up during our interview.
norah odonnell ▲ ● ▼		Is there something you can do?
norah odonnell ▲ ● ▼		Is there something you can do to bring this to the facts?
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Here's what I can't do.
		I can't give them a trillion and a half dollars so that they can give welfare to people that came into our country illegally, so that prisoners and that people from mental institutions and people that are drug dealers get vast amounts of money for health care.
		That I can't do.
		So my assistants are what I can do is I can continue to run a great country.
		We have the best economy we've ever had.
		I can continue to do that.
		What they should do, look, this started a long time ago.
		I always said, and you know, I've been very consistent: Obamacare is terrible.
		It's bad health care at far too high a price.
		We should fix that.
		We should fix it.
		And we can fix it with the Democrats.
		All they have to do is let the country open and we'll fix it.
		And ending the country open, and I'll sit down with the Democrats and we'll fix it.
		But they have to let the country.
		And you know what they have to do?
		All they have to do is raise five hands.
		We don't need all of them.
norah odonnell ▲ ● ▼		But so you're saying your plan is to tell the Democrats to vote to end the shutdown.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Correct, very simple.
norah odonnell ▲ ● ▼		And that you will put forward a health care plan?
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		No, we will work on fixing the bad health care that we have.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		President Trump, that was from his 60 Minutes interview.
		It took place on Friday.
		It aired last night at the extended version, 90 minutes of a 60-minute interview available online on the 60 Minutes website.
		But here's where we are on the government shutdown.
		It's day 34, 33 hours, 33 days, 7 hours and 4 minutes to be exact.
		The longest shutdown in U.S. history.
		That took place during the first Trump administration.
		Back in 2018, going into 2019, it was 35 days.
		And we are likely to be breaking that record this week.
		That's because tomorrow is Election Day in Virginia, in New Jersey, New York City, several closely watched off-year elections set to take place tomorrow.
		Even though there's been some discussions that started taking place last week on reopening the government, it seems unlikely that members of Congress will reopen the government on an election day, likely to see what happens from those off-year elections.
		The government could reopen this week or it could extend some talking through Thanksgiving.
		We're talking about day 34 of the government shutdown this morning on the Washington Journal: 202-748-8000 for Democrats to call in.
		202-748-8001 for Republicans.
		Independents, it's 202-748-8002.
		Barney is up first this morning out of Florida.
		Line for Democrats.
		Barney, good morning.
unidentified		Yes, good morning.
unidentified		Do you hear me?
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		I can hear you, Barney.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		What's your thoughts on this day 34 of the shutdown?
unidentified		My first thought is about the shutdown: people need health care.
		People need to get their benefits for the food stamps and the snap benefits.
		But my other problem is that we have to look at a 34-count convicted felon, sexual abuser, on nationwide TV.
		That's my biggest problem.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Barney, how do you see this whole thing ending?
unidentified		The Democrats, look, the Democrats need to hold out to the very end because if they cave, the Republic's going to lie.
		They're going to tell another lie about wait down the road, we're going to visit it next year.
		Next thing you know, ain't nobody going to have no insurance.
		Donald Trump, when he stole them documents, took them to Ma-a-Lago, he's got dirt on every Republican in that office.
		That's why he controls the Republican in the Senate and in the House.
		Any idiot would realize that if I'm a criminal, I'm going to do criminal activities.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Got your point.
		That's Barney in Florida.
		You talk about food stamps, what used to be known as food stamps, now SNAP Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.
		That's the shutdown impacting funding for that program.
		Some 42.5 million Americans participate in that program.
		Some 22.7 million households receive some amount of SNAP benefits.
		The average monthly benefit per person, just under $200 a month.
		The benefit per household, about $350 per month, and food banks straining under the demand in the wake of the announcement that SNAP benefits will not be funded.
		We'll see what happens in the coming days with that program.
		Meanwhile, we're hearing from you.
		This is Roy out of Florida, Line for Democrats.
		Roy, go ahead.
unidentified		Yeah, yeah.
		The thing is that the president has to get down and negotiate.
		It's always been that way.
		It'll always be that way.
		He can have these big ballroom parties like he did this weekend and all then bash the White House completely to the ground.
		My dad lives in D.C.
		This situation is just sickening what he has done to our country.
		Since day one, the guy hasn't wanted to be president.
		Obviously, he's on a retribution tour.
		The thing is, he has to sit down.
		People's premiums for health care is going through the roof.
		People are not going to be able to afford to live.
		There's no way.
		This is a fight the Democrats have to have.
		I understand the planes.
		I understand the staff benefits.
		I understand that so much.
		My premium's going way through the roof.
		So it's not even any situation, but this fight has to be had and he has to negotiate.
		That's the only way it's going to be done.
		Be a president, Donald Trump.
		Quit relying on your rich buddies, your friends.
		They're not going to get you anywhere.
		The people are the people that are speaking in this country through your brutal tactics and Stephen Mueller knocking people to the ground and kidnapping people all over this world.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		All right, got your point, Roy.
		Sean is in California.
		Independent.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Hey, good morning.
		Yeah, I just think that I think it's unfortunate.
		I think that with Donald Trump, he makes a lot of promises up front.
		If they just do this, then I'll do that.
		I just don't think that he'll be able to come through with any kind of health care plan.
		He promised he was going to do it, still won't be able to do it.
		And I think the shutdown, I think it's going to go on for some time.
		I don't think it's going to be ending anytime soon.
		It's almost like us voters, the people that are calling in and talking, and have to either get together somehow and try to force, have our own little continental congress where we try to put pressure on the congressional folks in all the different states to do what needs to be done to get things,
		you know, either changing the rules where, you know, congresspeople get paid with the shutdown and essential workers don't get paid, you know, things like that.
		Try to correct that somehow.
		But I think the voters have to kind of do that.
		We have to get together and try to put the pressure on our elected officials to do the right thing.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		That's Sean in California on the cost of health care next year.
		Some numbers from the Kaiser Family Foundation.
		Premiums nationwide are set to rise by 18% on average, according to an analysis by the nonpartisan health policy group, Kaiser Family Foundation.
		Combined with the loss of extra subsidies, have left Americans with the worst year-over-year price hikes in 12 years since the marketplace was launched.
		Nationally, the average marketplace consumer will pay $1,904 in annual premiums next year, up from $888 in 2025, again, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation, the Washington Post, with that story looking at premiums nationwide as people are trying to figure out this November what to do about their health care next year.
		This is Kevin in Connecticut, Republican.
		Good morning.
		You're next.
unidentified		Good morning.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Go ahead, Kevin.
unidentified		Yeah, this whole shutdown thing is absolutely ridiculous.
		These Democrats have lost it.
		All they want to do is kill this country.
		That's their whole goal: kill the country and do anything that Trump wants.
		They've got to do the opposite.
		I'm from Connecticut, and we got some real whistle nuts for Congress and senators in this state.
		They'll never change their mind.
		But I think Trump's right.
		I think they've got to go to the nuclear option and just get this country back open.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		You're talking about ending the filibuster, Senate filibuster.
unidentified		Yes, yes.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		By doing that, Kevin, the argument against doing that is if the other party is in power, it makes it that much easier for them to implement policies down the road that you may not like.
unidentified		Well, I understand that.
		But if the Democrats get into power, they're going to do it anyway.
		They're going to go with the nuclear option, eliminate the filibuster, and then they're going to start loading the courts and doing all kinds of things anyway.
		So we might as well just get the country open.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Why do you think they will do it?
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		There was a push to do it before, and Democrats stepped back from that edge before in the Senate.
unidentified		Well, because they just.
		They will.
		They're out to ruin the country.
		And people don't believe that.
		But if they really look and see what they did the last four years with a senile old man in office, you just can't, you can't trust them.
		And they want to, everything that they do, they blame on the Republicans.
		Every single thing they do, they blame Don Trump, or they accuse Trump of doing.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		That's Kevin in Connecticut.
		The leader of Democrats in the House, Akeem Jefferies, was on CNN State of the Union yesterday morning.
		He was asked how long the shutdown could go.
		This is what he had to say.
jake tapper ▲ ● ▼		The White House says that Thanksgiving travel could be a disaster if this shutdown continues that long.
unidentified		Are Democrats prepared to keep the government closed through Thanksgiving if it comes to that?
hakeem jeffries ▲ ● ▼		The question is, why are Republicans continuing to keep the government shut down?
		They have the House, the Senate, and the presidency.
		Donald Trump just made clear over the weekend repeatedly that Republicans have the ability to reopen this government.
		They don't want to do it because they'd rather continue to gut the health care of the American people.
		And here are some questions that need to be asked.
		Why have House Republicans remained on a taxpayer-funded vacation for the last six weeks?
		They keep canceling votes.
		They've canceled votes for next week.
		Of course, they are unserious as it relates to reopening the government.
		Why has Donald Trump spent more time on the golf course, including this weekend, than he has in talking to Democrats on Capitol Hill who represent half of the country?
		It's because apparently Donald Trump is uninterested in reopening the government.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Hakeem Jeffries yesterday on CNN, one other Democrat that was on CNN yesterday is Senator John Fetterman, Democrat from Pennsylvania.
		He's voted for that continuing resolution that would reopen the government several times since the shutdown began.
		And he was critical yesterday of Democratic strategy.
		When it comes to the shutdown, this is what he had to say.
john fetterman ▲ ● ▼		Well, I mean, for me, fundamentally, I'm deeply, deeply distressing to know that 42 million Americans are going to lose their SNAP benefits.
		And now that's one of the big reasons why I refuse to shutting our government down.
		And again, I feel like the Democrats really need to own the shutdown.
		I mean, we're shutting it down.
		I know why they claim because they want to address the tax credits.
		And I fully support that.
		I voted for all of their CRs, RCRs, every single time.
		And I refuse to put 42 million Americans in the kinds of food insecurity.
		Now, this is all solved by just reopening our government, and the people are now paid.
		Now, if we are, we are the party that are fighting for working people.
		Now, as far as I'm aware, every single union that's involved in this is now demanding to us to reopen that.
		That's the side that I'm in through this.
		And now the four airlines are now saying we really have to stop this right now.
		And why do we really want to make flying less safe by forcing this times of situation and making things that much stressed?
		So it's not something I support of, and I don't want to be involved.
		And now we can find a way forward.
		We need to find a way forward.
		And we really, I do believe we can achieve these kinds of tax credits.
		And this is something I support, but it's the wrong tactic.
		It was wrong when the Republicans did it.
		It's wrong now that we seem to be driving it.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Pennsylvania Democrat John Fetterman, yesterday.
		Your calls this morning on the Washington Journal.
		This is Ed out of Lawrenceville, Georgia, line for Republicans.
		Ed, good morning on this 34th day of the government shutdown.
unidentified		Good morning.
		The question was supposed to be about the government shutdown, but every time the Democrats got on the phone, you let them talk about Trump going golfing, the ballroom.
		That doesn't have anything to do with the question, and you should have cut them all off.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		What do you want to talk about, Ed?
unidentified		Well, I want to say President Trump, yeah, he might have played golf, but how about the fact that he brought in over $27 trillion into our country in new investments?
		I mean, nobody mentions that.
		Oh, he played golf.
		Oh, my God.
		I think I'm going to die.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Any thoughts on the shutdown, Ed?
unidentified		Pardon me?
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Any thoughts on the shutdown?
unidentified		Yes.
		I think the shutdown will, well, you know, it's the Democrats are stopping the vote.
		If they seriously wanted to stop it, they would do it.
		So they don't really want to stop it.
		They love pain.
		Let me tell you something.
		Democrats, every idea they've ever had never worked anywhere in the world.
		That's the thing.
		Like this guy that's going to become mayor of New York, his ideas never worked anywhere in the whole world.
		But in two years, they'll throw him out.
		You watch.
		And you know another thing.
		You can't, You're not supposed to raise taxes on the rich.
		You have to do it.
		Every group has to be.
		If you're going to raise it on the rich, you've got to raise it on the poor.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		That's Ed in Georgia.
		Zorhan Mamdami leading in the polls in the New York City mayoral race.
		That race, one of several closely watched races taking place tomorrow, the off-year elections, often setting the tone for the eventual midterms.
		This is the front page story of the race in the New York Times today.
		Heated mayor's race shakes New York City's balance.
		And this is just two paragraphs from a volatile mayoral election this Tuesday appears poised to reshuffle and reconstitute the long-standing power structure of a city that so often sets the political, cultural, and financial course well beyond its boroughs.
		And a collision of local and national forces, escalating deportation campaigns, searing mutual political disdain and dissolution, economic angst across income strata seems primed to scramble New York's very sense of itself, compelling it to confront some of the surface paradoxes that are core to its identity.
		The story going on to say the capitalist capital of the world is now the epicenter of the ascendant and impatient socialist-led rebellion over affordability, over who gets to make a life in New York, and New York that bred Wall Street and Occupy Wall Street, and now finds alums and avatars of both camps credibly contending that the future is theirs.
		That's this front page story on the race today from the New York Times.
		This is Judy in Youngstown, Ohio.
		Democrat, good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
unidentified		I think the government needs to take the Republicans and the Democrats, and all of us citizens should vote them all out of office and just start over again because these guys are sick.
elizabeth price foley ▲ ● ▼		They're acting like children in the playground and they're fighting over who's going to be on the swing next.
unidentified		And they're hurting us.
		Even the gentleman that's in the White House, he doesn't think of us as citizens.
		He just wants to do what he wants to do and forget about us.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Judy, how has the shutdown most impacted you in Youngstown, Ohio?
unidentified		Well, it's going to be bad.
		We've got people that we're trying to help everybody.
		We're going to our food banks.
		We're taking the food and everything.
		I'm a senior citizen, and I even take it, and I can't afford it.
		But I'm going to be there for my people and the citizens of the United States.
		That's who runs this company, this country, not the Democrats and the Republicans.
		Thank you so much.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		That's Judy out of Youngstown, Ohio.
		This morning, back on CNN yesterday, it was Treasury Secretary Scott Besant who was asked whether the Trump administration would use emergency funds to cover SNAP benefits.
		We'll show you that in just a second.
		This is Teresa in Louisiana.
		Democrat, good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Good morning.
		How are you?
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		I'm doing well, Teresa.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		What are your thoughts on the shutdown?
unidentified		Well, I think it needs to continue until the people who are most suffering say I can't take it anymore.
		And I want to thank them for taking it because they are standing up.
		And that's the only way we're going to get anything.
		And usually it comes from the bottom up.
		And I know people are suffering, but you don't get anything unless you suffer.
		I can tell you that groceries are extremely high.
		I find that to be true.
		And I think that people don't understand the needs of the lower hair.
		And we can certainly say the lower third or fourth of the people in the United States and what their needs are.
		And I feel like they could the citizens of the country could open their eyes and we all need to do something.
		I have been so glad that they had the No Kings parade because it was a way of doing something.
		And I'm calling in this morning trying to do something and to take our country back.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		That's Teresa in Louisiana.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Now, let me show you Scott Passent from yesterday on CNN on whether there will be emergency funds to cover SNAP benefits for Americans.
unidentified		Right, but there is this contingency fund.
jake tapper ▲ ● ▼		And as recently as September 30th, the Agricultural Department had a memo saying that these funds, the contingency funds, I think it's about $5 or $6 billion, could be used to pay these benefits.
jake tapper ▲ ● ▼		Now, it'd only be two or three weeks, but that's a lot for people who need the food.
scott bessent ▲ ● ▼		Well, President Trump just, as I said, President Trump just truthed out that he's very anxious to get this done.
		And it's got to go through the courts.
		The courts keep jamming up things.
		Democrats are in the middle of a civil war, and they should just open the government.
		That is the easiest way to do this.
unidentified		Is the administration going to appeal the ruling by the judge?
		Is that what you mean by the courts need to weigh in?
		Because the courts have weighed in.
scott bessent ▲ ● ▼		No, but there's a process that has to be followed, so we've got to figure out what the process is.
scott bessent ▲ ● ▼		President Trump wants to make sure that people get their food benefits.
unidentified		So it could be done by Wednesday.
scott bessent ▲ ● ▼		Could be.
		Okay.
		Could be.
		And five Democratic senators could cross the aisle and open the government by Wednesday.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Treasury Secretary Scott Bassent, that was yesterday on CNN.
		This morning on the Washington Journal, taking your phone calls on day 34 of the government shutdown.
		Mark Hampstead, Maryland, Republican.
		Good morning.
		You're next.
unidentified		Hey, good morning, John.
		How are you doing?
		Doing well.
		You know, to that last caller, I just want to remind her, we have a no-change day every year.
		It's called Independence Day, July 4th.
		I think the reason that we are having this government shutdown is because what the Democrats are not telling us, they're very good at doing a sleight of hand.
		They'll say things like, well, illegals aren't getting health care.
		But what they don't concede is that the health care system is being abused by the fact that, you know, yes, we did pass a law 40 years ago that says if you go to an emergency room, they have to treat you.
		And Democrats have been quick to point that out.
		But the problem is, is 40 years ago, we hadn't just had four years of open borders and 20 million people coming in.
		Now, that was not spontaneous.
		I'd like to point out that that's actually a plan that's been on the books for 60 years.
		It's called the Cloud Pivot Strategy.
		And it was a strategy that two Marxist college professors came up with back in the mid-1960s.
		And the idea was that if you let in enough illegals, got enough people hooked up to our welfare system, it would tank the economy and therefore open the dialogue up to having universal basic income.
		And like I said, it's on, I mean, you can find it right on the CIA's website.
		Just go to Wikipedia and look up Cloud Pivot Strategy.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		All right, that's Mark.
		This is Anthony out of South River, New Jersey, Independent.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Hey, man, thanks for coming in.
		Appreciate you guys.
		All right, I did the math on the ACA, and I got my numbers, and I'm going to share that with you guys.
		But before I go into that, I just wanted to say I'm very thankful for the ACA, especially with the pre-existing conditions.
		I think it's a great thing.
		It's really helped me a lot in my life to accomplish my goals.
		But I did the numbers, and fortunately for me, I'm single, and I've had the same plan for the last three years.
		Okay, so let me just run by the numbers.
		In 2024, my monthly premium was $1,065.
		That went up to $1,132 the next year.
peter gorman ▲ ● ▼		Next year, it's going to be $1,319.
unidentified		So if you crunch the numbers, and for next year, you know, I know the big scary thing is that we're all going to have to pay $24,000 a month for health insurance.
peter gorman ▲ ● ▼		My same plan went up $83.
unidentified		Okay.
		But let me dig deep into the numbers because here's where the problem is.
		It's not about the subsidies.
		It's about the insurance companies.
		Okay.
		So when I went through those numbers and I did the math, from 2024 to 2025, my policy premium went up 6%.
paul steinhardt ▲ ● ▼		Next year, it's going up 16.5%, which is in line with the 18% that you had mentioned from the Kaiser family, that the premiums are going up 18%.
unidentified		So one year it goes up 6%.
		Next year, you know, these insurance companies, they've never lost money.
		Okay.
		And guess, you know, when Nancy Pelosi said, well, you're going to have to find out what's in the ACA when you pass it because they didn't write the ACA.
		Guess who wrote the ACA?
		The insurance companies.
		So last year they got a 6% increase.
		Next year, it's 16.5% increase.
		I think the focus should be looking at why are they raising it 16.5%.
		In my state, New Jersey, if you want to raise house insurance or auto insurance, they have like a commission that they have to apply to that.
		So how can they get away with that kind of an increase?
		So finally, you know, since we're talking about the shutdown, I do have a message for the senators.
		And my message to the senators is you're playing politics over people.
		Specifically, you're taking food out of needy people's mouths.
		You're horrible.
		That's horrible.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Anthony, before you go, what do you think is going to happen in that gubernatorial race in New Jersey tomorrow?
unidentified		What do I think is going to happen?
		I think that we have so many Democrats in New Jersey that it's not a good thing.
		I was a Democrat my whole life.
		My first vote was for Jimmy Carter.
		But, you know, I just want to get back to the senators, though, because, you know, people are working without a paycheck.
		The holidays are going to be all messed up because of the air travel.
		You know, why are they putting politics over people?
		You pass the thing today, you know, and, you know, let's have a good holiday and figure about this health care thing because it's not really just adding the premiums because we're already 38 trillion in debt.
		We got to look at what's going on with the thing and make some tweaks with it.
		So, but let's not take money out of kids' mouths.
		Let's not ruin the holidays for everybody.
		You know, my, you know, all the senators, you know, let me just say this about the senators.
		You know, in my state, well, you know, I have a senator who has Spartacus moments and is a big grandstander and really likes to see Ellen scream.
		But could I tell you something about my senator?
		He had never passed a budget in his whole total Senate career.
		The last one was in the last century.
		Okay.
		So those guys aren't doing their jobs.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Anthony, got your point.
		In New Jersey.
		This is PJ out of the Lone Star State of Texas.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Thank you for taking my call.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		What's your comment, PJ?
unidentified		Hey, my comment is: I love what the Democrats are doing because the government has been so screwed up with not coming up with a good health care plan for everybody.
		We're the richest country in the world.
		They know how to send people to the moon.
		And by, right, they should be able to figure out how to come up with a health care plan.
		And also, we're supposed to have the smartest people that's working up in the White House, Congress and Senate.
		And they just can't figure out how to do that, you know.
		And I'm glad the Democrats are holding back until they come up with some type of health care plan.
		That's all I have to say.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		It's PJ in Texas to Don on that line for federal employees out of Memphis, Tennessee.
unidentified		Don, good morning.
		I heard DP talking about all that.
		Why?
		This man holding back the money.
		He don't both be holding back the money.
		He won't share the money.
		Nobody will be holding back nobody.
		You can't do your job, get off the job.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		And Dan, or Don, your federal worker, where do you work?
		We lost Don.
		Then we go to Ruth, Hyattsville, Maryland.
		Democrat, good morning.
unidentified		Good morning, John.
		Thank you so much.
		I really enjoyed the gentleman who called from New Jersey who talked about the fact that insurance premiums have been climbing up year after year.
		So I just wanted to ask you if you could share perhaps an article about the impending increase for 2026.
		Should be about 18%.
		It doesn't have anything to do with expiring premiums from COVID relief.
		And I think so you kind of conflated the two issues earlier this morning because you said there'll be an 18% increase.
		But if you read the articles on the health insurance side of this, that's because of the increase in GLP1s, so the obesity drugs, and cancer treatment and increased mental health care.
		So even if these premium enhancements are preserved, it's going to be a wash for the American public anyway.
		So I just thought it would be important not to conflate what's going on with the government shutdown and the increase that's coming anyway.
		And maybe you could have someone come in and talk about that.
		Thank you.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		So Ruth, stay on the line for a second.
		So you're just saying it's costing more in general for health care with the new health care needs of America and the new options that are out there, that that's part of this as well.
		It's not just insurance companies trying to make an extra buck.
unidentified		Well, I mean, increases in mental health care, things of that nature, I don't know.
		I mean, maybe they're policing the public on the side of mental health treatment drugs and kind of pushing those on younger and younger people.
		But I think it's important to separate out the expiring subsidies for the premiums with the fact that this is going to be the biggest spike in the cost of health care that the U.S. has ever seen.
		So an 18% cost is separate and apart from what's going on on Capitol Hill.
		So the question is to be looked at.
		And actually, some of the conversations going on with the shutdown might be an attempt to mask the fact that the ACA premiums are going to go up, they're going to be double what they've been in the past.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		One of the questions is then, what is the government's role?
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Is the government need to get into some spiral of keep trying to cover these costs and paying more and more, and healthcare costs continue to go through the roof and the taxpayers on the hook for it?
unidentified		What do you think the answer should be?
		Well, I think we need to take a look at that because if the professional class is on both sides of the equation, of course, they're going to launder money through the government to pay for contracts and hospitals and et cetera, et cetera.
		I think that is what we need to look at.
		And I think there are some proposals on Capitol Hill where they would put the control back into the consumers' hands, which could help the marketplace, health savings accounts and things like that.
		But this whole conversation is almost a red herring.
		This is what we should be looking at: the escalation in healthcare costs in general.
		Also, if everybody's on GLP1s and those kinds of weight loss drugs, we should be seeing a decline, a decrease in the cost of health care, but we're not going to see that.
		We're going to see an 18% increase.
		So we need some hearings.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Thanks for those points.
		Thanks for the call from Heidesville, Maryland, to the Mount Rushmore State.
		This is Alec in Brookings, Republican.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Hey, hey, how are you doing today?
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Doing well.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Go ahead.
unidentified		Thanks for taking my call.
		So I just was curious.
		I mean, I grew up in Massachusetts, and the state has more marijuana dispensaries popping up left and right, casinos.
		They get a good tax revenue from that.
		Is there not some kind of rainy day fund?
		I mean, in South Dakota, we have like a surplus every year.
		We've had something like Republicans for like six decades now.
		And for whatever reason, and it's awful that people are, you know, losing their SNAP benefits and everything else, but couldn't they tap into all that revenue that they're making from marijuana sales, casinos, revenue from there to kind of fund the SNAP program?
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Alec, you're saying can't states do this and cover this until this is over?
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		You're saying states should have these funds.
unidentified		Think about all the money that they're making from just everything in general, gas tax, registrations, marijuana tax, casino revenue, everyday taxes that you pay when you just go to the store and you grab a pair of pants, you get a pair of shoes.
unidentified		I mean, there's a lot of revenue that's coming in.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Alec, is it your thought that states around this country are good at staying in the black and keeping a rainy day fund and not operating on the margins of spending all or more of what they bring in?
unidentified		I think they spend too much, it seems.
luke rudkowski ▲ ● ▼		And it's not, I mean, obviously it's a tough comparison with South Dakota being, you know, population 800,000, Massachusetts being 7 million, or like Maryland being 7 million.
unidentified		You know, you've got the population difference.
		But as far as like a budget goes and balancing the budget, it just seems like the red state of South Dakota having a surplus every year is doing a really good job with that.
		And on a side note, I mean, you look at Hogan, the governor who just left Maryland, and they had a beautiful surplus.
		And now Moore is just spending like crazy.
		It's a deficit.
		And you would think that they could put this money to the side and tap into it so people could eat.
		The people that are on the benefits that are starving.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Alec, you talk about Wes Moore.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Do you think he's going to be a Democrat who could be in the mix for a presidential nomination come 2028?
unidentified		Absolutely.
luke rudkowski ▲ ● ▼		I don't know if he would be like a frontrunner, if you might come in as like a VP to say like a Cortez.
unidentified		I mean, there's some strong names out there, right?
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		That's Alec in South Dakota on elections.
		Former President Barack Obama on the campaign trail over the weekend in New Jersey and Virginia.
		Here's a picture of the former president from the Washington Times today with Abigail Spanberger, the Democratic nominee for governor in Virginia.
		He was also in New Jersey as well for Democratic gubernatorial candidate Mikey Sherrill.
		Those elections taking place tomorrow, the off-year closely watched elections.
		We are going to have coverage starting at 6 p.m. Eastern tomorrow on C-SPAN to watch the results come in and to take your phone calls.
		And then we'll, of course, talk about them on Wednesday's Washington Journal as well.
		So a lot going on this week, and we're here for you to hear what you have to say about all of it.
		This is Tina out of Fort Worth, Texas, Independent.
		Good morning.
		Go ahead.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I just want to say for the government shutdown, I was a federal employee, and we went through these government shutdowns, and the stress that it causes on the federal employees is immense.
		You know, we worry about how we're going to pay our bills.
		You know, we get close to, you know, losing our homes.
		And not only are they not getting paid, but now with food being so expensive, people are not even able to really afford to, you know, to buy food for their families.
		Not just the snap people that are getting snapped, but I mean, you know, just those of us that have to buy food, period.
		You know, we're not able to even afford the food.
		So, I mean, there's a lot going on.
		As far as the health care system, we're tired of the game plan.
		Democrats usually always sign, you know, the CR or whatever to keep people from, you know, starving or whatever because they don't want us to, you know, to go into that.
		So now that they didn't sign it, they're trying to figure out, you know, what to do.
		But what they really need to do is get to work.
		They need to negotiate health benefits, whatever it is that they need to do to get the government back open.
		Because the reason they're not going to sign, though, is because every time they do agree to negotiate or whatever, when they go forward with it, the Republicans never come back to the table and negotiate.
		So it's like they're suckers for signing it because they're not going to come back and negotiate anyways.
		It's like they own them.
		They own every branch of the government.
		So they need to negotiate.
		We're tired of the game plan.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		That's Tina in Texas.
		To Atlanta, this is Mitchell, Democrat.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I'd like to thank you for doing my phone call.
		I'm on disability and I've been part of the local voting rights as far as trying to get people signed up and everything else like that.
		But as all these things have gone on, all my health and pills and everything else like that that I got to go, I'm dying.
		And yet, for some reason, the government's not covered in none of these Medicaids or none of these Medicares covering all the procedures that it needs, everything else like that.
		And yet, for some reason, the government being shut down is really annoying because, you know, no offense to politicians, I understand they have families, but so do we.
		We have families that we got to care for.
		And yet, for some reason, I don't understand why it is that this government shut down when they're out there playing golf or they're able to pay this for their families, and yet we're not.
		All these subsidies and everything else that may add up, but all the cost of living has gone up.
		70% of the world of the United States is not covered in size of change.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		So, Mitchell, what's the answer?
		Do you think the government do you think we should even be in this government shutdown?
		Do you think this was a fight over Affordable Care Act subsidies?
		Do you think it's been a fight worth fighting?
unidentified		I feel like it is worth fighting for it.
		I mean, granted, government shut down for it, and yet the Democrats are on the side for it.
		I applaud them for the some of the stands, some, not all.
		But I mean, some of the things that the Republicans are expecting them to do is not right.
		Like, I mean, it says we, what is it, with taxation with representation?
		If we're being taxed on for everything that we're paying for, why don't we get representation inside for this government being shut down?
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		That's Mitchell in Atlanta to Youngstown, Ohio, Republican.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Dan, good morning.
unidentified		Yeah, so the Democrats on this issue are so hypocritical.
unidentified		I don't see C-SPAN running it, but on some of the other news channels, they're showing the Democrats during a Democratic administration saying how they would never vote to shut down the government and how important it is to keep the government going for the people that are in need.
albert in austin ▲ ● ▼		The Democrats brought in millions, tens of millions of ill-eagles, and then want to turn around on my back, give them free health care.
albert in austin ▲ ● ▼		So there's a lot of benefits that the government puts out there to give to people in need.
unidentified		These are people that live in this country, that are American citizens, that worked at some point in their life and earned these benefits.
		And now all of us get to pay for people that come into the country.
		They're not citizens.
		They're going to get all kinds of benefits that in the past were reserved for citizens of the United States who actually earned this.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Got your point.
		That's Dan.
		This is Becky, Michigan Independent.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Thanks for taking my call.
		I think that we've been treated to Democrats and Republicans for the last month, just blaming each other, blaming each other.
		I think it's time that we actually make shutdowns illegal.
		And I think a CR should be used only as a last resort.
		I think Congress should buckle down, do their jobs, and prioritize the budget.
		It's not been done over and over and over again for years now.
		And I think we need to make there needs to be some sort of mechanism that if the budget isn't completed each year, you either go with last year's budget, they go into conclave, and they actually sit there until they get their work done.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Becky, the go-with last year's budget, that's the CR route.
		That's the continuing resolution.
		We just fund the government at what's already been approved.
unidentified		Exactly.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		What's your feeling on the filibuster, Becky?
unidentified		I don't really have too much of an opinion on the filibuster.
unidentified		It's worked, and I really don't want to see it go away.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		When you say it's worked, what do you mean?
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		What is it done?
unidentified		It's helped the minority party actually have a voice.
unidentified		And I think that's important.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		President Trump, once again, last night calling for an end to the filibuster, taking to his true social page to say this, terminate the filibuster, not just for the shutdown, but for everything else.
		We will get all of our common sense policies approved, voter ID anyone, and make America great again.
		Remember, the Democrats will do it immediately as soon as they get the chance.
		Our doing it will not give them the chance.
		Republicans be tough and smart.
		The Democrats are crazed lunatics, the president said.
		They will not open up our country no matter how many people are irreparably harmed.
		That was all in caps, all those sentences.
		That was the president last night at 9:37 p.m. Eastern Time.
		Yesterday, White House Press Secretary Caroline Levitt was asked about the president's desire to end the filibuster.
		She was on Fox's Sunday Morning Futures.
		This is what she had to say.
karoline leavitt ▲ ● ▼		He is 100% right.
		Let's talk about what we are dealing with here.
		Radical left Democrats who have shut our government down and held the American people hostage for 32 days in a row.
		We have air traffic controller shortages all over this country.
		Half of our nation's major airports are suffering from severe delays as we head into the busiest travel months of the season.
		We have a half million federal workers who are going unpaid.
		SNAP benefits have expired.
		Only because of President Trump finding a legal maneuver are our troops continuing to be getting paid.
		If it were up to the Democrats, our military and our law enforcement would not be receiving their paychecks like the rest of the federal government workforce.
		And Democrats are not showing any sign of wanting to reopen the government.
		They want to give taxpayer-funded benefits to illegal aliens.
		These are crazed people that President Trump and Republicans are having to deal with.
		And that's why President Trump has said Republicans need to get tough, they need to get smart, and they need to use this option to get rid of the filibuster to reopen the government and do right by the American public.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		White House Press Secretary Caroline Levitt, that was yesterday on Fox's Sunday Morning Futures.
		Just about 10 minutes left in this first segment, the Washington Journal, talking to you this morning about the government shutdown, of course, day 34.
		It seems likely that this shutdown will break the record.
		The record was set during Donald Trump's first administration back in 2018 and 2019 at 35 days.
		Some talks beginning on Capitol Hill last week on ending the shutdown, but there is discussion on whether that could actually happen this week or whether the shutdown could go weeks or longer, perhaps through Thanksgiving or even more.
		We are taking your thoughts on phone lines for Democrats, Republicans, and Independents as usual.
		This is Roman out of South Bend, Indiana.
		Democrat, good morning.
unidentified		Hey, good morning.
		I don't understand why people think the Republicans are actually going to come to the table and negotiate this.
		They've tried to appeal Obamacare like, what, 30-something times or something like that?
		I mean, I don't understand why they, if this is the only play the Republicans have, then this is the only play the Democrats have.
		You know, I'm glad they are standing up for us, American citizens.
		So this is our common chance.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		How do you think this ends if you don't think Republicans come to the table to negotiate, and this is the only play that Democrats have?
unidentified		Well, eventually, when they came into this, the White House believed that this was showed poorly on the Democrats and they would get to blame for it.
		So Trump, in his narcissistic way, is like, hey, this ain't got nothing to do with me.
		Let them suffer.
		That's why he's been out of the country.
		That's why he's been at golf clubs, Halloween gas feet parties, and all that goodness.
		You know?
		Now, when it shows bad light on the Republicans and it tarnishes image, because that's all he's really concerned about, then he'll actually call the Republicans to say, hey, let's sit down and talk.
		Man, how can you talk to the opposing party when the leader is out of the country and the other half of the party is out of the state, out of the capital?
		You know, the House has been in recess now, what, one or four weeks?
		That's a self-imposed recess.
		So, I mean, until they get it to eight, they're going to face consequences at the ballot box.
		They're not going to sit down and have a conversation with the Democrats.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		The Senate is back in session today at 3 p.m. Eastern.
		The House not in session today.
		President Trump did travel to Asia last week.
		He was back on Friday to sit down for that 60 Minutes interview that aired yesterday, an extended 60 minutes.
		It ended up being 90 minutes that you can watch online at 60 Minutes website.
		And the president today is at the White House on the official White House schedule today.
		He's set to hold tele rallies in Virginia and New Jersey with Republican voters to try to rally Republicans to the polls in those off-year elections.
		There's closely watched gubernatorial elections.
		That's happening tomorrow.
		A lot going on this week.
		We'll be with you for all of it.
		And this is Jim out of Clyde, Ohio, Independent.
		Jim, go ahead.
unidentified		Yes, good morning.
		I just have a quick question.
		I understand Obama, Democratic president, in 2017, the Republicans shut the government down for two weeks over Obamacare.
		After they re-got back in, what surprises me is all federal workers were paid under the Democratic rule.
		Why can't President Trump pay all the federal workers now out of that same fund?
		Thank you.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Jim, I think you got your dates wrong.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Perhaps you're talking about 2013.
unidentified		Okay.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		You were saying 2017.
		President Obama was not in office in 2017.
		At least after the 20th of January.
unidentified		Yeah, so the dates might be, but what I'm saying is if he was in charge and they shut the government down over Obamacare, after two weeks, they went back in and everything's fine.
		But all federal workers were paid during that time period.
		That's the thing.
		Why can't that same funds pay all the federal workers now with Trump in charge?
		I don't understand that.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		So Jim, it's even more complicated than that.
		After the 2018-2019 shutdown, Congress passed a bill to ensure that federal workers would be paid despite a shutdown.
		And the Trump administration has said this time around that they are not sure if federal workers will be paid.
		So there's been some discussion about whether that's going to happen for those furloughed workers this time around or whether that law only applies to folks who worked during the shutdown and have not been receiving a paycheck.
		So it's even more complicated than that, Jim.
unidentified		All right.
unidentified		Thank you.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		That's Jim in the Buckeye State to the Tarhill State.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		This is Jeff, Republican.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Hello, John.
		How you doing, buddy?
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		I'm doing well, Jeff.
		Go ahead.
		Sorry, you got me drinking coffee.
unidentified		I'm glad you're on here.
		Why are you remembering?
		Y'all are the only ones that's not a radical left on there.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		I'll tell you what, Jeff, I think all my coworkers do a pretty good job here of moderating conversations.
unidentified		Okay, if you say so, but somebody may pick like three Democrats to one Republican call all the time like Pedro and Greta.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		I promise you, Jeff, that that doesn't happen.
		We take the calls as they come in and we try to rotate through the lines.
		Sometimes, especially at the beginning of a segment, there may be two Republicans or two Democrats in a row, and that's just because those are the first people that call in.
		But in general, we just kind of rotate through the lines.
unidentified		Okay, I appreciate that.
		But anyhow, I agree with a guy in New Jersey and a guy in Georgia who said that guy in Jersey said he's paying $1,000 plus a month for insurance.
		Insurance is such a ripoff.
		That's ridiculous.
		I went from 1996 to this year and had no insurance the whole time.
		Insurance was such a ripoff.
		I didn't want to sign up for Obamacare.
		I didn't want nothing to do with Obama because it's a failed and flawed program.
		These subsidies are going right to the insurance companies.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		So, Jeff, you're going to have to do it.
		You choose to go without health insurance.
		Do you do that in other aspects of your life?
		Do you have homeowners' insurance?
		Do you have life insurance?
unidentified		I've got all everything else.
		But I went from 1996 to this year when I got signed up for Medicare.
		I've had no insurance the whole time.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Have you had any health issues in that time?
unidentified		I had it before for 20, 25 years when I worked for a company, but I never used it.
		So I figured I'd pay enough for that.
		I went to the hospital with appendicitis.
		I run up by a $38,000 bill.
		When I left, I said, just pretend I'm a Mexican guy.
		I said, sue me or put me in jail.
		I never paid them a dime.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		You ran up a $38,000 bill and you never paid.
unidentified		Never paid a dime.
		I offered to pay them $5 or $10 a month because you don't get a bill from just one person.
		You get a bill from five or six different people.
		Doctor, mercury room, labs, all this crap.
		So, Jeff, when you bottled me, they bottled me for two or three years over the phone and by the letter.
		I told them what I could pay them.
		I offered them $5 or $10 a month, but they said, no, you need to pay at least $200.
		That's just one of them.
		I said, well, sue me, put me in jail.
		Nothing happened.
		I don't own a home or anything.
		They can put a lien on.
		They've done nothing to me.
		They can write it off.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Jeff, how do you?
unidentified		That's what they do.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		How do you feel about hospitals writing off people who come into the hospitals and hospitals have to treat them?
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		And they may be illegal immigrants to this country.
unidentified		Do you think they do it every day with illegals?
unidentified		Every day.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		So you did what you're talking about.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Do you think it's okay for them to do that?
unidentified		Sure.
		They got away with it.
		So I just told them to act like I'm a Mexican when I left, and I'm not paying you.
		Suit me.
		I said, put me in jail.
		Nothing ever happened.
		Anyhow, I want to help out the people 65 over on Medicare.
		Go down to your local Social Security office and get signed up for Medicaid.
		You may not get 100% Medicaid, but you will get something that's called, it's got different names to it, but it's called Partial Medicaid.
		Your state Medicaid will pay for your Medicare monthly health care premium.
		This year it's $185.
		Next year, it's probably going to go up to $200.
		But go to your social service department and you will get signed up for partial Medicaid.
		That will pay for your monthly Medicare premium every month.
		It's $185 right now.
		I don't pay nothing.
		And plus, they went back when I paid into it, and I got a check for $740 back that I already paid into Medicare.
		So I just want to help out the seniors out there.
		And I also qualify for $23 a month, two cents.
		But I told them, keep that and give to somebody that needs it.
		$23 ain't going to help me.
		I can work part-time and make a lot more than that.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		That's Jeff out of North Carolina.
		Time for just a couple more calls here.
		This is Michael Riverdale, Georgia, Democrat.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I think the Democrats are doing what they have to do because of President Trump's rescission tactics.
		They've got to negotiate.
		And even if they negotiate, there's a great possibility that he'll just pull back whatever they come up with.
		So I think that should always be discane, Michael.
		Okay, then secondly, I think it also would be of value if perhaps you listed from time to time the different benefits that came out of the Affordable Care Act.
		The main things I think about pre-existing conditions where you couldn't get insurance if you had a pre-existing condition like being pregnant.
		Also, I think there are no longer any caps on health expenses.
		If you have a catastrophic health event, there was a time where it would cap off.
		And of course, being able to keep your children on your health insurance until you're 26 years old.
		But importantly, because of rescission that's been put into place as a tactic, I don't see what the Democrats can do other than just hold out.
		What say you?
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		That's Michael in Georgia.
		Time for one more call.
		John, Ventura, California, Republican.
		Go ahead.
unidentified		Hi, John.
		Hi, everybody.
		A couple things.
		First of all, Fetterman, God bless him.
		He sounds so much like the Democrat of old today.
		But my point is this: the ACA, when you create a large fund of money, and just like the student loans, large fund of subsidized money, what happens is hospitals raise their prices, universities raise their prices.
		So even if you get that, the costs go up, and that causes insurance companies to raise their prices.
		The answer is this.
		The ACA should only cover pre-existing conditions, which is about 10 million people.
		The rest of the people should go on private insurance and have the insurance companies fight it out for low-cost premiums.
		But the government has created this huge pool of money with the ACA, and everybody has raised their prices because of it.
		So that's the real problem.
		The Democrats should follow Fetterman, who everybody thought was a wild man, but he's turning out to be a very, very responsible congressman, and I'm really proud of him, even though I'm a Republican.
		But the Democrats need to come over and stop this stuff because the ACA, as it stands right now, is, and you heard that guy with the fraud a couple calls ago.
		I mean, he was just a total fraud, the fraud and waste in the system, and he's gaming it.
		You have the illegals gaming it.
		And so really, let's just stop the madness and get back to work and solve the problem and make the ACA just for pre-existing conditions.
		And that would solve everything.
		So thanks very much.
		And I'll call in 30 days, I guess.
		So God bless everybody and God bless America.
		I love you all.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		That's John, our last caller in this first segment of the Washington Journal.
		Stick around.
		Plenty of more to talk about this morning, including a little later today.
		We'll be joined by Darrell Kimball of the Arms Control Association.
		We'll talk about U.S. nuclear testing.
		But first, after the break, we'll talk to reporters who cover both sides of Pennsylvania Avenue on this day 34 of the government shutdown.
		We'll be joined by Daniela Diaz of Notice and Daniel Bush of Newsweek.
		We'll be right back.
unidentified		A critical election night on C-SPAN.
		From coast to coast, key races that could shape America's future.
		In New York City, a hard-fought mayor's race in the nation's largest city.
		Governor's races heating up in New Jersey and Virginia.
		And a California constitutional amendment that could shift the balance in Congress.
		All the results, all of the speeches, coverage that's straight down the middle.
		Election night, Tuesday at 6 p.m. Eastern, only on C-SPAN.
		Your democracy unfiltered.
		And pass president nominates.
		Why are you doing this?
		This is outrageous.
		This is a kangaroo.
		Fridays, C-SPAN presents a rare moment of unity.
		Ceasefire, where the shouting stops and the conversation begins.
		Politico Playbook chief correspondent and White House Bureau Chief Dasha Burns is host of Ceasefire, bringing two leaders from opposite sides of the aisle into a dialogue.
		Ceasefire on the network that doesn't take sides.
		Fridays at 7 and 10 p.m. Eastern and Pacific, only on C-SPAN.
brian lamb ▲ ● ▼		In September 1975, 17 days apart, two women, one in Sacramento and the other in San Francisco, attempted to assassinate President Gerald Ford.
		The first attempt on September the 5th came from Annette Squeaky Fromm, the Charles Manson follower, spent over 30 years in prison, is out on parole, and is 76 years old.
		The other attempt came on the non-entrance side of St. Francis Hotel in San Francisco on September the 24th, 1975.
		The shooter, Sarah Jane Moore, served 32 years in prison and died almost 50 years to the day on September the 24th, 2025.
		Author Jerry Spieler wrote the book Housewife Assassin in 2009.
		She talked to and exchanged letters with Ms. Moore on several occasions.
		Here's her up-to-date story about the woman who tried to kill President Ford.
unidentified		Author Jerry Spieler with her book Housewife Assassin, The Woman Who Tried to Kill President Ford, on this episode of BookNotes 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 c-spanshop.org.
		Washington Journal continues.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		A Monday morning roundtable now on this, the 34th day of the government shutdown.
		Our guests are Daniel Bush, White House correspondent for Newsweek, Daniela Diaz, Congress reporter for Notice, and Daniela Diaz.
		We're about to set the record for the longest shutdown in U.S. history.
		The Senate returns today at 3 p.m.
		Some movements last week in the Senate.
		What were you hearing at that point, and how likely is that to continue and perhaps reopen the government this week?
daniella diaz ▲ ● ▼		When I was on Capitol Hill on Thursday, I specifically was looking for the moderate Democrats and moderate Republicans who have been part of these conversations about potentially opening the government.
		I mean, from the very beginning, Senate Majority Leader John Thune said that it would be rank and file that would potentially negotiate the end of this.
		It won't be leadership.
		It doesn't seem President Donald Trump is interested in having these conversations about extending the ACA subsidies, which is what Democrats are fighting for.
		But it does seem like there's potentially some movement.
		Now, a lot of that can change if President Donald Trump decides to fund SNAP benefits.
		That would take some of the heat off Democrats and possibly stall some of these negotiations, these talks as they've been saying that they've been having, that they started last week, but will continue into this week.
		But it's unclear truly where all of this will land.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Can I understand why he said rank and file are going to do this and not leadership?
		In a Congress where leadership seems to control most everything, why punt this to the rank and file?
		And who are the rank and file people you're talking about?
daniella diaz ▲ ● ▼		John, and it's not just, you know, it's three, it's Republican House, Republican Senate, and a Republican White House.
		So they're really putting a lot of pressure on Democrats, a couple of Democrats that they hope, and by they I mean Republicans, to defect and try to fund the government with the CR that they've been putting on the Senate floor over and over and over.
		But if you remember, let's flash back to what happened in 2019.
		There were two shutdowns, 2018 into 2019.
		And basically it was rank and file that got the Congress to fund the government.
		So they think this is the way to do it.
		It's too politically toxic to have those kinds of meetings that we witnessed within Democratic leadership, Republican leadership, President Donald Trump.
		It's going to be moderates in battleground states, potentially.
		I'm talking Arizona senators, Nevada.
		You know, Angus King is an independent who has been voting to vote for the CR.
		Also Republican senators Mike Rounds and moderate Democrats Gene Sahine.
		I'm just naming off the list that's coming up to me on the top of my head.
		But they're going to be the ones that we're going to see in these conversations.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		But also the Susan Collins and the Lisa Murkowski.
daniella diaz ▲ ● ▼		Lisa Murkowski, how could I forget those two?
		They're key here, especially with Susan Collins being the top appropriator in the Senate.
		So the pressure is on them, and they're very eager to end this.
		I mean, from the very beginning, they've been saying that.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Daniel Bush, so President Trump back in town after that very high-profile trip to Asia last week, what are the chances he comes to Capitol Hill this week and this no longer becomes a rank and file thing, but the president is on Capitol Hill and trying to insert himself into these negotiations?
daniel bush ▲ ● ▼		That's a good question, John.
		We're waiting to see what role President Trump is going to take right this week.
		We know that today into tomorrow probably, he is looking to be pretty focused on the elections tomorrow, which are going to be sort of a test for where the party's going into the midterm.
		So that's the White House's focus in the next 24 to, let's say, 48 hours.
		There was talk of President Trump coming up to the Hill to go to the Supreme Court for a big tariff hearing, which we may talk about a little bit later.
		He said he's not going to do that.
		So I think the expectation right now is that Trump is going to sit back, at least for the next day or two or three, and to Daniela's point, let Congress work it out.
		And that's been the White House's position really all along, right?
		They've said this shutdown is a Democrat shutdown.
		That's what Trump and his top advisors keep calling it over and over and over again.
		It's up to Democrats to reopen the government.
		We saw Trump doing a truth social about that, putting out a truth social about that just yesterday.
		Their position hasn't really changed.
		They've been content, at least now for we're going on what this is going to be, day 35 tomorrow, to sit back and let Congress work it out.
		So far, that hasn't happened, but that's not changing at the moment.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Daniela Diaz, 35 days tomorrow, 35 days is the number of the longest government shutdown during the first Trump administration, 2018 into 2019.
		What are the key dates here to watch?
		Obviously, tomorrow's an election day.
		Likely this thing doesn't get settled on an election day, I would imagine.
		So what are the key dates to watch for in the days and weeks, I guess, to come?
daniella diaz ▲ ● ▼		Well, to me, the most important date has just passed, and that was November 1st.
		That was on Saturday.
		That is when open enrollment for healthcare started.
		And what Democrats were going to say were Americans seeing their premiums go up and would possibly be an inflection point in all of this as they see why Democrats were fighting against the stopgap measure that Republicans put on the floor from the very beginning.
		Also, SNAP benefits.
		I've heard that from senators all last week.
		That is a major concern for them because they're not being funded and it started on November 1st as well.
		So we're going to feel the pressure that they're probably got from their home states when they come back today.
		They're flying in today.
		Senate votes at 5.30, as they always are.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Flying in today if flights are on time, I guess.
daniella diaz ▲ ● ▼		Their flights are on time.
		Look, last time there was a shutdown and it lasted as long as it did, it was TSA workers calling out because they weren't getting paid.
		That really caused a lot of pressure for Congress to figure this out.
		That could happen again.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		By the way, I asked Daniel about President Trump possibly coming to Capitol Hill and inserting himself.
		Do Republicans want that?
		Do Republican senators want President Trump up here and to take a more active role?
		Or are they happy with the process that you started this conversation talking about the rank and file discussions moving to perhaps something more?
daniella diaz ▲ ● ▼		John, if you ask Democrats whether President Donald Trump should be part of this, they say yes because they say Republicans are not going to do anything to fund this government without a sign-off from President Donald Trump.
		Do Republicans want President Donald Trump in this?
		Probably not because of who we know as President Donald Trump and how these negotiations have gone over the past couple of weeks.
		But it's probably going to require him okaying whatever Republican leaders agree with when it comes to whatever rank and file does negotiate should this shutdown end anytime soon.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Daniel Bush, come back to from the White House perspective.
		So at the beginning of the shutdown, again, now 34 days ago, there was talk of perhaps one of the threats from the White House on this was if the government gets shut down, this is an opportunity for the Trump administration, the Office of Management and budget specifically, to go through with major mass federal government layoffs of what Doge didn't do.
		They could kind of finish the task.
		34 days later, we've seen some cuts, some pink slips for federal workers, but we're talking about thousands and not tens and dozens of thousands.
		Where is the White House on further cuts?
		Has that effort subsided?
		Could we see more coming in the days and weeks to come?
daniel bush ▲ ● ▼		That's a good question.
		I mean, as you said, at the beginning, President Trump, OMB, others, they were threatening huge, enormous cuts, right?
		We haven't, as you said, we haven't really seen that come to pass.
		There have been some cuts.
		They have taken an aggressive scalpel to some federal agencies.
		It hasn't been the sort of chainsaw that Trump was talking about.
		You know, federal workers are clearly in a very difficult place.
		I hear from a lot of them, from sources, saying how hard it is week after week after week.
		There's a lot of stress there.
		And there have been more layoffs.
		Trump has also talked a lot about going after what he calls Democrat programs, right?
		That this is an opportunity, as you said, to make cuts to the social safety net, to other parts of the government that Republicans have long eyed, and they've done some of that too.
		The reality is they can't undo government Doge style, you know, even in 35 days, right?
		But they are using this as an opportunity to really put pressure on Democrats.
		The SNAP benefits are a good example of that.
		There is a fight in the last couple days where a judge ordered the Trump administration to essentially release emergency funding, right, to SNAP benefits, to help people get food on their tables.
		The administration is sort of slow walking that.
		Trump said last night that, you know, if a court gives him clear direction, he's happy to do it.
		We don't know exactly what that means.
		We know exactly what clear direction he's asking for, right?
		So they are really turning on the screws and trying to take this moment to sort of insert policy into this debate, which is frankly sort of different than what we've seen in the past, right?
		Past shutdowns, there have been big fights over specific policies.
		Back to Ted Cruz forcing a government shutdown over the Affordable Care Act.
		But even then, it was about one specific policy and a lot of other things sort of left off the table.
		And this time, it's different.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		We're trying to pull back the curtain on this day 34, the government shutdown.
		And a good time for you to call in if you have questions.
		Two folks in the know up here on Capitol Hill and at the White House.
		Daniel Bush is White House correspondent with Newsweek.
		Danielle Diaz, Notice Congress reporter.
		Here's the numbers for you to call in.
		Democrats 202-748-8000.
		Republicans 202-748-8001.
		Independents 202-748-8002.
		We still have that line for federal workers that we're setting aside.
		202-748-8003.
		Danielle Adiaz, as folks are calling in.
		Come back and explain what happened with that vote in the Senate last week on trade authority for the president and just what that was about.
daniella diaz ▲ ● ▼		What I found most interesting about that vote, which I hope you all agree with me, is that there were four Republicans that sided with Democrats in opposing Trump's tariffs.
		That is very notable.
		You're seeing his own party feel very conflicted about what this tariff situation has been from the very beginning.
		And also notable, those Republicans being Lisa Murkowski, Susan Collins, Mitch McConnell, and Rand Paul.
		So it's really, really interesting to see even rank-and-file Republicans oppose a lot of the efforts that the Trump administration has made to fight back or to fight on the narrative on tariffs in the country, in the world.
		And I mean, that major decision or hearing that we're going to see on Wednesday is also going to play a major part in how this all unveils in Congress as well.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, Daniel Bush, so preview that Supreme Court case that's happening 10 a.m. Eastern Time.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Wednesday morning is when they're expected to begin arguments on it.
daniel bush ▲ ● ▼		So tariff policy gets very weedy very quickly, but sort of in broad strokes, the Trump administration invoked an emergency power to impose global tariffs on all imports from all countries and then separately specific tariffs, right, on goods from particular countries.
		This started a trade war with a lot of different countries spending months negotiating.
		What the Supreme Court is trying to decide right now is whether the president has that authority to do that.
		The Trump administration is arguing that the trade issue, the imbalance in our economy versus China in particular, is an emergency and that gives him the authority to do what he wants.
		Supreme Court scholars and legal observers disagree.
		They say that if you look at the Constitution, it very clearly states in plain English that Congress has the power to levy tariffs and taxes, not the president.
		And we have seen presidents in the past invoke this kind of sweeping broad authority, right?
		Richard Nixon did it.
		George W. Bush did it.
		In both of those cases, however, they invoke this Emergency Power Act to levy tariffs on a specific good for a short period of time.
		In Nixon's case, just a couple of months.
		In Bush's case, a little less than a year.
		So what Trump is trying to do is something very, very different.
		He's saying, I can impose tariffs on anyone in the world at any time over anything.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		For as long as he wants.
daniel bush ▲ ● ▼		For as long as he wants, right?
		Legal scholars say, no, wait a second.
		You can't do that.
		The Supreme Court is going to make that decision.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		You mentioned that he said now that he's likely not going to go to the Supreme Court, sort of an unprecedented move for a president to go to the judicial branch of government and sit there and watch an argument.
		Do we have a sense of why he decided not to go?
		Because originally it talked about at least leaving the door open to going.
daniel bush ▲ ● ▼		So a couple of reasons.
		I mean, one, it's obviously a security and logistical nightmare to have a sitting president come into the Supreme Court.
		It changes the whole dynamic of the hearing.
		That's part of it.
		That's always a consideration when the president goes anywhere, right?
		Another part is Republicans, even some publicly, Kennedy of Louisiana, for example, pushed back a little bit and said, we don't really want the president to be sitting in on a hearing because it presents the appearance of trying to pressure or bully the Supreme Court into ruling in his favor, right?
		That's not what Republicans said we really want presidents to be doing.
		The White House heard that message, I think, and from what I've heard, decided, you know what, let's take a step back.
		Let's just let this process play out.
		After all, the Republicans have a 6-3 majority of conservative judges on the court.
		So the thinking is they have pretty good odds here, right?
		So why insert President Trump into that situation, make it even more controversial than it already is?
		Let's just sit back and let the process play out.
		That's what the White House decided to do.
		But of course, Trump could change his mind at any moment.
unidentified		Right.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		We've got two days until the actual case argument.
		So we'll see what happens.
		Taking phone calls this morning.
		Again, Daniel Bush of Newsweek, Daniela Diaz of Notice are our guests.
		And Charlotte out of the Hoosier State Republican line is our first caller.
unidentified		Go ahead.
		Good morning.
		I wanted to make a remark about the snap benefits because so many people are in such turmoil about this, but I do want to mention the children are not going to starve.
		The children who go to school get breakfast, lunch, snacks, and many times dinner.
		I know I grew up in the inner city.
		I know how that works.
		But I just wanted to say so many people are so upset about that, and the children are going to be getting food.
		And the other question that I really wanted an answer to is, and I'm really confused about this because people are talking about having Trump come in and make a decision or some way sway something.
		And I'm confused because I just thought we had a no-kings rally.
		And now the Democrats seem to want to, you know, do you want a king?
		Do you not want a king?
		Do you want him to come in and solve the problem?
		Or do you want to let Congress do it and do it the way democracy had said by obeying the laws and following the rules?
		Do we want a king?
		Do we not want a king?
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Charlotte, could I ask you, since it came up yesterday from the president's true social page, do you have any views on the filibuster?
unidentified		I think it's a bad idea to get rid of it.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Daniela Diaz, do most members of the Senate think it's a bad idea to get rid of it.
daniella diaz ▲ ● ▼		They do.
		I was on Capitol Hill last week talking about, asking people about the filibuster, and then on Thursday night after senators left back to their home states, that's when we saw the truth social post from President Donald Trump saying, we need to get rid of this.
		It's time to fund the government.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		And then double down on it last night.
daniella diaz ▲ ● ▼		And then double down on it last night.
		It would be completely unprecedented to do this.
		I mean, Republican senators are very aware of what this could mean going forward if they were to do something like this.
		I mean, we saw Senator Bernie Moreno made a comment about potentially nuking the filibuster last week.
		That's how this whole thing started.
		And then Trump obviously talked about it as well.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Tom Thun, back on October the 10th, gave this defense of the filibuster to reporters on Capitol Hill saying this is a bad idea.
daniella diaz ▲ ● ▼		And he said it again and again following now that we've renewed this conversation about the filibuster and possibly getting rid of it.
		He's saying, again, this is important for us to keep.
		It maintains bipartisan negotiations in the Senate.
		And also they are aware of what happens after November 2026.
		I mean, there could be a potential switch in majorities, and it could be politically terrible for them if they were to get rid of the filibuster if Democrats had power.
		I mean, this is all part of the negotiations that they're having when it comes to when this comes up, which honestly comes up every once in a while.
		This is not the first time I've talked about it and won't be the last time I talk about it.
		But there's no eagerness for Republican senators to get rid of this.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Daniel Bush, Marco Rubio served a long time in the Senate.
		JD Vance served in the Senate.
		Have they said anything about this filibuster issue?
		It'd be interesting to hear a Senate.
daniel bush ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, that's a really good question.
		We haven't seen them come out publicly, at least not as of this morning.
		It's something Rubio tries to sort of as Secretary of State stay away from domestic politics and get too in the fray.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		And we wouldn't expect them to disagree with their boss.
daniel bush ▲ ● ▼		That's right.
		If anything, they're going to back Trump up.
		But I think if you take a step back here, I mean, this is really an example of a Trump-era divide between institutionalists on the one hand and Trump world on the other, right?
		We have your John Funes, people who have been in the Senate for a long time from both parties, right, who have argued, don't blow this system up because then when the opposite party's in charge, they can do whatever they want, right?
		This is an important check and balance on the power of the Senate.
		Trump has long blown up norms or tried to that he doesn't like.
		And this is an example of him saying, I don't care all that much about the way that Washington works.
		If it doesn't work for me, I want a really big change.
		It's going to be interesting to see how that dynamic plays out.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		And it seems like the argument that he's making, or at least has made on True Social from following this, is that they're going to do it anyway the next time they get back in power.
		So we got to do it now before they do it.
		Is that resonating from what you can tell?
daniel bush ▲ ● ▼		On the Hill, as Danielle is saying, not yet.
		I mean, this is one of the only examples of an issue that Republicans will push back to Trump on, right?
		For a lot of other things, they go along with the president's agenda.
		They often agree with it.
		This is one particular issue where if this bill, if Trump begins to put more and more pressure on Republicans on the Hill, I expect that more Republicans are going to come out publicly and say, no, we don't want this.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		So, this, the trade vote that we talked about, where at least four broke with the president on trade tariffs, are there any other places you're watching to see kind of cracks in the Republican Party and alignment between senators and House members and the president?
daniella diaz ▲ ● ▼		The shutdown.
		I mean, there's pressure when you talk to Republican senators that they also feel that something needs to be done about funding the government.
		And right now, while President Donald Trump is putting pressure on nuking the filibuster, I mean, he's not talking to Democratic leaders and he's basically leaving it up for Congress to deal with it on their own.
		I mean, last week, he wasn't even in the U.S. while a lot of these conversations were starting.
		And obviously, he's backed, but it's about to be a record shutdown.
		And I would say today, not much has changed from when this began on October 1st.
		And the House has been gone since September 19th.
		I mean, Republicans are feeling that pressure as well.
		And while they will publicly always stand with President Donald Trump, privately, they are saying we need to solve this and as soon as possible.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Back to the phones, Falls Church, Virginia, just across the Potomac River.
		Matt is a Democrat.
		Good morning.
unidentified		I have a comment and then a question.
		My comment is: it seems right now Donald Trump is acting like our modern gilded age president who combines the corruption of the Grant administration with the racist toe-tapping of the Hayes administration and the foreign policy of the McKinley administration.
		I don't think in our modern era we've had a president who has taken us back so far in their demeanor and overall ethics as we have since the like late 1800s.
		But now my question: do you think the Republican Supreme Court will actually go against Donald Trump on tariffs?
		Or do you think they'll just rubber stamp him as they've been doing since most of them are appointees or sycophants?
		That's my question.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		And Matt, stay on the line after we get an answer.
		I want to come back to you for a second.
		Go ahead.
daniel bush ▲ ● ▼		Well, that was stretching back to some 19th century history.
		I like that.
		There's a couple of different options that the Supreme Court can do here, right?
		They can abolish all the tariffs.
		That would be controversial because, on the point, again, as I said earlier, of who has the power to levy tariffs, the Constitution is very, very clear.
		It's in there in black and white.
		However, in talking to sources on this issue for the last couple months, the Supreme Court could give Trump a partial victory.
		They could say, you know, you don't have the power to levy unlimited tariffs on everyone, but you can do it in a more tailored way.
		That could give, and it would depend on exactly what country, what goods, et cetera.
		But they could say, you know, you can't invoke your emergency power indefinitely, but you can against particular countries if you prove that there is a more legitimate national emergency, something like that.
		So there is an opportunity, Supreme Court, to sort of split hairs here a little bit, give Trump a partial victory, allow some of the tariffs to be in place.
		What is less likely, law experts tell me, is that Supreme Court will just summarily throw everything out because historically the president sometimes has had the ability to impose tariffs.
		So 6-3 majority, but we don't really know.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Matt, since you bring up a trio of 19th century presidents, Grant McKinley and Hayes, got to ask you, who's your favorite president?
unidentified		You know what?
		I don't really think too much about who my favorite president is because I think instead of looking towards like large figures to be like the pinnacle of what Americans should be, we should look at the little guy who's built up systems to help those big figures.
		So, you know, I think there's some good people who've been president, but I don't have a favorite.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Matt, thanks for the call from Falls Church.
		Daniela Diaz, let me give you Rhonda from the Keystone State Independent.
		Rhonda, go ahead.
unidentified		Hello.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		You're on the air.
unidentified		Yes.
		I just want to ask a question like, they're saying if Trump has the power to open up SNAP benefits, is that short-term or long-term?
		And also, I heard it's coming out of some kind of disaster fund.
		So what do we do if there's a disaster in our community and we need SNAP?
		And one more question.
		I feel that the Democrats are extorting Republicans because they're saying make costs come down, but they want to keep wasting money.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Daniella Diaz, do you want to start on the SNAP questions?
daniella diaz ▲ ● ▼		Absolutely.
		I mean, what we've seen the administration do is reappropriate funds, adding to the tariff conversation, to a lot of the conversations we're having today.
		It's always been Congress's job to appropriate funds.
		So what we're seeing is the administration try to solve these short-term problems in the hopes that the government will be funded at some point and there will be funding for disasters once they solve the short-term issue of SNAP benefits.
		So that's what we're seeing with this.
		We saw it with how Trump found a private donor for military spending to fund the military.
		I mean, it's how the administration is trying to kind of plug the holes while the shutdown is still playing out.
		But there's still a lot of very effective people that are workers that are not getting paychecks as well.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		For SNAP in particular, we're talking about $5.5 billion in contingency funds.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		And as I understand it, the funds were used to help cover SNAP during that 2018 to 2019 shutdown, but now they're tied up in the courts, right?
daniella diaz ▲ ● ▼		Exactly.
		And the argument from a lot of lawmakers is that this is the first time SNAP has never been funded.
		I mean, they've been able to fund it even during a shutdown, what we saw happening in Trump's first administration when there were two shutdowns.
		So this is unprecedented.
		And that's why a lot of lawmakers are very, very concerned about what this could mean for Americans in general.
		I mean, millions of people have SAP benefits.
		And then also just adding to the caller earlier who said children will not starve.
		There's 40% of children that take, that are on SNAP benefits as well with their families.
		So this is a major, major issue.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Roughly one in eight Americans receive SNAP benefits.
		About 42 million Americans get funding in some way from SNAP.
		This is Carrie out of Milwaukee Republican.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		A couple questions about SNAP for your guests.
		The last time that the government was shut down for so long under Trump, for like 30 days or whatever, whenever that was, 2017, 2018 or whatever, was SNAP at risk then of being cut off for folks who need it?
		And if it wasn't, is it an issue this time because SNAP is funded under one of the appropriation bills that had not yet passed in both the House and the Senate?
		And then lastly, how hard would it be to get SNAP funded or under the same category like Medicaid, which would not be affected in a government shutdown?
		So I don't understand exactly why SNAP is funded different from other low-income things like Medicaid.
		And why is it an issue now if it wasn't last time?
		Thank you very much.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		And Kerry, and I know we just had a SNAP conversation here.
		Maybe this will help.
		This is Treasury Secretary Scott Besant that was being asked about on CNN's State of the Union yesterday about whether these emergency, these contingency funds, the $5.5 billion that we just talked about, would be used to cover SNAP.
		This was his response to Jake Tapper.
unidentified		Right, but there is this contingency fund.
jake tapper ▲ ● ▼		And as recently as September 30th, the Agricultural Department had a memo saying that these funds, the contingency funds, I think it's about $5 or $6 billion, could be used to pay these benefits.
unidentified		Now it'd only be two or three weeks, but that's a lot for people who need the food.
scott bessent ▲ ● ▼		Well, President Trump just, as I said, President Trump just truthed out that he's very anxious to get this done.
		And it's got to go through the courts.
		The courts keep jamming up things.
		Democrats are in the middle of a civil war, and they should just open the government.
		That is the easiest way to do this.
unidentified		Is the administration going to appeal the ruling by the judge?
		Is that what you mean by the courts need to weigh in?
		Because the courts have weighed in.
scott bessent ▲ ● ▼		No, but there's a process that has to be followed, so we've got to figure out what the process is.
scott bessent ▲ ● ▼		President Trump wants to make sure that people get their food benefits.
unidentified		So it could be done by Wednesday.
scott bessent ▲ ● ▼		Could be.
		Okay.
		Could be.
		And five Democratic senators could cross the aisle and open the government by Wednesday.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Scott Basson there yesterday on CNN.
		Daniel Bush this morning.
		Thoughts on that?
daniel bush ▲ ● ▼		Well, as we just heard, you know, this $5.5-ish billion dollar pot of money is not unlimited.
		It doesn't mean that SNAP benefits could be funded forever.
		You know, the thought is, well, two or three weeks, maybe, maybe up to a month.
		But to the caller's point, you know, this is not, this money, you know, won't last forever.
		It's not sort of appropriated in a different kind of way where it's always guaranteed to be there.
		This is an issue that Congress revisits.
		And the Trump administration, as we heard from the Treasury Secretary right there, is putting it back on Democrats.
		They're saying, if you want SNAP benefits to not be affected, reopen the government.
		And this is frankly a difficult issue for Democrats, right?
		Because SNAP benefits are such an important part of the social safety net.
		As you said, one in eight Americans rely on this, on this really crucial benefit.
		It's something that Democrats have championed for decades.
		And now all of a sudden, unprecedented, as you said, it goes away.
		This is a difficult issue for Democrats to defend.
		Republicans are putting Democrats on the defensive and saying, yes, you may care about health care.
		This is what you've claimed this whole entire shutdown fight is about.
		What happens now when we, as we were talking about earlier, right?
		Trump said he was going to go after Democratic priorities.
		SNAP is off the table.
		What are you going to do now?
		And it puts Democrats in a very, very difficult place because the longer this goes on, there will be lines at food banks and food pantries, right?
		There will be people who will be very, very hurt by this.
		And at what point do Democrats say enough is enough?
		You know, it could be days, but it could be weeks.
		And that's going to be very difficult politically as it drags on.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Just like we're seeing the endless footage of lines at airports already, it'll be endless footage of cars lining up at food banks.
daniel bush ▲ ● ▼		Something like that.
		And then the question is: who is to blame?
		And I do want to say that we have seen some polls coming out in the last week or so saying that increasingly a majority of Americans are not happy with the Trump administration for handling this.
		And it is interesting because typically the party in power does get the blame from voters.
		For the first couple of weeks, this shutdown seems to be sort of 50-50.
		The public didn't seem to love the position the Democrats were taking.
		But as this goes on, it would be an anomaly if the party in power doesn't end up getting more of the blame, right?
		That's what typically happens.
		And that is also pressure that the White House is feeling.
		You know, they're looking ahead to 2026.
		Trump is very focused on these midterms.
		He does not want to lose control of Congress.
		And we know one thing: the White House follows polls very, very closely.
		If these sort of polls continue to come out, if this doesn't end in a week or two, that might be a pressure point on the Democrat, on the excuse me, on the Republican side, on the White House side to say we need to come to the table.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		We head to Arlington, Texas.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Independent line, Lisa, thank you for waiting.
unidentified		Go ahead.
		Good morning.
		I just want to know how do the Republicans or anybody or Congress expect for air traffic controllers to go to work without pay and then to come back and say when the shutdown is over, you're still not going to get paid.
		But they want them to come to work and be happy to be there without getting paid.
		But I'm going to tell you what they're doing.
		They're getting jobs so that they can support their families.
		So they're going to go to the job that's going to pay them.
		Why don't they have something that will pay the air traffic controllers, TSA, those people that are essential and have to go to work?
		I don't think it's fair for them to have to go to work and not get paid.
		And for Republicans to think that the shutdown is just on the Democrats, you know, keep calling them the left and whatever, you know, it's not the Democrats.
		They're going to get blamed also, is what I'm really trying to say.
		And to say that you're going after programs that are just Democrats, there's no program that you can mess with that's not going to affect the Republicans too.
		It's not a Democrat-Republican thing.
		It's an American people thing.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Lisa, thanks for the call from Texas on the SNAP question.
		We showed Scott Besant on the air traffic control question.
		Maybe a good time to show Sean Duffy, Transportation Secretary.
		He was on ABC's this week yesterday.
		This is about a minute of that.
unidentified		How close are we to this point where you might have to close airspace or airports as we watch air traffic controllers calling in sick?
sean duffy ▲ ● ▼		Well, so first off, if you look at other shutdowns, our air traffic controllers, God bless them, they've been coming to work.
		They're frustrated, but by and large, they've come.
		They're not getting paid.
		And so I can't predict, Martha, what's going to happen in the future.
		But as each day goes on, and again, it's not, you miss a paycheck, but every day you have expenses, food and gas, and then bills come in, whether it's Netflix or your YouTube TV.
		The expenses continue to roll and the pressure continues to grow.
		And the problem is these controllers, a lot of them are new controllers or they're trainee controllers.
		They don't make a lot of money.
		And so they may be the only person that is bringing money into the household.
		They have to make a decision, do I go to work and not get a paycheck and not put food on the table?
		Or do I drive for Uber or DoorDash or wait tables?
		Those are the real thoughts and conversations these controllers are having.
		So as I look forward, I hope Democrats are going to come to their senses and open the government back up.
		But I would just tell you, as bad as it is, the numbers you just gave, we will look back.
		If the government doesn't open in the next week or two, we'll look back as these were the good days, not the bad days.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy yesterday on ABC's This Week, Daniela Diaz, on Congress and air traffic controllers.
daniella diaz ▲ ● ▼		I mean, it's a real issue.
		We were just talking, I was talking with Daniel before this.
		This is clearly could be what adds the real pressure for them to negotiate the end of the shutdown.
		I mean, it's what happened in the last shutdown that went on for 35 days.
		Air traffic controllers were starting to collapse sick.
		It was around the holidays.
		It really affected holiday travel.
		But I think the more important thing that I really feel when we talk about the shutdown is that it has real consequences on real people who are working, trying to feed their families, just trying to manage day to day.
		There are hundreds of thousands of people that have not gotten a paycheck in the last month.
		I mean, this is going to have massive consequences on the economy.
		Maybe we're not seeing it right now, but we will see it soon.
		It was the same thing.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		In the holiday season.
daniella diaz ▲ ● ▼		In the holiday season.
		It's the same thing we saw last time as well, the last shutdown.
		And what's different about that last shutdown, we're about to pass that 35-day marker tomorrow that will mean this one will actually be the longest shutdown ever.
		Is that was a partial shutdown, what happened in 2019.
		There were still parts of the federal government that were being funded.
		This is a full shutdown that we're in currently.
		We're no part of the federal government, unless it's the Trump administration finding appropriations for certain parts, as we just discussed.
		Most people are not being funded.
		Most agencies are not being funded.
		People are not getting paychecks.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		On that point, Daniel Bush, there was an editorial in the, I think it was the Washington Post.
		It was fairly early on in the shutdown, arguing that shutdown should be more painful, that there are too many aspects of the federal government that remain open because people are considered essential employees.
		And that if a shutdown were to happen and no air traffic controllers were allowed to work and airports were completely shut down, then Congress wouldn't dare take this step of shutting down the government.
		I wonder your thoughts on that, on efforts to kind of limit the impact of the shutdown as much as possible, making these shutdowns happen more often.
daniel bush ▲ ● ▼		Well, that's been an argument for years, right?
		Make it as painful as possible, as quickly as possible, and that will bring Congress and both parties to their senses.
		No one will want air traffic to ground to a halt.
		No one will want people immediately to be on lines at food pantries, right?
		That is an argument.
		It typically is not the way that it works.
		Obviously, Democrats push back against that, and even Republicans as well.
		It would create, were it to happen, very difficult political circumstances for both parties.
		It's something they want to avoid.
		But also, if you take a step back again for a second, this is a function of how polarized these parties are.
		Because even if you could very swiftly somehow shut everything down in one day, would that really bring Republicans and Democrats together?
		20 years ago, maybe, 40 years ago, yes.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Not even that today?
daniel bush ▲ ● ▼		But not even that today, I don't think.
		And that's why this shutdown, to your point, is so different.
		I've covered these shutdowns now going back to Obama's second term, and they followed a particular pattern, right?
		First couple days, first week, both parties dig in, they make their arguments, they message, they blame the other side, then they sit back for a couple days and wait for the first polls to come out.
		They get a sense, gauge where the public is, and then that gives them their leverage points going forward to negotiate.
		But after that first couple days of messaging, both parties behind the scenes begin to have a conversation, right?
		And as you said earlier, those talks just didn't happen.
		Four weeks, and they're starting now, but this is a month in here.
		And it just goes to show you how polarized our country is, how divided Congress is, how unwilling these sides are, both parties, to really do the work of figuring this out.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		We're 40 minutes in here to this segment.
		We've got about five minutes left.
		Let me try to get a couple more callers to the Granite State Thaddeus, Berlin, New Hampshire.
		Democrat, good morning.
unidentified		Hey, how are you doing, man?
		I appreciate it.
		Hey, how you doing?
		Thank you for taking my call.
		I just have a question.
		Every day, there's some of us that leave the prison system without any help.
		And it seems like when we try to go get EBT, it seems like we may be shut down now and we have no rehabilitative services.
		Will that truly affect all of us?
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Daniella Diaz, something you cover some of those other services?
daniella diaz ▲ ● ▼		I mean, all services are at a halt currently.
		Because the federal government is essentially not funded right now, it's going to be very difficult for anyone to try to get any of the services they normally get.
		And the people that are helping, if they're essential, speaking to the fact that maybe shutdown should be more painful, there's still people working without paychecks.
		Now, everyone's human.
		Not getting paid for four weeks may not make you even the most efficient at your job.
		If you are an essential worker currently operating right now, that's the concern right now for what we're saying about air traffic controllers or TSA workers.
		It's affecting every part of the federal government.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Clearwater Beach, Florida, George Republican, good morning.
unidentified		Yes, good morning.
		Thank you for taking my call.
		I'd like to bring the subject back to tariffs and how the tariffs in Trump's first administration were considered successful to the point where even throughout the entire Biden administration, he did not relinquish them, but kept them in place.
		And now it's become an issue again.
		If we're going to bring our country back to manufacturing and things, we have to unfortunately bite the bullet because it's literally impossible to compete against Chinese pricing and things of that nature.
		So those are two subject matters that I'm concerned about.
		Thank you.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		That's George in Florida.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Daniel Bush, you want to take that in the final minute or two we have left?
daniel bush ▲ ● ▼		Well, very quickly, the caller is right.
		In Trump's first term in office, he put more targeted tariffs in, including steel and aluminum, on Chinese imports, among others.
		The Biden administration did not rescind those.
		That was a sort of sea change in U.S.-China relations.
		And the Trump administration is doubling down on that even further.
		He just returned from a trip to Asia where the White House struck a deal with China on a range of things to lift some of the reciprocal tariffs that both countries have started putting on each other.
		China agreed to buy more soybeans, which was a big win for Trump and in particular his Republican base in rural states that rely a lot on soybean exports to China.
		So we saw some movement on that.
		But the difference, again, between the tariffs in the first term, the tariffs in the second term is these are sweeping, they're global, they're not just going after China, but really all of our trading partners.
		We've seen the Trump administration over the last couple months try and negotiate some deals.
		They've announced some of them, but these deals are coming out more slowly than the White House would like.
		So we'll see how quickly they can get to a place where they can declare sort of a full-blown victory on their tariff war.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		The government is shut down, but it's a very busy time for Congress and White House reporters.
		I want to thank Daniel Bush of Newsweek, Danielle Adiaz of Notice.
		We'll let you get to your week of work, and we'll see you again down the road.
		Thank you.
daniel bush ▲ ● ▼		Thanks, John.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Coming up in about 30 minutes, a conversation with Darrell Kimball of the Arms Control Association, we're going to talk about President Trump calling for the U.S. to resume nuclear testing.
		But until then, it's our open forum.
		Any public policy, any political issue that you want to talk about, phone lines are yours to do so.
		The numbers are on your screen.
		Go ahead and start dialing in, and we will get to those calls right after the break.
unidentified		Watch America's Book Club, C-SPAN's bold new original series, this Sunday with our guest, The Chronicler of Adventures, award-winning, best-selling author David Graham, whose books include The Lost City of Z, Killers of the Flower Moon, and The Wager.
unidentified		He joins our host, renowned author and civic leader David Rubinstein.
david rubenstein ▲ ● ▼		So what about this fact, about this occurrence, made you think this could be something worth your time?
david grann ▲ ● ▼		And I started to realize that this odd little old manuscript contained, you know, the seeds of one of the most extraordinary stories of survival and mayhem I had ever come across.
unidentified		Watch America's Book Club with David Graham this Sunday at 6 p.m. and 9 p.m. Eastern and Pacific.
		Only on C-SPAN.
		Tuesday, a critical election night on C-SPAN.
		From coast to coast, key races that could shape America's future.
		In New York City, a hard-fought mayor's race in the nation's largest city.
		Governor's races heating up in New Jersey and Virginia.
		And a California constitutional amendment that could shift the balance in Congress.
		All the results, all of the speeches, coverage that's straight down the middle.
		Election night, Tuesday at 6 p.m. Eastern, only on C-SPAN.
		Your democracy, unfiltered.
		And pass precedent nomination.
		Why are you doing this?
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		This is outrageous.
unidentified		This is a kangaroo quarter.
		Fridays, C-SPAN presents a rare moment of unity.
		Ceasefire, where the shouting stops and the conversation begins.
		Politico Playbook chief correspondent and White House Bureau Chief Dasha Burns is host of Ceasefire, bringing two leaders from opposite sides of the aisle into a dialogue.
		Ceasefire on the network that doesn't take sides.
		Fridays at 7 and 10 p.m. Eastern and Pacific, only on C-SPAN.
		Washington Journal continues.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		It's time for our open forum.
		Any public policy, any political issue that you want to talk about.
		Phone lines are yours to do so.
		202-748-8000 for Democrats.
		Republicans 202-748-8001.
		Independents 202-748-8002.
		As you're calling in, here's the schedule on Capitol Hill today.
		The House not in session today, though we are expecting to hear from Speaker Mike Johnson.
		That's scheduled for 10 a.m. Eastern.
		That's where we're going to head here on C-SPAN after our program ends at 10 a.m.
		Over on C-SPAN 2 at 10 a.m. Eastern Time, Georgia Republican Congressman Rich McCormick will discuss how the U.S. can lead the world in artificial intelligence technology.
		It is happening again on C-SPAN2, C-SPAN.org, and the free C-SPAN mobile app.
		Also today at 2 p.m. Eastern, Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook will speak on the outlook on the U.S. economy.
		That's going to be live here on C-SPAN and also on C-SPAN now, the mobile app and c-span.org.
		So a lot going on today.
		There'll be a lot going on all week long.
		Tomorrow, it's Election Day, the off-year elections in Virginia, New Jersey.
		That New York City mayoral race that's being closely watched on Wednesday.
		It's the Supreme Court case on Donald Trump's tariffs policy.
		That's at 10 a.m. Eastern on Wednesday.
		So even though the government shut down, there's a lot for us to cover and talk about with you.
		And now's your time to talk about any of those topics.
		It's open forum.
		This is Anthony in the Keystone State Republican.
		Good morning.
		You're up first.
unidentified		Good morning, Mr. McCartle.
		Good morning, C-SPAN.
		I was trying to get in touch with your guests.
		I have a question and a comment.
		I'm going to get my comment first.
		Obviously, Chuck Schumer was getting battled by his left wing during the last vote for a continuing resolution, and he felt that he couldn't go down the same road.
		It's all about him and his reelection and AOC bringing on a primary against him.
		Now, that being said, the shutdown's been going on too long.
		Democrats have to realize that's their problem.
		It's America's problem, but their fault.
		I think I have a solution, but I'm not sure.
		Maybe you could.
		I wanted to ask the other guests if that's possible.
		Currently, the Senate don't have a filibuster for judges and for Supreme Court nominations.
		Now, why can't the Senate create a rule that says 30 days after a clean continuing resolution is not voted on or doesn't pass, then the filibuster would kick in and the filibuster would go away and we come a 51-vote majority only for clean continuing resolutions that are not approved for 30 days.
		So it gives time for everybody to talk.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		So the filibuster stays in place for the vast majority of legislative business, but when it comes to funding the government, this rule kicks in after a CR expires for 30 days.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Is that what you're saying?
unidentified		That's what I'm saying.
		And, you know, I'm surprised, you know, it seems like a really good way to fix this.
		You know, you're only going to have a shutdown for 30 days at most, and people will not be suffering forever.
		The way things go now, it doesn't look like we're going to get a resolution for this by next year.
		I mean, it's just the way everybody's so divided.
		But I believe the filibuster is in jeopardy because of the Democrats tried to do it last year, because except for Cinema and Manchin, the filibuster would have been gone.
		I totally disagree with getting rid of the filibuster for most legislation because the Senate was set up as a calming cup, as somebody said.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Anthony, what about, I mean, it's gone for judicial nominations, Supreme Court nominations, and for cabinet nominations.
		Do you think it should be gone for those nominations, the filibuster?
		I can give you the exact dates, but do you think it should be back?
unidentified		No, I don't.
		I think that, you know, it's proven itself to be functioning and the government still functions with the legislative filibuster in place.
		I mean, there are cutouts already.
		So why can't they use a cutout for a clean?
		And my emphasis is on clean, continuing resolution after 30 days.
		They close a majority vote.
		That's my question.
		I don't know if you could find out if that's possible.
		But Mr. McCartle, I respect you.
		I love watching you every day.
		You're a great guy.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Stay well.
		My response to that is I think the Senate can kind of do whatever they want, right?
		They have their own rules of the Senate.
		They also have their traditions, the filibuster being one of those.
		What you're saying doesn't seem out of the realm of possibility of what they could do.
		It's just whether they would want to do that.
		But in terms of who makes up the Senate rules, the Senate does.
unidentified		Yeah, so why not?
		I mean, just for continuing resolutions, nothing else.
		Got your point.
		Yeah.
		I mean, it just seems like I don't bury that.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Anthony, thanks for the call from Pennsylvania to Florida.
		This is Sandy Democrat.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Hello.
		I wanted to actually call and speak about the government shutdown.
		I wanted to correct the woman that called and said that the children aren't going to go without food.
		Well, I live in Florida, and the children don't all get food in free food in the schools.
		It depends on the district that you live in.
		The other thing is, you know, we have a lot of people in Florida who are going to lose their health care.
		There was a big article in the Orlando Sentinel just yesterday about the sticker shock.
		And I have two worthless senators.
		They're both Republican, Asley Moody and Rick Scott.
		You could call them all day long, talk to them, or try to talk to them.
		Rick Scott never answers his phone or his people.
		So I just, I appreciate that the government is shut down.
		And my congressman from Florida, Maxwell Frost, he's amazing.
		He's a Gen Z.
		And he should, he goes to Washington every week, even though Congress is closed, to be there to work.
		So come on, Republicans.
		Do your job.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		That's Sandy in Florida.
		This is Vincent out of Maryland.
		It's Gaithersburg, Maryland.
		Go ahead.
unidentified		Yeah, good morning.
		I'd like to know why.
		The general populace of across America, people are not stupid.
		They know it's the Democrats.
		Why?
		Five votes would avoid all of this.
		They want to hold on to that $1.5 trillion for the LGBT and all of that stuff, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.
		And the people who support these Democrats, not only are now communists, they admitted it, socialists.
		Not only are they that, but before that, they stand up for a very sore issue, infantile babies killed 28 days later.
		You know, all these things, a genital mutilation of children, all of these things are Democrats.
		And they admit it.
		See, I'm not.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		All right, that's Vincent.
		This is Lewis in Colorado, Republican.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Thank you for taking my call.
		Number one, you keep the filibuster.
		Thank you, Harry Reid.
		Remember those days, John?
		Good times.
		I think every vote should have a 60% majority.
		This 50% plus one thing just isn't working.
		I mean, 180 million people can tell 100 and or 181, 180 million people plus one can tell another 180 million people how to live their lives.
		That just doesn't seem right to me.
		I like the filibuster.
		Keep the filibuster.
		Thank you, Harry Reid.
		Number two.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		That's how it works in the House, though.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		It's simple majority.
unidentified		Simple majority.
		I understand.
		And you see how dysfunctional it is.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Do you think the Senate is more functional than the House?
unidentified		Well, I don't know that it's more functional, but I'm more inclined to lean toward in favor of a 60% majority vote.
		And it's what the whole thing about the filibuster and what Chuck Schumer is doing is look, who's getting paid?
		The only people getting paid are Congress.
		Why is that?
		Hello, America.
		The only people getting paid are Congressmen, the senators, and the representatives.
		That's it.
		Why are they, there's a perfect example of Congress exempting themselves from the rules they force us all, the rest of us all, to live under.
		Explain that one.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Members of the military have been paid during the shutdown.
		Money has been found to pay members of the military, but those workers, not military members who are working during the shutdown, have not been paid.
		And those, of course, who have been furloughed during the shutdown have not been paid.
		We're talking about something like 750,000 federal workers who have been impacted, have been furloughed during the shutdown.
		This is Miles in Burke, Virginia, Independent.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Thanks for taking my call.
		I think there's a hunger in the nation for civilized conversation and debate between people who don't agree with one another.
		And I think that C-SPAN has a unique platform.
		It has the time and the bandwidth, I hope, to present a series of debates, debates on public policy, debates about the proper role of government, debates about tax policy, debates about foreign policy.
		And I just wonder whether C-SPAN could not consider sponsoring such debates itself to get credentialed, recognized people on a long-form-ish format, at least a half an hour, an hour, where you could actually have a true exchange of views, not just two minutes on a Sunday morning program, which I find to be completely superficial.
		And I think the American public and the C-SPAN mission would benefit greatly by having such debates.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		So, Miles, I got great news for you.
		We don't call them debates, but conversations between members, folks of different political leanings.
		We have those conversations on a new program called Ceasefire.
		Fridays at 7 p.m. and 10 p.m. Eastern Time.
		You can watch people like Senator James Lankford and Chris Coons in the most recent episode: Wes Moore, Governor of Maryland, Kevin Stint of Oklahoma, Mike Pence, and Rahm Emanuel having these conversations, these sit-down conversations, to see what they agree on, to have civil discussions when they disagree.
		It's the whole purpose of this program that we've launched this fall.
		Have you watched any of those episodes, Miles?
unidentified		I did.
		I watched the last episode.
		There was a Congress, a congressman, a Democratic congressman and a Republican senator.
		I don't recall their names.
		Just frankly, I thought it was beyond boring because they went out of their way so much to be so cordial with one another.
		Okay, that's nice.
		But as far as the intellectual content of the program, I found it to be really superficial.
		I really appreciate the impetus behind Ceasefire, and I think it's a great idea.
		I just think that the debate format is sort of a unique way to kind of sharpen matters, sharpen intellectually the matters without having the kind of ad hominem attacks that you routinely see when you just televise the Congress.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		So, Miles, you're looking for a ceasefire with more fireworks?
unidentified		Well, I don't know, folks, no, fireworks.
		I think format and concentration on in-depth discussion of public policy is what's important.
		I think that's, you know, back and forth is how we sharpen our understanding of these public policy issues.
		What is the real difference in tax policy between the two spokespeople?
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		What if the difference is, I promise you, Miles, that that's what we're trying to do on Ceasefire.
		Hope you keep giving it a chance.
		Again, Fridays at 7 p.m. Eastern and 10 p.m. Eastern.
		Miles, appreciate the call.
		Got about 10 minutes left here in open forum.
		Let me get to David in Kent, Ohio, Independent.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Yeah, John.
		Good morning, and thanks for taking my call.
		Boy, there's so many things going on.
		I'm not sure where to begin, but I'd like to start by saying to help understand today's issues, it really helps to understand history.
		If you go back to FDR's time during the Great Depression, you know, the country was hurting.
		So he came up with, he or some of his cabinet came up with the idea of Social Security and Medicare.
		Now, it's instructive to look and see how both parties reacted to that.
		The Republicans of the day called it communist and everything and put it down and said, oh, it won't work.
		And then when it was finally enacted and put into law and it became successful, lo and behold, all of a sudden, the talk from the other side began to die down because it was successful and it still is successful.
		So they've been trying to go after it, they being the conservatives who want to want to control more and more, have been going after it.
		But I think we need all the other major countries have the public option for medicine.
		We all need medicine.
		We all need health care.
		There's no reason why that shouldn't be on the agenda.
		And so when you look at what's happening now with the health care situation, okay, in July, they passed the big ugly bill for oligarch tax break bill.
		In July, only required 51 votes.
		Now the continuing resolution requires 60.
		I'm not an expert on the rules, but I guess you can only do the reconciliation so many times in a fiscal period.
		So that's why they need Democratic votes.
		So this is the first time the Democrats have had a chance to say, look, you can't gut health care.
		And Marjorie Taylor Greene, to her credit, you know, and I applaud her for it.
		She came out and said, look, my kids are going to have to, their health care is going to, costs are going to triple.
		And this was before the shutdown.
		This was when she analyzed the bill and said her party had got it wrong.
		Now, I'm for good ideas.
		That's why I'm an independent.
		I vote for good ideas.
		But most of the good ideas, to me, don't come from the right because the right takes care of the billionaires that got them in power.
		So we need to help Main Street.
		Free enterprise, yes, but free enterprise with rules.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		You applaud Marjorie Taylor Greene for her comments about health care.
		What about John Fetterman, who has been critical of his party of Democrats for what he says is to blame for shutting down the government, saying real people are getting hurt by this shutdown.
		He has voted again and again with Republicans to reopen the government for that continuing resolution.
unidentified		Yeah, well, he has a right to his opinion.
		I certainly respect him for that, but I don't agree with his opinion.
		I think it's counterproductive to the see, there's two streets in America, John.
		There's Main Street and Wall Street.
		And Main Street's where the work gets done.
		That's where the working people reside.
		This course is symbolic and the big picture.
		But Wall Street's where the money is made, where foreign policy is set.
		And if you look at the foreign policy, it's interesting how many people came out of Wall Street, like the Dulles brothers.
		I think they were both worked for a law firm.
		The history is sorted.
		See, I'm proud of my American history with respect to the Bill of Rights and the Constitution.
		And some of our great technological successes.
		But some of the abuses have come from the extreme use of misuse of wealth.
		That's not an American problem.
		That's a human problem.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Day, I got your point in Ohio.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Let me just play John Fetterman from CNN State of the Union yesterday for folks who didn't see the Democratic sender being interviewed by Jake Tapper.
john fetterman ▲ ● ▼		Well, I mean, for me, fundamentally, I'm deeply, deeply distressing to know that 42 million Americans are going to lose their SNAP benefits.
		And now that's one of the big reasons why I refuse to shutting our government down.
		And again, I feel like the Democrats really need to own the shutdown.
		I mean, we're shutting it down.
		I know why they claim because they want to address the tax credits.
		And I fully support that.
		I voted for all of their CRs, RCRs, every single time.
		And I refuse to put 42 million Americans in the kinds of food insecurity.
		Now, this is all solved by just reopening our government, and the people are now paid.
		Now, if we are, we are the party that are fighting for working people.
		Now, as far as I'm aware, every single union that's involved in this is now demanding to us to reopen that.
		That's the side that I'm in through this.
		And now the four airlines are now saying we really have to stop this right now.
		And why do we really want to make flying less safe by forcing this kinds of situation and making things that much stressed?
		So it's not something I support of, and I don't want to be involved.
		And now we can find a way forward.
		We need to find a way forward.
		And we really, I do believe we can achieve these kinds of tax credits.
		And this is something I support, but it's the wrong tactic.
		It was wrong when the Republicans did it.
		It's wrong now that we seem to be driving it.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		John Fetterman, yesterday on CNN.
		Back to your phone calls in Open Forum here on the Washington Journal.
		This is Jack out of Clay, Kentucky, Republican.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning, sir.
		Thank you for taking my call.
		I'm a big Trump supporter.
		I think he's fighting the fight.
		He's doing a great job.
		But the topic about this government shut down, is it about illegals?
red beckman ▲ ● ▼		Because our country is a mess fighting illegals in every one of these states.
unidentified		And I don't hear the Democrats saying anything about this being part of the illegals.
unidentified		Is it part of the illegals?
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Jack, Democrats will argue that this is about Affordable Care Act premiums, about the expiring tax credits and people's premiums going up when it comes to next year's health care bills.
		But Republicans argue against that in terms of what this is all about.
		What do you think this is all about?
red beckman ▲ ● ▼		Well, because of the quietness from the Democrats about illegals, it's got to have something to do with that.
unidentified		And Trump, Republicans, are not going to give free health care to illegals.
red beckman ▲ ● ▼		And one thing I want to say about getting this situation resolved is why don't they sit down, Schumer, Jeffries, Trump, and a couple other Republican representatives on national TV for everybody to watch to get this resolved.
unidentified		And my opinion on trying to get it resolved, if you know what I mean.
		But I don't know.
		I'm just, it is something.
red beckman ▲ ● ▼		It's hurting a lot of people, and they need to get this fixed, you know, pretty quick.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		That's Jack in the Bluegrass State.
		This is Patricia in the Windy City.
		Democrat, good morning.
unidentified		Good morning, John.
unidentified		How are you?
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		I'm doing well.
unidentified		I need to go back to the basics because the CR that we're debating or talking about, I don't know if it's from the year ago or is it from the big, beautiful bill that we're talking about.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Patricia, what do you mean from the big, beautiful bill?
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		So Republicans will say this is funding the government at the same level that it has been funded, that this is the bill that Democrats voted for last time, or at least enough Democrats voted to continue funding at this same level.
unidentified		Well, back to when, in March, when the Democrats did vote for its CR?
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Yes, ma'am.
		They're saying we're going to keep the government funded at the same level.
		That's what we want to do.
unidentified		So the situation with the CR and with the Affordable Care Act, the extended subsidies, come into play with the CR from back then?
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Democrats want to address the expiring subsidies.
		They expire at the end of this year.
		They're saying the clock is ticking on those subsidies.
		Health care costs are going to go up for a whole lot of people come 2026.
		We need to address this right now, and we need you to come to the table and negotiate.
		And that's what they have been talking about.
		So two different issues, the continuing resolution, the government funding the government at the same level, and this legislation that's expiring when it comes to the health care subsidies.
unidentified		Thank you for answering that for me.
unidentified		One other thing I wanted to point out was the gentleman from Virginia talking about ceasefire.
victoria in montana ▲ ● ▼		It is a good program, but it needs to be a little more educational so we understand where everybody is at the same starting line.
unidentified		Just like I had the question on the CR versus the additional extended subsidies.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		What do you mean where everybody is at the starting line?
unidentified		Well, as far as people calling and understanding exactly what the debate is about, we are talking about the CR separately from the extended supplements.
		We are also debating about, just to throw in another subject, is the Medicare that is also affected.
		So there are a lot of things going on, John, and we need to keep everybody abreast of what we're debating.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		We'll keep trying to do that for you on C-SPAN.
		Thanks for watching.
		Ceasefire, Friday nights, 7 p.m., 10 p.m. Eastern is when you can watch that.
		To the shores of Lake Superior.
		Eric is in Duluth.
		Independent, good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
unidentified		Yes, I think the ceasefire is a great move in the right direction toward discussion of topics that are timely, but I think it needs bigger teeth right now.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		What does that mean?
unidentified		The subtraction of monies from Medicaid and now the cutting of the ACA subsidies.
		These are substantive issues that many people and the people, the Constitution is we the people.
		We need to speak now.
		It's my recommendation that there be a ceasefire-type debate only with Trump and perhaps Hakeem Jeffries and Dan Goldman.
		Oh, Eric, if you have a serious discussion with that at the end.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		If the president wanted to come on ceasefire with Hakeem Jeffries, I'm certain that we would host that.
unidentified		But hear me out.
		It has to have the teeth of being followed by nothing less than a vote of no confidence.
		That the people, you know, the emperor in Rome used to just give a thumb up or a thumb down to control people's lives.
		Well, we are we the people.
		This is a country of the people are the emperor, and he's trying to fight that and reverse history.
		But that's what we fought for in the revolution in every war is the people.
		What is the vote of no confidence at the end of a ceasefire-type discussion with teeth?
		That's what I, it's serious what this dude is doing.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Explain to me what you mean by a vote of no confidence at the end of a C-SPAN program.
unidentified		At the end of a ceasefire-type debate and a serious debate, and only it's not ceasefire, it's got the teeth that would hang over such a discussion if something followed like an election.
		So when we have our big presidential elections, there's debates, and there's so much hanging over it because the people are about to vote.
		Well, there's so much going on right now with an individual who's trying to fundamentally change the government, change the mode of government.
		The people should get a chance to weigh in after that debate.
		All right.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Eric, got your point out of Minnesota.
		I'm running out of time.
		Let me get to Gary in Pennsylvania, Republican.
		Go ahead.
unidentified		Hi, John.
		I'd like to switch things up here for a second.
		I don't see much reporting on weather warfare, geoengineering, cloud seeding.
		And your other person commented on your show being boring on Sunday or whatever show it was.
		You want a good show and some good comments?
		I would suggest having that as your topic.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Cloud seeding is what you want a segment on?
unidentified		Cloud seating, weather warfare.
		I mean, people are concerned about all these things when they should be concerned about their lives.
		I mean, I look at what's happening in my area and the planes that are here and the clouds in my garden and my insects that are here.
		They're all dying.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Gary, there's an article today in the New York Times you might be interested in.
		You're in Pennsylvania, so you probably have access to the New York Times.
		Delhi tried to make it rain.
		Here's why it failed.
		Officials experimented with cloud seeding to try to reduce environmental pollutants as residents choke on filthy air.
		That is, I'm fairly certain that today's New York Times is in the print edition.
		I think it was available online at the end of last week.
		But you can take a look for it.
		This is Tim in Massachusetts.
		Democrat, good morning.
unidentified		Hi.
unidentified		Good morning, John.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Morning.
unidentified		I'm going to talk about ceasefire real quick.
		It wasn't what I meant to call about this morning.
		And the one gentleman who mentioned it was kind of boring.
		And I've watched it a couple of times.
		I won't disagree with him.
		And I'm going to say that one of the reasons might be is because these two oppositions are being so polite to each other because they have such a rare opportunity to be in a conversation with each other in that context.
		When I first started watching C-SPAN, you guys had slightly different programming, or you had different programming, where there was an hour at night where you had call-ins and people of debate.
		And I thought that was fantastic.
		At the time, having moved from the West Coast to the East Coast, I thought, well, that's a great way to divide up the West Coast, getting more dumb time live.
		I thought that was fantastic.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Tim, I'll tell you, it was tough to time that evening show because sometimes the House or the Senate would go into special orders or speeches late into night.
		So that show would be time-dependent on Congress getting out at a certain time for us to start.
		If we didn't, that show would get bumped by hours or multiple hours.
		So that was one of the reasons doing it in the morning, 7 to 10, with the House usually coming in at 10 a.m. Eastern when they are meeting, we found is a pretty reliable time.
		Although, as you'll find with this program, sometimes the House comes in early and we head out to the House at 9 a.m. or even 8 a.m.
unidentified		And that's perfectly understandable and difficult to get people on and to commit to times.
		But I think part of the nature of the programming is that people will anticipate that.
		And it kind of fluctuates C-SPAN with the way the government is moving at the time.
		But that just wasn't what I really meant to call.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Well, Tim, make it quick because I'm out of time here.
unidentified		Okay.
		Real quick, listen, we're coming up to the 250th anniversary.
		As everybody knows, the Founding Fathers understood this much better than we really believe.
		And at times, we can see it.
		Now, if we went with the amount of representations that they desired for the House of Congress initially, we would have up to 6,000 people in Congress right now.
		And those people would be ordinary people from the streets and from who do regular jobs.
		It wouldn't be confined to the people right now.
		And I guarantee we would not allow the government to be shut down in this manner if you had regular people in office.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		We'll take your comment.
		That's Tim in Massachusetts, our last caller in this open forum.
		Stick around.
		We've got about 40 minutes left this morning.
		In that time, we'll be joined by Darrell Kimball of the Arms Control Association.
		We'll talk about President Trump calling for the U.S. to resume nuclear testing.
		Stick around.
		We'll be right back.
unidentified		Tuesday, a critical election night on C-SPAN.
		From coast to coast, key races that could shape America's future.
		In New York City, a hard-fought mayor's race in the nation's largest city.
		Governor's races heating up in New Jersey and Virginia.
		And a California constitutional amendment that could shift the balance in Congress.
		All the results, all of the speeches, coverage that's straight down the middle.
		Election night, Tuesday at 6 p.m. Eastern, only on C-SPAN.
		Your democracy, unfiltered.
		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.
hakeem jeffries ▲ ● ▼		And past president nomination.
hakeem jeffries ▲ ● ▼		Why are you doing this?
unidentified		This is outrageous.
		This is a kangaroo corporate.
		Fridays, C-SPAN presents a rare moment of unity.
		Ceasefire, where the shouting stops and the conversation begins.
		Politico Playbook chief correspondent and White House Bureau Chief Dasha Burns is host of Ceasefire, bringing two leaders from opposite sides of the aisle into a dialogue.
		Ceasefire, on the network that doesn't take sides.
		Fridays at 7 and 10 p.m. Eastern and Pacific, only on C-SPAN.
		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 c-spanshop.org.
		Watch America's Book Club, C-SPAN's bold new original series, This Sunday with our guest, The Chronicler of Adventures, award-winning best-selling author David Graham, whose books include The Lost City of Z, Killers of the Flower Moon, and The Wager.
		He joins our host, renowned author and civic leader David Rubenstein.
david rubenstein ▲ ● ▼		So what about this fact, about this occurrence, made you think this could be something worth your time?
david grann ▲ ● ▼		And I started to realize that this odd little old manuscript contained, you know, the seeds of one of the most extraordinary stories of survival and mayhem I had ever come across.
unidentified		Watch America's Book Club with David Graham this Sunday at 6 p.m. and 9 p.m. Eastern and Pacific, only on C-SPAN.
unidentified		Washington Journal continues.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Back with us this morning is the executive director of the Arms Control Association, Darrell Kimball.
		He's worked on nuclear non-proliferation and arms control issues for about 35 years.
		So Darrell Kimball, when you see the president's Truth Social last week that says, quote, because of other countries' nuclear testing, I have instructed the Department of War to start testing our nuclear weapons on an equal basis, and that process will begin immediately.
		What was your immediate reaction?
daryl kimball ▲ ● ▼		Well, my immediate reaction, I was disturbed by the fact that I was watching the World Series and it was really good.
		Second, I was a bit confused about this garbled announcement.
		I mean, first of all, no other country has conducted nuclear test explosions in the 21st century except for North Korea.
		So when he says others are testing on an equal basis, he needs to provide evidence about who is conducting nuclear explosive testing.
		Second, it's the Department of Energy that has been responsible for maintaining the nuclear warheads in the massive U.S. nuclear arsenal.
		Up until 1992, this was being done through scientific experiments and nuclear weapons test explosions.
		But Congress mandated a moratorium on testing in 1992.
		Clinton extended it in 93.
		This was matching a Russian moratorium.
		And since then, the United States has been maintaining the nuclear weapons arsenal, its reliability, without nuclear explosive testing.
		So the statement was surprising.
		It's still not clear what the president is talking about five days later, which is also, I think, one of the most disturbing aspects.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		A little bit more clarity from his Energy Secretary Chris Wright in an interview with Fox News yesterday.
		I think the tests we're talking about right now are system tests.
		These are not nuclear explosions.
		These are what we call non-critical explosions.
		So you're testing all the other parts of the nuclear weapon.
		For folks who don't follow this stuff, what does that mean?
daryl kimball ▲ ● ▼		Well, so he seems to be referring to what I just mentioned, which is the program of non-nuclear explosive testing experiments that the Department of Energy, specifically the National Nuclear Security Agency, is responsible for, the Weapons Labs.
		We're spending about $20 billion a year on this program.
		One of the key features are what are called sub-critical experiments.
		These are experiments underground in Nevada, the former nuclear test site.
		I've been to the underground facility where this is done two years ago on an official tour.
		These are experiments involving the plutonium that is the key element in the core of a nuclear warhead.
		They fire a high-energy pulse of energy at this speck of plutonium, tiny amount, and they learn about the physical characteristics of the plutonium to make sure it's not aging.
		And this helps them understand whether the existing warheads in the arsenal continue to work as designed.
		And they've been confirming that they do work as design for the last 27 years.
		The lab directors, Strategic Command.
		But these are not nuclear explosions.
		They do not produce a self-sustaining amount of energy, self-sustaining chain reaction, which is what we would define as a nuclear test explosion.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		So more from the President in his interview with Nora O'Donnell on 60 Minutes.
		It was a Friday interview.
		It aired last night.
		This is about a minute and a half of her questions on the nuclear program.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		We have more nuclear weapons than any other country.
		I think we should do something about denuclearization.
		And I did actually discuss that with both President Putin and President Xi.
		We have enough nuclear weapons to blow up the world 150 times.
		Russia has a lot of nuclear weapons and China will have a lot.
		They have some.
		They have quite a bit.
norah odonnell ▲ ● ▼		So why do we need to test our nuclear weapons?
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Well, because you have to see how they work.
		You know, you do have to.
		And the reason I'm saying testing is because Russia announced that they were going to be doing a test.
		If you notice, North Korea is testing constantly.
		Other countries are testing.
		We're the only country that doesn't test.
		And I don't want to be the only country that doesn't test.
norah odonnell ▲ ● ▼		Are you saying that after more than 30 years, the United States is going to start detonating nuclear weapons?
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		I'm saying that we're going to test nuclear weapons like other countries do, yes.
norah odonnell ▲ ● ▼		But the only country that's testing nuclear weapons is North Korea.
norah odonnell ▲ ● ▼		China and Russia are not.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		I know.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		is testing so my understanding and China is testing them to you You just don't know about it.
norah odonnell ▲ ● ▼		That would be certainly very newsworthy.
norah odonnell ▲ ● ▼		My understanding is what Russia did recently was test essentially the delivery systems for nuclear weapons, essentially missiles, which we can do that, but not with nuclear weapons.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Russia's testing and China's testing, but they don't talk about it.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Daryl Kimball, what did you take from that minute and 20 seconds?
daryl kimball ▲ ● ▼		Nora O'Donnell tried to get some straight answers from the President.
		I would say advisedly, I think the President may not understand what nuclear testing is.
		He is misinformed or has misheard what he believes other nuclear armed states are doing in terms of their testing.
		And it is very important that the White House, in a very specific, serious way, clarify the confusion that the President has created here.
		Let me just point out that there are certain kinds of tests that nuclear armed states, there are nine in the world today, engage in.
		One is flight testing of the ballistic missiles that can carry nuclear weapons.
		The United States does this on a fairly regular basis, Russia, China, others, India, Pakistan, North Korea.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Because you shoot the missile without the warhead.
daryl kimball ▲ ● ▼		Without the warhead.
		This is to make sure that the delivery system that carries nuclear bombs is working.
		Then there are the nuclear test explosions that were done during the Cold War.
		From 1945 to 2017, there were 2,056 nuclear test explosions conducted by nine countries around the world.
		The United States conducted an extraordinary, you know, 1,030, 215 of which were above ground, 100 at the Nevada test site above ground outside of Las Vegas.
		We amassed an enormous amount of knowledge about nuclear weapons that way, but the primary purpose was to proof test new warhead designs to make sure that they worked.
		Today, the task is different.
		It is how do we, the United States, maintain our existing warheads in a safe and reliable manner.
		Then there's another kind of test, the one that we were just talking about that Chris Wright talked about, which is non-explosive experiments involving nuclear material.
		So the president may be thinking about or may have heard about any one of these three things.
		There needs to be a clarification.
		And let me just point out that if the United States were to resume underground nuclear testing at the Nevada National Security Site, as it's called today, it would take many months.
		I mean, I've been there, I've talked to the officials there, I've seen the test readiness program equipment.
		I think it would take 18 to 36, probably 36 months, to get an underground test prepared.
		There would be enormous opposition from people in the state of Nevada.
		Just this year, the Nevada state legislature passed unanimously a resolution saying they supported continuing the U.S. nuclear test moratorium.
		75% of the American public in a poll conducted last year say they support continuing a global nuclear test moratorium.
		So if the president is planning this, it would cost a great deal of money, hundreds of millions, months.
		There would be congressional opposition.
		Congresswoman Dina Titus, who's from Nevada, on Friday introduced a bill that would block the president from being able to resume nuclear explosive testing underground in Nevada.
		So we need some clarification.
		And the final thing we add is if the United States were to do this, or just to announce that it's pursuing it, what are the international security ramifications?
		Other countries are going to start preparing to resume nuclear testing.
		North Korea.
		Russia has said it will conduct nuclear tests if the U.S. does.
		China might also do this.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		And we're talking about the explosion.
daryl kimball ▲ ● ▼		We're talking about nuclear test explosions.
		Underground, not mushroom clouds in the atmosphere.
		Nonetheless, because the United States has a longer and more detailed knowledge of its arsenal than any other nuclear country, we have an extremely sophisticated arsenal, several warhead types.
		We don't need to conduct nuclear explosive testing for any military or technical reason.
		But other countries with less of a nuclear test explosion pedigree could gain knowledge from additional nuclear test explosions, particularly states like North Korea or India or Pakistan, which have conducted a far smaller number of nuclear weapons.
		So this would be a non-proliferation disaster and a national security own goal, to use a soccer analogy.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		If you have questions on this topic, now is a great time to call in Darrell Kimball with us of the Arms Control Association.
		Here's how you can call in Democrats 202-748-8000, Republicans 202-748-8001, Independents 202-748-8002, and we'll keep Darrell Kimball with us until that Speaker Johnson press conference starts at the top of the hour, 10 a.m. Eastern is where we're going to go after this program ends.
		Darrell Kimball, for folks who don't know the Arms Control Association, you've been on this program several times, but what is it?
		Do you have any formal government role?
daryl kimball ▲ ● ▼		So we're a non-governmental organization, the Arms Control Association.
		We're a medium-sized think tank.
		We do research.
		We do public education.
		We were established in 1971 with the mission of reducing and eliminating the threats posed by the world's nuclear weapons, particularly nuclear weapons.
		And we publish a journal, Arms Control Today, that explores these issues.
		It's a platform for ideas, and we've got more information at armscontrol.org.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		And people always ask who funds these think tanks?
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Who funds the Arms Control Transport?
daryl kimball ▲ ● ▼		Well, our organization is funded by our members and private philanthropies.
daryl kimball ▲ ● ▼		We don't have any U.S. government funding, so we pride our independence and our ability to call things like we see it.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		As folks are calling in on phone lines for Democrats, Republicans, and Independents, the Nevada test site that you're talking about, you say you were there last year.
		How does one go to a nuclear explosion test site?
		How do you walk around there?
		There's been above-ground and below-ground explosions there.
		It's safe to walk around?
daryl kimball ▲ ● ▼		Well, the Nevada test site, the former Nevada test site, is about the size of the state of Rhode Island.
		It is enormous.
		It's outside of Las Vegas.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		How far outside?
daryl kimball ▲ ● ▼		It's about 50 miles outside of Las Vegas.
		I'm not exactly sure.
		Not too far as the wind blows.
		You can't just walk around there.
		It is a highly secure site.
		There are, you know, as I said, hundreds of nuclear test explosions that have been conducted there.
		There are what are called subsidence craters that pockmark the desert landscape.
		It's sort of from above it looks like a moonscape.
		I was there in 2023 on an official nonproliferation experts tour that the NNSA organized to basically demonstrate that the site has been transformed from a nuclear weapons testing site to a national security and nonproliferation site.
		And we visited the underground facility where the United States conducts these sub-critical nuclear experiments that Chris Wright was speaking about.
		And so that's where it is.
		The other world's nuclear armed states have their own test sites.
		The first test site for the Soviet Union was in Kazakhstan.
		I've visited that site.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		And that was an explosion site?
daryl kimball ▲ ● ▼		There were over 400 nuclear explosions in eastern Kazakhstan up until 1990 when the Kazakh people stood up in protest and told Moscow no more nuclear tests in Kazakhstan just before Kazakhstan's independence.
		So there has been a long history of people standing up in opposition to nuclear testing because the atmospheric testing that took place from 1945, mainly until the early 1960s, until the limited test ban treaty that Kennedy and Khrushchev signed that banned atmospheric testing, that spewed poison into the global atmosphere.
		We still have tens of thousands of downwinders in the United States who are being supported to some extent by a program called the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act.
		There was a big debate about that last year.
		So there are downwinders in these other countries too.
		So President Trump's announcement that the United States is going to resume nuclear testing, I think also is being seen as a slap in the face to those many thousands of people who've been affected by nuclear testing through the years.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		And then one more question before we get to calls.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		What are the treaties that we are signatories to right now that have to do with limiting nuclear tests?
daryl kimball ▲ ● ▼		Very good question.
		So as I said, the U.S. Congress imposed a nuclear test moratorium in 1992 that lasted nine months.
		Bill Clinton decided to extend it because nuclear testing was not deemed necessary to maintain the arsenal.
		And he put in motion global talks on the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty.
		That treaty was concluded in 1996.
		It bans all nuclear weapons test explosions.
		It has set up a global test monitoring system called the International Monitoring System to detect and deter violations of the treaty.
		187 countries, including the United States, Russia, China, France, Britain, have signed that treaty, which means they're legally obligated not to engage in any activity that violates the object or purpose.
		But in 1999, in a highly partisan and brief, after brief debate, the U.S. Senate rejected U.S. ratification of the treaty.
		So for that reason and others, the treaty has not formally entered into force.
		And what's important about that in the context of this is that it means we don't have the option to order on-site inspections of another country if we believe they are cheating on the test ban.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Let me get you some callers.
		Chad's up first in Houston, Texas, line for Democrats.
		Chad, you're on with Darrell Kimball.
unidentified		Hey, hey, thank you all for taking my call this morning.
		Mr. Kimball, I just had a question.
		If we don't have the money, you know, the United States don't have the funds for state and federal government-funded programs like food stamps, how would we have enough money as a state, as a country, to afford these nuclear tests that Donald Trump is saying that we're going to start resuming?
daryl kimball ▲ ● ▼		Well, the caller's got a great question, and I think that's a question that if people are concerned about it, they should be talking to their members of Congress about.
		Some facts to keep in mind about the nuclear weapons budget of the United States.
		The United States is currently spending about $70 billion a year to maintain and operate and upgrade the existing nuclear weapons arsenal.
		That's the delivery systems, the missiles, the bombers, the warheads on these weapons.
		The Department of Energy's National Nuclear Security Agency is spending about $20 billion on weapons activities.
		And right now, the United States is in the process of replacing the missiles that carry nuclear weapons, the submarines that carry missiles that carry nuclear weapons, and strategic bombers that carry nuclear weapons.
		And the estimated price tag of that program over the next 10 years exceeds $1 trillion.
		So as with all issues, we've got choices to make about where the dollars go.
		Additional nuclear testing, resumption of nuclear testing, would cost additional hundreds of millions.
		But I think the real cost is to U.S. national security because it would set off a chain reaction of nuclear testing by other countries, which is not in our interest.
		That would raise the global nuclear tensions that are already far, far too high.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		By the way, a note from my producer that you're pretty close on how far the Nevada test site is from Las Vegas.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		65 miles.
daryl kimball ▲ ● ▼		Okay, 65.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		I guess as the crow flies.
		This is Mark in Fort Lauderdale, Independent.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Hello, good morning.
dennis lawrence cuddy ▲ ● ▼		And as always, thank you for C-STAN.
unidentified		Mr. Kimball, you mentioned that it takes a long time to get the site, the situation ready for a nuclear test.
		That's good, but I don't know how well you know or have been observing Donald Trump himself.
		I can tell you, I actually worked with and around Donald Trump in the mid-90s.
		And you can see from the way he handled the East Wing change and the bathroom change.
		He doesn't care about time.
		He doesn't care about going through the proper procedures.
		He'll go around and cut corners and this and that and the other.
		So be it good or be it bad, if he decides to pursue this.
		And you never know with him, he'll mention something, and then a few months later, he'll come back to it again and hit on it.
		If he decides that's what he wants, he will probably just push through quickly and carelessly.
		Like you can see how careless the Department of War has become with how they handle some things.
		Also, I have one last question, if you'll bear with me.
		And I don't know if it's off-topic or not.
		I also have a background with some people that were here in the U.S. in the early 2000s to take advantage of the U.S. and the Russian situation, how to make money, this and that and the other.
		I still have a little bit of contact with one of the guys in Russia.
		And going back to the beginning of the invasion that Russia pulled, when everybody's worried about Russia's a nuclear power, Russia's a nuclear power, so we can't defend them.
		He told me at that time, and you could see it from how poorly they engaged in that invasion, that the Russian nuclear arsenal at that time, because who knows how they've upgraded it since since they're working on war stuff, it was in pitiful, pitiful shape because nobody wanted to spend money on it or maintain it.
		Everybody was interested in how much money they had.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Mark, got your point.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Daryl Kimball.
daryl kimball ▲ ● ▼		So I would agree.
		I mean, the Trump administration has shown that it will cut corners.
		It will blow past regulations on the environment or safety.
		So the official requirement that exists for resuming what's called an instrumented nuclear test, one that provides data for the weapon scientists, is 36 months.
		A simple demonstration test, an underground nuclear blast that simply says this particular nuclear weapon has gone off, which I think is completely, completely unnecessary.
		That would take less time.
		But we do need to just keep in mind that certain things would need to be done to make this happen.
		A, the Department of Energy would have to bring in people who can drill a vertical shaft deep, deep underground, probably from the oil industry.
		They would have to prepare a nuclear device to be lowered in there.
		They have to bring in equipment to lower that warhead there.
		It would require a very large crane, which is currently not at the site.
		They would have to backfill the vertical shaft to make sure it doesn't blast out.
		I mean, all of this does take time to do.
		Whether it actually takes 36 months or not, we shall see.
		I think before this can be done, however, there will very likely be a serious, I hope, debate in Congress, some serious questions about why is this necessary or not.
		And so, you know, the public will have a chance to weigh in.
		So that's what I would say in response.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Is it true that China has tripled its nuclear arsenal in the past five years?
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		And if that's true, our current arms control treaties and measures, is it working if China can triple its arsenal?
daryl kimball ▲ ● ▼		So now you're talking about the total number of nuclear weapons that China has.
		So just for context, the United States and Russia are by far the largest nuclear powers, largest number of nuclear weapons, close to 5,000 each.
		Not all of these are deployed.
		The U.S. and Russia have about 1,700 warheads deployed on long-range systems.
		China has a total, according to U.S. intelligence estimates and independent researchers, of around 600 today.
		That has risen significantly over the last seven to eight years.
		They're also building silos in the Western Desert that could house intercontinental ballistic missiles, long-range missiles.
		So it's estimated that they could have a deployed arsenal of somewhere around 1,000 total nuclear weapons deployed of all types by the year 2030.
		The U.S. and Russia have one treaty that's left that limits their nuclear arsenals, the new Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		New start.
daryl kimball ▲ ● ▼		New START.
		That treaty will expire in less than 100 days on February 5, 2026.
		If that treaty expires, it is possible that, in theory, the U.S. or Russia or both could increase the number of nuclear weapons on the existing missiles and bombers we have by doing something called uploading, putting more warheads on each missile.
		That would not be good.
		The Chinese would likely see this and they might accelerate what they're already doing.
		So one of the things that's important for Donald Trump also to answer is there was a proposal from Vladimir Putin on September 22nd of this year.
		He said that the United States and he would propose that the United States and Russia continue to respect the central limits of the New START Treaty, which is 1,550 deployed strategic warheads on no more than 700 missiles and bombers for one more year to build confidence and to provide time to negotiate some sort of new agreement.
		On October 5th, Donald Trump was asked by a reporter, what do you think?
		He said, I think it's a good idea.
		Now, the two countries have not formally agreed to maintain those central limits.
		That would be a very good idea.
		And so, one of the other things that reporters and members of Congress should be asking the President, well, what's your proposal to Putin?
		How do you respond to Putin's proposal?
		And are you going to engage with Russia?
		And how are you going to engage with China to exercise, to try to impose some nuclear restraint on China?
		So we are on the verge, if we don't have new constraints, John, a new era of nuclear competition, not just between the U.S. and Russia, as during the Cold War, but between the U.S., Russia, and China.
		And if Donald Trump adds nuclear testing to this radioactive mix, it's going to be all the more dangerous.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Let me go to Guy in Maryland, Line for Democrats.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Guy, good morning.
unidentified		Hey, good morning, Canada.
		Mr. Kimball is a knowledgeable professional who's, I think he's forgetting that he's speaking to lay people.
		So I have two things.
		First of all, a nuclear explosion is not like lighting a firecracker or even starting a fire.
		The timing, what it is, is the nuclear core, the nuclear material, surrounded by conventional explosives.
		And the whole process is to get the precise timing to detonate the nuclear core.
		So.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		So, Guy, what's the question?
unidentified		When you talk in terms of sub-critical and all of these things that people might not understand, it simply means that you're testing all the components that go to detonating the nuclear core.
daryl kimball ▲ ● ▼		That's a pretty good explanation.
		And yes, this is a technical topic, but lay people, I think, can understand more than enough in order to get their heads around this.
		So as you said, a nuclear warhead, a nuclear bomb requires fissile material, a critical mass, a certain mass of plutonium, and or highly enriched uranium.
		And with most U.S. nuclear weapons, conventional explosives implode the hollow plutonium core, so it creates a critical mass of the plutonium atoms coming together, which then releases the energy in a massive explosion.
		So these are not firecrackers, these are not conventional bombs.
		These are weapons that produce enormous energy.
		The bombs, as everyone remembers, that destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki were relatively small nuclear bombs.
		They were 15 to 20 kilotons of TNT equivalent.
		But nuclear weapons don't just create a blast.
		They produce enormous amount of heat exceeding temperatures that are on the sun.
		It produces enormous amounts of radiation and the blast kicks up soot and it creates enormous fires which produce fallout, radioactive fallout that can spread many, many, many miles downwind and it can loft it into the atmosphere.
		So if nuclear weapons are used in a conflict in the hundreds, it would have not just the effect of killing potentially hundreds of millions of people initially in the first hours, but creating atmospheric effects that change the climate, that make it difficult to grow crops in certain areas.
		So this is why President Reagan, Mikhail Gorbachev, said in 1985 at a summit in Geneva, a nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought.
		So Donald Trump, I think, understands that.
		But my concern is that he is engaging in policy and behavior that is at once conciliatory.
		He says he wants to engage with Russia and China in denuclearization talks.
		But then he's threatening to resume nuclear testing.
		So these contradictory statements, unclear statements, I can tell you, they're creating a great deal of confusion in other capitals.
		And it's important for the administration to straighten out what they're talking about and why.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		This is Mark in St. Louis, Missouri, writing in on X. Your website claims you want to get rid of nuclear weapons.
		How is that even possible?
		And who would want to give away their ace in the hole?
		Look what happened to Ukraine.
		No nukes and you're left open for attack.
daryl kimball ▲ ● ▼		Well, it's a good question about how we can and whether we can eliminate the 12,000 nuclear weapons that still exist on Earth.
		There are ways, pathways that this could be accomplished.
		We're on the wrong path at the moment.
		What I can tell you is that from my perspective and the perspective of most of the world's nations, the pursuing the goal and taking steps to move towards the goal of a world without nuclear weapons puts us on a safer path.
		Fewer nuclear weapons possessed by fewer states, fewer to no nuclear weapons threats, no nuclear testing.
		That all makes us safer.
		And if folks are watching their Netflix this week, I will mention that there is a remarkable film by Academy Award-winning director Catherine Bigelow called A House of Dynamite that illustrates in detail, at a heart-pounding pace, how dangerous the current nuclear deterrence balance of terror is.
		I mean, how easily things could be sent in the wrong direction if there's a Missile that is fired, or we think a missile is fired at us, and how we react, and how other countries react.
		So, in my view, it is unsustainable to maintain so many nuclear weapons with so many countries.
		At some point, nuclear deterrence is going to fail, and we could see a nuclear conflict.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		I may regret asking, but what is your scenario that keeps you up at night?
daryl kimball ▲ ● ▼		Well, there are a lot of scenarios that are worrisome.
		You know, just this past year, India and Pakistan had a hot conflict exchanging missile fire.
		They're nuclear-armed.
		That conflict could easily have gone nuclear.
		And it was good that President Trump helped intervene to bring an end to the fighting.
		So, that's a nuclear flashpoint.
		The war in Ukraine mentioned here.
		Ukraine gave up its nuclear weapons in 1994.
		They had to.
		They couldn't maintain them.
		Russia wouldn't have allowed it in 1994.
		Russia has threatened to use nuclear weapons in the Ukraine conflict.
		But note that Ukraine keeps hitting back and has kept Russia from taking over more of Ukraine.
		But that could become a flashpoint between NATO forces, Russian forces that could escalate also.
		The United States and China, there are tensions over the Taiwan Straits.
		There's a possibility that the conflict between the U.S. and China could go nuclear.
		And then there is our friend Kim Jong-un in North Korea, who possesses a small but extremely deadly arsenal, about 100-some nuclear weapons and various missiles.
		If there's a conflict on the Korean Peninsula, that conflict would almost instantly go nuclear because that's Kim Jong-un's strategy.
		If you hit us, if you attack us, if you try to decapitate my leadership, I'm going to strike back with nuclear weapons.
		And the distance between North Korea and Seoul is kilometers.
		And so that could be a disaster.
		So any one of these conflicts could go the wrong way if they erupt.
		And so we need to reduce the number of nuclear weapons, reduce their salience.
		We need governments to be speaking with one another.
		Right now, the United States and Russia are not speaking on a regular basis about risk reduction.
		The U.S. and China are not doing that.
		North and South Korea are not doing that.
		So it is worrisome, but we can do things about it.
		We have done things about it before with public pressure.
		Congress presidents have taken leadership to reduce the nuclear risk, and we need to do it again.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Five minutes left with Darrell Kimball of the Arms Control Association.
		It is armscontrol.org if you want to check out their work.
		After we finish this conversation, we're going to head up to Capitol Hill.
		Speaker Mike Johnson set to hold a press conference at 10 a.m. Eastern, as he did, has been doing throughout the shutdown, reporters gathering.
		So when he steps up to the mic, we will head there.
		Until then, your phone calls.
		This is Rick out of the Peach State Independent.
		Rick, good morning.
unidentified		Good morning, and I want to thank the Washington Journal for having such a sane guest of Mr. Kimball on.
		The country ought to be lucky to have you.
		Look, this is a no-brainer.
		Anybody that, if we're honest with ourselves, do we really think that this guy that's in charge of the nuclear codes is up to the task?
		And we need people like Mr. Kimmel here to kick us down into the calm state and put us back in the world of sanity.
		If you look at this guy in the White House cross-eyed, he sends out a tweet.
		I mean, were you kidding us?
		He's got the nuclear codes.
		We should be very concerned.
		And tomorrow's voting day, we all ought to vote, make sure we get the country back on track.
		Thanks, Mr. Camball, for all you do, and you're doing a great job.
		Thanks.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Anything you want to say?
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		We've got more callers.
daryl kimball ▲ ● ▼		Well, thanks for the kind words.
		We should just keep in mind that it is the President of the United States who does have the sole authority to order the launch of nuclear weapons and doesn't require consent from others.
		That is the current U.S. nuclear posture.
		So that's something everybody should just keep in mind as a fact.
		That's where things are today.
unidentified		Has that always been the posture?
daryl kimball ▲ ● ▼		Essentially, yes.
		There have been changes in the nuclear decision-making process through the years as the amount of time that the president has has been reduced.
		I mean, since the 60s, this has essentially been the situation where the president has the authority to launch nuclear weapons either first or in retaliation to a real or perceived attack.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		How long would it take for an ICBM to go from Russian territory to the United States, and which way would it go?
daryl kimball ▲ ● ▼		It would take about 20 to 30 minutes, depending on where the missile is launched.
		As folks who watch a House of Dynamite might see, that particular scenario had a missile that only took 18 minutes.
		So it is a very short decision time, and the president is under enormous pressure to make a decision about whether to retaliate or not, based probably on not a lot of good information that can be gathered.
		And in that 30 minutes, the president might be golfing.
		The Secretary of Defense might be seeing a doctor.
		I mean, there could be a lot of reasons why all of the best advice is not even available and all the information is not there.
		So one of the things we need to do to reduce the risk is to extend the time the president has and to remember that an instant retaliation is usually not, well, never, I would say, wise because we have the ability with our submarines, which are invulnerable to attack, to retaliate at any time of our choosing.
		But that's how fast nuclear war between the major nuclear armed states could take place.
		That's not the most likely scenario.
		And all of a sudden, out of the blue attack is probably a regional war that leads to nuclear use on a limited scale that then escalates.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Let me see if I can get in Helen out of North Carolina as we wait for Speaker Johnson.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Helen, go ahead.
unidentified		Hi.
		I want to thank you for taking my call.
		I'm a proud Democrat, and I'm ashamed and appalled with the behavior of the President as well as the Congress and the Senate.
		I am scared that what the other person said was that we I'm sorry.
		I'm a little nervous.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		That's all right, Helen.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		And we're running a little short on time, so just what's your question?
unidentified		Oh, well, I guess it's not a question, but I just think that people need to learn to say no to Trump.
		I don't think he's ever heard that before.
		And you can look back to Atlantic City as a great example of that.
		But I am scared with him in control.
		I'm frightened.
		I'm in fear.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		That's Helen in North Carolina.
		I've got Harrier waiting in Massachusetts.
		Independent line.
		Harrier, go ahead.
unidentified		Yes, hello.
		Thank you to the speaker.
		I have questions about how much nuclear fallout has affected from the previous wars and even situations where we have Just like Three Mile Island or the other places in the world where nuclear fallout, even Fukushima in Japan, how that's affected so many people across the world and continues to affect the Chernobyl accident, all those things.
		I'm just curious as to how many lives it's cost and it's continuing to cost without all that stuff.
john mcardle ▲ ● ▼		Darrell Kimball.
daryl kimball ▲ ● ▼		Well, it's hard to estimate exactly how many people have died or fallen ill because of nuclear testing-related radiation poisoning, but it is in the hundreds of thousands, if not millions.
daryl kimball ▲ ● ▼		It is very hard to draw a straight line between a radiation, low-level radiation exposure and a particular cancer or disease outcome.

▲