CSPAN - Washington Journal 11/10/2025

All Episodes

Previous Next

Nov. 10, 2025 06:59-10:04 - CSPAN

03:04:53

Washington Journal 11/10/2025

Participants

Main

adam goodman

r 18:20

ben lefebvre

politico 18:03

lucy caldwell

12:44

mimi geerges

cspan 35:17

Appearances

brian lamb

cspan 01:24

chuck schumer

sen/d 02:32

gavin newsom

d 01:30

hakeem jeffries

rep/d 01:18

jake tapper

cnn 00:46

jeanne shaheen

sen/d 01:02

john thune

sen/r 01:16

sean duffy

admin 01:17

walter isaacson

00:30

Clips

david rubenstein

00:06

judge joe brown

00:08

kristen welker

nbc 00:08

Callers

1949 in april

callers 00:07

al in delaware

callers 00:07

dennis in new york

callers 00:25

morgan in washington

callers 00:12

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Show episode speakers

Speaker	Time	Text
unidentified		C-SPAN, Democracy Unfiltered.
		We're funded by these television companies and more, including Cox.
		When connection is needed most, Cox is there to help.
		Bringing affordable internet to families in need, new tech to boys and girls clubs, and support to veterans.
		Whenever and wherever it matters most, we'll be there.
		Cox supports C-SPAN as a public service, along with these other television providers, giving you a front-row seat to democracy.
		Coming up this morning on Washington Journal, along with your calls and comments live, we'll talk with Republican strategist Adam Goodman and Democratic strategist Lucy Caldwell on this day 40 of the government shutdown and how the stalemate could impact the midterm elections and President Trump's agenda.
		And then it's a preview of the week ahead in Congress and a discussion on the latest on the government shutdown with semaphore Congress reporter Eleanor Mueller.
		And Notice reporter Violet Jira previews the week ahead at the White House and talks about the latest on the government shutdown.
		Also, Politico Deputy Energy Editor Ben LeFave previews the 2025 UN Climate Change Conference.
		C-SPAN's Washington Journal is next.
		Join the conversation.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
		It's Monday, November 10th.
		In a rare Sunday session yesterday, eight Senate Democrats joined Republicans to advance a bill to fund the government through January in a 60-40 vote.
		The Senate bill does not include extending ACA subsidies, but does agree to holding a vote in the Senate on extension next month.
		This funding deal would still need to pass the House, which has not been in session since September 19th, and be signed by the President.
		We'll get your thoughts on that this morning.
		Here's how to reach us.
		Democrats are on 202-748-8000.
		Republicans 202-748-8001.
		And Independents 202-748-8002.
		If you're a federal worker, you can call us on 202-748-8003.
		That's the same number you can use to text us.
		If you do, include your first name and your city-state.
		And we're on social media, facebook.com/slash C-SPAN and X at C-SPANWJ.
		Welcome to today's Washington Journal.
		Let's get into some of the details of the bill that was advanced yesterday evening in the Senate.
		It funds the government until January 30th, 2026.
		It funds military construction, Veterans Affairs, Department of Agriculture, and the legislative branch through September 30th of next year.
		It reinstates over 4,000 federal workers laid off during the shutdown, prevents the Trump administration from firing additional federal workers through reductions in force until January 30th.
		And it includes a promise of a December vote on extending ACA-enhanced subsidies.
		Let's take a look at what Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said on the Senate floor yesterday on why he's voting no.
chuck schumer ▲ ● ▼		America is in the midst of a Republican-made health care crisis.
		Worse than anything the American people have seen in decades.
		Republicans have spent the past 10 months dismantling the health care system, skyrocketing costs, and making every day harder for American families.
		Because of Republicans, Americans are going to suffer immensely as this health care crisis gets worse.
		Democrats have been fighting to end this crisis over and over again.
		Democrats have wanted to lower costs, but Republicans fought us every step of the way.
		We gave Republicans not one, not two, but three chances this year to extend the ACA premium tax credits.
		Republicans said no every time.
		On Friday, we offered Republicans a compromise, a proposal that would extend the ACA tax credits for a year and open up the government at the same time.
		They once again said no.
		And when they said no on our compromise, they showed that they are against any health care reform.
		Instead, they passed the biggest health care cuts in our nation's history just to give tax breaks to billionaires.
		And even then, they weren't satisfied with merely closing hospitals and community health clinics.
		They've callously did nothing to deal with the looming crisis of ACA credits.
		Premiums will spike by thousands of dollars a month.
		Millions will lose insurance.
		Democrats have sounded the alarm.
		We have demanded for months to meet with the Republican leadership.
		But Republican leaders refused to even discuss the issue, let alone negotiate it.
		We've asked them to meet in the summer and throughout the shutdown.
		To this day, Republicans still say no.
		We asked President Trump to step in and meet with us to deliver lower health care for Americans, and instead, Donald Trump has taken the American people hostage.
		From cutting off food, aid to hungry families and vets and seniors and kids, to manufacturing flight cancellations, to cutting off home heating aid, while he builds a billion-dollar ballroom with gold-plated toilets.
		Therefore, therefore, I must vote no.
		This health care crisis is so severe, so urgent, so devastating for families back home that I cannot in good faith support this CR that fails to address the health care crisis.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		That was Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer.
		This is Senate Majority Leader John Thune on the Senate floor yesterday.
		Take a look at what he said.
unidentified		Mr. President, after 40 long days, I'm hopeful that we can finally bring this shutdown to an end.
unidentified		And I don't need to go over all the reasons why it's imperative that we get the government open as soon as possible.
john thune ▲ ● ▼		From the truly precarious situation we are in with regard to air travel to the fact that our staffs have been working without pay for a full 40 days now, all of us, Republicans and Democrats, who support this bill know that the time to act is now.
		And so in just a few minutes, I will call up the vehicle for a clean, continuing resolution packaged with three bipartisan year-long appropriations bills.
		Agricultural appropriations, military construction, VA appropriations, and legislative branch appropriations.
unidentified		These bills will fund SNAP for the entire fiscal year.
gavin newsom ▲ ● ▼		They will fund WIC for the entire fiscal year.
unidentified		And they will fund our veterans for the entire fiscal year.
john thune ▲ ● ▼		After 40 days of uncertainty, I'm profoundly glad to be able to announce that nutrition programs, our veterans and other critical priorities, will have their full-year funding.
unidentified		And my goal is to quickly move to other full-year appropriations bills.
john thune ▲ ● ▼		As I've said many times, I firmly believe that the way to fund the government is by passing appropriations bills through regular order, a process that gives senators from both parties the fullest chance to make their voices heard.
		Mr. President, I also want to mention health care.
		There's been a lot of talk over the last several weeks on both sides of the aisle about the health care crisis in this country.
		And I'm thankful to be able to say that we have senators, both Democrat and Republican, who are eager to get to work to address that crisis in a bipartisan way.
gavin newsom ▲ ● ▼		These senators are not interested in political games.
john thune ▲ ● ▼		are interested in finding real ways to address health care costs for American families.
unidentified		We also have a president who is willing to sit down and get to work on this issue.
		And so I'm looking forward to seeing what solutions might be brought forward.
		Regardless, as I have said for weeks to my Democrat friends, I will schedule a vote on their proposal.
		And I've committed to having that vote no later than the second week in December.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Let's get to your calls now and we'll start with Mary, who's in Royal Oak, Michigan, Independent Line.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Mary.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I agree that the time to act is now.
		When you think that the Speaker of the House, Mike Johnson, salary is $223,000 and the Senate members is $174,000, yet they can't solve problems.
		This is not fair to us.
		And also, if the GOP is pro-life and a Christian party, not feeding the poor is not an option.
		And I hope they do continue health care benefits for children, veterans, and the disabled.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And here's Melissa in Cleveland, Tennessee, Democrat.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Melissa.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I am not happy with either side right now.
		We have had a lot of happy chat this morning for both sides saying how they wanted to resolve this situation.
		But the only reason they wanted to resolve the situation is because we were looking at Thanksgiving holiday, where people weren't going to be able to go home because the airspace was closed.
		And, you know, at the same time, we have millions of people finding out that their Thanksgiving dinner is going to be rice and beans and a can of tuna that they had to beg from charity.
		They're not, neither side right now is really caring at all about we, the people.
		And they need to remember that primary season for midterm starts in just a couple of months.
		Right now, if I'm an incumbent, I would consider myself an endangered species.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So, Melissa, what do you think about the actual deal that was struck?
		Do you regret that there was a deal?
		Do you think that your party should have held out longer?
unidentified		I regret that it took 40 days to come up with the same thing.
		They probably could have come up with after a week.
		You know, neither side really won on this.
		The Republicans are made to look like a bunch of Ebones or scruges.
		The Democrats look like they're a bunch of milquetasts.
		And for what reason?
		To protect Jeffrey Epstein, to protect the names of the Congress people who are probably on his list of clients, or the people who went to Epstein Island more than once.
		You know, and I'm not convinced it's just the Republicans that are protecting Mr. Epstein.
		I think the Democrats are too.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Melissa.
		And we are taking your calls this morning.
		The phone lines are open for you.
		It's 202-748-8000 for Democrats, 202-748-8001 for Republicans, and 202-748-8002 for Independents.
		And we still have that line for federal workers.
		We'll have that as long as the government is shut down.
		It's 202-748-8003.
		Here are the Democrats that voted with Republicans yesterday.
		They are Senator Dick Durbin of Illinois, Senator Jean Shaheen of New Hampshire, and Senator Maggie Hassen of New Hampshire, Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia, and Senator Angus King, an independent of Maine.
		And then they joined the original ones that were voting originally with Republicans.
		That's Senator John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, Senator Catherine Cortez-Masto of Nevada, and Senator Jackie Rosen of Nevada.
		They voted with Republicans yesterday to advance that bill.
		And here is Senator Shaheen, Democrat of New Hampshire, one of those eight senators.
		And here's what she said at a press conference yesterday.
jeanne shaheen ▲ ● ▼		Now, I understand that not all of my Democratic colleagues are satisfied with this agreement.
		But waiting another week or another month wouldn't deliver a better outcome.
		It would only mean more harm for families in New Hampshire and all across the country.
		And this is only the first step.
		So let me be clear.
		No one in the Senate chamber wants to extend the ACA tax credits more than I do.
		I introduced that legislation in 2019.
		I fought successfully to pass it in 2021 and 2023.
		And I am 100% committed to getting this done.
		President Trump, Speaker Johnson, and Leader Thun, along with many rank-and-file Republicans, say they want to keep health care premiums at their current rate.
		With the government reopened, we must move quickly to deliver on that promise and to keep health care premiums affordable.
		The American people are counting on us to get this done.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Back to calls now to Shirley in Newcastle, Pennsylvania.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Republican, good morning, Shirley.
unidentified		Good morning, and thank you for taking my call.
		Now, I am so thankful to God for these Democrats that have, you know, they've thought it over.
		I'm sure they've heard so much about it.
		Everyone is sick of it.
		And they have joined the Republicans to get this government open again so that people can get their paychecks, people can eat, things can be done in a proper manner.
		I thank God for that.
		Now, one thing I want to say: Rand Paul is always a disgrace to the Republican Party.
		He needs to be voted out and sent home.
		Every time there's a vote, he's always a no vote.
		So he's not doing his job, but he's collecting a paycheck.
		That is wrong.
		Thank you so very much.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Okay, and Shirley brought up Rand Paul.
		Here is Politico on that.
		He says it'll take them five days.
		Rand Paul could be an obstacle to quickly ending the shutdown.
		It says the Kentucky Republican has been warning he will obstruct passage of any bill that takes aim at the hemp industry in his state.
		Said that it says Senator Rand Paul has been warning GOP leaders that he will obstruct passage of any bill that takes aim at the hemp industry in his state.
		It's been a fight, has been a major internal headache for the GOP, pitting Paul against fellow Kentucky Republican Mitch McConnell.
		The release of agriculture spending bill text Sunday showed McConnell, senior member of the Appropriations Committee, won out over Paul with the inclusion of language that would crack down on some intoxicating hemp products.
		That's at Politico, if you'd like more information on that.
		And here's John, Brooklyn, New York, Democrat.
		Hi, John.
unidentified		How are you doing?
		I'm John Salkers from Brooklyn, New York.
		I'm a Democrat first.
		I want to say Hiking Jefferson, hold out.
		Don't do anything until you straighten out Obamacare because I remember when Obamacare wasn't in effect, people were going broke because of medical conditions.
		They were being kicked off the insurance for pre-medic conditions.
		And people need to think back.
		We was in a mess before Obama's care was passed.
1949 in april ▲ ● ▼		Now that it's passed, and things, if it stopped going up, people still don't look at it and understand.
unidentified		If it's so bad, then if you stop it, why is things going up so high?
		Next thing is, Trump called out a new mayor here in New York, Manzana.
		Communist.
		And he's the one doing communist things.
		He's taking money that Congress appropriated for different organizations.
		He just come in and taking it and don't have the right to do it.
		He got this group that he called ISIN that's lawless doing what they want to do.
		That's what communists do.
		I'm a mayor Manzana.
		If he become mayor, he can't do what he wants to do because there's restraints on the mayor.
		The city council can counter him.
		The governor have control over him.
		But Trump running wild.
		He's doing just what communists do, tearing down the White House.
		And I would like to tell him that tearing down that White House, I wish I could have got that material he throwed away because that stuff is worth a lot of money.
		That trice, he could have dissembled.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, John, and he mentioned Hakeem Jeffries, a House Minority Leader, and he did release a statement about this.
		Here's a portion of it.
		He says this.
		For seven weeks, Democrats in the House and Senate have waged a valiant fight on behalf of the American people.
		It now appears that Senate Republicans will send the House of Representatives a spending bill that fails to extend the Affordable Care Act's tax credits.
		As a result of the Republican refusal to address the health care crisis that they have created, tens of millions of everyday Americans are going to see their costs skyrocket.
		Many will not be able to afford a doctor when they or their children need one.
		America is far too expensive.
		We will not support spending legislation advanced by Senate Republicans that fails to extend the Affordable Care Act tax credits.
		And this is Tina in Cassville, Pennsylvania.
		Independent Line.
		Hi, Tina.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Thanks for taking my call.
		And first, I'd like to say to everyone listening, we need to get rid of the labels.
		We're American.
		There's just a couple points that I'd like to touch on, if I may, please.
		The Obamacare, I can remember my premium went very high when that was implemented, along with every copay I had.
		Then when Medicaid, Medicare rolled around for me, they give us these cost of living increases, but our premiums take that increase away, so we're still stuck on a meaningless budget.
		COVID did so much damage to people in America that we have to get rid of Obamacare.
		Because between the shot and the people that were infected, we are now dealing with long COVID.
		We're dealing with COPD.
		We're dealing with lung transplants.
		My husband is 55 years old, is a veteran, served in, I'm not going to say what he did, but he was in the law enforcement division.
		And I just want to say, people here in America need to realize that citizens should come first.
		What they were holding out for was to ensure that these 10 million that came across had the benefits.
		Well, why do you think the snap was taken away?
		Because they drained our benefits.
		This is America.
		They need to acclimate.
		They need to do it legally.
		And I thank God that President Trump is finally doing something with the East Wing.
		It is not the White House, people.
		It is a totally different building.
		And that ballroom is not at our expense.
		And it's going to be beautiful.
		And generations, my grandchildren will be able to watch events there.
		And I thank God he has our needs.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So, Tina, when you say that you say the East Wing is not part of the White House?
unidentified		It is part.
		It is not the White House.
		It is sits.
		If you're looking at the backside of it, it sits to the right.
		It is an attachment.
		It is not the original White House.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Okay, got it.
		And regarding SNAP benefits, here's the Associated Press with the news from yesterday that said Trump administration demands states, quote, undo SNAP payouts as states warn of catastrophic impact.
		It says that now the U.S. Supreme Court has stayed those rulings about demanding that the administration pay out full SNAP benefits, marking the latest swing in a seesawing legal battle over the anti-hunger program used by 42 million Americans.
		The demand from the U.S. Department of Agriculture came as more than two dozen states warned of catastrophic operational disruptions if the Trump administration does not reimburse them for those SNAP benefits they authorized before the Supreme Court's stay.
		That's the Associated Press.
		And this is Harold, Cleveland, Ohio, Republican.
		Hi, Harold.
unidentified		Oh, yeah, how are you doing?
		Good.
		Great.
		Yeah, I just wanted to say that I think it's a good thing that it's ending.
		Chuck Schumann said years ago that you shouldn't use shutdowns to debate things like health care because shutdowns hurt people.
		But what has changed?
		Well, what has changed is that the Democrats sadly have a really bad case, Trump derangement syndrome.
		All they are is about a rage against President Trump.
		And I remember a few years back, it was the Republicans, they used to have what's called, what they call it, Clinton derangement syndrome.
		And they always went after Bill Clinton.
		They always overreached going after Bill Clinton.
		And Bill Clinton always would come out on top.
		Well, Trump derangement syndrome is 100 times worse.
		They really, and they admit it, when you look at most of their comments, it's mostly about, we lost to President Trump.
		We came to President Trump.
		That's most of their comments.
		And that's really hurting this country because what's happened in this shutdown, you have people losing their jobs, people going hungry.
		I had a cousin who works in government, who she had to work without getting paid.
		You have Thanksgiving coming up.
		You have all these flights coming up.
		And that's all they care about is President Trump.
		Now, with the ACA, you have to address these subsidies because these sub ACA, the promise of ACA was that it's going to lower the premiums.
		But it has done just the opposite.
		People's premiums went up.
		And the only reason why they haven't skyrocketed is because of these subsidies.
		So you have to answer this question, but you have to do it separately from funding the government.
		And I just wish Democrats would, Trump coming in office, what, for three more years, and then it's going to be after Trump.
		I wish Democrats would just stop with this crazy Trump derangement syndrome.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Okay, we got that point, Harold.
		James in Goshen, Indiana, Independent Line.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Hi.
		Yeah, I'm glad the shutdown is going to be over, hopefully.
		Yeah, they got to fix the ACA.
		I mean, people won't, I think it's going to be good because now people realize that it is costing everybody.
		People are going to wake up.
		Hopefully, next election people do go out and vote to where it's not just for the billionaires.
		I mean, it's just been crazy.
		Everybody talks about it.
		Money and everything going towards health care and going towards illegals when it's going when we're giving breaks to the billionaires.
		I just think it's crazy, and that's pretty much all I had to say.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Let's talk to Ruben in Raleigh, North Carolina, Independent.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Ruben.
unidentified		Yeah, I'm quaring about this vote that is coming up out here in the Senate.
unidentified		Well, doesn't it have to go back to the House?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		It does, Ruben.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
unidentified		Well, okay, if it has to go back to the House, Mike Johnson isn't going to reopen the government because they're protecting pedophiles and child molesters.
unidentified		You understand what I'm saying?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Yep, no.
		So he is going to bring the House back, and he has, it says, yes, they're being given 36 hours notice.
		And originally it was 48 hours, but now they're being given 36 hours to come back.
		And they will have to come back into session in order to vote on that, the same bill for the Senate.
unidentified		Protect the child molesters and pedophiles.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Here's Jerry in Kentucky, Independent Line.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Hi, Jerry.
unidentified		Good morning, Mimi.
		Hey, I think it'll be a good time for Mike Johnson to, he owes the American people 60 days or whatever it is he's had the nation closed.
		It's time for him and Congress to get back, do their job, get the 12 bills passed that's supposed to be passed, forget about the CRs from now on, and do the work for the American people.
		The American people lost this time, and there's no reason for it.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And Tom in North Carolina, Republican.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Tom.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Thanks for taking my call.
		The first thing I think they need to do when they get back in session, if there's a shutdown, they don't get paid.
		No member, the Senate of the House gets paid.
		I mean, you got folks out here, you know, it's going on like 40 days.
		Can you imagine, you know, after 30 days, it goes on your credit.
		A lot of people's credit is probably already ruined.
		So I think the first order of business is if there's ever a shutdown, the House and the Senate don't get paid.
		I mean, I couldn't sleep at night knowing that these people out here as children that, you know, you can't provide food for them or whatever, but you're getting your big whatever a month.
		So they know they should not be getting paid.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So, Tom, they would have to pass a bill that would indicate that they would not get paid.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Do you think that they would be motivated to do that?
unidentified		Probably not because everyone's out for themselves.
		It's all about the power.
		I mean, you know, it's all about the power.
		But a bill needs to be passed where if there's ever a shutdown, they don't, both parties don't get paid anything until you open it up.
		And then maybe.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Did we lose you, Tom?
		Okay.
		Oh, sorry.
		We got your point anyway.
		Here's Michael in Silver Spring, Maryland, Democrat.
		Go ahead, Michael.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I'm a longtime listener, and thank you for everything you do at C-SPAN.
		I'm the husband of a federal worker.
		So everybody in my wife's department, they've been having canned food drives for their own employees and contractors.
		We've been told to hold the line.
		And we did.
		We did hold the line.
		And the fact that the few that were getting paid had decided that it is time that all this sacrifice for 40 days that we have done has been for nothing is so gut-wrenching and physically revolting that it was it's very it's very hard to reconcile.
		My wife right now is at work, still not getting paid.
		And it's been a very, very, very hard time for all federal employees, a lot of them having to beg their landlords not to evict them and still not stay to open the government because they know it was for the greater good of the health care for millions of Americans.
		And I am so proud of every federal worker that went to work not getting paid and did it because they knew it was for the greater good of the citizens that they have sworn a constitutional oath to help and serve and protect.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So Michael, let me ask you this question because those Democrats that did vote with Republicans last night, they said this wasn't going to work.
		Republicans were not going to extend the Affordable Care Act enhanced subsidies.
		And we have to make a deal.
		At least we can get the Senate to vote on it.
		That they felt that that was the best that they were going to do.
		They were not going to move otherwise.
		What do you think of that?
unidentified		I heard once that is very recently that the administration doesn't know what to do with strength, but it does know what to do with weakness.
		And what we have shown is that we will bend and we will break.
		And that is something that they have told the federal workers not to do.
		It is something they told them to go to work to show them that we can be strong and we can overcome their cruelty and their malice.
		And they did.
		And it was the ones who told them to be strong that were the ones who broke.
		They have been used as props in this, in the eight Democrats that have the eight Democrats that have bent and broke, they have used them as props.
		They are still using them as props in their statements.
		And it is insulting for people who have suffered and for the people that would have gone without SNAP benefits and the people who wanted to see their family and their flights were canceled.
		It is cruel to use them as props to then just break in the end.
		It is a very heartbreaking thing to see.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Michael.
		And here on the Republican line is Wynne in Wayne County, West Virginia.
		Go ahead.
		You're on the air.
unidentified		Yes.
		I'm going to tell you, all these shutdowns and stuff like this, I'm hit don't need to happen, like be happening like that.
		Listen to me.
		Both parties need to get together and listen me and try to and try to help the United States of America.
		I mean, you know, they need to they need to they need to work together for the greater good of the of the whole United States and don't don't binker back and forward at one another.
		Try to get something passed that'll help everybody.
		Because listen to me, we live in this United States and they're no use here.
		They're no use for us to fight back and forth over things when he can be worked out because, I mean, you know, you don't want waste, waste, abuse and fraud to come in play.
judge joe brown ▲ ● ▼		But look here, when somebody gets sick and needs to go to the doctor, hey, listen to me, they need insurance somewhere or somehow to get better.
unidentified		I mean, I mean, at least that much.
unidentified		I mean, they shouldn't.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So when you are are you are in favor of extending those subsidies or what are your thoughts on that?
unidentified		Oh, you mean expanding whatever they're talking about right there?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Yes, for the Affordable Care Act.
unidentified		I mean, if it's going to help, if it's going to help everybody on both sides, I mean, there ain't nothing wrong with it.
unidentified		You know, if it's going to help everybody.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Let's talk to Shiva in Norman, Oklahoma.
		Democrat, go ahead, Shiva.
		You're on the air.
unidentified		Hi.
		I'm in support of the ACA because that's my health insurance.
		I'm a freelance science writer, and I obviously am self-employed.
		And my premium went up 87%.
		And I enrolled in it just because I need health care.
		But people are really politicizing this.
		Like I saw on Instagram, someone said to take away my health care.
		They commented on, I think, Senator Markwin Mullen, who's our senator, they said, showing the power of we the people.
		And so I'm really angry that the Congress is taking away my health care because what am I going to do?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So have you decided to forego health care then, Shiva?
unidentified		No, I actually did re-enroll in the health care.
		I have no choice because I really do need to have health care.
		I have one of the things I love about the ACA is I can go get all my preventative services for free.
		And I'm a small business owner.
		My business runs on, I would say, quite small margins.
		And I have to work an extra 50 hours per week doing my side hustle since Chat GBT replaced me.
		And I'm a science writer.
		And also the scientists are getting laid off from the federal workforce.
		It's a whole mess.
		And Congress just acts like they just are ignoring this.
		And it's really sad.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Well, Shiva, one of your local papers, The Oklahoman, has this headline.
		It says, as many as 100,000 Oklahomans could be without health insurance by the end of the year because they can no longer afford health insurance.
		That's according to the state's insurance commissioner.
		Here is Chrissy, Norfolk, Virginia, Independent.
		Hi, Chrissy.
unidentified		Hi there.
unidentified		How are you?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good.
unidentified		Good.
		I'm calling in reference to the man who is a federal worker.
		His wife was a federal worker in Maryland.
		And he was talking about how they asked them to hold the line.
		And the reality is they asked them to hold the line until after the elections.
		They wanted to motivate people to get to the polls on Election Day.
		And now everything's going to be handled.
		And this was all what Virginia was saying.
		All the independents and the Republicans in Virginia were saying was, you know, wait until after the election, everything will be solved.
		Thank you.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And so, Chrissy, before you go, one of your senators voted to advance this bill, Senator Tim Kaine.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		How do you feel about that?
unidentified		I'm completely fine with opening the government.
		It's just it frustrates me that not everyone is understanding both sides being played and that all of this was just to try to get out a vote for Election Day.
		And now that it's done, all the sacrifice that they asked the federal workers to do was all for not because this was all about getting the election handled.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		And here is Dave in Auburn, New York, Republican.
		Dave, good morning.
unidentified		Yeah, hello, hopefully.
		Look, beyond all the squabbling that's been going on here for a long time about the cost of this and that.
		There's an old saying.
		It says it.
		You think it's expensive now, it's free.
		Now the free health care, the free education, all the bureaucracies that are built up around those agendas.
		And that's what's really costing this thing.
		If you could go back far enough, you go back to probably from FDR or back to Hoover or whoever, all the way up to the Johnson administration with the Great Society.
		Then the inflation hit because that's when all these free programs started.
		So can we put the brakes on this and reverse it?
		I don't know.
		But I'll tell you what, the more government does for you, the less you're going to have.
		And in the end of the day, someone actually has to do the work, and there's just not enough people now that do the real work.
		They don't just collect a government check with a pension, all the benefits that come with it, health care, et cetera, et cetera.
		So you've got too big of a government, too expensive, and it's got its own agenda.
		I'll just say that that's all I have to say.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Dave.
		And some other news for you.
		This is ABC News reporting this.
		Trump pardons Rudy Giuliani, other key figures allegedly involved in efforts to overturn the 2020 election.
		This is what it said.
		President Trump issued a sweeping pardon to key figures allegedly involved in the plan to arrange an alternate slate of electors and, quote, expose voting fraud during the 2020 election.
		Trump pardoned high-profile individuals allegedly involved in his attempt to overturn the election, including Rudy Giuliani, Sidney Powell, Boris Epstein, John Eastman, and Mark Meadows, and 72 other individuals allegedly involved with the effort to challenge the 2020 election results.
		The pardon, which Trump appears to have signed on Friday, covers each of the president's co-defendants who were charged in Georgia for a sweeping scheme to overturn election results.
		It says four of the pardon recipients pleaded guilty in the Georgia case.
		It says this, the pardon language explicitly states that it does not apply to Trump himself.
		Quote, this pardon does not apply to the President of the United States.
		That's at ABC News if you'd like to read that.
		Here is Dennis Huron, South Dakota.
		Democrat, good morning, Dennis.
		You're on the air.
unidentified		Hey, yeah.
		We need to.
		I think Trump was lying.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Regarding the government shutdown?
unidentified		Yeah.
unidentified		People need food stamps in South Dakota.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Are you on food stamps, Dennis?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Are you on SNAP?
unidentified		Yes, I am.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And how are you doing since you haven't gotten your November aid?
unidentified		How are you doing on food?
		I got some food left over.
		Me and my girlfriend share our food.
		So we need to get rid of Trump because he's lying to everything.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Dennis.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And on the Republican line in Clemens, North Carolina, Kelly, good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		First, I wanted to say that people are confused.
		And if you don't know what's going on, don't call because you're just confusing more people.
		As a matter of fact, someone was talking earlier about how the Congress should not be paid.
		Well, most of them are deferring their pay.
		They're not getting paid.
		There's lots of them that are deferring, not all of them, but there are a lot of them that are deferring their pay.
		Also, as far as now I forgot what I wanted to say, but hold on.
		That's okay.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		No, no, no, I won't.
		But I wanted to ask you about that.
		So, this is voluntary, that there are, as you said, some lawmakers who are volunteering, voluntarily deferring their pay until the government reopens.
		Do you think that it should be voluntary?
		So, because the caller was like that would add pressure on them to not close the government if they knew they would not get paid.
unidentified		Well, it's actually in the and by the way, I just remembered the other thing.
		It's actually in the Constitution.
		There would have to be an amendment that would have to go out.
		But also, the other thing I wanted to say was: everyone, yes, you want your premiums to, you want to keep getting those subsidies.
		But what you don't realize is our taxes are still going to the insurance companies to pay what you're not paying.
		Those prices will still be there for your premium, but you'll get to pay that little bit.
		And me and other people who either don't have insurance, because I don't, because under the ACA, mine went up to $2,500 a month for two people because we could only use one company in my county.
		This is recently, Kelly, or this is what it was.
		This was way back.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
unidentified		I can't imagine what it would be now.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Before the enhanced subsidies.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So before the COVID-era enhanced subsidies?
unidentified		Yes, way before the COVID.
		And I have chronic Lyme disease.
		And it's cheaper for me to not have insurance because I don't know if people know it, but doctors will reduce the amount that they charge you if you don't have insurance.
		And anyway, what I wanted to say about that, but taxpayers that are not under the ACA are paying the rest of everyone's premiums.
		Got it.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Here's Joe in Seneca, New York.
		Democrat.
		Joe, you're on the air.
unidentified		Yes, it's good to be on.
		All I can see is the people, they're calling in, blaming the Senate, the Congress.
		What about the quarterback of the team?
		What about Trump?
		He's the boss.
		He could have ended all this.
		But we're blaming these other people.
		It's Trump.
		We hated Doge.
		We hated Musk.
		But who brought Musk in?
		The boss.
		So why isn't our displeasure going towards the quarterback?
		That's all I have to say.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Joe.
		And this is Cindy on Facebook who says, Republicans finally got a few Democrats to come to their senses and open the government.
		Schumer's paycheck needs to be held back until the end of the year.
		And Vicki says, a big no on continuing the insane subsidies that included people making over $200K a year.
		No more subsidies.
		It was a flawed scam that drove everyone's premiums through the roof.
		No more freeloaders.
		And Steve says Rand Paul has to go.
		He's as phony as his father.
		This is the Hill on with this news.
		It says air traffic will be reduced to a trickle before Thanksgiving, according to Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy.
		He was on CNN yesterday and he was asked about air traffic.
		Take a look.
sean duffy ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, so first off, yesterday, Jake, 18 of 22 controllers in Atlanta didn't show up.
		We had 81 staffing triggers throughout the national airspace.
		Yesterday, that means controllers weren't coming to work.
		To answer your question, it's only going to get worse.
		I look to the two weeks before Thanksgiving.
		You're going to see air travel be reduced to a trickle.
		We have a number of people who want to get home for the holidays.
		They want to see their family.
		They want to celebrate this great American holiday.
		Listen, many of them are not going to be able to get on an airplane because there are not going to be that many flights that fly if this thing doesn't open back up.
		We have controllers who, again, are making decisions to feed their families as opposed to come to towers or traycons or centers and do their jobs.
		And I want them to come to work.
		The problem is they're confronted with real economic problems.
		The answer is vote to open up the government and then have your debates, have your conversation.
		I think that's the best way and best approach to get America back operational.
jake tapper ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, just to make sure for people, make clear for people who don't understand the reason the air traffic controllers are not coming into work.
		Some of them are just overstressed, but also some of them have to, they're taking jobs with Uber Eats or Lyft or whatever because they have bills to pay.
		Some of them are being evicted.
		Some of them have child care issues.
		They have to put gas in the car.
		So you talked about Thanksgiving.
		Do you have any sort of numerical idea of how many Americans will not be able to be with their families for the holiday because of this?
sean duffy ▲ ● ▼		I think the number is going to be substantial.
		Again, you look at the trend line, Jake, and it's only gotten worse as we've gone through the shutdown.
		We're day 40 now.
		And, you know, we saw the largest number of outage of controllers was on Halloween, the 31st.
		Those numbers were 61.
		Yesterday it was 81.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And back to your calls to Justin in Sanoa, Georgia, Independent.
unidentified		Yes, the shutdown wasn't for nothing.
		You know, earlier in the year with Doge Cuts and Elon Musk, the hacking way of the federal government, and where were the Republicans then standing up for the all-important federal workers that need to be paid now?
		You know, also, it revealed that there was someone willing to stand up to the authoritarianism.
		President that we have revealed that he was willing to take away food, snap benefits.
		So the shutdown wasn't for nothing.
		I think it was good.
		So that's all I have to say.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And Carl in Gaithersburg, Maryland, Republican line.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Carl, good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Thank you very much for C-SPAN.
		I just wanted to say that I agree with a lot of callers about the different ideas.
		And I had come up with something that I had called the Keep Federal Congress Engaged Act or the KFC Act.
		And the four aspects of that act are: A, do away with continuing resolutions.
		B, if the congressmen should not get paid if there's a government shutdown.
		C, was that they're not allowed to have any continuing, or I'm sorry, any recesses during a government shutdown.
		And the fourth thing is to extend the fiscal year to 1231 instead of September 30th because that better aligns with the federal calendar.
		And I wrote my congressman with these suggestions.
		And what I would like to do is suggest that all the C-SPAN listeners take those four ideas and write their congressmen because unless we do it in mass, nothing's going to change.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		And this is, we got a text from a guy in Oklahoma.
		Hi, Mimi.
		Could you review the particulars of the bill that passed last night?
		Was it clean or were there stipulations?
		Let's go ahead and put that on the screen about what passed yesterday.
		This is the details.
		So it funds the government until January 30th.
		It does fund military construction, Veterans Affairs, Department of Agriculture, and the legislative branch through the fiscal year.
		So that's September 30th, 2026.
		It reinstates over 4,000 federal workers that were laid off during the shutdown, and it prevents the Trump administration from further firing any additional federal workers through a riff until September, sorry, January 30th, which is for this bill.
		And it includes a promise of a December vote on extending the ACA enhanced subsidies in the Senate.
		That doesn't necessarily apply to the House.
		Here is Jennifer in Texas, Line for Democrats.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I'm calling because I'm absolutely disgusted with the eight Democratic senators who voted with the Republicans on this bill.
		I am a caregiver who relies on the ACA.
		I need it to take care of myself and for the disabled person I care for.
		The premiums are outrageous, almost $2,000 a month for insurance.
		That's just unaffordable.
		I wonder how many people who are now going to receive their SNAP benefits are also on the ACA.
		I mean, their insurance premiums are going to be outrageous, too.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So, Jennifer, one of the arguments that Republicans are making is that you're right, it's just unaffordable the way it is, so it's not working.
		And we shouldn't continue to fund a program that is not working.
		What do you think?
unidentified		I think it's necessary.
		And the Democrats did put forth their proposal to fund the ACA for one more year, you know, while they might be able to work on something else.
		And that was turned down by the Republicans.
		You know, until something better is proposed, this is working, and it's needed.
		And even with the extended subsidies, you know, that, well, it really is necessary.
		And one thing I did not hear discussed was whether or not telehealth visits would resume being covered by Medicare.
		I'm not sure if that would be Medicare has stopped covering telehealth visits.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Oh, telehealth.
unidentified		Yeah, so I didn't hear that.
unidentified		I don't know if that's going to resume or not.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		No, I didn't hear that as well.
		So we'll take a look and see if we can find anything for you on that, Jennifer.
		Here's Scott, New York State Independent Line.
		Scott, good morning.
unidentified		Hey, good morning, Scott.
		The human.
		We all belong to the human party.
		Let's all vote human party.
		Anyways, the shutdown should never happen.
		We should never allow the government to keep on with, like the last gentleman said a couple calls ago, the CR.
		They're not doing their job.
		We need to pass a year-long budget.
		That's what these people are getting paid for to do their job.
		They need to quit.
		New York State is getting their food stamps.
		Thank God for that.
		Why not?
		Thank Mr. Trump.
		I'd like to talk, you know, what could you bring up when Donald Trump fell down going up the steps of the airplane and then he made Marco Rubio fall down behind him afterwards just so it didn't make Donald Trump look so bad?
		All these people that are being run by sand got.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And this is Emmanuel on Facebook who sent us this.
		America is the most powerful and richest country in civilization and yet we are the only industrialized nation when thousands of people suffer and die because they don't or can't afford health care.
		That is evil and wrong.
		By the way, for your schedule, the Senate does come back into session today at 11 a.m.
		And we will have coverage of that, as we always do, over on C-SPAN 2.
		You can watch proceedings there, 11 a.m. Eastern.
		Larry, Alton, Illinois, Republican, good morning, Larry.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I think it would help the viewer whenever we talk about elected officials that forego their pay, exactly who's doing it.
		And I think it would also be a good thing.
		I mean, really, really, Mimi, just think about this for a second.
		You can go on strike.
		Who is the only Americans that can go on strike and collect a paycheck and keep their benefits?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		You're talking about lawmakers?
unidentified		There's no other people, and the elected officials' pension system needs to be looked at.
		It needs to be gotten rid of.
		And to stop any of this stuff, they should not be receiving pay whenever they do this.
		And I think everybody should look at Dr. Franklin.
		He had the best opinion on the welfare.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So let me ask.
unidentified		I don't think I've ever heard the last 250 years was by Dr. Franklin.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, go ahead.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		What was it?
unidentified		And oh, I'm not like my son.
unidentified		There's no way I can do it.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		No, that's okay.
		But going back to lawmaker pay when you were saying that they're on strike, I mean, the Senate was continuing to be in session.
		Do you think that, you know, since you're a Republican, the Speaker keeping the House out of regular session was a good idea, or would you have told him to not do that and get back to work?
unidentified		But the House side did their job, Mimi.
		The House side did their job.
		It was up to the Senate.
		This was the Democrats thing.
		And they lost.
		But we need to take a hard look at some things, the pensions and everything else.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, so Larry, let me show you what ABC News has on that.
		So it says, which members of the Senate are taking paychecks during the shutdown?
		It says members of Congress are guaranteed by the Constitution to be paid during a federal government shutdown, but at least 55 of the 100 U.S. Senators are either not taking their paychecks during the shutdown or are donating their salaries in solidarity with federal workers who are furloughed or working without pay.
		This is, there are 26 Republicans, 28 Democrats, and one Independent.
		It says to compile the list, ABC News reached out to offices several times for a response, emailed multiple staffers.
		But you can take a look at this map here, and you could get a list of those.
		And we'll get you that full list in case you're interested.
		Thelma in the Bronx.
		Democrat, good morning.
unidentified		Good morning, Mimi.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Go ahead, Thelma.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
unidentified		Yes, can you hear?
		Yes, I just want, I'm just calling you to say Joe Biden was in the presidency for four years, and he never had the government closed down for the whole four years.
		The government never closed down.
		And if it behind Donald Trump, twice now, the government closed down.
		You know why, Mimi?
		Because Joe Biden knows how to run the country.
		Donald Trump does not know how to run the country.
		And another team, Donald Trump went all the way to the Supreme Court.
		How does these people sleep at night, Donald Trump and the Republican?
		How do you people sleep at night?
		They went all the way to the Supreme Court to take away food stamps, take away food from disabled people, kids, and veterans.
		They went all the way to the Supreme Court to have the Supreme Court take away food from hungry people, disabled people, and young children.
		How is it that Donald Trump get away with all this crime that is committed in the White House?
		He's doing so many things, and yet the Republican didn't stand by him.
		Me, I've been in this country for 50 years.
		I came here when I was 16.
		I have all my kids, three kids was born in this country.
		I'm a citizen.
		I vote.
		I never see America like this.
		People all around the world is asking.
		I have relatives in Canada, all over the world.
		They're asking, what is the hell is going on in the United States?
		This is so horrible and terrible.
		They go all the way to take away food from disabled people who is hungry in this country.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Got that point.
		Here is Amanda in Virginia, Republican.
		Good morning, Amanda.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I am a registered Republican, but I campaigned for Kamala Harris because I couldn't stand what Trump was doing with his lies.
		And I was concerned about his adherence to the Constitution.
		My husband is also a government worker, so he's been furloughed for the last several weeks.
		And my son, I wanted to call about health insurance because there's a woman that said, well, I can't afford health insurance, and so I'm just not having it.
		I wanted to share with listeners our experience, which was that my healthy 17-year-old son, last April, got the flu and two strains of staphylococcus at the same time, ended up in septic shock, was in the hospital for 68 days, and the bills amounted to $3.8 million, sorry, yes, $3.8 million.
		And thankfully, we got health insurance, so we're fine.
		But people who talk about going without health insurance, it's just not tenable.
		You never know when an emergency is going to happen.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Amanda, is your son okay now?
unidentified		He is okay now.
		He continues to have surgeries to help him recover.
		He had a lot of complications after the septic shock.
		So he lost, he was going to lose his leg, but they were able to save it.
		And he is in a cast right now as his.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So you said that, I mean, emergencies do happen, which is certainly the case.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		What do you say to people that can't afford health insurance?
unidentified		Like I said, I'm a registered Republican, but I think that the Congress needs to figure out a way to make it work.
		I was in solidarity with people who said, don't open up the government until the ACA is taken care of, until they get those.
		But because I know what happened to us, I mean, literally, he was totally healthy going to go to college in the fall.
		And then he was in the hospital.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Yep.
		Thanks for sharing that with us, Amanda.
		This is Benny, North Carolina, Independent Line.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Well, first off, best wishes and speed of recovery to that young woman's son.
		I want to go into the Affordable Care Act.
		We forget that 2017, it was gutted by the Republican Congress.
		They think it was subsidies that were required if you didn't have insurance coverage.
		It's just like any other plan that starts out.
		Have to get people to pay into it for it to become whole or solvent eventually over time.
		The problem is, old white men in America think these things are for them and they have no recompense or concern about people of the future.
		If the ACA would have held its standing from when it was first put in place, we now would have the funds to incorporate these things that we need to incorporate instead of actually still complaining about it.
		The other thing is, a lot of people don't realize rich people don't pay for insurance.
		Billionaires don't pay for insurance.
		They pay out of pocket for whatever they need.
		The billionaires are upset that they would have to pay for poor people's insurance because they would have to pay that subsidy.
		That's why it didn't last in 2017.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Oh, yeah, sorry.
		I know you wanted to continue, but I wanted to ask you about the ACA subsidies.
		And there are people making the argument, Republicans make the argument, that because there are subsidies and because the government pays for it, that's why insurance and health care keep going up and up and up.
		And if the government stopped paying all these subsidies, then those costs wouldn't increase.
		What do you think of that argument?
unidentified		Profit margins are the reason they keep going up.
		If the insurance companies, they're saying that, but at the same time, some of their donors are insurance companies, CEOs, and heads.
		So I don't get they're playing two sides of the coin.
		You can't complain about subsidies and price of insurance, but not complain about CEOs getting $20 million a year in bonuses that don't necessarily be a part of their income and they're not taxed accordingly.
		So they're playing two sides of the coin.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, buddy, let's hear from Hakeem Jeffries, a minority leader of the House.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		He was on Meet the Press yesterday talking about this.
hakeem jeffries ▲ ● ▼		Let's understand that these Republicans have tried to repeal the Affordable Care Act more than 70 different times over the last 15 years.
		They're not acting in good faith as it relates to dealing with a health care crisis that they're visiting on the American people.
		This is the same group of folks who just enacted the largest cut to Medicaid in American history as part of their one big ugly bill.
		Hospitals and nursing homes and community-based health centers are closing all across the country, including in rural America, because of Republican policies.
		We're faced with the possibility of a $536 billion cut to Medicare at the end of this year if Congress doesn't act, connected to what they did in the one big ugly bill.
		And now they're refusing to extend the Affordable Care Act tax credits for even a year when they just enacted massive permanent tax breaks for their billionaire donors.
		Does that seem reasonable?
		Is that the type of policy that the American people are screaming out for as evidenced by what just happened with Republicans being wiped out in the general election last Tuesday?
kristen welker ▲ ● ▼		Leader Jeffries, just very quickly, yes or no?
kristen welker ▲ ● ▼		Do you rule out supporting a bill that would include a promise to vote on Obamacare subsidies?
unidentified		Yes or no?
hakeem jeffries ▲ ● ▼		I don't think that, I don't think that the House Democratic caucus is prepared to support a promise, a wing and a prayer from folks who have been devastating the health care of the American people for years.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		I was on Meet the Press yesterday, and this is Gordon in Wisconsin, Republican line.
		Good morning, Gordon.
		You're on the air.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I was just wondering why do they call it the Affordable Care Act when you had callers calling in saying that they can't afford a $2,000 or $2,500 premium each month, so they don't even have medical insurance because they can't afford the Affordable Care Act.
		Why is it called the Affordable Care Act when you got people that can't afford $2,000 a month for premium costs?
		Why is it called that?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And Gordon, what kind of health insurance do you have?
		Are you not there anymore, Gordon?
		Oh, sorry.
		Jim Butler, Wisconsin, Democrat, good morning.
unidentified		I have a question for you.
		I paid in for 50 years for health care.
		That's for Medicare, I should say.
		The politicians are stewards to protect my money.
		How can they cut it?
		It looks like they're not stewards for the American people, only for a few, for the billionaires.
		That's all I got to say.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		And Richard in Las Vegas says this by text.
		I applaud the Republicans for not ending the filibuster over this issue.
		Apparently, they do not blindly go along with everything that Trump tells them to do.
		That's Richard in Las Vegas over text.
		And for your schedule, later today, this evening, we've got a program, a conversation on ways to strengthen democracy and respond to challenges in the U.S. and abroad.
		The speakers include Democracy Playbook 2025 co-editors Norm Eisen and Jonathan Katz.
		You can catch live, you can catch that live at 6.30 p.m. Eastern on C-SPAN.
		C-SPAN Now, which is our free mobile app, and online at c-span.org.
		This is Punch Bowl News.
		Well, we won't do that yet.
		We'll just take another call.
		Here's Dennis in New York, line for Republicans.
		Wrong line.
		Dennis, good morning.
unidentified		Let's remind the American people why we're in this position.
dennis in new york ▲ ● ▼		The Democratic Party, when they opened a border, stressed out our system as far as education, health care, food.
dennis in new york ▲ ● ▼		And what party would open up the borders in the middle of a pandemic?
unidentified		Nobody vaccinated, nothing.
unidentified		Coming through our border during a worldwide pandemic.
dennis in new york ▲ ● ▼		If the Democrats can explain that to me and make it make sense to the American people, I'd love to hear it.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, and that's our last call for this segment.
		Later, we have the UN Climate Change Conference starts today in Brazil.
		We'll have Politico's Deputy Energy Editor Ben Lefebvre giving us a preview of that.
		But first, Republican strategist Adam Goodman and Democratic strategist Lucy Caldwell discuss the funding deal in the Senate last night and how the shutdown could impact midterm elections and President Trump's agenda.
		We'll be right back.
unidentified		Today on C-SPAN's Ceasefire, at a moment of deep division in Washington, former Democratic National Committee Chair Donna Brazile and former Republican National Committee Chair Ronna McDaniel come together for a bipartisan dialogue on Tuesday's election results.
		potential impact on the 2026 midterms, and increasing partisanship.
		They join host Dasha Burns.
		Ceasefire, Bridging the Divide in American Politics.
		Watch Ceasefire today at 7 p.m. and 10 p.m. Eastern and Pacific only on C-SPAN.
		Watch America's Book Club, C-SPAN's bold original series.
		Sunday, best-selling biographer Walter Isaacson, who chronicles history's most remarkable lives.
		His books include Benjamin Franklin, Steve Jobs, and Einstein.
		He joins our host, renowned author and civic leader David Rubinstein.
walter isaacson ▲ ● ▼		What attracted you to these people?
david rubenstein ▲ ● ▼		Was it because they were geniuses or you just happened to like them?
walter isaacson ▲ ● ▼		Smart people are a dime a dozen.
		In order to be a genius, you have to be creative.
		You have to think out of the box.
		And one of the things that struck me when I wrote about Benjamin Franklin early on was what a great scientist and technologist he was.
unidentified		Watch America's Book Club with Walter Isaacson.
		Sundays at 6 p.m. and 9 p.m. Eastern and Pacific, only on C-SPAN.
		America marks 250 years, and C-SPAN is there to commemorate every moment, from the signing of the Declaration of Independence to the voices shaping our nation's future.
		We bring you unprecedented all-platform coverage, exploring the stories, sights, and spirit that make up America.
		Join us for remarkable coast-to-coast coverage, celebrating our nation's journey like no other network can.
		America 250.
		Over a year of historic moments.
		Only on the C-SPAN Networks.
brian lamb ▲ ● ▼		Retired George Mason University history professor Peter Henriquez starts off his author's note writing, quote, If anyone had told me in the summer of 2023 that I would be writing one more book on George Washington, I would have expressed extreme skepticism.
		In episode six of this Book Notes Plus podcast series in 2021, Professor Enrique told us the same thing.
		But at 88 years old, he's back with another book on our first president, George Washington, his quest for honor and fame.
		In the afterword chapter at the end of the book, Peter Henriquez puts a special emphasis on George Washington and slavery.
unidentified		Author Peter Henriquez with his book, George Washington, His Quest for Honor and Fame, 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.
		Washington Journal continues.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Journal, we're joined now by Adam Goodman, a Republican strategist, and Lucy Caldwell, a Democratic strategist.
		Welcome to both of you.
		Adam, I'll start with you.
		The Senate advanced a plan to end the government shutdown.
		How did we get here?
adam goodman ▲ ● ▼		Well, it was a painful path, wasn't it?
		I can tell you, I came in last night from New Orleans with a bunch of people coming from going to different directions.
		We're all unsure whether any of our flights are even going to leave, much less be on time.
		It really hits home with Americans when you actually feel the effects of a shutdown.
		And as maybe terrible for me to say, you know, I'm concerned about a flight being on time.
		Think about people on food stamps and other benefits, the furloughed workers.
		I think there is a solution to this, and the solution is you get the decision makers on these resolutions into a room, you lock the room, and you don't let them out except for meals that come in until they get it done because...
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		You think that the problem was that they weren't meeting with each other, that they weren't in a room together?
adam goodman ▲ ● ▼		It's almost like there's an expectation that we're going to let this go to the deadline and beyond.
		And when you live in the bubble, sometimes you don't understand that there's life outside the bubble.
		And I think that's what hopefully these leaders on both sides of the aisle are going to realize all over again 40 days in.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Do you think that that's the case, Lucy?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Do you think that they just didn't realize the pain that Americans were going through?
lucy caldwell ▲ ● ▼		I certainly think that Republicans have been a bit blind or a bit callous about the pain that Americans are going through.
		I don't think that that is what has happened.
		I think there's a lot been going on.
		We obviously had the midterm, or excuse me, the off-year midterms in a bunch of states in the last week.
		So there was a lot of energy around those elections.
		I do think that we have seen over the past month momentum grow and Democrats having the wind at their backs.
		And so I think what Democrats are extremely good at doing is choking.
		And I think that that is what they have done in this deal, right?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		You think they choked.
lucy caldwell ▲ ● ▼		I do.
		I do.
		I think that whatever we think about the ACA subsidies, and I'm a former Republican.
		I can make a lot of good arguments against the ACA subsidies themselves.
		But ultimately, that is the line in the sand that Democrats drew, right?
		And polling in recent weeks has shown that voters across the spectrum, including Republicans and Independents, wanted Democrats to hold the line on some of these key issues, including the ACA, and they have just given up their key leverage.
		So, you know, I don't think that they are assured of anything.
		We will find out in coming days.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Do you think that was a mistake, though, that they did draw that line to say extend the subsidies or we're not opening the government?
lucy caldwell ▲ ● ▼		It may have been a mistake, but as the Smiths would say, right, what we do know is we're here and it's now.
		So once you drew that line in the sand, once you set up that juxtaposition, right, between Democrats wanting to extend the ACA premium subsidies so that people could continue to have affordable health care, and they made a lot of mistakes along the way with some of the optics.
		But going into this weekend, this past weekend, they certainly had their wind at their backs with American voters who were saying we're feeling this pain, including the pain of rising health care costs as people who are buying insurance through the exchanges are in their open enrollment.
		So yes, I think that given the cards that they had been dealt and the hand they were holding heading into last weekend, this past weekend, yeah, I think they've made a mistake.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		What do you think, Adam, as far as do you think that Republicans expected Democrats to hold out this long on the Affordable Care Act?
adam goodman ▲ ● ▼		Probably not.
		But you know, sometimes we take, we get false courage.
		So we talked about, at least you just talked about the midterms.
		In the state of Virginia, only once in the last 30, 40, 50 years has the party in the White House won the governor's office.
		So this was true to form.
		It was going to happen, of course, with the furloughs and the layoffs and the shutdown in Virginia.
		It made the Virginia election a foregone conclusion.
		I think New Jersey was a little surprising in terms of the margin, but not surprising in terms of the result.
		This is kind of so if Democrats were taking some kind of courage and confidence from the fact they did so well in the off-year elections, that's really misplaced because it was going to happen most likely anyway.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		What about the nationwide elections, though?
		Because I understand the point of, okay, New York City, New Jersey, Virginia, they're all blue areas, so not a big deal.
		But there were statewide elections in Georgia, Mississippi, or what do you think of that?
adam goodman ▲ ● ▼		Well, of course, the biggest one beyond the three you mentioned was in California, where Proposition 50 passed to try to even the score on all the rejiggering on redistricting, right?
		I don't think there was much of an understanding that there was a bright signal that came out of the other contests that got far less fanfare.
		The midterms, obviously, are the next big show.
		It sounds like it's just around the corner in political terms, political people.
		It's a light year away.
		There's so much that could happen.
		But the next thing I think that we're going to see a measurement on, and I think the jury's out, frankly, is how Americans feel about the economy, the affordability piece of it, which I know Democrats have been hitting.
		We don't know where that's going yet.
		On the one hand, I think the president of the United States has actually done very well, especially recently in Asia in terms of bringing in certain deals, but the impact of tariffs, we don't know yet.
		But we do see for the first time massive new investments in this country that are coming in from abroad.
		For instance, this uranium enrichment group out of Paris, they want to put $5 billion into Tennessee.
		It would be the largest industrial project in the history of the state.
		How does that impact jobs?
		How does that impact the economy?
		How does that impact our feeling about whether or not we're doing well?
		I think that's the next measure of whether the government under President Trump is going to be doing well enough in the eyes of the American people to continue an agenda which is a total reimagining of government itself.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		We have Republican strategist Adam Goodman and Democratic strategist Lucy Caldwell with us at the table.
		If you'd like to ask them a question, you can start calling in now by party.
		So Democrats are on 2028-8000, Republicans 202-748-8001, and Independents 202-748-8002.
		Lucy, this concept of affordability and the polling showing that there was a big emphasis at this last election on affordability.
		President Trump kind of pushed back against that, saying, you know, that that's a hoax, this whole idea of affordability.
		Everything's, the economy is doing great.
		What are your thoughts?
lucy caldwell ▲ ● ▼		Well, I think that actually Donald Trump is making an electoral season mistake that we actually saw Joe Biden make in his last term, which was to poo-poo the very real feelings of American voters.
		And there are some gaps that Donald Trump has made even in recent days that are going to come back to get him.
		I mean, things like saying, I don't want to hear anymore about affordability.
		That is really real.
		And again, I think that in the context of the government shutdown, it doesn't really matter what the actual dollars and cents are.
		I think it's the juxtaposition of things like private jets for Christy Dome and Kash Patel, a $40 billion bailout to Argentina, a tariff policy that feels erratic at best, juxtaposed with the fact that people are feeling like SNAP benefits are going away, health care is uncertain.
		And so I think that it's that push-pull of those two things that really make it a thing that people continue to feel very, very strongly.
		And certainly I think Democrats need to continue to seize on this moment.
adam goodman ▲ ● ▼		There was an interesting poll that came out of the Washington Post, I think about a week ago.
		And the question was: has the President of the United States lost touch with the American people?
		And I think it was something like 60, 61% said yes.
		But the more telling number was, have the Democratic Party, has that party lost touch with the American people?
		Is it 68?
		I think there's a confidence gap across the board.
		We like to talk as Republicans and Democrats and who's winning, who's losing, who's right, who's wrong.
		I think there's been a pox in all houses recently.
		The shutdown, I think, is an example that I think the American people are really kind of fed up with politics, the way it's being played.
		They want things to happen.
		The one thing I think you have to give President Trump credit for, whether you like him or not, is he's at lightning speed moving to get things done in a more imaginative way than we've seen in our lifetime.
		And we've complained a lot about it going into the last midterms, into the last election rather, in 24, seven out of 10 Americans were saying, we don't like the way things are going.
		Okay.
		So we're putting into place something that is completely different.
		And I think it's going to take a little time, frankly, for it to play out.
		And if we don't have that patience, you know what's going to happen?
		We're going to boomerang right back to where we were, frankly, under President Biden.
		And no one seemed to kind of like that.
		And I think Kamala Harris, among others, were the recipients of the blowback to that.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		I do want to show you an NBC News poll.
		This is from last week.
		Okay.
		With the question, has President Trump or the Trump administration lived up to your expectations?
		Have lived up to your expectations is 30%.
		Have fallen short is at 66%.
		So the question is, expectations.
		Did President Trump set expectations too high?
adam goodman ▲ ● ▼		He absolutely set the bar high.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Too high is what?
adam goodman ▲ ● ▼		Well, he set it high for a reason.
		Without moving to that height, we were just going to kind of motor our way to some kind of tweaking in terms of change as opposed to transformational change.
		And of course, you have only a certain amount of time as president to really do things.
		You really have maybe a year.
		And in President Trump's case, one term.
		So he went at it.
		He knew that the impact of what he was doing would not translate overnight.
		It couldn't possibly translate overnight.
		I'm not concerned about the measure today.
		I'm more concerned about where we are, frankly, the middle of next year, when his policies will have a chance to take root.
		And we will have a chance as the American people to understand how it impacts all of us.
		And I think we're going to feel very good about it.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Let's talk to callers.
		We'll start with Gerald, Republican in West Virginia.
		Good morning, Gerald.
adam goodman ▲ ● ▼		Translate overnight.
unidentified		Yeah, everybody keeps coming out here's the Affordable Care Act, but it's not a full book to start with.
unidentified		So why did they need a substitute covered?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Lucy.
lucy caldwell ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, I think that that's a very valid question.
		And as I said, I actually used to work on the Republican side of the aisle.
		And one of the chief arguments against not only the Affordable Care Act, but also against the exchanges, right, was that the Affordable Care Act was really did not solve the underlying health care issue and wound up focusing on insurance, right?
		And we talk a lot about health care, insurance, and health care often as though they are interchangeable, and they are not, right?
		And actually, I think that an area in which Democrats have really failed is that they have failed to talk about health care and instead are often talking about insurance coverage.
		So that's a very valid question.
		And there are a lot of reasons that insurance costs continue to go up.
		And there are definitely systemic problems with the Affordable Care Act.
		You will not get disagreement from me.
		In fact, in the last couple of weeks, President Obama gave an interview where he talked about how the ACA itself was not what he would have wanted, but it felt like the incremental step toward systemic health care reform, which could take a lot of different forms, perhaps single payer, perhaps some sort of hybrid.
		We are where we are now.
		So we have this system, and we do have this issue that in order to deliver insurance at affordable prices, we have to now sort of we're sort of stuck with these subsidies, and this is a thing that has become a constant football, right?
		And so I do think that that's a very valid concern of Americans.
		And I think a few weeks back, Democrats were engaging in a form of talking points around the subsidies themselves that was optically not compelling at all, which was to put up images of people who are like people who chose to retire early in their 50s, who then were like, and now my costs are going up, right?
		That's not a story that is compelling to people.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So let me ask Adam about alternatives.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		What are the Republican alternatives to the ACA if there's agreement that it's not affordable as is and requires all these subsidies and it keeps going up?
adam goodman ▲ ● ▼		Great question.
		Let's set a little context, though.
		And it starts with this question.
		Why is it in a country that spends more on health care than any other nation on earth, do we have such miserable mortality rates, difficulty with pregnancies, rising of disease, the capping of the life expectation, people are living shorter lives?
		Why is that with all this money going in?
		The answer is the system.
		Systems aren't broken.
		It just doesn't work the way it should work, not with the investment we're making.
		So this administration, you've heard a lot about Maha, making Americans healthy again, right?
		That's the right idea in terms of opening up new questions and new ways of looking at things.
		You've got people like RFK Jr., who's taken a lot of flack, obviously, on vaccines.
		I think somewhat unfairly, but he has.
		But what he hasn't gotten enough attention around and deserves is trying to put our focus on prevention and living healthier lives up front instead of forever being focused just on the end game.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Which is a great long-term strategy.
adam goodman ▲ ● ▼		Right.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		But what happens right now when people can't afford their premiums and they go without health insurance?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And something catastrophic happens.
adam goodman ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, I think that's it's a legitimate concern.
		I mean, obviously, you know, premiums continue to go up.
		One thing that brought Donald Trump to power in 2016, the unknown issue, was the squeeze, where wages were not going up as fast as cost of living.
		And I think we're feeling the squeeze in part today because of health care costs, and we have to come up with an answer.
lucy caldwell ▲ ● ▼		But we still, I mean, with all due respect, even in that answer just now, you said we have to come in an answer.
		We are now a decade into Trump on the scene.
		And he began that race.
		He said, you know, he was going to come up with a concept of a plan.
		Then there was the famous the health care plans coming in two weeks.
		Then he got into office after 2016 and he said, oh, who knew health care could be this complicated?
		I mean, it is a parody at this point, except it's really not funny because these are a life, this is a life and death situation.
		And RFK, I mean, as I said, it bothers me that Democrats do not spend more time talking about the underlying issues around health care versus insurance coverage.
		RFK, sure, there are some things that are important that he's brought forward, things like talking about the obesity epidemic, talking about the foods we eat.
		But he's also a person who is really kind of a madman in terms of increasing vaccine skepticism, the stuff on Tylenol.
		So candidly, I don't see that we are any closer on the Republican side.
		I don't see that the Republicans are giving us any confidence to believe that health care is an issue that they're interested in solving.
adam goodman ▲ ● ▼		I think Madman's a little strong, but he is largely responsible for a $50 billion infusion into rural health care.
		It's never before happened to that level.
		And there's an embarrassment about our system right now.
		It's in rural America, where rural hostels have been closing as fast as they seem to be.
		They're bringing patients in.
		If you are in rural America and you have any health issue, you're in trouble if you have an emergent situation.
		That's inexcusable.
		There should not be a health system in America that is biased towards where you live.
		And if you see with the investment we made in urban America versus rural America in terms of health care, it's been wrong.
		It's been wrong for a long time.
		And you tried to suggest that it's Trump over the last 10 years.
		There was Joe Biden for four years as well in between.
		And he didn't seem to have the answer to this.
		I don't know what the answer is.
		I do know this.
		We've got to do what we've been doing.
		We can't do what we've been doing the same way and expect different results.
		And the rural health care infusion is one place where America can go back to the laboratory in terms of a policy imperative that dramatically has a chance to dramatically improve the health of people.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Let's talk to Zomi in Bowie, Maryland.
		Democrat, good morning.
		You're on the air.
unidentified		Good morning, Mimi.
		Thank you for posting what's in the Senate-passed bill.
		Can you put it up again, please?
		Sure.
		Republicans sold it, not the Democrats.
		The bill includes full funding for a trio of appropriations bills, SNAP, reinstate furlough, enrich employees, and protections against further such layoffs.
		And then there's a promise to vote to extend the ACA premium tax credit.
		Lucy, question for you.
		You were the campaign manager for a Republican.
		Now you're woke.
		What happened?
		Explanation, please.
		Thank you.
lucy caldwell ▲ ● ▼		Well, it's funny that anything about what I've said would be considered woke, because I don't think that we've actually really touched on some of those issues.
		So, look, I am a former Republican, and I believe that this current Republican Party poses an existential threat to our American democracy.
		And I think that Donald Trump is a deeply threatening figure to our politics.
		And I think that the way that congressional Republicans and other parts of the Republican machinery have just completely abdicated their sensibilities around separation of powers to just do whatever the president wants is deeply concerning.
		So if that makes me woke, I guess I'm woke.
		I would say, unfortunately, what the caller said about the promise of those ACS subsidies is just not the case.
		What Senator Boone indicated was the idea that they would take a vote on it, but there are no assurances of those premium subsidies continuing.
adam goodman ▲ ● ▼		First of all, I really appreciate the question.
adam goodman ▲ ● ▼		Sorry.
lucy caldwell ▲ ● ▼		About my wokeness?
adam goodman ▲ ● ▼		No, no, no.
lucy caldwell ▲ ● ▼		The question was, am I what happened?
adam goodman ▲ ● ▼		I appreciate the observation that if you look at what is about to pass, it seems like there's something for everyone in that as opposed to, oh my gosh, the Democrats caved.
		I'm not a Democratic consultant.
		I understand that in this town, it's all about still who won and who lost.
		Everyone wants to win a point, score a point.
		How about for the American people?
		Are they well served by, there was the suggestions yesterday that still this shutdown might not technically be over for another couple days because a number of Democrats were talking about making long speeches on the floor to try to, again, draw the line in the sand about affordable health care and Rand Paul, too.
		It's like, wake up, get out of the bubble, see what's going on in America.
		We've got an agreement.
		The agreement is not, the nice thing about the compromise here is no one's completely satisfied, which is usually the definition of something that is right and works.
		The caller referenced appropriately.
		There are things in this for everybody.
		There will be a vote on the subsidies for affordable care.
		There's going to be a vote.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		What do you think the turnout of the vote is going to be?
unidentified		Do you think it'll pass subsidies?
adam goodman ▲ ● ▼		Hard to say if I were a better, I am actually, thanks to sports betting.
adam goodman ▲ ● ▼		I would say yes.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		That it will pass.
adam goodman ▲ ● ▼		I think ultimately there will be some version of it that's going to pass to relieve kind of the squeeze on a lot of Americans who are having to deal with increased premiums, et cetera.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Does it get a vote in the House, and does it pass?
adam goodman ▲ ● ▼		Well, the interesting thing about the House politics, as you know, is it all begins and ends with the President of the United States.
		So President Trump wants us to move forward, and there's so many things the President has embarked on clearly on so many fronts.
		I think the last thing he wants to do is find the bullet train he's on, slowed down by an issue like this, when there's so many other things he needs to achieve in his last term in office.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So you're saying that the president does want the ACA subsidies extended?
adam goodman ▲ ● ▼		I don't think I'd say he wants them extended, but I think if a vote was taken, and I think we're looking at a vote ultimately in December, that might not be something that everyone's going to put their heels in the sand about if it slows down other things that are happening at the same time.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So you believe that the president would tell House Republicans to vote yes on extending or no?
adam goodman ▲ ● ▼		No, I wouldn't say he would tell them.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		What would he tell them?
adam goodman ▲ ● ▼		I think the fact he would tell them, not tell them, you know, dig your heels in, will be a signal.
adam goodman ▲ ● ▼		And I expect that.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Let's talk to John Orlando, Florida, Independent Line.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, John.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Thank you for taking the call.
		My question relates to the President's recent proposal to potentially do a tariff rebate of $2,000 for each American.
		And so I thought we were told the need for tariffs and some a trade imbalance that needs to be fixed.
		I thought we were told that there was a national debt level of $37 trillion.
al in delaware ▲ ● ▼		And now he's slowed in $15,000 to go back to each and every American for what he's doing.
unidentified		Can you justify that?
unidentified		Thank you.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And I'll just show this to people so they know what John was talking about.
		This is the Hill.
		Trump says Americans will receive $2,000 each from tariff push.
		That's at the Hill.
		It says, quote, a dividend of $2,000 a person, not including high-income people, will be paid to everyone.
		That's what the President put on Truth Social.
		He added that those against the tariffs are, quote, fools.
		Adam.
adam goodman ▲ ● ▼		Great move.
adam goodman ▲ ● ▼		I mean, why not?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		But the caller asked about the trade deficits and the debt, the national debt.
adam goodman ▲ ● ▼		Okay, so first of all, I say great move, the $2,000 tariff rebate.
		Okay, that's what I'm referring to.
		The trade and tariff approach that the president is embarked on, which we haven't seen in our lifetime, he has believed in for decades.
		This is something he's always wanted to do.
		I remember having on my show Peter Navarro talking about his approach.
		He was the lone wolf, the lone voice back in Trump won, saying, Mr. President, we really, with all due respect, we need to continue down this trail to rebalance what is completely out of balance.
		And again, as I said earlier about something in response to another question, it won't happen overnight.
		It's going to require patience.
		American people tend not to have patience.
		People in the political world tend to have even less patience.
		So I think we're going to have some turbulence along the way.
		But when it's all said and done, I like the direction that these trade deals are going on.
		I think there was a very healthy exchange between the chairman of the People's Republic of China and the President of the United States and Asia recently and other deals that were put together that were impactful and will be impactful.
		Remember the bottom line here.
		If someone's taking advantage of us, we should call them on it.
		And that was the opener for a lot of people in terms of looking at tariffs.
		I think it's absolutely, verifiably true.
		We were absolutely not in the place we should have been in.
		What impact will it have in terms of investments in America?
		We're starting to see evidence, maybe a massive impact on investments in America, which translate into jobs.
		Without jobs, without that kind of economic security moving forward, I think we'll be hearing a lot more turbulence from the American public than what I think we're going to see when these policies take root and are starting to bring America back.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Lucy, what do you think a $2,000 rebate from tariffs?
lucy caldwell ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, so I wasn't able to hear the caller's question, but I'm going to pick up based on what you were saying.
		I think that it's one thing to ask voters for patience.
		It's one thing to ask the political class for patience.
		Sure, certain policies take longer to play out to sort of see the effects.
		But there's no policy principle undergirding these tariffs, right?
		And the people who are bearing the brunt of tariffs are the American consumers who are having their prices passed on based on the tariffs coming in.
		So that's the case.
		And to the earlier caller who asked why I went woke, right?
		This Republican Party does not reflect the fiscal conservatism that once was the basis of the Republican Party, which is why you see people like Rand Paul objecting to these policies.
		In terms of the $2,000 dividend, I mean, I think that that is a sort of ridiculous idea because it doesn't reflect the fact that how do we get that, right?
		How endless are the president's powers, right, in terms of just sort of, oh, you know what, we'll just do a dividend.
		But beyond that, it's really reflective of how this administration, they don't even talk to each other.
		I mean, Scott Bassett then gave an interview.
		He's like, oh, $2,000 dividend.
		Hmm.
		Maybe that could be just like, we'll just pick that up from the no overtime taxes.
		Or, you know what, maybe it'll just be like a tax reduction.
		It'll just be like a reduction on your taxes, which shows how out of touch he is, right?
		To our earlier discussion about your point about people being out of touch with real Americans' experiences.
		A lot of people don't have enough tax liability that that would even make a difference.
		So there is no plan.
		It is right, I think, to ask what is the, how do you square the dividend?
		How do you square any of this spending with our massive debt and deficit?
		But this dividend, this is just a thing that the president, I think, had a whim about and, you know, true socialed out over the weekend, essentially.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Here's Sam, a Republican in Palm Coast, Florida.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Sam.
unidentified		Hi, good morning.
		First, I have to say happy birthday to all the Marines out there as a Marine veteran myself.
		Today's our 250th birthday.
		And I just was curious, guys, you know, President Trump has floated the 50-year mortgage idea, and I'm a 28-year mortgage banking industry leader.
		And I'm curious your take on it, because as recently as, you know, this week, Secretary Turner came out and was giving false information about how reverse mortgages and the government shutdown basically is hurting, you know, seniors in America.
		And now you have the president talking about extending mortgages up to 50 years.
		And it seems like our leadership on affordable housing just is completely out of touch with what your Americans and ground-level people need.
		So I'm just curious what your take is on everything.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		What do you think, Adam?
adam goodman ▲ ● ▼		Well, we have a housing crisis in America.
		We continue to have a housing crisis.
		You ask any Gen Zer what their optimism is about ever owning a home as opposed to having to bunk up either with their parents or with themselves.
		We've got to figure out something to reinvigorate that part of the American dream.
		That's something when I was growing up, it was a given that if you worked hard and you tried hard and got a decent amount of things falling your way, one thing that you're going to be able to experience was home ownership.
		That is now beyond the pale for a lot of people.
		And you see the massive increase in housing costs that are pricing all sorts of people out of even the hint of being able to live that dream.
		So I'm in favor of everything on the table to figure this out.
		The housing industry itself is a major driver of the nation's economy.
		But more importantly, it is a major symptom of America's confidence in itself.
		And I think we have to do whatever we can to try to seek different ways to reimagine an America where everyone has a chance to live that part of the dream.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And USA Today does have an article about it, headline, Is Donald Trump proposing a 50-year mortgage?
		What to know about long-term loans at USA Today?
		And this is Bill in New York, Line for Democrats.
		Good morning, Bill.
unidentified		Good morning, everyone, and thank you for taking my call.
		I just wanted to ask, I am a foundational black American, and I am wondering why no one is talking about the 61st day of the shutdown.
		I was wondering what is the worst thing that can happen at the 61st day of the shutdown.
		And can they keep the shutdown going until 2027?
		My last question is, do we gain anything if the government stays shut as far as decreasing our debt?
		Thank you.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Is there any cost savings to continuing the shutdown?
lucy caldwell ▲ ● ▼		Well, we hope not in a way, right?
lucy caldwell ▲ ● ▼		Because cost savings to continue to the shutdown means that people, our federal workers are going without pay, right?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		But they will get paid back, right?
		So there's actually an increase.
		Like we pay more for a shutdown.
lucy caldwell ▲ ● ▼		Right.
		But for example, there was coverage in the past week about how some air traffic control workers, it is not even that they don't know that they would be paid back.
		It's that they are living paycheck to paycheck.
		You know, a woman described how she, even knowing, yes, I could be paid back, right, the back pay, she couldn't afford to pay the person who provides child care for her.
		And so she just couldn't come to work.
		And so she was going to go without.
		And of course, it also means that people are going without critical benefits.
		It means that children are going hungry.
		So government shutdowns are not a fiscal savings.
adam goodman ▲ ● ▼		It happens too much.
adam goodman ▲ ● ▼		Okay, it happened, I think, a handful of times under Jimmy Carter, a handful of times under Bill Clinton, eight times, ten times under Ronald Reagan, obviously twice under the current president, happened under Biden.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		No.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Shutdown didn't happen under Biden.
adam goodman ▲ ● ▼		Well, There was a two-day technical, I think it was a weekend that the government was officially open.
		Well, I'll check my facts on that.
		The bottom line is this: it doesn't help anybody.
		It doesn't help the economy.
		There are a lot of stats that justify the fact that it is costing America every day the government is shut down.
		Two, it further creates a public confidence crisis in government, the dysfunction of government, the inability of leaders from both sides of the aisle to come together and do the nation's business.
		That's not a positive.
		It telegraphs to the world that America doesn't have its act together, right?
		That it takes all these days, all these weeks to try to pass a budget.
		The stock market is not a fan of uncertainty.
		It doesn't help that either.
		I think we've got, moving forward, we've got to take a look at how we can govern without all moving to the precipice of a cliff before we make what is often very, very hard decisions.
		So the bottom line is I'm no fan of these.
		I think it definitely has an economic cost, but it also has a psychological cost on not just us, but those who depend on us in other parts of the world.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Let's talk to Eric, Eastern Shore, Maryland, Independent Line.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Eric.
unidentified		Hi.
		I wanted to say a few things.
		The vote that the Democrats just did is exactly what the Republicans have been saying all along.
		So it's a little confusing as to why the Democrats have held out for so long to just do what the Republicans have said, you know, we'll go ahead and negotiate after we open the government backup, which I remind everybody is the right way to handle things if you know how a bill is produced.
		So I have to say, for Christmas, I think everybody needs dictionaries and history books because the integrity of a lot of people in America is very lacking.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Lucy.
lucy caldwell ▲ ● ▼		Yeah.
		Republicans have gotten what they wanted in these negotiations, and it may feel like a compromise, but I think Republicans, look, Republicans are a lot better at politics than Democrats.
		They just are.
		It's unfortunate.
		As I said at the top, I think Democrats choked in this negotiation.
		And in messaging advice that Democrats have been getting in the polling that we've seen from the American people, Democrats on these issues had favorability across the board with Republicans, Independents, and Democrats in favor of Democrats holding the line on these issues, chiefly the ACA subsidies.
		And the polling was showing, and this started happening in polls around two weeks ago, that if Democrats gave in and did not hold the line on ACA subsidies, that they suddenly actually become net unfavorable with all of these groups, and especially with independents.
		And this scholar is an independent.
		So I don't know why Democrats, and we should also not say Democrats, right?
		It is eight senators, seven Democrats, one independent, right?
		You have the two senators from New Hampshire.
		You have the two senators from Nevada.
		Then you have Angus King from Maine, who's an independent.
		You have Dick Durbin from Illinois, Tim Kaine from Virginia, and then Fetterman, who could be a Republican any day now, the senator from Pennsylvania.
		So this is not the Democratic Party en masse.
		So we should be clear about that.
		Even Chuck Schumer himself has said he's a no.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		I want to ask you about Chuck Schumer.
		This is a post by Seth Moulton on X.
		So he's a representative from Massachusetts, a Democrat.
		He says this, tonight is another example of why we need new leadership.
		If Senator Schumer were an effective leader, he would have united his caucus to vote no tonight and hold the line on health care.
		Maybe now Senator Markey will finally join me in pledging not to vote for Schumer.
		What do you think of that?
lucy caldwell ▲ ● ▼		Well, I think that's interesting.
		I mean, Seth Moulton is running for Senate in Massachusetts, and I think we do see a kind of push-pull on the Democratic side to ask for a changing of the guard, right?
		So we see this pattern, especially on the House side, now where we're seeing not rogue, you know, fringe on the outs Democrats getting in, but actually people who are people who themselves are institutional Democrats but feel like they're part of a new guard getting in and saying, we want new leadership, right?
		And so is this the right moment to take issue with Chuck Schumer?
		I don't know.
		I don't know.
		That I think what Seth Moulton is really trying to do is to spotlight Ed Markey and to connect Ed Markey to Chuck Schumer because he rightly knows that Chuck Schumer is unpopular and is a bit of a boogeyman.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Lucy, do you think this is the end of Senator Schumer's leadership?
lucy caldwell ▲ ● ▼		I don't know.
		I don't know.
		I think that is hard to say.
		I think that inertia is a very powerful force.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And I did check there was no shutdown during the Biden administration.
adam goodman ▲ ● ▼		Okay, I stand corrected.
		I'm glad I was corrected on C-SPAN, by the way, because this is the one place I want information to be completely 100% verifiable.
		I kind of agree with where Lucy was going.
		I think there's a changing of the guard.
		Okay, she didn't really want to say this about Chuck Schumer.
		He's on his way out.
		Is it imminent?
		We'll figure that out.
		There's got to be a turning of the page.
		I think, Mandoni in New York certainly shows Democrats that there's another way to go.
		Whether you like him or not, the way he campaigned or not, we'll see how he governs.
		That's going to be a big deal.
		That is a symptom of, and not just Democrat.
		I think across the board, you're going to see generational movement in leadership where older leaders are going to be replaced by younger people who have fresh ideas, fresh energy, et cetera.
		I think we could use it.
		I think the process needs it.
		There's always this intellectual argument about, well, we need all this institutional knowledge.
		We can't function in Congress without all these people that know how to, where to, you know, where the key is.
lucy caldwell ▲ ● ▼		Lobbyists are for, right?
adam goodman ▲ ● ▼		Right, of course.
		You know, which is bogus.
		What we need is America to continue to refresh itself with ideas coming from multiple generations.
		And I'm cheering this development.
		I think Chuck Schumer, I'm sorry he's taking the brunt of this in a way because I don't agree that he's caving in.
		He didn't hold the line long enough.
		I mean, for heaven's sake, you want this shutdown to go 80 days and then you want to be anybody in elective office.
		You go out there, you fly in any airport, a couple weeks from now and this is still shut down.
		Are you going to feel safe?
		Are you going to be adored?
		Are you going to be adulated?
		No, you'll be running for your life and you should be.
		This is inexcusable.
		We have to stop this precipice governing and start to do the nation's business the way it was meant to be.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		John is in Baltimore Republican line.
		Go ahead, John.
		You're on the air.
unidentified		Yes, I have a procedural question.
		It seems to me that the continuing resolution the Senate passed last night is different than the continuing resolution the House passed in terms of the date.
		The House had a November 21st date.
		The Senate has a January 30th date.
		So I ask the logistical questions.
		Number one, Speaker Johnson has to call the House back in to pass this Senate CR with the January 30th date.
		Am I not correct about that?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		That's right.
unidentified		They do.
unidentified		Has Speaker Johnson made any statements since the vote last night?
adam goodman ▲ ● ▼		Not that I've heard of.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		We haven't seen anything in public, John.
unidentified		Okay, neither have I, but I went to bed, so, you know, things happen overnight.
		You know, but the second thing is, how long would it take, let's say that Speaker Johnson today says, I am calling the House back in to pass the Senate's CR, because that's what I asked for all along, a clean CR.
		The date was just different.
		How long would it take for there actually to be a quorum in the House if he called them in this morning?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Do you know, Adam?
adam goodman ▲ ● ▼		I don't know.
		I don't know offhand.
		Good question, though.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		But I believe the last thing I saw was that they were given 36 hours to call the House back.
		I don't know if that has actually been triggered, if the 36 hours has been triggered.
		We'll look more into that, John, and get back to you on that.
		And that's all the time that we've got.
		This is Adam Goodman, a Republican strategist.
		He's also host the podcast called 13th and Park, and Lucy Caldwell, a Democratic strategist, former Joe Walsh 2020 presidential campaign manager.
		Thank you to both of you for joining us.
adam goodman ▲ ● ▼		Great to be with you.
lucy caldwell ▲ ● ▼		Thanks for having us.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Up next, we'll get updates from Congress and the White House as part of Open Forum.
		So you can start calling in now.
		The lines are Democrats 202-748-8000, Republicans, 202-748-8001, and Independents 202-748-8002.
		We'll be right back.
unidentified		Watch America's Book Club, C-SPAN's bold original series.
		Sunday, best-selling biographer Walter Isaacson, who chronicles history's most remarkable lives.
		His books include Benjamin Franklin, Steve Jobs, and Einstein.
		He joins our host, renowned author and civic leader David Rubinstein.
		What attracted you to these people?
david rubenstein ▲ ● ▼		Was it because they were geniuses or you just happened to like them?
walter isaacson ▲ ● ▼		Smart people are a dime a dozen.
		In order to be a genius, you have to be creative.
		You have to think out of the box.
		And one of the things that struck me when I wrote about Benjamin Franklin early on was what a great scientist and technologist he was.
unidentified		Watch America's Book Club with Walter Isaacson, Sundays at 6 p.m. and 9 p.m. Eastern and Pacific, only on C-SPAN.
brian lamb ▲ ● ▼		Retired George Mason University history professor Peter Henriquez starts off his author's note writing, quote, if anyone had told me in the summer of 2023 that I would be writing one more book on George Washington.
		I would have expressed extreme skepticism.
		In episode six of this BookNotes Plus podcast series in 2021, Professor Enrique told us the same thing.
		But at 88 years old, he's back with another book on our first president, George Washington, his quest for honor and fame.
		In the afterword chapter at the end of the book, Peter Henriquez puts a special emphasis on George Washington and slavery.
unidentified		Author Peter Henriquez with his book, George Washington, His Quest for Honor and Fame, 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.
		Today on C-SPAN's Ceasefire, at a moment of deep division in Washington, former Democratic National Committee Chair Donna Brazil and former Republican National Committee Chair Ronna McDaniel come together for a bipartisan dialogue on Tuesday's election results, potential impact on the 2026 midterms, and increasing partisanship.
		They join host Dasha Burns.
		Ceasefire, Bridging the Divide in American Politics.
		Watch C-SPAN today at 7 p.m. and 10 p.m. Eastern and Pacific only on C-SPAN.
		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.
		Celebrate our nation's journey like no other network can.
		America 250.
		Over a year of historic moments.
		Only on the C-SPAN networks.
		Have been watching C-SPAN Washington Journal for over 10 years now.
		This is a great format that C-SPAN offers.
		You're doing a great job.
		I enjoy hearing everybody's opinion.
		I'm a huge C-SPAN fan.
		I listen every morning on the way to work.
		I think C-SPAN should be required viewing for all three branches of government.
		First of all, if you say hello, C-SPAN, and how you all covered the hearings.
		Thank you, everyone at C-SPAN, for allowing this interaction with everyday citizens.
		It's an amazing show to get real opinions from real people.
		Appreciate you guys' non-biased coverage.
		I love politics, and I love C-SPAN because I get to hear all the voices.
		You and C-SPAN show the truth.
		Back to year verse for C-SPAN.
		It's the one essential news network.
		Washington Journal continues.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Welcome back to Washington Journal.
		We are in open forum, so we will get to your call shortly.
		You can keep calling in, but hold the line because we've got Eleanor Mueller in.
		She's a congressional reporter from Semaphore.
		We're going to talk about what's going on in Congress.
		Eleanor, welcome.
unidentified		Thanks for having me.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So what's going on?
unidentified		Great question.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		We had the Senate in session last night and they advanced a bill that would that we're moving towards reopening the government.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So refresh us on what happened.
unidentified		Yes, I was there for about 12 hours yesterday on a Sunday, good times.
		And the senators had a big breakthrough on this bipartisan deal.
		It's the same bipartisan deal that we've been talking about for weeks, but I think that there was a group of eight senators who caucused with Democrats, Angus King, an independent is one of them, who decided that this has gone on long enough and that this is something that they need to accept.
		They got a few additional wins.
		You know, Senator Kaine of Virginia negotiated some protections for federal workers who were laid off as part of this continuing resolution.
		And then that's what wound up advancing late last night.
		So exactly eight Democrats, exactly the number that they need.
		And we'll take the rest of the votes at some point this week.
		And what did they say about why they switched now?
		They, Senator Shaheen, who was one of the key architects of this deal, you know, she's retiring after this term.
		She said last night while the vote was still open, they saw this as the only deal on the table.
		You know, they're taking a lot of heat from other Democrats in the Senate, other Democrats in the House, Democrats on the campaign trail.
		But her point was we weren't going to get anything else out of Republicans out of President Trump.
		And so we have to just move forward with what we feel is what's up for offer right now.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Now, the narrative before this was that the election on Tuesday was giving a lot of momentum to Democrats and that this gave them the impetus to hold on and to keep waiting for a better deal on the ACA.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		They did not get that.
unidentified		We heard that.
		last night a lot from some of these progressives who are upset about the deal.
		You know, Senator Bernie Sanders said repeatedly, Tuesday was about Americans wanting us to push back on Trumpism.
		Agreeing to this deal is doing the opposite.
		It's greenlighting Trump.
		It's greenlighting his agenda.
		And we've seen similar arguments now from even House minority leader Hakeem Jeffries, you know, really senior leaders who say that it was a mistake to take this deal and walk away with it.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So what is facing minority leader Schumer now?
		Because it seems that he's, had he kind of gone along with it like he did in March and said, no, we need to be the adult in the room and we need to keep the government open, he would have gotten a lot of pushback and a lot of anger.
		He's getting that anger now.
unidentified		Yeah, you kind of can't win if you're Chuck Schumer.
		You know, he voted for a bipartisan funding deal earlier this year.
		He took a lot of flag.
		He voted against it this time.
		He's still taking a lot of flack for not, people are saying keeping his caucus aligned.
		There's not a ton he could have done, right?
		I mean, these in the Senate especially members have minds of their own.
		And if these centrists wanted to take it upon themselves to say that enough is enough.
		We've got the longest government shutdown in history.
		We have a Republican-controlled House, Senate, White House.
		We're not going to be able to push them too far to our side.
		We just have to move on.
		Then there's not a ton that he can do about that.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So now what happens on the House side?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Has Speaker Johnson officially called the House members back to Washington?
unidentified		So this is the million dollar question at this point.
		Johnson has not called members back to Washington yet.
		You know, obviously we're seeing travel delays across the country, so it's going to take them a while to get here once he does.
		But he did say last night that instead of giving them 48 hours notice, he's giving them 36 hours notice.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		But that 36 has not started yet.
unidentified		Has not started.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And we don't know when it's going to start.
unidentified		We don't know when it's going to start.
		They're having a call this morning at 11 a.m.
		So I think we'll hear more then.
		He's also doing a press conference at 10.
		So both of those things should give us a little more insight into what the game plan is.
		The holdup is that we don't have a time agreement yet in the Senate.
		So it could take them a day.
		It could take them several days, depending on whether or not some senator, whether a Democrat or Rand Paul, who has issues with some of the hemp provisions, decides to hold things up.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Now, explain that part as far as holding things up.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		How does a senator do that and how long can they go?
unidentified		So to secure expedited consideration of something in the Senate, you need every single senator to implicitly be okay with it because just one of them can object and then force them to move through the entire lengthy Senate process of concerning a bill.
unidentified		So they'd get there eventually and that's what you want.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		How long could it take?
unidentified		It could take, I think, four days, if I'm not mistaken, is how long it could take.
		So the earliest we're looking at is about Wednesday with that 36-hour notice.
		Latest could be, you know, this weekend into next week.
		But again, I think that a lot of the senators, Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts was saying this last night, accept that this, even though they don't like it, is the inevitable outcome.
		And so at that point, are you really going to withhold federal workers' paychecks, children, food aid benefits?
		Or are you just going to say, you know, we're going to do what we can from now on and move on?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		No, once the House gets back into session, you know, the critics of Speaker Johnson have said that he's trying to hold the House out of session so that he doesn't have to swear in Adelita Grajalva of Arizona, thereby triggering the discharge petition on the Epstein files.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So what happens with that now that the House has to come back?
unidentified		He said repeatedly that when they are back, he will swear in, re-elect Grajalva.
		So he'll have to do that as soon as they come back to Washington this week.
		That will then almost immediately trigger that discharge petition.
		Now, House Republican leaders do have the option to change the House rules to still prevent that bill from getting a vote on the floor despite the discharge petition.
		Johnson has signaled at least that he's not going to do that.
		I think this week we find out whether or not he means it.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And the CR will go to the end of January.
		What happens at the end of January?
		Could this all happen all over again?
		And the government shut down again.
unidentified		So the deal is three full year bipartisan appropriations bills, one extension of all other funding levels through January 30th.
		That's that continued resolution.
		That's what includes the protections for federal workers.
		And then separately, this promise of a vote by mid-December on a bill that the Democrats have approved on these enhanced health care subsidies.
		That was what we saw some of the Democrats who helped craft this deal say last night is, hey, January 30th, if we don't have what we want from Republicans on health care, we'll have the option to do this again.
		Of course, the impact will be restricted because they'll have these full years appropriations bills in place, but they could still press them in the same way that they have been for the last month or so.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Do you know anything about where you think the vote's going to go, that the ACA extension vote in the Senate?
unidentified		I think that that's that is, yeah, it's a fantastic question.
		I mean, we don't even know what the compromise is.
		I think a lot of Republicans have said they take issue with extending the subsidies in their current form.
		They want to see some changes to maybe an income limit, maybe the amount of the benefit, maybe the way that Americans get to control where it goes.
		And so even from the Democrats who voted against the deal last night, they were saying just being able to put Republicans on record on something that we could make particularly painful for them by now addressing all of the concerns that they've raised over the last month and a half is maybe a win in and of itself.
		I think the question is maybe whether or not that vote actually happens and whether it happens in the House where Speaker Mike Johnson has not said that he plans to make any such concession.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And then the president would have to sign it in any case, which is a whole other issue.
unidentified		Yes.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		That's Eleanor Mueller, congressional reporter for Semaphore.
		You can find her work at semaphore.com.
		Thanks so much for joining us.
unidentified		Thanks for having me.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And we'll get back to your calls.
		It's open forum.
		So whatever you would like to talk about, the numbers are on the screen and the lines are open.
		We'll start with Edie in New York, line for Democrats.
		go ahead, Edie.
		Edie, are you there?
		Let's go to Wiley in Concord, North Carolina, Republican line.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Thank you for taking my call.
		I have been listening to C-SPAN for a couple years now, and I'm amazed at how the electric does not know what's actually going on.
		They get all their information from off of the media, and it's just unbelievable what they're saying.
		But I'd like to speak about the ACA.
		This shutdown has been taking place, and it was going to happen.
		It started two years ago with the Democrats.
		They got it voted through, and not a single Republican voted for it, but they said that where it would end this year.
		And so they play the long game just like the Chinese do.
		They've got it on a calendar, and this ACA, it never has worked.
		If you've got to put subsidies to a program to keep it afloat, then it's a bad deal.
		It's really bad.
		And the ACC, the ACA, was given during the COVID shutdowns, and I don't have a problem with that.
		But now, when you start giving money away to people, giving money away to the insurance companies, which is the villain in this, that it's hard to take the money back.
morgan in washington ▲ ● ▼		And so I think that when the ACA was voted on, and even in the shutdown, we don't have but 53 senator Republicans in the Senate, 47 Democrats.
unidentified		We know that it has to pass with 60 votes.
		The Republicans cannot increase their votes.
		They only have 53.
		So it was going to take Democrats to come alongside and vote for it.
		The Democrats shut the government down.
		It was their plan all along to shut it down and to bring this false flag of the ACA back up to be voted on.
		The taxpayer is tired.
		We have been overtaxed, and we're not being represented either by both houses, the House and the Senate.
		They're only in session.
		I kept hearing them say, well, we just need a little bit more time.
		How much time do you need?
		The Senate and the House went in about 217 days.
		217 days.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Got it, Wiley.
		Let's talk to Stephen and Maryland.
		Democrat, go ahead, Stephen.
unidentified		Hi, good morning.
		This was more for Mr. Goodman, who was previously on.
		But anyway, I'm in my late 20s, but I do remember what insurance was like before the ACA.
		But even better, I see the replacement options from the Republicans today.
		And it seems to me, at least, that they're always in a race to naturalize the brutality of the market.
		Well, Democrats can't seem to do much more than build Rube Goldberg-style public-private hybrids, and they can't really mitigate the suffering without confronting any of the for-profit logic you'd think.
		But if I can continue, let's just focus on Republicans because when they shut down the ACA extensions, something the OBBA or OBBA already wants, they need a new plan.
		But those plans, even when in neutral language, they're structurally social Darwinist.
		Only the healthy, employed, financially solvent, control and navigate the market while sick people are sorted out, priced out, or pushed into uncertain safety nuts.
		And a lot of nonpartisan evaluations of Republican health care plans, including Trump's 2016 plan, the repeal and replace bills, and now the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which is fundamentally a health care platform for the Republicans, in my opinion.
		Well, those nonpartisan evaluations found only more market choice for healthy and affluent people, less regulation for insurers, more uninsured people, and higher cost burdens for low and middle income people with real medical needs.
		But that's just what's been on my mind lately.
		Thanks for taking it.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And stay on the line.
		If you are already on the line, we will come back to calls.
		But we're going to talk now to notice reporter Violet Jyra joining us from in front of the White House.
		Good morning, Violet.
unidentified		Good morning.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		What was President Trump's reaction to the Senate deal last night?
unidentified		President Trump spent the weekend at Mar-a-Lago, and before it looked like this deal was in the works, he was tweeting a lot or truthing a lot about how the shutdown needed to be over, the filibuster needed to be nuked to that end.
		But once it became clear that Republicans and Democrats were nearing some sort of compromise, we really haven't heard much from the president.
		Last night after the Commanders game, he told the reporters that he thinks we're nearing a deal, but we haven't really heard any full-throated response or opinion from the president.
		It's been reported that this deal has the blessing of the White House, and we had some reporting in the Notice newsletter this morning which stated from a White House source that the president just wants the shutdown to be over.
		So we're going to be seeing if that happens this week.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So the proposed CR does include funding for SNAP and WIC for a year.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		To what extent is President Trump on board with that?
unidentified		I think the President is ready to see SNAP and WIC funded.
		I think his main objection to funding it during the shutdown was tapping into those contingency funds.
		And we've seen the Trump administration try to fight that battle in court.
		And that battle is ongoing.
		And all eyes will be back on that case if for some reason this push to fund the government this week fails.
		But I think the president is so far fully in support of funding the government at regular levels through the continuing resolution.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Now we did hear this weekend that the administration had told states that were funding WIC SNAP to undo what they had done for funding or risk penalty from the federal government.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		What can you tell us about that?
unidentified		Right, that is part of what the Trump administration had argued in court and Justice Kentaji Brown Jackson on Friday issued a Supreme Court ruling essentially putting that on pause while the Trump administration's appeal was considered.
unidentified		Sort of like I said a few minutes ago, if the government ends up being funded this Thursday, then all of that sort of flies out the window because the government bill will fund SNAP for the entire fiscal year of 2026.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Now he had President Trump had to put on Truth Social on the 8th about, he said that I'm recommending to Senate Republicans that the hundreds of billions of dollars currently being sent to money-sucking insurance companies be sent directly to the people so that they can purchase their own much better deal for health care.
		What do you know about that, Violet, as far as is that a plan to change the ACA to replace it?
		What do you know about that?
unidentified		The president has never been in support of Obamacare of the Affordable Care Act, so it's not surprising to hear him say something like this.
		However, I think Treasury Secretary Scott Bessant said after Trump made that truth social post that there were no formal plans in the work and the works for that to happen.
		So we'll see.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		We were also asked by a caller today about President Trump's posting about a $2,000 tariff rebate check to people excluding very high earners.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		What do you know about that and how that is that an actual proposal or is that going to happen or is it not?
unidentified		The president did make a true social post to that effect suggesting that tariff revenue will be used to pay back Americans excluding high earners, sort of similar to the stimulus checks that we saw during the pandemic.
unidentified		However, once again, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessant said that there were no formal plans in the works for that and that we that Americans might see tax dividends or something to that effect instead of actual $2,000 payments.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And what do you know about the president's schedule for this week and what you'll be following?
unidentified		I think one of the biggest things on Trump's schedule this week is a meeting today at the White House with the Syrian president.
		This is the first time that a Syrian president has been to Washington since, I think, 1946, and it's the first formal state visit for a Syrian president.
		In December, the autocratic Syrian regime was toppled and replaced by this current president who has really made an effort to sort of reintegrate Syria into the world economy.
		We're expecting President Trump and this new president to sign a deal where he's part of an ISIS, a coalition to defeat ISIS, a U.S.-led coalition to defeat ISIS, in addition to a host of other things.
		So I think that's probably one of the more interesting things happening this week.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Violet Jira, reporter for NOTICIS, that she's at notice.org.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		If you'd like to follow her reporting, thanks so much, Violet, for joining us today.
unidentified		Thanks for having me.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And it's open forum, so we are taking your calls.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Ricky, Detroit, Michigan, Independent Line, good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I'd like to say that today is the 50th anniversary of an event that many in Michigan will be remembering, many across the Great Lakes region.
		And it's the 50th anniversary of the sinking of a 730-foot-long freighter in 1975 called the Edmund Fitzgerald.
		And 29 sailors passed away on that.
		And it was made famous by a song by the Canadian songwriter Gordon Lightfoot.
		And so it's a big part of history in the Great Lakes region.
		And we're definitely thinking about it today.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Ricky, here's Kay in Michigan, Republican line.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
unidentified		First of all, I got to say Ricky stole my thunder because I started out with, I wanted to remind everybody today is the 50th anniversary of the Edmund Fitzgerald sinking.
unidentified		We all remember that day very well.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So Kay, I just, before you go on, I want to tell people that it is on the front page of USA Today.
		It's here on your screen, remembering the Edmund Fitzgerald 50 years after freighter's sinking.
		Tragedy still resonates.
		But go ahead with your comments.
unidentified		But some of us had friends who had parents or grandparents on that ship.
		So it is a very important day for us here in Michigan and across the Great Lakes, of course.
		And what I wanted to say also was with the passing of the bill last night, stayed up late and watched it.
		And I'm just hoping and praying that we've reached a new turning point here in our country and our congressmen are going to maybe hopefully work together to solve some of these big issues like our health care.
		And, you know, for our seniors, it's terrible to see people struggling with health care and food and housing.
		And I'm going to pray that this is a new turning point and we're starting fresh and let's start out new.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		What do you want to see happen on health care, Kay, with the subsidies for the Affordable Care Act?
unidentified		Well, I really, really, I was working in health care when Obamacare was passed in 2010 and I was one of those people who were eliminated because hospitals had to lay off so many people.
		500 from each of our local hospitals were laid off to make plans for Obamacare and that's how our letter said due to Obamacare and the future of our hospital, we have to make choices.
		So they laid us all off and we lost our jobs and nobody cried about us losing our jobs.
		And the insurance just got worse.
		I used to pay $230 a month for my health care.
		It covered my entire family.
		Right now my husband pays $900 a month and it covers just me and him and we're wanting to retire.
		We're 62 years old.
		We'd like to retire, but we can't because we have to pay for this insurance.
		And we'd like to see it go back to what it used to be.
		And I'm hoping with this new plan that the president has in mind and his people, they work together and get it so that the insurance companies can compete for our business.
		I'd love to go outside in my mailbox and get letters from insurance companies trying to give me a better rate on my insurance and let them compete and let the health care or the government and the taxpayers help subsidize us people.
		Our poor senior citizens, we have people with dementia.
		They can't even get into a nursing home.
		It's not covered.
		They have to lose everything they have.
		They can't have more than $3,000 to get Medicaid.
		And then God knows what's going to happen to them in health care.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		And this is Ray, North Carolina, Democrat.
		Good morning, Ray.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I really wanted to talk to the two people you had up there.
		But anyway, I think this was a brilliant move by Chuck Schumer.
		Now, he's given this insurance thing a chance for them to send these letters out, and these people start getting these huge bills by the end of what, January, and they don't see.
		And another thing, I wanted to talk to the lady, too.
		She set up that and let him get away with saying this Kennedy guy, the guy ahead of the EPR, whatever he's head of, the medical.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		HHS, yes.
unidentified		Yeah.
		RFK Jr. helped help give the rural hospitals $50 billion.
		My goodness, it was $145 billion.
		They flashed off almost $100 billion.
		And she letting them get away with it.
		That's about all.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Hansel in Central Islip, New York, Independent Line.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
unidentified		Yes, good morning.
		My name is Hansel, and I'm retired.
		And I also depend on SNAP benefits.
		And I am willing to hold out.
		I'm willing to go on food pantries.
		I just wish the Democrats had enough guts to hold out on this assault on working class people.
		Chuck Schumer, he needs to go.
		He cannot even hold his caucus together for a simple thing as holding the line for ordinary people.
		We're willing to sacrifice just so it sends a clear message to that king that's in the White House that he cannot get away with these draconian policies against hardworking American people.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And, Hansel, when you say hold out for how long?
		Give me a timeframe.
		How long would you be willing to hold out?
unidentified		Whatever it takes.
		We're behind the Democrats in holding out and sending a message.
		However long it takes, the polls show that the American people, based on the recent elections, the polls show that the American people are with who wants their premiums to go up 50%, 100%.
		That's insane.
		It's jarconian.
		And you have to draw the line in the sand somewhere.
		And Chuck Schumer doesn't have the guts.
		I bet you if it was something concerning funds to Israel or something like that, he would have hold the line.
		We, the ordinary American people, need someone to represent us in those high offices.
		You need to stick together to protect the working class people.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And on the Republican line in Long Beach, Washington, Jerry, you're on Open Forum.
unidentified		Well, thank you very much for taking my call, Mimi.
		I have a proposal.
		I hear a lot of folks out there talk about term limits, and that includes even some of our people in the government.
		I would like to make a proposal.
		And here's my proposal.
		First of all, in the House, I would like to get a constitutional amendment to change from a two-year term time to a three-year, but a maximum of four.
		That's 12 years.
		In terms of the Senate, it would be still the six years, but they could not be in there more than four terms.
		That's 24 years.
		I would like to also say that they can't run past 72 years old.
		What that means is that the House would have to be finished at 69 and the Senate would have to be at 65.
		I believe that would be.
		And in terms of the presidency, I would want them to not run beyond 75 years old.
		And the last of my proposal would be that in the judiciary, that they all, including the Supreme Court, not be more than 25 years.
		And that's my proposal.
		Thank you.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Sandra in Mesquite, Texas.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Democrat, you're next.
unidentified		Hi.
		Hello.
		Hi.
		Hi.
		My name is Sandra.
		First time calling.
		I have so much I want to say, so I'm going to talk fast.
		First of all, I want to speak about Adam that was on your show.
		Adam, you asked Adam about, they talk about Obamacare, Obamacare, okay, that it's horrible.
		But my thing is this, Mimi, if it's so horrible, Republicans, then come up with something better.
		They constantly talk about it, but they don't come up with anything.
		And I'm sick and I'm tired of it.
		No matter what Trump says, the Republicans fall to his feet.
		They don't disagree with anything this man says.
		They're so afraid of him.
		And they know, they know it's wrong.
		But no matter what he says, no matter what he proposes, they go right along with it.
		And it's so wrong because the American people are suffering.
		Now, none of this bothers me.
		I'm fine, but it hurts me for the American people.
		I am retired.
		I have good insurance, so I'm doing fine.
		But I'm so hurt for my American people.
		Now, these Democrats, they voted to open the government.
		Okay, fine.
		We don't want people suffering, not getting their food stamps or stamps or whatever it is.
		But now you also have people that's sick, that their insurance is going to go sky high, Mimi.
		And it's just not right.
		When will any of these Republicans put on their grown-up clothing and say, hey, Trump may be the president, but the lot he's doing is wrong.
		He's blowing these ships up.
		They know it's not right.
		This man is just, and so many of the people that's suffering, Mimi, they voted for this man, and now they're suffering.
		A lot of them are Republicans that are suffering.
		A lot of them, they get food stamps.
		They're majority of them, okay?
		A lot of them lost their jobs.
		Many of them, even before the shutdown, how many of them lost their jobs?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Sandra.
		And this is Dave San Diego, Independent Line.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Hi, good morning.
		Yeah, we're 37 trillion in debt.
		Just as a reminder to everybody, but what I mainly called for was I've been calling C-SPAN for many years complaining about the border.
		And I live on the border in San Diego and have property out in the backcountry.
		And just wanted Americans to know the border is very secure.
		And, you know, Trump, like him or not, I like him on some, dislike him on other issues, but he's done a really good job securing our border.
		And just wanted to throw that out there.
		And thank you for letting me talk, Kim.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right.
unidentified		Have a good day.
unidentified		Thank you.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Davey Two.
		And here's Ron, a Republican, Loosedale, Mississippi.
		Good morning, Ron.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I just got a couple of things to say.
		The insurance company profits were like $170 billion.
		They're wanting to take our tax dollars and give it to the insurance company.
		That doesn't make sense.
		So under Obamacare, my insurance went up eight years in a row over eight years in a row, $100 and something a year.
		Now I pay $1,500 to $1,600 a month for health care when I was paying somewhere around $200 to $300 a year.
		And it's really, when it comes down to it, it's about money.
		So follow the money.
		These insurance companies with the profit that they're getting of $170 billion, if you follow the money, I'm sure it goes right back to the same senators that are bickering about this.
		This is not about Democrat or Republican.
		This is an American healthcare crisis.
		And I understand everybody needs health care, but I don't think Obamacare is the answer.
		And insurance companies, CEOs, make between $10 million and $75 million a year in salary.
		That's outrageous for one person to make that much money.
		That don't include the board members.
		And then it's just too much money for one CEO, $170 billion profit, and that needs to be looked at.
		That needs to be, I think any company that receives taxpayer dollars should fall under a certain guideline rule to where the CEOs are not allowed to make X percent profit or money.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Would you include Elon Musk in that, Ron?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Because his companies do get federal, not grants, contracts.
unidentified		Tax dollars.
		Yeah, yeah.
		Anybody who receives tax dollars, I think one person, and I know I'm very conservative, but I just don't believe one person should be making that much money.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		You saw the latest package for Tesla from the board for Elon Musk was $1 trillion.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Did you see that?
unidentified		That's all, but that's all based off the performance of his company.
		Correct.
		If you're a private health company and you do not receive any tax dollars, then you should make whatever you want to make.
		It's a free market.
		I believe in capitalism.
		If I start a company and I'll make a high profit, I can pay myself what I want.
		But if I receive any federal-funded tax dollars, then I should fall under a certain guideline.
		Okay.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Here's Jim in Illinois, Democrat.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Hello, Jim.
unidentified		Hi, how are you doing?
		Good.
		The reason why I was calling is, first I'd like to do a shout out, my president.
		Hey, Joe, another Volt and MAGA, Joe.
		Another Volta MAGA.
		As far as what's going on in the country, it's easy to explain if you break it down as a baseball game.
		Our innings will be Groundhog Day.
		As far as the two teams, you got the home team, welfare of the rich.
		We'll call them the Republicans.
		As far as the visiting team, we'll call them Democrats, Welfare of the Poor.
		Our umpire will be the Supreme Court.
		And what will happen here is the Democrats just protested again.
		And that's what the conflict is about right now.
		The game is just basically on the protest by the Democrats because they feel that the umpire is making home phone calls, and that's what's causing the whole issue.
		That's my opinion.
		Thank you.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		In Pennsylvania, on the line for independence, Carlos, good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Thank you for having me.
		I just wanted to talk about something that was said before.
		It's the fact that these senators on both sides of the aisle, they forego their payment.
		Some of them have foregoed their payment during this time of government shutdown.
		That's an empty gesture.
		These guys, they have so much money.
		They live in a fine, their finances are totally different from the American people, most of the American people out there.
		What should be done, and as you mentioned, it would take an amendment, but they should lose all their benefits, pay, tuition for their children, and most important, most important of all, they should lose their security detail.
		They need to feel the anguish, the anguish, the anxiety that the American people feel when they can't get health care, when they can't get those that depend on SNAP benefits, they can't get it.
		They need to feel that because as a unit, they have failed to do their job in Washington.
		And when they do that, they should forego everything they get.
		They gravity train that their jobs are because that's the only way they're going to feel the same level of anxiety that the average American, a lot of Americans, will feel when they don't have health care, when they don't have SNAP benefits.
		And they don't lead by example, including our president, who has extravagant parties every weekend while people are counting pennies and lining up at soup kitchens.
		It's deplorable.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Got it, Carlos.
		Troy, a Republican, Barrington, New Jersey.
		You're on the air.
unidentified		Good morning.
unidentified		How you doing?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good.
unidentified		I just wanted to call to just express my disgust with the Democrats just caving in here.
		They've been letting Trump do whatever he wants, blow up votes, start wars everywhere, have fake red coats running around the street picking up people.
		And finally, they stand up, and then they just cave in for nothing.
		They get nothing in return.
		We all came out and voted for them.
		I'm a Republican.
		I voted for Mikey Cheryl, coming out to show them that we support them in their fight.
		And then they win, they get their seats, and then they turn on everybody.
		I don't know what the point of even having a Democratic Party is.
		The Republicans already caved into Trump, and now the Democrats are doing the same.
		And in the same night that they do a deal with the Senate, Trump is pardoning Rudy Giuliani, Jenna Ellis, Mark Meadows, all these people who actually tried to steal the election, and the Democrats sit there and do nothing.
		I just, I'm frustrated.
		As a Republican, I'm frustrated.
		I could just imagine how my Democrat friends are feeling today as well.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And let's talk to a Democrat, Nashville, Tennessee.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Tina, you're on the air.
unidentified		Thank you for taking my call.
		The reason the ACA doesn't cover everyone, everybody in the United States are visiting here, like, for instance, Canada does, Australia does.
		I've had a sister who gets hurt everywhere and she's never been charged anything in those two places.
		Is that the Republicans won't give into the single provider system that would cut into huge insurance stock dividends and prices that insurance companies pay and their stock goes up because they're buying back billions of dollars?
		You can look at your iPhone and look up the stocks for insurance companies and look at their yield.
		Look at their yield and their earnings per share.
		And that'll give you a little bit about that.
		I'm on Medicare now.
		And before even the company I have now will re-enroll me, I have to answer a whole bunch of pre-existing conditions.
		And I'm afraid that the pre-existing conditions and effect will probably go away because that did not exist in regular insurance before Obamacare.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Tina.
		And coming up next, the UN Climate Change Conference starts today.
		Politico's Deputy Energy Editor Ben Lefevre gives us a preview of what is on the agenda.
		We'll be right back.
		Stay with us.
unidentified		Today on C-SPAN's Ceasefire, at a moment of deep division in Washington, former Democratic National Committee Chair Donna Brazile and former Republican National Committee Chair Ronna McDaniel come together for a bipartisan dialogue on Tuesday's election results.
		potential impact on the 2026 midterms, and increasing partisanship.
		They join host Dasha Burns.
		Ceasefire, Bridging the Divide in American Politics.
		Watch Ceasefire today at 7 p.m. 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 cspanshop.org.
		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.
		If you ever miss any of C-SPAN's coverage, you can find it anytime online at c-span.org.
		Videos of key hearings, debates, and other events feature markers that guide you to interesting and newsworthy highlights.
		These points of interest markers appear on the right-hand side of your screen when you hit play on select videos.
		This timeline tool makes it easy to quickly get an idea of what was debated and decided in Washington.
		Scroll through and spend a few minutes on C-SPAN's points of interest.
		Washington Journal continues.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Welcome back to Washington Journal.
		Before we get to our guest, just wanted to let you know that Speaker Mike Johnson will be holding a press conference right after this program at 10 a.m.
		We will take you there directly so you can see what he has to say after the events of last night in the Senate.
		But joining us now is Ben Lefebvre.
		He is Deputy Energy Editor for Politico.
		Ben, welcome to the program.
ben lefebvre ▲ ● ▼		Thanks for being here.
brian lamb ▲ ● ▼		Thanks.
ben lefebvre ▲ ● ▼		Appreciate being here.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So COP30 has just gotten underway.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Can you tell us what that is and what is expected to happen there?
ben lefebvre ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, COP30 is the annual conference where you have pretty much almost every country in the world meeting up different locations every year.
		This year it's in Brazil to discuss kind of the way forward that countries can take to lower their emissions.
		And the main idea behind this is if you don't lower emissions, climate change is going to keep getting worse.
		The globe will keep warming up.
		We'll see more extreme weather patterns.
		You know, everything from hurricanes barreling down the Gulf at higher speeds and stronger winds and rain to you have literally small villages in Alaska kind of falling into the seashore because of rising waters.
		So the leaders get together in Brazil this year, try to figure out what laws or what ways can we, what can we do to kind of lower our carbon emissions from our different industries in the different countries to prevent the increasing temperatures around the globe.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		When you say almost everybody from around the world, the United States will not be sending a delegation.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Why not?
ben lefebvre ▲ ● ▼		Correct.
		President Trump has made it pretty clear he views climate change as, in his words, a scam, that it's a conjob, I think he's called it.
		And they don't see a point in sending U.S. government officials to the conference.
		Trump had threatened to pull out of the Paris Agreement, which is the agreement that countries made 10 years ago to kind of, among other things, to hold these annual meetings.
		He never was able to quite do that.
		But this year, they've gone ahead and done it and they've said, we're not sending anyone.
		There's no one from the State Department that we know of, no one from the Energy Department, from the Interior Department.
		It's basically, as far as U.S. leadership is concerned, it's a vacuum at Brazil for the U.S.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Well, I guess the highest level elected official that will be going from the United States is Governor Gavin Newsom of California.
		He was on State of the Union yesterday.
		We'll just play a portion of that and then we'll talk about it.
jake tapper ▲ ● ▼		After here in Houston, you're heading to Brazil for the UN Climate Conference.
		You'll be the highest profile or the highest level U.S. official because the Trump administration is not sending anyone.
		Are you standing in for the president or are you just representing California?
		What is your role?
gavin newsom ▲ ● ▼		Standing in for my kids and grandkids for common sense, for our economic future.
		I mean, climate risk is fundamentally financial risk.
		It's a cost of living issue.
		Ask anyone in places like the coast of New Jersey or down in Florida.
		Ask folks in Louisiana or in my home state, California.
jake tapper ▲ ● ▼		With the wildfires.
gavin newsom ▲ ● ▼		Get insurance.
		Your insurance has been dropped.
		The premiums are going through the roof.
		I mean, that's a housing crisis in the making.
		We need to talk about that issue more.
		It's also about competitiveness.
		China's going to clean our clock.
		They're flooding the zone, dominating in the automobile industry.
		Cross the zone in Asia and European Union, number one exporter into Mexico.
		And we've got legacy companies that have doubled down, GM, with all due respect, sold out to our Trump administration, and literally is trying to recreate the past as these guys are sprinting in the future.
		It's not just about electric vehicles.
		It's about the technology stack.
		They're dominating in batteries.
		They're dominating increasingly in softwares.
		They're producing three times more automobiles than the United States of America, China, and they are dominating the supply chains and manufacturing.
		This is a real crisis in the making.
		It's not just about the hots getting hotter and the dries getting drier.
		And so that's going to be my focus.
		Financial risk, cost of living, and competitiveness.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And if you'd like to join our conversation with Ben Lefebvre, Deputy Energy Editor at Politico, about that 2025 UN Climate Change conference, you can give us a call.
		The lines are bipartisan.
		Democrats are on 202-748-8000.
		Republicans, 202-748-8001.
		Independents, 202-748-8002.
		You can also send us a text at 202-748-8003.
		So, Ben, what impact do you think having Governor Newsom there will have, if any at all?
ben lefebvre ▲ ● ▼		It'll have some impact.
		I mean, it'll show to leaders from Europe or from Africa or from Asia and other places that there is someone who has a pretty high profile and pretty big portfolio in the United States who's actually showing up.
		I mean, don't forget, California's economy is like one of the largest in the world.
		And I think having the governor there kind of keeps a line open to them if they want to get messages or if they want to deal with someone in the U.S. who actually can have some effect on the ground, even if it's only in his state.
		It kind of shows that the U.S. hasn't totally exited.
		I think it kind of is interesting in that, even though the federal level, there's nobody, I think on the state level, there are a number of people, not just Governor Newsome, but others on the state level who even if you can't get a commitment from the feds, maybe you can get something in a number of states that kind of move, you know, move the ball a couple inches forward anyway.
		And, you know, the other part of this is Governor Newsom has also been, you know, pretty, you know, I don't want to say blatant, but pretty obvious that he's got higher office in mind than maybe the next election.
		So for him, it kind of shows that, you know, that, you know, you can make relationships in Brazil with foreign leaders and, you know, kind of get to know each other.
		So I think for him, it might be a little bit of a meet and greet for the world stage.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So some of the bigger carbon emitters like China and India, will they be there at the conference?
ben lefebvre ▲ ● ▼		Yes, we've already seen China showing up.
		One of the fears I know of Democrats and for European officials was if the U.S. administration doesn't send someone to COP, it's basically ceding the ground to China, where China becomes like the biggest economy in the room.
		And therefore, they have a little bit more sway than some folks might like in some of these negotiations.
		For the Trump administration, it's a little bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy, I think, where one of their concerns was why should we go and negotiate away carbon emissions when for now the main economic beneficiary of that is going to be China, which as Governor Newsom kind of mentioned, it has such a head start with renewable energy technologies, with battery technologies.
		Every time we shave a couple degrees off or tenths of a degree off our carbon temperature goals, we're basically putting money into those companies.
		But on the other hand, if you totally leave the stage, you're giving China free reign to be the main negotiator in the room for a lot of these talks.
		So China's there.
		India's there.
		I think the real, what people are really watching for is how much does China try to sway talks to its own benefit and how much is it going to succeed in doing so.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Now, COP30 officially starts today, but there have been world leaders there since Thursday.
		What have you been hearing from them?
		What direction is this going so far?
ben lefebvre ▲ ● ▼		The direction right now, I think, is, I don't know if you can call it a direction.
		It's more of a, given that this is the first year that the United States has not shown up, I think the first few days have just been trying to get used to that situation.
		People just kind of feel around, like, what do we, you know, what do we do?
		I mean, they may not have always agreed with the U.S., but the U.S. was kind of like one of the most solid, you know, kind of one of the fundamental countries there.
		So everyone kind of took their cues from that.
		Now that we're not there, I think that it's just still feeling out of like what are the relationships going to be given our absence.
		So I haven't heard too much of concrete things happening, but a lot more of people like how, you know, I think one of our reporters mentioned that there's this feeling among European leaders of, well, the U.S. was always the bad cop, and we were the good cop at these climate conferences.
		Now that the bad cop isn't there, you know, how are we going to deal with China?
		You know, if it had been the U.S. would be the one kind of threatening China with economic economic sticks for to get China to agree to something and the EU is the one to offer the carrots.
		What do we do if the sticks no longer, you know, no one's willing to stick there?
		So that's what we've been seeing so far.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Let's talk to callers.
		Let's start with the Republican line in Georgia.
		Frank, you're on the air.
		Go ahead.
unidentified		Hi.
		You know, we have a population of 9 billion people on this planet right now.
		And nobody seems to address the problem of overpopulation as what's causing the climate control.
		But yet you want to destroy people's economy of the Western civilization that basically the Western civilization has been at zero population growth for the last 10 years.
		And these other countries, China, India, South America, in Malaysia, they just, their population is exploding.
		And until you control the population, climate change ain't never going to happen.
		You know, and nonsense of destroying our economy is foolishness.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		What do you think, Ben?
ben lefebvre ▲ ● ▼		Well, I mean, in some places, actually in China, I would argue that the actual problem over there right now is they are going to start going through a depopulation.
		Their birth rate has been below replacement.
		We've seen that in Japan too.
		But as far as the economics is concerned, you hear a lot more about that, how the new technology that will be needed to lower pollution, the climate change causing pollution is a new economic opportunity.
		So folks will make that argument of, look, we were going to have all these battery plants that we're going to open up in the U.S., including in Georgia, that may not be now because the subsidies that the Ben administration offered have been clawed back by the Trump administration.
		But it offered a new kind of route for new technologies to be developed, new manufacturing to be done.
		I think there was a big, between the last COP and this COP, I think there was this big realization that countries were depending on China too much for like things like solar panels or wind turbines.
		And the idea was, well, we need to reshore those manufacturing bases to do that here.
		Now, the Trump administration, because they're saying now we're not doing that, they have not been involved in, or they actually tried to claw back a lot of the money that had been meant to seed those manufacturing bases.
		We're still seeing some of it happen.
		I mean, I know that there were just a couple of press releases that there are solar facilities, manufacturing, you know, solar panel manufacturing facilities opening up in the United States despite the Trump change in policy.
		But I think that the economic argument is one that is being taken more seriously now.
		And it is thought, well, we can kind of use this to create a new manufacturing base in the United States.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		On the line for Democrats in Woodbridge, Virginia.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Robert, good morning.
unidentified		Good morning, and thank you for C-SPAN.
		I am a devout environmentalist.
		I have been doing that for 25 years since the first Earth Day.
		I am an enlightened individual, and I have realized that this problem is not about overpopulation as such.
		This is about each country's prioritization, a realization of how serious the effects of climate change are, and they are raging on and on.
		And this is also a result of the U.S. is typically, until the last 20 years or so, has been a leader in innovation and progressive policies.
		But now, because of politics and the over abundance of the motivation for profit-taking, this is overtaking our judgment.
		And we're not fully realizing that these effects are going to be more than economic.
		They're going to be existential and a global and U.S.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		We got your point though, Robert.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Go ahead, Ben.
ben lefebvre ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, I mean, the one interesting thing I'm going to be watching for at this COP is now that the U.S. is out, you know, at least for a few more years, maybe, whether this changes COP's focus overall.
		I mean, we have already seen in the U.S. the idea that affordability is at least the biggest issue for voters than climate change.
		And I think we're seeing politicians trying to dovetail those two issues: being, well, look, you don't have to have one without the other.
		I mean, we are trying to bring down prices in electricity, for instance, for even for gasoline, at least some of that we can do with renewable energy technologies.
		And I think you're seeing Democrats in that last elections we had last week were trying to message their campaigns on that to say basically we don't have to do renewable energy development and drive up your prices.
		You know, solar and wind power can be at least as cheap as fossil fuel-fired power in the electricity industry and the utilities.
		So I think we're going to see a rethinking at COP of how do we take the issue of climate change, which is obviously a real issue and is something that is affecting people on construction sites.
		You've got worries, greater fears about people overheating.
		You have land issues in Louisiana with disappearing coastline.
		But how do we take those existential fears as a last caller voice and try to really meld them into economic concerns that basically every voter can kind of feel part of?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Let's talk to James in California, Independent Line.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		You're on with Ben LeFave.
unidentified		Hey, Ben, how are you doing today, my friend?
		I just like to say this.
		Gavin Newsom, as a governor, has done nothing.
		Well, let's keep it 1,000.
		He's the son of people attached to the oil business.
		So therefore, he has nothing but the interest of energy consumption at the top of his list.
		In addition, he's also made so much money off of these fake taxes that they put on all Californians for purchasing fuel, for using fuel, for buying a car, for anything that could possibly energy-wise.
		Let's talk about how PGE has screwed its customers left and right and been sued how many times.
		Edison, let's say they've probably been sued a couple more times.
		So let's just keep it a thousand.
		Mr. Newsom, the so-called Democratic choice for presidency in 2028, he's trash and he has no chance against James Houston II, the real California representative, the real voice of the millennial, the real voice of the future for the United States.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, James, let's get a response.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Go ahead, Ben.
ben lefebvre ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, I mean, it's pretty obvious that Newsom wants to run or probably will run for president next time around.
		It is definitely not guaranteed that he will be the nominee.
		I mean, there's always a concern of, you know, well, he plays well in California, but does he play well in other states he'll need to win?
		You've seen him, however, try to change his position somewhat to kind of fit more of a national profile that he'll need to win to the presidency, including being a little bit more, I should say a little bit less strict on fossil fuel considerations.
		One of the things we're looking for, we've written about, is that the Trump administration will probably open up the Pacific Ocean to drilling in their next proposal of offshore drilling plans.
		And we haven't seen so far Newsom squawk too much about that.
		I think it'll put him in a difficult position of Californias have, I'm pretty sure it's the highest gasoline prices in the country.
		I mean, Alaska might give him a run for it, but I know California is definitely up there.
		Is he going to come out and say, well, no, we don't want to have more oil coming on the shores that would think would be something that would bring fuel prices down.
		But he hasn't raised too much concern so far about the administration's plan to open up Californian waters.
		And there's also the idea that Newsom will not be the only state governor, we would assume, to run for president next time around.
		We've already seen moves by Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro to do so.
		We would think that Michigan Governor Gretchen Wittner has, I think, the ambition.
		I don't know if she'll jump in the water, but there are others out there besides Newsome who would try to take over from the Trump administration the next time around.
		And you would assume bring climate into their goals, but also affordability into their policy goals.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Elizabeth is in Ohio, line for Republicans.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Elizabeth.
unidentified		Hi.
		Is it true that a four-lane highway is being rushed to be completed for access to the site of the climate conference in Brazil and that 100,000 rainforest trees have been felled for this project?
		If true, is this not hypocritical?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Do you know anything about that?
ben lefebvre ▲ ● ▼		I've seen those.
		I think President Trump has kind of repeated those allegations.
		I haven't seen anything confirming that, but to be honest, I haven't looked too hard at it.
		I do know that the site in Brazil, it's Bellum, Brazil, of the conference has raised some controversy.
		I mean, if they were planning to build a four-lane highway, they didn't get it done in time.
		Just my colleagues having to plan for this trip was a bit of a nightmare.
		It's kind of in the middle of the Amazon.
		It's not particularly close to any of the main sites like in Rio de Janeiro that conferences might usually get held at.
		So there was this concern of like, well, you're making everyone kind of fly in further into the Amazon to attend this climate-themed conference, and that Brazil itself has a bad reputation, if not for this conference, or if not for this conference, but in general, of cutting down a lot of the rainforest for development, especially cattle grazing, I think.
		But as far as specifically for this conference, I have not heard or been able to confirm that these construction projects are going on.
		It doesn't mean they didn't happen.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So, Ben, we are our producer was able to find this on the BBC.
		It says, this is from March of this year.
		Amazon Forest felled to build road for climate summit.
		It says a new four-lane highway cutting through tens of thousands of acres of protected Amazon rainforest is being built for the COP30 climate summit in the Brazilian city of Bellum.
		Its aim is to ease traffic to the city, which will host more than 50,000 people.
ben lefebvre ▲ ● ▼		Oh, there you go.
		There's confirmation.
		So, yeah, so, and again, you're right.
		I think a lot of people would view that as very hypocritical: you know, we're meeting here to save the climate, but to do so, we've got to cut down parts of the rainforest and increase traffic.
		So, yeah, these conferences don't always win on the, you know, they might win on sincerity of intention, but they don't always win on the hypocritical outcomes.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		On the line for Democrats, Brad Shreveport, Louisiana.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Brad.
unidentified		Hello.
		My question is about the grant given to Louisiana.
		I think it was an NSF grant, the largest in history, to be used for energy production.
		And now I'm seeing comments from Exxon about building mechanisms in order to take carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.
		Is there a relationship between the grants to Louisiana and this mechanism?
		Thank you.
		I'll take your comments off the line.
ben lefebvre ▲ ● ▼		It's a good question.
		I'm not familiar with that grant by that name.
		I do know that there had been grants that the Biden administration had put out to create, they called them carbon capture hubs.
		And one of them would have been in the Louisiana area.
		These sites would have used kind of developing technology to basically suck the carbon dioxide and methane and other pollutants out of the air.
		I'm sorry, out of the smokestacks, basically, before they got into the atmosphere to contribute to climate change.
		So that had been seen, these hubs were kind of seen as a major development and making sure this technology was ready for like prime time to make sure it worked at scale.
		And the oil industry had been really supportive of these grants and of this technology.
		It would have helped companies like Exxon continue to produce oil or to do basically any sort of heavy industry and then not contribute as much to climate change as they would have otherwise.
		The Trump administration did pull a lot of, you know, did cancel a lot of these grants.
		You know, we saw that they had said during the shutdown, or, you know, as the shutdown was kind of beginning, they were going to pull a lot of grants for blue states.
		But a lot of these projects were actually taking part in Republican-led states.
		So CCS, as it's known, carbon capture, may have become a casualty of the Trump administration's desire to kind of shrink the government, or at least to cut these grants.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Connie, Richmond, Virginia, Independent Line, good morning.
unidentified		Morning.
		This may be a dumb question, so bear with me.
		And I could research this myself, but I wanted to ask the guests exactly why does President Trump and his administration, why are they climate change deniers?
ben lefebvre ▲ ● ▼		Part of it, you know, it's kind of part of it is, you know, they get a lot of money from the oil industry, at least a part of the oil industry that would have a harder time doing business if they had to cut their emissions suddenly.
		There are different parts of the industry.
		There's the multinationals like Exxon and Shell and others who have a bit deeper pockets and want to play in different markets around the world.
		And they might say, well, yeah, if Europe is going to crack down on carbon emissions, we have to make sure the oil or the plastics we produce meets those standards.
		And therefore, we have the money, we can invest in something like carbon capture that we mentioned earlier.
		But a lot of the independent oil companies either don't have the money or the inclination to make those kind of changes to how they operate.
		And they were heavy supporters of President Trump's latest presidential campaign.
		I think part of it too is this sense of basically, according to the administration's viewpoint, as they voiced it to us, is essentially the U.S. is good at making oil.
		We've got plenty of oil beneath our feet.
		Oil is cheap here.
		I was just in Louisiana over the weekend, and you can get a gallon of gas for like $250 a gallon in some parts of the state.
		In Europe and other places, it's not like that.
		They don't have their own energy to produce, even if they wanted to produce it.
		So they have to focus, it's easier for them to focus on renewable energy and get their own energy at home.
		But for the U.S., if we want to go that route, we basically have to go against some of our current strengths.
		Their criticism of that is: you're playing today's game and you're going to lose tomorrow's game if you don't get into the renewable energy industry heavier.
		And the thing that's driving renewable energy, at least in the administration's mind, are fears of climate change.
		You can also make the argument that renewable energy is also now cheaper than new fossil fuel energy investments.
		But in their mind, if we basically defang the fear of climate change, it's better for the oil industry, our home industries, and the one that's backing the current president.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And we are standing by for Speaker Johnson's press conference live at the Capitol.
		As soon as he gets to the podium, we'll take you there directly.
		But in the meantime, we'll talk to Kay in Omaha, Nebraska, Independent Line.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Thanks for discussing climate change on this program.
		Pollution and emissions are clearly causing climate change and weather impacts like flooding and severe storms and heat waves.
		In our society, our economics drives everything.
		And I don't understand why we can't charge the entities that are polluting some sort of fee.
		They're polluting for free.
		They're putting emissions in the air.
		The coal plants are creating this issue.
		Why don't we have the strength to charge them for this negative impact that they're causing?
ben lefebvre ▲ ● ▼		A lot of it has to do with, I mean, there's the cynical view, and then there's the actual, you know, there's a practical view.
		The cynical view is that the companies don't want to pay for it, and therefore they get their lobbyists down the hill and they convince people not to vote for anything that would introduce a carbon tax or any sort of mechanism that would charge them for carbon emissions.
		One of the practicalities that's been difficult is who do you charge or how do you measure the carbon that's being emitted?
		So one of the big fights has been this technical matter of, they call them scope two or scope three emissions.
		Scope two is, you know, you can charge people for the emissions that you may, you know, your building or your business may put out.
		But if you're getting oil from a company, you know, should you be charged for the emissions that come from their operations?
		If you're getting oil or a company from more than one well site, how do you measure what's coming out of each well site?
		How do you aggregate it?
		You might be on one end of the pipeline, but the actual emissions might be on the other end of the pipeline.
		Who has to pay for it?
		So it's one of those things that even some of the larger companies will say, yeah, we should do something.
		But when you get into the weeds of how much do you charge, how do you measure it?
		It quickly falls apart.
		Interestingly, the Biden administration actually, in one of the laws they passed, the Congress passed through the law.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And Ben, we're not going to be able to get to that.

▲