CSPAN - Washington Journal 02/07/2026

All Episodes

Previous Next

Feb. 7, 2026 07:00-10:01 - CSPAN

03:00:54

Washington Journal 02/07/2026

Source

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
Video Reposted: Voter Fraud Reaction 00:14:57
	online at c-span.org.
	Coming up on C-SPAN's Washington Journal, KFF Health News senior editor Stephanie Stapleton talks about the decline in Affordable Care Act enrollment after the enhanced subsidies expired at the end of last year.
	Then the executive director of the Arms Control Association, Daryl Kimball, discusses the expiration of a nuclear arms pact between the U.S. and Russia.
	Washington Journal starts now.
	I didn't see the whole thing.
	I guess during the end of it, there was some kind of a picture that people don't like.
	I wouldn't like it either, but I didn't say it.
	This is the Washington Journal for February 7th.
	While en route to Florida aboard Air Force One, President Trump made his first extensive remarks about images in a video he reposted on Troop Social that portrayed former President Barack Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama as apes.
	The president claimed he did not see that portion of the video he reposted, would not apologize for it while saying that he condemned racist parts of the video.
	To start the show today, we'll show you his comments and get your reaction.
	And you can call in on the following lines.
	For Republicans, it's 202-748-8001.
	Democrats, 202-748-8000.
	And Independents, 202-748-8002.
	If you want to share your remarks about the president's reaction to the video that was reposted and you want to do that in a text, 202-748-8003 is how you do it.
	You can also make your thoughts known on our social media channels.
	That's facebook.com/slash C-SPAN.
	And you can also react on X at C-SPAN WJ.
	ABC News talks about the trip the president made to Mar-a-Lago yesterday where he made those remarks about this video that was reposted.
	Here's some of what the reporting goes: saying that the president told reporters he did not see the entire video before it was shared on his social media platform late Thursday night that included racist animation of former President Barack Obama and former First Lady Michelle Obama depicted with the bodies of apes and suggested he won't apologize for it.
	Speaking to reporters aboard Air Force One Friday evening, the president said he only saw the first part of the since deleted video that focused on debunked claims about the 2020 election.
	Earlier this morning, we played you those comments from the president aboard Air Force One.
	Here's that portion specifically where he talks about the video.
	The White House says that a staffer sent it.
	Who sent it and are you going to?
	No, I looked at it, I saw it, and I just looked at the first part.
	It was about voter fraud in someplace, Georgia.
	There was a lot of voter fraud, 2020 voter fraud, and I didn't see the whole thing.
	I guess during the end of it, there was some kind of a picture that people don't like.
	I wouldn't like it either, but I didn't see it.
	I just looked at the first part and it was really about voter fraud and the machines, how crooked it is, how disgusting it is.
	Then I gave it to the people to generally they look at the whole thing, but I guess somebody didn't.
	And they posted and we took it down and we did it.
	But that was a voter fraud that nobody talks about.
	They don't like to talk about that post.
	We took it down as soon as we found out about it.
	Mr. President, a number of Republicans are calling on you to apologize for that post.
	Is that something you're going to do?
	No, I didn't make a mistake.
	I mean, you give, I look at a lot of thousands of things.
	And I looked at the beginning of it.
	It was fine.
	And they had that one post, and I guess it was a takeoff.
	By the way, a lot of people covered.
	If you look at where it came from, a lot of, I guess it was a takeoff on the Lion King.
	And certainly it was a very strong post in terms of voter fraud.
	Nobody knew that that was at the end.
	If they would have looked, they would have seen it.
	And probably they would have had the sense to take it down.
	But that was a takeoff of the Lion King.
	And a lot of people were covered in different positions.
	But I spoke to Tim Scott.
	He was great.
	Tim is a great guy.
	He understood that 100%.
	Those were the president's comments aboard Air Force One.
	You heard him mention South Carolina Republican Tim Scott, senator, who started criticism of the posting of that video, which prompted other Republicans to do the same.
	When it comes to Senator Scott, he wrote this, yes, on February 6th, saying, praying it was fake because it's the most racist thing I've seen out of this White House.
	The president should remove it.
	Other Republicans following suit.
	Senator Roger Wicker, this is totally unacceptable.
	The president should take it down and apologize.
	Senator Susan Collins, Tim is right.
	Going back to Senator Scott's comments, this was appalling.
	Senator Dan Sullivan saying this, the post was offensive.
	I'm glad the White House took it down.
	And Senator Pete Ricketts making these comments.
	Even if this was a Lion King meme, a reasonable person sees the racist context to this.
	The White House should do what anyone does when they make a mistake.
	Remove this and apologize.
	Again, those are Republican senators responding to the posting of this video and subsequently it's been taken down.
	The president's comments from yesterday.
	Again, if you want to give comment, 202748-8001 for Republicans, 202748-8000 for Democrats.
	Independents, 202748-8002.
	And you can text us at 202748-8003.
	We'll start with Dale in North Carolina, Republican lying.
	Good morning.
	Good morning.
	Narrative of the day.
	Trump and these old mean, nasty, racist Republicans, white racist Republicans.
	They're all bad.
	They need to change y'all's name to CNN Span.
	So what did you think of the video, the posting, and the president's response to it?
	It don't matter.
	Y'all going to press the narrative CNN does.
	Change your name to CNN Span.
	Dale, let me give you one more chance.
	You said it doesn't matter.
	Why is that?
	You painted him as a Nazi, a racist, you name it.
	He's been called it.
	We all have.
	The mainstream news media don't cover the news.
	Billions and billions of dollars being stowed out of these Democrat cities.
	It's Democrat run.
	Okay, we'll go to Horace.
	Horace is in Philadelphia.
	Democrats line.
	Hello.
	Good morning.
	You're on.
	Go ahead, please.
	I think it's appalling for him to be the president of the United States of America for people, all the people.
	He shows our pensively to be a racist.
	And I mean, this has been going on all his presidency.
	And people should really get it together and realize that this man is a true racist to his heart.
	What do you think about the president's response that he didn't see the video, the portion of the video that's made the news?
	Nothing but lies.
	The man lies every time he takes a breath of air.
	How do you not know what's going on on your own truth, truth services?
	It's lies.
	And people should get it together and believe this man for what he is, a true racist.
	Okay, Susan is next in Massachusetts, Republican line on the president's comments to the video that was posted and taken down.
	Susan in Massachusetts, hello.
	It was a mean.
	It was a mean, big deal.
	My president is called every stinking name in the book, and he should apologize.
	That's ridiculous.
	And Tim Scott, you should be ashamed of yourself because you're there because of Trump, too.
	These Republicans are terrible.
	And the only thing I'd say, where are the Clintons?
	They're making deals and everything else because we got another creep in coma.
	Letting these two criminals dictate everything.
	It's ridiculous.
	Well, Susan, you've mentioned Tim Scott.
	It was several Republicans who got in line and condemned what was seen in the last 24 hours.
	What's your reaction to that?
	Tim Scott started it by opening his vote.
	That's why they followed suit.
	Sure, why do you criticize that move, though?
	Why do I criticize black people voted for Trump better than they voted for what's her name, Harris, because she was a dumb creep.
	And I'm sick of it.
	These black people that call, they are the biggest racists in this country.
	Okay.
	John is in Mississippi, Independent Line.
	Hello, you're next up.
	Now, you heard that woman in America?
	That gives you an idea into how these people feel.
	That comes from not giving black people reparations.
	People like Trump and his family, they came here.
	The forests were already cleared.
	Everything was already ready for them when they come here.
	And they got two billion acres to farm.
	Well, stick to the memes, stick to the reaction.
	What do you think of that specifically?
	The memes, it just shows specifically how a person can be in this country and have such white privilege to where they can benefit from white privilege and keep black people from their businesses and make it all the way, use racism to get them to the White House and then have racism on their platform and then don't make an apology for it.
	And because he's got so many people in America that are riding with him, that don't want blacks to have reparations, that feel like we're supposed to pay for college and everything just like everybody else, even though our ancestors didn't get anything like Trump's.
	His family came here and benefited from the family.
	You made that point, John.
	Again, you can continue calling in on the lines.
	A previous caller had mentioned the former Vice President of the United States, Kamala Harris.
	She posted this.
	This was before the president's comments from last evening.
	But in response to the story overall, she said, no one believes this cover-up from the White House, especially since they originally defended the post.
	We are all cleared eye about who Donald Trump is and what he believes.
	That's Kamala Harris giving her comments there on X. You can do the same if you want.
	You can call in on the lines if you want.
	202748-8001 for Republicans.
	202748-8000 for Democrats Independents.
	202748-8002.
	Lisa is in North Carolina.
	Democrats line.
	Hello.
	You're next up.
	Go ahead.
	Good morning, C-Spin.
	To all the people who voted for Trump, this is on you.
	He's not fit to hold this office.
	He never was.
	If anyone of you are okay with this latest meme, his behavior, you are nothing more than trash.
	People who cannot take, we cannot take three more years of this.
	It's absolutely ridiculous.
	His behavior is nothing more of that of a white supremacist.
	And if you're okay with this, then you will go down with him.
	I'm done with this.
	This administration is ridiculous.
	He is a racist.
	And if you don't want to believe that, then you must be a racist also.
	Julius on our line for Republicans.
	Good morning.
	He joins us from Georgia.
	Go ahead.
	Hi.
	I'm Grayish, Republican, and I did not vote for Trump at all.
	I believe Tim Scott needs to step down and get off the train and face reality for what it is.
	And it's another thing for the other side.
	I have a problem with no response from Obama yet.
	No response from the HBU after Trump said they beg for the schools beg for Trump.
	I mean, the schools beg to Trump to pay them.
	I'm very young.
	Can I follow up with something?
	Senator Tim Scott led the criticism, but you aim your criticisms to him.
	What do you mean by that?
	Well, the criticism comes from after all of what Trump said, and he replied.
	I'm saying that it's only rightful for him to step down because, you know, the train has been full-fledged on one track, and it seems like it's no stopping, stopping the train.
	So to see how life, what it is as being black, it just seemed like we just got to, you know, suck it up and do something else.
	Julius there in Georgia giving us his thoughts.
	He mentioned the former president of the United States, Barack Obama, did not comment on the video.
	The only comment making on his ex site was that to the activities of the Olympics, only posting to all athletes representing two USA.
	I'm proud of you.
	Your talent and perseverance have brought you to this moment.
	And Michelle and I will be joining Americans from across the country cheering you on, making those comments 11 hours ago.
	Mona is next on our line for independence in New York State.
	Good morning.
	Good morning.
	Yes.
	Hi.
	Thank you for taking my call.
	I think what we have here is icing on the cake, complete and further evidence of just how un-American Donald Trump is and just how low one can go and that there truly is no bottom.
	And when I listen to certain Republican callers, perhaps we'll call them MAGAs, that the hatred and the racism that comes forward through these phone calls is heartless and shows a complete lack of acceptance or understanding that we are a melting pot, that the United States is for all of us, not just them.
Icing on the Cake 00:14:52
	And I think Donald Trump, who constantly says things like, I didn't see it.
	I didn't know that.
	I have no idea about this.
	We know that he is a prolific pathological liar.
	And for anyone to continue to support him and buy this is so incredibly disheartening.
	And again, it's un-American.
	Thank you so much.
	Mona in New York there.
	Here's some of the reaction from you on the various other social medias that we have.
	Facebook Jim Dahmer saying it's a joke, it might be a bad one, but nothing to get excited about.
	President Trump does too much good for me to get upset.
	Some staff are putting up an insulting social media post towards Democrats.
	John Simmons saying he's too old to be acting like this.
	He's almost 80 and he's the president of the United States.
	He shouldn't be posting racist memes.
	He should be taking responsibility for his actions.
	Gerald Ernest adding, he didn't, he said he didn't do it, and I believe him.
	Look at all the crap that the majority of your callers have said about our great president over the last 10 years.
	And then Michael Bullerman from our Facebook page: Trump should apologize, and the quote-unquote staffer should be fired.
	Again, social media is available to you.
	Facebook.com/slash C-SPAN is how you do that on X.
	It's at C-SPANWJ.
	And you can text us too: 202-748-8003.
	Hakeem Jeffries, the House Minority Leader, on the posting of the video.
	This was before the president's comments yesterday, but he went to X himself adding his own thoughts on this.
	Warning callers, if you're watching at home, there is an expletive in this, but here's Hakeem Jeffries.
	This disgusting video posted by the so-called president was done intentionally.
	Donald Trump and his vile, racist, and malignant behavior.
	This guy is an unhinged bottom feeder.
	President Obama and Michelle Obama are brilliant, caring, and patriotic Americans.
	They represent the best of this country.
	It's time for John Thune, Mike Johnson, and Republicans to denounce this serial fraudster who's sitting at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue pretending to be the president of the United States.
	Let's hear from Cheryl in New York, Democrats line.
	Hello.
	Hi, good morning.
	We have the biggest thug in the country.
	He's disgusting.
	He's vow.
	He needs to be impeached.
	I can't wait till they figure out a way to do that, but he needs to be gone.
	He's divided the country.
	Well, let's stick to the comments of the video and the reaction.
	What do you think of that?
	What you've seen over the last 24 hours or so?
	It's disgusting.
	It's disgusting.
	And he wished that he was Obama.
	That's the problem.
	He's angry.
	He needs to go.
	Thank you.
	Cheryl in New York.
	Mimi is in Pennsylvania.
	Republican line.
	You're next up.
	Hello.
	You've got to be kidding me.
	This is the most important issue facing America.
	You want to take Trump down like all the other media.
	And all you're doing is creating animosity between the parties.
	Mimi, let me ask you this.
	The president himself chose to make comments to this topic and made extensive ones at that.
	She's gone.
	John is next.
	John in Connecticut, Independent Line.
	Good morning.
	You're next up.
	Yes.
	Good morning, Pedro.
	Yeah, I agree.
	That staffer should be fired, and that wasn't a smart thing to do from a sitting president.
	But I guess, Pedro, you haven't seen all the memes and things that have been posted about Donald J. Trump over the years.
	He gets berated every single minute of the day by you, by every other media in this country.
	And people are getting tired of it.
	And maybe he didn't see it totally, but if you saw the whole video, it's kind of funny in a sense.
	Okay.
	John in Connecticut giving us his thoughts.
	Some of the other people giving us thoughts or at least giving thoughts on the issue as well.
	One quoted in the Wall Street Journal this morning, and this you can find it online.
	But it quotes Mark Burns.
	He's a South Carolina pastor and the president and a supporter of President Trump.
	He spoke with the president about the post and said this: quote, the president made it clear to me that this post was made by a staffer, not by him.
	Burns wrote on social media, adding that he urged the president to fire the staffer, going on to say this: quote: This kind of insensitive and racist communication does not reflect the heart values and leadership of President of the United States, nor does it represent the America we are striving to build.
	Again, those are the comments from Mark Burns.
	Let's hear from Steve, Line for Republicans.
	He joins us from Massachusetts.
	Steve, go ahead.
	Hey, Pedro, good morning.
	C-SPAN has hit a new low by making this the question of the day.
	It's not a serious issue.
	And you do everything to make Trump look bad and give slaughter for the idiots to call in and trash him.
	You should change the Democratic line to the moron line.
	Well, let me ask you this: the president himself addressed it yesterday.
	Why not talk about it?
	He addressed it.
	And then you jump on this as a story.
	It's ridiculous of all the stuff in this country that is being pulled with fraud and attacks on ICE and law enforcement.
	This is your question of the day.
	You're an embarrassment.
	C-SPAN, three-quarters of your guests are liberal left-wing progressives.
	You try to be even, you're not.
	You're as bad as MSNBC.
	Well, no, I'll retort that we are even in what we do.
	We talk about a lot of issues during the day, including the ones you've mentioned.
	This is the issue that we're talking about now.
	The president himself deciding to make extensive comments on that.
	So that's that.
	Let's go to James.
	James in our independent line.
	He joins us from Florida.
	Hi.
	James in Fort Myers.
	Hello, James, let me interrupt you.
	I apologize.
	We can barely hear you.
	Can you get closer to your handset, please, or find a better signal?
	Okay, James, I apologize.
	Please, let's try to improve that signal.
	And if you can, and then we'll try to get you back on once you've improved that.
	Let's go to Mike.
	Mike in Reston, Virginia.
	Democrats line.
	Hi.
	Good morning.
	I think Trump is an embarrassment to the United States.
	He's a racist, a liar, and a fascist.
	He started his presidency with the burgerism against Barack Obama, our president.
	And he, when he published the newspaper to execute the five black guy, and he never apologized for that, he came down to Esquire, calling all Mexican racist.
	Okay, well, let's stick to the last 24 hours.
	What do you have to say about that?
	Well, he's lying about it.
	He did it.
	He does all the this.
	He does it all the time.
	And the people who said, oh, he should take it down and all this, no.
	The guy needs to be impeached.
	He's supposed to represent all America, not just the white Americans.
	And he's always after anybody, whenever he does something, he said, no, I didn't say it.
	I didn't do it.
	I don't know anything about it.
	The guy, New York Times, 30,000 times, he lied.
	The guy led an insurrection on January 6th.
	Okay.
	Let's go to Frank.
	Frank in Republican line, Idaho.
	Hello.
	Hey.
	Hey, I really enjoyed this show.
	The reason I get up early on Saturday morning.
	I just wanted to say one thing.
	On Friday, the stock market reached, the Dow Jones reached $50,000.
	My 401k is doing great.
	I'm going to have a happy retirement in Trump's golden age.
	Well, how does that relate to the last 24 hours, particularly this posting?
	What's that?
	How does it relate to the last 24 hours with this posting?
	How do those two things relate to you?
	Well, I'm hearing a lot of negative stuff.
	And I think Trump has done a wonderful job with the economy.
	And if he's going to go down in history 100 years from now, he's going to be more famous than Theodore Roosevelt.
	What did you think about the posting and the response to it?
	I don't know.
	I thought it was stupid, really.
	I don't know how something like that would happen.
	But, you know, when you think of what he's doing for the economy and the well-being of people and providing an opportunity in America to get whatever you want, I think we're in a golden age.
	So in your terms, if you think it was stupid, do you think there should be more apology coming from the president?
	Oh, geez.
	I mean, the guy is bombarded.
	He bombarded.
	People have been trying to put him in a jail for 10 years.
	30 tricks.
	Russia, Russia, Russia.
	I mean, come on.
	Let's all lighten up.
	Okay, that's Frank there in Idaho.
	You can join him in thoughts when it comes to the phone lines.
	There they are.
	The only rules we have, so to speak, are if you've called in the last 30 days, if you can hold off from doing so today and pick the line that best represents you.
	Cheryl up next.
	She in Knoxville, Tennessee, Independent Line.
	Hi, good morning.
	Thank you for C-SPAN.
	I really wish you all would not put that atrocious picture up again.
	I think it's a shame and a disgrace.
	And what I really hope is that the Obamas do not respond to this.
	I hope they take the high road and just do not respond.
	Because why?
	Well, because Trump knew, I believe it was Donald Trump's posting.
	So I do not believe it was a staffer.
	I don't believe anything happens in his administration without his approval.
	And I don't believe he didn't see it all.
	And even his own minister has tried to ask him to do the right thing, which he's refused to do.
	And so I just am hopeful that the Obamas will just take the high road and leave this low road to the administration.
	That's Cheryl, who is in Tennessee.
	Oscar joins us next.
	He is in North Carolina.
	Line for Republicans.
	Go ahead.
	I'm thinking that C-SPAN is showing her colors a little bit this morning because you're asking a trick question, which is a gotcha question.
	If anybody approves of it or praises Trump, the least bit, you're automatically a racist.
	Well, I'm not a racist any more than Al Sharpton is a racist.
	So I think that you really put a bad question up there that the only answer you can say is, oh, he's a terrible man.
	He lies every breath.
	I bet you don't laugh when he says, I want a Big Mac, but I think he's a good president.
	I think we'll keep him for a long time, I pray.
	Well, Oscar, we framed it more of a statement.
	What do you think about the posting and the president's reaction to it?
	It's not so much a question per se.
	We're asking people to react to the president's comments that he made himself.
	I have no reaction to that because President Trump is a man that speaks his mind.
	Now, he might be prejudiced.
	I'd say everybody has some prejudice in him.
	But I think C-SPAN as well as the rest of the media is just blowing it all out of proportions.
	So I say, let it slide.
	Something else will happen that will take the place of this soon.
	Thank you.
	Okay, Debbie, up next in Florida Democrats line.
	Hello.
	Good morning, Pedro.
	So good to hear your voice.
	I haven't called in in years, but regarding the issue you have today, you know, Donald Trump, you know, he had this reality show called, I forget the name of it, but it was all a reality show that, you know, he was supposed to be some big businessman.
	But it's clear that he's a pathological liar, a grifter, and a cheat.
	And he appears to have a staff that they are all willing in his administration to lie for him.
	So, you know, he still, President Trump still thinks he can convince the ignorant and the bigots of our country to believe the one election was stolen from, you know, when Biden won the election, the last one in between his two.
	So I don't expect him to apologize.
	I've never seen him admit to anything because that's been his whole thing on the apprentice: never admit you made a mistake.
	So I don't expect him to lie, and I certainly hope that none of our previous presidents, you know, will make any kind of statement.
	Let this hang in air.
	Let the people see our president all over the world for what he is.
	We can't defend the indefensible.
Ivey On Trump's Legacy 00:15:50
	Okay, one more call on this topic.
	This is Chris in Washington Republican line.
	You're next.
	Hi.
	Good morning, Pedro.
	There needs to be a complete addressing of the, you know, memes are like pieces of furniture.
	Pick the one you want to sit in and defend it, I guess.
	I think that it was a little distasteful, but it was not his post.
	And I think the overall point that needs to be made was made.
	And we're talking about the stolen election of 2020.
	It's not a false claim.
	I'm sorry.
	Okay.
	That is Chris joining us from Washington.
	We'll carry on.
	202-748-8000.
	One for Republicans.
	202-748-8000 for Democrats.
	Independents, 202-748-8002.
	Text us too at 202-748-8003.
	Before the President's comments from yesterday, the initial reaction from the White House about this posting came from the White House press secretary Caroline Levitt.
	She also appeared on Fox News to talk about the situation or the posting and the reaction to it.
	Here is a portion of that interview.
	I know the president did remove it, deleted it, but it was up for, I think, 12 hours or something like that.
	How did this happen?
	And can you really throw a staffer under the bus for this?
	Well, look, Laura, you know, it was a meme that was posted by a staffer on the president's true social account.
	It was from a Lying King video depicting, as you pointed out, different Democrats as different animals.
	I think Kamala Harris was depicted as a turtle in this video meme.
	The president did take it down.
	He spoke with lawmakers today out of respect for them, including Senator Tim Scott.
	The post was removed, but leave it to the leftist media, of course, to talk about this all day rather than talk about the fact that the Dow has broken over 50,000 points for the first time in our nation's history, rather than talk about what President Trump did last night,
	launching trumprx.gov, which is the first of its kind, amazing, beautiful website for direct-to-consumer drug purchases for the American people to go to trumprx.gov right now and to purchase prescription drugs that are at a much lower cost, sometimes more than 600% less, because of the successful deals that this president negotiated with pharmaceutical companies.
	It's great news.
	Yeah, it's phenomenal news.
	Actual solutions to problems that other politicians have kicked, you know, can kick down the road for years and years.
	But, you know, it's not just Democrats, there are Republican senators, Pete Ricketts, others saying, look, we understand it was us, but the president should just come out and apologize for it and say, look, this was a mistake.
	Sorry if it offended anyone.
	Why not?
	Well, look, I won't get ahead of the president, Laura, and he may be speaking with the press later today, but he did take down the post.
	And again, this is merely a distraction for the fake news media.
	Kelvin is next in Ohio.
	Democrats line.
	Hi.
	Yeah, it's getting on my nose to hear Republicans justify everything that Trump is doing.
	The guy is despicable.
	I mean, what more can he take from Americans?
	He's took health care.
	Republicans run around.
	Oh, look, Trump took health care.
	Ain't he the best?
	Oh, well, Trump just took education from Speak.
	Oh, look, that's wasteful and the beast.
	Trump's a good president.
	Oh, well, look, Trump just gave $40 billion to Argentina.
	Oh, Trump's the best president ever, man.
	Look, he's looking out for us.
	All right, well, let's stick to the last 24 hours.
	What was your reaction to that, please?
	To the point that they just justify everything that the man does, no matter how despicable it is.
	We all know if a white person, if a black person gets that by the white person, it'd be holy hell.
	But now that he, now that we all know Trump's a racist, he's always been a racist.
	And they just, like somebody said, the Pied Piper, Trump knows the language.
	He's things a good star.
	No matter how bad it is, they just falling right off a cliff.
	That's all I got.
	Republican line from Delaware.
	We'll hear from Mark.
	Hello.
	Hello, sir.
	How are you today?
	I'm well, thank you.
	Good, good, good.
	Have a good morning, I hope.
	I think the biggest problem is he deserved what he got after what Obey did to Trump.
	Here's the thing, sir.
	Think about it.
	I used to, I was at least grew up in D.C., I was born in D.C., grew up there all my life.
	I've seen, I'm the only white kid in the class half the time.
	I see people come from all over the world and they come here, first generation, the child who speaks perfect English better than me and own a business.
	Why is it everybody in the world can come here and do that, but people here can't do it?
	I don't understand that.
	They come from Africa, the country itself, the continent itself.
	I know people from Nigeria, Uganda, all sorts of countries that make money.
	Why don't they make the money here?
	I think we can.
	How does that relate to the posting and the taking down of the said posting?
	Well, it doesn't really.
	I thought in my first sentence, spoke that.
	He deserved it after what he did to Trump.
	And I don't even like Trump.
	I think he's a-hole, to be honest with you.
	But I voted for him because the country was so screwed up.
	We can't continue in the direction we're in.
	Thank God he came around and turned us around.
	Dominic is next.
	Dominic in Colorado, Independent Line.
	Hi.
	Hi, how are you doing this morning?
	Fine, thanks.
	Go ahead.
	I think that when somebody shows you who you are, you should absolutely believe them.
	Trump has a habit of throwing red meat to his base when things come out that he doesn't want to talk about.
	For instance, let's take a look at how January was the worst month for job cuts since 2009.
	He wants to claim that he's the best in everything that he does, but it seems like anytime something comes out that may hurt him or may make people think about him in a different way, he throws these racist red meat things straight to his base, and that's what gets everybody talking about things other than what we should be talking about, like the price of health care, job cuts, why you can't afford to send your kid to college,
	or why you go to the grocery store and pay an astronomical amount of money for everyday goods.
	So we all know that he is a racist.
	It's very clear, in my opinion.
	He shows it time and time again.
	But what I think that we need to do is stop being outraged by these little things and start taking a look at the big picture that's actually going on.
	Willie is in Miami, Republican line.
	Go ahead.
	Yes.
	You're on.
	Go ahead, please.
	Yes.
	Oh, I'm sorry.
	You're from Michigan.
	I apologize.
	Willie from Michigan.
	Sorry.
	Yes.
	I am a, I was born in 1953.
	I've seen a lot of racism, black and white water fountains, places where black people could not go.
	Those things you have to overlook because the real problem are the Democrats.
	Everyone has a hate crime bill except the black people.
	That's the fault of the Democrats.
	All they do is look for small things that will upset the people, but they never offer any solutions.
	They were the ones that set up a free abortion clinic at the Democratic Convention.
	People.
	So, Willie, to the comment, though, it was a black senator, Tim Scott, who started the criticism towards the president on this issue.
	What do you think of that?
	Well, Tim Scott is a weak person.
	All he does is run to whatever issue that will make him look good.
	This is something that the Democrats have to take care of.
	Instead of crying about these things, give us a hate crime bill to where these things, when they happen, people will have to pay for it.
	And it'll end all of this.
	Thank you.
	One more call on this topic.
	David in North Carolina, Democrats line.
	Hi.
	Hi.
	This is David.
	One of our problems is going to talk about what happened on yesterday.
	Mr. Trump, you can change a man's mind, but you can't change his heart.
	And this is where the problem is.
	Trump has this issue within his heart.
	He's going to always be that way.
	But the best thing you do is for the Obamas not to respond.
	The best thing for the media to do is to set up and say, hey, listen, let's stop publicizing him so much.
	We'll tone him down.
	Eventually, he's going to have to get out of office.
	And when he's out of office, they say, we're going to be able to get this place back going and get it back straight.
	But right now, since Donald Trump has been in office, this is what he has done continuously with respect to the United States, the people who has the authority to straighten this thing up, need to stand up, have some gut, and put him back in order.
	I would say to America, let's stay away from the ignorance.
	This is in Donald Trump's heart.
	He's a 78-year-old man, and statistics shows that an average lifespan is about seven to four years.
	Here we are.
	It's not that much longer.
	Okay, okay.
	We'll leave it there.
	Here's the plan from now until the end of the hour.
	If you want to participate, you can do so in open forum.
	Same lines for you to use if you want to do that.
	202-748-8001 for Republicans.
	202-748-8000 for Democrats.
	Independents.
	2020 748-8002.
	You can still comment on what we started with, or you can choose other news and topics related to politics.
	We'll do that until our next guest joins us.
	One more bit from the last story we did.
	Representative Glenn Ivey, the Democrat from Maryland, made his own comments about the president's posting and the larger issues around it.
	Here are the comments of Democrat Representative, Democratic Representative Glenn Ivey of Maryland.
	Go.
	Well, I mean, it is racist.
	It's shocking.
	It's sickening.
	You know, and we should all be disgusted by it.
	But I think we also need to make sure we're not distracted by it as well.
	I mean, the president's had a very bad series of weeks here.
	And, you know, some of the things you just pointed out, but also, you know, losing that Texas Senate race, the beating they took on the health care piece and continue to take because they've allowed the healthcare tax credits to expire with respect to ICE and the killings that have taken place and the detentions and how that's flipped the issue on him.
	They're now way underwater.
	I think the 65 to 70% of Americans disapprove of the way he's handling that situation.
	And there are others like that too.
	You know, the economy, he's failing to focus on bringing down the high costs and increasing costs of things like rent and groceries and utilities.
	And the American people are like, wait a second, we voted for you to try and address those issues.
	You're dealing with everything else but that.
	And we don't even have to bring up the Epstein files, right?
	So, you know, there's a lot going on that's bad for the Trump White House.
	You know, and frequently these types of things pop up when things are, you know, at a low.
	But I think he's going to continue to go low, and I think they're going to continue to get worse for him.
	I think the public's tiring of this.
	Even the MAGA dieharders, I think, losing some patience for all this kind of nonsense.
	And that was Representative Glenn Ivey.
	Again, you can continue on your thoughts when it comes to the posting we were talking about during open forum.
	You can talk about other matters as well on this time up until the end of the top of the hour when it comes to the Epstein files.
	What you heard Representative Ivey mention one of the news stories that came out yesterday is that the Department of Justice said it will begin allowing lawmakers to review the unredacted Jeffrey Epstein files starting then in the wake of criticism that the administration has improperly shielded the identities of various people.
	Quote, I am writing to confirm that the department is making unredacted versions of more than 3 million pages of publicly released documents available for review by both houses of Congress starting Monday.
	That was the Assistant Attorney General Patrick Davis writing in that letter to all 535 members that was obtained by the Hill.
	Lawmakers will be able to review the files in a reading room at the Department of Justice.
	While they are not permitted to bring electronic devices, they may take notes.
	The story adding that the alert came after several members of Congress said they had questions about whether the DOJ had fully complied with the law requiring the public release of the files.
	Birmingham, Alabama, Independent Line on this open forum.
	Hello, you're next.
	Hey.
	You're on.
	Go ahead, please.
	Hi.
	Yes.
	I'm 72 years old, born and raised in Alabama.
	And remember when there were separate bathrooms and separate water fountains for people of color?
	And I thought one day things would get better.
	I did.
	I did.
	I watched You Kill a Mockingbird.
	I read the book.
	Things are not better.
	I'm so shocked by that.
	But the president said was awful.
	It hurts my heart.
	It just does.
	I just can't believe that people hate like that.
	They don't look at the person.
	They look at the color of their skin.
	And it will never end.
	I don't think it will ever end.
	And I'm so sorry that people like this man to see him.
	And that's what I have to say.
	Down there in Birmingham, Alabama.
	This is Jill.
	Jill is in Wisconsin, Republican line.
	Hi.
	Good morning.
	I understand why the president did not earn the, was it Nobel Prize?
	That's what he was hoping to get, yes.
	No, but this right here deplects the morals, the values, the ethics.
	I understand.
	God is watching.
	Thank you.
	That is Jill in Wisconsin.
	And by the way, the Epstein files, because of the calling by the calling of Bill and Hillary Clinton to testify on these issues on Capitol Hill in front of the House Oversight Committee, that garnered a response from the former Secretary of State early this week.
	It was former President Bill Clinton adding a series of postings on X when it comes to the topic.
	He says this, I have called for the full release of the Epstein files.
	I have provided a sworn statement of what I know, and just this week I agreed to appear in person before the committee, but it's still not enough for Republicans on the House Oversight Committee.
	He goes on to say that now Chairman Comer says he wants cameras, but only behind closed doors.
	Who benefits from this arrangement?
	It's not Epstein's victims who deserve justice, not the public who deserve the truth.
Calls for Epstein Files Release 00:10:30
	It serves only partisan interest.
	This is not fact-finding.
	It's pure politics.
	And he finishes by saying, I will not sit idly by.
	I will not sit idly as they use me as a prop in a closed-door kangaroo court by a Republican Party running scared.
	If they want answers, let's stop the games and do this the right way in a public hearing where the American people can see for themselves what this is really about.
	Again, those are the comments of former President Bill Clinton on investigations into the Epstein files.
	Helen is next on the open forum in Kentucky Democrats line.
	Hi.
	Hi, thank you so much for taking my call.
	I was calling about the post.
	I think it is absolutely racist.
	I think it's intentional.
	It's the oldest trope in the book.
	And when the targeted party isn't laughing, it's not a joke.
	But this is not anything new.
	What I'm discouraged about is that people are willing to place feelings over facts.
	You might not like things like the asylum law, but it's the law.
	And it's just further excuse to dehumanize people.
	It's tied in.
	If you watch the video, which this was all intentional, it points into these false claims about the election.
	I think it's a sad time in history that military is willing to go against the Constitution, that a con artist has made his way into the White House and he is fleecing America as we speak.
	The question is, what are we going to do about it?
	And when I say we, I mean white women, me.
	What are we going to do about this?
	This has been a racist nation.
	White supremacy is rising.
	Capitalism, the patriarchy, we need to speak up and speak out and try to get democracy back.
	And thanks for taking my call.
	New Hampshire is where Cecil is on our independent line.
	All right.
	Good morning.
	So I may begin by saying I'm an original Jersey girl and I'm 71 years old and I grew up with that man across the river and no one ever liked him.
	And the fact that he now sits in the White House is just an abomination.
	As far as this racist thing that was posted, he knew it.
	He knows all about it.
	He can't say, oh, I didn't know.
	It's just another one of his shiny objects for us to watch over here while he does everything he can to destroy this country over there.
	The fact that now we have this new drug thing, Trump, our ex, he wants to put his name on everything.
	I want to know, where's that money going?
	Is it going into some offshore account when people order off of this?
	He's taken away our health care.
	He's taken away food benefits for children.
	He's taken away education.
	He wants to destitute this country.
	And if no one realizes that, the ones he talks about Trump syndrome, Duran's Trump syndrome, his people are the ones who are suffering from it because they can't see the forest for the trees.
	Okay, that's Cecil there in New Hampshire in Kentucky.
	Larry on our line for Republicans.
	Go ahead.
	Yeah, I just wanted to, obviously, we're talking about the Post.
	Obviously, it's totally unfortunate, but it's the political world we're in now.
	People just put stupid things online, and the more and more it happens, it just becomes more watered down.
	The other thing is about Donald Trump that's unfortunate is he can't get out of his own way.
	He takes two steps forward and then one step back when he does something silly like this.
	And he just, it'd be nice to see him go a whole week without just stupid, outrageous news.
	And that's all I got to say.
	Paul in Texas, Democrats line.
	Hello, you're next.
	Yes.
	You know, stupidity is real coming in America.
	And these Republicans calling in and trying to defend that, that's because they're biggest, just like Trump.
	You know, I just hope that and pray that it's enough moderate Republicans to where they can this coming November that we can take the House and the Senate and put handcuffs on that idiot we got in the White House.
	In terms of economics, one of the things that made news yesterday is the headline of the WALL Street Journal this morning, the Dow Jones hitting 50,000 for the first time.
	And according to analysis of this, saying this, an era of ultra-low interest rates helped spur the longest post-war expansion in U.S. history and pump Silicon Valley into a global juggernaut.
	Washington threw massive amounts of money into the financial system and economy to propel a rapid rebound from the pandemic.
	An artificial intelligence boom has more recently juiced the stock market at historic scales.
	The Dowell's final push above 50,000 arrived at an unlikely moment as Wall Street has ramped up scrutiny of AI mania and a slump in software stocks began spilling into other areas of the market in recent days.
	Investors have funneled money into real economy stocks and a wager that the U.S.'s growth is once again accelerating.
	Again, that's the analysis from the Wall Street Journal from this morning.
	You can roll that into what we have as far as open forum is concerned.
	Faye in Missouri, Independent Line.
	Hi.
	Can you hear me?
	Yep, you're on.
	Go ahead.
	Okay, thank you.
	You know, it really hurted my heart to see that post that Trump retweeted.
	It just really hurted my heart.
	I could have cried.
	But we were not, me and my brothers, me and my sisters and brothers were not brought up to be racist.
	And I just didn't think that here in the 20th century now, that we see our own president of the United States, you know, retreating something like this.
	I think we should keep this going and going and going, just like when Emma Timmy's mother, they tried to talk her out of not showing his body.
	And she said, I'm going to do this because I want people to see what they've done to my child.
	So we should just keep this going and going because this is outrageous.
	And I don't care what nobody thinks or how they try to rephrase it or whatever.
	They always coming to Trump's rescue.
	And we should stop this.
	We should stop this right now.
	This is ridiculous.
	And people are just laughing at us.
	Keep it going.
	Keep it going, people.
	Keep this going.
	We do not need a racist president for the United States of America.
	Okay.
	Okay.
	JC in North Carolina, Republican line.
	Yeah, I was just speaking on the post Trump put up.
	I didn't find anything racist.
	Would it have been any different if the Obamas was on a zebra or an elephant?
	I think the Democrats are just trying to divide this country because they didn't get into office and they continue to do it and make this man look as bad as they can.
	I mean, should he have done it?
	Probably not, but I didn't find anything racist.
	And again, you know, I'm a Trump supporter, and I think he's doing the best that he can with what he got because the Democrats continue to find a way to divide this country.
	And that's all I got.
	That's JC, Republican line.
	Jovana joins us from New Hampshire, Democrats line.
	Hello.
	Hey, good morning, Pedro.
	I am so thrilled to be on your show.
	I've just been watching the show for the couple of years, but it's really nice to hear opinions from all over.
	I'm commenting on the post made by the President of the United States, and I believe it was him that did it.
	And my question is just this: it's like, why do it at all?
	He has so much to do with, he's not doing his job.
	He should be presidential, worried about the state of this country, and not doing it.
	And my comment for Americans is: have you forgot your empathy?
	Have you forgot what is right, what is wrong?
	Morally.
	I mean, to hear the lady from Birmingham, Alabama cry almost made me want to cry too.
	And I also want to say that everybody has to answer for themselves.
	And the only way that evil will triumph is that good people don't do anything.
	And I think people have to watch out for their neighbors, first of all, and just be a good citizen.
	You know, this is horrible.
	And the ones that have caused the vision that I've seen are the Trump people.
	You know, I hate to put blame on you, but it's just very sad to see a country divided when we should stand together to make things better.
	Okay.
	That's a viewer from New Hampshire, political reporting this morning that a federal appeals court last night backed the Trump administration's policy to lock up the vast majority of people it is seeking to deport without offering a chance for bond, even if they have no criminal records and have resided in the country for decades.
	A divided three-judge panel on the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals concluded that the administration's view, a reversal of every administration position for the last 30 years, is the correct interpretation of the federal government's power to detain people targeted for deportation.
Elon's Vision for Offices & Jobs 00:10:55
	Quote, that prior administrations decided to use less than their full enforcement authority does not mean they lack the authority to do more.
	That was Judge Edith Jones, a Reagan appointee writing for the 2-1 majority.
	The matter could soon be headed for Supreme Court consideration, according to the story from Politico.
	This is in Illinois.
	Marianne, you're up next, Independent Line.
	Hello, my fellow citizens.
	Good morning, and thank you for this time.
	I'm called in today because I am an independent, because I see how divided our country is.
	And I just called in today to give all of our fellow citizens some motivation that we pay our legislators $174,000 a year.
	We pay the majority and minority leaders $193,000 a year.
	We pay the Speaker of the House $223,000 a year not to do their jobs.
	Any other CEO would be fired.
	Now, the people that walk in their offices are lobbyists because they're consistent.
	They show up in district offices and call them every day.
	We need to use our civil duty and pick up the phone and call our Capitol Line at 202-224-3121.
	That number, again, is 202-224-3124.
	Marianne, let me ask you this.
	You listed out a lot of facts there, but you overall said that they're not doing their jobs.
	What specifically do you look at?
	And that says they're not doing their jobs.
	What are you looking at specifically?
	We need to start having a PAC or an organization of we the people where we vet our people in our area.
	Sure, sure.
	But when you look at the, but when you look at the actions of Congress, what convinces you that they're not doing their job specifically?
	Well, they're arguing and they forgot what it's like to be in debate class and have some moral empathy and kindness towards our fellow citizens.
	I don't agree with what the Republicans are doing at all right now.
	I don't agree what Joe Biden did, but at least Joe Biden stepped down when we all knew that he needed to step down.
	And I think we all could be on the same page that this president needs to step down.
	Okay, got your point.
	This is Bobby in Pennsylvania Republican line.
	Go ahead.
	Yes.
	Hello.
	I don't know what the true circumstances are concerning that post, but I want to inform people, you could Google this, that the Democratic president that we had in office, Woodrow Wilson, that he was a true racist.
	He even believed in the Ku Klux camp, Clinton.
	So people can Google that for a fact.
	But, you know, as far as I'm concerned, Obama did a lot to harm President Trump.
	And nobody wants to talk about that.
	And he is being an effective president.
	Who else would you want in there right now?
	You tell me.
	If I may ask, how did former President Obama hurt President Trump specifically?
	Well, if you want to really get down to the nitty-gritty, President Obama is the one who started the race card.
	And, you know, the race card has become so frivolous anymore.
	It's a joke.
	Why are people attacking this president?
	You know, President Trump has a lot of, I mean, how much can a man take?
	How much can he take of all that they did, all the lies they try to sabotage his presidency?
	I believe he did win in the 2020, according to the Georgia Fulton County, all of those, you know, votes.
	Okay.
	Taryn up next in North Carolina Democrats line.
	Hello.
	Hi.
	Hi, you're on.
	Hi.
	Hi.
	I'm not sure about the live caller.
	I've never heard Obama refer to any past or present president in any racist way.
	I have not.
	And this president's behavior, what he said, what he posted was just mean-spirited, pure evil.
	I thank God that I was not raised in a racist home.
	My parents weren't perfect, but they taught us to love everyone.
	And I thank them for that.
	This man has a second chance to come in and to make the world better.
	And he chooses to be pure evil.
	And as far as the Democrats, we must remind him, like Elon Musk said, he would have never won this election without him.
	Elon said it out of his mouth.
	I heard him say it.
	I didn't read no post.
	I watched him say it.
	He would have never won this election without him.
	Elon said that.
	And that's why he got upset with Elon.
	And Democrats, we need to remind him of this every day.
	You would never won this with Elon Musk, which means you didn't win this election fairly.
	What he said was pure evil.
	It was mean-spirited.
	And it was hurtful.
	Okay, one more call.
	And this will be from Mary Ellen in Pennsylvania Democrats line.
	Hi.
	Hi.
	I love C-SPAN, and I donate.
	I just wanted to say that Trump tapped into an unacknowledged racism in our country.
	And I know it's not everybody.
	There's a lot of good people, but there's a solid portion of them.
	And it's just, he's the president of all people, and he's an extension of who we are.
	Do people want America to be thought of like that?
	People have elected a person who's a grifter, a misogynist, a white nationalist supported by evangelicals in the former Confederate state.
	I wasn't surprised that the very first caller said it didn't matter, and it didn't matter to him.
	And a person calling about their 401ks.
	That's what's sad about this, that people do not even realize that he's harming and talking about a portion of our country.
	I just count on the decent white people to stand up to him because this is disgraceful.
	Okay, Marielle, and finishing off this round of open forum, for those of you who participate in the last hour, two minutes, thank you for doing so.
	We'll have two guests joining us throughout the course of the morning to give various thoughts on topics later on in the program.
	We'll talk with the Arms Control Association's Darrell Kimball.
	We'll discuss not only this week's expiration of the nuclear arms pact between the U.S. and Russia, but also possible next steps.
	But first, KFF Health News Senior Editor Stephanie Stapleton on the decline in ACA enrollment after the enhanced subsidies expired at the end of the last year and other topics related to that.
	She'll join us when Washington Journal continues.
	Congressman Cohen, welcome to the program.
	Thank you.
	It's good C-SPAN still funded by the government.
	It is not funded by the government.
	What do you mean?
	Well, I thought you don't get any money from the government at all.
	No, not at all, and we never have.
	What a disappointment to Elon Musk.
	I'm sure he liked to doge to you.
	Thanks for having me.
	Love C-SPAN.
	Appreciate the opportunity to come out.
	You know, I wish we could have a thousand C-SPANs across the media spectrum.
	Unfortunately, we don't.
	I think C-SPAN is a huge, huge asset to America, not just the coverage that we get of both chambers on one and two, but programs like Washington Journal that allow policymakers, lawmakers, personalities to come on and have this question time during Washington Journal.
	So it's a huge benefit.
	I hope that all these streaming services carry C-SPAN as well because it's an important service to the American people.
	I'm actually thrilled that this time on Washington Journal, I'm getting a lot of really substantive questions from across the political aisle.
	Our country would be a better place if every American just watched one hour a week.
	They could pick one, two, or three.
	Just one hour a week, and we'd all be a much better country.
	So thank you for your service.
	Next week on the C-SPAN Networks, the House and Senate are in session.
	Both chambers must pass legislation to extend funding for the Homeland Security Department, past the Midnight Friday deadline to avert a department shutdown.
	On Monday, the Heritage Foundation hosts a conversation with Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on the first anniversary of his confirmation.
	On Tuesday, the House Homeland Security Committee will conduct an oversight hearing of the department's ICE, Customs and Border Protection, and United States Citizenship and Immigration Services agencies.
	Then on Wednesday, the House Judiciary Committee will have an oversight hearing on the Department of Justice investigating recent controversies within the department.
	And Thursday, National Transportation Safety Board Chair Jennifer Homindy testifies before the Senate Commerce Committee investigating the systematic failures that led to a mid-air collision, killing 67 people last year.
	Watch live next week on the C-SPAN networks or on C-SPAN Now, our free mobile video app.
	Also, head over to C-SPAN.org for scheduling information or to watch live or on demand anytime.
	c-span democracy unfiltered declines in aca enrollment since the end of extended subsidies last december Stephanie Stapleton, welcome to the program.
	Hi, thank you for having me.
	Let's start with KFF so people know what it is.
	KFF Health News, what is that?
	Okay, well, it's interesting.
	KFF is sort of the umbrella organization and it specializes in providing quality independent health organization to people just in general.
	So there's a polling arm, then there is a policy arm, and then there's the nonprofit news organization, which is where I work, KFF Health News.
	And so I imagine one of these topics you've been and your colleagues have been looking at since a long time is ACA enrollment.
Dramatic Shifts in ACA Subsidies 00:14:31
	We've seen some different numbers this year at the start compared to years previous.
	Paint the picture of where we're at with those numbers.
	Okay, well, so open enrollment on the Federal Exchange ended on January 15th.
	States have a little more variation because let me just take, it's also very complicated, like healthcare.
	This is very complicated.
	So there's the federal exchange and then 20 states in the District of Columbia operate their own exchanges.
	Now, those states have a little more flexibility in when their deadlines might be.
	Some of them went to the end of January.
	But in general, open enrollment for the Federal Exchange ended January 15th.
	And the first round of numbers that came in in terms of signups totaled about 23 million, which is 1.2 million below this time last year.
	And that, of course, everyone was really watching that closely because it was, you know, now we don't have the enhanced subsidies.
	What's going to become of the signup numbers?
	But that's just the first glance.
	It's going to take months for the actual numbers to shake out.
	And so $23 million in 2026, like what you just said, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services back up that $24 million for 2025.
	It also says that for new consumers, as they've defined them, for 2026, 3 million signing up comparing to 4 million the year previous, and then returning consumers, 19.5 million this time around, 20 million for the previous year.
	What do those numbers tell us as well?
	Well, the one thing that's interesting to think about is the returning customers.
	Those are the people that are already in ACA plans.
	Many, many of those people are automatically re-enrolled in the same plan they have or a similar plan, which, and this is one of the reasons why the numbers have to shake out over time.
	Because for some of those people, the first time they're really going to focus in on what their new cost is is when they pay their premium, that first premium.
	And so that's when the sticker shot could hit.
	So the thought is that, you know, people are going to be like, oh my God, this is a lot higher.
	Estimates are that it could be like double or even more, which is a lot for any household budget to absorb.
	And so, you know, they might not pay their first premium.
	They might try to pay a premium and kind of realize over time that it's not going to work for them.
	That's what we're watching.
	And, you know, it's going to be, as I said, a few months probably into summer before the numbers are more final.
	So Vic, those things could skew the numbers themselves.
	We could see even more downward trends.
	Is that the possibility there?
	That's kind of the idea, yes.
	When it comes to the subsidies themselves, step back a little bit.
	Let's say I'm a person facing those new payments without a subsidy.
	How much do those subsidies cover at the beginning, approximately?
	Oh, heavens, this is a hard question.
	I guess it varies by plan and by your own income level.
	The biggest difference with the enhanced subsidies, what that did was it expanded the eligibility for this kind of premium support to People would have to pay a lower percentage of their household income toward their premium, and they would also have no income cap to qualify for the subsidies.
	So, that's why you saw, you know, it's many more people signed up.
	Those enhanced subsidies were credited with the record-breaking sign-ups that we've had in recent years up until this year.
	Remind people about the enhanced subsidies themselves.
	How long were they designed to last?
	Well, that's a great question.
	So, they came as sort of a COVID-era benefit to help people, you know, get over those difficult days.
	And that was part of the argument that we heard last fall when Congress was and into the winter, obviously, when Congress was debating whether to extend the subsidies or not.
	Some people kept saying these were intended to be temporary, they were part of this public health emergency, and that public health emergency is over.
	And they do cost money, you know.
	So, that was one of the arguments against extending them.
	I suppose that the issue is that people came to depend on them.
	Yes, very much.
	And so, now that the loss is there, you say that we're still months away from knowing for sure where the numbers are.
	We have the first blush estimate from what we're seeing from the Centers for Medicaid and Medicaid Services.
	Talk a little bit about what the potential is.
	Well, let's start with this.
	Who is dropping out?
	If we're talking about the numbers that you're seeing, who's dropping out primarily?
	Well, what we've seen, and this is again when I was talking about the federal exchanges and the state exchanges, there are you know around 7 million, 7.2 million people signed up through the state exchanges.
	And that's where we're kind of getting the most detail at this point about who signed up or didn't sign up.
	Across the board, a lot of states did see fairly strong drops.
	Some states managed to find ways to use their own money to provide some support.
	And those states, there were actually some of them that had some increases because they were still providing sort of that subsidy-like assistance.
	But across the board, they had pretty dramatic drops.
	And one state I know, Pennsylvania, their numbers indicated that the two categories of people, kind of demographic groups, I guess, that were the biggest drop-offs were people aged 55 to 64, because those are the people that insurers can charge the highest premiums.
	And then, of course, the 2030-somethings, you know, we during the ACA debate, we called them the young invincibles.
	You know, they're like, you can see in the cost-benefit analysis, they might be more comfortable going bare without insurance.
	But take out the young invincibles, it ultimately affects down the line.
	Is that the idea?
	Well, you know, the whole notion of insurance is that you want to spread the risk, so you do want the young health people, young, healthy people in the risk pool.
	So, that does help control costs.
	Okay.
	Stephanie Stapleton joins us for this conversation.
	And if you want to ask her questions about the current state of the ACA, you heard her talk about declines in current enrollment for 2026, 2027-8001 for Republicans, 202-748-8,000 for Democrats, and Independents 202-748-8002.
	And if you want to text us your thoughts, you can do that at 202-748-8003.
	When you take a look at the history of the subsidies, what are the main concerns as far as what you're seeing reporting-wise as the year goes on?
	said those numbers could shift.
	What trends might appear?
	Well, I can tell you one of the trends that has already appeared is that people have shifted to what they call them the bronze plans.
	And just also another quick reminder, the ACA plans have metal tiers that reflect the benefits that you get.
	So there's gold, silver, platinum, gold, silver, then bronze.
	And the bronze are lowest premium, highest deductible.
	And so there's been a pretty dramatic shift to the bronze coverage, which means that people just want to be able to have some insurance.
	They can pay, you know, that premium is the most affordable one, but it does create, you know, then it's like, oh my goodness, am I going to be able to pay my deductible?
	You know, the average deductible cost of the bronze plans is $7,500.
	We'll talk more about that.
	I want to ask you, though, what has the Trump administration done as far as compensation at all?
	Has it come back with anything saying, hey, we understand this happened.
	Here's how we plan to meet that.
	Well, during, I think we can talk about this on two levels.
	Like, first, during the debate about the subsidies, I think it kind of the president sort of came to this idea that instead of paying the insurance companies these subsidies that help them, you know, underwrite the insurance costs, the dollars should go directly to people.
	And so that was sort of this direct to people was sort of his idea.
	And then earlier this year, last month, January, it's February now, he did unveil his Great American Healthcare Plan.
	And that sort of reiterated that concept of finding a way to give the people money directly.
	That was one key part of the plan.
	And that would be sort of modeled after the health savings account concept.
	I think most people are pretty familiar with that idea.
	And let me also talk about a recent addition to the health care efforts of the president when it comes to prescription drugs, Trump RX, which he announced last year.
	I want to play a little bit of what he had to say about that and roll that into the conversation.
	Okay.
	Under the most favored nation agreements, my administration has negotiated.
	The United States will pay the lowest price paid by any other country.
	So we're taking the lowest price paid for drugs we will pay equal to whatever the lowest price anywhere in the world.
	That's the price that you're going to be paying.
	It's a tremendous reduction.
	Drug prices in other nations will go up by doing this.
	They had to agree, and the reason they agreed is I used tariffs.
	I said, if you don't put them up, then we're going to put tariffs on your nation, which would be more expensive to you.
	So in many cases, the drug costs will go up by double and even triple for them, but they're going way down for the United States, come all the way down by a difference of as much as 300, 400, 500, even 600%, even more than that in some cases.
	For example, you will see dramatic reductions in the cost of popular weight loss drugs known as GLP1s, GLP1s.
	Novo Nordesk will be slashing the price, as an example, of Ozempic from more than $1,000 to $199.
	And the price of Wegovi from more than $1,300 to $199.
	Nobody can even believe it, a 578% difference.
	Eli Lilly, who's been very helpful to us in getting this done, will be cutting the cost of its common insulin drug and medication from $200 to $25.
	Nobody can believe it.
	And Stephanie Sampleton, there are a larger aspect of the president's, or at least this administration's efforts on health care.
	We'll talk about that in a bit.
	We have calls lined up to talk about the ACA Tony in Pennsylvania.
	Independent Line, thank you for holding.
	Tony, go ahead.
	Yes, good morning.
	Great topic.
	I think part of the problem with when we talk about healthcare is we're often not using good data and facts.
	And often it's scare tactics.
	And so when I think about the ACA, and I think about when that was a passed during the Obama administration, private health insurance stocks soared.
	That was a giveaway to industry.
	It didn't have a public auction, so it wasn't going to control costs.
	But we rarely talk about facts.
	And then Trump's plan, giving a little money to each person so they can maybe manage their runaway health care cost also doesn't seem to be based in reality of controlling costs.
	And so what's often missing is we sort of ignore the rest of the world where they've solved health care and made it affordable.
	And there's sort of universal health care.
	It's affordable.
	They pay less.
	They have better outcomes.
	Their people live longer.
	We just ignore all that.
	And then generally, we have talking heads that come on your program that scare people.
	During elections, I'll say something like, oh, my gosh, well, if we went to universal health care, it's going to cost $32 trillion over 10 years.
	But what they leave out of the conversation is that the current system is costing $50 billion, and it is expensive.
	It has poor outcomes.
	And roughly right now, prior to these cuts to ACA, we had about 68,000 Americans dying a year because of delayed and denied access to care.
	You can increase that now by about 50,000 a month.
	So we're talking about 9,000 Americans dying per month unnecessarily for an expensive system that doesn't provide good care, that enriches CEOs.
	And I think that's why Luigi, when he may have done something, he may have not, but people cheered when that healthcare CEO was killed.
	Okay, we'll leave it there.
	You brought a lot of things to the table when it comes to the overall cost of health care.
	Do you want to start there or wherever?
	I will note that one of the things during our coverage at KFF Health News during the debate over the extension of the subsidies, one of my colleagues, Stephanie Armour, she wrote a story about how, you know, affordability,
	this does encapsulate the affordability issue, but also the fact that Congress was debating the subsidies and that this had become such a heated argument was almost a lost opportunity because the debate was just about maintaining the status quo.
	It wasn't about getting at the very complicated underlying factors that drive up health care costs.
	So that, I mean, that continues to be really interesting to me.
	If I'm a health insurer company, how do I look at the drop of these numbers that we're talking about?
	Oh, my.
	You know, I have not thought about that.
	I would imagine that that's not something that they welcome because that would get at their bottom line too.
	But Rhonda in New Jersey, Democrats line.
	Hi.
Health Care Costs in Red States 00:15:48
	Hi.
	Good morning, America.
	My question for you regarding the subsidies being taken away from all Americans, basically, I think it's going to affect everyone in the country.
	Where is this money going?
	What is he doing with our money?
	He's robbing us.
	I saw on TV where Donald Trump opened up a secret account in Qator.
	This man is robbing us.
	And not only that, now with the EBT subsidies, they're saying that if a child is 14, he has to go work.
	And if he doesn't find a job within two months, he disqualifies.
	Well, caller, there's a lot there.
	Specifically, what would you like our guest to address, please?
	I would like to know where is our money going?
	Where is this money being diverted?
	Because I guarantee you it's going in his pocket.
	I guarantee you it is because he's a thief.
	Okay.
	You know, I think I can only answer that question kind of generally because the subsidies are expensive.
	You know, they do cost the federal budget.
	And so I think in this whole changing priorities of the Trump administration versus, say, the previous administrations, that's part of that calculation.
	Patrick in Michigan, on our line for others, hello.
	Go ahead.
	Hello.
	I would just like to say I'm a small business owner and I was on the ACA.
	Still I'm on the ACA.
	My deductibles went up by 100%.
	They doubled.
	My monthly payout went up 600%.
	I had no choice but to drop my plan coverage from a silver to a bronze to be able to afford health care going forward.
	So I'd like to say that the easy answer to this is universal health care for all.
	Well, first, I'd like to say thank you for calling because you sort of gave a voice to exactly what the number said that I was talking about at the top of this show.
	And also, your experience is something that we're hearing a lot about at KFF Health News.
	We have started just recently a new series called Priced Out, and it began because of the subsidies and because of people like this who have faced this really difficult decision about how to proceed.
	And we're getting so just an outpouring of comments from readers who are going through what our caller is going through, but also sometimes people who have insurance and still can't afford health care.
	So, you know, it just says to me that this is a really, really important issue.
	Is there a common theme that's emerging from those you were talking about about why they make the decisions they do when it comes to well I mean you know it's some it's often the decision like do I pay my mortgage or do I pay for health insurance?
	You know it's people have to make really difficult choices within their own budget.
	There's not an easy answer to the question.
	For those who are under the ACA with stories like him saying my costs went up considerably, what drives those increases?
	Is it the insurance company?
	Are there other factors that drives the increases that people pay under ACA?
	Well this increase is definitely the loss of the enhanced subsidies.
	Now there are you know before the enhanced subsidies took effect there were less generous subsidies and those still exist but they are you know they the eligibility for those is more narrow and they are much less generous so people don't feel that same boost.
	And those subsidies are from the federal government?
	Yes.
	And as far as the eligibility, what weighs into who gets those types of subsidies?
	Well again it's sort of what I mentioned a little bit earlier.
	We're back now that the enhanced subsidies are gone, the COVID era enhanced subsidies.
	We're back to the original subsidies, and those deal with first there's a household, you know, an individual or a household, you have to pay a certain percentage of your income, of your income has to go toward the premium before you qualify.
	And then, and so that's higher.
	And then also, there are income caps.
	So, at a certain point, you just won't get a subsidy any longer.
	Stephanie Stapleton of KFF Health News along for this discussion.
	Let's hear from Roland.
	Roland's in Maryland, Democrats line.
	Hi.
	Thanks for clicking my call.
	You know, this whole thing, you know, has just been made political.
	You know, the Republicans, most of them, you know, they've, you know, like, just like how they vote against their own interests anyway.
	I'd like you to see, I mean, do you have a breakdown of the enrollees and the statewide, you know, red states, blue states?
	Because if you pull, I mean, I'm pretty sure maybe half of or more than half of folks in West Virginia and some of these very red states all probably voted against the Obama and the health care plan and voted for Trump because the Republicans keep convincing them it's the illegals and the black folks that get all these benefits.
	Once we can get rid of all those people, food will be cheaper, rents will be cheaper, health care will be cheaper.
	But I bet you, most of those folks get health care in the emergency room.
	Okay, okay, let's stop there.
	Let's let our guests respond to that.
	Well, we don't have a breakdown yet because these numbers are still, as I said, shaking out.
	But I know in recent years, the ACA people who have used the ACA for their health coverage is not broken down by blue or red state.
	It's not like I am a Democrat, so I'm going to get an ACA plan.
	That's not how people are making the decision.
	And some very red states have some really high numbers in terms of people who buy their plans on the ACA marketplace.
	So I think it comes down more to just their health insurance realities and what their options are.
	Your organization did recent polling on issues, including the AACA.
	One of the things they found is this saying that two-thirds, it was 67% of the public say the Congress, quote, did the wrong thing by allowing the tax credits to expire twice the share.
	33% say Congress did the right thing when it talks about that expiration.
	What's the status of trying to bring those subsidies back in Congress?
	You know, I was just reading some news stories on that yesterday.
	And it seems like, you know, the House did sort of a huge thing.
	In December, a handful of Republicans joined with Democrats to back a discharge petition that would bring the subsidies bill to the House floor.
	And then earlier this year, in January, that subsidy bill passed the House by a pretty strong margin, which I think does get to the fact that people who face election in a few months are very focused on how the loss of the subsidies is playing.
	It is a concern.
	So then negotiations had started in the Senate, the Senate, and based on what I read this week and some podcasts and just like talking to folks, they're really kind of stalled.
	And it seems like optimism is not at an all.
	It's pretty low right now that they could figure out a way forward.
	Now, I say that, but at the same point, this is Washington, D.C., and who knows?
	Who knows what will happen next?
	You say that.
	A viewer says this when it comes to Congress itself saying, would you say that Congress understands the complicated underlying issues which drive the cost of health care?
	If they don't have a grasp on the problem, how can they fix it?
	Well, that, again, what we always say is healthcare is really complicated.
	And so when you start to look at all of the dynamics that drive up the health care costs, right, the subsidies aren't necessarily the thing that's driving, you know, it has made premium costs go up because people aren't getting that assistance that they're used to.
	But that doesn't factor in like what are the prescription drug costs that insurance is covering?
	What are the hospital costs?
	Like, you know, there are all of those underlying factors that kind of feed into why this is so expensive in our country.
	And it is perplexing, and I think people are struggling to answer that.
	To what degree does, say, the hospitals say, well, hey, we'll cut our costs, but what about the prescription drugs folks?
	What are they going to do?
	Or what about the doctors themselves?
	What are they going to do?
	Do they take these protective measures when it comes to this idea of cutting health care costs, do you think?
	Well, I feel like within the broader health care sector, there seems to be like there's always another bad guy in a way.
	I mean, just this, you know, in recent weeks, for, you know, the pharmaceutical benefit managers, the middlemen between, you know, the beneficiary and the employer, the insurer, the PBMs, they're a real bad guy right now, right?
	Congress just passed some reforms to try to like curb their impact.
	But at the same point, then, you know, there were some hearings on the Hill where the health insurance executives were really called to the carpet for their involvement in health care costs too.
	So, you know, there's not just one bad guy, I guess.
	But everyone wants somebody else to be really the cause.
	By the way, those hearings with those health care executives that our guest referenced, you can still find them on our website.
	If you go to cspan.org, several key healthcare executives on Capitol Hill being interviewed by members of Congress.
	And you can go to our website to find more there.
	Another Stephanie joins us.
	This Stephanie's in Ohio.
	Independent Line, you're on with Stephanie Stapleton of KFF Health News.
	Stephanie in Ohio?
	Yes.
	Go ahead.
	Can you hear me?
	Yep.
	I was calling in because I work at a critical access hospital.
	And one of the problems we have is people don't have insurance.
	They choose not to get insurance.
	And then we don't get paid.
	And there were about 700 hospitals that closed across the country because of all the cuts to insurance and reimbursement.
	And so I want to ask if anyone's considered that they're not going to be access to health care because we can't afford to keep going in the negative.
	Okay, Stephanie, Ohio, thanks.
	And Stephanie from Ohio, I have to tell you, I'm from Ohio too.
	So that's a great coincidence.
	To what you said, I guess I have to say yes.
	I mean, I think that like rural health care is that critical access hospitals tend to be in rural areas.
	And the rural health care system is, you know, it's really struggling along.
	We're not talking about Medicaid cuts so much today, but the impact of the Medicaid cuts that we're going to see in the out years that will come from the Big Beautiful bill, the so-called big beautiful bill, I should say.
	Other people call it the Trump tax and spend bill.
	It kind of depends.
	But there's a feeling that that's going to hit rural areas really hard, these rural and the critical access hospitals really hard.
	And, you know, so much so that one of the negotiations that happened in Congress when they were considering that bill was to create this rural health transformation fund that was supposed to stabilize and help figure out innovations that could help make sure that access to care is preserved.
	How that works out, you know, that's just an early, early, early days for that program.
	But this is a big concern.
	Well, then let me circle back to the president's pharmaceutical announcement, Trump RX.
	What does it mean that the government's in the pharmacy game?
	This is tricky for me because I'm not, like, I don't know a great deal about.
	It's not a general sense that they've engaged in this kind of front.
	It is, it's interesting to say, like, how will this work?
	You know, again, this is one of those things I think we're still getting a handle on a lot of the specifics.
	And from what I know, it would be a lot of Medicare beneficiaries would be going, and it's not clear what drugs would be included in that Trump RX formulary.
	So as I said, this is a hard one for me to talk about because I don't have a sense of how it's going to work.
	Rob is in Missouri.
	He is on our line for Democrats.
	Hello, Rob.
	You're on with our guest.
	Yes, good morning, Pedro.
	And good morning, Stephanie.
	I had private insurance last year, and I needed a stress test for my heart, you know, for my cardiovascular system.
	The insurance, my United Healthcare, they never, the group that was going to do the stress test, the cardiovascular group, never got a pre-authorization.
	And they never called me back, and I actually complained.
	So it was a failure.
	So 20 years later, I still don't have a stress test done.
	But what I really want to talk about is I know, Gene, that you may not be an expert in Medicare, but I know that the fact that the Medicare premiums per person is only $202, you know, which is phenomenal, okay?
	So I'm thinking that if we go with Medicare for all, and I think even Bernie Sanders doesn't talk about it, and we add more people to that pool of Medicare, I think the cost will go down for everybody.
	I don't think Obamacare, because of what Republicans are so against it, they voted 60 times, more than 60 times against to basically destroy Obamacare because they don't want government helping people.
	If the billionaires needed a health care subsidy, the Republicans would have already voted for it and gotten it done.
	So I think we need to hear more about what if we went to Medicare for all for everybody, how that would drive the cost down, what would the premium be per person?
	I know it's not going to be $202, but it certainly is not going to be what it is now, both for private insurance and for Obamacare.
	Would you please address that?
	Thank you.
	Well, I think what you're, you know, some of what you just mentioned are things that we talked a lot about in the previous presidential election.
	You know, we had a lot, and we talked a lot about Healthcare for all, about Medicare for all.
Medicare for All Costs 00:07:13
	And I almost feel like it's cyclical.
	You know, it's sort of like we had a health care election and then we didn't talk about health care at all.
	And I feel like we're warming up again.
	I mean, you mentioned that poll.
	People are definitely thinking about their health care costs.
	And that is something that it's like, it's months away, but we're starting to feel like people are, this is an issue and our politicians need to pay attention to it, apparently.
	And so I feel like we could get back, like if we get back to health care, then maybe our representatives would talk more about the underlying problems that drive health care costs, for instance.
	That poll, by the way, healthcare topped that list when it comes to top household expense worries, 32% of those saying that they were very worried about it, 34% saying somewhat worried about it.
	It goes down from there, but it tops the list when it comes to things like food and groceries, rent and mortgage, and such and so forth.
	Michael, Michael is in Pennsylvania.
	Republican Maya.
	Hi.
	Thank you for taking my call, Pedro.
	And thank you to your guests.
	I had a question for her because I've often thought that this, truth of, I'm a dentist, so I've been dealing with dental insurance companies for a long time.
	And I have real questions about how they determine what premiums, what gets paid out and what doesn't.
	They keep changing the goalposts all the time.
	And I believe that's the same thing with health insurance companies.
	And these companies take advantage of the people that are in the pool by switching coverages, by doing things for the profit, on the profit motive.
	And there are companies out there that have, and I think President Trump is talking about the right thing when he says there's other ways to do that.
	This shouldn't be employee-based.
	It should be, everybody should be able to get health insurance and they can find their own pools and do it.
	Something like what they do with that MediShare plan.
	You know, you have MediShare and there's a number of faith-based insurance companies that don't operate on the profit motive.
	Because I don't think insurance, health insurance is like other insurance.
	They can change, just like dental insurance, they call it insurance, but it's really not.
	It's a prepayment program.
	And they determine, it's not like your house burns down and they have to pay for your house or you get an accident and they have to pay for your car.
	It's like they keep changing what they're going to cover.
	So in these MediShare programs, people have banded together and set their own limits on what they're going to pay for.
	And it's faith-based.
	And there's no highly paid CEO.
	It's not on the profit basis.
	Rather than going all the time to the government to fill this thing, couldn't we go to more like something like that?
	Okay.
	Michael Baer in Pennsylvania.
	I think that returns us back to some of the philosophical issues.
	And I do believe that it's almost like a personal philosophy that makes people decide what they think they need in terms of health care.
	You know, because on one hand, you have Obamacare or the ACA, and that comes with a lot of rules.
	You know, there is an essential health benefits package that has to be covered.
	You know, they have to cover things like maternity care, you know, preventive screening.
	There's a whole long list.
	And then there's, and some people want that.
	It's very comprehensive coverage.
	You know, it's a comprehensive plan.
	But on the other side, and I think, you know, we heard JD Vance say it at one point, that we needed to deregulate health insurance.
	And I think that's a little bit about what your caller's getting at, that maybe we don't need all of those strict rules, that maybe people want to just decide what they need.
	There are, you know, I think the experts would say sort of a yeah, but because you think you're okay, except then you find out that what when you really need something that it's not necessary, necessarily covered or the resources aren't there to cover it.
	But this is part of the debate.
	Like on one side, yes, the plans can be less expensive, but they're also much less comprehensive.
	And so it's almost like when you look at those two approaches, they are apples and oranges.
	How does the whole idea of no pre-existing conditions factor into coverage and what companies offer when it comes to coverage?
	Right.
	Okay.
	Well, I always think of the pre-existing condition exclusions.
	And I think like everybody in the world would agree with me on this, that those were the bad old days.
	You know, like that wasn't good for really anybody.
	So with the ACA plans, you know, there is, it is the law of the land that pre, you know, you cannot be excluded from coverage because you have a pre-existing condition or your coverage can't exclude that illness you have or that issue you have from the rest of your coverage.
	That's no longer allowed.
	Now, there are some, there are plans that are sold off of the ACA that don't necessarily have, that's part of the essential health benefits rules, you know, so they don't have to follow that rule.
	So they can still exclude certain conditions or place lifetime or annual limits on what kind of benefits they're going to pay, for instance.
	One more call, and this will be from Leo.
	Leo joins us from Delaware Independent Line.
	Hi.
	Hi, Patrick.
	Thank you for taking my call.
	Stephanie, what you're saying is spot on.
	And personal experience, now, I have to say, well, I was on hold for a while.
	The caller that had the medical stress test, my son was, his was denied too.
	It was a successful test.
	We ended up having to pay $2,200 copay.
	And the insurance company said, oh, the test was, you were fine.
	You didn't need it.
	I mean, how ridiculous is that?
	But my main point is, Stephanie, with the younger people and getting them to sign up so you spread the risk.
	My other son had an issue where, to me, it was all about what Obama told us.
	You shouldn't go bankrupt just because you get sick.
	And so that was my point to my kids: you need health insurance in case you get in a car accident and you have a $300,000 bill.
	That's the coverage, the catastrophic.
	But this high-premium, high copay, they're going to pay out of pocket.
	They're not going to pay in $3,600 a year because they won't have that out of pocket if they go see their primary in most cases.
	So how do you get them in?
	I think universal Medicare makes some sense.
	And that's all I have.
Sunday On C-SPAN 00:04:22
	Thank you, Percy.
	Sweden.
	Well, I mean, you did raise a lot of issues there.
	But I think that you're right.
	I think that it's hard to get young people, even when they sign up for care, the catastrophic, they're worried about getting hit by the bus, that like crazy event that nobody wants to happen, but is really scary to think about.
	But, you know, it's like I said earlier, there are that group of young invincibles that they can't quite wrap their brain around why they need health care yet.
	You know, if that's the biggest expense item every month, like do they really want to pay that insurance premium?
	Like they're, you know, they're like at their best.
	So.
	Stephanie Stapleton is the senior editor for KFF Health News, KFFHealthNews.org, the website.
	If you want to see their work, thanks for giving us your time.
	Thank you.
	Later on in the program, we will talk about the current state of nuclear affairs between the United States and Russia, especially with the evaporation of a nuclear arms treaty between the two countries.
	Darrell Kimball of the Arms of Control Association will join us later for that discussion.
	But first, another round of open forum, and you can call us 202-748-8001 for Republicans, Democrats 202-748-8000, and Independents 202-748-8002.
	Those open forum calls will take place when Washington Journal continues.
	Sunday on C-SPAN's Q&A, the Smithsonian Air and Space Museum's Teasel Muir Harmony on the history of the U.S. space program.
	From the creation of NASA in 1958 to Neil Armstrong taking his first historic steps on the lunar surface in July 1969, and NASA's plans to return astronauts to the moon.
	She also looks back on astronaut Frank Borman's Apollo 8 Christmas Eve broadcast in 1968.
	Frank Borman was told when he was preparing for this mission, and the schedule is short.
	He said, he was told, the broadcast will be on Christmas Eve, and more humans will be listening to your voice than have ever listened to a human voice in history.
	Say something appropriate.
	Those are the instructions he got.
	And he thought, you know, what should I say?
	In the beginning, God created the heaven and the earth.
	The Smithsonian Air and Space Museum's Tiesel Muir Harmony.
	Sunday night at 8 p.m. Eastern on C-SPAN's QA.
	You can listen to Q&A and all of our podcasts on our free C-SPAN Now app or wherever you get your podcasts.
	Book TV, every Sunday on C-SPAN 2, features leading authors discussing their latest nonfiction books.
	Coming up this weekend, we'll feature chef and former food policy advisor to Barack Obama Sam Cass on his plan for making the food system more sustainable with his book The Last Supper at 1 p.m. Eastern.
	Then at 7 p.m. Eastern, it's America's Book Club.
	Pulitzer Prize-winning author John Meacham joins David Rubinstein to discuss his biographies of Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, and George H.W. Bush.
	At 9:20 p.m. Eastern, author Howard French discusses his book, The Second Emancipation, on Ghanaian President Kwame Nkrumah's role in the Pan-African movement of the 1950s and 60s.
	And at 10:30 p.m. Eastern, Nicholas Boggs examines the life and activism of writer James Baldwin in his biography, Baldwin, a Love Story.
	Watch book TV every Sunday on C-SPAN 2 and find a full schedule on your program guide or watch online anytime at booktv.org.
	Washington Journal continues.
	It's open forum, and if you want to participate, if you've hold off, if you've called us in the last 30 days, make sure you pick the line that best represents you, and that's 202-748-8001 for Republicans, 202-748-8000 for Democrats, and Independents 202-748-8002.
FBI Takes Over Guthrie Search 00:02:53
	The latest from the Associated Press when it comes to the search for Nancy Guthrie, especially since the FBI's involvement in that search.
	Just to show you the headline when it comes to the FBI, they are reviewing a new message that's tied to Nancy Guthrie's apparent abduction.
	There's a story it was yesterday in Washington where Pam Bondi came before cameras, gave her thoughts on the latest when it comes to the Guthrie investigation.
	Terrible tragedy we're watching in Florida, in Arizona, with Nancy Guthrie.
	I understand you know Savannah Guthrie.
	What is the federal government doing right now?
	Is the FBI now leading the investigation, taking it over from the locals?
	We're doing everything to assist the locals.
	We're working with the locals.
	Breaks my heart for Savannah and for her family.
	I know she's asked for all of our prayers.
	So please pray for her.
	Pray for her beautiful mom.
	Pray for her family that she's returned home.
	That's all we can say about that at this time.
	But yeah, I've known Savannah for over 30 years, and it's breaking my heart.
	More from that press conference on other issues that you can find on our website and our app.
	Let's hear from Terrell.
	Let's hear from Tony.
	Tony in Connecticut, Independent Line on this open forum.
	You're up first.
	Go ahead.
	Good morning, Pedro.
	My heart is broken.
	My heart is broken.
	I can't tell you how badly I feel.
	Two points are just really, I had a Kleenex here wiping my tears.
	The first thing is this thing about the monkeys or whatever.
	A friend of mine sent me a piece from a Fox show last night, Gutfeld.
	Do you know that the Democrats have selectively posted our president's picture with monkeys, with orangutans, with all sorts of monkey type animals eight times?
	I don't know where the selective criticism comes out.
	I beg you to please show it.
	And secondly, thanks to Bill Gates, I have co-pilot on my computer.
	It's an AI app.
	And I asked about this thing with the Jeffrey Epstein files.
	And, you know, it's pulled up and anybody can do it because this thing reads the whole Epstein files that are made to the public.
	I'm sorry, I'm making up.
	Bill Clinton has been there 27 times without his wife, without his kids, on the Lolita Express 27 times.
	And it just, this hypocrisy goes on and on and on.
Reviews and Scoring Controversy 00:04:01
	These are just two.
	I beg you, Pedro, please play that segment from Gutfeld.
	Okay, well, Tony, we'll leave it there.
	Let's go to Debbie, Debbie, Missouri, Republican Line.
	Hello.
	Hello.
	That video is the song Awima Wack, the Lion King Sleeps Tonight.
	And it's long and it has all kinds of characters of Hillary Clinton and Jeffries and Schumer.
	They're all animals, warthogs, all kinds of things.
	And it's not that expensive.
	And I would just like to say that nationally, we need to scrap and abolish the current voter roles and have everyone re-register with proof of citizenship and give them a voter ID and have a national national elections.
	They can do their local elections any way they want, but for national, we have to have standards and vote in person on the same day or a three-day period and not only have the mail ballots for people that are out of the country or seriously disabled and elderly.
	Okay.
	Bill is next in Pennsylvania, Democrats line.
	Hi.
	Hi.
	I wanted to comment about the last segment about health care.
	We call it health care.
	We're really talking about insurance.
	I'm an old guy, 75 years old.
	I'm on Medicare.
	Medicare is great.
	That's why I'd like to see Medicare available to all, not mandated to everybody, but available.
	If people want to stay with private insurance companies and get denied claims and get on the phone for hours to argue about it, I have been there.
	Get the insurance companies out of it, just Medicare for all.
	Now, finally, the reason this won't happen is because the health care lobbyists are one of the strongest lobbyists in Washington.
	And therefore, so many congressmen, they're not representing us.
	They're representing the insurance companies.
	So I agree with one of your callers who said the simple solution is Medicare for all.
	Okay, Bill, in Pennsylvania, the Hollywood Reporter takes a look at recent scoring when it comes to the documentary that's come out on Melania Trump that goes as such, saying our great national political divide has come to rotten tomatoes.
	The critic score for Melania is an abysmal 6%.
	The documentary's audience score is an incredible 99%.
	This is the biggest critic versus audience split in the movie review site's history, confirmed a site spokesperson.
	And Rotten Tomatoes says those audience numbers are, in fact, very real.
	Quote, there have been no manipulation in the audience reviews for the Melania documentary.
	The company said in a statement provided to the Hollywood Reporter, reviews displayed on the popcorn meter are verified reviews, meaning it has been verified that users have bought a ticket to the film through Fandango.
	And it goes on from there saying, adding this, and certainly nobody has doubted the validity of the critic score.
	Many of the scathing reviews sound like the reviewer attended the screening at Gunpoint.
	A trio of positive reviews that have kept the score above zero were from the publications though for having a right-wing tilt.
	The Epoch Times, the London Evening Standard, and The Spectator.
	To be fair, many of the outlets that left negative reviews and often accused of having a liberal bias by those on the political right.
	There's more there if you're interested in the follow-up to the release of that documentary and who's watching it, The Hollywood Reporter.
	Let's hear from Sankofa in Georgia, Independent Line.
Gwen's Voice in Arizona 00:03:50
	Hello.
	As a foundational black American who are not immigrants, but captives who are chained and shipped and brought to this country to be enslaved, I don't like the Republicans and I detest the Democratic Party.
	I have noticed that my people are not en masse supporting these mass demonstrations against ICE.
	We will not allow our bodies to be used as body shields for groups that would not spit on us if we were on fire.
	And the fact that most Latinos and Hispanics have anti-black sentiments, I resent the way Democrats making false equivalents of our mistreatment and enslavement to illegal immigrants that came to this country freely by hook or crook.
	ICE is not coming after us as foundational Black Americans.
	There has not been any of our group detained and deported.
	And where would they deport us?
	Back to some state in the United States?
	This fear tactic is not going to work to get us out in these streets and mass because a lot of us can see through the play of the Democratic Party.
	The United States citizens get detained every day, having nothing to do with immigration, and as well as being separated from our families due to legal activity.
	As a United States citizen, if you are driving a car with your children with you and you get stopped by the police for a taillight being out and they run your plate and they find out that you have a bench warrant for traffic tickets not being paid, they will lock you up and have you call a family member to pick up the children.
	And if there's no one to pick the children up, then child protection will be called to get the children.
	Okay.
	Yeah, got your point.
	Let's hear from Gwen in Arizona, Republican line.
	Go ahead.
	I'm also a team.
	So the lady that has been missing, I feel really bad for her and Tucson.
	I feel really bad for her and her family.
	But the amount of coverage that it's getting is really irritating me because all of the kids that are missing and other people that are missing get nothing.
	And just because her daughter is on today's show or morning show or something, she is suddenly a national celebrity and is getting all of the news time.
	And I don't think that's right for all of the kids and the families of the kids that are missing.
	They deserve a lot of that time, too.
	Thank you.
	Gwen in Arizona, giving her thoughts on that.
	There's a profile of New York Democrat Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in the New York Times this morning, taking a look at efforts to step onto a wider stage, as the headline says, saying that seven years after she swept into office as a progressive agitator, unafraid to hammer fellow Democrats, Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York has emerged as an increasingly sought-after leader within the party she had set out to disrupt.
	She has positioned herself as a top antagonist of Vice President JD Vance, a potential heir to President Trump's political movement, sparring with him on social media.
	She stepped up her support of moderate and mainstream Democrats, sending a fundraising email last month asking her supporters to donate to the Senate campaign of former Representative Mary Patola of Alaska, a friend whose support oil drilling and gun rights are at odds with the New York Congresswoman's stances.
	And at a time of tumult across the country and uncertainty within the Democratic Party, her direct and camera-ready speaking style is breaking through.
	And after federal agents killed Alex Predty in Minneapolis, she swiftly appeared on cable news, argued he had been, quote, executed in the street.
Town Forum Discussion 00:06:36
	Earlier this week, there was a town forum featuring the representative from New York.
	And one of the comments made during the town forum was that when it comes to ICE and its practices in various cities across the United States, here's a portion from earlier.
	Personally, I believe that it has to be part of the DHS negotiation to prevent that and tie their hands in being able to deploy ICE agents who are killing U.S. citizens from being anywhere near a poll site this November.
	Point blank, period.
	In terms of like the strategizing, I do not know if our leadership, like in terms of that for a long term, but we have to use political, we have to use our political power and we have to use our political pressure.
	What I can say is that, frankly, the outrage last May at refusing to hold people's ground on the shutdown resonated a lot in Washington.
	There were a lot of moderates, especially in the Senate, that just wanted to fold right away.
	And they experienced a lot of backlash after that.
	So that it is literally people's mobilizing in May that is what gave them the spine to actually go through with a shutdown in September, demanding reversal on the ACA cuts.
	So just know that this is starting to work.
	But we're going to, this upcoming fight on DHS is it.
	This is the moment.
	This is the moment.
	We have to send that message to Loveham.
	We have to send that message to both of our senators here in New York State.
	And we need to make very clear that this is the moment.
	There is no other bite at the apple.
	This is it.
	The funding fight and the DHS funding fight is it.
	And you can see more of that town hall on our website at c-span.org.
	This is open forum.
	There are the lines.
	If you want to get in, let's hear it from Benny in Pensacola, Florida.
	Democrats line, you're next.
	Benny in Florida, go ahead, please.
	Oh, yeah.
	Okay.
	I couldn't hear you.
	You got Congress lady up there on the phone, on the screen.
	I couldn't hear you.
	But I was calling in about the things that are happening here in America.
	I think most of the Caucasian people in America has chosen deportation over Medicare because if they wanted to do, if they wanted to do it right, they would allow Congress and the Senate would sit down and work that deal out.
	That's their job.
	If they want to change the health care system, they need to sit down and talk about it, work out a deal between themselves.
	That's what they have voted in office to do.
	But it doesn't seem like they can do that.
	Okay, let's hear from Ben in San Francisco.
	This is on our line for independence.
	Hello?
	Hello, John.
	Okay.
	Hi, C-SPAN.
	Thank you for taking my call.
	I know I said my name was Ben, but I actually go by serial designation N. I'm a disassembly drone from Copper 9, and I was sent there by a company called JC Jetson and my colleagues V and J to eliminate these drones called worker drones.
	And let me tell you about this weird encounter I had with a worker drone named Uzi Dorman.
	She yelled things like fighting and tried to obliterate me with her sick-as-hell relegon as part of her rebellion against humans and us disassembly drones.
	At first, I thought it'd be a goner.
	But then, out of nowhere, VNJ swooped in to save the day and took the relegant as Uzi's hands.
	I really owe them a lot.
	Jim in Crystal River, Florida, you are next on this open forum.
	Republican line, go ahead.
	Yes, good morning, Pedro.
	Thanks for taking my call.
	Let's talk about positive things, please.
	Thanks to Trump, the EV mandate is eliminated.
	That's where all cars have to be electric by 2030.
	Just in this week, the big three lost $129 billion.
	It's Atlanta $4 billion.
	And right now, Jim, I apologize.
	You're breaking up.
	Either you're going to have to code to a better signal or get closer to your handset, please.
	Jim, are you there?
	Yes, Prime Minister.
	Okay, yeah, you're still breaking out.
	Let me put you on hold.
	Try to adjust that signal and get it to a point where we can hear you clearly.
	Margot in Indiana.
	Hello, your next up Democrats line.
	Hi, Pedro.
	How are you this morning?
	Fine, thank you.
	I'd just like to make a comment about the means and a little information about what a primate is, referring to apes and monkeys.
	Monkeys have very, and apes have very thin lips, along with the fact that they have very straight hair and very flat behind from evolution of sitting on rocks and squatting on rocks for hundreds of thousands of years.
	So just to reiterate that that's just a matter of projection once more.
	Remember that monkeys have very thin lips, not thick lips, very flat behind, not bulbous ones.
	So that refers more to a European state of evolution compared to what African Americans are.
	Thanks, everybody, and happy Black History Month.
Comparing Healthcare Access: U.S. vs. Switzerland 00:02:28
	Margo, in Indiana, the Politico reports out of Milan through the Associated Press that American athletes received an enthusiastic welcome at the opening ceremony for the Milan Cortina Winter Olympics, but the mood shifted when cameras briefly turned to the Vice President JD Vance, led by speed skater and flag bearer Eric Aaron Jackson.
	Team USA was among the last delegations to enter Milan Sincera Stadium at the Parade of Nations on Friday.
	The crowd cheered for the Americans, but jeers and whistles could be heard for Vance and his wife, Second Lady Usha Vance, were shown on the stadium screens waving American flags from the Tribune.
	Support for the U.S. among its allies has been eroding since the Trump administration has taken an aggressive posture on foreign policy, including punishing tariffs, military action in Venezuela, and threats to invade Greenland.
	Vlad is in Maryland, Independent Line.
	Hello.
	Good morning.
	I wanted to talk about the cost of healthcare and access and choices that we have.
	And I would like to compare us with Switzerland.
	Why Switzerland?
	Because it's a high level of quality of life country.
	Also, among European countries, it is, I think, similar to the U.S. because it has lower taxes than, for example, Scandinavian countries than France and Germany.
	Corporate tax is a bit lower in Switzerland than it is in the U.S.
	And overall tax burden is kind of on par.
	The expenditures per individual on healthcare in the U.S. is between $14,000 and $15,000.
	This information is easily searchable.
	So, you know, anyone who is interested, do a quick search or a simple search.
	You will see these numbers.
	And in Switzerland, it is between $9,000 and $10,000.
	So the difference is significant.
	So it's $15,000 per person in the U.S. versus $9,000, $10,000 in Switzerland.
	In terms of healthcare, they have access for everyone.
	We can call it socialized.
	We can call it any way people want.
	How do we compare what is better?
	I think that one of the most objective criteria is life expectancy, which is in the U.S. 79 years presently, and in Switzerland it is 83 years old.
Lives Lost, Borders Blurred 00:02:59
	And now I would like to kind of stop at this because I don't want to spend much time on detail.
	But people who are interested, please, this is all about numbers.
	Okay, Nevada, next, this is Debbie, Republican Line.
	Oh, yes.
	Hi there.
	Good morning for taking my call.
	You know, I just wanted to comment on the woman who called out of Arizona regarding all the coverage for the family who lost their mother.
	It's just awful.
	I lost my mother there four years ago of cancer, but I think the news is giving it way too much coverage.
	There was a little boy in New York, I believe Brooklyn, that disappeared a few weeks ago, and they talked about him a couple days, and then that was the end of it.
	And it kind of breaks my heart.
	And number two, I am Republican.
	I am glad that Trump was nominated as our president.
	And sometimes he does say things that are off the cuff.
	But, you know, our Democrats have called him every name in the book.
	And afflicted him is every type of animal.
	And the name's Nazi.
	You know, I think he's been serving our country well and helping.
	And stock market, and everything seems to be going okay.
	And as far as the borders being closed, I'm glad they are because my son died of an accidental overdose a couple years ago, and it was awful for our family.
	But I think overall he's done pretty good when there's been Democrats in power as president.
	I try to be supportive, and it's hurtful to see our border people being hurt and disrespected.
	It's awful that those two people lost their lives.
	But I just don't understand when it became okay for people to disrespect the police and spit on them and cuss at them and push them and berate them.
	And they are here to serve us, serve us, the people, and take care of us.
	And God bless them.
	And that's all I wanted to say.
	And again, thank you for taking my call.
	I appreciate you.
	Debbie there in Nevada, this is Winifred, who joins us from New York.
	Line for Democrats.
	Hello.
	Hi, Pedro.
	How are you?
	Hi, America.
	What I think, I think the president should apologize.
	And I believe that it's a distraction from the Epstein files.
	And I also think that it's time that the U.S. should give reparations to the African Americans whose ancestors were slaves in this country.
	And everybody have a good day.
Bridging Political Divides 00:10:38
	Bye.
	When it comes to trade deals, the Hill reporting that the U.S. and India announcing a framework for an interim trade deal that was released in a joint statement yesterday, an agreement between the two nations, reconfirms the commitment to broader bilateral trade negotiations.
	The president announced earlier this week that the Indian prime minister had pledged to stop buying Russian oil in exchange for the U.S. lowering its reciprocal tariffs on Indian goods from 25% to 18%.
	Quote, the Prime Minister is also committed to, quote, buy American at a much higher level in addition to over $500 billion of U.S. energy technology, agriculture, coal, and other many other products.
	The president writing earlier this week on Truth Social teasing the framework.
	Renee is in Connecticut, independent line on this open forum.
	Hello.
	Good morning.
	Thank you for taking my call.
	I want to talk about the previous topic about health insurance because I offer health insurance.
	So, two things, which is on the faith-based, which isn't bad, but people got to understand: if you're not really healthy, it's not the best route to go.
	It's all about education.
	The other thing was with the Obamacare and everybody, whether you're a Republican or a Democrat, I've had folks from Sikorsky where, hey, I don't want none of that Obamacare.
	But since he was a straight shooter, I said, okay, well, this is the reality.
	Your sister's going to go to the hospital.
	You don't want to have Obamacare, but the companies are Blue Cross and Connecticut.
	So when something happens, she's not going to have coverage.
	Then all of a sudden, he changed his mind.
	It all comes down to being educated, you know, about health insurance.
	And it's important for folks to do their own research.
	But health insurance, yeah, has its quirks like anything else, but you just try to be as educated as possible.
	Let's hear from David.
	David joins us from Kansas.
	Republican line.
	Hi.
	Hi, Pedro.
	Hey, I was just wanting to, I'm just a farm over here in Kansas.
	And the reason beef prices are so high is because Biden's interest rate got so high that the ranchers couldn't fill their herds back up.
	So they sold the herds off.
	And it takes about two years to get a herd and get a cow to go to market.
	And then on the energy, the immigrants, I've been a broker, real estate broker for 38 years.
	And the energy problem is the immigrants won't pay their bill.
	They leave the bill and it goes to where they're going to shut the water, the gas, or whatever off.
	And then they get somebody else to come in there and put it in their name.
	And so the companies have to eat all those bills.
	So to eat the bills, they got to raise the prices.
	It's the same way with housing.
	The housing Biden made everybody not pay rent.
	He said, you don't have to pay your rent.
	Well, all these people that own rental houses, they still had to pay their mortgages.
	So once they couldn't pay their mortgage, they sell their house.
	And a lot of these big companies come in and bottom.
	And that's why rents are out of crazy.
	Thanks.
	To the caller's first point, a story in recent days that the president signing an executive order that would allow the import of an additional 80,000 metric tons of Argentinian beef that to be imported to the United States on an annual basis.
	This is the story from USA Today, if you're interested in reading it.
	Let's go to Dennis.
	Dennis in Michigan, Democrats line.
	Hi.
	I love Washington Journal.
	I listen to you on a regular basis.
	I just want to get one point across that, and this is primarily for our Republican listeners and viewers.
	There's only one political party currently.
	If you are a neo-Nazi, if you are a white supremacist, if you are a, let's say, prowboy, oathkeeper, the Republican Party welcomes you with open arms.
	You are their kind of person.
	Come on in.
	Be a Republican because you are our kind of guy.
	Republicans, you got to wake up to what your party is all about.
	Wake up.
	Thank you.
	Dennis, let me ask you a question.
	We saw in light of the meme that we talked about earlier, we saw several Republicans line up to push against back against that, starting with Tim Scott.
	Think of that move by Republicans?
	Like I said, not all Republicans are this way.
	But MAGA, you got to look in the mirror.
	That's all I'm saying.
	Look in the mirror.
	Do you see the MAGA movement as you describe it in the Republican Party as the same thing?
	Stuart Rose, Enrico Terrio, these guys, they were head of the oath keepers and the Proud Boys.
	They led this insurrection.
	Okay, they were charged.
	They both were serving over 20 years in prison.
	Donald Trump pardoned both of those gentlemen.
	And I use that word loosely.
	That should say enough.
	Okay, Sarah, up next in Georgia, Republican line.
	Hi.
	Good morning.
	I just called to talk about Advantage Insurance, Medicare, Advantage Medicare, I believe it's called.
	Anybody can get that where?
	Who is paying for that?
	I know people in Alabama and Georgia that get it, and it doesn't matter how much money you make a year or how.
	So who's paying for that?
	Because I've had friends that say, why don't you do that instead of paying your insurance company?
	Well, how do I know what they would do?
	But I know a lady that's been on it like four years.
	She's been happy with it.
	She doesn't pay anything.
	One more call.
	This will be from Detroit, Michigan Independent Line.
	This is Pat.
	Hello.
	Hello.
	Good morning, Pedro, and everybody else.
	I'd just like to say I've been an independent for 45 years.
	It really began when Ronald Reagan came into office.
	I spent all that time listening to him rallying against big government and how it should be destroyed.
	And throughout the 45 years, I've seen both parties work to privatize the government and give complete control to the rich people.
	And at this time, as I see it, the rich people control our energy, our finance, our commerce, our transportation, our communications, everything.
	We are in very serious trouble.
	I agree with the gentleman that there is only one political party, and that is the party of the rich.
	This whole Epstein business should be a wake-up call to everybody.
	The first complaint against Epstein was filed over 30 years ago, and it has been covered up ever since through all the administrations to the one we have now.
	Okay, Pat in Michigan, finishing off the round of calls.
	Thanks for those of you who participated.
	The last guest of the morning will be Arms Control Association's Darrell Kimball talking about the expiration of the nuclear pact between the United States and Russia.
	What happens next?
	And he'll answer your questions on those topics when Washington Journal continues.
	Best ideas and best practices can be found anywhere.
	We have to listen so we can govern better.
	Democracy depends on heavy doses of civility.
	You can fight and still be friendly.
	Bridging the divide in American politics.
	You know, you may not agree with La Don Crown in everything, but you can find areas where you do agree.
	He's a pretty likable guy as well.
	Chris Kinns and I are actually friends.
	He votes wrong all the time, but we're actually friends.
	A horrible secret that Scott and I have is that we actually respect each other.
	We all don't hate each other.
	You two actually kind of like each other.
	These are the kinds of secrets we'd like to expose.
	It's nice to be with a member who knows what they're talking about.
	You guys did agree to the civility, all right?
	He owes my son $10 from a bet.
	I never paid for it.
	Fork it over.
	That's fighting words right now.
	I'm glad I'm not in charge.
	I'm thrilled to be on the show with him.
	There are not shows like this, right?
	Incentivizing that relationship.
	Ceasefire, Friday nights on C-SPAN.
	Watch America's Book Club, C-SPAN's bold original series.
	This Sunday with our guest, best-selling author Jodi Pico, who has written 29 books about a wide range of controversial and moral issues.
	Her books include The Storyteller, 19 Minutes, and Her Latest by Any Other Name.
	She joins our host, renowned author and civic leader David Rubenstein.
	People come to you and say you've changed their views on certain social issues because of your books.
	That's why I write.
	You know, it's to start a discussion.
	And you can't always have a discussion with people.
	Some people just aren't ready to hear it.
	But there are a lot of minds that you can change one mind at a time.
	Watch America's Book Club with Jodi Pico this Sunday at 6 p.m. and 9 p.m. Eastern and Pacific, only on C-SPAN.
	In a divided media world, one place brings Americans together.
	According to a new MAGIT research report, nearly 90 million Americans turn to C-SPAN, and they're almost perfectly balanced.
	28% conservative, 27% liberal or progressive, 41% moderate.
	Republicans watching Democrats, Democrats watching Republicans, moderates watching all sides.
	Because C-SPAN viewers want the facts straight from the source.
	No commentary, no agenda, just democracy.
	Unfiltered every day on the C-SPAN networks.
Verification Challenges 00:15:06
	Washington Journal continues.
	We welcome back to the program Darrell Kimball of the Arms Control Association.
	He serves as their executive director, a discussion starting with the nuclear agreement between the U.S. and Russia.
	Where does it stand these days?
	Good morning, Pedro.
	Yes, this morning, the United States and Russia do not have limits on their strategic, their long-range nuclear arsenals or any part of their arsenals for the first time in about five decades.
	The new Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, which was negotiated in 2010, entered into force in 2011.
	It reduced the U.S. and Russian long-range missiles that carry warheads and the number of warheads by about a quarter from the previous levels.
	And it put in place new kinds of verification procedures and on-site inspections to monitor compliance.
	But the treaty, which lasted 15 years, was set to expire on February 5.
	President Biden and Medvedev, I'm sorry, Putin extended the treaty in 2021.
	And Donald Trump came into office, knew that it was going to expire, did not respond to Russian overtures to begin talks on negotiating a replacement treaty.
	Putin offered to continue to, for the two sides to respect the central limits of the treaty while they negotiate something new, but President Trump deferred.
	And so just this week, his deputies, Under Secretary of State from Tom Donano, laid out why the Trump administration did not pursue this option to continue some of these restrictions.
	And he says the United States wants a better or stronger nuclear restraint architecture involving other states, including China.
	So the problem, however, is that without these limits, the United States and Russia could, in theory, increase the number of nuclear warheads they put in their long-range bombers and missiles for the first time in more than 35 years.
	So let's keep in mind what these numbers are and what these weapons are.
	These are the most dangerous weapons that exist on Earth.
	The United States and Russia have a total of about the United States about 3,700 nuclear weapons, the Russians just over 4,000.
	The U.S. and Russia deploy about 1,550 on no more than 700 missiles and bombers.
	So that is an enormous amount of nuclear firepower, more than enough to destroy both countries several times over.
	And they could begin to increase, and there are some in the United States in Congress who want to begin increasing to counter China, which is now increasing its smaller arsenal, but still deadly arsenal.
	China has about 600 total nuclear weapons, and now about 300 of those weapons are in long-range ballistic missiles, and they're adding more.
	So this is a very uncertain period.
	We are without arms control, which has provided guardrails throughout the course of the nuclear age.
	And I think from the perspective of the Arms Control Association and many other experts, we are concerned that the Trump administration has not put forward a plan or a strategy.
	There's been a lot of talk about what they would like to do, but they haven't outlined exactly how they want to do it.
	So this is a very difficult period, and there are going to be a lot of questions and debates as we go further into 2026.
	Let me ask you, as far as the old treaty itself, was it a good treaty?
	Well, I think it was a very strong treaty given what it was supposed to do.
	In 2008, the previous agreement, the START 1 agreement negotiated by Ronald Reagan, was due to expire.
	So when Barack Obama came into office, he knew that something needed to be done to replace this arrangement, quickly negotiated, with a lot of preparation, the New START agreement with the Russians.
	There was a vigorous debate in the Senate over ratification, but it was approved by a bipartisan majority for ratification.
	And it entered into force and it put in place new kinds of inspections to not just monitor warheads, I'm sorry, missiles as the previous agreements did, but also the warheads, the bombs on the missiles.
	So, you know, it's been criticized by some Republicans and some nuclear weapons proponents because it didn't cover all types of U.S. and Russian nuclear weapon systems, didn't cover tactical nuclear weapons, and more recently, it was criticized because it didn't include Chinese nuclear weapons.
	Well, it wasn't designed to do that, and there's nothing that has stopped the United States from pursuing talks and negotiations with these other countries to deal with those other kinds of weapons.
	We're going to show people the highlights of the START treaty that you just talked about.
	Now that that has gone away, what is the sense of both countries is that if we even, we don't have a formal agreement, but we're going to honor what the agreement said.
	What's the sense of those countries committing to that?
	And does it matter?
	Well, it matters.
	You know, there is no formal or informal agreement, apparently, between President Putin and President Trump not to exceed the limits set by the old New START Treaty.
	I don't believe that Russia intends to increase the number of deployed nuclear weapons anytime soon.
	Their statements suggest that if the United States does, they will.
	Now, how could the United States and Russia quickly increase their nuclear arsenals?
	Not all of the United States and Russian missiles carry the maximum loading of bombs, of warheads.
	So they could take some of these reserve warheads out of storage and put them onto the land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles, the submarine-launched ballistic missiles, but that would take many months to do.
	I mean, it's not expensive, but it is a process that requires bringing submarines back in and pulling the missiles out of the ground.
	So that would take many months.
	So it is very important, I think, for the two sides to exercise restraint while they may resume talks.
	President Trump said in a social media post he would like to see U.S. and Russian expert teams get back together.
	But as of this morning, there is no plan.
	There's no sign that they're actually going to do that on a particular date.
	It's going to take time, as it always has, for U.S. and Russia negotiators to hammer out some kind of new agreement to supersede New START, especially if the Trump administration wants a quote-unquote better deal.
	And in this case, the Trump administration wants to bring in China, I believe.
	Russia wants to bring in Europe maybe into the factoring.
	Are those deal breakers, do you think, in any future negotiations?
	Well, let's keep in mind that the United States, Russia, China, France, and Britain, all nuclear-armed countries, they have legal obligations under a different treaty called the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty to engage in good faith negotiations to end the arms race and on disarmament.
	Now, Russia and the United States have 90% of the world's nuclear weapons.
	The Chinese insist, and I think it's a valid point, that they have the greatest responsibility to reduce their arsenals.
	But the Chinese and the British and the French have responsibilities too.
	Now, President Trump, since about 2020, and end of his first term, has insisted that China be somehow involved.
	But one problem is that having a three-way negotiation is much more complex.
	I mean, the two of us are sitting here.
	Imagine we had another person.
	We're trying to work something out.
	The Chinese have refused that format.
	The Chinese have not necessarily refused bilateral talks.
	So it's going to be interesting to see if the Trump administration tries to pursue the failed trilateral approach, which I wish the Chinese would agree to, but they're not going to, or a bilateral approach.
	President Biden's team and the Chinese team met actually bilaterally in November of 2023 on these issues.
	It was one meeting, didn't continue, but the Chinese might agree to that format.
	If Britain and France are invited, I mean, that would take a lot of energy on the part of President Trump.
	They have much smaller arsenals.
	I personally don't think they need to be involved in a five-way negotiation, but they too could pledge not to increase their nuclear arsenal numbers.
	Darrell Kimball is with us, and if you want to ask him about the current status of nuclear agreement between the United States, Russia, other countries, you can call the phone lines 202-748-8001 for Republicans, 202-748-8000 for Democrats, and 202-748-8002 for independents.
	You can text us your thoughts at 202-748-8003.
	You talked about inspections.
	Has Russia always been transparent in allowing the inspections process?
	Well, inspections have always been a key issue and challenge in these negotiations through the years.
	But the New STAR Treaty had two basic forms of verification and monitoring.
	One was the two sides exchanged data on each other's detailed information on each other's arsenals.
	And then on-site inspections were taking place many times each year to verify the accuracy of those declarations.
	And those inspections, however, were suspended in 2020 due to the pandemic.
	They were not resumed because they couldn't agree on exactly how to resume.
	And then something called the massive Russian invasion of Ukraine took place.
	Russia expressed its displeasure with the United States' support for Ukraine's defense by suspending implementation of New Start, which meant that they formally said, okay, we're not going to allow inspections to continue.
	And then they stopped the data exchanges.
	But the Russians did agree to continue to abide by the central limits of the treaty.
	And the U.S. and Russia then each had to verify as best they could through national technical means of intelligence, satellites, other means.
	So this will be an issue in any future negotiation.
	How do you verify the number of nuclear weapons the two sides have agreed could be deployed or stored, etc.
	And each kind of agreement requires a different verification system.
	This is Deborah in Ohio for our guest on our line for Republicans.
	You're on with Darrell Kimball.
	Go ahead.
	Good morning.
	Just like Stalin in Yalta, Russia cheats.
	You know, after Yalta, Stalin went back and immediately started backing off what he agreed to with Churchill and FDR.
	And then in the Bush administration, when we wanted to put missile defense in Poland, Condoleezza Rice and Bob Gates, Secretary of Defense, tried desperately to get Russia to agree to that and said to Russia, you can come in and inspect these Patriot missiles every six months.
	Russia never agreed, never would agree.
	And so I don't see how you deal.
	I mean, we have to try to deal with Russia, but knowing that they will be non-compliant, how do you deal with that?
	Well, as I said, verification is always a tough issue, especially in countries that are not as transparent as the United States.
	But it is not correct to say that Russia always cheats.
	There have been several compliance disputes through the years.
	But the point of these agreements is that you negotiate mutual limits or reductions in these arsenals and the systems that deliver them.
	And then you don't just trust, you go verify.
	I mean, this was Ronald Reagan's trust, but verify line.
	And that is the fundamental philosophy behind how the United States has, Republicans and Democratic administrations, pursued these agreements.
	If there is a compliance dispute, you know, you need to pursue the mechanisms that you've got through the treaty to resolve it.
	But ultimately, that is the best we can do.
	It is better than not having any agreement or any verification.
	Then we have a situation in which everybody is operating with worst-case assumptions.
	And before we had nuclear arms control agreements in the 1960s, if you recall, there were concerns about the so-called missile gap.
	In the 1960 presidential election, Nixon and Kennedy were arguing about whether the Russians were ahead with the number of missiles or not.
	And so there was an alleged Soviet missile gap that turned out to be untrue.
	And we didn't know about that because we didn't have the insights that we have had for many years through these arms control agreements with the inspections.
	Kenneth?
	Kenneth in Virginia, Independent Line.
	Go ahead, please.
	You're next.
	Yes, good morning.
	I'm curious.
	I have a question about China and how it figures into this.
	You mentioned a three-way or a multiple party agreement.
	more difficult.
	But wouldn't that be more efficient if, I mean, we've gotten off it now.
	And it's to the point where our leader might end up winning the Nobel Prize by sharing global warming because he started a nuclear winter, you know.
	So let's talk about the Chinese.
	So, I mean, China has historically had a much smaller nuclear arsenal.
	They detonated their first nuclear device in 1964.
	For many decades, they had an arsenal of around 100 to 200 nuclear weapons.
	In recent years, in about the last decade, they have begun to, in a very ambitious program, modernize their nuclear arsenal, increasing the number of nuclear weapons as a whole, but also building modern, sophisticated, land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles in their western desert.
	So, you know, this is of concern because they're now at 600 nuclear weapons.
	The U.S. intelligence community and others believe they could have a total of about 1,000 nuclear weapons total by the year 2030.
	But they've never been part of a bilateral negotiation with the United States because their arsenal has always been smaller.
	So this is new territory for the Chinese, for the United States.
Building Confidence in Nuclear Talks 00:15:31
	And as I said before, the format of talks matters a lot.
	And I think, you know, President Trump has talked about wanting to get the Chinese somehow involved.
	He tried in 2020 when the New STAR Treaty was going to expire the first time in 2021 when he was talking with the Russians.
	The U.S. senior representative invited the Chinese to attend on Twitter, not in a formal way, not in a serious way.
	And the Chinese were a bit perplexed.
	What do you want us to be there for?
	You're negotiating with the Russians.
	So we need, first of all, a serious proposal from the United States, which unfortunately President Trump has not put forward in the last year to the Chinese.
	And, you know, we need the Chinese to be a lot more cooperative and to understand they too have a responsibility to negotiate methods to prevent an arms race.
	So my suggestion would be a bilateral track with the Chinese, a bilateral track with the Russians.
	The United States, being in both negotiations, can certainly keep in mind what's happening in one might affect the other.
	But if we want to see progress, that is the better chance of results in that way.
	You mentioned Thomas Donano before.
	He's mentioned in a story in the Wall Street Journal this morning accusing Beijing of secretly conducting low explosive power tests.
	Is this an arm twisting measure into the larger idea of bringing them to the table?
	Well, there are a couple of things going on here.
	So this brings us to the subject of nuclear weapons test explosions and another treaty that bans nuclear weapons test explosions.
	So, you know, the most visible symbol of the arms race during the Cold War were the atmospheric nuclear tests that the United States and the Soviet Union, others conducted until the limited test ban treaty of 1963.
	Then, after the Soviet Union fell apart, the U.S. and Russia agreed to suspend nuclear test explosions, which were taking place underground, and negotiate a global treaty to ban all nuclear weapons tests.
	That treaty is the 1996 Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty.
	China has signed, Russia has signed, the United States has signed, 180 other countries have signed and ratified.
	But we're legally obligated not to conduct nuclear test explosions.
	So the accusation here is a serious one, and if true, it is a serious problem.
	Tom Donano did not provide any further information about how they know this.
	The Trump administration has not proposed a solution to this.
	I think the appropriate thing to do at this point is to try to engage the Chinese in direct talks to resolve this dispute, to find new ways to build confidence that no country, even the United States or Russia, are conducting nuclear test explosions of any yield at their former test sites.
	But what Danana was also saying in this speech, he lays out a list of long grievances about China's nuclear buildup, possible Chinese and Russian nuclear testing, and the United States needing to pursue a different approach to arms control other than a bilateral approach.
	Well, certainly, arms control needs to adapt to deal with today's nuclear challenges.
	But it also requires solutions.
	And my main criticism, which is also mentioned in that Wall Street Journal article, is that the Trump administration has been in office for six years.
	They have complained a lot.
	Some of these complaints are very valid about the behavior of other countries.
	But they've not put forward serious plans or solutions to address these problems.
	And we simply don't have results.
	So I'm glad that President Trump wants to pursue arms control.
	He says the right things, but he has to walk the talk.
	And now is the time when we need to see a serious approach to how we deal with China's possible nuclear test explosions and how we deal with this potential three-way nuclear arms race.
	Our guest is the executive director of the Arms Control Association.
	Describe that for our viewers.
	Well, the Arms Control Association has been around since 1971, just before the first U.S.-Russian agreement was negotiated on arms control.
	We're an independent membership-based organization.
	We publish a monthly journal, Arms Control Today.
	So we provide information and we're a platform for ideas about the most dangerous weapons, particularly nuclear weapons.
	You mentioned Ukraine.
	Does that bring a new layer of complication to achieve what the U.S. wants to see with Russia?
	Well, it certainly has been a huge complicating factor.
	Throughout the history of the Russian, U.S.-Soviet relationship, we've had extreme differences on lots of different issues.
	And yet, nuclear arms control has always been a topic the two sides have been able to talk about because nuclear weapons represent a common threat.
	But with Putin's invasion of Ukraine, which really began back in 2013, remember, this aggression on the part of Russia has complicated the dialogue between the U.S. and Russia.
	And it has always put the talks about reducing nuclear threats on the back burner.
	And Russia also, as I said before, they penalized the United States, tried to penalize the United States, because the United States was supporting Ukraine's defense, as it should have, by saying, we're not going to talk about strategic stability, nuclear arms control talks with you until you drop that support.
	So right now, it's not so much of an impediment because the Russians are willing to talk to the Americans about nuclear arms control and vice versa.
	But as we know from reading the headlines, the Ukraine issue still dominates most of the diplomatic back and forth between the United States and Russia.
	A new headline is just emerging today, the President giving the U.S. and Russia, or Ukraine and Russia until June a deadline to reach some type of agreement.
	Right.
	So this is what is taking up most of the bandwidth in the White House State Department.
	That's what Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner are talking with Putin's advisors and cronies about for most of the time.
	We don't have Under Secretary of State for International Security and Arms Control Tom Donano talking to his counterpart, Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Rabkov, right now.
	That's what we need to see happening.
	And those two men and their expert teams need to sit down.
	And by the way, the next round of U.S.-Russian arms control talks on a new agreement, it's going to be more complicated than Newstart was back in 2010.
	Why?
	Because they need to address the issue of how do we limit strategic nuclear weapons, which is what Newstart covered, the long-range systems, but then intermediate-range systems.
	There was a treaty, the 1987 Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty, that Ronald Reagan negotiated.
	It eliminated an entire class of intermediate-range weapons, mainly in Europe.
	That treaty is gone because of a compliance dispute with the Russians in 2019.
	Then there are the sub-strategic nuclear weapons, the so-called tactical nuclear weapons.
	They're still extremely dangerous and large detonations, but they're carried on short-range systems.
	The Russians have a relatively large stockpile of about 1,000 in storage that could be brought forward in a regional conflict.
	The U.S. has about 250.
	That's an issue that we want to get our arms around.
	And then we've all heard about President Trump's Golden Dome concept.
	What it really is, is an expanded strategic missile defense scheme.
	That has always been a controversial part of the U.S.-Russian nuclear weapons dialogue because if one side has effective strategic missile defenses or partially effective, it can knock down a portion of the other country's offensive force.
	So the Russians look at this and they say, well, if you're going to build a defense against 200, 400 of our missiles, we're going to build 200, 400, 500 more.
	So it leads to an action-reaction cycle.
	So all these issues are going to be, if the two sides get together, part of the mix, and how they decide to put all this together in one package, which would be extremely difficult, or have a series of agreements.
	That is a big question.
	And we haven't heard from the Trump administration about how they seek to deal with this.
	Let's hear from Pat, the New Jersey Republican line.
	Go ahead.
	Hello.
	My question is: even if the U.S. and Russia reach agreement on arms control, if China is not willing to go along with it, will there be greater dangers on the Asian continent?
	Will India or even Pakistan try to keep up with China increasing the supply of nuclear weapons on a single continent?
	Thank you.
	Well, it's a great question because each of the world's nine nuclear-armed countries do tend to look at what one another is doing.
	India's greatest concern in terms of nuclear armaments is Pakistan, but they also look to China.
	India has about 175 nuclear weapons.
	Pakistan has a similar number.
	So at some point, India may want to adjust the size of its arsenal, how it is deployed.
	They're building sea-based missiles to follow what China is trying to do.
	But let me get back to what China's buildup means for the United States, and can we negotiate limits with the Russians even without China?
	As I said, the United States and Russia have right now about 1,550, 1,600 deployed strategic weapons.
	China has about 300 to 400 nuclear warheads on long-range systems that can reach the U.S.
	The U.S. has, in my view, in the view of many defense experts, more nuclear firepower than necessary to deter Russia and certainly China.
	And if China builds up, we may want to rethink how many nuclear weapons we have, how they are deployed.
	But it does not make any sense from my perspective not to have limits on U.S. and Russian arsenals as we try to engage with China to stop and then reverse their buildup.
	Why is that?
	Because if the United States begins building up the size of its arsenal, or Russia does, the two of us are going to get into an action-reaction cycle.
	And the Chinese are going to see that.
	And they're likely going to accelerate, not slow down, their buildup.
	And they may go to the farther end of what they're capable of doing.
	So, you know, it's very important that the United States and Russia continue to exercise restraint.
	And, you know, China's buildup, the other thing we should keep in mind of strategic nuclear weapons, it's not pointed at or designed to deter India's nuclear arsenal.
	It's not really focused on Japan or South Korea.
	The Chinese are likely concerned about their ability to have a strategic retaliatory attack on the U.S. if they're attacked.
	In other words, they want to be able to threaten to be able to hit back at the U.S.
	And if they only have a relatively small number of strategic nuclear missiles that could be hit in a first strike, knocked out, they might not have that retaliatory potential.
	So they're building up the number of missiles.
	I don't support that, but that is the logic of arms racing and nuclear deterrence.
	And so we need to understand that our actions are affecting their calculations.
	We're going to show folks a graph that the Arms Control Association has of suspected weapons buildup in 2025.
	And as we do that, we'll hear from Patty.
	Patty in Wisconsin, Democrats line.
	You're on with our guest, Darrell Kimball.
	Go ahead.
	Mr. Kimball, thank you for this life and death information.
	I'm a grandmother, but we've had lots of military and current military service people currently serving now.
	That being said, I don't want my grandchildren drafted for people's egos, and I'm so fearful.
	And please keep us informed.
	And if we could just be kinder to one another.
	But I'm afraid of President Trump because he's so aggressive.
	What happened in South America just pushes all the buttons.
	And please give us more advice.
	Thank you.
	Well, one thing that brings us all together is we need peace.
	We want to avoid war.
	We need to find ways to protect our country and build international security.
	And I mean, one thing I would say is that the United States, Russia, China, Republicans, Democrats, Independents, I mean, we need to find effective ways to reduce nuclear dangers.
	And I personally disagree with President Trump on a lot of policies, but one reassuring thing is that he does seem to understand some of the fundamentals about nuclear weapons, that they are too expensive, we have too many of them, and that a nuclear conflict, if it were to break out, would be catastrophic and it must be avoided.
	And he's also said that he wants to negotiate, or as he puts it, denuclearization with Russia and China.
	But what I think we all need to think about is, even as we've got many other issues to deal with, healthcare, education, crime, immigration issues, climate, this is one of the most important issues facing the United States and the world.
	So members of Congress need to hear from all of you about how you feel.
	They need to speak up and ask hard questions of the executive branch, which has almost total control over policy in this area.
	We need to be asking questions about how much our tax dollars are being used to spend on nuclear weapons.
	I would just note that the United States is on track to spend about $1 trillion to modernize the existing nuclear arsenal.
	That's an enormous sum of money.
	And if we get into an arms race that is possible without effective constraints and arms control agreements yet to be negotiated, it would cost even more.
	So we need to be asking hard questions.
	We need to demand more of our elected leaders to act to deal with this threat.
U.S. and Iran Nuclear Talks 00:06:43
	Richard is joining us from Massachusetts.
	Richard, on our independent line, go ahead.
	Good morning.
	Daryl, I spoke to you on June 14th of the previous, not last year, but the year before.
	I was involved with the Ano Etok cleanup and building the runed dome.
	Hello again.
	I tried to get in touch with you and you never got back to me, but I just want to make a comment.
	Out of the 4,000 guys that cleaned up Ano Etok with no protection, and it's well documented, okay, there's only 300 of us still left.
	We want compensation.
	Tomorrow it's going to be 50 years.
	I want those veterans and myself compensated for what we did and how they lied and how the widows and the children after their husbands died cleaning up Ano Etok got no benefits whatsoever.
	That's my comment.
	Okay.
	You'll have to put some context to it, please.
	Yeah, thank you.
	Well, listen, I apologize for not getting back to you.
	I got a lot of inquiries, but I will get back to you.
	We'll look back at the email.
	But what the caller is referring to, the Iwanitak dome.
	So the United States, in the early days of the Cold War, conducted atmospheric nuclear tests in the Pacific.
	And these were extremely dirty, very large nuclear test explosions, displaced islanders in the Marshall Islands chain.
	And one of these tests that was detonated on a small atoll created an enormous amount of radioactive contamination that the United States government had to go back and try to contain by putting a concrete dome over a large portion of the residual waste and contamination.
	And it was American soldiers and workers who did that work.
	And the caller was one of the people who was involved in this.
	It was extremely dirty work.
	Those workers have been suffering health problems for years and years.
	There is a whole, there are hundreds of thousands of people who worked at nuclear weapons production plants around the United States.
	I grew up near one of them in southwest Ohio, who have suffered from radiation and chemical exposure at these plants.
	And then there are all of the people who have suffered from the fallout from nuclear test explosions conducted in the United States, mainly in Nevada, 100 atmospheric nuclear test explosions, who are still suffering today from radiation-related illnesses.
	There are some programs that have been established to help with Department of Energy nuclear weapons workers.
	There's a program called the Radiation Effects Compensation Act.
	Congress just barely extended last year that covers many, but not all of the downwinders.
	But the workers at Iwanatak Atoll, where the room at Dome is, they apparently are not covered or not covered well enough.
	So we have a legacy of contamination and people who've been affected that our government has not provided justice for if they ever really could.
	Here's the map that we referenced earlier when it comes to the Arms Control Association, the 2025 Estimated Global Nuclear Warhead Inventories.
	You can see that at their website.
	With that in mind, I want to talk to you about a headline out of yesterday about the U.S. and Iran approaching talks over the program.
	What are the talks and what do they center on?
	Well, these talks are the first since the United States bombed key Iranian nuclear sites back in June.
	That disrupted earlier talks with the Iranians about the status and the future of its nuclear program.
	So the talks on Friday covered a wide range of issues, including the nuclear program.
	There was no clear outcome yet.
	Iran, after the U.S. and Israeli strikes in June, still has a residual capacity to enrich uranium, even though its major facilities are currently disabled.
	They have a stockpile of some 400 kilograms of highly enriched uranium from previous work.
	And I think significantly, the U.S. and Israeli bombing led to the removal of the International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors who were there on the ground keeping an eye on what Iran was doing, what it had, et cetera.
	We need to get those inspectors back in to understand what the situation is, to make sure that Iran is not reconstituting the program in a way that could allow them to weaponize some of that material.
	There are no signs that they're doing that yet.
	And I hope that's a priority of the Trump administration.
	But we have to remember, Iran looks at this program and they believe that they have a right to a peaceful nuclear energy program.
	They want to have the option to enrich uranium.
	The U.S. is saying you cannot enrich uranium like all other non-nuclear weapons states are allowed to do.
	And Trump is threatening further military action if the Iranians do not agree to a long list of demands.
	Both sides need to be more flexible.
	Both sides need to zero in on what the most important areas of agreement are that would solve the most urgent nonproliferation issues.
	So it is a longer conversation, but I hope that they continue to work at this.
	This is an important issue still.
	And we have negotiated with the Iranians in the past.
	There was the 2015 Iran nuclear deal that Trump pulled out of.
	It was very effective in holding back Iran's pathways to the bomb blocking the pathways, but Donald Trump pulled out of it in 2018.
	It's now on him to address this issue, and I hope it is done diplomatically rather than with more bombs in a new war in the Middle East.
Iran Nuclear Deal Fallout 00:01:00
	Our guest website is armscontrol.org.
	Darrell Kimball, the executive director of the Arms Control Association.
	Thanks for your time.
	Thank you.
	That's it for our program today.
	A new edition of Washington Journal comes your way at 7 o'clock tomorrow morning.
	Ceasefire is next.
	Welcome to Ceasefire, where we try to bridge the divide in American politics.
	I'm Dasha Burns, Politico White House Bureau Chief, and joining me now, two guests who have agreed to keep the conversation civil even when they disagree: Chad Wolfe, acting Homeland Security Secretary during the first Trump administration, and John Sandwig, acting ICE Director during the Obama administration.
	Thank you both so much for joining me.
	I feel very lucky to have your expertise here today.

Chapters

00:00:00 Video Reposted: Voter Fraud Reaction
00:14:58 Icing on the Cake
00:29:50 Ivey On Trump's Legacy
00:45:40 Calls for Epstein Files Release
00:56:11 Elon's Vision for Offices & Jobs
01:07:07 Dramatic Shifts in ACA Subsidies
01:21:38 Health Care Costs in Red States
01:37:27 Medicare for All Costs
01:44:41 Sunday On C-SPAN
01:49:03 FBI Takes Over Guthrie Search
01:51:57 Reviews and Scoring Controversy
01:55:58 Gwen's Voice in Arizona
01:59:49 Town Forum Discussion
02:06:25 Comparing Healthcare Access: U.S. vs. Switzerland
02:08:54 Lives Lost, Borders Blurred
02:11:53 Bridging Political Divides
02:22:31 Verification Challenges
02:37:38 Building Confidence in Nuclear Talks
02:53:10 U.S. and Iran Nuclear Talks
02:59:53 Iran Nuclear Deal Fallout