CSPAN - Washington Journal 02/09/2026

All Episodes

Previous Next

Feb. 9, 2026 06:59-10:01 - CSPAN

03:01:50

Washington Journal 02/09/2026

Source

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
Super Bowl Views Labeled 00:09:30
	Would end Friday if an agreement is not reached.
	Watch live coverage of the House on C-SPAN, the Senate on C-SPAN 2, and all of our congressional coverage on our free video app, C-SPAN Now, and our website, C-SPAN.org.
	C-SPAN, Democracy Unfiltered.
	We're funded by these television companies and more, including Charter Communications.
	Charter is proud to be recognized as one of the best internet providers.
	And we're just getting started.
	Building 100,000 miles of new infrastructure to reach those who need it most.
	Charter Communications supports C-SPAN as a public service, along with these other television providers, giving you a front-row seat to democracy.
	Coming up on C-SPAN's Washington Journal, Cliff Young of Ipsos Public Affairs shares the latest public opinion research on President Trump and issues voters say are top of mind for midterm elections later this year.
	Then Bloomberg government senior White House reporter Mika Solner previews the week ahead at the White House.
	And Dennis Shea of the Center for Housing Policy, the Bipartisan Policy Center, discusses Senate and House packages aimed at addressing housing affordability.
	Washington Journal starts now.
	Good morning.
	It's Monday, February 9th.
	Over 120 million Americans watched yesterday's Super Bowl, and the Winter Olympics are underway in Italy.
	We'll start this morning not with the games themselves, but your reaction to the politics around them.
	Recently, politics has surfaced in several ways.
	Statements from athletes and artists, messages and advertising, commentary from public figures, and even competing halftime programming, including the NFL halftime show and the alternate halftime event hosted by Turning Point USA.
	So we want to hear from you.
	Do you welcome political messages during major sporting events?
	Or do you think sports should be a politics-free zone?
	You can call, text, or post.
	Here's how.
	Republicans, call us on 202-748-8001.
	Democrats, 202-748-8000.
	Independents, 202-748-8002.
	You can send a text to 202-748-8003, include your first name in your city-state.
	And you can reach us on social media, facebook.com/slash C-SPAN and X at C-SPANWJ.
	Welcome to today's Washington Journal.
	Here's the front page of the Washington Post with a picture of the Super Bowl, Seahawks soar to Super Bowl Championship, and the Wall Street Journal.
	Seattle dominates Patriots in Super Bowl 60.
	And here is the New York Times with the Winter Olympics on the front page.
	And their headline is for U.S. athletes at the Olympics.
	No escaping American politics.
	It says wearing a flag with everything it represents.
	We're going to be hearing from you this morning on your thoughts on politics at major sporting events, given that the Super Bowl was yesterday, the Olympics are ongoing.
	Wonder what you think about that.
	If you watched the ads, if you watched the halftime show, which halftime show did you watch?
	Let's take a look at one of the ads, and this is from ICE, and it's a recruitment video.
	They're friends and neighbors, sons, fathers, their little league coaches and veterans.
	They're people who love this country.
	These are immigration and customs enforcement officers.
	They are removing violent criminals from our streets and neighborhoods.
	It's dangerous and difficult work.
	But ICE has one mission to make America a safer place to live.
	And that's what they're doing.
	This is law enforcement.
	This is ICE.
	There's a YouGov poll here that was asking, this is from February 6th, so three days ago, what Americans think about Super Bowl and Bad Bunny.
	Here's a couple of things for you.
	A majority of Americans plan to watch the Super Bowl.
	Men are more likely than women to say the game itself is their favorite part of the Super Bowl broadcast.
	Young adults, Hispanics, and Democrats are especially likely to be satisfied with Bad Bunny as a Super Bowl halftime performer.
	This is how it breaks down visually.
	You can see here, this is the younger age group, 18 to 29.
	It decreases as you get farther down.
	And here is Democrats, Independents, and Republicans.
	So Democrats much more satisfied with Bad Bunny as a Super Bowl, halftime performer.
	Republicans very or somewhat dissatisfied there.
	Let's go to the calls now and start with Vincent in the Bronx.
	Democrat, good morning.
	Yeah, I wanted to talk about Super Bowl halftime.
	Sure.
	I'm a 76-year-old African-American.
	Grew up in the South Bronx with a lot of Puerto Ricans.
	And I have to say, that was the greatest halftime show I've ever seen in my life.
	It was like a play, a musical, it was just incredible.
	I mean, the creativity was phenomenal.
	I don't know how anybody can deny that he is the greatest musician in the world.
	And what do you think, Vincent, that there was an alternate halftime show?
	This is the first time that's happened.
	Well, this is America, so I had no problem with it.
	I wasn't going to watch it because I had to see the halftime.
	It was a Super Bowl halftime show because I knew it was going to probably be incredible.
	I didn't know it was going to be that great.
	So this is America.
	That's fine.
	All right.
	And we have a couple of posts here on Facebook.
	Steve is posting about the game itself.
	He said, I didn't watch either halftime show and partially watch the game.
	I'm glad the Seahawks won.
	Now my Steelers have a chance to be the first to seven.
	And Heather says, very bad turnoff.
	My family has stopped watching all sports as much as we used to.
	And Mary Lynn says, I wish we could enjoy things like football and Olympics without politics.
	I mean, on social media, everybody says their beliefs.
	There's protests everywhere.
	I just wish there was a place we could all come together and have some enjoyment.
	So I just didn't even bother watching.
	I watched Bridgerton instead.
	And Matthew says, sports are much better off without it, being politics.
	If it's leftist views, it will be labeled as unifying.
	And if it's conservative views, it will be labeled as divisive culture war.
	They will tell us that love is greater than hate before saying F something.
	One of the ads, oh, we've got Antonio is also in the Bronx, but a Republican.
	Hi, Antonio.
	Hi, good morning.
	How are you doing?
	I have a question.
	My father and my mom, my mom was Italian, my father's Hispanic.
	I speak both languages pretty fluently.
	My question is, is that the people that are complaining about this or saying they liked it, there's nothing wrong with that.
	But it seems like it's coming more from the white community.
	There seems to be nothing wrong with having what they should have had two English songs, two Spanish songs.
	I don't think there's anything wrong with that.
	And yourself included.
	Let me ask you, when was the last time you took your grandchildren and your children just to a Spanish-speaking movie?
	Have you ever done that?
	I don't have any grandchildren, Antonio.
	Well, whatever.
	People take.
	No, I understand the point.
	Samantha in Denver, Colorado, Independent Line.
	Good morning.
	Oh, yes.
	Hi.
	I really love your show.
	Thank you for answering my call.
	I've tried to call in many times.
	But I just wanted to say, I have an answer to your question, but I just wanted to say, ask a question first, and that is: do you have you changed a little bit?
	It seems like you're going more for culture-type issues that are maybe more divisive.
	To me, these kind of divide and conquer topics, I've seen, you know, we can see through all of human history.
	So I don't know if you have a question, an answer to that question.
	Do you think this topic, this morning's topic, is divisive?
	I do.
	I think these kind of questions, I think that for me, I did watch the Super Bowl.
	My husband loves the Super Bowl.
	I thought the halftime show was spectacular.
	I don't know Bad Bunny.
	I didn't know his music, but I thought it was wonderful.
	But at the same time, I think a lot of people in America, not to speak for my fellow Americans, but it seems more and more things are, more companies, more organizations, more institutions are trying to attract people from around the world, perhaps at our own expense.
JD Vance Booed? 00:04:37
	So I think some of these issues, maybe if we took a more nuanced view and took a step back, then maybe we could see what's in it instead of kind of using it, the issues to divide people against one another.
	All right.
	And this is USA Today with this.
	This is about the Olympics.
	Was JD Vance really booed at the Olympics opening ceremony?
	Here's what they said.
	So JD Vance, the vice president, and his wife Usha, were in the crowd at the 2026 Olympic opening ceremony on Friday when they were reportedly shown on the screen.
	The reaction by many, many accounts, it was booze that rained on the VP from the crowd.
	But there are people wondering online if that was true or not, given that it may not have been audible on the NBC telecast.
	A video that's since been deleted seemed to make it clear there were booze.
	Other videos show booze, but there's this from USA Today's sports Sidney Henderson: quote: U.S. Vice President JD Vance and his wife, Second Lady Usha Vance, were shown on the stadium's Jumbotron at the site of Vance waving miniature American flags from the grandstand.
	The crowd booed loudly.
	And there are more accounts that is on USA Today.
	Also, one of the ads was from Epstein Survivors.
	Let's take a look at that.
	After years of being kept apart, we're standing together.
	Standing.
	Standing together.
	Because this girl deserves the truth.
	Because she deserves the truth.
	we all deserve the truth let's talk to Jim Beverly Hills California Democrat, good morning, Jim.
	Yes, good morning.
	I think it's our country in such a critical period right now.
	And the Super Bowl is an event, to me, even greater than a sporting event.
	It's a cultural event.
	And I think it's important that at the halftime, that someone be allowed to express themselves the way they did.
	I'd never heard of Bad Bunny, but I've watched clips.
	And the concept of saying God bless America in terms of all the countries, all the flags of the Americas, was a brilliant, wonderful way to bring us together.
	And I think it was amazing and very positive and unexpected.
	And then before I hang up, I just want to thank C-SPAN.
	I watch every day from 4 to 5 a.m.
	And personally, the way you handle yourself and are strong about what's really happening, allowing people to speak, you should be commended tremendously for the job that you do.
	Thank you.
	Thank you, Jim.
	And this is a post by President Donald Trump on True Social.
	He said this last night.
	The Super Bowl halftime show is absolutely terrible, one of the worst ever.
	It makes no sense, is an affront to the greatness of America, and doesn't represent our standards of success, creativity, or excellence.
	Nobody understands a word this guy is saying, and the dancing is disgusting, especially for young children that are watching from throughout the USA and all over the world.
	This, quote, show is just a slap in the face to our country, which is setting new standards and records every single day, including the best stock market and 401ks in history.
	There's nothing inspirational about this mess of a halftime show.
	And watch.
	It will get great reviews from the fake news media because they haven't got a clue of what is going on in the real world.
	And by the way, the NFL should immediately replace its ridiculous new kickoff rule.
	Wonder what you think about that.
Hunter Hess's Dilemma 00:02:46
	If you agree, this is Deborah, South Bend, Indiana, Republican.
	Hi, Deborah.
	Hi, good morning to you.
	Look, in my world as a nice poppet, 501 fee 3.
	I was so disappointed.
	And that's Super Bowl, because remember, as a professional grant writer, you are expecting me to promote economic development opportunities all around the world.
	When you let me saw something like that come in from me, from a not-for-profit world, as they do it right there.
	All right, let's take a look at the Wall Street Journal.
	Here is the headline.
	It says, Trump calls U.S. skier a loser as politics ripples through Olympic Games.
	Hunter Hess said he had mixed emotions about representing the U.S. right now.
	Here's what the article says.
	President Trump attacked a skier representing the U.S. at the 2026 Winter Olympic Games, saying that it is too bad that Hunter Hess is on the team and that it's hard to support him after Hess sought to distance himself from the Trump administration's policies.
	It is exceptionally rare for a sitting U.S. president to criticize a member of the country's Olympic team.
	The Olympics in Italy are becoming an indicator of how Trump's policies are playing both with young members of the Olympic team and on the world stage.
	Vice President JD Vance was booed by the international crowd at the opening ceremonies.
	On Sunday, the second family attended the men's 5,000.
	It says that he and his family attended several events and met with U.S. athletes without incidents, and he did attend the men's 5,000-meter speed skating.
	In a post on True Social on Sunday morning, Trump said, U.S. Olympic skier Hunter Hess, a real loser, says he doesn't represent his country in the current Winter Olympics.
	If that is the case, he shouldn't have tried out for the team, and it is too bad he's on it.
	Very hard to root for someone like this.
	He is a freestyle skier from Oregon, and he competed on Sunday.
	Well, here is the skiers, USA freestyle skiers Chris Lillis and Hunter Hess from a news conference this past weekend.
Stephanie's Comment on the Halftime Show 00:15:15
	I feel heartbroken about what's happened in the United States.
	I'm pretty sure you're referencing ICE and some of the protests and things like that.
	I think that as a country, we need to focus on respecting everybody's rights and making sure that we're treating our citizens as well as anybody with love and respect.
	And I hope that when people look at athletes compete in the Olympics, they realize that that's the America that we're trying to represent.
	It brings up mixed emotions to represent the U.S. right now, I think.
	It's a little hard.
	There's obviously a lot going on that I'm not the biggest fan of, and I think a lot of people aren't.
	If it aligns with my moral values, I feel like I'm representing it.
	Just because I'm wearing the flag doesn't mean I represent everything that's going on in the U.S.
	So, yeah, I just kind of want to do it for my friends and my family and the people that support me getting here.
	Let's talk to Annie in Michigan, Independent Line.
	Good morning.
	Good morning.
	I wanted to make a comment about the halftime show.
	The people who are complaining about it being in Spanish, the album that was a top-winning award was all in Spanish.
	You wouldn't ask an opera singer, an Italian opera singer, to convert her song into English.
	That's ridiculous.
	In the 50s, blacks would go overseas, blue singers, jazz singers.
	They sang in Paris and France.
	They sang in English.
	This whole thing about the Spanish, it's just a made-up controversy, and it's unfortunate.
	The most important thing he said at the end was in English.
	God bless America.
	We have to stop being so discriminatory toward anything that's not like us all the time.
	It was a great performance.
	It was all love.
	You did not need to be able to speak English to understand.
	Thank you.
	Alan, Fort Pierce, Florida, Republican, you're on the air.
	Well, thanks for having me on.
	It was a fantastic halftime show.
	I can't believe they put that together with so much dancing and music and the musical stars, Lady Gaga and Ricky Martin.
	The most important thing that I don't think most people understand is Puerto Ricans are Americans.
	Puerto Ricans are Americans.
	They are part of this country and have been for over 100 years.
	And that's part of having this territory, this Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, is they are Americans.
	And a lot of people don't even know that Puerto Rico provides a huge percentage per capita of people to the U.S. military service.
	So how dare anybody bash The halftime show being from in Spanish or from someone from Puerto Rico, we need to come together and embrace what is part of America.
	Thank you.
	And Alan, I'm curious, since you're a Republican, did you were you curious about the alternate halftime show?
	Did you want to take a look at that at all?
	I flipped to it for about 10 or 15 seconds, and all it was was some song that was trying to rile up the MAGA bass.
	And remember, not all Republicans are MAGA or not all Republicans support Donald Trump.
	All right, Alan.
	Here's Stephanie, Tampa, Florida, Democrat.
	You're on the air, Stephanie.
	Good morning.
	Good morning.
	Thank you also for allowing me.
	And I stand with my fellow Floridian.
	And I did like the show.
	I like the message that I, although I clearly am not a Spanish-speaking Floridian, I could visually see the message that Bad Benny was sending us.
	And I liked his message.
	I like the fact that it wasn't as divisive as what we've seen for several years.
	And I really hope that the Democrats and the Independents take note.
	And maybe they need to put forward a Spanish-speaking constituent to bring the country together again politically and globally in the world foreign policy.
	So hopefully we have somebody that can bring us together, get behind the podium, not worry about getting reelected, bring down the national debt, and get us back to where we need to be.
	All right, Stephanie, let's hear next from Frankie, Republican, Silver Creek, Georgia.
	Good morning.
	Good morning.
	I didn't see anything wrong with the halftime show.
	I thought it was awesome.
	You know, Spanish is the second largest spoken language in the world.
	The Spanish were here a good 300 years before the French and the Brits ever got here.
	You know, it kind of made me wanted to get up and dance.
	And if you're familiar with New Orleans and St. Augustine, you'd know something about the Spanish heritage in this country.
	And I just didn't see anything wrong with it.
	And I, and the clickbait on the social network was unbelievable.
	You know, I was enraged about some of it, but my son, he said, he said it was a lot of clickbait on the internet before the show got, yeah.
	You were talking about on social media?
	Was there something that you saw specifically or just in general?
	Oh, yeah.
	They met out like it was going to be a drag queen show.
	And I didn't see a drag queen show at halftime, you know, as it's what a lot of the clickbait was on social media.
	So that was a thing.
	So, and I didn't see, you know, I've been to New Orleans a couple of times.
	I mean, I actually lived in Louisiana.
	I, you know, you got to understand the history of Spain.
	And, you know, their empire got so massive that they couldn't govern over it.
	So that's the reason they kind of withdrew.
	And they were the first European country to abolish slavery.
	You know, I just think it was totally overblown.
	Very frank.
	Let's check in on our social media.
	This is Eric, who says on Facebook, keep it separated.
	That's sports and politics.
	I love sports.
	It's a great pastime.
	Politics just divide and it grosses me.
	This is Jeff in Dearborn by text, the most engaging Super Bowl halftime show I've ever seen.
	I couldn't believe how quickly it went by.
	How'd the TP show work out?
	Well, there is, let me actually bring that up since the question is out there.
	This is sportingnews.com.
	How many people watched Turning Point USA halftime show?
	How 2026 Super Bowl alternative compared to Bad Bunny?
	It says that TPUSA produced its own halftime show featuring Kid Rock, Lee Bryce, Bradley Gilbert, and Gabby Barrett.
	Show was pretty popular for its own right with the various TPUSA channels producing a respectable number of viewers.
	That is, at its peak, was 5.7 million people.
	So it says for most of the show, the viewership was between 4 to 5 million fans.
	It lasted for 25 minutes.
	And the Super Bowl, of course, is at about 100.
	Estimates are about 127 million.
	Here's Patrick in California, Independent Line.
	Good morning, Patrick.
	Good morning.
	Good morning.
	You're on the air.
	Go right ahead.
	Yeah, you know, I've never really been big on the halftime shows, but you know, it wasn't bad.
	The only thing I would have liked, I would have liked subtitles because I haven't had a Spanish class for decades.
	And both in my professional and personal life, I haven't had to use a lot of Spanish.
	So I would have liked to have understood.
	I mean, I could see that, you know, the love there, you know, families, people getting married, kids growing up, just everything that goes on in life.
	It wasn't bad, but it's, you know, not my thing.
	And here's Taylor in Asheville, North Carolina, Democrat.
	Go ahead, Taylor.
	Yeah, I just wanted to say, like, in regards to Trump's comments about the halftime show, that Bad Bunny show is essentially a conservative's traditional values, wet dream.
	He mentioned God, had a hetero wedding, passed on his accolades to a child, celebrated his heritage and the community that raised him.
	Then he shouted out our nation as well as the nations around us.
	Finally, promoted love over hate, just like Jesus.
	And yet, MAGA can only hate because nothing in their worldview or politics has anything to do with anything other than jingoism, white Euro-nationalism, and unadulterated racism.
	Also, one other thing.
	It's funny that our president and his followers saw the message, the only thing more powerful than love is hate, and understood it correctly as an attack on them.
	That's all.
	Right.
	So the only thing more powerful than hate is love.
	Just swish it.
	Sorry.
	Anyway, targeted by thinking that they were the target correctly because it was about them saying that love is more powerful than hate.
	And anybody that thinks they're being victimized by that statement needs to seriously consider their values.
	And here's Ron in Massachusetts, Independent Line.
	Hi, Ron.
	Hi, Gremon, and how are you?
	Good.
	I need span watching it all the time.
	You can learn a lot.
	We should have been celebrating the 250th anniversary of the United States of America at that halftime show.
	When I went to school, I was taught English.
	I wasn't taught Spanish, so I don't know a word he was saying.
	You know, we're in the United States of America.
	We're an English-speaking language.
	They should at least put a closed caption on there or something so you could understand what they were saying.
	And the dancing, I've seen the same thing at a strip show, just with the clothes on the way they were doing on TV.
	There's no reason for that.
	All right.
	And here's Terry in Columbus, Ohio, Democrat.
	You're on the air, Terry.
	Yes, this is one thing I would like to say.
	This nation is built on everybody's makeup.
	It don't nobody get bothered with going to go get Spanish food, their style going over to their countries, lefting over their women, lefting over the men.
	And we are, everyone just gets together.
	Look at the video right now.
	That's awesome.
	If you can't get that, you don't want to need to leave the United States.
	You're not American.
	Because Spanish, African-American, Chinese, Somali, everybody, they make America.
	And if you're not, if you're not willing to accept that, you are something's really wrong with you.
	Because ask that president, do you eat Spanish food?
	Yeah.
	But he eats McDonald's that's made with human meat, things like that.
	All right, Terry.
	And we got this posting on X from Senator Cortez Masto who says, this was such a fun and powerful and emotional concert for the halftime.
	Congratulations, Bad Bunny.
	Like he said, love is more powerful than hate.
	Senator, sorry, Speaker of the House, Mike Johnson, the best moments in broadcast so far this year, Jelly Roll at the Grammys and Kid Rock at TPUSA's All-American Halftime Show.
	And he posted a picture there.
	And this is Ashini on Facebook who says, Super Bowl is an event sponsored by NFL Corporation.
	They can do what they want to get their audience.
	This is not a government event.
	Too much attention given.
	And finally, Heather said on Facebook, very bad turn off.
	My family has stopped watching all sports as much as we used to.
	And Frank in Delaware, Republican.
	What do you think, Frank?
	Politics at major sporting events.
	Well, I got to tell you, I have seen every Super Bowl ever since I was 16 years old, back in 1968.
	And this was the worst Super Bowl halftime show I've ever seen in my life.
	This was a disgrace to the United States of America people watching it.
	Those are like, what country is this I'm watching?
	This is the United States of America.
	The football is the United States of America's game.
	We should be celebrating the United States of America.
	We were celebrating Puerto Rico or somebody last night.
	I don't know who that one was, but it wasn't the United States of America.
	And I'm going to tell you, if you turn the other station and you saw that was American, what they were doing over the other channel, that was American.
	This last night was just horrible.
	So which one did you watch, Frank?
	Or did you flip back and forth?
	Okay, he's gone.
	This is an opinion piece by former Senator Ben Sess in the Wall Street Journal.
	It says, politics should be more like the Super Bowl.
	Pick sides, argue, talk trash, then go back to your real life of family, community, work, and worship.
	At the Wall Street Journal, if you'd like to read that article, we'll take one more call on this topic of sports and sorry, politics in sports, and then we'll do open forum.
	So this is Alexis, Detroit Independent Line.
	Good morning.
	Morning.
	I agree with one of the, I think it was the second message you just read.
	This event, it really, let me try to watch my language here.
Sports As Anti-Intellectualism 00:02:56
	It really disappoints me that this event gets so much attention each year, and both of them actually, the Olympics and the Super Bowl.
	Sports are anti-intellectualism.
	That's why really super smart people, nerds we used to be called, could care less about two teams fighting it out.
	It's going back to the Roman days or a bullfight or anything else like that.
	It's so anti-intellectual.
	I can't believe Washington Journal, like the woman said earlier, is having this as a topic.
	That's my first thing.
	Wait, wait, wait.
	Yeah, no, I'll let you get to your second thing, but I wanted to ask you: do you think, and I get what you're saying, there's some people that just don't like sports at all, but the Super Bowl brings in, we're looking at almost 130 million people watching it.
	Isn't it something that brings everybody together, like to do the same thing, when really we haven't had things like that, like besides the Super Bowl and major sporting events like the Olympics?
	What do you think of that?
	I think the Oscars do that every year, which I also don't give a rat's you know what about.
	But Oscars, Grammys, all these award shows, they bring, they're the ones that are supposed to bring in all the people who care about frivolous, vacuous things.
	And you know what?
	If it is an economic issue, it's on CNBC this morning, too.
	They talk a lot about sports because they talk a lot about the gambling crisis we have amongst young males in this country who are killing themselves.
	And I didn't, of course, I didn't watch the stupid thing.
	I never have.
	But I'm assuming there was tons of gambling ads because that's what I've heard in the last year just through the zeitgeist that people can't even watch any kind of NBA, NFL, or any other kind of sporting show on television or whatever it's on these days, streaming or whoever has sports these days, because it's all gambling ads.
	Really?
	We as a culture need to get it together and smarten up.
	And as far as throwing in the politics for the people who were, oh, it's such a great show, the halftime show part, I don't like Kid Rock.
	I don't give a crap about him.
	And I also don't care about this other person.
	But the point is, if it is going to be such a gathering event for American anti-intellectuals, dumbass people who want to watch TV, why don't we come on?
	You're going to call 130 million Americans names like that.
	But anyway, was there another point?
	Because you said there was something else you wanted to talk about, or was that it?
	Who used to go watch the Gladiators, Mimi?
	Eddie in New York City, Democrat, you're on the air, Eddie.
	Eddie, are you there?
Eddie On The Air 00:02:39
	Yeah, I'm here.
	I'm here.
	Okay.
	Like I said, like I said, I mean, you know, it was interesting.
	And I mean, you know, like I said, it showed for the first time.
	It showed the people that were marginalized performing at the Super Bowl.
	And it was, I guess, I guess for the first time in history, we saw people that did not speak English perform for the first time for a bunch of millions of Americans.
	And like I said, I mean, that whole thing with the whole thing with what they were trying to promote with that separate stuff there, the Super Bowl, that's you're looking at the decline of white America.
	All right.
	And like I said, the world now, the world now is moving into a different direction.
	America is moving into a different direction.
	Okay, Eddie, and we are in open forum.
	If there's other things you'd like to talk about, you're welcome to call in now.
	Republicans are on 202-748-8001.
	Democrats 202-748-8000.
	Independents 202-748-8002.
	If you'd like to continue talking about this topic, you're welcome to do that as well.
	In the meantime, while you're calling in, here is Republican Senator Bill Haggerty.
	He was on Fox News Sunday talking about where Republicans stand on the ICE debate, if you'll recall.
	That is coming up.
	The deadline for DHS funding is coming up this Friday.
	I think Democrats are going to have a very hard time shutting the government down just so they can perpetuate the kind of chaos that's going on in Minneapolis.
	Look, there's a reason why ICE does not want to have their badges and their names on their uniforms.
	There's a reason why they're masking because threats have risen 1,300%, death threats against ICE agents.
	They're being doxxed.
	The left has gone completely overboard, and they're threatening the safety and security of our agents so that they cannot do their job.
	This is something we need to look at very carefully.
	The request that we should put ICE agents in harm's way is absolutely intolerable.
	And again, the Democrats need to get serious.
	If they do shut the government down, it's not going to have an impact.
	As you said, you discussed this earlier.
	It's going to impact the Coast Guard.
	It's going to impact TSA.
	It's going to impact FEMA in our state.
	You know, we've had massive ice storms.
	Let's shut that down.
	Is that the argument that the Democrats want to make?
	Friday at midnight.
	We'll find out.
	I don't think the American public are going to believe this is the right path to follow.
	Friday at midnight, as the senator said, is the deadline for DHS funding.
Political Situation in the Country 00:03:59
	And here is Mark, Floral Park, New York, Independent.
	You're on Open Forum.
	Good morning.
	Good morning, Mimi.
	I've been watching Super Bowls since the beginning.
	And it's always been a very nice halftime show.
	It's not about Spanish American.
	It's about the advertisers.
	It's about making money.
	Bunny's going to make more money.
	He's going to bring in more people watching than Kid Rock.
	And although I'd rather see Kid Rock, I'll watch a very entertaining dancer and singer.
	It's all about the money.
	And as far as making political statements, Marlon Brando did it back when he won the Oscars.
	It's been around for a long time.
	I have no problem with it.
	And as an independent, I feel it's an American way.
	I have no problem watching great dances and singers at a halftime show.
	Let's talk to Sylvia next.
	Fort Lauderdale, Florida, Republican.
	Hi, Sylvia.
	Hey, how are you?
	Good.
	All right.
	So what I wanted to say is that I have a Spanish background.
	So my husband and I, we made the decision of not watching the half-crime show because we have heard the lyrics from the songs of Bat Bunny, and we definitely don't think that they're appropriate.
	They are degrading to women.
	So I don't agree to the message in his music.
	And I don't follow him.
	So that's one of the things that brought us to watch the other show, Turning Point.
	And actually, I felt most.
	It was a message, from my point of view, was a message of transformation.
	How he got the message from Jesus to switch from being Kid Rob to his real name.
	I think it's Robert something.
	I don't know.
	I don't remember.
	But, you know, it was a message based on faith.
	And it was very moving.
	I found it, you know, that it was really nice.
	And I think at the end of the day, people had options, which was great.
	And I really enjoyed the other show, the Turning Point Show.
	Now, about the show itself with Bad Baden and the music and all of that, it was very colorful.
	And, you know, people enjoyed it overall.
	But I think the political message behind it was, you know, all of these flags of countries.
	And it's a message of unifying, yes, but at the same time, it appeals to what's going on with ICE and the open borders and, you know, let everybody in.
	So it was kind of encoded there about the political situation in the country.
	And it complemented his message from the Grammys, I think.
	So it was politically charged from my view.
	Got it.
	But everyone had its own options, right?
	All right, Sylvia.
	And as far as the lyrics go for Bad Bunny's performance, this is CBS has this Bad Bunny Lyrics to Know for his 2026 Super Bowl halftime show.
	This was published before the halftime show.
	It does have translations here of many of his most popular songs.
	And there are other sites that you can go to if you'd like to get the actual translation in English of what he's saying on Super Bowl.
Rally For John Alsoft 00:04:04
	Terry, Bellwood, Illinois, Democrat.
	You're on the air, Terry.
	Good morning, Mimi.
	How are you?
	Hey, Mimi, I understand there was a rally in Georgia for John Alsoft.
	And the media didn't, our national media didn't pick it up.
	Maybe you could look through your papers and tell me what was the result of that.
	That seemed like it was pretty interesting.
	And maybe Trump should invite Bad Bunny to his State of the Union address.
	Maybe he'll get some sympathy.
	Have a great day.
	All right.
	Wanda is next.
	California, Republican line.
	Go ahead.
	Yes, can I mention some podcasters that are on YouTube?
	Sure.
	At first, okay, I'll do that first.
	Professor Nez N-E-Z.
	Another one is Neil Johnson.
	And one more, Doc, D.O.C. Rich, R-I-C-H.
	Okay, now I want to talk about your response to the guest that you had on yesterday, who's talking about how honest our elections are, which is not true.
	Because here's just an example.
	And these podcasters discuss it at length.
	Fulton County in Georgia, around Atlanta, there were 315,000 unsigned ballots, and they were counted in the 2020 election.
	And there are so many other examples in other states that proved in 2020 that Trump won.
	And I don't know why you don't have any guests on your show, besides that old fossil you had on yesterday, who's talking about how honest our elections are.
	It's not true.
	And it has not been true for a long time.
	Caller mentioned the rally in Florida, in Georgia.
	Sorry, here is GeorgiaRecorder.com.
	The headline, Osoff, tells supporters we will overcome this together as he blasts Trump for the FBI raid.
	Senator Osoff is running for reelection in Georgia.
	It says, 30-minute speech at the Georgia International Convention Center, Osoff highlighted the rising cost of groceries and health care for Georgia residents, painted Trump's efforts to pass tax cuts that experts say disproportionately benefit wealthy Americans as a sign of the president being out of touch with the needs of everyday Americans.
	Quote, Trump was supposed to fight for the working class.
	Instead, he's literally closing rural clinics and hospitals to cut taxes for George Soros and Elon Musk.
	At a previous rally held last March when Trump had only recently returned to office, Osoff declared from the stage that, quote, Georgia will bow to no king.
	Saturday's rally, which campaign press secretary Kendrick said drew roughly 1,400 people.
	He continued to harness anti-Trump sentiment to energize progressive voters.
	Jim in Indiana, Independent Line, you're on the air.
	Hello.
	It's funny.
	People talking about the 2020 election.
	And I live in a ruby red state as an independent.
	And people didn't think the 2020 election was stolen.
	I've yet to meet a person who's actually had their hands on ballots.
	So every one of these people are talking about something someone else has told them.
	They don't really know.
	They don't have facts.
	Their truth is the same as their opinion, but they don't have facts.
Move On To Citizenship 00:10:08
	Now, let's move on to the president in the Super Bowl.
	Our president apparently doesn't have enough to worry about.
	So I would be concerned about things like the national debt.
	What's happened to it since he's been a president?
	That national debt keeps going up.
	What's happening to Social Security?
	I'm of age where I'm concerned about it.
	I'm concerned for my daughter.
	What's happening to it?
	When I look at those things, a great stock market is good for the economy.
	I agree with the president on that.
	However, there's enough other things when you're on the international stage.
	You hit Iran once.
	You run from Russia.
	You run from China.
	And you think that you're helping us.
	You've got problems.
	Stay out of the Super Bowl business, man.
	That's all I got.
	Here is House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries.
	He was on CNN yesterday and he talked about the Democrats' stance on ICE reforms.
	Here he is.
	We start with a basic premise that taxpayer dollars should be used to make life more affordable for everyday Americans, not brutalize or kill American citizens like Renee Nicole Good or Alex Predi.
	We know that ICE is completely and totally out of control.
	They've gone way too far and the American people want them reined in because immigration enforcement should be fair, it should be just, and it should be humane.
	So dramatic changes are necessary to the manner in which the Department of Homeland Security officers are conducting themselves before any funding bill should move forward.
	So you say very clearly that this, and it's clear in your proposals, this is about reigning in ICE and the CBP.
	But those agencies, as you well know, are very well funded already through the Big Beautiful Bill Act.
	That's what the president called it.
	And it passed last year.
	So what that means is that a shutdown would really only impact unrelated agencies, FEMA, TSA, FAA.
	So how does pushing for these changes and potentially not getting there help rein in an immigration crackdown?
	Well, our plan is to get there on behalf of the American people.
	That's why we need to press forward aggressively and ensure that there are legislative changes enacted as part of any DHS spending bill, because that's the way that you change behavior.
	And these are common sense changes.
	Things like mandatory body cameras.
	Judicial warrants should absolutely be required before ICE agents can storm private property and rip everyday Americans out of their homes in such a violent fashion.
	Of course, we need to make sure that there are no masks so that ICE is conducting itself like every other law enforcement agency in the country.
	That shouldn't be controversial.
	It shouldn't be controversial that we are demanding that the Fourth Amendment constitutional protections are adhered to as it relates to the way in which ICE is conducting itself.
	We also need to make sure that state and local officials have the ability to conduct independent investigations so that when ICE or CBP or other officers violate the law, they can be investigated and prosecuted and held accountable for those violations of state and local law, not being able to govern themselves with impunity, which is the case right now.
	We're in Open Forum and we're talking to Quincy in Hempstead, New York, Democrat.
	Good morning.
	Hey, yeah, hi.
	Good morning.
	Yeah.
	You know, I just wanted to say that, you know, I feel like we're entering a phase now where in America, it's ignorance versus intelligence and it's lies versus the truth.
	It's good versus bad.
	And it's so funny how we can all sit and watch a movie and everyone knows who the good guy and who the bad guy is.
	Nobody in the movie theater disputes who's the good guy and who's the bad guy.
	And I'm telling you, I'm watching this world and I'm watching these Republicans and I'm trying to figure out how do you not know who the bad guy is.
	The bad guy is always going to be the one that steals from the poor and gives to the rich.
	The bad guy is always going to be the bully.
	The bad guy is always going to be the person that doesn't help the poor.
	It says it in the Bible.
	And these Republicans, like, they don't even know what's good for their own self.
	I'm in the union.
	I'm a Democrat.
	There are people that are in my union that vote Republican.
	And the Republicans are trying to hurt the union.
	This is how you feed your kids, you know?
	And when you talk about ICE, I just want to say that these people are the bottom shelf of the earth when it comes to law enforcement.
	Before they became ICE, where were they?
	Home with their pajamas on, doing absolutely nothing.
	They weren't cops.
	No cop is going to leave his job to become an ICE agent.
	No military person is going to leave his military job to become an ICE agent.
	So where were these ICE agents before they became ICE agents?
	And what they're doing is they're running around picking up people because they got to get eight arrests a day.
	So they don't care where they get the arrests from.
	They get eight arrests a day.
	That's how they get paid.
	So what do they do?
	They want to find the easiest prey.
	They want to go to the school.
	They want to go where they see people are trying to get their green cards.
	And they snatch these people because it's easy prey for them.
	It's not about getting the worst people off the street.
	These agents are trying to find easy pickings.
	Why are you going to the school picking up little children?
	They have no morals, you know.
	And I'm just so sick of it.
	And on the Super Bowl, listen, I may not approve of everything I saw at the Super Bowl, but I understand that this is America.
	You know, these Republicans, you want to eat Mexican food, but you don't want to see Mexicans.
	You love Mexican food, but you don't want to see Mexicans.
	You can't have it.
	I got to move on, Quincy.
	This is Greg in Las Vegas, Republican.
	Good morning.
	Good morning, Mamie.
	I'd like to see how you have a Republican phone number, a Democratic phone number, and an Independent phone number to call in.
	I think you need to add in a phone number for the illegals to call in, and that way you'd really hear what's going on.
	All right.
	Was that it, Greg?
	I have another point.
	Sure.
	You know how Trump has the, I think it's called the gold card, where people can pay a million dollars to become a citizen.
	I think they should have a program for the people that are here illegally, but are working or have this H-1 visa or whatever.
	Give them the opportunity to pay to become a citizen.
	I really think a million would be too much, but the few people I talk to think it's a good idea.
	And I'd like to see if they would pay or not to become a citizen.
	If they can't pay enough, maybe their employer or family or whoever wants to sponsor them could pay for them to become citizens.
	All right, Greg.
	And I need to actually look it up, but you don't become a citizen right away.
	I think it's a way to get permanent status, and then you have to apply for citizenship, which takes some time.
	And then there's some, I believe, some vetting involved.
	So it's not, you don't just pay and then you become an American citizen.
	But I understand what you were saying.
	Some things for your one item coming up later today that we have live coverage of is Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy.
	He marks one year since his confirmation, and he has a conversation at the Heritage Foundation that we're covering live.
	That's at 11 a.m. Eastern Time here on C-SPAN.
	You can also watch it at C-SPAN now and online at C-SPAN.org.
	The House is not in session today, so that will be on C-SPAN.
	Ted Astoria, Oregon, Democrat, good morning.
	Good morning.
	I just would like to congratulate the Seahawks for finally, again, winning a Super Bowl.
	Number two, I really admired and enjoyed the halftime entertainment.
	It was very professional.
	It was very, very telling the story of Puerto Rico.
	Many years ago, when I was a fresh-based young kid, I joined the Air Force, and my first NCOIC in a U.S. Air Force plumbing shop was from Puerto Rico, and he was very much professional.
	And I learned a lot in those years when I wore a green suit and traveled the world.
	I learned a lot.
	And what I did learn from my seventh grade civics teacher that when the Constitution was written, there was no mandate for the English language.
	The forefathers understood that this was going to be a melting pot.
	When I was a kid, my mother, who was born in Finland, used to speak Finn to me, and I was very fluent.
	My father, a Norwegian from North Dakota, he told her, do not do that.
	Do not do that, because he had been in the country for two generations.
	This is truly a melting pot, and it was truly a great performance.
	Thank you very much.
	All right.
	And there is also ads in yesterday's Super Bowl about artificial intelligence.
Speak Out, Female Reporters 00:02:28
	This is in the Washington Post.
	Can Super Bowl ads move Americans' view on AI?
	Experts review four commercials that will try to win over consumers gloomy about artificial intelligence.
	And I won't read them to you, but the four companies that had Super Bowl ads were Google Gemini, ChatGPT, Claude, and Meta.
	So you can kind of look at, if you're interested in AI, you can look at those ads and the analysis about those ads.
	Rose, Independent in Tennessee.
	Hello, Rose.
	Good morning.
	You know, I never watched the Super Bowl.
	I consider a Luciferian show, as well as the game.
	My message this morning is to actually Mr. Trump directly and to all female reporters out there who are trying to do a good job.
	Female reporters do not have to smile for Mr. Trump when they're discussing rapists and pedophiles that are listed in the Epstein files.
	Female reporters have one job only, and that's exposing government corruption.
	Only 3 million of the 6 million files have been released thus far, and for that alone, Caitlin Collins should not smile.
	Trump has called women piggy, stupid, and incapable.
	And this is from a man named 38,000 times in 5,000 files in those pedophiles.
	And he weighs 244 pounds on a 6'2 frame, which clearly makes him obese.
	He's claimed to be 6'3 to improve his BMI, just as he's moved golf balls to improve his golf game.
	So here's my message to female reporters: speak out even more, female reporters, and when he resorts to name-calling, have an appropriate retort like, I don't think pedophilia and rape are matters to smile about, Mr. President.
	Do you?
	That's what I have to say.
	Have a good day.
	And here's what Rose was referring to, New York Times.
	Trump scolds CNN's Caitlin Collins for, quote, not smiling.
	Testy remarks from a president who has frequently singled out female journalists for criticism and personal attacks.
	That's at the New York Times.
	This is Victor, Washington, D.C., Democrat.
Sonia's Sad Approval Rating 00:15:43
	Good morning.
	Good morning.
	I am an adjunct professor in university.
	And all I'm trying to say is it's high time people travel out small and just appreciate the versatility we have in India.
	And I am also saying if anyone is kind of offended by that show, it means there is a guilt conscience.
	It's in you up in there.
	And that is what you should check.
	Yes.
	And Sonia in the villages, Florida, Republican, good morning.
	Good morning.
	Good morning.
	I just find it just very sad that we have gotten to the point where we will pick sides over absolutely everything.
	At the conclusion of the performance of the second show, what was billed as the Great American halftime show, which I chose to watch only because I have not liked any of the halftime shows for the past few years.
	And I chose to watch the other show.
	I got on Facebook, and immediately it was a we versus them.
	And it just, it's just so sad to me that everybody has to be on one side or the other.
	And we have to always be choosing sides and hating each other.
	And we just have to, we just have to not be like this.
	It's over something as simple as wanting to do a show that provided the premise, as I understand it,
	was to provide what they considered, quote, wholesome entertainment, which was a country show that has not been a choice of a halftime show in, well, I can't remember the last time it has been.
	And that's why they select to do that.
	Hi, Sonia.
	And CNN.com has a list of what they're saying, Super Bowl halftime performers who got political way before Bad Bunny.
	That's the headline on CNN.
	If you'd like to take a look at the history there of halftime performers and political messages.
	Genevieve, Woodbridge, Virginia, Democrat.
	Hi.
	I just want to call and drop a lot of your callers a quick geography lesson.
	Puerto Rico is part of America.
	They vote.
	Donald Trump is their president as well.
	I hear a lot of people calling and saying they would prefer an American.
	They're American.
	So.
	And just a quick correction on the schedule.
	So the House is in today, but it is coming in at 12 noon.
	We'll cover that, of course, as we always do here on C-SPAN.
	And the Senate comes in today at 3 p.m.
	That's over on C-SPAN too, if you'd like to watch that.
	Ralph, North Carolina, Republican, you're on the air, Ralph.
	Good morning, Mimi.
	My philosophy of all this is that, you know, you say that America is a melting pot.
	It is.
	But the culture was for everybody to come here and speak English, learn to assimilate.
	What we have now is a party that believes that anything flies, that we can bring in 10 million people, dump them on the streets of America like dogs, and expect them to just adapt.
	We have a party that thinks vote buying, vote buying is okay by bailing out college debts by saying you don't need an ID to vote.
	That's just ridiculous.
	I mean, if we, it's the most important thing you can do for this country and you want to make it as trivial as it can be.
	I just think that, you know, I've been watching your show for 25 years and over this time I've tried to figure out who it is that's working against our country.
	And what I found out is if you look in the big perspective as I have, it's the Jewish people of America that are doing this to us.
	Charles, North Carolina, Democrat, good morning, Charles.
	Good morning, C-SPAN.
	Good morning, Amy.
	I'm a first-sign caller.
	I just want to give a shout out to C-SPAN for erring the unveiling of a statue at Washington that was yesterday when I saw it.
	I don't know when it was first aired, but it was a statue which Abraham Lincoln gave the proclamation, I think it was in September of 1862, which was to also, if the southern states did not comply, it was to free the slaves.
	With that proclamation, actually allow blacks to first invest their blood in America.
	I understand that 250,000 black Americans signed up to be soldiers.
	And they supposed to have the reopening of the Afro-American Museum.
	I think it's in November, maybe this year.
	So if you could tell me when that may have been eroded, all I can say is I'm proud to be a black veteran, American, and I salute my 200 plus 200 some thousand other veterans that serve for this country.
	Thank you, C-SPAN.
	Earl in Indiana, Republican, you're on the air.
	Yes, ma'am.
	I tell you, I have a hard time through this country.
	People can go to these ball games and spend thousands of dollars for a ticket.
	Then they follow that they don't have enough money to get groceries.
	They don't have enough to get gas.
	What did Christ do at the Tyre Babel?
	He separated the languages because they couldn't understand each other.
	And now he tells you, serve me or serve the world.
	You got two choices.
	When you leave this world, you're not going to take any money with you.
	You're not going to take a house with you.
	The only thing you're going to take is your spirit, and God's going to take care of that.
	And that does it for this segment.
	Later this morning on the Washington Journal, Dennis Shea from the Bipartisan Policy Center will discuss the Senate and House packages aimed at addressing housing affordability.
	But first, after the break, Cliff Young of Ipsos Public Affairs shares the latest public opinion research on President Trump and issues voters say are top of mind with midterm elections later this year.
	We'll be right back.
	America marks 250 years, and C-SPAN is there to commemorate every moment.
	From the signing of the Declaration of Independence to the voices shaping our nation's future, we bring you unprecedented all-platform coverage, exploring the stories, sights, and spirit that make up America.
	Join us for remarkable coast-to-coast coverage, celebrating our nation's journey like no other network can.
	America 250.
	Over a year of historic moments.
	C-SPAN, official media partner of America 250.
	We bring you into the chamber, onto the Senate floor, inside the hearing room, up to the mic, and to the desk in the Oval Office.
	C-SPAN takes you where decisions are made.
	No spin, no commentary, no agenda.
	C-SPAN is your unfiltered connection to American democracy.
	Advance the mission.
	Donate today.
	At c-SPAN.org forward slash donate.
	Together, we keep democracy in view.
	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.
	If you ever miss any of C-SPAN's coverage, you can find it anytime online at C-SPAN.org.
	Videos of key hearings, debates, and other events feature markers that guide you to interesting and newsworthy highlights.
	These points of interest markers appear on the right-hand side of your screen when you hit play on select videos.
	This timeline tool makes it easy to quickly get an idea of what was debated and decided in Washington.
	Scroll through and spend a few minutes on C-SPAN's points of interest.
	Washington Journal continues.
	Welcome back to Washington Journal.
	Joining us to talk about public opinion and campaign 2026 is Cliff Young, Ipsos Public Affairs Polling and Societal Trends President.
	Welcome, Cliff.
	It's great to be here.
	Let's start with President Trump's overall approval rating.
	I'll just show this slide right here that shows that over time, this is over the past year that he's been in office.
	Kind of take us through this, if you will.
	We'll put it on the screen.
	Here is where he just takes office.
	There's a little bump, as most presidents get when they first take office, and then what happens.
	Yeah, and then he declines.
	But ultimately, quickly, Mimi, that's the average of all the polls out there, not just Ipsos.
	That's the best measure to understand where we are, why our approval rating is important.
	They're important for two primary reasons.
	They're really good at predicting the elections or the next election.
	And they say a lot about whether a president can push through his or her agenda, right?
	And so where we are, the decline over the first year is about eight points for Trump.
	The average historic average is about five, so he's sort of outstripping that average.
	He's doing worse than the average.
	Right now, he's at 42 points.
	Approval rating, that's marginal.
	I mean, he's holding steady, let's say.
	He's weakening on the margins.
	The tipping point's at 40.
	When you get into the 30s, it really becomes difficult to win those elections and to push forward your agenda.
	So I would say he's at the edge.
	Trump and the Republicans are facing headwinds right now, and the numbers reflect it.
	You've got a couple of major events here.
	For instance, Liberation Day tariffs announced, signing of the One Big Beautiful Bill, the government shutdown, the capture of Maduro, the shooting, the fatal shooting of Renee Goode.
	Can you explain how any of those impacted President Trump's approval rating, if at all?
	Yeah, we have to understand that events can impact approval ratings since we have to be very cognizant of that.
	They can impact it negatively or positively, usually not for that long because you have this natural tendency downward.
	That's just the way it is.
	When you govern, you start to lose your coalition as you make decisions, as you push your ultimate agenda forward.
	The tariffs were very frictional.
	People did not like them.
	People were worried about the inflationary aspects to them.
	They still are.
	Even before they actually.
	Even before.
	That was the worry.
	And actually, it's very interesting because you had an effect of an event that hadn't even happened on the numbers.
	We can understand that's why Trump and his administration pulled back a bit, reorganized, readjusted, and pushed forward.
	Things like Venezuela had a positive impact of a point or two, but that was temporary.
	Those foreign policy endeavors, unless you're in the middle of a war, you put troops on the ground, don't last very long.
	And so we typically like to associate events to understand where those approval numbers are.
	Now, those approval numbers, as you said, were an aggregate of all the polls out there.
	This one here is President Trump's approval ratings on economic issues specifically and other issues.
	This is an Ipsos poll.
	So let's talk about this.
	We've got the cost of living at the lowest.
	That's at 30% approval.
	The highest here is immigration at 39%.
	First of all, it doesn't seem like a big spread to me between 30 and 39.
	Or is it, in fact, a big spread?
	Is it substantial?
	Well, I think for today's world, the highly polarized tribal world we live in, you have two sides, red and blue.
	It's a pretty big spread because people typically select their team, like I said before, whether it's red or blue, before they even answer a question.
	And it makes sense, too, right?
	When you peel away the onion and you look at Trump's numbers on the issues, he does better than his issues.
	There is kind of a brand bump there.
	There's the Trump effect or halo for him.
	But on his issues, he's underwater, I would say, right now.
	He's below 30.
	His best issue is 39% immigration.
	That's not great.
	It's the strongest one.
	The one he's weakest on, obviously, is cost of living, affordability.
	And that's really going to be the one that, in our mind, determines the midterm elections.
	Well, let's talk a little bit more about immigration and ICE enforcement and tactics.
	You did a question on the shooting of Alex Predi and asking the question, was it an excessive use of force?
	So talk about the responses there.
	Yeah, so it doesn't matter how you ask this question.
	You can answer it in a whole bunch of different ways.
	But it shows basically the same thing, that a majority of Americans think that ICE went too far.
	In this specific question, it was 55% say that.
	Now, there are large partisan differences.
	Republicans think less so.
	Democrats think more so.
	What's critical here is that we have independents that are tending towards excessive use of force.
	They help determine the next election.
Student Loan Concerns 00:15:27
	They're the swing voters.
	And as I said, if you just look across all questions, whether at Ipsos or from other polling firms, Americans believe that ICE went too far.
	I'll invite our callers to start calling in now.
	If you'd like to talk to Cliff Young of Ipsos, you can do so by party.
	So Republicans are on 202-748-8001.
	Democrats 202-748-8000.
	And Independents 202-748-8002.
	Cliff, as you know, anybody that doesn't like the results of a poll will attack the poll itself.
	So if you could tell us about how you got these numbers and what was the methodology that you used, how many people did you talk to?
	It's always attacking the messenger, right?
	Always attacking the pollster, right?
	But ultimately, this is a sample representative of the American population by demographics, by party persuasion, Republican, Democrat, and Independent.
	We do this poll online.
	We go to people's doors, we knock on their doors, or we send a mail, invite in the mail, excuse me.
	We bring them to the poll.
	This is a gold standard we've used over the course of the last decade or the last decades.
	It's very analogous to other methodologies used, and that's specifically what we did.
	There's this question here about deportation.
	So you asked about if they support deporting undocumented immigrants and how comfortable they are.
	So here is that it's 26% are at supporting support deporting undocumented immigrants and are comfortable with current tactics.
	Then 45%, the largest chunk here, support deporting undocumented immigrants but are uncomfortable with current tactics.
	And finally, 26%, so about a quarter, do not support deporting undocumented immigrants, I guess, at all.
	Yeah, and I think that question is very telling.
	It reinforces what we find in the polls in general.
	Americans are very nuanced on the issue of immigration, right?
	If you put those numbers together, about 71% in one way or another support deportation.
	There's nuance there.
	There's more support for, let's say, deporting criminals than children, as an example.
	But overall, Americans are saying, even if I agree, I think the tactics have to be adjusted.
	Indeed, another question we have on the same poll suggests that on the one hand, Americans are in favor of strong borders.
	They're in favor of enforcing the existing laws.
	But ICE agents need to be better trained, and there needs to be a path forward for citizenship of those who are not here legally.
	So ultimately, I think the takeaway is that Americans are nuanced and we just have to sort of recognize that.
	You wrote a book that is titled Nativist Nation, Populism, Grievance, Identity, and the Transformation of American Politics.
	Can you explain what you mean by nativism?
	Nativism is favoring native-born over foreign-born, very simply, right?
	It is, I believe, and my co-author believes, the primary force driving politics today, both in the United States and globally.
	And ultimately, it's what we're seeing with the Super Bowl, right?
	We have the Half-Dyne Show and the alternative Half-Dine Show.
	This is nativism in a nutshell.
	But ultimately, when you peel the onion away, it's really about American identity, who belongs and who doesn't, who is a true American and who isn't.
	And it defines, as I said before, politics today.
	So you have this interesting chart.
	This goes back to 1995.
	The trend lines here, this is the red on top is Republicans, and then independents, or sorry, total is in the middle and gray, and then the blue is Democrat.
	The percent who agree that when jobs are scarce, employers should prioritize hiring people of this country over immigrants.
	It has, interestingly, not really changed that much over time for Republicans, but has changed for Democrats.
	Can you explain that?
	Yeah, and so we have a changing composition of the parties.
	On the one hand, Republicans have become more the party of the working class.
	The Democrats have become more the party of the more educated, so that's in part how we understand these trends.
	It's very important to emphasize that in 95, the beginning of the trend, we were all equally nativist.
	Now we have this huge gulf, almost 30 points between Democrats and Republicans.
	And that's just a very important proof point of my point that this is an important, if not the most important driver of politics today.
	All right, let's talk to callers.
	We'll start with Alan Rhinlender, Wisconsin Independent Line.
	Go ahead, Alan.
	Hi, good morning.
	Good morning.
	I wanted to talk about the student loan issue.
	And this is rarely asked about, and it probably isn't reflected very well in the polls.
	But there are around 37 million voters in this country who will never be able to repay their student loans.
	So around 40% of these people never even graduated college, but yet they have the student loan debt to deal with.
	Now, the Republicans, up to this point in Trump's term, they get an F minus on actually handling this issue in a way that serves not only their constituents, but the whole entire country.
	Now, Trump knows full well.
	Lyndon McMahon, they both know full well that bankruptcy rights have got to be returned to these predatory loans.
	Trump knows about bankruptcy.
	Lyndon McMahon knows full well, personally, about bankruptcy.
	Now, some smart Republicans like Ron DeSantis, they're calling for the return of bankruptcy with a clawback from the colleges.
	And I think that's completely appropriate.
	But, you know, that idea is getting nowhere within the party because, quite frankly, I think it's been captured by the elites, by the colleges, by the lending industry, and by local forces who are profiting wildly on this failed loan scam.
	All right, Alan.
	Let's get close.
	Anything on student loan?
	Well, not specifically.
	Obviously, if you ask on it, it's a big concern among younger Americans, Gen Z and millennials.
	I think it goes to a broader issue of affordability this year, the ability to make ends meet.
	Obviously, a student loan is chunky.
	It takes away from your disposable income and the ability to do other things.
	It's a primary concern of Americans going into the midterms this year.
	Democrats are doing better on that.
	We just saw that with the data on Trump.
	He's not doing well on cost of living.
	Republicans are not doing well on cost of living.
	And obviously, student loans, among other issues, are sort of wrapped up together in that issue of affordability.
	So let's take a look at that specifically.
	So here's your chart on if the 2026 congressional elections were held today, which of the following would be the single most important factor for you in deciding who to vote for?
	Cost of living by far was the top as far as total goes, but for Democrats, it was protecting democracy and democratic norms.
	So talk a little bit about that, Charter.
	Yeah, once again, cost of living or affordability is a critical issue.
	In our mind, that will be the issue that defines the midterms this year.
	But, you know, threats to democracy, worries about norms is a Democratic issue.
	It's especially an issue among the more educated.
	It's important to emphasize that point.
	That's one of the Achilles' heels, in my opinion, of the Democratic Party, is that because they're top-heavy with educated people, they're worried about issues that aren't necessarily the focal point of the average American.
	I think we're going to have a force kind of drawing parties and politicians to the center, to the average voter, which is focused on affordability.
	But we can understand the breakdown of priorities that way.
	The last point I was going to make is: Republicans, while they're worried about cost of living, also worried about immigration.
	Obviously, immigration is a critical issue, especially for their base.
	Rachel is in Silver Spring, Maryland.
	Democrat.
	Hi, Rachel.
	Good morning.
	Thank you, C-SPAN.
	Good morning, Mr. Young.
	My question is, and your opinion is, what is your opinion of the recent racist video that President Trump reposted?
	And what will the effect be among the American population of seeing such an awful thing and President Trump not apologizing, seeing that it's hurtful.
	Regarding his moral character, how will this affect him in the polls?
	Thank you.
	Yeah, I don't think it's going to have much of an impact directly.
	Whatever you think about Trump is already baked in.
	I do think it's an important proof point for advertising this electoral season.
	Every Democrat's going to use it and reinforce it.
	I also think it goes to this issue of nativism.
	Nativism isn't racism.
	It's important, or a racial grievance.
	It's important to emphasize that point.
	But there are interconnections there.
	I think it also has a lot to do with the media bubbles we live in.
	In one media bubble, it might be not seen as negative, and in other ones, it will.
	Again, not making a value judgment about it, trying to explain sort of the dynamics there.
	But ultimately, I don't think it affects him.
	But it is a give-me-to Democrats this year.
	Joanne Nevada Republican.
	Hi, Joanne.
	You're on the air.
	Hi.
	I wanted to address the polls.
	It's not that I'm answering the questions on the polls.
	It's not the pollsters' fault.
	It's the questions they ask.
	By the time you get down to answering the question, you don't understand what the, you forgot what the question was.
	They make it too long and too hard to understand.
	So I told my brother, I said, I don't know if I'm answering this for my side or how I really think I get so confused.
	So I just dropped on answering polls.
	So Joanne, have you?
	Sorry.
	Wait, no, I'm going to let you continue, but I just wanted to know: have you been called for polls?
	And do you still have a landline?
	Is that how you're getting?
	I do have a landline.
	I don't use a self.
	No, that's social media.
	That's what gets you in trouble.
	I got in trouble with Facebook, and I said, uh-uh, I ain't going to get that.
	Mean people on social media is me.
	Okay, but go ahead with your other point, Joanne.
	Oh, I wanted to say I was the lady in HR block singing, thank you, Trump, daddy's home, because my tax rate this year threw the roof.
	Thank you, Trump.
	I love you, buddy.
	Any comment, Claire?
	Well, there's lots unpacked there.
	So, you know, basically, I would say it is our fault if she can't get through, the caller can't get through the questionnaire.
	I mean, we need to make them short and understandable.
	We work hard to do that, but we don't always do the greatest job.
	You know, the question is, you know, covering the coverage on the one hand and understandability on the other.
	The other point is, while our national poll at Ipsos is online, which makes more sense, a lot of the state and local elections are done by telephone.
	It's easier to get to people because we use voter rolls.
	That is, the industry uses voter rolls and links it to the cell and mobile phones.
	That gets at those individuals that don't vote all the time, but they vote once in a while.
	We call them low-propensity voters.
	So I imagine that the caller has been called on her landline and/or cell phone because of that.
	But ultimately, it is our responsibility to make sure there's questions that are understandable.
	Don, in Mantua Township, New Jersey, Independent Line, you're on the air, Don.
	Yes.
	Do you think that with this Trump's antics, criticizing the halftime show of the Super Bowl, and trying to build a memorial arch in his name, the other silly things that he has done, renaming the Kennedy Center, and I think he's jeopardized the Republican Party and has put them in a position now that they are not only going to lose the House, but they're also going to lose the Senate.
	And if that happens, I think his presidency is over.
	What is your opinion on that?
	Yeah, I think that that's a great point.
	Carla makes a great point, great question.
	I don't think it's as much the specific issues or things that Trump is doing that matter.
	I think it's about focus.
	I think this, you know, we know based upon data historically that administrations have about one year to get things done.
	They've had a lot of priorities and haven't focused on one thing, and that's been a problem.
	That's the first point.
	I think all these examples are just proof points reinforcing the fact that administration wasn't that focused or hasn't been that focused.
	That said, the Super Bowl alternative halftine show reinforces and it's read meat to the base.
	But ultimately, it's going to be about affordability this year.
	That's what people are worried about.
	And if the administration and Republicans aren't focused on that, they definitely will lose the House.
	And even now, we're beginning to see cracks in the foundation when it comes to the Senate.
	And this is your chart on that.
	This is Real Clear Politics poll average.
	This is a 2026 generic congressional vote.
	So would you vote for the Democrat or the Republican?
	And you can see those lines are, as time goes on over the course of the year, those lines are starting to separate with Democrats on top at 47.7%, Republicans at 42.5%.
	Yeah, it's not a good place for the Republicans.
	It's not a good place for the administration.
	A five-point advantage by Democrats really is a problematic leading indicator for Republicans.
	It's good for Democrats.
	If you take that into kind of models and project out, it suggests that the Democrats would take back the House this year.
	So yeah, the numbers are not looking good, whether at the administration level, that is the presidency, or specifically at the House.
	We've got a text from Mike in North Carolina.
	He says, there's 350 million people in the U.S., 1,000 respondents to a survey.
Consumer Confidence Crisis 00:15:11
	It's not true, America.
	Yeah, I just would have to disagree.
	I mean, I understand the reaction, but think of it like a blood test.
	We don't have to take all your blood out to understand and run your labs on it.
	We can take just a sample of it.
	The sample of people works in theoretically the same way, conceptually the same way.
	We obviously make sure that we're balanced in terms of demographics and political affiliation.
	But again, I've used the analogy of blood samples.
	That's best for understanding polls.
	Kyana is in Cleveland, Ohio.
	Democrat, good morning.
	Good morning.
	I just had a comment on a lot of the polls being like, the guest is saying it's like nativism, nativism, nativism, and that nativism isn't like racism.
	And I just need white people to admit, like whether it's the Super Bowl halftime show or white Americans' views on immigration or like when they say I don't recognize the country that I live in right now, like I just need them to admit, like they're scared because they're white.
	Okay.
	And they're afraid of anything or anybody that doesn't look like them or talk like them.
	This country is on pace to become a majority minority for the first time in its history around like 2050.
	And white people see their power dwindling.
	So they're doing everything they can from the White House to the local city's mayor's office.
	They're doing everything they can to re-entrench their power.
	And I just need white people all around the country to admit that because that's where the healing is going to start.
	We cannot fix this until we acknowledge the root of what it is.
	Thank you.
	Yeah, I mean, it's a great point.
	And it's a critical point of the debate of what's going on, those social forces that are shaping our world and more specifically our politics.
	In the book, we talk about these long-term trends.
	We talk about the changing racial composition.
	But when you put all these factors together, it's nativism that basically swamps out all the other explanations.
	That's not to say that racism isn't there.
	That's not to say that authoritarianism isn't there.
	It's not to say that populism isn't there.
	But it's ultimately about nativism.
	And I think that's critically important because the policy levers we have at our disposal to address the issue of nativism or more specifically immigration are more concrete.
	We can come across and we can come to consensus on some sort of broad-based plan.
	I already talked about the fact that Americans are nuanced on that.
	Yes, there's racism.
	There's always been racism here.
	Racism has always been an element of our politics, not just today, but over the course of our history.
	But when we understand the politics and the dynamics today, it's really a politics of belonging, who is an American, who isn't, who should belong to Club America and who should not.
	And we have no consensus on that issue today.
	Because that always changes, and that's always changed over time.
	I mean, in the past, Italian immigrants weren't considered white.
	Italian immigrants weren't, the Irish weren't considered white.
	And I think our book goes through the history of nativism in the 1840s and the 1890s and the 1910s.
	And each of those times, there was some sort of consensus on a modification in respect to immigration, because immigration does change the composition of a population.
	It does threaten certain groups over others.
	It is highly traumatic to a society.
	And again, I think if we, yes, racism is there, but if we focus on that, we're missing the bigger picture.
	And the bigger picture has a solution, which would be a comprehensive consensus on the issue of immigration.
	We got this from Alan in Hobart, Indiana on text.
	He says, no one has ever polled me ever.
	No one has ever come to my door to do a poll.
	Never been solicited for a poll.
	Who are you polling exactly?
	Just Democrat cities?
	If so, it's not a true reflection.
	Well, no, we're not.
	And we have about the right, we have about the equal number of Republicans, Democrats, and Independents always in our sample.
	America today is about one-third, one-third, one-third.
	I think it's important to understand that a poll of a thousand is a thousand over 330 million people or a little bit less if you think of adults.
	It's not sort of surprising that he's never been polled.
	But if you've ever gotten a call on a cell phone and he's thought it was spam, it might be one of us pollsters.
	So maybe we called him and he decided not to respond.
	If he didn't respond, someone else like him probably responded.
	Yes, so iPhone will say potential spam.
	And we could be that.
	That could be, it could be a legitimate pollster like myself on the other line waiting for you to talk to me and you just hang up.
	And Gigi, Hillside, New Jersey, Democrat.
	Go ahead, Gigi.
	So my concern is: you know, when are we going to stop talking and dancing around the lack of affordability in this country, remove our focus on other countries, and funnel our focus on improving the lives of everyday Americans?
	Well, that's the critical issue this year.
	Americans are essentially worried about that.
	They'll be selecting their rep. They'll be selecting their senator based upon those issues, based upon the issues of affordability.
	I agree there's lots of noise out there, but when you poll after poll after poll, suggest that bread and butter issues are the driving issues of the day.
	And if political actors, politicians, governments don't understand that, they'll be penalized on Election Day.
	I want to ask you about consumer confidence in the U.S.
	And I'll play you from a hearing last week.
	This is Senator Pete Ricketts, a Republican of Nebraska, who asked Treasury Secretary Besant about what the Senate can do to help improve and raise low consumer confidence numbers.
	Yet, despite all this progress, we're seeing consumer confidence is not really rebounding the way that the economy seems to be.
	In your opinion, what more can we in the Senate be doing with regard to consumer confidence and making, you know, obviously we had 40-year high inflation under the Biden administration, but what more can we be doing in the Senate to be able to help out with confidence of consumers?
	Other than telling consumers to turn off MSNBC, a large part of it is a survey problem where Democrats vote very low, Republicans are more realistic, and then we end up what we're seeing.
	What do you think?
	Oh, it's always the instrument.
	It's always either those doing the surveys or the individuals responding to the surveys.
	Yes, there's a partisan aspect to consumer confidence today.
	That is, I'm more confident in general if my party is in power.
	We find that.
	But overall, it's middling at best.
	By the way, if you compare it to other countries in the G7, the United States is doing better than the other countries.
	It is about ultimately not being able to make ends meet.
	I think people, we don't have a lot of experience here in the United States with inflation.
	I lived in Brazil for 10 years and Latin America for 10 years.
	We had a lot of inflation in countries there.
	It takes a long, once you have control of it, it takes a long time to work itself out.
	So you have high levels of cost.
	The cost levels are high.
	And that's what the average American's feeling today.
	He or she might have a job, though it's a little bit fuzzy.
	We're not quite sure.
	Companies are not spending like they used to.
	There's been a lot of laid offs.
	But that said, a little fuzzy there, a little bit of uncertainty.
	Where the real uncertainty is, is making ends meet.
	When you do focus groups, you talk to people, they would not agree with the Secretary whatsoever.
	They would say, two years ago, I spent $100 on these items.
	Today I'm spending $120.
	I don't have money at the end of the month.
	I count my nickels and diams.
	They might not necessarily know how to calculate the inflation rate, but they know what inflation and cost of living increases are.
	Bob is a Republican in Arkansas.
	Hi, Bob.
	Hello.
	Good morning.
	My question for the gentleman is the way they select for the poll.
	But the thing is, you know, I would ask them if the Democrats had won the election, would we have another five or ten million people in the country that are illegal?
	I think the people and the way they, I don't think they're asking that on the poll.
	So, you know, that's the way I feel.
	And I don't have too much faith in the polls because they can be, you know, very selective.
	Thank you.
	Well, I think he reflects an underlying attitude here in the United States, but around the world, that the system is broken and no longer functions.
	You know, parties and politicians don't care about the average person.
	Institutions like the institution of polling and pollsters can't be trusted.
	I think that's kind of reflected in what the gentleman was referring to.
	But we ask a lot of different questions, not just on one poll, but across the board.
	And definitely Republicans are very worried about immigration.
	They believe, there's a strong belief that there are way more illegal immigrants here than the estimates suggest.
	That's what's driving ultimately the worry and the politics of nativism ultimately.
	And I think the polls reflect that very clearly.
	It's just not that all Americans and all the people that the gentleman knows, like they might be worried about the issue, but not all Americans are worried about that specific issue.
	But indeed, Republicans are.
	Line for Democrats in Georgia.
	Sam, you're on the air?
	Yes, Mimi.
	I wanted to ask a question to the professional there.
	Most of our country, we look at either C, or we either look at C-SPAN or we look at CNN or we look at Fox to get our news or MSNBC or NewsMax.
	I would like to know if there is any kind of research that can tell us how much inflammatory or derogatory words are used in the course of a 24-hour, 48-hour sequence on Fox versus CNN.
	Because if we keep using these words towards one another, we are only going to be enemies towards one another, and our country will never be united as we should be.
	So my question, if I didn't make it clear, is there any research that will suggest or has any numbers that says Fox uses the inflammatory or derogatory words this many times or CNN uses this many inflammatory, derogatory words towards Fox viewers, or vice versa towards the CNN news?
	And I'm going to hang up and I want to hear his response on that one.
	All right, Sam.
	Yeah, I don't have the data specifically, but obviously, depending on the news agency and news source you go to, they're going to have biased frames, meaning they're going to look at the issue differently.
	And from one angle, you might look at immigration from a human rights standpoint or a race standpoint.
	From another source, you might look at it in terms of, you know, are we following the law or not?
	I think that the guest cite a list of different news agencies.
	The older of us, which I include myself, we watch those.
	The young don't at all.
	They're going to be getting those clips on social media on TikTok or Instagram or X. They'll be watching their favorite podcasts or podcasters.
	That's where they're getting their information.
	So the information ecosystem is extremely eclectic and heterogeneous at this point.
	And it's hard to sort of nail it down simply between saying we have the foxes on the one hand and the MSNOWs on the other.
	I want to ask you about foreign policy.
	You did ask two different questions.
	So one was about the U.S. policy of dominating affairs in the Western Hemisphere and if people agreed that they should have, that the United States should have that policy.
	Those numbers were pretty low, 43% being the highest among that's Republicans.
	The other one was the U.S. military should only be involved in conflicts when the U.S. faces a direct and imminent threat.
	Those numbers much bigger.
	Yeah, like I said at the beginning, Trump did have a slight bump in his approval ratings when they went in and captured Maduro a couple points.
	That lasted for a time.
	It's burned off already.
	Americans today don't want muscular intervention.
	They were burned over the course of the forever wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.
	The Gen Z and millennials really feel it's imprinted on their brains today when they reflect on these things.
	Yes, we can use the military if we need to to defend ourselves, but using it in an imperious or imperial way, Americans do not agree with.
	By the way, not just that question, across all questions like that, Americans are very different today than they were, let's say, in 2005.
	On the independent line in Virginia, Tom, you're on with Cliff Young.
	Thank you.
	A general question about polling.
	Mr. Young mentioned that they use landline, telephone, to poll people.
	And my question is, do they consider that there's a certain type of person that will answer a ringing phone at their home at a number they don't recognize?
	And another person that never picks it up.
	And is that reflected in the answer of the polls?
	Thank you.
	Yeah, that's a great question.
	And obviously we use a broad toolbox of ways of getting at people.
	So some of the polls might be landline together with mobile, together with online, sometimes even mail, snail mail.
	It's important to emphasize that Pew did a study a few years ago that suggests that never before has the polling industry used such a diverse set of methodologies when capturing the opinion of people.
	And yeah, so we're in a highly complicated era where Americans are using a variety of ways to get their information to communicate, and pollsters in order to represent the population must align with that.
	And another text on the process, this is from Jamie in Tampa, Florida.
	Hey, Cliff, I'm someone who refuses to answer numbers I don't know, yet I never see a text offering a political survey.
Polling Paradox 00:06:09
	If I did, I would.
	Why aren't texts sent?
	That is an excellent question, and it's an innovation in the industry today.
	We're increasingly using text to, we call it text invite to survey.
	I'm the same way, by the way.
	I do not respond to calls, even if they're from a pollster.
	I will not answer it.
	Even if from myself, I will not answer it.
	But with text, I do.
	And so it is a solution, innovation that the industry is implementing now.
	But if you get a text, you have to click on that link, don't you?
	Well, we might do a number of things.
	It might be a soft invitation where we ask you to go to a website and do it.
	It might be a hard invitation where we have the link itself.
	Yeah, so there are issues.
	Obviously, people are always worried about spam and sort of scammers and all these sorts of things.
	So we have to deal in this sort of very complicated ecosystem today, but it isn't an effective, it is an effective solution.
	By the way, we're not doing a poll all one way or the other.
	I think that, once again, just emphasizing the point, we're using all these methodologies together to get an accurate and robust picture of the American population.
	David in Bloomsburg, Pennsylvania, Republican.
	Go ahead, David.
	Good morning on this frigid day.
	I'm a consumer, a Republican consumer.
	I filled up my gas tank last Wednesday.
	It cost me $52.
	I specifically remember during the election cycle, it cost me almost $90.
	I went to the store before the winter freeze came in.
	Eggs were $1 a dozen, extra large brown eggs.
	Regular lunch meat was $4.99.
	All the cheeses were, none of them were over $5.
	Sure, some things have gone up.
	I'm not buying French champagne.
	You know, I don't drink champagne anyway.
	You know, I'm not buying caviar from the European Union.
	You know, I'm buying the staples that are here.
	And I see prices relatively stable.
	Now, my coffee did go up a dollar a pound.
	I'll admit that.
	But when it comes to the polls, it seems like they're cited out there and there's no reference number to it.
	You know, I do participate in YouGov polls.
	That's a genuine email.
	And I do say them cited as a source.
	But all these other ones that talk about doom and gloom, there's no source listed.
	And I used to get phone surveys, probably two or three a quarter.
	I haven't gotten one phone survey.
	And the answering machine picks up the calls that I don't get.
	And there hasn't been a survey to a conservative Republican.
	It seems like the questions are skewed for the liberal Democrats.
	And if you call 2 million liberal Democrats compared to 100,000 Republicans, you're going to get the voices that you want and the answers that you want.
	They're too selective, some of these polls, with their group that they participate with.
	And as far as the polls on social media, we all know you can do a social media poll four, five, even 10 times.
	And with AI, it's absolutely ridiculous how you can load the answers to these questions, simply make an account with one little letter different in your name.
	So I don't have any faith in these polls.
	I didn't have faith in the polls in 2016 when Donald Trump won.
	I didn't have faith in the polls in 2024 when Donald Trump won.
	And we won't even get into the 22 election debacle that happened.
	All right, David.
	Well, there's a lot of skepticism there, right?
	I mean, like, once again, it just reinforces or goes into this notion that the system is broken.
	There's widespread systemic distrust and pollsters were seen as part of the problem, not part of the solution.
	But there's no cabal of pollsters.
	We're not trying to sort of manipulate as an industry the numbers to ultimately hurt the Republicans and help the Democrats, or vice versa, by the way.
	We do as good a job as we can.
	It's in a difficult environment where people are using all these means.
	I think we do a fairly good job if you look at the historic record.
	And ultimately, the point about the cost of gasoline, you know, there's some evidence suggests that Trump should be lower in the polls, but if it were not for the gas being lower, right?
	The price of gas being lower.
	There's some good analysis out there that suggests that.
	So it's not like the consumer isn't sensitive, but we have to understand that inflation in the cost of living is a regressive tax.
	It affects the poor the most.
	It affects the young the most.
	And where do we have the most negative numbers when it comes to Trump and his administration?
	Among minorities, among the poor, among the young.
	John from Arizona wants to know if your poll covers the Epstein files.
	Yes, we have questions on that.
	You know, the last few we've done is just looking at relative interest and more specifically whether people believe that there's a collusion among elites.
	Americans want disclosure.
	Americans believe that elites are working together to keep that from the American people.
	There's not a lot of difference across parties.
	I think there is strong majorities across parties.
	Obviously, there's some variability depending on how you talk, you ask the question.
	I think it just reinforces once again this notion that the system is broken, doesn't work.
	The elites have rigged the system.
	It goes to frustration and systemic distrust.
	I think it diverts the focus of the administration and Republicans away from the critical issue, which is once again affordability.
	That's what people are worried about, making ends meet.
	And we'll see where it kind of unfolds.
	But it's a net neutral to negative for the administration and Republicans.
	Cliff Young's book is called Nativist Nation: Populism, Grievance, Identity, and the Transformation of American Politics.
	He is polling in societal trends president at Ipsos Public Affairs.
	You can visit ipsos.com for their polling results.
Unbiased Book Club Discussion 00:04:49
	Cliff, thank you as always for coming in.
	It's great to be here.
	Later on this morning, we'll talk to Dennis Shea and discuss housing affordability and the bipartisan packages in Congress aimed at addressing it.
	But first, after the break, it's open forum.
	You can start calling in now.
	Here are the lines: 202748-8001 for Republicans, 202748-8000 for Democrats, and 202748-8002 for Independents.
	We'll be right back.
	C-SPAN invites you on a powerful journey through the stories that define a nation.
	From the halls of our nation's most iconic libraries and institutions comes America's Book Club, a bold, original series where ideas, history, and democracy meet.
	Hosted by renowned author and civic leader David Rubinstein, each week features in-depth conversations with the thinkers shaping our national story.
	Among this season's remarkable guests, John Grisham, master storyteller of the American justice system.
	Justice Amy Coney Barrett, exploring the Constitution, the court, and the role of law in American life.
	Famed chef and global relief entrepreneur Jose Andres, reimagining food.
	Rita Dove, Hulitzer Prize winner and former U.S. Poet Laureate.
	The books, the voices, the places that preserve our past and spark the ideas that will shape our future.
	America's Book Club, Sundays at 6 p.m. and 9 p.m. Eastern and Pacific, only on C-SPAN.
	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 Darkron in everything, but you can find areas where you do agree.
	He's a pretty likable guy as well.
	Chris Koons 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.
	Don't fork it over.
	That's fighting words right there.
	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.
	C-SPAN is as unbiased as you can get.
	You are so fair.
	I don't know how anybody can say otherwise.
	You guys do the most important work for everyone in this country.
	I love C-SPAN because I get to hear all the voices.
	You bring these divergent viewpoints and you present both sides of an issue and you allow people to make up their own minds.
	I absolutely love C-SPAN.
	I love to hear both sides.
	I've watch C-SPAN every morning and it is unbiased.
	And you bring in factual information for the callers to understand where they are in their comments.
	This is probably the only place that we can hear the honest opinion of Americans across the country.
	You guys at C-SPAN are doing such a wonderful job of allowing free exchange of ideas without a lot of interruptions.
	Thank you, C-SPAN, for being a light in the dark.
	We bring you into the chamber, onto the Senate floor, inside the hearing room, up to the mic, and to the desk in the Oval Office.
	C-SPAN takes you where decisions are made.
	No spin, no commentary, no agenda.
	C-SPAN is your unfiltered connection to American democracy.
	Advance the mission.
	Donate today at C-SPAN.org forward slash donate.
	Together, we keep democracy in view.
	Washington Journal continues.
	Welcome back.
	It is Open Forum, and we'll go right to your calls and start with Joe in Texas, Democrat.
	Good morning, Joe.
	Good morning.
	How are you?
	Good.
	I had a question for the author and your guest concerning nativism.
	Sorry, Joe, he's gone.
Ukraine's Natural Resources Conflict 00:03:13
	Oh, okay.
	It's just me, but if you'd like, you can make a comment.
	Yes.
	I have studied history a little bit and have seen the various isms throughout our history, but it seems now nativism is on steroids, and I'm a little concerned about the trends not only for our national policies, but for our international policies.
	And that's what I have to add.
	What impact would you think that would have on international policies?
	Well, I think it might lead to isolationism.
	And I don't think that we are able to support ourselves as our president thinks we can.
	All right, and here's Wayne in Junction, Texas, Republican.
	Hello.
	Hi, Wayne.
	Yeah, I just want to comment on the halftime Super Bowl show.
	Yes.
	And I think it was pretty lousy.
	That's all we got is a satanic homosexual from Puerto Rico coming here doing a halftime show.
	It was disgusting.
	Greg in Pennsylvania, Independent Line.
	Good morning.
	I'd like to talk about what I believe is the real reason behind the Ukraine-Russian war.
	Okay.
	The five areas that Russia wants are five areas that hold most of Ukraine's natural resources.
	In fact, the Luhans and the area next to it, they hold 88% of Ukraine's coil, coal.
	Now, they also have 1.5 trillion cubic metric tons of natural gas in that area.
	Now, and don't forget all the oil wells that surround Crimea.
	I mean, it's surrounded by oil wells.
	And the thing is, Russia depends 60% on oil and gas exports.
	40% of their economy is tied up in this.
	Russia can't afford Ukraine to open up these resources that just started opening up and also the rare earth.
	But they're just opening those up and Russia can't let them because if they supply Europe and everyone else, no one's going to want to deal with Russia because, you know, they're like America's getting, you don't know which way to go.
	And that's Russia.
	And I'm sorry to see America starting to go that way.
	But anyway, I want people to know that once again, the three countries, Russia, United States, and Ukraine, none of them want to say this is about natural resources, oil, gas.
	We don't want an oil war.
	Nobody in no country, that's why it's not being said.
	But that's what it's over, because the only areas that Putin demands to hand on to are the areas with these natural resources.
Diplomatic Pressure and Beyond 00:15:42
	All right, Greg.
	And the top Democrat on the intelligence committee, Senator Mark Warner of Virginia, was on CBS yesterday.
	He was asked about Director Tulsi Gabbard, and here's that exchange.
	Well, the director is frustrated with you personally and issued this really long, blistering statement saying you have repeatedly lied to the American people, that the media also lies, and that she never had the whistleblower complaint in her possession and saw it for the first time two weeks ago.
	I guess the actual hard copy.
	So do you care to respond to this accusation that I do not believe that Director Gabbard is competent for her position?
	I don't believe that she is making America safer by not following the rules and procedures on getting whistleblower complaints to the Congress in a timely fashion.
	I believe she has been totally inappropriate showing up on a domestic criminal investigation in Georgia around voting machines.
	I think she has not been appropriate or competent in terms of frankly cutting back on investigations into foreign malign influence, literally dismembering the foreign malign influence center that's at the director of national intelligence.
	And we are going to agree to disagree about who's telling the truth.
	And I believe her own general counsel, who's now her deputy general counsel, testified this week that he shared with Director Gabbard in June her legal obligations.
	And this is the response from Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, on X, who says, Senator Mark Warner and his friends in the propaganda media have repeatedly lied to the American people that I, or the office of the DNI, hid a whistleblower complaint in a safe for eight months.
	This is a blatant lie.
	It continues, but you can see that at X. Joining us now, and we'll come back to your calls in a moment, but joining us now is Mika Solner.
	She's senior White House reporter for Bloomberg government.
	Mika, welcome to the program.
	Thanks for having me.
	Let's start when we take a look at the White House week ahead.
	We'll start with President Trump's reaction to the Super Bowl.
	Yeah, I mean, as expected, I think the President has his criticisms, particularly about the halftime performance.
	That was, you know, kind of the first of its kind.
	You had a Latino performer there singing in Spanish.
	And obviously, it was a more subtle dig at the Trump administration's policies there.
	But we know that Bad Bunny as an artist has taken shots at the president before when it comes to ICE and his immigration tactics.
	The funding for DHS runs out this Friday at midnight.
	ICE reforms discussions on Capitol Hill seem to be at a standstill.
	What are you hearing from the White House and if you think that White House officials or President Trump personally will get involved?
	Yeah, interestingly enough, the White House has been not super vocal when it comes to the Democrats' demands that they laid out.
	House and Senate Republicans have taken shots at the list of demands that Democrats are demanding on ICE.
	Caroline Levitt, the press secretary for the White House, said last week that they will start engaging with Democrats in order to reach DHS funding, which expires on Friday.
	So we're going to see more this week.
	I think that there's going to be a lot of talks between Capitol Hill leaders and the White House, but there's been little in terms of public input of some of the demands listed by Democrats, which includes banning of face coverings as well as the implementation of warrants and other things to change the way that ICE has its protocols right now.
	And do you think that the White House is motivated to make a deal or do they feel like the politics are on their side?
	I think it can be a mixed bag.
	I think the White House is extremely cognizant of the consequences if DHS does not get funded in terms of its impact on Border Patrol officials and even the Coast Guard.
	The press secretary laid that out last week as well, but I also think that they're standing firm on their policies when it comes to their efforts to deport individuals here who are in the country illegally and they have not softened on those positions.
	Yet I think that a lot of the staff internally within the White House is very aware as well of some of the public pushback they're getting, especially in the wake of the Minnesota shootings prompted by ICE.
	Well, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu is expected to be in Washington on Wednesday to talk about Iran.
	What are you watching there and if you can also update us on those Iran talks?
	Yeah, absolutely.
	You know, the White House started its talks with Iran last week in Oman and we're going to see more diplomatic efforts from President Trump and his allies here.
	But I think that these talks on Wednesday with Prime Minister Netanyahu are going to focus on Iran's nuclear programs, ballistic missiles, and really trying to ease those out and where Trump stands.
	So I think that we're going to see a lot here, but I know that this is going to be big in terms of the foreign policy agenda of President Trump, who's actually had to crack down before when it comes to how Iran has handled its protesters.
	But I think we're going to see more diplomatic turn.
	And finally, President Trump met with the Honduran president at Mar-a-Lago this past weekend.
	What do we know about what happened between those two leaders?
	Yeah, President Trump has been really positive about that meeting.
	He endorsed the Honduran president, and he said that the meeting was very positive.
	He's been very public about that.
	He even, the president has even threatened to cut off funding for Honduras if their current president was not elected.
	So I think that that shows another potentially strong relationship between Trump and another Central American ally, perhaps.
	We saw this with El Salvador.
	Obviously, the president is close with the leaders of El Salvador there.
	And I think that the main effort from the White House is they really want to create partnerships to crack down on cartels and a drug flow into the U.S. That's Mika Solner, Bloomberg government's senior White House reporter.
	Mika, thanks so much for joining us.
	Thank you.
	We're back now to open forum and we'll talk to John in Kentucky Line for Democrats.
	Good morning.
	Morning.
	I think Donald Trump has awoken a sleeping giant.
	Thank you very much.
	Wait, wait, wait, you can't leave us with that, John.
	What sleeping giant?
	I'm going back to World War II when we were attacked in Hawaii and the Emperor from Japan, that's exact words he used.
	And I think we're at that right now.
	Thank you very much.
	All right.
	Let's talk to Michael, Republican, Asheboro, North Carolina.
	Go ahead, Michael.
	Yes, ma'am.
	I'm just wondering what polling is on voter ID.
	And that if the Democrats and if the Democrats are wanting ice to taste their max and stuff off, then why don't they make it like a 10-year prison sentence for anybody blocking us, threatening us, doxing us, throwing bricks at them, and ice drinks and stuff like that?
	Why shouldn't they, and plus make the protesters take their mask off?
	Wouldn't that make it more fair?
	All right.
	Steve, Independent in St. Louis, Missouri.
	Go ahead, Steve.
	Yes, good morning, everyone.
	I'm a political junkie, but I keep my mouth shut.
	I'm not a protester.
	Excuse me.
	I listen to both sides, and then I draw my own opinion.
	But besides that, something that happened at the Super Bowl that really brought a tear to my eye, it was the Budweiser commercial.
	And I've watched it three or four times, and I hope everyone got the real, the true meaning of what that commercial meant.
	The bald-headed eagle and the horse.
	It was just tremendous.
	I just wanted to make that comment.
	Thank you.
	But Steve, tell us what you believe that it meant.
	Like, what was the larger meaning there for you?
	Well, there was an emotional connection, I guess.
	That the eagle and the horse were two icons, and that those two are stronger together.
	And maybe us as Americans need to think about that to bring us together somehow.
	Republicans, the Democrats, Independents, if we can come together somehow, we'll be stronger as a nation.
	That's what.
	Memphis, Tennessee, Line for Democrats.
	Lewis, you're on the air.
	Yes, I just want to speak on the ICE situations that's going on in the Democratic cities.
	And I think it's all about publicity.
	And I think one way to get ice out your city is when you're out there, Democrats straighten about the ICE, improve some F-seeing stuff.
	And I guarantee you, Donald Trump will pull those folks back because he don't want no F-seeing stuff in the news.
	He just wants to keep the other stuff highlighted.
	So, Lewis, we're having a little bit of a hard time hearing you because there's some noise in the background.
	I don't know if it's the TV you could mute.
	Oh, yeah, I got the TV on.
	I'll get in another room.
	What I was saying is, I think Donald Trump have ICE in cities like LA and Chicago and now Minnesota is all about the publicity.
	He likes the camera.
	No, I got that.
	So, Lewis, isn't ICE in Memphis as well?
	Yeah, but.
	So, what are you seeing there?
	Yeah, because they were saying, well, you know, I guess in Tennessee they're cooperating with ICE so they don't have to do the things that they're doing in those other cities you mentioned.
	Well, they're not occupying Memphis.
	You know what I'm saying?
	They ain't got all these folks.
	They got more ICE agents in Minnesota than they got police officers.
	You know, if you, if those guys out there that's, you know, demonstrating against ICE wearing some airpin signs, don't drop a poor, poor, poor little folks back because you don't want airports there in the news.
	All right, let's talk to Johnny, Republican, Otway, Ohio.
	Go ahead, Johnny.
	Okay, I just want to thank Donald Trump for being a good president.
	I'm a retired trip driver for 27 years and got on disability, and he's taking care of me on my medical and all that stuff.
	Are you on Medicare, Johnny, or Medicaid?
	I'm on Medicaid, or Medicare.
	All right.
	Richard in New Jersey, Independent Line.
	Go ahead, Richard.
	Yes.
	If people want to go and see whether or not there's any cover-up about the Epstein files, you have to look no further than Trump's behavior and his endorsement of Ray Roy Moore and look at Gates and also Trump's sexual misconduct and his behavior at Miss America.
	I don't think that they would be willing to let the Epstein files come to light because I believe that they're part of it.
	And that's all I have to say about that.
	Thank you.
	Linda in Pittsburgh, Line for Democrats.
	Go ahead, Linda.
	Hi, I want to talk about the midterm elections.
	I think that no matter what the economy does, people are really upset with Trump's corruption, his whole cabinet and their corruption, and Trump's boarish, unbelievable behavior.
	Thank you.
	Stephen is next.
	Schenectady, New York, Independent Line.
	Hello, Stephen.
	Hello, I'm here.
	I like to speak about Donald Trump and his behavior without Baracko and his wife.
	They posted that he posted.
	I kind of like don't blame him because he really don't know no better.
	But I see what Donald Trump is trying to do is divide the country.
	Donald Trump is going around.
	He's doing what the average white person wants him to do.
	He wants to dominate the whole place, divide the country, and that's exactly what he's trying to do.
	He has no respect for the human race at all.
	He's going around picking fights with everybody, going crazy in the bad people of the country.
	He's the boss.
	But I think that's what all the governments is like that.
	The whole United States government is like that.
	If you got the Republican or the Democrats, it doesn't matter which you get.
	They're all one bird with two different wings, but they're all flying the same direction.
	All right, Stephen.
	And this is Senator Bill Haggerty, a Republican of Tennessee, and he was on Fox News Sunday.
	This is the portion where he talks about Iran.
	And what's different now is we're not just talking diplomatic talks.
	You saw Steve Woodcoff, Jared Kushner, and importantly, Admiral Brad Cooper in the room, our lead military officer there who runs CENTCOM.
	Importantly in the room with the negotiations in Oman just taking place.
	What you also see is a significant military movement.
	So it's not just diplomatic pressure.
	Military pressure is coming to play in a very significant way.
	The other aspect, which I think fails to be covered enough, is the economic pressure on Iran is significant.
	The real is in a tailspin.
	If you look at what we've done in terms of secondary sanctions, look no further.
	We were talking about our allies and the importance of having our allies with Senator Warner earlier.
	We just signed a trade deal with India.
	India is no longer going to buy Iranian crude.
	India is going to buy that oil now from Venezuela.
	This is the type of economic pressure, again, married with military pressure and diplomatic pressure, that actually puts President Trump in a much more serious bargaining position to achieve what he's trying to accomplish.
	It's Open Forum.
	This is Francis Cheyenne, Wyoming Democrat.
	Hi, Francis.
	Hi.
	The president, or whoever he is, he has been so hateful.
Belief in Constitution 00:06:24
	He used to make fun of disabled children, movie, making movements like them in 15 when he ran first time.
	He's evil.
	He's terrible.
	I've never seen anything like this in my lifetime.
	He doesn't tell the truth.
	He starts drama.
	He's prejudiced.
	Be all the above.
	I cannot say enough about the man.
	I've never seen anything like this in my life, and it's disgusting.
	He hates everybody that's not white and rich.
	Period.
	Thank you.
	On the independent line in Santa Ana, California, Steve, you're on Open Forum.
	Yes, thank you, Mimi, for taking my call.
	You know, the white person sure gets thrown under the bus a lot.
	You're not, you know, it's stupidity when you categorize a group of people.
	I'm married to a person from Mexico, and the Mexican-Americans that are in this country are the most patriotic people on the face of the earth.
	And it's not that white people want to save white people in this country.
	They want to save the best country in the world.
	My wife says the reason why people come here from these other countries is because their countries are lousy and corrupt.
	You know, it's funny these white liberals, especially the women call up, when they sent them to, what was it, up Boston, the place they're that island out there, it's a resort with billionaire homes.
	Half of them didn't even have residents in them.
	And they kicked the immigrants out within 48 hours.
	What world are we living in?
	This country is the greatest country on the face of the earth, and people just want to save it.
	It's not a matter of what color you are.
	Everybody of every color has died for this country, every race.
	We just want the people to come here to assimilate and abide by laws and protect the people.
	Until you have, we all have one country.
	They can come back and forth and go whenever they please.
	Finally, we have someone that's taking care of our country.
	God bless America and God bless all citizens of this country that are citizens.
	Thank you.
	And some news for you.
	This is from the Associated Press.
	Vance is in Armenia, a country no sitting U.S. president or vice president has visited before.
	It says this.
	Vice President Vance landed in Armenia on Monday.
	That's today.
	A country that no sitting U.S. president or vice president has visited before.
	As the Trump administration looks to advance a U.S. brokered deal aimed at ending a decades-long conflict with Azerbaijan.
	The Vice President and his wife Usha were greeted with a red carpet, an honor guard, and a delegation of officials.
	Armenian and American flags hung from polls as the delegation drove to the vice president's meeting with some demonstrators on the side of the road, including one with a sign that said, Does Trump support devils?
	Vance is meeting Armenian prime minister, who signed a deal at the White House in August, intended to reopen key transportation routes with Azerbaijan.
	It continues.
	You can see that at the AP.
	Let's talk to Larry in Albany, Georgia, Democrat.
	Go ahead, Larry.
	Yes.
	I want to talk about something.
	It's dealing with June 16th, which is Black History Week, but I want to talk about the white citizen.
	I'm a black person.
	And I want to talk about the white citizens and the black citizens that's always standing hand in hand when something happened like what the president is doing now.
	And I'm going to give you one example about what the white citizen did for the black people.
	And we love them.
	What the white people did for us during the demonstrations.
	There was white that believed in justice, law, and order.
	They believed in the Constitution.
	And when we were out there marching, I'm one of the guys that was marching in Chemistry, North Carolina.
	And when we were marching, the white people that believed in law and order, they came out and marched hand in hand with us.
	During that same day, in the 60s, there was a white lady that took a black man down to the demonstration in Mississippi.
	And on the road, when she started bringing him back, they shot and killed her.
	She was one of our heroes.
	They killed her.
	They shot the black man.
	The black man is still living today.
	And I want you to know that the white and black in the United States are very close together.
	We're not divided.
	They keep saying that we are.
	The young people, the Gen Zs, we have more mixed race now than ever.
	And we have mixed races in the government and in the army.
	And the problem is, when we go to war, the two races that's going to really die is going to be the black and white because when they stand together, they stand with power.
	In Albany, Georgia, there's a young boy called King Randall.
	And in Albany, the white and black are marching together.
	They're running together.
	They're eating together.
	And it's called the Good Life City.
	If you could bring up King Randall, Albany, Georgia, you will see what we are talking about.
	All right, Larry.
	This is America, and I love you.
	Yes, ma'am.
	Dave in San Diego, Line for Independence, you're on the air.
	Good morning.
	Yeah, Russ C-SPAN.
	I've been calling for many, many years.
	And unfortunately, years back, I had to complain about the border security.
	And today I just wanted Americans to know the border is very secure.
	I have property out here, and our neighbors are very grateful for the Border Patrol protecting our country and us.
	And I tell Officer Gary, he's well known.
	He's very much appreciated.
	And it's just a shame that has turned into a political mess.
	But we appreciate the men and women protecting us and our country.
Yes, Yes: 10 Books Changed 00:03:48
	All right.
	Yes, go ahead.
	No, I was going to say, Officer Gary is customers in border protection.
	Yes, yes, yes.
	All right.
	And one more call.
	Frank, Queens, New York, Republican, you're on the air.
	Hi, good morning.
	I just wanted to make a comment about something I heard on the news just a few minutes ago.
	Gillene Maxwell is scheduled to have a hearing in front of the Congress.
	I think that is pretty dumb idea, to be honest, because I think that's just going to force Trump's hand to give her a pardon, and she's going to walk away scot-free.
	So this could be wrong.
	Yeah, so this is what the Telegraph, that's a UK publication, says the Telegraph says this.
	Ghelaine Maxwell to stay silent at Epstein hearing.
	Sex trafficker will plead the Fifth Amendment to avoid risk of perjury accusation, says her brother.
	And we'll keep an eye on that and see if there's any other news on that.
	But it's according to this reporting, she will be not really testifying, but pleading the Fifth Amendment.
	Coming up after the break, we'll talk with Dennis Shea, he's executive vice president and chair of the Center for Housing Policy at the Bipartisan Policy Center.
	He'll discuss those bipartisan Senate and House packages aimed at addressing housing affordability.
	We'll be right back on this episode of Book Notes Plus with our host, Brian Lamb.
	In the December 1st, 2025 edition of the Wall Street Journal, there was this headline on page R25.
	These 10 books changed the way Americans thought about work.
	Carol Heimowitz, the author, wrote, it began with Benjamin Franklin, who couldn't stop working or writing about work throughout his 84-year-long life.
	Carol Heimowitz has been associated with the Wall Street Journal since she got her master's degree in journalism at Columbia University.
	Other books she featured in this article about work include Tocqueville, Frederick Douglass, Upton Sinclair, John Steinbeck, Dale Carnegie, and C. Wright Mills, plus others.
	We wanted to know how she chose these 10 books about work, and so we had a chat.
	A new interview with journalist and writer Carol Heimowitz about her Wall Street Journal article.
	These 10 books changed the way Americans thought about work.
	BookNotes Plus with our host Brian Lamb is available wherever you get your podcasts and on the C-SPAN Now app.
	Get C-SPAN wherever you are with C-SPAN Now, our free mobile video app that puts you at the center of democracy, live and on demand.
	Keep up with the day's biggest events with live streams of floor proceedings and hearings from the U.S. Congress, White House events, the courts, campaigns, and more from the world of politics, all at your fingertips.
	Catch the latest episodes of Washington Journal.
	Find scheduling information for C-SPAN's TV and radio networks, plus a variety of compelling podcasts.
	The C-SPAN Now app is available at the Apple Store and Google Play.
	Download it for free today.
	C-SPAN, democracy unfiltered.
	Washington Journal continues.
	Welcome back to Washington Journal.
Bipartisan Solutions to Housing Costs 00:15:55
	Joining us to talk about housing affordability is Dennis Shea.
	He is Executive Vice President at the Housing Policy Center.
	Sorry, Executive Vice President at the Bipartisan Policy Center and chair of the Housing Policy Center.
	There's a lot there.
	There's a lot there.
	Welcome.
	I agree.
	Welcome.
	Just remind us about your organization.
	Sure.
	BPC was founded nearly 20 years ago by four former Senate Majority Leaders, including my former boss, Bob Dole.
	And it's designed to be a place where people from across the political spectrum can come together in good faith and try to figure out areas where we can advance the country.
	So we have programs not just on housing, but on economics and fiscal policy, on health, on energy, on human capital, and on governance.
	So it's a great organization.
	I encourage everybody to check out our website at bipartisanpolicy.org.
	It's a place where people find you can get the data-driven analysis, fairly written material, and good background material.
	And we take positions too.
	Well, let's talk about a poll.
	This is a New York Times Sienna poll from last month about housing costs.
	And 54% of those polled said that housing costs were unaffordable.
	Why is that and why has housing costs increased?
	Well, I think the short answer is that we just have not built enough housing to meet demand.
	So the supply-demand imbalance has led to soaring housing costs.
	I work, I lead the Tawilliger Center at BPC.
	It's named after Ron Tewilliger, a former multifamily developer who's now one of the leading housing philanthropists in the United States.
	And he used to call the housing affordability challenges that we face here in the U.S. the silent crisis.
	But it's certainly not silent anymore, as this polling information shows.
	I mean, if you look between 2020 and 2025, home sale prices have increased about 50%.
	The median home sale price is about $432,000.
	Rents have increased about 30% during that period.
	And about 43 million households, about a quarter of homeowners and half the renters, pay more than 30% of their income just on housing costs.
	So we do have an affordability problem with respect to housing in the United States.
	And most folks believe that the reason that we have this affordability problem is because we just have not built, we've underbuilt housing by millions of homes, particularly since the Great Recession of 2008.
	Now, what impact does the presence of a large number of illegal immigrants have on housing prices?
	Because if it's a supply and demand issue, then that would be a large demand signal on housing when there's more people in the country than should be here as far as legal status.
	Well, clearly, I mean, the fact that there's tremendous demand for housing, some households have not formed because you have the doubling up effect, young kids staying at home with their parents.
	There's just been not enough supply.
	Research shows, for example, with respect to undocumented migrants, asylum seekers into the U.S., that led to an increase in unsheltered homelessness, particularly in large cities where they congregated, New York, Chicago, Boston.
	So it is an issue.
	I know it's an issue that the Trump administration feels that one reason for the housing crisis, the high housing costs, is this influx of new people, new immigrants across the border.
	And do you agree with that?
	I think there is in certain communities, yeah, I think it definitely has had an impact.
	But we shall see now with some of the closing of the border, The more secure border, weather housing prices have gone down.
	Some housing prices have gone down in certain communities throughout the United States, Austin, Texas, for example.
	But that's because the supply came on board to meet the demand.
	People are building to meet the demand.
	Well, let's talk about the demand and how much of a shortage there is, because there seems to be a disagreement on how much of the shortage.
	I want to read to you from the Washington Post.
	They say this, it says, America faces a serious housing shortage, one that Moody's estimates would take more than 2 million new homes to resolve.
	Over at Goldman Sachs, the analysts put the number at 3 million.
	Zillow's estimate is 4 million.
	Brookings projects 5 million.
	McKinsey says 8 million.
	Meanwhile, Congressional Republicans insist the shortfall is closer to 20 million.
	So, Dennis, nobody knows how much.
	Well, I mean, the one thing that's clear here is that we have a shortfall.
	But don't we need to know how much of a shortfall?
	We will never know exactly what the shortfall is, but we do have, because our demographics are dynamic, but we do have a shortfall.
	So, the thing that ties that all together is that we have a shortage of homes in the millions.
	So, that is what we should be focused on.
	When you're dealing with economists, you're going to get a different view depending on what models they're using.
	But the key fact here is that we have a shortage of homes.
	If you've got a question for Dennis Shea about housing affordability, you can give us a call.
	So, here's how our lines are split up.
	If you own your home, it's 202-748-8000.
	If you're a renter, it's 202-748-8001.
	Everybody else can call us on 202-748-8002.
	So, you would use that line, for instance, if you're in a nursing home, if you're unhoused, if you're living with family members, that kind of thing.
	So, owners, renters, and all others are our phone lines for this segment.
	So, Dennis, there are several proposals now in front of the House, in front of the Senate.
	Can you explain to us what those proposals are?
	Sure.
	Well, there's broad recognition in Congress that the reason why we have a high housing cost is the fact that we have a shortage of homes.
	So, the two bills in the House is the Housing for the 21st Century Act, and the Senate's the Road to Housing Act.
	Both bills try to increase supply, which is where the bipartisan sweet spot is.
	There's agreement across party lines that we need to increase supply.
	But both bills aim to improve federal programs, streamline, deregulate, incentivize local communities to adopt policies that are more pro-housing, that allow for greater density.
	So, that's essentially what the bills do.
	And it's important to understand these bills are strongly bipartisan.
	The Road to Housing Act, which is the Senate bill, passed out of the Senate Banking Committee by 24 to zero.
	So, you have a conservative like Tim Scott, Senator Tim Scott, and a Liberal like Senator Elizabeth Warren coming together to endorse this package.
	And it was part of the defense authorization bill, NDAA bill.
	It was added to that at the end of last year.
	The House bill, the Housing for the 21st Century Act, is a cooperation between French Hill, the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, Mike Flood on the Republican side, and on the Democratic side, Maxine Water, who's the ranking member of the committee, and Emmanuel Cleaver.
	And they've come together, and that passed out of the House Financial Services Committee 50 to 1.
	So there's really the good news is that there's strong bipartisan agreement that we need to address this issue.
	And I'll say tonight, the House will be considering the 21st Century for the Housing Act on what is known under suspension of the rules.
	So it's just 40 minutes of debate, no amendments.
	And this is done for bills that have, are deemed by the leadership to have broad bipartisan support.
	But both of those need to be the same.
	Obviously, they have to pass the exact same bill.
	So are there points of disagreement that could scuttle this whole thing?
	Well, there are points of disagreement.
	What's probably likely to happen is that the House will pass their bill this evening, and then the Senate, rumor has it that the Senate's going to repass the Road to Housing Act, yeah, the Road to Housing Act by the end of this month, February.
	So at some point, there's overlap between the two bills.
	Maybe the Road to Housing Act's a bit broader.
	There's more authorizations of new programs in the Road to Housing Act.
	But eventually, both the House and the Senate will have to come together to reconcile the differences between the two bills.
	And again, there's a lot of overlap between the two bills.
	So they're going to have to decide which provision of road to housing should be included, which provision that's not in 21st Century Act, which provision of the 21st Century Act, which is not in road, should be included.
	So we should have a So you're optimistic that this is going to go through.
	I am very optimistic.
	I think members of Congress are hearing from their constituents that high housing costs is a major concern, and they want to demonstrate that they're doing something about it.
	So let's assume it does pass.
	How long until we start seeing a difference in housing availability and housing prices?
	That's a great question because it's really important to understand.
	I mean, I think it's great if Congress passes this bill and President Trump signaled that he'd support the road, the Trump administration signaled they'd support the Senate package.
	So I presume they will support whatever comes out of out of Congress.
	But rebuilding, getting the supply shortage, filling that gap is going to be a multi-year effort.
	And it's not just the Congress.
	It's just not the federal government.
	It is state and local governments and counties working together.
	It's the private sector.
	It's philanthropy.
	So it's going to be, there's no silver bullet, there's no magic solution to this problem, but it's very important if Congress takes this action, it's demonstrating that they get it.
	They're trying to take some measures that will improve the situation.
	But it's going to be a multi-year, multi-actor process.
	Let's talk to callers.
	We'll start with Lynn in Lowell, Massachusetts on our line for renters.
	Good morning, Lynn.
	Good morning.
	I have a question for your guest in regards to the building of luxury units, high-priced luxury units as opposed to affordable units and how those are affecting fair market rents, whether they fit empty or not.
	And also just your opinion on that and also the tearing down of smaller homes that would otherwise be more affordable for younger people just starting out and building as they are commonly known McMansions.
	If you wanted to make a comment on that.
	Well, I think we need to build more starter homes, no question about it.
	A starter home is about 1,500 square feet.
	It's smaller than the McMansion style homes.
	In the 70s, we used to build about 40 percent of new home construction was starter homes, so you know available to people who are trying to be first-time homebuyers.
	Recently, the numbers have declined to 10 percent or less.
	So, there are a number of reasons for that.
	Restrictive zoning and land use policies that require minimum lot sizes and minimum sizes of homes on those lots that restrict density.
	So, no question about it that we need to build more and we need to build more homes that are affordable to people trying to become homeowners for the first time.
	Is there anything in any of these packages in front of Congress that incentivizes more starter home building?
	Sure.
	I mean, there is a provision that would create a grant program in HUD that would allow, that provides guidance to localities to have pre-approved designs for duplexes and accessory dwelling units and smaller homes.
	So they don't have to go through the long permitting process.
	They can be pre-approved, the design.
	So, there's money in there in both bills that would encourage that.
	A very affordable source of housing is manufactured housing.
	And manufactured housing today is nothing like it was 10 or 20 or 30 years ago.
	I mean, some of the homes, if you've been in them, are quite beautiful.
	So, there is a federal regulation that requires that all manufactured homes have a permanent chassis built under them because the thought was that they'd be moving around.
	But in fact, most manufactured homes, when they get to where they're going, are going to stay there forever.
	So, there's a provision in both bills that would remove that requirement, and that should reduce the cost of that home by $5,000 to $10,000.
	And it's already an affordable source of housing.
	On the line for owners in California, Roberta, you're on with Dennis Shea.
	Yes, I have a couple of suggestions for everyday Americans to afford a house.
	They should either get a second or third job or they should be paid a living wage.
	Well, your point, at the core of your point, is the fact that incomes have not kept up with rising housing costs.
	So, I think that's actually a fair point.
	I mean, but housing costs have gone up so dramatically pre-pandemic to today, 50% for home prices, 30% for rents.
	It's understandable that incomes have not kept up with those increases.
	John in Connecticut, on the line for all others.
	Go ahead, John.
	Morning.
	I'm a condo owner in Connecticut, and our solution for affordable housing has been a mandate under HB 830G, which says basically every municipality must have 10% affordable housing.
	If they don't meet that goal, the contractor or builder can come in and override any zoning regulations if he has 30% of the housing he constructs on the mandate for in order in order to meet the mandate of that 10%.
	I'd like to get your opinion on that.
Housing Complexity and Rentals 00:15:10
	Well, I assume HB 830G is a state law that sort of preempts local actions.
	And I think you're seeing that more and more throughout the country, not just in sort of blue states like Connecticut, but also in red states where the state legislatures and the governors are saying, okay,
	if you're a city above a certain size, you have to allow, for example, multifamily development in commercially zoned areas, or you have to allow accessory dwelling units if a property owner wants to put an ADU on their property.
	So I think more and more you're seeing that, John, in other states of state-level, state governments preempting local activity, local restrictions.
	So Adam in Maryland has this question for you.
	What about converting existing but now unused large buildings into reasonable affordable housing, either as condos or rentals?
	There's a lot of empty retail or business park locations to choose from now with good traffic locations, including Walmart's.
	That's a great question.
	I mean, particularly in COVID, post-COVID, you go to some city centers and the office buildings are empty.
	And so maybe converting some of that to residential housing, affordable residential housing works.
	And some communities are trying to do that.
	Sometimes the office buildings are not architecturally structured to be easily converted to residential housing.
	But you see some cities, for example, like Washington, D.C., that has a tax credit to help incentivize the conversion of office to residential.
	And there is a provision in the 21st century for Housing Act that amends the home program.
	This is getting technical.
	That would create a pilot program for grants to assist communities that want to do this type of conversion.
	Loretta is a renter in Cocoa Beach, Florida.
	Good morning.
	Good morning, Mr. Shea.
	I have one question about it's my understanding that there's a 50% owner-to-renter ratio to be able to qualify for the FHA 3.5% down.
	If that one rule would be changed, that excludes so many young people from getting into, from renters into home ownership.
	There are thousands of properties below, one and two bedroom properties below the 150 mark, where those kids would only be paying well below 1,500 PITI every month.
	I know one complex where my daughter's looking in Gainesville.
	There are 15 units available in that complex that are below 150.
	Some of them are 110.
	Beautiful little units, one bedroom, one bath, nice quality swimming pool, everything a kid wants, right?
	But because of the 50% rule, you need a portfolio lender or you need to be all cash to get into those properties.
	And that's keeping thousands of young kids from getting into their starter homes and getting their first step on the property ladder.
	And if that one FHA rule was changed, all these young people could get into their homes and their mortgage and PITIs would be $15, maybe $1,200 a month, half of what they're paying right now in some of the complexes in Gainesville for rent.
	And I'm just wondering why we have all these other programs, really hundreds of programs, but the one FHA rule is keeping all these kids from getting started on the property ladder.
	Thank you.
	Well, thank you very much.
	It's a great point.
	I don't know that particular rule, but I am going to go back to my office and check it out.
	So I really appreciate your raising it.
	Thank you.
	John is an owner in Wilmington, Illinois.
	Go ahead, John.
	You're on the air.
	You know, you guys keep talking about we need to shorten up lot sizes, build double houses.
	What about the infrastructure?
	I mean, you built an infrastructure for 30 houses on one side of a block, 60 houses total, and you want to put on two houses, three houses on two lots.
	Well, you're going to raise it by 30%.
	So, what about the infrastructure that needs to handle it?
	I mean, you know, that's the biggest deal in all of the new subdivisions in the southern suburbs in Chicago is who's paying for the wider roads?
	Who's paying for the sewers?
	Who's paying for the new schools based upon these things?
	Y'all look at it from this perspective of we got to build more houses, and nobody talks about the fact that in the United States, the cost of a house is five times more than the average wage earner.
	Well, thank you.
	I mean, you raise a good point that when you build more housing, particularly in developed areas, you have to be concerned about infrastructure and whether the existing infrastructure can support the additional housing.
	You know, is there enough parking around for the additional residents?
	So, that's a factor that definitely must be considered.
	I'll say, you know, in the Road to Housing Act, which is the Senate bill, there is something called the Innovation Fund.
	And I'm curious as to whether this will make it into the final package that would authorize about $200 million a year in grants to communities that adopt more pro-housing policies, that have adopted more pro-housing policies, and that money can be used for infrastructure, like sewers and other things.
	So, I think that demonstrates this as a recognition that when you build more housing, there are other things that you have to keep in mind.
	Peter is an owner in Walnut Creek, California.
	Hi, Peter.
	Mimi, I'm a condo owner, and I agree with all the callers who own who own.
	It's affordability.
	Who has 20% down, especially in California?
	And then our HOAs are going up too.
	And it's inflation because all these young people, they're broke.
	Their credit card, you know, they have lousy credit.
	They check your credit too.
	And it's greed.
	I believe it's greed.
	These people everywhere is greed.
	This is what's wrong with everything.
	It's greed.
	That's it.
	So, Peter, tell me about how much a one-bedroom condo would cost in Walnut Creek.
	Oh, my God.
	You know what?
	I paid $185,000 for my condo here in Walnut Creek in 2002 because I sold my place in Antioch in the 90s.
	I bought it for $40,000.
	I took over my brother's payment.
	And it's right before all the housing fell, and it sold for $107,000.
	And so with that $100,000, I bought my condo in Walnut Creek because I wouldn't have $100,000 to put down.
	So how much is it worth?
	How much is your condo worth now?
	Yeah, well, it was worth $360,000, but now because housing has gone down, now it fell to $330,000, $330,000.
	Who could put 20% down?
	And then what's the interest rate?
	7%?
	I got that big 4.125 because I still owe on it, like 90,000, like 100,000.
	I still own it.
	But it's the association fees, too.
	It's just unaffordable.
	I feel sorry for these young people who want to own.
	It's crazy.
	Dennis.
	Well, I have a daughter who's graduating from college.
	And I'm thinking, Dennis.
	No, she doesn't want to.
	But it's tough out there.
	I totally agree.
	I mean, it's tough to find a job.
	I think it's a different issue.
	The role of AI in disrupting the workforce, particularly at those entry-level positions, it's going to be serious.
	And it is, you know, with the average home sale price of $423,000.
	And if you have to put 20% down as a young person, that's out of reach for most.
	Kevin, a renter in Alexandria, Virginia.
	Hello, Kevin.
	Yes, hello.
	I'm calling to find out if the rents in Alexandria, Virginia for apartments will ever go down.
	Do rents ever go down?
	I used to live in Alexandria, Virginia, and I know the home prices always went up.
	So they will track what the rental will go up with housing.
	I mean, Alexandria, Virginia is a desirable place to live.
	It's so well located.
	There's a lot going on in Alexandria.
	So I suspect that with more building there, there could be a softening of the market and rents could go down.
	But I'm not going to, that's not financial advice or anything like that.
	Dennis, there is building codes, which can be very complicated and very confusing.
	Is there any proposals that would nationalize or standardize building codes across the country so that it would make it that builders would be more incentivized to build more?
	I mean, that's a great question.
	I mean, there was a provision in this 21st century Housing for the 21st Century Act that directed a federal government study of whether there should be a national building code, but that fell out of the bill.
	I mean, the patchwork of building codes, some builders say, really increases complexity and cost.
	We're strong supporters.
	I said BPC takes positions.
	We're strong supporters of the low-income housing tax credit program, which incentivizes private investment in the production and rehabilitation of rental housing that's affordable to lower-income people.
	It's been a very successful program over the past 30 or 40 years.
	But one thing that we have suggested is that there could be a common building standard for LITEC units because that could potentially reduce the complexity.
	And how likely is that to get anywhere?
	I don't see it in the imminent future, but I think we have a number of ideas for improving the LITEC program, which are designed to reduce the regulatory cost and try to create more less complexity.
	Kelly in Warrensburg, Missouri, owner.
	Hello, Kelly.
	Hello, good morning, and thank you for taking my call.
	I do agree with everyone that's saying we need new starter homes.
	I really do think that would help a lot.
	However, from what I understand, the cost to build starter homes has increased so significantly for the builders that it's not feasible for them to build starter homes.
	And I was wondering if the guest there, if he also thinks that tariffs on appliances, everything that goes into building a home, lumber, from what I understand, the tariffs have really hurt the capability for builders to build starter homes.
	And thank you.
	Well, I think the thanks, Kelly.
	I think it is correct that many builders find the margins are very tight on building starter homes.
	So it's more profitable and makes business sense to build better homes when the margins are bigger.
	The issue of tariffs, we've had tariffs on softwood lumber, for example, from Canada for many years, countervailing duties because our government assesses that the Canadian lumber industry is subsidizing their industry, which is impacting our lumber producers.
	So that's been an issue for many, many years.
	I think COVID, you know, when you saw when COVID hit, it really damaged the supply chain and the price of lumber and copper and other inputs into the home building process really skyrocketed.
	I have not seen the numbers.
	I have not taken a look at the numbers recently of whether I assume the prices have gone down, but I don't know how much they've gone down.
	Laura's a renter in Starksville, Mississippi.
	Hello, Laura.
	Hey, thanks for taking my call.
	I hear that you're saying a lot of the affordability issues are because there just aren't enough houses.
	But I live in an area that should be one of the more affordable places in the country.
	And there are homes available, but the problem is they're either way overpriced or the starter homes that were available five or six years ago are all short and long-term rentals now.
	The rental that I live in, I could afford the mortgage on, but it's a rental.
	And that's pretty much the case with everything near me and most of the places in my state that I've looked at moving to, and even like the Memphis area.
	So I was just curious, how much of it is really a housing, like there's not enough houses, and how much of it is that the houses that would be affordable are bought for short and long-term rentals?
	Yeah, I think there's definitely a shortage of homes, particularly in communities that are desirable and that afford opportunities.
	There's clearly not enough housing that's accessible to middle-income people in those communities.
	You can build a lot of housing, but you could put it an hour away or two hours away from where the jobs are.
	And that's not very desirable.
	So we need to be building more where the jobs are, where the opportunities are.
	Short-term rentals, that's a continuing debate.
	I know in New York City, they really restricted short-term rentals and did not have an impact on the vacancy rate in New York City.
	So it's a tough issue.
	So President Trump has been moving to ban institutional investors from purchasing single-family homes.
	Will that work?
Ban on Institutional Investors 00:05:00
	I mean, has that contributed to the problem initially that institutional investors were buying up single-family homes?
	Well, he issued an executive order in January.
	He carves out single-family rental homes from that executive order.
	It's single-family for ownership, directed the Treasury Department to define what an institutional investor means and how many homes are we talking about.
	I mean, institutional investment in homes is really concentrated in certain areas of the country, the Southeast and I think parts of the Southwest.
	As a total share of the overall single-family market, institutional investment is relatively small as an overall share.
	So, you know, an institutional investment is often helpful to rehab homes.
	Some of the institutional investors are rehabbing dilapidated homes.
	So it's a complex question.
	Chris, San Antonio, Texas, an owner.
	Good morning, Chris.
	Good morning.
	I'm also a real estate broker.
	All I can say is the Congress and the Senate, I just don't see how they're going to help.
	Everything they've passed over the last 10 years has been detrimental to housing.
	I mean, you have closing costs go up, and you have the banks aren't helping.
	I just don't see how you're going to get affordable housing with some bill going through the Senate and to the House.
	What do you think?
	Well, I understand your sentiment.
	You know, no bill, no congressional bill is going to solve the housing affordability challenge in the United States alone.
	But I do believe it can be very helpful.
	I believe it can have cascading effects at the state and local level.
	And as I said earlier in the program, I think it's really, there's got to be a real focus on this with the federal government involved, but also the state government, local governments, the private sector is critical to help solve this problem.
	So we really need to get everybody working together.
	One more call, Dennis.
	This is Ashley, Round Lake, Illinois, on the line for others.
	Hi, Ashley.
	Good morning.
	So I've been watching your segment from the beginning.
	And I know some of the stuff that you were talking about is that immigrants are kind of taking over affordable houses and coming into these places, which I believe is a little untrue.
	People can't afford houses, as other people have said, because of the affordability crisis.
	You know, there's a wage disparity.
	Most Americans used to be able to buy a house based off of one wage.
	Now even off of two combined wages, they really can't afford anything.
	I don't think there's a lack of housing in this nation.
	It's more people don't have the means to get it.
	And I want you to kind of touch on, you said people can't afford these desirable locations.
	Can you expand on that a little bit more?
	Sure.
	I mean, it's very expensive to often to access housing in downtown areas or areas that have access to transportation, access to jobs, access to grocery stores.
	And we could build a lot more housing in areas that are not outside these city centers.
	But they're not desirable for people.
	And then the amount of savings from housing is basically compensated for by an increase in transportation costs and other things.
	So we really need to build.
	It's something that we feel strongly about at the Tuligar Center at BPC.
	We really need to build in locations where people want to live.
	That's really, really important.
	And close enough to their work so that they're not on the road for over an hour.
	Right.
	All right.
	That's Dennis Shea.
	He's Executive Vice President at the Bipartisan Policy Center, chair of the Housing Policy Center there.
	You can visit them at bipartisanpolicy.org.
	Thanks so much for joining us.
	Thanks, Mimi.
	And thanks for watching.
	That does it for us today.
	We'll see you again tomorrow morning at 7 a.m. Eastern.
	Until then, have a great day.
Kennedy Jr. Marks One Year 00:00:46
	This morning, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. will mark one year since his confirmation in a conversation at the Heritage Foundation.
	Watch live at 11 a.m. Eastern on C-SPAN.
	C-SPAN Now, our free mobile app, and online at c-span.org.
	Democracy.
	It isn't just an idea.
	It's a process.
	A process shaped by leaders elected to the highest offices and entrusted to a select few with guarding its basic principles.
	It's where debates unfold, decisions are made, and the nation's course is charted.
	Democracy in real time.
	This is your government at work.

Chapters

00:00:00 Super Bowl Views Labeled
00:09:30 JD Vance Booed?
00:14:08 Hunter Hess's Dilemma
00:16:54 Stephanie's Comment on the Halftime Show
00:32:10 Sports As Anti-Intellectualism
00:35:07 Eddie On The Air
00:37:46 Political Situation in the Country
00:41:45 Rally For John Alsoft
00:45:50 Move On To Citizenship
00:55:58 Speak Out, Female Reporters
00:58:27 Sonia's Sad Approval Rating
01:14:10 Student Loan Concerns
01:29:38 Consumer Confidence Crisis
01:44:49 Polling Paradox
01:50:58 Unbiased Book Club Discussion
01:55:48 Ukraine's Natural Resources Conflict
01:59:01 Diplomatic Pressure and Beyond
02:14:44 Belief in Constitution
02:21:08 Yes, Yes: 10 Books Changed
02:24:57 Bipartisan Solutions to Housing Costs
02:40:53 Housing Complexity and Rentals
02:56:03 Ban on Institutional Investors
03:01:03 Kennedy Jr. Marks One Year