CSPAN - Washington Journal 02/19/2026

All Episodes

Previous Next

Plain Text

Feb. 19, 2026 06:59-10:10 - CSPAN

03:10:55

Washington Journal 02/19/2026

Source

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
Question About Democracy's Future 00:14:05
	Fund hosts a discussion with Democratic Kentucky Governor Andy Bashir on ways the party can resonate with voters.
	You can also watch live coverage of these events on C-SPAN Now, our free mobile app, and online at c-span.org.
	Democracy is always an unfinished creation.
	Democracy is worth dying for.
	Democracy belongs to us all.
	We are here in the sanctuary of democracy.
	Great responsibilities fall once again to the great democracies.
	American democracy is bigger than any one person.
	Freedom and democracy must be constantly guarded and protected.
	We are still at our core, a democracy.
	This is also a massive victory for democracy and for freedom.
	Coming up on C-SPAN's Washington Journal, Vance Ginn, formerly with the Office of Management and Budget, talks about the future of AI and its potential impact on jobs and energy in the U.S.
	Then former acting CDC Director Dr. Richard Besser discusses Trump administration actions dealing with public health.
	And the chair of the America 250 Commission, Rosie Rios, talks about the upcoming events and programs surrounding the country's 250th birthday this year.
	Washington Journal starts now.
	Good morning.
	It's Thursday, February 19th.
	We begin today with two new numbers with numbers from Gallup showing that Americans' optimism about the future has fallen to its lowest point since the organization began tracking it nearly two decades ago.
	Fewer than six in ten adults now say they expect to be living a high quality life five years from today.
	It's a sharp drop from pre-pandemic levels and part of a steady decline over the last several years.
	So this morning, we're asking you, are you optimistic or pessimistic about the direction of the country?
	And what's shaping your outlook?
	Is it your own personal circumstances, the broader economy, or politics?
	Here's how you can share your thoughts with us.
	Republicans, call us on 202-748-8001.
	Democrats, 202-748-8000, and Independents, 202-748-8002.
	You can send a text to 202-748-8003.
	Include your first name in your city-state.
	You can also post to social media, facebook.com/slash C-SPAN and X at C-SPANWJ.
	Welcome to today's Washington Journal.
	Start with the Associated Press, an article about that poll with this headline, What a New Gallup poll shows about the depth of Americans' gloom.
	It says, Americans' hope for their future has fallen to a new low.
	According to new polling in 2025, only about 59% of Americans gave high ratings when asked to evaluate how good their life will be in about five years.
	It's the lowest annual measure since Gallup began asking this question almost 20 years ago.
	Let's look at the poll itself.
	Here is what it looks like visually.
	So this is the green line is current life, and then the dark blue line is the future life.
	And you can see here over since 2009 what that looks like.
	Here's the question that they asked.
	So here's the question.
	Please imagine a ladder with steps numbered from zero at the bottom to 10 at the top.
	The top of the ladder represents the best possible life for you, and the bottom of the ladder represents the worst possible life for you.
	On which step of the ladder would you say you personally feel you stand at this time?
	And then they asked, on which step do you think you will stand about five years from now?
	So that's the questions that they asked their poll.
	And if you're interested, they had 22,125 interviews with U.S. adults.
	It's part of a Gallup panel, and that encompasses all 50 states and DC.
	So we're asking you that question.
	If you'd like to weigh in, you can go ahead and call us now.
	Here is what the Washington Post said about this poll.
	They said the number of Americans who anticipate they will have high quality lives in five years' time has dropped to a nearly two-decade low, according to a poll released today.
	Around six in ten people surveyed said they expected their lives would be significantly better in the future than today.
	That is about nine percentage points lower than during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, according to Gallup.
	That's from the Washington Post.
	This also is from the Washington Post.
	They said this.
	Gallup has used two questions to gauge the national mood as part of its national health and well-being index.
	Its poll asked around 22,000 adult respondents to rank their current life and where they imagine their lives will be in five years' time on a scale of one to 10.
	Both ratings have slumped over the past five years across a pandemic, affordability issues, turbulent national politics, and global conflicts.
	The steep drop in optimism in 2025 suggests some Americans think their lives will worsen still.
	So what do you think if you were answering that question, where would you put yourself on those steps from zero to 10?
	And where do you think that would be in five years?
	Let's start with Jeffrey in Greensboro, North Carolina, Republican.
	Good morning, Jeffrey.
	Good morning.
	Thank you for taking the call.
	Actually, it's almost what the Washington Post kind of reiterated.
	It's actually right on point.
	It is getting harder every month after month to sustain the struggle that the economy, a normal person, is experiencing.
	You know, it's just somewhat very unfortunate.
	You know, you have people putting out these surveys of Gallup polls, like what part of America are people getting these polls from?
	Because average Americans in Greensboro, North Carolina, it's a struggle here.
	It's homeless everywhere.
	It's jobs lost everywhere.
	Is businesses closed?
	It's really a textile state where all of these manufacturing jobs are gone.
	So to see what's going on now with, like you was reading out with the Washington Post, the global economic aspects of war and so much financial money is invested global or international wise, right here in your own backyard with so many just recent catastrophic natural disasters.
	So, Jeffrey, let me ask you the same question.
	So on that scale, 0 to 10, where do you see yourself right now?
	What number?
	At least about a 4.5.
	A four and a half was previously, I would say with optimistic, climbing up, but absolutely not.
	Everything is up.
	Utility is up.
	Water bills are.
	So Jeffrey, let me ask you the next question, which is, okay, you're at a four and a half now.
	Where do you think you'll be standing in five years?
	What number?
	I pray.
	I honestly, only Lord and I'll save you know if I'm going to be alive in five years.
	I would hope it's a better, a better outcome.
	All right, ladies burying Larry in Minnesota, Independent Line.
	Go ahead, Larry.
	Larry.
	Hi.
	I think this country's going just perfectly in the right direction.
	Oh, hell, we got to be, I got to be at least a 10 or a 20 for optimistic.
	I mean, with Trump and Yahoo shooting fish in a barrel, how can you lose?
	You know, it's got to help all the world situation.
	And, oh, this little bit of terrorism happening here, you know, from a few Muslim jeepers, it's got to put a stop to it.
	Let's just shoot Iran all to hell.
	They're right in a barrel.
	Gosh, you could probably chuckle while they're running around.
	Thank you.
	Goodbye.
	George in Buffalo, New York, Republican.
	Go ahead.
	Hi, thanks for taking my call.
	Yeah, I'm very optimistic.
	I think things are going solid in the right direction.
	I think a big problem is you're always getting the negatives from the other side.
	I mean, Trump's been in office for one year, okay?
	He's got a solid foundation.
	He's protected our borders.
	GDP is up.
	Jobs are up despite what the other side is saying.
	And I think if you just try to work together to move things forward, I think things will change their attitude.
	They always want to say the other side that, no, things are bad.
	Things are bad.
	Things are bad.
	Just like what happened in Munich.
	I mean, you had three or four Democrats going overseas, making our country look bad when I think that was totally wrong.
	And I think there's plenty of opportunity for younger people to go to school and get a good education.
	Even the trades, the trades are booming.
	If they're not educationally inclined, they can pick a good trade.
	And if you work hard, I'm a firm believer, and that's the wonderful thing about our country, capitalism.
	It's the reason why a lot of other people want to come here.
	If you work hard and apply yourself, the sky's the limit.
	So I'm very, very optimistic.
	Okay, so George, at least.
	Okay, so you personally, I heard what you said about the kind of the country as a whole.
	You personally, what step are you on, your personal circumstances, and where do you think you'll be in five years?
	Well, I'm in my mid-60s, but I'm still working, and I want to work until I die.
	I love my work.
	And so, I mean, I've worked hard my whole life.
	I managed to save things.
	And hopefully, if I live to be in my 70s and 80s, sooner or later, I may cut back.
	But I'm proud of our country.
	And I think if people work together, rather than always the other side taking negative attitudes.
	And let's face it, I mean, Trump could walk on water and they'll find something wrong with him.
	If we work together, you'll move forward, especially the country as a whole, and things will be great.
	I mean, I think this two-party, I can't stand you stuff.
	I think if everybody joins together, we'll be great.
	All right, George.
	Some news for you, just for your awareness.
	Andrew Mountbout in Windsor, this is the former Prince Andrew in the UK, has been arrested.
	It says on suspicion of misconduct in public office.
	And this is the BBC reporting.
	King Charles has said that the law must take its course after Andrew's arrest.
	Of course, that's his brother.
	It says, I have learned, this is King Charles's statement, I have learned with deepest concern the news about Andrew Mountainbout in Windsor and suspicion of misconduct, public office.
	What now follows is a full, fair, and proper process by which this issue is investigated in the appropriate manner and by the appropriate authorities.
	We will keep you updated if anything else happens with that.
	But that just happened.
	Kevin, Windsor, Connecticut, Independent, optimistic, pessimistic about the direction of the country.
	Well, I guess it's pessimism.
	I'm not looking good at the future ain't looking good.
	I mean, that's $75 billion.
	We better start making five aircraft carriers for that money because now we don't have no allies over in the Middle East.
	And, you know, it was so easy for Trump and the Republican Party to give Europe to Russia on a silver platter.
	And all of us, pretty much all of us came from Europe.
	We all got families over there.
	And how this country could turn their back on Europe is disgraceful.
	And now we're defending the Middle East for Bitcoin's and Kushner's investments and Trump's investments over there in the Middle East.
	This ain't about nuclear bombs over Iran.
	They're afraid that Iran is going to drop bombs on their investments over there.
	That's what this is all about.
	Now when you look at those ships over there in the water, that's just us now with no allies.
	And I think America, I'm ashamed about our country now, where it's going to.
	Of course, nobody's above the wall over Europe, as we could see this morning.
	But the victims here in America, American daughters, they're not getting justice here.
	All right, Kevin.
	And speaking of the Middle East, Caroline Lovitt, White House press secretary at a briefing yesterday, was asked about the potential for a military strike on Iran.
	Here's that exchange.
	There's many reasons and arguments that one could make for a strike against Iran.
	The president had a very successful operation as commander-in-chief with Operation Midnight Hammer, as you know, as you just said, totally obliterated Iran's nuclear facilities.
	The president has always been very clear, though, with respect to Iran or any country around the world.
	Diplomacy is always his first option.
	And Iran would be very wise to make a deal with President Trump and with this administration.
Anthony And Zach Discuss Red States 00:14:47
	He's talking to many people.
	Of course, his national security team, first and foremost, and you know who the members of that team are.
	And this is something, obviously, the president takes seriously.
	He's always thinking about what's in the best interests of the United States of America, of our military, of the American people.
	And that's how he makes decisions with respect to military action of any kind.
	And our topic is whether you're optimistic or pessimistic about the direction of the country.
	Check in with Facebook postings.
	Here's Mike who says, I'm pretty sure that potential war with Iran and the ever more disgusting revelations regarding Epstein, including the arrest of former Prince Andrew, is more newsworthy.
	And Andrew says, with the current leadership, pessimistic.
	Create Love is neutral at the moment.
	And Mohammed says, I'm optimistic.
	With strong leadership like Trump, America can get back on the right path.
	You can also let us know what you think on Facebook or on Twitter or send a text or you can call like Trevor is in Washington, D.C. Democrat.
	Good morning, Trevor.
	Hi, good morning.
	It is an interesting and beautiful day in D.C.
	We are getting the weather we deserve.
	If anyone's listening outside of the country, it is dreadful outside.
	I'm optimistic about the future of our country.
	Even though things, the walls seem to be kind of falling down.
	What with the news about Iran?
	Ukraine at the brink.
	And Somewhat of a reckoning with the behavior of powerful figures, the Epstein files.
	I think this is a turning point.
	Poll after poll is showing people are no longer trusting Trump to tell the truth.
	And they're having to look at the evidence of their own eyes.
	They're having to look at each other over the kitchen table and see, have we bought into a bowl of a bill of goods?
	Now, maybe the answer is no, but it's really important that people ask that question because that's the nexus where citizenship starts again and people start taking responsibility for their own government.
	That makes me very optimistic for both Republicans and Democrats.
	All right, Trevor.
	Talk to James next.
	Newark, New Jersey, Independent Line.
	Go ahead, James.
	Yes, hi, Doug.
	Now, thanks having she's been.
	Now, I do vote.
	Both of them, optimists and pessimists.
	Now, Jesus, the Bible, all the signs is fulfilled.
	Matt 24.
	All the signs fulfilled.
	So he may come back sooner than five years from now.
	Sorry, James, I'm having a bit of trouble making out what you're saying.
	Sorry about that.
	Anthony in Cape Coral, Florida, Republican line.
	You're on the air.
	Good morning.
	I'm optimistic.
	I waited around, I say seven and a half right now because it just started, you know, to turn over from what we've been in for four years.
	And then I was trying to say, like, where do the polls come from?
	Are they all blue states?
	Are they all red states?
	Actually, I have that information for you, Anthony.
	And this, it's called a probability-based panel encompassing all 50 states and the District of Columbia.
	That's from Gallup.
	So they have what's called a Gallup panel, and it's 22,125 interviews with U.S. adults.
	Okay.
	Yeah, because like blue states, the red states are totally different.
	Like where I live in Jersey, for example, like the gas tax.
	So say Trump lowers the gas tax for us, you know, to drive.
	The blue states, like I looked it up, the blue states raised the gas tax.
	So I live in Florida now.
	So our gas tax actually went down, actually lower because the states control the gas.
	So if you don't like what Trump's doing, all you got to do is raise everything, like the property taxes, gas tax.
	He's raising everything where it's unaffordable for the blue state people.
	That's why they leave.
	That's why I left Jersey.
	I was there for 47 years.
	I'm living way better.
	It's so much better here.
	So that's why I'm optimistic because I'm in a good state now.
	If you're in one of those states like that, you're not going to have any money.
	And those people can't leave because they're broke because they can't afford to move.
	Are you working, Anthony, in Florida?
	No, no, no.
	I'm disabled.
	I broke my back when I drove a truck.
	So I packed up everything there after what they were doing.
	My homeowners' insurance and taxes were like, you know, $3,000, $4,000.
	Then it went up to like $7,000, $8,000 in a year.
	So I came down here, I bought a house.
	My taxes here, $3,500 for the year.
	No state tax, none of that stuff here.
	So what they're doing is just draining everybody's walls in the blue states.
	And then I see what they do.
	They make up things, these Democrats.
	I'm sorry.
	I used to, I voted for Obama.
	I voted for Clinton back in the day when I was younger.
	But now I actually got into this more.
	You see what they're doing.
	They're really like lying to these people.
	I watch all the channels.
	I got every news channel.
	I watch every one of them.
	Republicans are just for Americans.
	You want everybody to do good.
	So we have a good life.
	So, Anthony, let's take a look at the breakdown here.
	And here's what it looks like.
	So, by political identity, here are the Democrats.
	This is in 2021.
	And you can see from 2021 to 2024 a drop and a further drop in 2025.
	So, that percentage change is a five-point drop.
	Since 2024, it's a 7.6 drop.
	That's Democrats.
	Now, look at Republicans here.
	Similar, it's a 4.8% drop between 2021 and 2024.
	So, pretty much the same as with Democrats, but it's a 0.9%, so almost one-point increase since 2024.
	And Democrat, sorry, independence was again the same between 21 and 24, so very similar here among Democrats, Republicans, Independents.
	Independence still dropped, though, 1.5 percentage points since 2024.
	You can also see here with race and identities and ethnicity: white adults, black adults, Hispanic adults.
	Biggest drop from 2024 is Hispanic adults right here at six points.
	Continuing with our calls, Oliver, Falls Church, Virginia, Independent Line.
	Good morning.
	Good morning, Mimi.
	Good morning.
	Go right ahead, Oliver.
	Optimistic, pessimistic.
	I'm pessimistic, Mimi, and I'm going to tell you why.
	I hear a lot of, I used to call Washington Journal once a month.
	I've stopped calling lately and just listened to what was being said to people and to you, you people that run the show.
	And I'm telling you, it amazes me that the American people have accepted a man like Donald Trump, who is a liar, who is a cheat, who is cheated on his wife, who's in the middle of a pedophile investigation.
	And people call on here and pat him on the back for what he's done.
	And while he was the president, a million Americans lost their lives because of COVID and the way he handled that disease.
	That's what caused our country to be in trouble from the beginning.
	And thank God for Joe Biden, who came along and gave us a break away from this man who I really think mentally is not all there.
	And the American public who runs to support him, one day will regret, just like they the other day when he pulled the American people out of the Clean Air Act.
	He's a disgrace to this country.
	I can't wait till he's out of there.
	And I'm praying that God lets me live in America for a little longer time so I can see how this country rebounds from this disaster named Donald J. Trump.
	So Oliver, let's say you do live for another five years, hopefully.
	What do you see as do you think that it'll be better in five years or worse?
	Sweetheart, listen.
	I'm telling you the truth.
	I am so happy.
	I'll be so happy if somebody else gets control of the government.
	And even if it's a Republican, if it's somebody that I can trust, that when I lay down at nighttime, I'm 72 years old and retired.
	I'll be able to lay down and get some rest without this man running the government.
	He worries me.
	And I think he's still in the pocket of Russia.
	Thank you, Mimi.
	Here's George, Independent Line, Strongsville, Ohio.
	Good morning, George.
	Good morning, Mimi.
	I'm optimistic about the economy, and I cite two reasons for that.
	Number one, the stock market is up, and unemployment is down or reasonably down.
	So, those are two reasons I feel are reason to be optimistic.
	However, I would like C-SPAN to do something if they can.
	And that is, Donald Trump, of course, was a tariffs person, and he had supposedly $18 million in pledges by foreign countries so that they can get out from under the tariffs.
	Of the $18 trillion pledged, how much money has actually been spent by those outside interests within the United States?
	Anything?
	I would like to see a graph, you know, like a what do they call that?
	One of those bar graphs.
	Yep.
	Here's the 18 trillion, and here's where we are now for spending.
	Have you looked that up, George?
	Does that exist?
	I apologize.
	I have not looked that up.
	I was hoping maybe you'd have some information for me.
	Okay.
	We'll take a look and see if there's anything like that.
	Okay, that's appreciated.
	Thank you so much, and have a great day.
	You too.
	Zach in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, Democrat.
	Good morning.
	Hi, my name is Zach, by the way.
	Yes.
	Yeah, I just optimistic.
	As an 11-year Air Force veteran, I believe we're going to get back to some truth.
	And I think that's going to be our saving grace.
	The fact that Republicans, I don't know, I don't know how to explain it, but a few facts is when the Democrats are in office or in control, the economy is always better.
	That's just a fact.
	Another fact is the poorest states in our union are red states.
	That's just a fact.
	The lowest graduation rates in our union are in red states.
	So what we have to do is reach the people at the poorest level who can't seem to get out of their own way, who vote against their own best interests.
	How can you vote for a party that says they don't care if your child gets cancer treatment?
	I mean, how can you vote for a party who doesn't care if at 2 o'clock in the morning they break into your neighbor's home?
	So, Zach, let's talk about what you think in five years.
	Where do you think, like, do you feel like things will be better in five years or worse in five years?
	I'm 67 years old, so I believe that if we don't succumb to recycled crap, like this whole thing with Iran, if we become more like the Brits and hold our leaders accountable,
	no matter what their station is in life, if we get a democratic controlled government that just allows the order of law to survive, then we'll be fine.
	If we could teach our children that, yes, law and order matters.
	Yes, breaking the law matters, no matter who you are.
	You know what I mean?
	We know we're back on track.
	You know what I mean?
	If we claim to be such a Christian nation, the rule of law should matter.
	All right.
	Taking care of our brothers and sisters should be the first order of business.
	Got it, Zach.
	And let's get an update real quick on Iran.
	This is CBS News with this headline.
	Trump has discussed timeline for Iran strikes, including as soon as this weekend, but no decision yet.
	It says top national security officials have told President Trump the military is ready for potential strikes on Iran as soon as Saturday, but the timeline for any action is likely to extend beyond this weekend, sources told CBS News.
	Mr. Trump has not yet made a final decision about whether to strike, said the officials who spoke under condition of anonymity.
	The conversations have been described as fluid and ongoing as the White House weighs the risks of escalation and the political and military consequences of restraint.
	It says over the next three days, the Pentagon is moving some personnel temporarily out of the Middle East region, primarily to Europe or back to the U.S., ahead of potential action or counterattacks by Iran if the U.S. were to move ahead with its operation.
	That's it, CBS News.
	And this is Robert, North Carolina, Independent Line.
	Go ahead, Robert.
	Hi.
	Good morning, Mimi.
	Good morning, America and American midterm voters.
Carrie's Pessimistic Outlook 00:13:41
	Don't forget your ID.
	I am very optimistic that in five years, the rich will be a little bit richer.
	And I am very pessimistic that the poor may be just a little bit poor if I go by history.
	And as a retired black American male, if I may, I would just like to say that thank God I got my VA disability.
	I worked all my life, but my retirement is small from the state, and I get Social Security.
	But without that VA disability, where I had knee replacements for military service, I would be up the creek without a paddle.
	So, and I, one last comment, if I may, is that black Americans should have reparations because without it, a lot of them will remain at the lower runs of the ladder.
	And in all conscience, we live in the richest, most prosperous country in the world.
	And part of that, even a small part, was built on slave labor.
	So I think every American should feel like there should be some type of help for the descendants of slave to help them, you know, move off of that bottom run.
	Thank you so much for listening.
	And Heather in Whitehall, Maryland, Independent Line.
	Good morning, Heather.
	Good morning.
	How are you?
	Good.
	I am, you know, pessimistic in the outlook in the next couple years because what I'm seeing as a nurse and in the medical field, a great deal of people already struggling with not being able to afford medications.
	The hospitals are overfilled.
	And I work in several different states and areas throughout my life.
	And this is probably the worst I've ever seen it as far as what I'm seeing more homeless.
	I'm seeing more elderly losing places to stay.
	And I think in general, the loss of our in the World Health Organization as a teacher, as a lifelong learner, I've always utilized our education.
	And in the research that we're losing, the grants, the amazing government workers that we've lost and replaced with incompetence.
	If anyone would like to read some of Michael Lewis's Who is Government and the FIFA Risk, they're really wonderful at explaining some of the wonderful things our government has done.
	And I think that if we don't come together as a country and work together as people, as neighbors, and really look at the injustice that's occurring with ICE and with The loss of grants and things like that, then we are in a really sad place.
	But I'm hopeful that maybe we can change things.
	So, Heather, we're going to be talking about public health later in the program.
	So, I hope you can stay with us for that discussion.
	Mark Westwood, New Jersey, Independent Line, you're on the air.
	Hi, thank you for C-SPAN.
	And I'm a retired guy that was born in Boston, the same place that our country was born.
	And we were born because we had a bloody revolution against King George.
	And the whole idea was we didn't want kings, and we wanted the people to be represented in government.
	And it worked for a while.
	But with this guy in office right now, it's just terrible.
	I'm very pessimistic for the future of this country.
	For one thing, everybody in Europe is going to renewable energy, which is the way the world has to go so that the world survives climate change.
	And he's turning us into a petro state.
	I mean, he is just, he's a criminal.
	That's the best thing I can say, because I grew up in New York and I saw all the schemes and crimes that he pulled.
	And I just still can't believe that so many people voted for this man.
	And so, Mark, what do you think would happen?
	Like, what do you think the country is going to look like in five years?
	Well, I think that the rich are going to be so much richer.
	I think the poor are going to be so much poorer because all Trump did in his first term, and he's going into a hyperdrive now to give rich people tax cuts and to cut all social programs.
	I mean, I need my Social Security to survive, and I'm scared of what Elon Musk and his guys did in the Social Security office.
	I don't understand why the Democrats aren't subpoenaing everybody who was in Social Security and finding out what they did.
	It's not their private enterprise.
	It belongs to all of us.
	We paid into it, and we should be expanding Social Security, not trying to get rid of it, which is exactly what the Republicans have been doing all along.
	They hated Social Security when Franklin Roosevelt got elected, and they still hate it.
	So that's a perfect example.
	All right, Mark.
	And let's take a look at Utah Governor Spencer Cox.
	He's a Republican.
	Yesterday, he spoke about the importance of checks and balances.
	But they knew, so they divided government as much as they could.
	They divided it between the federal government and the states.
	That's one way they divided it.
	That was brilliant of them.
	And they gave most of the power to the states because exactly what Governor Stitts said, they knew that the only way a deeply pluralistic and divided, different group of states, colonies at the time, but states eventually, would be able to survive is if we didn't force a one-size-fits-all government onto them.
	That we should be different.
	They knew that Massachusetts was very different from Virginia and that someday, someday California and Utah would be very different and that's okay.
	But what we, here's the flaw, if I can say, and it's not their flaw.
	They believe that everyone would be selfish.
	So we divided the federal government up, right?
	And they decided we don't want a strong president because a president always feels a little king-like.
	Governors feel this.
	We have the power.
	We're the executive.
	We only have to convince one of us.
	And that's it.
	Two of us with our spouses.
	And that's it.
	So we're not going to give them much power.
	We're going to give the power to Congress.
	Congress will be the preeminent power because it's going to be really hard to get stuff done there.
	You have to go in or you have to build coalitions.
	You're going to have to work really hard.
	You're going to have to convince them.
	And they can change it.
	It would take a long time, and we like that.
	But what they didn't anticipate was that we would have one branch of government that did not jealously guard their power, that willingly just gave it away, and that is completely dysfunctional.
	They did not foresee that piece of today.
	So, what has happened?
	Well, the presidents, if you say, if Congress isn't going to act, people will need something done.
	So, I'm going to do what I want to do.
	And that's bad because every four years, it means that if you elect Kamala Harris, the country's going to be just like California.
	And you know what?
	That means Utah's really scared.
	We don't want that.
	And we're going to fight, and it's going to get really ugly.
	And if Donald Trump wins, the whole country is going to be just like Florida.
	And Californians don't like that.
	And they're going to fight.
	And it's going to get ugly, right?
	Because it was not supposed to be that way.
	And yet, here we are.
	So what happens?
	The other institutions are holding.
	I sued President Biden 63 times, 63 times, because he was just doing stuff that he did not have the authority to do.
	And we won the vast majority of those cases.
	Many of them you've never heard of, but we won most of those.
	Westmore's probably sued Donald Trump 63 times at least.
	And if you look, they're winning most of those cases because presidents aren't supposed to do this stuff.
	Congress needs to get their act together and stop performing for TikTok and actually start doing stuff.
	That's the flaw that we're dealing with right now.
	But in the meantime, in the meantime, it is up to the states to hold the line.
	Wonder what you think of that.
	We're talking about your level of optimism or pessimism about the direction of the country, the future of the country.
	And we'll go to Coco, Florida, on the line for Democrats.
	Lucretia, you're on the air.
	Hi.
	Thank you for taking my call.
	And that governor was saying exactly what I pretty much along the lines because I'm pessimistic for the next few years, but I'm optimistic for the future.
	I've known people that didn't vote for president, but they went ahead and voted to party lines.
	So I actually blame Congress for bowing down and letting him take their power away.
	And I'm hoping people realize, you know, I believe in my party, but I still try to get the right person because this guy is something else.
	So I appreciate you taking my call.
	You got any questions?
	Let's talk to Dan, Republican, Middletown, New York.
	Good morning.
	Good morning.
	I'm actually optimistic because I don't know.
	I think short-term, you know, we went through COVID.
	The federal government flooded the U.S. market with cheap money.
	That, you know, certainly caused some problems.
	We're coming out of that now.
	I also am very optimistic because I have three young children and I see the things that they do and I see what they're interested in and how much they care.
	And, you know, the fact that certain jobs that are kind of dead jobs where you go to the job and you sit at your desk all day long and you don't feel like you're able to really accomplish anything.
	I think AI is going to take a lot of those jobs.
	But instead of looking at that as a negative way, I look at it that human beings like a sense of accomplishment and completing things and doing things.
	And I'm seeing folks coming back to the trades.
	I see this in our future.
	I see our ability to repatriate some of the products that we need and depend on and use.
	I see what's going on with China and Taiwan as an opportunity for the country to take back the creation of all of the computer manufacturing, cell phone manufacturing, microchip manufacturing.
	This is going to create opportunities.
	The young people of today, they want to learn, they want to do.
	And I think at some point it's going to turn.
	We can't stay in this position forever.
	And I believe in American exceptionalism.
	We have tremendous natural resources in this country.
	We still have the freest country in the world.
	And the opportunities here are boundless.
	We just have to want to work for them.
	And I think the young generation, as much as people bad talk them and everything like that, I really believe inside them is American exceptionalism.
	It's going to blossom very soon.
	All right.
	And Dan, we are going to be talking about AI and jobs in the next segment.
	So I hope you are still with us for that and can join us for that.
	Carrie in Illinois, Independent Line, good morning.
	Good morning, Mimi.
	What do you think, Carrie?
	Oh, I just wanted to say, how can I be optimistic when the health care premiums are going to rise?
	How can I be optimistic when the grocery store prices are high?
	How can I be optimistic and Australia is green energy?
	50%.
	America is not, he wants to go total petrol.
	How can I be optimistic?
	And Doge took my identification, took everyone's personal information.
	And that's a crime.
	And no one is saying anything about it.
	And how can I be optimistic when the dollar just dropped 9%?
	The dollar is falling.
	Has anyone on this, has any caller ever thought about that?
	The dollar is falling.
	So I'm pessimistic for a man that's running, for a man that put ICE, got ICE infrastructure of $90 billion.
	So how can I be optimistic when all that money can go to American citizens and the border and the Department of Education is gone?
	How can I be optimistic?
	And I'm losing my rights.
	And I'm optimistic.
	No, I'm pessimistic because this is a problem.
	And in the next few years, what this guy is doing is destroying this country and turning it into Russia.
	What we need is America's to wake up.
	He shouldn't win a state.
	He shouldn't win 50 states.
	If Americans are smart, we're fighting a war with our own government that wants to destroy its people.
Barney's Concerns About Rights Threat 00:02:39
	All right, Gary.
	Thank you.
	I'm the line for Democrats in Florida.
	Barney, good morning to you.
	Yeah, I kind of agree with that, gentlemen.
	But boy, how can you be optimistic when you got a criminal in the White House?
	A sexual predator.
	You know, they just arrested Prince Andrews.
	Yes, we mentioned that this morning.
	Yeah.
	Yes, isn't that a disgrace?
	The whole Republican Party is part of this cover-up.
	You got women standing there at this briefing, and this Ted Gill, she's the lieutenant general in my home state, and she screwed this state up.
	This is nothing that I've never seen in my 72 years of living in this world.
	This is this thing is unbelievable.
	We got a criminal protecting criminals in the White House.
	All right, Barney.
	And let's take a look at James Tallarico.
	He's a Democratic candidate for U.S. Senate in Texas, and he was criticizing Republicans for trying to control media consumption.
	Take a look.
	The 24 hours before this tour launch has been something else.
	Last night, I filmed a interview with Stephen Colbert on the late show.
	And as you probably know by now, Trump's FCC colluded with corporate media executives at CBS to keep that interview off the air.
	But I think it's safe to say that their plan backfired.
	I think Donald Trump and his billionaire friends know that we're about to take back Texas.
	And these are the same people who ran against cancel culture.
	And now they're trying to control what we watch, what we say, what we read.
	And this is the most dangerous kind of cancel culture, the kind that comes from the top.
	They went after the View after I went on there.
	They went after Jimmy Kimmel for telling a joke they didn't like.
	They went after Stephen Colbert for telling the truth about Paramount's bribe to Donald Trump.
	Corporate media executives are selling out the First Amendment to curry favor with corrupt politicians.
Cancel Culture's New Frontier 00:08:05
	A threat to any of our First Amendment rights is a threat to all of our First Amendment rights.
	Whether you're a Democrat or Republican, whether you're conservative or progressive, the real fight in this country is not left versus right.
	It's top versus bottom.
	And we're asking about your level of optimism or pessimism about the direction of the country.
	A couple of things, though, for your schedule.
	So starting at about 9 a.m. this morning over on C-SPAN 2, President Trump's newly established Board of Peace convenes its first meeting to discuss the ceasefire and reconstruction efforts in Gaza.
	You'll hear from representatives from Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Hungary.
	They're expected to attend.
	That is live on C-SPAN 2 at 9 a.m.
	At 10 a.m. right after this program, Politico holds its 2026 governor summit.
	Discussions on how state leaders are setting the agenda for the future and the impact elections could have on the political landscape.
	That's here on C-SPAN.
	And then at 1 p.m. also here on C-SPAN, the Minister of Economic Affairs for the Israeli Embassy discusses U.S.-Israel cooperation in tech, including AI and cybersecurity.
	And it's hosted by the Hudson Institute.
	That's at 1 p.m. on C-SPAN.
	All those you can watch on our website, c-SPAN.org, or our app, C-SPANNow.
	Let's hear from Jim in Inglewood, Ohio, Republican line.
	Go ahead, Jim.
	Good morning, Amy.
	Thank you for taking my call.
	I am an advent listener to C-SPAN, and I can't say that I enjoy the diversity of your callers, but I do listen to both sides of the story.
	I am optimistic.
	And the thing that makes my head spin the most has to do with the fact that people think the world is ran with an easy button.
	You know, you hit the easy button and everything changes.
	The situation that we're now in and what President Trump is trying to do in a reasonable way is reverse the last four years.
	Economically, socially, the media has played such a role in disparaging President Trump's efforts.
	There's always two sides to the story, and no one's going to look at things exactly the same way.
	But the economy and the prices didn't go up when Donald Trump went in.
	They were already up.
	They're falling.
	I shop with my wife.
	I look at what was and what is now a dozen eggs for 99 cents.
	That seems like a steal compared to $4 a dozen 15, 16 months ago.
	The gas.
	I mean, there's so many narratives that can be talked about.
	And I heard a gentleman talk about insurance pricing.
	Everyone has a role to play with medical insurance.
	Some of the medical conditions that affect the populations are unavoidable.
	And yet, it's hand of mouth.
	It's what you put in your body.
	It's your consumption and how much you consume.
	Whether you get up and move and get away from the TV.
	Although I watch C-SPAN in the morning and I watch some of the other news channels to get a variation of expressions, of points of view, I think Donald Trump is a man with a spine unlike anybody else in the world.
	And I'm grateful that this nation voted him in unanimously.
	I thank you, Mimi, for your time.
	All right, Jim.
	I appreciate it.
	Thanks for calling.
	Here is a text from Guy in Oklahoma.
	Hi, Mimi.
	I'm optimistic.
	Spencer Cox for president, a common sense Republican.
	John in Michigan, I'm optimistic now, at least until November 2028.
	If we elect a Democrat as president, that optimism goes right down the tubes.
	Then Tony in New York says, I'm generally optimistic.
	The economy is getting better.
	The borders are secure.
	Conversations are happening about health care and immigration that I hope leads to common sense solutions.
	I do worry about the socialist leanings by younger voters in blue states.
	And Marie in Florida, I am extremely pessimistic about the direction of the country.
	Politicians on both sides have more interest in their own parties than to work for the betterment of America and its hardworking people.
	Let's talk to Lawrence next in Covington, Louisiana, Independent.
	Good morning.
	Good morning, Mimi.
	Let me turn my TV down here.
	Good morning to you.
	You look great as always.
	But I'm going to do the political answer, okay?
	I'm both optimistic and pessimistic.
	You know, Trump has done some good things.
	And any American, regardless of what your party lines are, have to realize there were some things that had to be done.
	And they did some good things.
	Unfortunately, some of the bad things he does overwhelm those good things.
	And it's so unfortunate.
	I know many people that are both Republican, Democrat, Independent, but they decide based on the things that are going on.
	And I don't believe any Republican or Democrat always goes the party line, which is what should be done.
	They should go to the better things that happen in the country.
	And as far as our, I guess, our future goes, I'm more like, hey, we've come a long way.
	This world has come a long way.
	And unless something happens in a nuclear Holocaust, which God forbid would ever happen, this is a great world, okay?
	And I do believe people should not be extremism about their party.
	I'm a firm believer in an Abe Lincoln saying that, you know, that goes back to some of the people all of the time.
	You can fool some of the people all of the time.
	You can fool some of the people all of the time, but never all the people all the time, right?
	So let's come on, America.
	Let's all be all of the people all of the time.
	Let's agree on both parties that have the good things out there.
	And again, you look great this morning, Mimi.
	You are a light in everyone's view.
	And I love C-SPAN.
	I watch all three C-SPANs.
	Thank you, Lord.
	God bless everyone.
	And here's Sean in Pennsylvania, Democrat.
	Hi, Sean.
	Hello.
	Good morning.
	What I'm about to say has a hint of both pessimism and optimism.
People Need to Be Held Accountable 00:07:11
	And it pertains to the federal student loan system, which has failed presently, and we are in the middle of a student loan crisis.
	And contrary to common belief, older borrowers outnumber younger borrowers.
	This affects both people in red and blue states.
	But there's a lay at the end of the tunnel.
	There is hope.
	There's presently a big class action lawsuit against the Department of Education, which may actually end up being the largest class action lawsuit in this country's history.
	And if they're successful, consumer protections will be returned to all student loans.
	The federal government should get out of the student loan business for good and abolish the Department of Education.
	And finally, colleges and universities will be held accountable to some extent for the graduates they produce who end up having to bankrupt their loans.
	Thank you.
	So, Sean, what's your situation?
	Are you a new graduate?
	Do you have a student loan?
	Yeah, so I graduated in 2008, and I graduated with about $50,000 in federal loans.
	I paid over the course of over 10 years before COVID, up to COVID, I paid $22,000 back.
	I presently owe $63,000.
	$63,000?
	Yes, ma'am.
	And were you able to find a job that would allow you to cover that and still pay your bills?
	Fortunately, yes.
	However, it's a struggle right now with everything else going on.
	I have the family and house and other obligations.
	Okay.
	I'm just hoping for the leverage of consumer protections to be returned so that therefore, like any debt, I can negotiate with my lender instead of being held to this userist rate.
	Yep.
	The situation we're in now.
	Understood that.
	And here's Kyle, Republican, Truth or Consequences, New Mexico.
	Good morning, Kyle.
	Good morning, Mimi.
	Thank you guys so much for taking my call.
	It is kind of hard to be optimistic a lot of the time, but maybe for Lent I gave up pessimism.
	I don't know.
	But, you know, Trump has done a lot of the stuff that I do agree with, and I voted for him while I voted for him.
	A lot of the immigration policies I agree with.
	We don't need a flood of illegal immigrants.
	They get taken advantage of.
	The work market takes advantage of them.
	The black market takes advantage of them.
	And we shouldn't be like that.
	We should be better than that.
	I don't agree with the fact that RFK and the Maha movement, we worked so hard for so many years to bring recognition to the damages that glyphosate brings.
	And I believe Trump just kind of went back on that.
	And, you know, so that's a battle we're going to have to keep fighting.
	I'm also incredibly concerned about the situation in Iran right now.
	We're really pushing them.
	And this, the last time it was, I believe it was aircraft that flew a very long way.
	This time it's aircraft carriers bringing aircraft close.
	And I'm not sure we've had a serious naval conflict since World War II.
	I'm not sure the American public understands what that feels like to lose sailors.
	We're accustomed to losing soldiers and Marines and whatnot.
	But Prince Andrew, our former Prince Andrew, just got arrested, apparently, the BBC reported.
	So I don't know whether I mean I feel optimistic about that, but it's also shaking up politics all around.
	In my state, two pretty prominent politicians, one serving mayor and one candidate for governor for the Democrat ticket for governor, are implied in those and have had to respond to them publicly.
	So it's shaking up the norm.
	And so it's kind of unforeseeable right now where we're headed.
	You're optimistic that people will be held accountable?
	Yes, absolutely.
	Absolutely.
	So Kyle, I've just been wondering, where did your town get the name Truth or Consequences?
	Is there a story there?
	A bad one.
	Oh.
	You know what?
	Let me look that up.
	It's like a Stephen King novel.
	It's like a Stephen King novel, if you want to hear it from me.
	No, I'll look it up.
	But thank you.
	Anyway.
	John, Germantown, Maryland, Independent Line.
	Good morning.
	Yes.
	Hi, Mimi.
	How are you?
	Good.
	A little bit optimistic, a little bit pessimistic.
	You had a caller previously call in and talk about student loans.
	And, you know, I want to talk about that current generation that has all come out of college.
	I've just kind of migrated out of it.
	Some folks were able to achieve student loan forgiveness or absolve that.
	But if you want to look at the current state of the way the country's head and look at this generation that has come out of college, your bulk of your employees throughout corporate America, if you want to know why most folks are not starting families right now or why you see a degradation of that family build in America, it's because the average student has come out with over $50,000, $60,000 of debt.
	And because we watch an entire generation of parents divorce at a rate of over 60% and a lot of financial pitfalls, I'm pessimistic about the country because it feels like so much of that generation is constantly pulling water out of the boat and in endless effort to keep it from sinking.
	And because they're so busy Competing on a daily basis to pay rents that are about $2,500 a month to go into grocery stores, spend $300, $400 a grocery trip, still maintain all of their other bills.
	It's got folks running on such a fast wheel.
	I'm not optimistic about people being held accountable.
	They've got us so busy chasing the money, keeping up with the Joneses, and distracted with phenomenal distractions, whether it be a Super Bowl or the Knights of the Seven Kingdoms on Sunday night.
	We just move on every day like crazy isn't all around us.
	We have more politicians and more billionaires implicated in these files than any other nation, and yet we're moving around like it's perfectly normal.
	You know, I've never seen such a docile democracy out of us.
	Where is the outrage?
	Where are the thousand-man marches on the hill?
	Where are the farmers spraying crap on the buildings until these political charlatans are held accountable?
	I mean, the stuff that's in these files, I'm not going to repeat over the year because it's so appalling.
	And yet, we're all moving around like this is normal.
	It's not.
	People need to be held accountable.
	This is the largest story in the globe, and we should be talking about nothing else until these people are held accountable.
Wide Variety of Opinions 00:06:35
	Thank you, Mimi.
	I'm not optimistic right now.
	All right, John, and this is the Independent that says this: quote: He was never a prince.
	Virginia Guffray's family speaks out as Andrew Mountbout in Windsor arrested in the UK.
	It says, While the arrest was not in connection to sexual abuse allegations against the former prince, it was welcomed by the family of Guffray, who was among his accusers.
	And Mariah, Houston, Texas, Democrat, you're on the air.
	Good morning.
	Morning.
	And I also appreciate you taking my call.
	First thing I would like to say is I started watching C-SPAN about three years ago.
	And I love C-SPAN because you get a variety of people from all races, from all walks of life, some well-to-do, some college-educated, some not.
	But you get a wide variety of opinions.
	I'm a Democrat, but I probably should be an independent only because there is no one right political party.
	We are the United States of America.
	And everyone is entitled to their opinion because we all have one.
	My mom used to say, even Keith and Tong fall out when you bite your own tongue sometimes.
	So there's never going to be one side right or one side wrong.
	So, Mariah, what do you think?
	Are you feeling optimistic or pessimistic?
	That's what I was getting ready to say.
	Okay, go ahead.
	Today, today.
	And in the last few years, I have been pessimistic.
	I feel pessimistic because I'm 72 years old and I've never seen my country in such upheaval.
	I don't recognize it.
	I think we are all intelligent people.
	We know right from wrong.
	Three branches of government, but right now there's only one branch.
	I voted for my congresspeople to represent my state and the people of this state.
	Our congresspeople should be representing us, the citizens, not one party or the other.
	So, Mariah, I have a question for you about the Senate race in Texas.
	Have you decided who you're going to be supporting in the primaries?
	Yes.
	Do you want to share that?
	You don't have to, but I don't mind.
	I'm voting for Jasmine Crockett because I believe that we need some new blood in government.
	Just like the president can't serve more than two terms, I think the people in Congress should not be allowed to serve more than 10 or 12.
	Serving 25, 30 years, they go in young.
	They come out old.
	All right, Mariah.
	We'll move on to Stephen, Lexington, Kentucky, Independent Line.
	Good morning.
	Yes, good morning.
	Thank you for having me, Mimi.
	Thank you, Steve Span, for allowing us to speak our voices and our opinions, especially in such a moment where I don't feel like I have a lot of options on venting on, because I can only go on a corner and protest so much.
	And just, it's so tough right now.
	Mimi, I bet you if you split up, you know, the callers in age groups, we would see some major differences because it sounds like the older people are just living life right now and loving it compared to the younger generation, such as me, that really are struggling and not having a good time out here.
	How old are you, Stephen?
	I don't want to give you my exact name, but I do.
	Yeah, just give me a range.
	I'm a millennial.
	I'm on the younger millennial side.
	Okay.
	And, you know, with a kid and a family and paying all the debts that I've owed throughout my life and, you know, doing the thing, went to college, all that stuff.
	And it just seems like, you know, this might be very dramatic, but I think that President Trump is going to be the last president.
	I'm very pessimistic on our country and the way it's going.
	All the doors have been opened, you know, and all the lies that we've been told are coming out to the truth.
	And so I don't think that we're going to see the same America that we've had the last 10, 20, 30, 40 years.
	I think we're in a completely different game.
	It's a two-tier economy.
	It's very hard right now if you have young kids trying to afford everything, trying to, luckily, I have a great job and my wife does too, but we still are struggling.
	It's not a time now where you can have one parent at home.
	It's not the same.
	So I'm very pessimistic.
	And I do think it's not a left or right issue.
	I think this is an American issue.
	So if you're a red-pilled or blue-pilled, it doesn't matter.
	You just need to stand up for America.
	Stephen, but what do you mean by President Trump's going to be our last president?
	You don't believe we're going to have elections anymore?
	No, I don't think he's going to give up power.
	You know, he's talked about having a third term.
	You know, he's just, there's no way that he's going to let go of the power that he has right now.
	It sounds dramatic, but our system is not the same anymore.
	At the top, at the very top layer, it looks like it.
	It feels like it.
	If you keep digging down, everything's rotten to the core.
War Within Democracy 00:02:10
	And so, you know, folks, listen up.
	The White House is actively protecting pedophiles, and it's disturbing.
	So, I'm very pessimistic, Mimi.
	And thank you so much for letting me vent.
	This is important.
	C-SPAN is very important because we feel like we have no voice sometimes.
	You know, this crazy stuff on the news, and you just don't know what to do with it other than express your opinion.
	And, like, some other callers said, we need to be on the streets more.
	You know, go to the Capitol.
	Let's something about it.
	They're throwing so much crap at us all the time that we're just so busy trying to stay afloat.
	So, pessimism all the way.
	Thank you, Mimi.
	All right, and that's our last call for this segment.
	More to come.
	We have later in the program, we've got former acting CDC director Dr. Richard Besser.
	He'll discuss the Trump administration's actions on public health.
	But first, after the break, economist Vance Ginn joins us to talk about the economic disruptions of the AI boom and the battle over regulating the new technology.
	We'll be right back.
	Sunday on C-SPAN's Q&A, former Washington Post correspondent Will Haygood, author of The War Within a War, talks about the experience of black American soldiers in Vietnam and the struggle for racial equality, both in the war zone and back home in the United States.
	He also reflects on growing up in Columbus, Ohio during that time, where he experienced this stark divide firsthand as a child.
	And I found myself as a 14-year-old kid running from National Guard tanks during the riots.
	I don't think it was until I really got deep into the research of this book that I realized that these two epical moments in American history-Vietnam and the draft and then riot-that I saw elements of both through my own eyes.
	Author Will Haygood with his book, The War Within a War, Sunday night at 8 Eastern on C-SPAN's QA.
AI Regulations Moratorium 00:15:43
	You can listen to QA and all of our podcasts on our free C-SPAN Now app or wherever you get your podcasts.
	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 to the program.
	Joining us to discuss artificial intelligence, the impact on jobs and on energy is Vance Ginn.
	He is a former Office of Management and Budget Chief Economist for the Trump administration, also host of the podcast, Let People Prosper.
	Vance, welcome to the program.
	Thank you so much, Mimi.
	It's a pleasure to be with you.
	I want to start with the potential impact of AI on jobs and specifically entry-level jobs.
	The CEO of Anthropic has said that as much as 50% of entry-level white-collar jobs will go away because of AI.
	What do you think?
	Well, AI is something that's new.
	And so many people are looking at should we fear it?
	Should we embrace it?
	You know, what's going to be the best path forward?
	And if you look back historically to other types of revolutions, and I do believe we're in the AI revolution now, there's been the same sort of fears, whether it be whenever we went from horse and buggy to the T-model car or when we had the internet.
	These are all things that have come up in our lives.
	And yes, some job displacement happened.
	And I think that's important to acknowledge that some jobs will be displaced.
	But at the same time, there were many more jobs that were created in the process.
	Whether it be from the horse and buggy to the T-model car, there are many more people who were helping build the car.
	Or on internet, on the internet, there were more people that were able to access things and start businesses online than before.
	And so now we're in a situation where AI could displace many of those entry-level jobs.
	But it could also mean opening up of new jobs that we don't know about.
	And some of that's already happening now, whether it be the data centers that I know we'll talk about where people can work on and build and other things that are happening there, or the new innovations that are coming out.
	I think one of my key points here, Mimi, is that I don't think that we should necessarily fear AI.
	We're using AI every day, and I don't know that people actually consider it to be AI, whether it be using your computer or using GPS when you drive from one place to the other.
	These are all forms of AI that we've been using for years, if not decades now, that I think we just need to take a step back and say, what exactly is happening?
	And from what I'm looking at this as an economist and someone looking into AI, I think this is going to be a pro-growth, pro-people sort of situation that's going to allow us to flourish and prosper even more into the future.
	So yes, we need to understand the causes and effects and other things that are going to happen, but I don't think it's something that we should fear at the end of the day.
	So Vance, I want to read to you a portion of an article written by Matt Schumer.
	He's an AI influencer.
	He posted this on X and it's gotten a lot of attention lately.
	And then I'll have you respond to it.
	He says this.
	Here's the thing nobody outside the tech quite understands.
	We're not making predictions.
	We're telling you what already occurred in our own jobs and warning you that you're next.
	The experience that tech workers have had over the past year of watching AI go from helpful tool to does my job better than I do is the experience everyone else is about to have.
	Law, finance, medicine, accounting, consulting, writing, design, analysis, customer service.
	Not in 10 years.
	The people building these systems say one to five years, some say less.
	So this would indicate a much bigger disruption, Vance, than going from the horse and buggy to automobiles.
	And it could, especially in certain tech industries and other places.
	But what I would consider is what Frederick Hayek, an economist, called the knowledge problem.
	We don't know exactly what's going to happen in the future.
	We know what the jobs are today that are using AI and other areas in our economy, but we don't know what new jobs, new sectors, new innovations that will come out in the future that will allow us to feel many of those jobs that are displaced in the process.
	So I'm not here to say that there's not going to be any disruptions and there's not going to be any sort of changes in the economy.
	I think that there will be.
	The issue is that I'm trying to argue is that we don't know exactly what the future jobs will look like and how we could use AI to best support the jobs that are already there, to use it as a tool to help us to improve the jobs that we're doing.
	And maybe some of the jobs that we're doing today are more mundane or things that we would like for an AI to do to help us out in the process.
	And I don't see anything that's wrong with that.
	And so while we may want to fear it or regulate it or tax it, there's many things that politicians are trying to do to AI right now.
	I think that would be setting us back.
	The other thing we've got to think about is that we're not just in this alone as America.
	We're in a competitive marketplace.
	Some of those who are friends and foes in other countries like China.
	And the more that we press pause or try to regulate or tax away AI, the other countries are unlikely to do that.
	And so they would tend to grow faster in this space.
	And if we are left behind, we're doing ourselves a disservice on national security, on economic output, and ultimately the prosperity of people.
	We've got a question for our guest, Vance, again, about artificial intelligence, about the impact on jobs, the economy, data centers, energy, you can call us now.
	The lines are biparty.
	Republicans are on 202-748-8001.
	Democrats 202-748-8000.
	And Independents 202-748-8002.
	I want to mention a YouGov poll, Vance, that say that Americans are more likely to say AI will have a negative overall effect on the economy than a mostly positive one.
	So 45% versus 16%.
	What do you think of those numbers?
	And is there, where do you think they're coming from and how would you counter that?
	Well, I mean, I think it's normal for us to be able to think about this in a negative way, where we want to fear what AI is going to have forward.
	I think people oftentimes will consider maybe the Terminator, right?
	And thinking about this AI that's coming to attack us and maybe displace all the jobs and cause major disruptions in our lives.
	But there's also many positive things that are happening at AI that I think, for one thing, I don't think the Terminator is going to exist.
	And if we do have a Terminator, we need an AI that's going to help compete with it, right?
	To help overcome it.
	And so we need to make things positive in the same time.
	But there are certain areas of our economy that I think could improve dramatically and which helps our lives, which are education.
	I think education is going to be reformed by AI and allow for there to be better education tools that can help meet the needs of the unique students versus just being in a classroom all day.
	Or maybe in the classroom, they're able to use AI to get more information or allow for them to have more interaction with what's happening and get a better feel for what they're learning.
	The other big one, though, Mimi, is looking at healthcare.
	Healthcare and AI, I think, is another area where you can get multiple second looks, third looks, fourth looks on whatever it is that you're, you know, your MRI or x-ray or other things that are life-saving situations, along with better drugs and prescriptions to allow for us to have a healthier lives.
	So we could be better educated, healthier in the process.
	And I think this would also help many of the manufacturing plants and others to where, sure, some jobs could be displaced.
	And I can understand the fear.
	I'm empathetic with it as well as someone who has three kids and works in this space a lot.
	But I think at the same time, I want to be an optimist about the human ingenuity of these God-given brains and resources that we have, I think are going to allow us to move into the next centuries being even better and brighter and healthier than we've ever been before.
	So going back to education and jobs, you know, we had a couple of callers in the last segment talk about student loans, which as you know can be substantial.
	What are you telling young people to major in?
	What are you telling your own kids to major in?
	And are college degrees still worth it in the age of AI?
	Yeah, it's a great question.
	And I think it's something that has been changing over the last few years as student loans have become so expensive.
	And it's not just the student loans, but it's the tuition that's so expensive and the housing that you got to pay for as well.
	And so all these have led to people to reconsider, students to reconsider, parents to reconsider whether or not a four-year degree is right for them.
	So that way they're not burdened by the additional amounts of student loans.
	And I think instead of just looking at four-year universities, we should also be thinking about trade schools and how could you best use your talents that you're given in order to be a productive member of society and be able to get a higher income.
	Many of the trade schools and the things that you could do in trade schools, whether it be plumbing or working on HVACs and air conditionings or a number of other options that they could look into, could pay more starting off and come out with lower student debt, student loan debt, than going to a four-year university.
	I went to a four-year university, got my PhD in economics from Texas Tech University.
	So I'm still in favor of that sort of route as well.
	But I think it's important to talk to our kids to get them to understand that that may not be the only route to go because there are other options that are on the table to deal with whatever is going to happen in the future, whether it's AI or something else.
	And this is another key part that I like to tell students and others is that we need to make sure we have our own personal responsibility.
	Don't just blame others around you, but make sure that you have your fiscal house in order, like your financial house in order, but also what your future and what your education is going to look like.
	And we should always be learning.
	And I think this is another great example of doing so in this AI revolution.
	I want to ask you about regulation since you mentioned that.
	And as you know, the White House, the president did sign an executive order in November that there should be one federal standard for AI regulation instead of states, and that states would not be allowed to have their own regulations.
	Axios is reporting this White House pressures Utah lawmaker to kill AI transparency bill.
	This is a bill that would require AI companies to publish safety and child protection plans.
	So what do you think of that?
	And do you agree with that executive order banning states from having their own AI regulations?
	Well, I think what the president has talked about is a kind of a moratorium, or at least what's been discussed and in that EO that he talked about there, the AI action plan, is to really look at how can we kind of freeze any additional AI regulations.
	So the old ones would still be, you know, grandfathered in, if you will.
	So those would still stay on the books and allow for that to happen.
	But at the same time, we've got to think about what does our system of federalism say?
	Our system of federalism, which I think is a beautiful part of America, allows for states to have more rights and authority to do things than just the federal government.
	So there's not this top-down approach.
	And that allows for this laboratory of competition to see what works and doesn't work.
	So we have some of this AI that's happening regulations that have been happening across the states, including in Texas where I live, there was an AI bill that was passed last year.
	And so if a statewide moratorium on AI regulations would keep those in place, it's just saying, hey, let's take a pause, see how these are going to have effect, and then determine what's going to happen next.
	Because the issue with AI is it's not just in one state, right?
	It is a commerce across states.
	So the Commerce Clause also comes in, which brings in federal authority to do something whenever it's dealing with cross-state, across state lines sort of approach with this AI.
	And so I think that's something that we really got to consider.
	I'm more in favor of doing that right now because I think what we're seeing is a patchwork quilt of different regulations on AI across the states.
	And that could not only hinder the economy, hinder the progress that we could have, but it could also hinder what other states are going to do.
	Because if California has a highly regulated system that stops much of the AI and new progress that's going to happen, then that's also going to influence other states.
	California's got nearly 40 million people.
	And so if that is going to impact them, it's going to impact many others.
	And so I do think that this is a good opportunity for the federal government to come in and even provide some safeguards.
	You know, I'm a limited government free market guy.
	So I don't think that there should be a lot of new regulations that come in because of the progress and the prosperity that we would otherwise have.
	And so I think this is where the federal government does have a role to play in this situation.
	And a statewide moratorium on new AI regulations would be a good path to go.
	So we've got a question for you by text.
	This is Michael in Riverdale, Georgia.
	He wants to know your thoughts on if a universal basic income is an answer to jobs lost as a result of AI.
	Well, I appreciate the question.
	And when you look at this, a UBI, universal basic income, could be a fixed amount or some amount that would go out per person or per household.
	Some have said maybe $10,000 per person.
	There's different amounts that have come out.
	I remember a couple of years ago, Andrew Yang, who was running for president at the time, really tried to push this more as a UBI.
	The issue is that if you give out the $10,000 in one pocket, that money has to come from somewhere.
	Nothing is free, especially when it comes to government spending and taxes.
	And this would just be a massive redistribution instead of allowing for the private sector to deal with through spontaneous order, through different market activity, to deal with the situations that are in place instead of trying to redistribute money around through something like a UBI.
	So I don't think that a UBI is a good idea.
	I think it also breeds dependency on government from those redistribution that's taking place rather than allowing for people to improve their skills, go to trade school, find other avenues that are going to allow them to be more productive and have increases in their real wage in more jobs than ever before.
	Maybe many more people are working remotely in an AI sort of situation or working in pods and other opportunities for them to deal with whatever the situation may be with the AI revolution, rather than having the government come in to either stop it through regulations and taxes or to subsidize people through something like the UBI.
AI Revolution Pods 00:05:12
	All right, let's talk to callers.
	Michael is in Florida, aligned for Democrats.
	Michael, you're on with Vanskin.
	Yes, this AI thing, I hear this gentleman talking and everything about what you've been discussing.
	The thing I got a question about, I've seen some of your response from people that have lost their jobs from it already.
	The thing they don't talk about is they don't ask the consumer how they feel about AI.
	And they're dealing with it every day because they deal with their banks, they deal with everything.
	It's all AI.
	You don't get to talk to a person.
	It takes forever to get a person to talk to, which is very aggravating to people.
	I think this is a bad thing and not a good thing.
	And as far as the workers go, my advice to them, all these workers, they need to get together and organize.
	Organize and start a union.
	And if you want to fight this, that's the way you fight it.
	You fight it as a group.
	And get organized and tell them what you don't want.
	Thank you.
	Vance.
	No, I appreciate that.
	And I think you're right, actually, as far as the workers go.
	I'm not for forced labor unions.
	I'm glad that I live in a state that's a right-to-work state.
	It should be voluntary.
	But if that is something that workers want to do and join together voluntarily, then go for it and allow for those voices to be heard even louder in that sense.
	But I think we've also got to be careful about how much that we want government or the private sector to move in a certain direction without thinking about all the opportunity costs and the benefits.
	I think too often we consider kind of out of that fear, right, because it's something new, the cost of AI, like we've been talking about today, without really considering the benefits, education, healthcare, transportation, banking.
	I mean, there's a lot of other benefits that have happened.
	And, you know, it reminds me of when the ATM came into existence, many people were worried that the bank tellers were all going to lose their jobs.
	Well, that actually didn't happen.
	Bank tellers were able to do different jobs than dealing with loans or dealing with other things that are helping the consumer more than just handing out cash or cashing checks or depositing checks that now you could do in ATM.
	Now, of course, AI could be much greater than that sort of situation, but it provides an example of what I think that we're missing, right?
	We have the seen versus the unseen.
	And all too often, the unseen has many more benefits than the cost of what we're seeing on the surface.
	And so that's why I'm an optimist when it comes to AI.
	Let's talk to Alan in Old Saybrook, Connecticut.
	Republican, good morning, Alan.
	Hi, Ms. Feemy.
	I watch business news on various channels, and there seems to be concern about how artificial intelligence affects software use and installation.
	I'm not really even sure how software is used at broad scope.
	Can you explain that dynamic of software and artificial intelligence, please?
	Thank you.
	Well, if I understand that, thank you for the question there.
	If I understand it, there is an opportunity now using AI, things like Claude or ChatGPT, where you can create your own coding, which can go into software.
	And so that has sped up the process of coding, whether or not you have a coding background or not.
	You can figure out ways to code to build that software, if that's what you're saying.
	And I think that's where some of these tech jobs have been displaced or even taken over in that sense because you're able to use these other resources.
	But think about it this way, though, too.
	Using that AI to come up with that code to build that software in a faster amount of time is also improving that person's job.
	So that gives them more opportunities to do other things in that job as well.
	And this is one of the things I think is so important is that we're stuck sometimes thinking about the world in which we live right now within this box without seeing what's to come next.
	And I think that that's something that also gives us optimism, that gives me hope about the future, about labor and leisure choices, and a whole bunch of other things that could be beneficial to us, while still understanding that there could be a tough patch, that there are things that will happen during this transition that will have some booms and busts over that period.
	But that's happened historically through many different ways.
	And we didn't want to stop a certain new innovation just because that was going to happen.
	Or another way of saying is that maybe many people did want to do that, but we didn't stop it.
	And we allowed for things to flourish more.
	You know, there's a good book called Where's My Flying Car.
	And in this book, you know, there's been talk about a flying car like the Jetsons for, man, 100 years.
	It's been going on for a long time.
	And it's like, well, where is my flying car?
	And the author does a great job in this book to talk about all the new regulations, the way that this was stifled over time, to where it set us back to, yes, we have nice cars now, but nothing that's a flying car, nothing that's more advanced yet.
Regulating AI: Market vs. Policy 00:14:21
	And so I think we've got to be really careful about how much fear plays a role in setting policy, what many of us call the precautionary principle.
	You set a regulation, you set a policy in place today for something that you think may happen in the future relative to allowing for the marketplace to best regulate it through prices, through wages, through the market activity.
	That is typically a better way of going about the future than saying we're going to regulate it or we're going to subsidize other things through government intervention.
	Okay, let's talk to Ryan in Honolulu, Hawaii, Independent Line.
	Good morning, Ryan.
	Aloha, Mimi and Vance.
	How are you guys doing?
	Before I go into my main topic, if I can speak from the future, I pretty much think a robot can install appliance or fix a pipe, your water pipes better than a human.
	But Vance, you mentioned the magic word, China.
	Okay.
	You keep talking about regulation.
	We have our American politics, Western politics.
	The Democrat callers said, form a union.
	I have to laugh at that.
	Look, China cuts through all of that.
	They don't care.
	They say, oh, Western world, you have your unions.
	Ha ha.
	AI is working so well for us.
	We're going to go forward to this.
	I foresee them even leaving the UN AI is going to work so well for them.
	So to me, China's going to be the one who directs the use of AI.
	And they're going to spearhead it and they're going to force the hand of other nations because, you know, hell, they've had manpower forever.
	That's been their AI forever.
	Now this comes about, they're going to use it.
	And they don't care about our Western world sensitivities or regulations or whatever.
	And I just wanted to hear your opinion on that.
	Thank you.
	All right, Ryan.
	Go ahead, Vance.
	Yeah, thank you, Ryan, for those points and for the question.
	And I agree with you.
	I think that when you look at this with China, Vice President JD Vance said early on in the administration, giving a speech about if we're holding back AI and the reforms that we're making here and the progress that's being made, other countries like China, to your point, will not.
	They'll continue to move forward.
	And we need to have the ability to protect ourselves from a national defense sort of angle, from an economic angle, and other factors.
	Because look, if China is continuing to expand or does expand at a faster rate than what we are, then we're already behind.
	And this is a system of competition.
	We talked about the laboratory of competition here in America through our system of federalism, but it's also a global competition.
	And I don't want to see America get pushed back for any reason from where we otherwise could be, nor allow us to defend ourselves when we should be able to.
	So I think this is a major issue that should be discussed and is a part of why I'm optimistic about AI, because I think it is something that could also potentially help us have a more peaceful world, allowing for us to come together more.
	So, Vance, regarding competition with China, are you in favor of the Trump administration's plan to allow NVIDIA to sell the H-200 chips to China?
	Do you agree with that plan?
	I do.
	I think that there should be options for other countries to buy these things to advance where AI is at.
	Look, if we only consider the United States as the place where new innovations are going to come about, and we do come up with a lot of them, right?
	We're only 340 million people out of an 8 billion populated world.
	And so there's a lot more opportunities for others to use these resources to advance us over time as well.
	Now, we have to consider some of the national defense and other types of issues that are out there.
	But as long as there's not government subsidizing NVIDIA, which could be an issue here, given what some of the administration has tried to do.
	That was the proposal, right?
	Wasn't it 25% back to the U.S. government?
	Yes, yes.
	And so that's the issue that I have with.
	But the question of just NVIDIA and selling chips to China, I don't have a problem with.
	But the stakes, the clawbacks or the amount that they want to take in of 25%, I think that's a bad idea.
	I think that there should be voluntary trade happening between countries and not imposing a higher tax, which is really what that is, a 25% tax, on those chips.
	All right, let's talk to Rhonda in Washington, D.C. Democrat.
	Good morning.
	Good morning.
	Thanks for taking my call.
	I'm listening, and I had a couple of, I had a statement and a question.
	So first, as we're talking about AI, but yet going to trade school to cut certain things and you'll still have a job, wouldn't AI get rid of some of those trade schools and some of those hands-on positions?
	And additionally, as you encourage other people to send their children to trade school, would you send your children to a trade school?
	Like, just wondering.
	Yeah, no, it's a great point.
	And I would send them to trade school if that's where they intend to go.
	But I think you're right.
	And I didn't mean to say that none of these jobs would be displaced or replaced through AI that are going to trade schools now, like plumbing or something else.
	But I think what my main point was is that trade schools are able to deal with the new situations that are happening from demand by firms much faster than four-year universities are, right?
	It takes a lot of Congress sometimes to get universities to change up their curriculum and what courses they're offering.
	And so it can take a while.
	Whereas trade schools tend to reflect more of what's happening in the economy.
	So my point was, is that as AI transforms or improves a lot of the markets and the work that we're doing, they'll be more likely to come up with the next trade school that's going to help prepare you for dealing with the AI world, to dealing with those new jobs, to being able to work in different sectors.
	And so that's why I think AI could be a great place for my kids and others across the country to go in the future.
	So Vance, the other major issue with AI is data centers.
	And I want to play you a portion of what Peter Navarro said, he's a White House economics advisor on data centers and the role of government.
	Problem.
	Yeah, because he's balancing, on the one hand, wanting and needing to be the number one global power on AI, beating China, and that means a build out of data centers.
	But on the other side, he's battling people like Senator Bernie Sanders and Richard Blumenthal, who are criticizing rapid data center buildout, saying all of these data center build out, that needs to stop.
	I mean, you can't exactly stop if you're looking to be number one on the global stage in terms of AI.
	What needs to happen, Maria, is that all of these data center builders, meta on down, need to pay for all of the costs.
	Emphasize on that.
	They need to not only pay for the electricity that they're using on the grid, but they have to pay for the resiliency that they're affecting as well.
	They need to pay for the water.
	So there's activity, action here going forward where we force them to internalize the cost.
	You can't be a Luddite like Bernie.
	I mean, Bernie's one of the great Luddites.
	But what you have to do is make sure the American people are not hurt.
	And you lost.
	And Vance, that was the Fox Sunday Morning Futures there.
	What do you think of what he said about the data centers and the role of possibly a role of government there or the companies themselves?
	Yeah, I mean, me, this has been another key area that Peter Navarro is mentioning here that people have been very concerned about as data centers.
	And just to hit his points real quick is I do think that this is something that we should be interested in and know what's going to happen.
	There's a lot of fear that's out there.
	And I think two key points is one, internalizing the price.
	And the best way to do that is through the pricing system.
	Because the other point he made was about force, force them to internalize it.
	And those are two separate things.
	You can get the pricing mechanism through voluntary exchanges, meaning that when the data centers are built, they pay for the electricity just like anyone else would on the grid.
	And you don't need to force them to through regulations and mandates and other things, because what that will do is reduce the number of data centers and the amount of information that we're getting from them.
	One thing I don't think that we've quite realized is that data centers are powering the things that we're using each and every day, whether it's our smartphone and the AI that's in there on our computers, many of our cars nowadays.
	There's so much information, electricity that's built up in all these computers that are in these data centers that if they go away, we're not going to have access to the livelihood that we have today.
	And I think that's also something that we should be concerned about.
	Sorry, sorry, Devon.
	If you could just go back and explain the economics of the electricity, because people are seeing their electrical bills go up.
	So if we left this completely to the open market and the hand of the market, if you will, our electrical bills will go up because there's a tremendous demand on the system.
	Well, demand comes from many different angles, right?
	You have a growing economy, so you have more people who are going to be demanding electricity.
	And sure, the data centers provide or use a lot of the electricity as well.
	But think about this.
	Many of the data centers also can provide their own electricity.
	And this is something that I think places like New Hampshire are doing right, where there's a bill that would allow for these data centers to have consumer regulated energy to electricity, to where they can generate their own electricities from like small modular reactors or other forms where they may not even need to be connected to the grid.
	And so therefore they've internalized all the costs themselves.
	I don't want that to be a mandate, which is not what New Hampshire is doing, but allowing for those things to happen in the marketplace, I think will be very important.
	Because there's also this thing where as all these computers within this data center are generating this electricity and everything else, there's an excess amount of electricity that can then be allowed to go back onto the grid.
	So if they're not connected to the grid, we may also be losing additional electricity that could help to bring down prices.
	The other thing to bring down prices over time, electricity, is new supply.
	And so while we're thinking about the demand, we also need to think about energy abundance and how do we get more energy, whether it be through natural gas and other things that we're using and building, but also improving the grids towards reliable energy, not solar and wind, which tend to be unreliable, but going towards more nuclear, natural gas.
	That will put us in a more energy abundant situation to deal with any of the increases or decreases in electricity prices over time.
	And so I think while the data centers are getting a bad rap and they're getting all the blame for higher electricity prices, there are many other factors that are going in.
	Let's talk to Nelson in Florida, Republican.
	Go ahead, Nelson.
	Good morning.
	Can you hear me okay?
	Yes, go right ahead.
	I'm almost 77 years old, so I've seen a lot of changes, technologically speaking, over the years.
	And I am not against those changes, but I do have a concern regarding the effect that it's having on the educational ability of future generations.
	So I'll give you a good example.
	If you go to any restaurant or any store today and the cashier puts in the amount that you're giving them and how much change they're supposed to give you back, once they have that figured out by their artificial intelligence cash register and you give them the additional three cents so you can get back three dollars change rather than two dollars and ninety-seven cents, they get completely lost.
	And it's flabbergasting to see that.
	In addition to that, I've noted that many young people who are technologically savvy don't know the difference between the American Revolution and the American Civil War.
	I think a lot of this has to do with high technology, perhaps the inclusion of artificial intelligence.
	And I don't think that that's going to serve future generations very well because they seem to be forgetting how to think.
	All right.
	What do you think, fans?
	Yeah, it's a good point.
	And there has been a lot of concern about this is that this is going to make us dumber in the processes.
	We're not learning these things.
	However, I think that there is an opportunity for us to learn more about AI.
	This is one area where I think schools should be teaching more about social media, about the internet, things that kids are doing online.
	But we really got to make sure we're empowering parents and not regulators, not politicians.
	Parents should be in the driving force about what kids are learning.
	And so while I'm concerned that maybe kids are taking the easy route and not learning as much as they should more deeply, I think there's a lot of opportunity for AI to improve the amount of learning that's happening in the classroom.
	Maybe by putting them in with virtual reality, you know, masks, of putting them in the situation of the American Revolution, putting them in the situation of the Civil War and see what's happening.
	That could really improve their education, their knowledge.
	And so I think this is another area where it could help improve education, even though in the short term, there might be some cost along the way.
	Michael is up next in Bowie, Maryland, Independent.
AI in Education 00:07:54
	Go ahead, Michael.
	Good morning.
	My comment was just that.
	My perspective is, I think that we should do the legislation first, because I know one caller mentioned the UBI with people already losing their jobs and no way for them to their income to be replaced every time I'm trading in the stock market, from Amazon and all these big tech companies matter, so on and so forth, people are just being laid off.
	And already, with the, with the consumers, you got high inflation, mortgage rates are very high, it's very hard to make daycare, and so on and so forth.
	And so when you just continue to implement this technology, give these people, these billionaires, these tax havens, to continue to deploy it, you keep passing on to consumers and they're not, we're just not getting any relief.
	And so, with the what gentlemen, is um, what you're, What you're asking us to do, is really just continue to let this thing take our jobs and just hope for the best in the future.
	And I'm just saying that that's just no way to live.
	And Michael, can you tell us what you do or would you like to share that?
	And have you been impacted by AI at all in your job?
	So I'm currently affected by the shutdown.
	I work for the Department of Homeland Security.
	And so we do have like chat DHS or whatever the case is, but we can't put a lot of information into it, depending on your clearance level.
	So for me, like I'll use it if I need to like, you know, like rewrite an email or something like that.
	But only thing that I would just say for the department is I've just seen a lot of the like executive assistant roles.
	I've seen a lot of those ones be phased out and they would tell like the executives like, hey, just use Chat GPT.
	And, you know, a lot of their pushback is like, hey, you know, but it doesn't schedule meetings.
	It can't help me brief and so on and so forth.
	So, but that's all I've seen.
	All right.
	Go ahead, Vance.
	Yeah, no, thank you for that.
	And, you know, I think that there are certainly concerns, right, that you brought up here.
	I just wonder if we start going down this route of over-regulating and putting more restrictions or bans or different things in place on AI, we're also going to be hurting many of the jobs that Amazon, Meta, and others are employing today.
	And so is that right to push it all on a cost to some others while at the same time thinking about new ways to do business, whether it's at DHS or other departments within the federal government that maybe could do things in a more efficient route to where there could be cost reductions to the taxpayer or at businesses to allow for them to be more profitable and invest in other avenues.
	You know, the magnificent seven, if you will, the large tech companies that are out there are a major expansion of our economy.
	And many people use them every day, whether it's Amazon Prime getting something delivered or Meta on social media or something else.
	And these people employ, these companies employ many people at the same time.
	So I don't think we should fear them or cast them out as something that's bad, but instead, think about how can we best deal with the future.
	And instead of it being the government and central planning and a top-down approach, I think it's better from a bottom-up approach through free market capitalism that allows for those exchanges in the pricing system, the markets to determine what's going to happen in the future versus politicians and regulators.
	In Butte, Montana, Democrat, is it Kaylee?
	Yes.
	Go right ahead.
	You're on the air.
	Hi.
	I remember about 20 years ago when we deregulated electricity.
	We were all supposed to have low prices and all this magic.
	That didn't happen.
	And now these, whatever they're called, data centers, there's no reason why they can't manufacture their own power, but they're going to have to be required to.
	There's nothing wrong with some regulations because they won't do it themselves.
	They'll say that they won't.
	They use up a god-awful amount of water.
	There's no reason they can't provide all those things.
	If they're this brilliant to come up with a billion things and cetera, et cetera, why not that?
	And the free market's fine, but we've been trying that for 40-some years.
	And why are more people working two jobs than ever?
	Why are more people struggling more than ever?
	We're all falling behind.
	And finally, what is the AI race?
	I don't even understand.
	They make it sound like it's all some kind of magical something or other.
	I don't know.
	Anyway, thank you.
	Go ahead, Vance.
	Yeah, just starting with the last part.
	I mean, the AI race is how do we come up with the new innovations, the new, whether it's the interface that we're dealing with, like the new chat GPTs or Grok and other ones that are out there, or is it something that's more of a robot that's helping you around the house or doing other things?
	I mean, I think that is kind of part of the AI race, but also the AI race can be from what's America doing to China and other countries and making sure that we're not falling behind.
	So there's a number of ways to think about that.
	You know, I think about the data centers, though, is that they are being innovative.
	I mean, the data centers, the electricity usage, a lot of it is being able to be done within the data center itself.
	And many of them are using their own electricity where they're not even connected to the grid through like something like small modular reactors.
	The problem is that there's a lot of regulation that's taking place that is already creating a situation that's not allowing them to do that.
	That's why I think what New Hampshire did of allowing for these small modular reactors and for these businesses to create their own electricity for a data center, I think is a step forward.
	So what we have right now is a limitation of regulation of what data centers can do, which is one reason why I think the government should be stepping back and not allow and not hindering what's happening.
	The other thing is on water.
	There's a lot of talk about how much water data centers use, but I don't know if the audience knows as much, but the thing is that there's a lot of estimated amount of water or estimated electricity that's used, but the data centers actually have a lot of these closed loophole water systems to where they recycle the water.
	So even though there's the estimate of how much they would use without these closed loopholes or without the recycling of the water, that's actually what they're using.
	And so it's not the massive amount of water usage.
	It's really done more of saying, okay, we're going to recycle this.
	We're going to use this water again and again to go through the data center.
	So it's not a huge effect on the overall water in that community or on the electricity.
	And I think the more that we regulate it and create higher costs, the more it's going to push them away from those new innovations that reduce the amount of electricity used, reduce the amount of water use.
	Another thing that I'll pause it out there to the audience is right now we have these large data centers that are big buildings, a lot of computers inside, very few people work in there.
	But that's what we have today.
	And what we've seen whenever computers were first existed is that there were large mainframes, that one mainframe fit in a whole room.
	Now we have it on our smartphone, something small, right?
	And so I think this will also be an evolving and improving situation to where the data centers are also going to be much smaller than what we have.
	But we don't want to stifle those new innovations and the opportunities we have dealing with AI and advanced computing today by over-regulating and over-taxing and even over-subsidizing many things through government interference.
State of Unbiased Exchange 00:03:46
	All right, that's Vance Ginn, chief economist, former chief economist at the Office of Management and Budget during the Trump administration.
	He hosts a podcast called Let People Prosper.
	You can find him at vancegin.com.
	Thanks so much for joining us today.
	Thank you so much.
	It's been a pleasure.
	Coming up next, we're joined by former acting CDC Director Dr. Richard Besser.
	He'll discuss the Trump administration's recent actions on public health, from leadership changes at the CDC to the FDA's reversal on a new mRNA flu vaccine that's coming up right after the break.
	And we are going to renew unlimited promise of the American dream.
	Every single day we will stand up and we will fight, fight, fight for the country our citizens believe in.
	Watch the C-SPAN Networks live Tuesday, February 24th, as President Donald Trump delivers the annual State of the Union Address before a joint session of Congress.
	The speech will mark President Trump's first State of the Union of his second term.
	The State of the Union Address.
	Live Tuesday, February 24th.
	Our coverage starts at 7 p.m. Eastern on the C-SPAN networks.
	C-SPAN, bringing you democracy unfiltered.
	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 Le Darkron in everything, but you can find areas where you do agree.
	He's a pretty likable guy as well.
	Chris Coons 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.
	Liz did agree to the civility, all right?
	He owes my son $10 from a bet.
	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.
	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.
	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 watched 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 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.
Misinformation Around Vaccines 00:14:52
	Thank you, C-SPAN, for being a light in the dark.
	Washington Journal continues.
	Welcome back to the program.
	Joining us now to talk about public health policy is Dr. Richard Besser.
	He was the acting director of the CDC during the Obama administration.
	He's currently president and CEO of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.
	Dr. Besser, welcome to the program.
	Thanks for having me on, Mimi.
	It's always great to be here.
	If you could just start by reminding us about the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, your mission, and how you're funded.
	Yeah, so we are a large national foundation.
	We're based in Princeton, New Jersey, and our focus is on working towards a future where health is not a privilege, but a right for everybody.
	We are fully endowed.
	Our original resources came from an endowment from Robert Wood Johnson II, who built up the Johnson ⁇ Johnson, a large pharmaceutical company.
	He left his resources for this foundation.
	And Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the Secretary of Health and Human Services, just celebrated his one year since he was sworn in as Secretary.
	What grade would you give him for the year?
	Well, I think he has been successful at what he has tried to do.
	But what concerns me is that before he became Secretary of Health, he was one of the nation's leading anti-vaccine advocates.
	He did more to spread distrust and misinformation around vaccines than just about anybody.
	And as Secretary of Health, he was very successful in doing that.
	In terms of the nation's health, I would give him a failing grade because I think we are much worse off, at much greater risk to health threats than we were before he became Secretary of Health.
	Can you give us a little bit more information on what exactly you think the nation's health is at risk as a result of his policies?
	Yeah, you know, there are a number of areas.
	He came in with a strong view that our nation's governmental health system was broken.
	And so there was a large slashing of positions within the Department of Health and Human Services across the board.
	The area that I focus on in a big way is the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
	I've worked there for 13 years.
	And it's an institution that was the gold standard for public health, for governmental public health around the world.
	And the people who work there and who continue to work there work tirelessly to promote health and protect health here and around the globe.
	But thousands of positions were slashed from the CDC and positions that put us at risk around the country.
	Just one simple example, early on in his tenure, after there were the initial slashes at the CDC, Milwaukee was dealing with a real challenge with lead in their water.
	And they called CDC for assistance, but the department that dealt with lead poisoning was no longer there.
	That's a big challenge.
	Secretary Kennedy talks about the importance of trying to reduce chronic diseases and chronic diseases that start in childhood.
	I'm a pediatrician and I'm all for that.
	But he eliminated the Office on Smoking and Health, which is the number one preventable cause of chronic disease.
	So those are just a couple examples of the way that there's been harm.
	There's been harm in terms of how the government has responded or not responded to the spread of measles around our country.
	But my big concern is how much mistrust he has spread around vaccines, which are so important to protecting the lives and the health of our children.
	Well, to that point on vaccines, I want to show you the CDC website that now states this.
	The claim vaccines do not cause autism is not an evidence-based claim because studies have not ruled out the possibility that infant vaccines cause autism.
	It continues studies supporting a link have been ignored by health authorities and that HHS has launched a comprehensive assessment of the causes of autism, including investigations into plausible biologic mechanisms and potential causal links.
	Your reaction to that.
	Well, it's falsehood after falsehood.
	You know, the question as to whether autism was a cause or one of the causes of autism was an important question to ask and to address.
	But the science has been done to address that question.
	And so to put that on the CDC's website just spreads misinformation.
	And, you know, it.
	But Dr. Besser, it's saying that there have been studies that do support that link.
	Have they been taken into account?
	Because this is saying they have not.
	Yeah, that's a lie.
	Not a lie that there are studies that look at a link, but they have to be looked at within the full context of all of the research that's been done.
	You know, there is research of different, very varying levels of quality.
	That's been looked at.
	It's been looked at by the National Institutes of Health.
	It's been looked at by the National Academy of Medicine.
	It's been reviewed time and time again.
	And what we're seeing is really a diversion of resources that could be going to ensure that those who are on the autism spectrum can lead as full a life as possible.
	I talk to individuals who are in the field of autism research, and they are just distraught at the federal dollars that are being diverted back to studying questions that have already been answered.
	It's not that their question shouldn't have been answered, but it's been answered and it's been addressed.
	And to keep putting it forward as a valid scientific question leads to confusion and unfortunately will lead some parents who want to do right by their children to withhold vaccines that could help keep their children safe.
	So the childhood vaccination schedule has been changed.
	Do you think that that is going to be putting children at risk of diseases?
	I do.
	I do.
	But even though Europe has a much shorter vaccine schedule, I mean, the argument was being made that we've got way too many and that they're not necessary.
	Yeah, I mean, you can pick and choose.
	The secretary was very selective in terms of what countries he looked at for that comparison.
	We are very much in line with most wealthy countries in terms of our approach to vaccines.
	But it's really important that each country looks at each disease, looks at the benefits and risks of both the vaccine and the disease, and makes a decision based on that.
	The idea that we are the same as Denmark is absolutely absurd.
	Denmark is a very small country.
	It has universal health care.
	It has a much higher level of standard of living than we do across our nation.
	And so that's not the way you make these decisions.
	You look at each disease, you look at the risk from that disease, you look at the opportunities for prevention, and then you make a recommendation.
	And then, you know, I practiced pediatrics for more than 30 years, and there's always been shared decision-making around vaccines.
	You're always in conversations with parents around vaccines, what the potential benefits are from the vaccine, what the potential risks are.
	And it's a shared decision.
	To say now that there's now a series of diseases that are for shared decision-making and the others are recommended strikes me as absurd and will put children at risk from diseases where parents say, well, I guess that one isn't as important anymore.
	You know, during the course of my life as a pediatrician, I used to feel such joy when vaccines were developed so that I no longer had to see families suffering from diseases that could be prevented.
	Rotavirus is a typical one.
	That is now in the list of diseases that's not routinely recommended.
	It's there under shared decision making.
	Well, I remember when I was training as a pediatrician in Baltimore and a young child came in with rotavirus diarrhea.
	You can get dehydrated very quickly and young children are at risk for severe consequences from profound dehydration.
	And a child came in with profound dehydration.
	We tried as much as we could to save that child and we couldn't.
	And to see the suffering that that family went through in losing a child and then to see a vaccine come along that prevents that and now it's no longer on the recommended list to me, it just defies logic.
	We've got a question on public health for Dr. Richard Besser.
	He'll be with us for about 25 minutes.
	You can start calling in now.
	Republicans are on 202748-8001.
	Democrats 202748-8000.
	And Independents 202-748-8002.
	Well, one of the illnesses is measles.
	And I've got a map here showing the cases of measles in the U.S. this year in 2026, given the states.
	South Carolina has over 616 cases.
	Can you explain?
	I mean, the Secretary has said that he recommends the measles vaccine for every child.
	Why are there so many cases of measles around the country?
	Yeah, you know, measles is a really important disease to pay attention to.
	It's one of the most, if not the most contagious virus that we know of.
	And so it will pick up on any community in which the vaccination rates in children are not almost uniformly there.
	So anything below 95% of children being vaccinated, and you'll see the spread of measles.
	And so what we're seeing by the rise in measles around the country is that there are pockets where the coverage rates for measles are low.
	And they're low for a number of reasons.
	That is one of the vaccines that the Secretary has spread a lot of misinformation around.
	Last year, when we saw measles starting to rise in Texas, he was very slow out of the gate in terms of saying anything about recommending the measles vaccine.
	The normal approach would be to put a lot of federal resources towards controlling measles wherever you see it.
	I said I'd served at the CDC for 13 years.
	For four of those years, I ran emergency response during the Republican administration under George W. Bush.
	And there was never a sense of politics affecting what we did as a public health agency.
	If there was a measles outbreak or increase, we would throw everything at it to try and control it, to make sure that every child had had their measles vaccine or their second dose of vaccine if they were older.
	We made sure that adults who hadn't been vaccinated had access to measles vaccination.
	And for the past 25 years, we had been certified as having eliminated measles.
	It didn't mean we didn't have any cases.
	It meant that the only cases we had were measles that came into the United States from another country and then spread locally before being controlled.
	I'm very concerned that we're about to lose that status because of what your map shows.
	That shows measles spreading around the country and it will spread.
	It does not respect state borders.
	So what's happening in South Carolina is not just happening in South Carolina.
	It's happening in other places as well.
	And quickly before we get to calls, I want to ask you about the CDC leadership situation.
	It was just reported by the New York Times that the NIH director, Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, will serve as acting CDC director until the president appoints somebody else, a permanent director.
	This is now the third leader of the CDC during this second Trump administration.
	It is saying the article here quotes that he is a physician, but that public health experts, including former CDC officials, say it will be nearly impossible for Dr. Bhattacharya to run both the nation's biomedical research agency and its public health agency, that being the CDC.
	Your thoughts on that?
	Yeah, you know, I had the honor of serving as acting director of the CDC at the start of the Obama administration.
	And the reason I was put in that job was because I had run emergency preparedness response for four years.
	You want someone in that seat who knows what they're doing in the event of a public health emergency.
	Because I can't tell you what the next public health emergency will be, but I can tell you that there will be one.
	There will be two.
	There will be many.
	The idea that someone could run the NIH and CDC demonstrates a total lack of understanding as to what the CDC is supposed to be doing in terms of protecting the health of people here and around the world.
	I just don't see how someone can do it.
	I found it to be more than a full-time job.
	And I was in the chair when the H1N1, the swine flu pandemic hit in 2009.
	I don't know what we will do as a nation if we get another flu pandemic, if we get another major public health threat.
	And we have someone who's leading two very critical agencies at that time.
	Let's talk to Chuck in Michigan, Independent Line.
Moderna's Vaccine Trials Delayed 00:14:50
	You're on with Dr. Richard Besser.
	Good morning, Chuck.
	Hello, C. Man's first time calling.
	Yeah, I was going to ask him, all the facts that the CDC gave us during the pandemic were always wrong.
	And how can we believe what he's saying now when they told us that it was mandatory to get the shots and you wouldn't get the COVID if you got the shot?
	Then they told us you couldn't spread the COVID if you got the shot.
	Then they told us if you wear masks, you can't get COVID.
	And all that stuff was not accurate.
	And then they got the MNR shots that have a lot of side effects and blood clots and heart attacks and all this.
	I know a lot of my friends had after effects from it.
	I was wondering how could he say that these vaccines are not harmful.
	A lot of them are from what the ingredients they put in.
	All right.
	Dr. Besser.
	Thanks for that question.
	You know, public health took a big hit during COVID for a lot of reasons.
	You know, when I was at CDC in 2009 at the start of the swine flu pandemic, one of the things that was clear was that to maintain trust with the American people, we needed to communicate directly about what we knew, what we didn't know, and what we were doing to try and get answers.
	And as we learned more, we were able to talk to the public and say, we've learned something new, and so our recommendations are changing.
	That did not happen during COVID.
	CDC and our public health leaders were cut off from the media, were cut off from the public.
	And so when there was learning, when there was a new finding that led the CDC to change a recommendation and new learning that found that a previous recommendation had been wrong, CDC didn't have the opportunity to share that directly.
	Because what should happen is that as you learn more and as your recommendations then get better, that trust increases.
	But we saw direct attempts, successful attempts to politicize the response to COVID so that whenever there was a change in a recommendation, it was put forward as it's a flip-flop, public health doesn't know what they're doing, rather than putting it forward as public health is learning and here's what you can do to protect your health.
	I also believe that there wasn't as much transparency during the pandemic in terms of what was known, what was not known, what recommendations were based on best opinion versus good science.
	And those are different things.
	At the start of a new disease outbreak, all of your recommendations are going to be based on expert opinion.
	But then as you learn more, then you're going to refine those and base them on evidence.
	But I agree there was a real hit to trust.
	And with the politicization we have right now, with the big divide in our country, we're seeing people's willingness to get vaccinated, their belief in vaccines to align with political affiliation.
	And that's a really dangerous thing because viruses don't care what political party you live in.
	They don't care if you live in a red state or a blue state, in a rural community or an urban community.
	They are equal opportunity agents that are there to harm our health.
	And we need to figure out how do we close the politics so that it truly is a situation where we're all working off the same information and can make informed decisions about our health that are based on good science.
	Well, let's talk about the flu vaccine, Dr. Besser, because the FDA had initially refused to review Moderna's flu vaccine.
	New York Times reporting that the FDA has reversed that decision and has agreed to review that vaccine.
	It says Moderna held further discussions with regulators and announced that the agency would accept the company's application for approval of its flu vaccine.
	What do you make of that situation on that mRNA technology?
	Yeah, you know, Mimi, I can't comment in particular on the Moderna situation.
	As a foundation, we have invested in that company and that vaccine because we believe that technology is a right way to go.
	What I can say is that it is absolutely chilling that the government has cut off the funding for research on mRNA technology.
	The reason that President Trump was able to be so successful during his first term in developing vaccines against COVID was that the federal government for decades had invested in basic science research around mRNA.
	And that led the manufacturing sector to be able to respond so quickly with not just one, but multiple highly effective and safe vaccines against COVID.
	That saved millions of lives.
	That's a fact.
	That is not up for debate.
	That is a fact.
	And the idea that we're no longer going to be having government funds going into our universities to fund research around mRNA and the possibility that that could be used to develop vaccines for other diseases is really chilling and it will have health consequences.
	I want to play you a small portion of Moderna's president.
	He was on Fox Business yesterday and he talked about the impact of regulations on the ability of companies to do research.
	So take a look.
	Now, by the time you heard from the FDA, you had already scaled back investment.
	I want to talk about that because Moderna is scaling back investment in its new late-stage vaccine trials over these regulatory delays that we're talking about and this skepticism that could be coming from the FDA over vaccines, frankly, and uncertainty around access to the U.S. market.
	So tell us about that.
	Is it harder to put new money down in place when you've got these uncertainties in terms of what the regulatory process may be?
	Yeah, it's exactly right.
	So we're, you know, as you know, these are really long investment cycles, oftentimes 10 years to bring forward a new medicine or cure, and well north of a billion, $2 billion to run those pivotal studies.
	What we need are clear and transparent rules from the regulators, clear objectives that we're aiming at, and we need those consistently applied.
	What we can't have is somewhat arbitrary changes to those rules after the game has been played, because that will really make it harder for companies, including Moderna, to invest in the next big billion-dollar attempt to bring forward a new vaccine or a new medicine or a new cure.
	And that plays everywhere.
	It's not just in vaccines.
	We're, as you know, we're working right now in cancer very aggressively.
	And we similarly, as we did in the flu vaccine case, we seek guidance from the FDA and regulators about what they want to see.
	We really need to be able to rely on that guidance and that it won't change year over year over time as we move forward in that program.
	Dr. Besser, your reaction to that.
	Yeah, you know, one of the areas that I worked on when I was at CDC was on antibiotic resistance and the fact that we're running out of antibiotics to treat a number of different infections.
	The challenge with that, very similar to the challenge now with vaccines, is that there's not a lot of incentive for pharmaceutical companies to develop drugs in those areas.
	For vaccines in general, it's a product where someone, you want someone to use it once, maybe multiple times over the course of their life, but not every day, like a medication for a chronic disease.
	Similarly with antibiotics.
	You use it if you have an infection, but that's about it.
	Hopefully you won't ever have to use it.
	Pharmaceutical companies don't like to invest in products like that because there's not the same return on their investment as there is on some of the other drugs.
	And so you need to have a system where the government is not putting up barriers, not making it harder for companies to move into those areas.
	And you do need to ensure that if there is investment in those areas, that there will be a market.
	Vaccines is one of those challenges.
	There are fewer and fewer companies that make them.
	And some of the moves that Secretary Kennedy is looking to do in terms of removing protections from companies that make vaccines will likely lead more companies to decide it's just not worth the effort.
	Shelly is in Springfield, Virginia.
	Democrat, good morning, Shelly.
	Hi.
	Hi, Dr. Besser.
	I wanted to call in today because I'm very interested in this topic.
	I was a researcher within the federal government, not specifically in the health field.
	But, you know, my field was research.
	And research takes time.
	And it's been really frustrating to see all of last year and now going into 2026, the assault on research and what the implications of that are.
	You know, I'm now considered old, you know, because I'm over 60 years old.
	And my use of vaccine is from when I was a baby or a child way back in the early 60s, right?
	So does that vaccine even protect me anymore now that we have more people not getting their children vaccinated?
	You know, do I need a booster?
	I'm frustrated by the trouble with looking at MNRA, that new technology that has been around for decades now, by the way, and all the good research that went into that that was so instrumental in creating those COVID vaccines, which I took.
	And I can report, I only had one documented case of COVID during the entire time that COVID has been in circulation in our population.
	So I just, I don't know where this is going, but it seems to be going in a very bad direction.
	And if we are faced again with another epidemic or, you know, whatever, we're not going to be prepared.
	If you thought we weren't prepared before for COVID, I think we're even less prepared now.
	What do you think?
	Yeah, you know, thank you.
	Thank you for those questions.
	I share your concerns.
	I think we are far less prepared now than we were back in 2020 when the COVID pandemic started.
	And your comments raise another really important point.
	We are all members of society and a shared community.
	And so when we vaccinate ourselves or we get our kids vaccinated, we do it to protect them and ourselves, but we also do it because it helps protect those around us.
	One of the benefits of vaccinating children against the flu is that they're less likely to bring it home to grandma or grandpa who are more likely to get severe disease.
	We vaccinate our children against whooping cough because it helps protect them from whooping cough, but it also helps protect the children in their class who may have a medical condition where they either can't get vaccinated or the vaccine doesn't work.
	So, you know, these are important things.
	What does it mean to be part of a community?
	What responsibility do we have for each other?
	I always think of it as a beautiful thing that when we take a step to protect our own health, we are also protecting the health of our families, of our neighbors, of those people we run into in the supermarket, people who we don't even know who they are, but it's part of being part of our community.
	Ahmed is in Morgantown, West Virginia, Independent Line.
	Good morning.
	Good morning.
	Thank you for taking my call.
	So just quick little background.
	I work in the pharmaceutical industry.
	I'm a pharmaceutical scientist.
	Personally, I've had reactions to vaccines.
	And so I don't consider myself an anti-vaxxer, but I am vaccine cautious.
	And one of the things that I personally have seen within science and the medical community is that there are scientists and physicians that can fall into dogma camps, not politicization, but dogma.
	And to me, that's a concern when, you know, for me, science should always be about the data and always challenging theories, assumptions, and everything like that.
	And I feel that the current public health establishment, at least publicly, doesn't acknowledge that enough.
	And that concerns me.
	And I think that the people that, you know, the runners of Robert Kennedy, Jr., I think it is, you know, it's a socio-political reaction to part of the establishment not, you know, becoming too dogmatized, so to speak.
	And like, you know, here you react, and particularly with the Robert, you know, Wood Johnson Foundation, I would hope that that's something that you guys could actually study, you know, medical sociology and where we're going as a medical establishment or science, you know, science, medical science establishment.
	Thank you.
	Yeah, thanks for that question.
	I think that the overall issue you're lifting up in terms of dogma is really, really important.
	And I do think that there are times where public health paints things with too broad a brush.
	It is important that there's real honesty around how effective a given vaccine is, what the potential side effects are, so you can have an open conversation.
	Not all vaccines are as effective as each other.
	The measles vaccine is one of the most effective vaccines around.
	It's more than 95% effective.
	That's terrific.
	When you get the measles vaccine, you may have a sore arm.
	You may have some redness.
	You need to talk about those things.
	The measles vaccine is far more effective than the flu vaccine.
	You need to be able to say that.
	Here's the benefits of the flu vaccine.
	Here's the risks.
Vaccines And Public Health 00:06:12
	So there can be an open, honest discussion.
	You shouldn't talk about all vaccines as if they are created equally.
	At the same time, though, when you lift up RFK Jr., I see him as someone who has brought dogma to his office.
	He came in with the ideological bent that all vaccines are bad.
	He's never met a vaccine that he thinks is worthwhile.
	And that is really, really dangerous to have in your Secretary of Health.
	He has lifted up some things that I think are really important.
	How do we ensure that our food supply is really safe and healthy?
	I would love to see the Secretary work with the Secretary of Agriculture on saying, how do we ensure that the lunches that are served to our children in school are as healthy as they can be?
	How do we make sure that each school has a kitchen so that real food can be made?
	Those are really important things.
	And I would love to see more effort in that area because that could do a lot to try and reduce chronic disease in children.
	Carlos in Washington, D.C., Republican, you're on the air.
	Yes, good morning.
	I had a question for Dr. Besser, being a pediatrician, from my own experience.
	What is the difference between COVID and, let's say, polio?
	Because I remember two generations ago, I was born when Eisenhower was in the White House, and my mother's greatest fear was that we would get polio.
	And my earliest recollection is the smell of Clorox bleach itself.
	And I still have her.
	And I ask her sometimes.
	And my question to the doctors, what has happened in that we are so skeptical?
	Because public health policy is a legitimate concern and responsibility of government.
	And those of us who are Republicans, sometimes we're skeptical about government in other areas, but not here in health.
	And our reaction to COVID and this skepticism of everyone, where did we fail?
	And I thank you for this opportunity of asking the question.
	Thank you for that question.
	You know, polio is such a wonderful example of the power of public health, the power of vaccines to totally transform society.
	You know, I was born at the very end of what you would call the polio era, An era in which parents were afraid to send their kids to the swimming pool because they were concerned they could get polio.
	And that vaccine was viewed as miraculous.
	And we, as a global community, have come close to eliminating polio from the face of the earth in the same way that smallpox was eliminated.
	I worry if vaccine skepticism continues to rise, that we could see polio return to our country.
	The only reason we're not seeing that is because of vaccination.
	COVID, you know, the story told about COVID was very different, but I think there is a wonderful story to tell.
	You know, we had a response to the COVID pandemic by the Trump administration that led to the creation of multiple safe and effective vaccines against a brand new virus in record time.
	It was about a year after that virus was identified.
	We had vaccines that were available, and that saved millions and millions of lives.
	What happened was the trust in public health, the trust in our government to protect the population here and around the globe was destroyed, was decimated during that pandemic because of a lot of different reasons.
	Some that had to do with how public health responded, but largely from my perspective, due to how politicians tried to make political capital over the pandemic and what it required of people to do during a time of incredible crisis.
	And I'm not sure the path out of there.
	I think part of it is the ability to have conversations like this with folks who come from different political persuasions.
	I loved public health and my time at CDC because it was above and apart from the politics, but that's no longer the case.
	We have to learn how to talk about public health, the important role the government plays in public health to people who may not agree on every single issue.
	This is an area where we need to be able to come together for the health of all.
	And you had mentioned diet earlier.
	I just wanted to show people the website.
	This is the government website for the Eat Real Food campaign.
	It's at realfood.gov, and the site says real food wins.
	America is the greatest country on earth and the sickest.
	Highly processed food has hollowed out our health, driving obesity, diabetes, heart disease, and early death.
	The truth is simple: real food restores health.
	And that's all the time that we've got.
	Dr. Besser, former acting director of the CDC during the Obama administration, currently president and CEO of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.
	They are at rwjf.org.
	Thank you, as always, for being on the program.
	Thanks so much for having me and for hosting these kind of conversations.
	Coming up next, it's Open Forum.
	You can go ahead and start calling in now on any topic you want to talk about related to public policy.
	Republicans are on 202748-8001.
	It's 202-748-8000 if you're a Democrat and 202-748-8002 for independence.
	We'll be right back.
Signing the Declaration Independence 00:04:41
	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 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, sites, and the spirit that make up America.
	Join us for remarkable coast-to-coast coverage, celebrating our nation's journey like no other network can, and proudly supported by our television partners.
	America 250, over a year of historic moments.
	C-SPAN, official media partner of America 250.
	Washington Journal continues.
	Welcome back to Washington Journal.
	We will take your calls in open forum shortly, but first we're going to talk about America 250 programming with the America 250 Commission Chair Rosie Rios.
	Welcome to the program.
	Can you just remind us of the role of chair of the America 250 Commission, what you are charged to do this year?
	Absolutely.
	So we are the national organization charged by Congress to plan the 250th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence.
	This is my eighth year on this commission, three and a half years as chair, and we are hitting the ground running in 2026.
	And C-SPAN is the official media partner for America 250, but you're planning a lot of programming for the birthday celebrations.
	Can you tell us about the launch of America's Startup?
	What is that?
	Yeah, so America's Startup is a national college competition to spotlight the next generation of entrepreneurs and innovators.
	We're really excited that we launched this officially on our website at America250.org February 15th.
	We are going until March 31st, and we want college students to realize the American dream by submitting their ideas in a one-page proposal, a two-minute pitch.
	You have nothing to lose.
	So that's for college students.
	You also have a program for high school students, and that's America's Field Trip.
	Yes, America's Field Trip is actually for grades three through 12.
	They get to answer the question, what does America mean to me?
	Either an essay, a poem, a piece of art.
	And in exchange, they get to choose from a series of backstage experiences, most of which have never been offered to the public.
	This is our third round.
	It's going until March 30th, and we already have every single state represented.
	So it's going to be a great turnout this year.
	Backstage experiences like what?
	You'll be traveling somewhere?
	Yes.
	You can choose from many of our national parks.
	We have some local activities, including with the National Archives, the Library of Congress.
	We have, you know, when I had a chance to participate in many of the field trips, we took a tour of New York.
	And so it wasn't just the Statue of Liberty.
	We actually got into the Crown, which normally doesn't happen on the public tour.
	We had the backstage tour of the Kennedy Space Center at Cape Canaveral.
	And so these kids get to choose from what resonates with them.
	And ready for this?
	The last two years for the field trip experiences, which all happen in the summer, Yellowstone was the number one choice by these students.
	And there was a major development in Congress regarding the America Gives program.
	Tell us about that.
	America Gives.
	This is really exciting.
	So we launched this in Times Square on December 31st, ringing in the calendar year 2022, 2026.
	Our goal is to make 2026 the largest year of volunteer hours ever recorded by our country.
	It's never happened before.
	So, our counter is already on the website.
	You can go to our website at America250.org.
	You can register as an individual or as an organization.
	We're already up to over a million and a half hours.
	We're going to come back to Times Square on December 31st at the end of this year to say what that record number is.
	We have no idea.
	It could be in the billions.
2026 Volunteer Challenge 00:08:17
	We hope it is, and we want this to carry on long after 2026.
	All right.
	Well, we will check in with you more if people have questions or want to find out more.
	It's america250.org.
	Rosie Rios is the Commission Chair for America250.
	Thanks so much for joining us today.
	Thank you so much.
	And it is open forum, so we will get right to your calls.
	Let's start with Ben in Connecticut, Independent Line.
	Go ahead, Ben.
	Yeah, good morning, and thank you for taking my call.
	With regards to the 250-year celebration, I was just wondering, there's a lot of good things going on, but I'm also wondering how much will this be influenced by the current president who is with himself that he is naming airports and institutions, changing the name to his name.
	So, how much is this celebration going to be influenced by this current administration?
	Well, Ben, we do have, I don't have an answer for that, but we do have the president is speaking at the Board of Peace.
	And as you know, the U.S. Institute of Peace has added his name to that as well here in Washington, D.C. We've got coverage of that over on C-SPAN 2.
	We've got live coverage of that if you'd like to see that the Board of Peace meeting.
	Yeah, but you're not answering my question.
	I don't have an answer for you, but thanks for the call.
	Chris in Oregon, Line for Democrats.
	Good morning, Chris.
	Good morning.
	I'm just not very hopeful about the whole country.
	And celebrating 250 years is probably going to be the last time we celebrate.
	So that's just me.
	I've got children and grandchildren and great-grandchildren.
	And I'm 75 years old.
	I'm on Social Security, but I'm still working a full-time job and trying to make it as everybody else is.
	And I feel sorry for the younger generation and families because people can't afford anything.
	No food.
	Rent is here in Oregon, where I live, it's just a little, that's a little town, and it's anywhere from $2,000 to $2,500 a month.
	And we don't have that.
	We have good jobs, but they are kind of limited.
	And it's just not a good time in my life of 75 years.
	And I feel sorry for the next generation because I don't have any hope.
	Thank you.
	Josephine in Livingston, New Jersey, Independent Line.
	Good morning, Josephine.
	Good morning.
	Unfortunately, your guest is not there, but I wanted to make a comment.
	All of a sudden, remember the guest you had on from the CDC and also with us.
	All of a sudden, they've got the panic button on and telling everybody that they need to be vaccinated for measles.
	Sadly, we operate from panic instead of from knowledge.
	The other thing I wanted to point out: Lancet, which is one of the most respected journals in the world, had 1 million children reviewed against Tylenol.
	And they said what Kennedy and Mr. Trump said was to be debunked.
	It had absolutely nothing to do with reality.
	One million children.
	And they said there was no cause-effect.
	I'm sorry.
	I take science over policy.
	Thank you.
	And President Trump is speaking currently at the first meeting of the Board of Peace.
	This is happening here in Washington at the U.S. Institute of Peace.
	Take a look.
	Virtually complete.
	Nobody's ever seen anything.
	So congratulations.
	You made a good decision.
	We did it together.
	Thank you, Johnny.
	Great guy.
	So I want to thank the many leaders and dignitaries who have traveled great distances and lengths for the important gathering that we're at right now.
	This building was built for peace and nobody knew what to name it.
	And then Marco named it after me.
	I had nothing to do with it.
	I swear I didn't.
	I had no idea.
	They said there's a surprise coming.
	I didn't know that surprise.
	I thought they were going to give me a lot of money or something, maybe cash.
	Can always use some extra cash.
	But I came and they stopped the beautiful beast.
	I got out very safely, I'm sure, and looked up and there it said, Daniel J. Trump on the building.
	And when I say that that had nothing to do, nobody believes it, and that's okay.
	But I appreciated it.
	That was Marco and JD and a group got together and they did that.
	And I just thought it was very nice.
	And it makes me work harder.
	We're going to have to work harder.
	We're going to have to make this building much more important.
	It's brand new.
	They built it for peace, but nobody occupied it.
	Nobody knew what the purpose of it.
	But the architecture is so beautiful.
	And it was with the meeting rooms, the reception rooms.
	It's really amazing.
	Who would think that it was built without anybody in mind or anything in mind?
	And then the State Department took it over.
	They liked it.
	Marco came over one day.
	He saw this.
	He said, this building is great.
	And he actually claimed it, right?
	He claimed it.
	And that's what he does.
	Where is Marco?
	Marco?
	Is that true?
	You claimed this building.
	You took it away from about five groups that wanted it.
	That was done very quickly, very methodically.
	But it was really, really built so beautifully in such a beautiful building.
	But we worked together to ensure the brighter future for the people of Gaza, the Middle East, and the entire world.
	I think that the Board of Peace, because it's mostly leaders and unbelievably respected people, but mostly leaders of Middle Eastern countries, countries from all over the world.
	And they've been very generous with money also.
	And the United States, which I'll say in a moment, is also very generous with money because there's nothing more important than peace.
	And there's nothing.
	And you can continue watching our live coverage of that meeting over on C-SPAN 2, or you can stay here with us on Open Forum.
	Just so you know, here's Politico.
	This is from last March with the headline, U.S. Institute of Peace Lays Off Staff After Dramatic Standoff with Doge.
	So that's what happened there in that building.
	And we're in open forum, so here's Jeanette, Vermont, Republican.
	Good morning.
	Hi, good morning.
	I voted for last election, the Republican, McCain, Romney, but I could not vote for Trump.
	Our forefathers must be turning over in their grave.
	We're about to celebrate 250 years of democracy.
	But this president is not for democracy.
	He tore down some of the White House.
	He's torn down our forefathers, their legacy.
	He's not a president of the people.
	He's a president of the rich and powerful.
	Corruption, corruption, corruption with Donald Trump.
	America, wake up when the elections come in November, vote all of those Congress Republicans out of there because they're not for the people.
	Get it through your heads, America.
	They're not for the people.
	They're for the rich and famous.
	And they're covering up Epstein file and not protecting those poor young girls, those little girls that were tormented and great.
	And Trump's in it.
	He's all in it too.
	He's in it.
Minneapolis Religious Concerns 00:04:00
	All right, Jeanette.
	Let's talk to Jose Ontario, California, Democrat.
	Good morning.
	Yeah, hi.
	Good morning.
	Thank you for taking my call.
	I just want to say that every morning when I wake up, I want to hear some good news.
	And finally, this morning, I heard some good news.
	Former disgraced Prince Andrew was arrested overnight in the UK.
	And so that gives me hope that the net is circling in on the people in the EFS team files.
	And so that brings me hope.
	Secondly, I'm also an educator here in California.
	And I just want to say that Trump's policies with the ICE is just hurting our children.
	A couple of years ago, we got COVID, and that affected our learning for our students here.
	And now seeing our students on a daily basis worried about whether or not their parents are going to be home when they get home from school is, it's sad.
	It's sad.
	But, you know, every day, like I said, I wake up with hope and optimism that things are going to get better.
	And this morning's news about Prince Andrew getting arrested brings his come hope.
	Thank you.
	All right, Jose.
	This is Ben in Minneapolis, Minnesota, Independent Line.
	Good morning.
	How are you doing?
	I just wanted to talk about basically what's going on in New York City.
	Because they're doing the Adan here in Minneapolis in the mornings.
	And they're doing it rather early.
	And they do that in New York, too.
	And there was a lot of complaints about it because when the church was ring their bells, they have respect for the people.
	They respect the noise ordinance.
	And when you're running the Adan very loud on speakers, at five in the morning, it upsets people.
	And they do that here in Minneapolis.
	And I understand freedom of religion, but this country was founded on Judeo-Christian beliefs and ideology and not Islam.
	And I respect people's religion.
	It doesn't matter what religion you are.
	Worship however you like, but don't try and change the fundamental religious structure we have here in the United States, which is Judeo-Christian.
	And even here, the churches have enough respect to ring their bells, not at 5 a.m.
	They, you know, they wait until a better time, you know, earliest 7 a.m.
	And trying to change to a Islamic type religious state in cities like New York and Minneapolis and some other cities that I hear are in the world.
	You're hearing the Islamic Call to Prayer broadcast at 5 in the morning there?
	Sometimes, you know, it's not all the time, but sometimes it does that.
	I think people kind of put a kibosh on that a little bit because it was upsetting, you know, not just to hear it that early, but to just, you know, did, you know, to hear it over, you know, the bells at such an early time.
	And now they're doing it in New York.
	And Mamdani is, you know, he's spending all this money, you know, hundreds of millions of dollars on, you know, trying to help, you know, illegal immigrants stay there.
	And I get it.
	You know, I mean, you know, they deserve a chance sometimes.
	You know, it depends on the case, I guess.
	But also, you know, the garbage piled high, the rats, you know, and they're saying, well, he did implement this.
	Well, yeah, after the fact.
	So all I'm saying is, is he's spending money on trying to change, you know, and, you know, inherent, you know, religious structure that has been, you know, since the, you know, since the beginning of New York City, you know, that has been a, you know, a Judeo-Christian belief system in certain Minneapolis.
Incinerators And Disappearance 00:08:31
	Well, Ben, let's talk to somebody in New York.
	This is Margarita, Line for Democrats.
	Good morning.
	Hi, good morning.
	I'm so happy I don't have to work today.
	School's out.
	I just want to say, I am just appalled at all these calls, but I'm appalled at President Trump with the Board of Peace talking about his wonderful decorations and his White House.
	I'm ashamed to say he's my president.
	I have even with my family, half of them are Republicans.
	But what I really want to say is this with Gaza and Ukraine, everything is about Trump.
	Everything is about Trump.
	I hope when everybody goes to vote, they vote Democrats so we can impeach him and his little goonies that are there.
	It's a shame.
	It's a shame.
	And for the New Yorkers, I'm in New York all my life.
	I've been here.
	Okay, so everybody has their own rights here.
	But as far as with Trump, and oh, by the way, go back to the Epstein files.
	He's a pedophile.
	He should even be there.
	That's why everybody else is going down.
	I hope that the people take this with the Epstein files very, very serious.
	I work with children, and I would hate to see these children go up knowing that it's okay to be molested over thousands of these people who have done.
	So please, Epstein files, get Trump out.
	Okay, Margarita.
	And this is the front page of the Washington Post with the headline: Israel deepening control in West Bank.
	Here's the picture.
	Jewish settlers clear land last month to build new homes at a new unauthorized outpost near the West Bank settlement of El Mon.
	It says, Israel has moved aggressively in recent days to deepen its control over the occupied West Bank, unilaterally adopting policies that analysts say represent a major shift toward annexation and appear to defy President Donald Trump, who has said he opposes annexation but has not publicly pushed back on the escalating Israeli measures.
	That's at the Washington Post on the front page.
	Let's talk to John in Oklahoma, Republican.
	Hi, John.
	Hello.
	I appreciate this.
	What my concern is, is small children and cancer.
	We have had a tremendous increase, and no one seems to want to talk about the electricity.
	And I'm talking about whether it is batteries or 110 or 220, there is an electrical field.
	And in the last 20 years, toys that they give to little bitty kids who are extremely delicate are all electrically generated.
	And no one wants to talk about that.
	All right, John, and here's Sarah in New Hampshire, Independent Line.
	Good morning.
	Good morning.
	A couple of things.
	One on immigration.
	If an immigrant breaks a law, they'll get arrested and go through the judicial process.
	So this whole thing about illegal immigrants, most of these people have applied for asylum or have been working and paying Social Security that they'll probably never receive from and are law-abiding citizens.
	And the Trump regime is attacking them.
	And American citizens are getting rounded up.
	Native Americans are getting rounded up and put into these concentration camps.
	And we hear, oh, they're just holding them for 20 days, 30 days.
	No.
	There's children in a concentration camp in Dilley, Texas that have been there for eight months, eight months, begging to get out of there.
	And they are being traumatized.
	They are not getting clean water, clean food, health care.
	So instead of putting money into this ICE thing, I think which we should defund, disarm, and disband, we should take the money.
	And because the minimum wage hasn't gone up only a quarter in the last 45 years, Americans are suffering.
	We need food subsidies.
	We need housing subsidies.
	We need health care subsidies.
	We need child care subsidies.
	And that's where the money should go.
	If the Republican Party is serious about family values, they would be supporting the family, not kidnapping families and putting them in concentration camps.
	And now we hear they're going to set up incinerators.
	This sounds so much like Nazi Germany.
	Incinerators for what, Sarah?
	Yeah, that's a good question.
	What are they going to incinerate?
	The dead bodies?
	Because we hear people are dying in these concentration camps.
	And are they going to, they've already disappeared them.
	They won't let them reach out to their families or lawyers or anything.
	That the centers, the detention centers are creating incinerators?
	Yes, this came out this week.
	And this.
	Do you remember where you saw that, Sarah?
	Well, I am a big YouTuber, and I also watch all the CNN, CNBC, ABC.
	I get my news from a lot of sources.
	But yes, incinerators.
	So also.
	Yep, got to move on.
	So Barb in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, Democrat, go ahead.
	Good morning.
	First, I just wanted to thank you for making that correction on when Trump, the clip you played of Trump at the Board of Peace thing and correcting the narrative of the building.
	We need more respectable news sources to do that to hold him accountable when he lies.
	So I just wanted to thank you for doing that.
	I also wanted to thank that previous caller, Jeanette, who is a Republican who sees the truth about Donald Trump and the people who are enabling him and supporting him.
	I just wish that for our country's sake that more Republicans would see through this nonsense and see that he's just so self-serving and so corrupt.
	Thank you.
	And a quick on that last call before this one of Sarah.
	So this is Snopes, and it has an article here breaking down the claim of incinerators at Alligator Alcatraz Detention Center.
	It says, a TikTok user said her neighbor's cousin got a contract to supply a ton of incinerators at the Florida Migrant Detention Center.
	So this breaks it down here.
	And it says, we found no evidence that anyone involved in the construction of Alligator Alcatraz had installed incinerators at the time of this writing.
	TikTok user originally made the claim in a video that has since disappeared from the platform.
	We have no credible news outlets or officials reporting the claim as true.
	That is on snopes.com if you'd like to take a look.
	Here is Rick in Tennessee, Republican.
	Hi, Rick.
	Hi, how are you today?
	Good.
	So that's crazy.
	Incinerators, are they saying that we're incinerating people like the Jews?
	Anyway, my thing is the nurse in Minnesota who had the gun and the two magazines and the permit, well, he didn't have a gun and permit for ICE.
	He had a gun and permit because when he got off his shift at the hospital, it's a dangerous area.
	Also, all the protests were in dangerous areas.
	They were not in high-cotton neighborhoods.
	So this man carried a gun for criminals, not for ICE.
	Thank you.
	David in Morganville, New Jersey, Independent Line.
	Good morning, David.
	Good morning.
	Thanks for having me on.
Concerns Over Science Funding 00:04:56
	If they're with me, I actually want to come to you with a background in clinical research, spanning decades setting up research labs.
	And this is a topic that I want to just expand upon.
	I'm not sure most Americans realize how health science and research has been impacted not since just COVID, but across this administration, because we all have family members, including ourselves, that span every generation.
	And what we're seeing right now is mostly a debate amongst laymen where we question science.
	Even going back to the last caller about what she saw in the Lancet Journal, her interpretation of the conclusions is completely inaccurate.
	The conclusions of the Lancet Journal, while not, does not create a direct line between Tylenol and autism.
	Rather, the idea is that Tylenol is taken by most women during pregnancy because of fevers, which could impact neurological development in utero.
	So there's no way to extract it to we would not try a control study where we put women's health at risk as well as the baby and the newborn.
	I want to state in February of 2025, I attended a toxicology conference, which is global.
	At that time, the current administration, Trump and RFK, banned all travel for members of the EPA, Environmental Protection Agency, as well as the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences.
	Over 2,000 scientists who study chemical toxicity and exposure, presenting data on a global stage, were banned from going.
	At the same time, you have an EPA that's deregulating toxins in our food and water supply.
	The government just removed themselves from absolute regulations that impacts human health.
	The last thing that I want to say is that we are seeing an administration that just this year at the executive level tried to reduce the federal spending for science down to $13 billion from $50 billion.
	And I want to put that into perspective because human health, science and research not only is important to our intellectual property, our economic development, but also our health and well-being.
	It's national security.
	I want to compare that to the department with the Pentagon.
	Their national budget is $1.5 trillion.
	Now, let's put that on a scale.
	You're talking about human health, science, to the tune of maybe $50 billion for the National Institute of Health that's doled out to academic research institutions where scientists are now leaving this country because of what our government is doing.
	They're telling our scientists who depend on grants and aid to do research that we're no longer going to be there to support you.
	We have a country whose ears have been tuned away from the credible of science to what they're seeing on YouTube.
	This is dangerous.
	Historically, $1 of government aid into scientific research has doled out $2.59 in economic output.
	That is important to our economic future.
	I think Americans of all stripes need to wake up and not listen to everything that you're hearing out of Trump.
	You have an environmental health scientist who doesn't understand atmospheric chemistry, compounding chemistry, making claims about what he thinks of mercury and the environment to mercury as an adjuvant in a vaccine.
	You're now seeing corporate biotech companies shutting down their vaccine development programs.
	This is dangerous.
	This is not good for America, both economically as well as our health.
	And I only wanted to bring that perspective, not because I consume news, as like some people want to say, but somebody who's actually in this field, who's watching the demise.
	And what's your field specifically, David?
	I'm a medical scientist, and we set up medical research labs globally.
	And we help basic research scientists at the bench develop and optimize experimental workflows.
	So I don't want to go too much into specifics other than to say, if you are in the science sphere, you are scared.
	And it's questionable whether we encourage our children to go down the path of being clinical, patient-oriented, or even into science, because doctors are being challenged, as well as scientists no longer know if they spend six months writing a research grant, whether it can be funded.
Dennis's Concerns About Science Funding 00:03:06
	All right.
	Because they're actually dismantling the scientific review committees, and the government is deciding.
	We've got that, but I do have to move on, David.
	So this is Ed, Democrat, Landsberg, Pennsylvania.
	Good morning.
	Good morning.
	My concern is about the ICE agents.
	Are these fellows being vented in any way?
	After 47 days, they give them a gun, don't know what their mental capacity is.
	And the reason I say that is why would they shoot a person in the back three times and not even render aid like other police officers when there's a shooting, they render aid.
	My concern is, are these people just thugs of Trump's or are they actually being vented the way they should be?
	Thank you very much for your time.
	And we are standing by to take you to the national, the 2026 Governor's Summit.
	It is underway.
	We are going to be taking you there shortly once that gets fully underway.
	This is John in Pennsylvania, Republican.
	You're on the air.
	Yeah, I just think this is ridiculous every day.
	Just like that woman got on there talking about putting people in concentration camps and incinerating.
	Don't you think that I'm not Jewish, but don't you think people who are Jewish and went through maybe this Holocaust and still alive, don't you think that's highly offensive to let you let that woman go on?
	And if somebody calls in and says something about Joe Biden, like the diary about him showering.
	Got that.
	Dennis in Wisconsin, Independent Line.
	Good morning, Dennis.
	Thank you.
	I've been recently banned from another radio station here in Wisconsin.
	For what?
	I don't know.
	They didn't even, in February 18th of 23, I was banned from WCLO and Janesville.
	And they sent me a check saying they no longer take my calls because they didn't like my tone and alleged foul language, which I never.
	But just recently here, WRT Madison 89.9 during the Tom Rough show, they vacated my line.
	They're not taking my calls for over a month now.
	And I take that, this is Black History Month, by the way.
	Shout out to Gil Scott Heron, which is why I was calling in anyways.
	Anyone unfamiliar with Gil Scott Heron, definitely check out his legend in his own mind disc.
	But yeah, incredible.
	They opened Wart this month with a thing from the ACLU saying, speak out, don't be silenced.
	They silenced me.
	Aaron, thank you for taking my call.
	Dave in Virginia, Independent Line, you're on the air.
	Good morning.
	I want to be sure you know the Mamdani has taken over New York City.
	Soon, there is going to be Charia State.
	Thank you.
AI's Impact on Jobs 00:05:10
	All right.
	And that's it for today's program of Washington Journal.
	We are going to be back with you tomorrow, 7 a.m.
	Thanks, everybody, for calling in.
	Thanks for watching.
	The Governor's Summit will be coming up next.
	And live this morning here on C-SPAN, coverage from the Politico Governor's Summit, where state leaders are discussing what's on their agenda ahead of the midterm elections.
	Starting shortly, we'll hear from Ohio Governor Mike DeWine.
	Other participants include former Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano and former Maryland Governor Larry Hogan.
	We're bringing that to you live shortly here on C-SPAN.
	In the meantime, some of today's Washington Journal.
	Welcome back to the program.
	Joining us to discuss artificial intelligence, the impact on jobs and on energy is Vance Ginn.
	He is a former Office of Management and Budget Chief Economist for the Trump administration, also host of the podcast, Let People Prosper.
	Vance, welcome to the program.
	Thank you so much, Mimi.
	It's a pleasure to be with you.
	I want to start with the potential impact of AI on jobs and specifically entry-level jobs.
	The CEO of Anthropic has said that as much as 50% of entry-level white-collar jobs will go away because of AI.
	What do you think?
	Well, AI is something that's new.
	And so many people are looking at, should we fear it?
	Should we embrace it?
	You know, what's going to be the best path forward?
	And if you look back historically to other types of revolutions, and I do believe we're in the AI revolution now, there's been the same sort of fears, whether it be whenever we went from horse and buggy to the T-model car or when we had the internet.
	These are all things that have come up in our lives.
	And yes, some job displacement happened.
	And I think that's important to acknowledge that some jobs will be displaced.
	But at the same time, there were many more jobs that were created in the process.
	Whether it be from the horse and buggy to the team model car, there are many more people who were helping build the car.
	Or on internet, on the internet, there were more people that were able to access things and start businesses online than before.
	And so now we're in a situation where AI could displace many of those entry-level jobs, but it could also mean an opening up of new jobs that we don't know about.
	And some of that's already happening now, whether it be the data centers that I know we'll talk about, where people can work on and build and other things that are happening there, or the new innovations that are coming out.
	I think one of my key points here, Mimi, is that I don't think that we should necessarily fear AI.
	We're using AI every day, and I don't know that people actually consider it to be AI, whether it be using your computer or using GPS when you drive from one place to the other.
	These are all forms of AI that we've been using for years, if not decades now, that I think we just need to take a step back and say, what exactly is happening?
	And from what I'm looking at this as an economist and someone looking into AI, I think this is going to be a pro-growth, pro-people sort of situation that's going to allow us to flourish and prosper even more into the future.
	So yes, we need to understand the causes and effects and other things that are going to happen, but I don't think it's something that we should fear at the end of the day.
	So Vance, I want to read to you a portion of an article written by Matt Schumer.
	He's an AI influencer.
	He posted this on X and it's gotten a lot of attention lately.
	And then I'll have you respond to it.
	He says this.
	Here's the thing nobody outside the tech quite understands.
	We're not making predictions.
	We're telling you what already occurred in our own jobs and warning you that you're next.
	The experience that tech workers have had over the past year of watching AI go from helpful tool to does my job better than I do is the experience everyone else is about to have law, finance, medicine, accounting, consulting, writing, design, analysis, customer service.
	Not in 10 years.
	People building these systems say one to five years, some say less.
	So this would indicate a much bigger disruption, Vance, than going from the horse and buggy to automobiles.
	And it could, especially in certain tech industries and other places.
	But what I would consider is what Frederick Hayek at Economist called the knowledge problem.
	We don't know exactly what's going to happen in the future.
	We know what the jobs are today that are using AI and other areas in our economy, but we don't know what new jobs, new sectors, new innovations that will come out in the future that will allow us to feel many of those jobs that are displaced in the process.
	So I'm not here to say that there's not going to be any disruptions and there's not going to be any sort of changes in the economy.
	I think that there will be.
	The issue is that I'm trying to argue is that we don't know exactly what the future is.

Chapters

00:00:00 Question About Democracy's Future
00:14:05 Anthony And Zach Discuss Red States
00:28:53 Carrie's Pessimistic Outlook
00:42:34 Barney's Concerns About Rights Threat
00:45:14 Cancel Culture's New Frontier
00:53:19 People Need to Be Held Accountable
01:00:31 Wide Variety of Opinions
01:07:07 War Within Democracy
01:09:17 AI Regulations Moratorium
01:25:01 AI Revolution Pods
01:30:14 Regulating AI: Market vs. Policy
01:44:35 AI in Education
01:52:29 State of Unbiased Exchange
01:56:16 Misinformation Around Vaccines
02:11:08 Moderna's Vaccine Trials Delayed
02:25:58 Vaccines And Public Health
02:32:10 Signing the Declaration Independence
02:36:52 2026 Volunteer Challenge
02:45:09 Minneapolis Religious Concerns
02:49:09 Incinerators And Disappearance
02:57:41 Concerns Over Science Funding
03:02:38 Dennis's Concerns About Science Funding
03:05:44 AI's Impact on Jobs