tv Washington Journal 02232018 CSPAN February 23, 2018 6:59am-10:01am EST
maryland. watch landmark cases live monday at 9:00 eastern on c-span, c-span.org, or listen with the free c-span radio app. for background on each case, order copy of the companion book , available for $8.95 plus shipping and handling. and for an additional resource, there is a link on our resource to the interactive constitution. >> coming up, live on c-span, washington journal is next. at 10:00, we will join the conservative political action conference for remarks by president trump. hour, thein an goldwater institute on right to ill allowing terminally patients to obtain experimental drugs not approved by the fda. tim huelskamp, now president and ceo of the heartland institute, on tax
climate and energy policy, and drug availability. and later, becky pringle on recent school shootings and safety. ♪ host: good morning everyone on this friday, february 23rd. we begin this morning with gun owners only. do you support or oppose what you are hearing from the president on combating gun violence? if you own a gun and you support .imits, (202) 748-8000 if you oppose limits as a gun owner, (202) 748-8001. you can also join us on twitter or join the conversation on facebook.com/c-span.
gun owners only this morning for our first hour. the washington post front page this morning with the headline -- "arminges teachers is the president's top priority." here is what he had to say yesterday when he met with state and local officials on the issue. [video clip] lot have been reading a about it, and i think when you allow a person that has been in the marines for 20 years, who has done nothing but handle guns and handle them safely and well -- you cannot just get a teacher a gun. one of the fake news networks said i want teachers to have guns. i do not want teachers to have guns. i want highly adept people, people who understand weaponry, have thathey really aptitude. not everybody has an aptitude for a gun. but i think if they have the aptitude, a concealed permit for letting people in other are people in the building with a gun, you would not have these shootings. these people do not care.
they will not walk into the of teachers, 20 percent, maybe 40%. what i recommend is the people that do carry, we give them a bonus, a bit of a bonus. frankly, they feel more comfortable having the gun anyway, but you give them a bonus. so practically for free you have now made the school into a hardened target. host: that was the present yesterday, giving more detail on teachersg about arming in this country. the new york times editorial, let the teachers teach. they write "let's ask someone in the trenches every day what you arming teachers?" number ofrs, the gunslinging educators would be huge. there are about 3.5 million elementary and secondary school
teachers. arming 20% of them would mean 700,000 were so teachers with glocksand the like on -- their hips, an armed force half as large as america's real armed forces on active duty. why would we think that someone have those kinds of problems is going to make rational decisions based on the fact that no one in the school might be armed to the teeth? and there is the inescapable reality -- teachers are human. it means it would most likely react to stress induced fear the same as anyone else. and that could put even more people in peril. they go on to say nationwide police shootings are not to be found, but if new york is typical, analysis shows officers only hit their targets one third of the time. during gunfight, that accuracy can drop to as low as 13%.
only this morning. your view of what the president has put on the table for combating gun violence? and, you support the idea. which part of his proposals -- arming teachers? caller: yes. host: tell us why? because i mean, what else are they going to do? i think that arming a teacher or arming several teachers, no one knows they are armed, not even the other teachers. it is a concealed carry thing, and i think that by arming the teachers, this problem will end. in winchester, good morning. you are a gun owner and you oppose these ideas. caller: good morning, thank you for taking my call. yes, i oppose these ideas. i think any professional shooter, this would be a swat team number, military number,
these shooters train for hours upon hours at ranges. and they sow your -- fire thousands of rounds down range. giving joe teacher a glock to carry on his hip, who may get to a range once or twice a year and shoot maybe 20 or 30 rounds through his weapon does not qualify him to stand in front of an ar and challenge that shooter. everyone was surprised that they heard that the security guard did not engage. i was not surprised at all. no one is going to run into hell with a nine millimeter glock on their hip. i oppose the president's idea of arming more people. if you listen, he practically lapierretly what wayne said at the cpac conference
yesterday. the president said i talked to the nra today. they are nice people, and i am sure he was told exactly what to say when he addressed the media. i would like to address something that is never talked about in this issue -- that is the gun manufacturers and the munitions manufacturers. if you look at the birth of the for thet was born military. it is an assault weapon. let me define an assault weapon for you. an assault weapon is any weapon that is loaded from the bottom that has the ability to put multiple rounds in a target at one time. that holds a shotgun five rounds, a semi automatic shotgun that holds five rounds, you can put one single round at a time in that shotgun. 40 atnnot put 20, 30, or one time in that gun. that is the issue that we need
to deal with. our gun manufacturers were given specifications by the middle -- military in the late sick -- in the late 1940's, early 1950's to develop a combat rifle for the military men, and i am a combat veteran. i served in an infantry platoon. they handed them the special occasions -- they handed them the specifications in a camp with -- and they came up with the ar-15. that is where that gun was born. why do we need a military weapon for our civilian population to carry? i suggest that if our thernment can't give manufacturer's specifications to make their guns so it cannot be loaded from the bottom, it has to be loaded, one bullet at a time, from the top. and the mass produce those guns. i suggest that we halt sale,cturing, use, anything that has to do with the current ar configuration until
our manufacturers can come up with a gun, and it will look just like today's ar, but it will only have the ability to be loaded one bullet at a time from the top. host: you made your argument. how many guns to you on? -- do you own? now, i have owned multiple types of guns. i am a hunter, i started hunting when i was 16 years old. i am now 67 years old. i enjoy the sport of white tailed deer hunting every november. i carry in the woods with me a modern version of the same weapon that was used to fight the american revolution. i carry a single shot black powder rifle. i don't the powder down the barrel, shove the bullet down, prime it, and then i can shoot. my record of deer kills in the you have toginia --
register all deer kills. for the past 10 years, i have not hunted with anything but a single shot black powder rifle. i kill every deer i shoot, i have killed black bears with a from a muzzleloading gun. i do not need 20 rounds to go kill a deer. nobody needs 20 rounds to go kill a deer. if you cannot hit your target with one shot, turn in your man card, because you do not qualify . we need to ask now. all the my new shop about now we will blame the parents and we are going to blame -- i heard someone on cnn say shouldn't we ask more questions about how we want to arm our teachers and turned on sellers into psychologists to determine whether someone is mentally stable. we need to modify the gun. host: i need to get into other voices. before you go, have you been or
are you an nra member? first camen the nra out, i was a member. protect mye not to gun rights, but to help allow me to hunt. that is when i joined the nra. when wayne lapierre took over the nra, it started spewing his terror into this country, i stop sending them money. i want you to listen to what i have to say, america. there is a man in this country that is arming a small army for himself, and his name is wayne lapierre. he wants everybody to have an ar, he wants everybody to have a glock. if you listen to him and listen to the reaction of his audience and then go find film clips from the 20's and 30's and listen to adolf hitler, they are the same person. host: ed, we will leave it there. the new york times referring to the ed had to say,
revelations added to a growing list of failures and missed signs by the authorities that might have helped prevent one of the deadliest school shootings in american history. the florida department of children and families with state social service agencies looked into mr. cruz, being one of the missed opportunities. this talked about how the guard at the side of the school took a position outside of the school, but did not engage the shooter. he resigned yesterday. al, maryland. good morning. caller: good morning, and thank to, c-span, for allowing you share my thoughts. i fully support the president. hear -- i would like to we recognize that what president is wantinging immediate engagement to attack .his problem in the now
whatever resources are available until we come up with a better putting cameras in schools and monitors, security guards, etc., we have to do things in the now. i think he is reaching out for teachers that have the aptitude, skills, ability, and the licensing of concealed carry to engage. i would not have a problem with that. rememberre in 9/11, i when the area was threatened for , they took people participating in the air traffic and flying. when that was a threat in that national guardd and secret service marching around and carrying weapons around the airport entries. we now have a tsa, etc., but in our schools, i see a very low priority.
yes, we need to have a long game, and endgame, but we need to have an engagement in the now , and that is why i support his narrative on doing something. they do not fact want to have the third grade art teacher carrying a glock on her hip. not unless the person has the skills, ability, proper training that she can engage in the now, today. host: and what about his other also that he has floated, talking with lawmakers and friends about raising the age from 18 to 21 for purchasing assault weapons like the ar-15 used in the park when shooting. last fridayorce one en route to florida to meet with victims and first responders, senator marco joint trump and argued that the age limit for rifles was based on a previous
era, when handguns, not rifles, mostnted with -- for high-profile gun violence. epidemic ofaid the mass shootings involving assault rifles has brought the issue to the floor again. what do you think about raising the age limit? i completely -- caller: i completely understand that. i was back in the anon when they played with the drinking age, get it was ok for us to go killed, but we could not order a beer. it is nothing but distractive narrative. ? we have tothreat separate the guns from the threat. guns are not the threat. it does not matter if it is guns, knives, bombs, the threat is unlawful entry. ,e have to protect and harden make our schools more resilient
by hardening the schools to the threat, and the threat is illegal entry. the threat is not done. this is a very opportunistic opportunity to direct the at theve to pay, look squirrel, there goes the squirrel. it distracts the narrative on the real threat. host: more calls coming up. ownerstalking to gun only. do you support limits or oppose limits? a little more from the president yesterday when he met with state and local officials. he has had two days of listening sessions, and here is his response to a reporter's question on the national rifle association. [video clip] >> [inaudible] thank you very much. i do not think i will be going up against them. i think the nra wants to do what is right. they are close to me, i am close to them, they are great people, they love this country.
they are patriots. the nra wants to do the right thing. i have spoken with them over the past few days, and they want the right thing. they are going to do the right thing. host: the president yesterday saying the nra wants to do the right thing. he has talked about raising the age limit, and i think that was in response to a question about that specifically. we are asking gun owners this morning, do you agree or disagree with the president here? bill in new york, you oppose what the president is talking about. good morning to you. let me try this again. bill in new york? caller: thank you for taking my call. can you hear me? host: you're on the air. caller: i appreciate what the president is trying to do. he is making an effort, but what i am afraid of is god forbid, there's an incident when the swat team comes in and they do not know who the perpetrator is, they might shoot the teacher by mistake.
i think what we are also missing is why does the perpetrator have to go into the school and actually shoot the kids in this rule. he could just wait or them outside and get them when they are coming out, so i think we are missing the whole picture here. i hope we come to some kind of solution. host: as a gun owner, how many guns do you have, and what would you support for any limits? caller: i have two guns and imx military. i think the ar-15 should not be in the hands of a regular civilian. there is no need for it. it is a very dangerous weapon, and if you do not know how to shoot it properly -- they want to arm the teachers with a glock . a glock is not going to go up against an ar-15 and be successful. and the kids are going to know that teachers have guns. it is a very difficult thing, and i hope they come to some kind of solution here, you know? thank you very much. host: paul in new jersey.
you support what the president is talking about. good morning to you. caller: hello, how are you doing? host: good morning. caller: i think i am on the wrong line, i am not a supporter, but i have a few things. just quickly, no rational arguments, never reconsider anachronisms, nothing resembling accuracy. thank you. host: joe, clarksburg, pennsylvania. good morning. you support what the president is talking about here? caller: good morning, and thank you for taking my call. heretened to the debate this morning, and i am just astonished. the nucleus of this whole problem in florida, the defeat of law enforcement, whoever took on that tipion
line, about his behavior, and did not follow up, they need to be charged with 17 murders. that man, we are always talking about these brave guys who had the guns at the shoe -- at the school to stop this kind of an incident, he just ran. the problem with the gun is not with the majority of the people in our country, the problem is with the cops, the fbi. the fbi would not even go to check out the lead that men were flying jumbo jets. you can go look. the problem is with our government. not with the guns or anything else. thank you for taking my call and wake up, america. it is not the guns. the fbi and the cops dropped the ball again. host: before you go, are you an nra member? caller: no ma'am, no, no, not at all. host: why?
caller: i am just not a big club member like that. host: but you won't guns? -- you own guns? waser: absolutely, since i a kid. i took a shot gun to school with me when i was in six grade. host: why. caller: that is what we did at gun safety glasses. there is a whole thing about these guns -- we just need to look at the cops and the fbi, the fbi especially not following up on that lead. that is a breach in the fundamentals of what this is all about. host: chris, you oppose any limits. good morning, you are on the air. are you there? texas city. caller: hello? host: good morning, you are on the air. you oppose what the president is talking about. why is that? caller: yes ma'am.
i do not believe in arming school officials. underqualifiedre . themsed to see a lot of doing inappropriate things with students and stuff, i do not think that -- those are the .eople to be arming i also believe in restrictions on guns. i own a shotgun myself, and i keep it for my own protection. back, but not way much of a hunter anymore. i do not believe that people should be holding high-capacity believe that is a recipe for destruction right there. so what do we do? do you agree with the earlier caller that says we prohibit manufacturers from creating these kinds of guns and the way that they load, from the top, one at a time as opposed from
the bottom with rounds? >> i think so. i think that these manufacturers should be held responsible for a lot of the gun crime that we see here and in mexico. if you trace all the weapons that these criminals are using, they are coming from here. a lot of the time, they are getting them legally through someone who can purchase them legally, and they are sending mexico orthere, to south america or wherever. nraeah, i think that the and these gun manufacturers are literally arming all the criminals. research's look at pew and the charts they have put together on who gun owners are in america.
we are talking to gun owners only this morning. america's complex relationship with guns. they know that two thirds of gun owners say protection is a major reason why they own a gun. by comparison, four in 10 site hunting is a major reason, and sportin 10 site -- cite shooting. take a look at this statistic inside of the pew research. they found that only about 20% members --rs or nra are nra members. 90% of all u.s. gun owners say all belong to the -- 19% of u.s. gun owners say they belong to the nra, republicans are twice as likely, and among republicans, conservatives have significantly higher rates of membership. the public is divided when it
comes to the amount of influence the nra has among gun laws in the u.s., while 41% of all adults say the nra has too much influence. toward a percent say they have the right amount of influence -- 40% say they have the right amount of influence. the new york times notes this on their front page. there was a two-page ads taken out in the new york times this wednesday that show the lawmakers who have received money from the national rifle association. the new york times front-page story says this morning, another group founded and financed by the formeromberg, new york mayor, activated the survivorers of a network and page 230 thousand dollars for an advertisement in the new york times, referring to that ad that ran earlier this week. there it is on your screen. it shows the members of congress
that receive political donations the national rifle association. you can find that online, if you are interested in reading more. wayne viewers noted, lapierre, the ceo of the nra, was addressing the conservative lyrical action conference, the national gathering of inservatives, yesterday maryland, if you miles from the nation's capital. and he had -- he told that audience that democrats were trying to take away their guns and that they were trying to exploit what happened in parkland, florida. here is also what the nra's had to say about safety in our school -- nra ceo had to say about safety in our schools. [video clip] care one bitt about safety of america's schools and school children. if they truly cared, they would
.rotect them for them, it is not a safety issue. it is a political issue. care more about control, and more of it. their goal is to eliminate the second amendment and our firearms freedom's so that they can eradicate all individual freedoms. [applause] what they want are more restrictions on the law-abiding. think about that. their solution is to make you, all of you less free. they want to sweep right under the carpet the failure of school ,ecurity, the failure of family the failure of america's mental health system. even the unbelievable failure of the fbi. [applause]
they fantasize about more laws stopping what other laws failed to stop. succeed --s lost lost succeed only when people -- laws succeed only when people obey them. wayne love the air, at the conservative political action conference yesterday, talking to that group about what the nra would like to eat. -- would like to see. the president will be speaking time.c at 10:05 eastern our coverage of cpac picks up on morning.t 8:30 this you can follow along if you go to our website. you see the schedule of the programming there. theiro the nra and comments yesterday, the washington times says the nra will provide free support through the school shield
program to help in any school place armed security guards and its hallways. the good guy with the gun philosophy is also being advanced by the white house. president trump talked about offering bonuses to teachers who are willing to take training and arm themselves on school grounds. mr. lapierre says his supports efforts to ensure the national instant criminal background check system has all of the records it is supposed to have. also called on more prosecutions of those on the banned list to try to buy weapons. in 2010, roughly 80,000 limited people committed a felony by trying to buy a gun. just 44% were prosecuted for it -- just 44 were prosecuted for it. does that sound like good numbers to anybody? the obama administration made several trust -- such efforts in
its remaining days. adding more mental health records into the nci s appears to be one area with broad support among people on both sides of the issues. the president also spoke about steps toditional prevent mentally ill or troubled people from obtaining guns, but seemed most focused on the idea of arming teachers, at one point saying that those willing to carry firearms would receive bonuses. what do you think about what the president has suggested? we are talking to gun owners only this morning. you oppose. yes, i do oppose it, absolutely. i was raised military, and in a military family, and we were howht how to use guns and to do safety. but we were always in wartime. but to sit there and say to go ahead and arm teachers when it
is really not their job and give instead when we should be teaching education, the gun manufacturers should be held accountable, video games. we should have some kind of a that are latchkey children, so forth. we have no need for ar-15 or semi automatics. everybody who keeps saying guns are not the problem, yes. they are the problem. making money hand over fist, and all the women in our family were taught not only how to shoot, but how to respect guns. it is not something we play around with, it is not cool, we do not allow our children to play the video games either. fine line, but a right now it is strictly political. the republicans want to keep saying it is all the democrats,
but it is not. it is everybody. host: are you a republican? caller: no, i am an independent. host: did you vote for president trump? caller: no. host: and are you an nra member? caller: no. i have family members that were nra members. they pulled out. host: why? caller: because of everything that is going on. a lot of my family members are actually republicans as well, and they have pulled back from politics because what they feel they are doing is wrong. and being military, we have a different view on guns and weapons in general. host: let me read this part. the white house spokesperson said the president remains open to a range of actions, but one step long sought by gun-control advocates, a ban on semi automatic rifles such as ar-15's
, is not under active consideration. would you say that you and your family would disagree with the president on that, that there should be a ban on semi automatic weapons? ban on there should be a semi automatic weapons, yes. there should be a ban on that. host: because of the military style of it? caller: yes, exactly. you are using those weapons to either defend or whatever the case may be. you do not need those to go hunting. if a hunter needs a semi automatic, they are a crappy hunter. a man cannot be a man and just trap these animals, they are not hunters. if you cannot hunt with a shotgun, get out of it. you do not need a semi automatic for anything unless you are in the military or law enforcement or anything like that. our family would absolutely not want the semi automatic. we do not think they are needed
at all. if you are taught right anyway, notjust learned very simple just with weapons, but in general. parents need to pick up the ball a little bit as well, and adults in general -- we need the education out there. the nra needs to stop making some of these weapons. bruce in new jersey, supports the ideas by the president. hi, bruce. ? i'mr: how are you doing on the wrong line, i do not support the president at all, and i want to see limits on the machine guns that they are giving everybody. i want to see limits on age. i am a 10 gun owner, and have teachers for sons and daughters, and i do not believe the nra has a leg to stand on in this argument. i am totally upset with what is going on, down in florida,
watching this massacre, and i am astounded that the state of florida world the ones to bring that gun manufacturer here. it is like karma come to get florida. that is the way i am feeling right now. host: bruce, did you vote for the president? caller: no, no. i'm a union democrat. host: a union democrat who owns 10 guns. how often do you practice shooting and use your guns? now, i used 62 those guns when i was hunger for hunting -- younger for hunting. now i do a lot of fishing, i do not do hunting. so i have kind of switch from killing to fishing. in new jersey. some teachers are already armed, the headline in the wall street journal this morning. eight states allow teachers to schooluns on k-12
grounds. so far, in 2018, at least six states have introduced legislation's that would make it easier to have school personnel carry firearms on school property. several districts in ohio and texas with armed staff said thursday they have not had any incidents involving guns accidentally going off for being shot unnecessarily. a concern by some who do not want teachers armed. terry in oklahoma. you support the idea by the president, which one? caller: i support gun legislation, and the idea of arming teachers scares me. many, many people are killed with their own weapons. there was a security guard in , and i that went outside hate to think about the guy where there were teachers without a gun standing up.
i think there should be no stone unturned. everything, whether it is mental illness, the history of violence, and gun regulations. the bump stocks, the assault weapons, they all should be looked at. thatnk that the loopholes we see every so often in tulsa, three to four times a year, we which is just a way to buy a gun without good background checks. i think that everybody should , they are gun owners not the nra, and that they all stand for selling more weapons. that is why they are there. they are pushing an agenda that says, that tells you that some to take all of your
guns away. the democrats are going to take away all of your guns, but no one has ever, ever said that. shotgun 12 gauge pump and a louisville slugger, and i need to protect my house, i and i do not even worry about that that much. on bump stocks in the washington post, as you promise to take action in the wake of the park when shooting, president trump directed attorney general jeff sessions to ban bump stocks and other weapons that turned semi automatic guns into machine guns. gun owners only this morning. gary, mississippi, you are opposing the ideas put forth by the president. tell us why? caller: good morning, ma'am. i kind of agree with a lot of your previous callers. as far as the teachers being armed, that is absolutely
ridiculous. to iraq.loyed we kicked in a lot of doors. if you want to confuse a lot of law enforcement going into an active shooter situation, they are going to be so confused who .s the active target that is absolutely, to me, is ludicrous. . anti--- i am not anti-president trump or anything, but i think that would be absolutely ridiculous. that is a ludicrous idea to me. what i have seen in my personal experience overseas, i do not see how that would ever work. i think it would be highly confusing. ideaswhat about the other -- raising the age limit? i understanda'am, that, and that, to me, is a touchy situation. i think that is ok, in my opinion. i think that is all right. as -- you haveng
people in the military, young men and will determine -- and women in the military who are 18 and serving their country. i think that is fine. but raising that from 18 to 21 here for a civilian, because you have so many children who turned 18 and they are seniors in high school, like this young man here who blew his court. i do not think that would be such a bad idea. 18 reason -- raising it to from -- from 18 to 21. you had a lady that set a little bit ago that said deer hunting, and i cannot agree with him more. that wants to hunt, you do not need an ar-15 to hunt a deer or a bird or a turkey or anything else. that is absolutely ridiculous. need 150 rounds to go
shoot a deer. that is ridiculous. that is kind of how i feel about it. host: what about banning bump stocks? i would ban those immediately, absolutely. they have to go. that makes no sense. host: we will go to charles in utah. you are supporting what the president is saying about gun violence. good morning. caller: good morning. first of all, let me say this. i am a transplant in utah. i am originally from virginia. guns everised with since -- my father was in the army, and my grandfather was in the army. i was in the army for 22 years. but we were raised around guns and we respect guns, and we would go out and have a beautiful time with the families and my grandfather and grandmother and all of us, we would make a day of it.
we would also get into these gun competitions through the nra. thing, family oriented if you respect the gun and also have a good time with the guns. but there is a time and a place for everything. i think right now, we need to get behind the president and get rid of these bump stocks. fighting this, but at the same time i am not. are kind ofcks ridiculous, if you ask me. host: are you an nra member now? caller: yes i am, yes. i had my membership since i was 15. host: how much do you pay a month to belong to the nra? caller: i think the membership i have -- i have a lifetime membership. so --k it is $60 a year,
but it is a lovely thing that you can have in your home to protect your house, and my son is a gun owner. it is handed down from one generation to the other. there has to be a stop on certain weapons, and i agree with the president. we have to get rid of the bump stocks. it is not needed. host: do you think the nra represents you adequately? do you like what they stand for? caller: the nra -- you know, a lot of people have a bad taste in their mouth about the nra because they do not know what the nra is. what you need to do is call the nra, and there are people on the lines who can tell them what .hey do to support the gun laws gun are not with the
lobbyists, although they are considered one at times. they do a lot of great things fbi,he police force, the and all the way through life, they are there for the people who protect us. a lot of people don't understand this. gun can go to these competitions and get to know these people, and they are just everyday people, like you and me. host: charles in utah. an nra spokesperson spoke to the conservative political action conference yesterday before her -- way myht muggier fear. here is what he had to say about gun violence. >> in charleston, this murderer checkpass a background because, as former fbi james comey said, they made a mistake. there was a paperwork error. sutherland springs, this mass murderer was able to go and mow down a church because why?
report hisce did not conviction, the fact that he was mentally unstable to the system, which, by the way, the organizations that i represent, , million plus members, average everyday americans that to the school runs, the grocery store, they are students, hunters, people like me who simply do not want to be assaulted in a parking lot if i go to the grocery store to get a gallon of milk at night. -- they are people like us, and we will not began slighted into thinking we are responsible for a tragedy that we had nothing to do with. our job to follow up on red flags. it is not our job to make sure states are reporting to the background check system. that was the cpac convention yesterday. you can go to our website if you want to listen to her speech or the other participants at that.
our coverage continues today with the president at 10:05 a.m. .astern time here on c-span c-span radio, you can get the free c-span radio app, or go to our website. also, our coverage of the conservative political action conference begins at 8:30 a.m. eastern time on c-span two. the oregon legislature passes a bill threatening that states gun law. the oregon legislature passed a bill thursday banning anyone with a domestic violence conviction from owning a firearm. the state has banned those with domestic violence convictions from owning guns in 2015, but a loophole in the law allowed those not married or living with the victims to still get the guns. journal inll street vermont, the governor changes his views on gun control. the republican governor has had an about-face on gun control.
mr. scott said he is now open to expanding background checks to private gun systems, rating the with certain21, exceptions, and adding restrictions on high-capacity munition magazines. state democratic leaders are also calling for new gun control measures. the fourth term governor said he was shaken by a near tragedy last week in for -- vermont, where police arrested an 18-year-old after getting credible information that he planned on shooting of a high school. this came a day after the 19-year-old killed 19 people in parkland, florida. where does the gun debate stand in congress? politico has that story this morning, with a different outosal that has been put there by different lawmakers. the gun debate in congress, from concealed carry to the assault weapons ban, a background check improvement offered by senator john cornyn, and chris murphy.
a jiffy champion of the second amendment joined forces with one of the democrats most vocal countrywoman -- most vocal gun control proponents on an effort the fbi database used to conduct background chest of gun buyers. this has the backing of the nra. this was part of the bill passed by the house in december that also includes controversial concealed carry rights -- right of property provisions. the age limit for ar-15's, senators dianne feinstein and republican senator federally of arizona, licensed gun dealers are barred from selling handguns to anyone under 21, but there is no similar limit on the purchase of rifles. these senators, one from each party, are backing legislation that would raise the age limit for rival purposes from licensed dealers to 21, and president trump has signaled he might support the move.
a bump stock ban. to senators are proposing legislation that would ban the bump stocks. the president on tuesday directed the attorney general to prepare restrictions on the devices. assault weapons ban, dianne feinstein, a longtime advocate of the van, in 1984, a ban on so-called military style -- the latestons proposal to reinstate the ban has support from 26 democratic senators, but it is a nonstarter with republicans. it has slim on the passage -- slim odds of passage. another piece of legislation would put concealed carry reciprocity -- that was included legislative piece
that went over to the senate, where it is a nonstarter over there. that is from politico this morning. it also says in the hill lawmaker,that one gop carlos cabello of florida, is calling on speaker ryan when they return next week to washington to bring up gun safety legislation. early in alabama, you are opposing we are hearing from the white house. good morning. good morning -- caller: good morning, how are you today? host: doing well, sir. caller: i'm really amazed at some of the comments i am hearing today, especially as i hear the words or the phrase that they have no need for these types of weapons over and over. i have read the constitution before and looked at it pretty closely, and i have never seen
any phrase in the constitution that says that citizens are needred to demonstrate a to exercise their rights. you are a journalist, correct? host: correct. caller: did you have to go to the sheriff and get a license and have a background check done on you in order to exercise your first amendment rights? host: well, you do have to get credentials to go to capitol hill as a journalist, you do have to submit information to the federal government in order to get into the building. caller: in order to get into the building, but to be a journalist at large, just a journalist and exercise your first amendment rights, or your third amendment, ourth, fifth, sixth,
whatever right you have guaranteed by the constitution, you did not have to go and pass -- ask the sheriff of your county if it is ok to do that, do you? but gun owners do. if someone wants to carry a gun, which is a right guaranteed by the constitution of the united states -- that is the best key documents that -- pesky document that keeps getting in the way of people who want to make the world safe. host: how do you respond to somebody who would say a journalist's pen or reporting would not kill somebody. caller: the pen is the most powerful thing. it is mightier than the sword. host: let me finish. are thereound checks to protect the greater good so
that somebody who has a criminal background or somebody who has domestic abuse violence does not get a gun, to protect the greater good. carrying that argument forward, in order to protect the greater good, it would probably behoove us to require that everyone who wants to espouse his or her opinion go or governmentent representative, like the sheriff, and get permission from the sheriff to espouse your opinions. -- or ate all know least people who are literate know that the most powerful thing in the world is words. lead people to do things en masse, like we are witnessing right now. it is the words that are making people react to march in the
street. host: i will go on to dan, who is in shreveport, louisiana. you support the president's ideas? caller: i do, and i want to thank c-span for doing such a good job and allowing us to hear the opinion of america. thank you very much for doing that. we go on to north carolina. good morning to you. good morning to you, i'm afraid i called in on the wrong line. host: what are your thoughts? caller: i have watched the guns kill my nation over centuries. they wrote the constitution, they wrote the constitution for a breech loaded period. shot one shot,
i think the guys that wrote the constitution were pretty smart. one million people with a single than oneon is stronger ak-47 or whatever the number is. a man with a 70 shot clip. they have killed my people with -- capitalism, guns, and god. it has killed the people that i love. host: mary in north carolina. you are on the air. yes.r: it is a very complicated issue, obviously. the one thing that i do not hear being talked about in terms of securing our schools is having a surveillance system. it is constantly advertise every day on our tv, home surveillance systems. they show an intruder coming to
your property, a woman all by herself is on her exercise machine. she speaks to an intercom to the while contacting the resource center that will quickly's went a swat team, blah blah blah. i don't understand why we are not looking at having a command schoolsny school -- in that has constant surveillance of the perimeter of the schools. signs out there saying this property is under constant surveillance, and if you make it to the front door, we are also armed and waiting for you, and know that you are coming. to me, i am like where is the dialogue about putting high-tech surveillance systems in our schools? host: some other headlines for you this morning. the hill newspaper says the house has canceled votes for
billy graham to lie and honor in the rotunda. the senate will remain in , but is shortening the work week, canceling boats for the late reverend billy graham to lie in honor in the capital rotunda. another headline in the wall street journal, russia bypassed facebook filters. the tech company systems cannot detect misinformation from doctored photos. that in the wall street journal. and from the washington post this morning, oligarch kremlin -- a russian oligarch believed to control the russian mercenaries who attacked u.s. troops and their allies in area this month was in close touch with the kremlin and syrian officials in the days and weeks before and after the assault. he intercepted communications in thatjuly, the all of oligarch told a senior official that he had secured permission
from an unspecified russian minister to move forward with a fast and strong initiative that would take place in early february. the oligarch made front-page headlines last week when he was indicted by special counsel -- wereueller by bankrolling and guiding a long-running russian scheme to conduct information warfare during the election. and also in the washington post, the u.n. has delayed a vote on syria troops as russia criticizes the plan. a key ally of syria, russia has used its veto power at the un security council nine times to block resolutions critical the syrian government, but other members hoped they would abstain in the face of heavy civilian casualties. 300 50 people were killed in the eastern part of the country since sunday, according to local doctors in groups, marking one in thebloodiest periods seven-year war in that country.
also on the front page, the new york times has it, as do others. raised charges add pressure on manafort. they have added tax fraud and other charges to the accusations against paul manafort and his assistant, mr. gates. it says that mr. manafort exaggerated his income by millions of dollars to take out mortgages on homes in soho and the hamptons that he had porches -- purchased years earlier with illegally funneled bank accounts. cameaundered money from mr. manafort work as a lobbyist and political consultant to a russian aligned former u.k. and president. ukrainian president. we will go to robert in maryland. you support the ideas that the president has put forth. go ahead. caller: well, to some extent.
i am a democrat. i am a heartland democrat, originally. believe that there should be a consideration for advanced security. certainly not arming teachers. if they want to produce or want to have greater law enforcement presence or something, that is fine. talker, what they never about is how they are going to fund it, when you have school district after school district that cannot even fund their budgets in the first place. it is kind of disingenuous to advocate for that without actually having money behind it. i will say that. say now that we have found out that the resource officer failed to go into the , now i am beginning to go yeah, well it kind of hurts the good guy with a gun problem
if they are unwilling to actually put themselves ahead of children. there are no silver bullets in analogy ashorrible that is, but at the end of the day, hopefully we will take steps. the other piece i want to say is coming from a world of hunting and everything else, i am one of those that has a problem with the term assault weapon. any sin i automatic rifle serves the same -- any semi-automatic rifle serves the same purpose. i am retired military. , butit looks like an m-16 at the end of the day it could look like a normal rifle, but as long as it is semiautomatic it serves the exact same purpose. one of the discussions simply has to be got to get away from saying assault weapons and going back to automatic rifles. inhink it hurts the cause
the discussion because people who do understand weapons know that that is unfortunately a red herring. it really is. anyway. that's what i wanted to say. host: thank you. we will go to randy in st. charles, missouri, opposing what the president is saying. you are a gun owner. caller: i own one gun. host: and why? caller: just for protection in case someone hums into my house. you said 44% of the 80,000 people who illegally try to obtain handguns, but the actual -- and that is the problem. we have a situation in st. louis where one of these thugs was shooting at our police officers
and the prosecutor brought the case to the judge, recommended eight to 10 years, and the judge you had a bad childhood. i don't agree with what the president is recommending. i think anybody caught with an illegal gun should have a mandatory three-year prison sentence. the people doing most of the shootings are repeat offenders. if you get those up the street, it is going to be a much safer place. i think we should agree that ar-15 should be outlawed. there is nobody that hunts with those. they are just designed to kill people. there is really no reason why we need this. ,ost: ready, you are correct the washington from "the washington times" says roughly 80,000 people committed a felony for trying to buy a gun, just 44 prosecuted for it. does that sound like a good number to anybody? this is a quote from wayne
lapierre, the ceo of the nra, when he spoke to the conservative political action conference. we covered that if you want to hear all of the arguments he made. we will leave the conversation there for now. coming up next, the goldwater joins us to discuss drugs not approved by the federal fda. we will be right back. ♪
announcer: sunday night on "afterwards," and author talks about growing up in the idaho by --ins, interviewed >> a lot of people grow up with this idea that to learn something you have to have this whole institution in place. i'm grateful that i was not raised like that. when i decided i wanted to start college at 16, it felt like something i could do that because i had a full education but because i need to learn how to run. i will -- need to learn algebra. so i bought a book and would learn it. i kept going with that. my parents took it too far. i arrived at university really underprepared. raised my hand and
the class and asked what the holocaust was because i'd never heard it before. people that i was anti-semitic. it was not the ideal education. announcer: what genetic on book -- watch at 9:00 eastern on book tv on c-span2. this year as a special project, we are featuring best-selling fiction writers for our monthly program "in-depth, fiction edition." j join us with -- join us with "godshaara for his book and generals," which was turned into a motion picture. we will be taking your phone calls, tweets, and facebook messages. sunday, marchries
4 live from noon to 3:00 p.m. eastern on book tv on c-span2. "washington journal" continues. host: at our table, the senior policy advisor for the goldwater institute. let's begin with what the goldwater institute is and your mission, and what you are here to talk about, this right to try movement. guest: think he so much for having us on today. the goldwater institute is a public policy and research institution. people often wonder where politicians and government institutions come up with their ideas. we give them ideas that we feel like align with the constitution and expand people's personal freedoms. host: how are you funded? guest: we are funded by individual donors across the country in all 50 states. our mission is to help the government advance individual rights, follow the constitution.
,e do have a litigation center and with the government doesn't follow its own laws we will step in and defend people's rights in court. host: one proposal you are pushing forward is this right to try. what is it? guest: it is a bipartisan idea to allow people who have been diagnosed as terminally ill to or treatments that are still in the clinical trial that they themselves cannot qualify for in an effort to save their own lives. basically this says is a drug is safe enough to be used in people in a clinical trial we think it is safe enough for people for terminally ill to make their own decision, along with their doctors antidrug manufacturer, if it is safe enough for them as well. host: how many people do you think would want to do this? by would this make a difference? guest: it is so hard to say how many people would be impacted by a law like this.
we know that, for example, with a disease like als, one person dies almost every hour from als in this country. it is one of those where there hasn't been a new treatment really available to people in almost three decades. you think about all of those people who are not able to get into clinical trials because they are too sick, they don't have any options once they've run through all the available treatments. there are so many people who could be helped by a law like this so it is hard to put a number on it. host: how does the fda process work right now that makes it difficult for people to quickly receive a drug if they are terminally ill? guest: as a process in place at the fda caught expanded access. basically the way that that works is if you are being treated at a hospital and your doctor thinks a treatment that is in clinical trial might help you come at they can make application to the fda on your behalf. that application has a lot of
steps to it and a lot of red tape. you have to work through several different steps not just at the fda come about through an external review board and all kinds of other things have to happen to move forward. our challenge with that and what we think is not appropriate is that if a terminally ill patient is fully informed of all of the risk of an investigational treatment, their doctor thinks that it might help them, and the drug company also thinks it might help them, we don't think the federal government should have a veto stamp over somebody's personal decision about their own risk. host: how long does it take for a person to get approved if their doctor is asking for them to receive that drug? how long can it take on average, and how much does it cost if this is not an fda approved drug? the length of time that it takes for someone to receive a drug through the fda expanded
access program is unknown and unknowable because each situation is different. with the right to try program, there is no application to the federal government. the conversation is strictly between the patient, doctor, and drug company. in some cases we think that could be a couple of days worth of conversations that would result in the patient being treated with a new treatment option. as far cost goes, it's the same situation right now as investigational drugs that people receive through clinical trials. sometimes it is covered by insurance, sometimes it is not. sometimes struck companies give those for free come a sometimes they are allowed to charge cost recovery. it is the same process we have now. it will depend every time an individual patient reaches out to a drug company. host: we are listening to our viewers have to say about this.
we also have a line this morning for those terminally ill patients or family members who would have or have participated in programs like the federal government has. this stand was legislation? according to "the washington passedthis legislation unanimously in the senate in 2017 and is now in committee in the house. it bars federal government from patientsg access to for medications that have undergone only preliminary in humans, requires patience to try all other available treatments and be unable to participate in clinical trials, and gives drug companies legal protection is a treatment results in harm.
it did pass the senate unanimously in august last year. we are waiting on action in the house. but is also interesting is that this law has been passed and adopted in 38 states and introduced in the other 12, so this is truly a 50 state bipartisan effort to help terminally ill people get access to something that could possibly help them walk their daughter down the aisle or see their grandkids graduate high school or hold their baby a little longer. that is really what this is all about. this is about giving people one more chance. host: what is something that could be done on the executive order,ith an executive and not something that needs legislation? guest: reducing the president and fda have the authority to make this change on their own --
ando think the president fda have the authority to make this change on their own. of a it takes a little bit push from congress or the people, that is really what we are seeing with this issue. we traveled around the country working on this. there are literally thousands of patients reaching out to us all the time, telling us how important this law is to them and how much they think it could help them. we are seeing that activism at the capitol as well. we know lawmakers are hearing from patients and their own districts encouraging them to support this law. host: the president mentioned it during the state of the union as well. speed access to breakthrough cures and affordable drugs. last year the fda approved more new and generic drugs and medical devices than ever before in our country's history. [applause]
pres. trump: we also believe that patients with terminal conditions, terminal illness, should have access to experimental treatment immediately that could potentially save their lives. people who are terminally ill should not have to go from country to country to seek a cure. i want to give them a chance right here at home. it is time for congress to give these wonderful, incredible americans the right to try. [cheers and applause] to try is ourt conversation this morning with starling coleman, senior policy advisor at the goldwater policy
institute. derek is our first caller. guest: good morning. i just love the title of the program -- caller: good morning. i just love the title of the program. we are talking about humanity, and we want to give ourselves every opportunity to live and ready to cut back on the red tape and the politics holding such things up. if i was in a dying state i would want to be able to try a drug that could help humanity. that is the one thing i would want to do besides trying to help myself is help my fellow citizens. we have to start looking at humanity. from us, theg away people, our love from each other. we are so disconnected. it's become about politics and money. to guests just mentioned, for a parent to be able to watch the
child -- to walk their child down the aisle. we want to put a value on that humanity? is we get back to that, so much more will be corrected. host: you have a supporter there. how much grassroot movement is therefore this? guest: it is overwhelming and indescribable. that color is a perfect example of what we hear every time we are in the state legislature talking about this issue in a committee hearing. that we've never met, never reached out to hear about this through the newspaper or on tv and come to the legislature, take time away from the family and work to say exactly what that color just said -- that caller justthat said current to help themselves and to help other patients in the future.
the more people trying these drugs in clinical trials, the more data we have on whether or not they are effective. that is really important, too. this is really some but that could advance science. one thing that is important for people to know if we are only talking about drugs that have already passed fda approved safety trials. these are not drugs that are never tried in a human or something that somebody is cooking up in the garage. these are drugs that are in three fda clinical trials and already being given to patients across the country. host: opponents of the measure are concerned the use of drugs the fda has approved to bypass authority could drug developed efforts and patient safety. guest: we do not agree with
that. it does not bypassed the fda. as a drug is not an trial, it is no longer eligible under right to try. trialelies on the fda process to make sure the only drugs people are to underwrite to try our drugs the fda itself has artie said are safe enough to try. the other thing to her member is this is completely voluntary. andatient have to try investigational drug. no doctor has to pursue and investigational drug. no drug company has to give an investigational drug to a patient that they don't think it will help. this is simply another path. host: kenny is watching, a republican. caller: people jump up and down about abortion, it is my body, i can do what i want with it. what about the same argument applied for this? that last guy was spot on.
another van, as far as the teachers go, maybe we should start reevaluating what the modern-day teacher has to be. if they are not willing or able to handle a firearm or take training to handle a weapon community need to reevaluate who is being teachers. host: we believe that there. we will go to travis next in south carolina, independent. yes, iyes -- caller: actually wanted to talk about a drug that is not experimental that has been around for thousands of years and has shown great help with people that got cancer and ptsd, and that drug is marijuana. we know about it. tests have been done on it. we could do a little more tests, but i think it is about time we legalize this drug to help out patients around the country with terminally else conditions. host: does the goldwater institute have a position on marijuana? guest: we don't. in this issue we are talking about drugs in the fda clinical trial process. host: randy in new york, independent.
caller: hello, yes. i have a question. i was very interested earlier -- that said that i unanimously this past the senate last year. i'm curious as to why it hasn't passed the house. guest: great question. we are too. we are expecting the house to take action on this bill in the coming weeks. sometimes it just takes a while for everybody to get on the same page on scheduling. they have had some big policy proposals that have been working on. but we do expect the house to consider the spell soon. host: vicki and laverne, california, republican. ,aller: yes, i was wondering when it is a matter of life and death, if it was approved in the senate last summer, it makes no
sense that they just can't at least get these quick little bills approved or disapproved right away. it a quick little bill or attached to something larger? guest: it is a quick little bill, a page and a half. for federal legislation, that is remarkable. it is very straightforward. it is not attached to anything else. is not being negotiated with any other larger piece of legislation. it is a stand-alone bill that is very simple to understand, very straightforward, and we sure would like a vote. host: who are your lead sponsors in the house? guest: one congressman from arizona, andy biggs, and another from pennsylvania, ryan fitzpatrick. host: trump pushing ahead on koch-backed experimental drug's right to try a agenda the
headline on cnbc. is there support helping you broaden and push your agenda? is it helping? guest: we will take partners from across the spectrum on this issue and work with anyone who would like to help us push this forward. we welcome support from folks on the conservative side of the spectrum and all the left. one of the things that is so amazing about this issue is the types of people that do come together to support it. in texas, for example, when the state law was passing, the texas afl-cio joined with the catholic bishops conference and a number of other patient groups like the metastatic breast cancer community, als advocacy organizations, and others to come together to support this law. this is not a partisan law. it has nothing to do with the
kochs or any of that. this is a completely patient focused bipartisan effort. host: howdy respond to critics who say most right to try laws include provisions that allow health insurance company's job doubt from paying for a patient's experiment with treatment? guest: that is current federal law. it is the same thing for people who are in clinical trials. health insurance companies do not have to pay those costs. host: sean in new jersey, a democrat, you are next. good morning. caller: good morning. i just want to make a comment. i think it is not appropriate to take advantage of the patients who are terminally ill. they are going to be charged with high price to take the medication that has very little chance to succeed. , we don't havey
-- [indiscernible] issue. not the there is a reason that some of these disease are terminally disease, such as cancer. these diseases are hard to treat. is a goodt think this idea to push the unproven drug. says that phase one is to love a threshold as most drugs that succeed turn out to be too unsafe for clinical use. guest: we are talking about drugs that have passed the phase one trial and are in an active phase two or phase three trial.
these drugs are already being given to patients. we are already evaluating the effectiveness of these drugs. positionioned -- our is that if a drug is safe enough to be given to someone in in a clinical trial, it is safe enough for an informed patient to decide that they would like the opportunity to try it as a last opportunity. to respond to the previous caller, this is not something that is going to be forced on any patient. like i said earlier, it is completely and totally voluntary. if the patient isn't comfortable with trying an investigational medication, they don't have to do that. as far as charging people a lot of money, there's actually federal legislation that governs how much people can be charged. companies are not allowed to make a profit on investigational drugs. they are allowed to charge for individual cost recovery and that is it.
is the exact same cost situation the patient's face today. host: john in cincinnati, a republican, your next. guest: hi. great job as always, greta. ofnd in general in favor freedom and letting people make their choices, especially about andthing like and of life care, but i also think it is very tricky to go in and tweak andthing in our health care not have it spin out of control. the question i have is this. how do you make sure the right to try doesn't turn into the right to spend unlimited funds on unproven treatment, thereby taking money from proven treatments for other people and care? does the right to try become the light -- the right to spend unlimited. you say right now drug companies don't have to pay, so under the
provision, with a have to? , doesher quick concern the right to try begin to interfere with ongoing clinicals? if people hear about something that seems to be working, will of control group jump out other clinical trials and thereby upset them? how you keep the testing routine going if patients are free to come and go and try different things? for one moreime thought, what i would really like to try for my health care, approaching 60, i would like to try capitalism. alike to be able to buy a life insurance policy from the same company that divides health insurance for the rest of my life. i would like for it to be an obligation that they can't get out of. finally, my health care provider will want to keep me alive rather than i out of the
anyway, i will shut up and listen. greta: we will take your question. guest: so how do we make sure this doesn't interfere with clinical trials? great question, and it really important for it. it is only for a clinical trial. -- it is onlyy for those who do not close by for a clinical trial. the question on how we make sure it doesn't become something where we are spending an mostited amount of money, -- as far as public health care goes, medicaid, medicare, most of those programs don't cover investigational treatment. this is something we would not have to worry about taxpayers picking up a tag for some kind of exorbitant experimental drugs
or procedures or something like that. that is not what we are talking about here. any cost will be voluntarily covered by health insurance companies or a patient themselves. that might lead to a question, is this just for rich people? what i would say is that that what we have today. that is what president trump alluded to in his state of the union. if you have a lot of money you can go across the world looking for treatments that have been approved in other countries, not here. we have seen this. jobs, for example, was going to switzerland for treatment for pancreatic cancer. the treatment he was looking for just finished clinical trials here in the united states and was just approved in january of this year after a two and a half your weight after a clinical trial was done. as a doctor in texas using the right to try law to treat terminal pancreatic cancer patients in that two-and-a-half your window of the time the trial was finished -- two and a half year window of the time that trial was finished so they
can continue being treated and stay alive. that is the kind of specific circumstance we are talking about with this law. we are not to give up temple cream for healthy teenagers. this is -- we are not le cream fort pimp healthy teenagers. we are talking about serious issues that have few treatment options. caller: i am a palliative patient. i have took myself off of hospice because i wanted off of opioids, and i am only on cannabis. my question is two-part. the first part is if these things aren't listed as curative and they are experimental and i , is forke to know payment and research purposes, if they are listed only as experimental or how much
percentagewise they need to be shown as promising? the second thing i wanted to say was a comment, and that is that money can buy anything you want. let me say that. insurance will pay for fertility treatments. people are welcome to have that. we know we have limited amounts of money. i watch c-span every day, and every day after the tax bill i see the congress saying how we got to scale back. i saw a congressman the other day ask why they didn't address public housing in the scale back. my question is, when we are looking at our money and i am , and anyway -- i am dying i am done with treatments and chemo, so i want to have a good quality life -- and i spend almost all my money on my medicine, and my quality of life
i am sustaining, but you have to understand when we only have small amounts of money in the tax bucket, we have to be careful of offering things to term allele people. we can only -- terminally ill people. we can only live so long. guest: i am very sorry for your about your situation. my brother died almost two years ago from melanoma, and it is very hard to watch a family member go through a situation where they have to make a decision to stop treatment and put themselves in hospice care or palliative care, so i am very sorry for you and your family. i am sure this is very hard on all of you. , there are right only some a treatment options available for people. there's only so much we can do. but write to try, the point of right petraeus to let patients make that decision for themselves. if there is something in the pipeline that might help a patient, we think they should
have access to it. if they are fully informed about the risk, their doctor and the drug manufacturer think it could help them, we just don't think there is a role for the federal government to say no. if a patient understands the risk and their doctor and the drug company things he could -- it could help, they should be able to try it. caller: i am so thankful for ms. coleman. you don't know how vengeful i am for you bringing this up. my wife has gastroparesis. they do not sell any medicine in the united states to do anything with it unless it gives you parkinson's. we have been fighting this for two years. doctor in lady monroe, louisiana that finally came in and gave her a prescription for debra dunn --
for a medicine out of canada. big pharma is killing the united states. killing us. the doctor she had, he would run tests, over $6,000 worth of tests, and shook her hand and told her he could not make enough money off of her, to find another doctor. that was abandonment. you andso thankful for for canada for getting her the medicine. she is doing great now. it is unbelievable. greta: ms. coleman? guest: thank you so much for calling. gastroparesis is a horrible disease. people basically cannot process food and you slowly starve to death. there is a drug, the drug he mentioned that his wife has been inen, that is legal
basically every other country in the world besides the united states. there is one pharmacy in texas that is allowed by the fda to compound this drug and provide it. it is so hard for these patients to get treatment. my goodness. we did a report on how complicated it is for people with gastroparesis to be treated and why this kind of law is needed for them. they don't have time to go through application process after application process after application process. these people are starving to death. there is a woman we talked to in texas whose little girl had been on a feeding tube for years. finally when she was able to get treatment she was able to come off the feeding tube. the fda recently changed regulations and will take that drug back away from that little girl. can you imagine being that mom and having to tell your seven-year-old. are you have to go back on the feeding tube after being able to eat for a couple of years? it is not ok.
this isn't the role of the federal government to decide who lives and dies. people need to be able to make that decision for themselves when they are fully informed. host: where can people find this report you're talking about and other reports? guest: we have a website, org, that has lots of research and information and tell people how to get involved in the movement. starlee coleman, senior policy advisor with the goldwater institute, we appreciate the conversation this morning. when we come back, we will open up the phone lines. you can keep calling in about this, other policy debates or politics. there are the numbers on your screen. later, former congressman and current heartland institute timident can use cap --
will join us from the conservative political action conference. announcer: she's been was created as a public service by america's cable television companies come and day we continued -- c-span was created as a public service by america's cable television companies as a public service. c-span is brought to you by your cable or satellite provider. announcer: sunday on c-span's "q&a," duke divinity school's professor talks about the indictments -- being diagnosed with cancer at the age of 35.
sick i whole i got community got together in the chapel on just prayed like marathon runners for me drop michael surgery -- for me throughout my surgery. my hope is that as you are preparing to die like i was, that someone or something lead you there, and i certainly felt that way. announcer: sunday night at 8:00 eastern on c-span. "washington journal" continues. greta: we are back on this friday morning in open phones. or public policy issues politics you want to discuss is on the table. ,epublicans (202) 737-0002 democrats (202) 737-0001, and independents (202) 628-0205.
headline this morning, "school cop should have killed the killer," coming from law enforcement officials there saying the cop did not enter the school while that shooter was killing students and others in the parkland high school. he retained his position outside. he resigned yesterday. headline,na republic" arizona hashers? nowhere"ey went "minnesotans dissent on the capital." michael in new york am a republican. good morning to you.
caller: hi, how are you? i want to thank you for your wonderful effort today with starlee. i helped lead a national support and what gastroparesis it to parrot the point made from the previous caller. , thoser point to address against right to try talk about the therapeutic cliff, that there is not a backlog of medications available to treat conditions, and unfortunately i with allo say that due respect, that is not the case. there are drugs that have been available overseas for more than approved by those drug regulatory agencies but do not have a lot of data in the united states.
for her starlee .ontinued efforts bob in jacksonville, texas, a democrat. you are on the air. caller: thank you greta. i have an opinion about some of the things that is going on. one is i don't believe that teachers should be armed. be a veryat would dumb thing to do for lots of reasons. i am 83ackground is years old. i am a democrat. used to be a republican. gun collector. i own over 40 guns. all forve any need at an ak-47 or ar-15.
they are for killing people. i even got softhearted and don't like to shoot deer anymore, but still like my guns. unlike the fellow that called an earlier -- i'm like the fellow that called in earlier. if you can't hit a deer the first time you shoot, you need to hang it up and do something else. greta: what do you think about raising the age of those i love to purchase and ar-15 or that type of gun from 18 to 21 the age of those able to purchase and ar-15 or that had begun from 18 to 21?
caller: i personally think you should be 21 to purchase any kind of gun is like an automobile. they are as dangerous. you need to grow up a little bit before you can purchase either one of them. i think the biggest thing about this ar-15 is it is a macho thing. if you go to the gun shows and hang around the booths that sell them, i think you'll figure it out. personally i've got for home prediction eight -- home protection a double-barreled shotgun. greta: do you have it by your bed? caller: i had it close all the time. greta: ok. shawn, key west, florida. independent.
caller: hello. good morning. my comment is that all of this is just absurd. this is going to continue no matter what happens. there was a woman speaking with the president the other day who brought up the position that what we need is on the front end. we need to see the counselors well-equipped and well-trained and well-financed. but the bottom line is we are a violent nation. we are indiscriminately committing -- indiscriminately killing people all over the world. what kind of example does that set? it really doesn't matter how many bullets you put in the gun. is the type of individual that is going to be involved in that, the type of leadership that is going to address subjects that are important. today it is the same thing. arming teachers in the school, good lord. what in the hell are those people think about? when he to understand that we
are a violent nation -- we need to understand that we are a violent nation, and what are our children going to do? this isn't going to change anything, and it is going to happen again. greta: is there any solution? caller: the only real solution, in my opinion, is to come to grips with who we are as a people, to understand that we do have a violent culture. we need to address that. somebody was saying the other day that their child was killed on the way home from school. so if you are protecting the school area, what about surrounding areas? shootings in miami and chicago, killings going on endlessly. we need to deal with that. plus, where that violence coming from? , they are meant that if somebody shows up with a gun outside your front door you're going to wish you had a gun, but with somebody shows up
at your front door with a tank? you're going to wish you had a tank. this just goes on ad infinitum. we need to deal with who we are as a people. until we do that, nothing is going to change. marches on washington, i have been there the matter how many -- have been there i don't know how many times, it is not going to change anything. greta: there is a march to demand more from congress next month. politico has the story this morning about done debate legislation -- gun debate legislation in the wake of this shooting. it would encourage state and federal agencies to send more information about individuals' criminal histories. controversiales
concealed carry reciprocity conditions. other senators are backing age totion for raised firearms to 21. , bothban on bump stocks. parties calling for a ban on what can turn a semiautomatic into a fully aromatic. the president -- fully automatic. the president directed the ag to prepare for that. representative pat toomey from pennsylvania and joe manchin of
west virginia are behind legislation which fell short of the required 60 votes in the senate in 2013 and 2015, but it is far from clear the legislation will come any closer to passage now. that concealed carry reciprocity included in the house bill come richard hudson, a republican of north carolina, and senator cornyn of texas, are behind that. this is from politico. andrew from massachusetts, a democrat. good morning to you. caller: yes. the drug issue that lady was talking about, it isn't the government causing the problem. it is the drug companies and insurance companies that make it difficult. tested drugshas since the first gulf war, had an 80% effective rate in reducing the pain and the amount of
painkillers the soldiers take , andess time on the drugs less trouble getting off the drugs. will not authorize it to be used as an alternative to drugs, and that is called acupuncture. it is a fact-based truth. you can look it up in the military. , with thatissue mentally ill kid in florida, i was born autistic and a roman catholic family. i was brought up with the christian values and i had to toss it all down the toilet. , but ainto a cemetery
bottle of jack daniels and a believend said i don't the catholic god, but i know god loves me. after that i haven't had any then.t issues since that god isng telling you to do this. god loves you and you don't need the violence. you don't need to grab that gun. greta: ok andrew, i am going to leave it there. in political news this morning, mes," theington ti governor of missouri was indicted on a late charge accusing him of taking a new photo of a woman without her can consent.ithout her
, an independent. caller: good morning. of course, the school shooting has been on everyone's mind. here in montana we are an open carry state. there's guns in the gun racks in the back of pickups just like most world communities that most rural communities -- most rural communities. president trump more or less stated that teachers, the once wanted to, could. if they want to volunteer that is fine. the ar-15, i am an nra member. --voted has come down to it i suppose if it came down to it i would go along with the band,
but once to give up one thing you're going to lose another. it just rolls downhill, you might say. ,he thing about raising the age you're going to ban an 18-year-old from having a rifle. well, when he goes into the military at 18 years old is going to have a rifle. i am a vietnam vet. they lowered the driving age down to 18 and 19 in a lot of states while vietnam was going on because why should you send your kid to die and you can have a beer? greta: ok. president likely to talk about gun violence when he speaks to conservatives who have gathered here outside of washington for their annual conference for the conservative political action conference. he will be delivering those remarks at around 10:05 a.m. eastern time.
c-span,have coverage on www.c-span.org, and the free c-span radio app on your device. our coverage of the conservative political action conference started on c-span2 this morning around 8:30 a.m. eastern time and continues to run today. some of these bigger this morning, energy secretary rick perry interior secretary zinke ryan zinke he, and representative ryan meadows. we will continue with cpac tomorrow as well him of the annual conference taking place in washington. the national section of "the new line, "the has this atf is on the verge of a crisis.
the agency which has not grown significantly since its founding is about to confront a staffing shortage and is set to lose its tobacco and alcohol enforcement authorities. president trump has yet to nominate a director to oversee the agency commode has been without permanent leadership for eight of the past 12 years. the white house is pushing the atf to the forefront of its fight against violent crime. response to the mass shooting at a florida high school last week, mr. trump, who promised to fight violent criminal gangs and illegal guns, two of the atf key missions, announced he would be relying on the bureau to regulate so-called bump stocks. it is all but politically impossible for mr. trump, who counts the powerful gun lobby among his most ardent supporters, to strengthen the atf. the national rifle association has long sought to hobble the agency in an effort to curb its ability to regulate guns, which the gun lobby has traditionally opposed. it has congressionally -- it has curtailed the ability to
regulate firearms. one for bids the atf from using electronic databases to trace gun owners. instead the agency relies on a warehouse full of paper records. it is beneficial to the nra to have a smaller agency like the atf in charge of gun regulation, one senior bureau official knowledge, rather than a larger more powerful agency like the fbi that can more effectively demand additional resources from capitol hill." let's go to john in indiana, a republican. caller: i have some comments about gun control. what i wanted to say is you can use the second amendment and keep as many guns on your own property if you want, but if you leave your property then you have to follow certain restrictions. japan has 124 million people and only 10 shooting deaths a year. you have to do a training course
to get a permit, and have to pass with a 95 test score, have a mental exam, a background track. if we would do those three things that really make it tough for you to take a gun off your property i think that would help a lot. thank you. greta: johnson in minneapolis, a democrat. caller: good morning. i worked in depth in minneapolis , and isn't anyone else extremely exhausted with this guy is president? i had has -- my head has been spinning since november 9. i apologize, but i'm a democrat, and so i think god i live in a democratic society in minneapolis. if you are a democrat, come to minneapolis. the economy is great. everything is good. my comment is i am sick and
tired of people blaming the mentally ill for the background checks. i know this guy was clinically depressed. i think the repercussions that we need to look at as humans in society, we need to stop blaming other people for the issues we talk about in society and how we treat each other as human beings. we need to get back to common courtesy. we need to get back to common respect for each other and just allow each other to be in existence. we can agree to disagree without getting nasty and negative. i am just exhausted. i don't know about you. how are you doing with all of this? i didn't mean to ramble. greta: that is ok, i will leave their. has the york times" piece about the aftermath movement behind the parkland high school shooting by those
who are demanding more gun control. it notes that another group founded and funded by michael asked the the dilbert billionaire former new york mayor, activated its 1500 members of his survivor network and paid $230,000 for a two-page advertisement in "the new york wednesday -- there it is on your screen -- and noted how much each lawmaker has received from the nra. page forred $50,000 a that ad -- $150,000 a page for that ad in "the new york times." frank, a republican. caller: hi. we keep saying this guy is gets me is hewhat
threw his love and down and escaped with other students trying to escape. -- his what he was doing weapon down and escaped with other students trying to escape. he knew what he was doing. i want to know what he was doing a social media. nobody is saying anything about who you was communicating with on social media yet. i am in favor of banning the any of thosetocks, weapons that kill humans that are designed to kill humans need to be banned. they need to raise the age to 25. yes, you are 18 and the military. you are trained and with people with weapons all the time. they need to raise the gun purchasing age to 25. guy iy -- i think -- this think needs to be executed. i am tired of this mental illness, mental illness. obvious he knew what he was doing because he tried to
escape. maine, avey in mexico, democrat. good morning. caller: thank you c-span for having me on. what i have got to say is all these lobbyists that go to washington, d.c., and give all this money to these people that are running for office, that should be stopped. they should stop all the lobbyists going in and do away with it. as far as these assault weapons, they should be done away with. as far as the public is concerned, the public should not be allowed to have them. as long as the republican party goes along with accepting money from the drug administration, why everyone is hopped up on drugs, and the gun people, they are correct.
the whole government is very corrupt. they need to change everything in washington, d.c. host: i am going to leave it there. another quick headline. the new york times has the story about added charges to raise pressure on paul manafort by special counsel robert mueller. exaggerated his income by millions of dollars to take out loans for homes in soho and the hamptons that he had purchased illegally years earlier. the laundered money came from his work as a lobbyist to the russian aligned former ukrainian president. after he was ousted in 2014 and fled to russia, his income weekly window. detail aunt indictment complex plot with the help of his longtime business partner and campaign deputy rick gates.
the charges do not implicate the trump campaign or mr. trump. they align new criminal behavior and appeared to be the latest attempts to pressure mr. manafort and mr. gates to cooperate with his inquiry. in florida, republican. good morning. caller: it is cecil. host: i'm sorry. the morning. caller: i had some about guns and the problem we have. i think fully automatic weapons have been illegal for many years, and semi automatic, a lot of people don't know the difference between a semi automatic and a fully automatic. today with we have younger kids with guns and everything else is the movies, the cell phones, and the biggest
thing of all is we have so many unwedded people in this country. there is single-parent kids all over, or no parent kids all over. everybody is on welfare. nobody has discipline. if you don't have discipline, you don't have respect. host: i will leave it there at that final thought for open funds. we will take a break. when we come back, we will go live to the conservative political action conference to institute'stland tim huelskamp to discuss conservative economic and energy policy. later, becky pringle of the national education association will be here to discuss school safety and president trump's proposal to arm teachers and school staff. join us saturday at 9:00 a.m.
eastern on american history tv at the american civil war museum in richmond, virginia, for live coverage of the civil war's impact on americans. of theobertson, author untold civil war, jane schultz, author of women at the front, and in taylor, author of the divided family in civil war america. at 8:00 p.m. on lectures in history, from the georgetown law talks, a guest speaker about his book, the political theory of the american founding. >> in a republican form of government based on consent, elections are needed in any other form of government more. the people picked the rules. america, thereel historic about the
brown v. board of education decision. >> delegates from high schools in st. louis. >> at our school, some kids just don't like colored people. >> some people don't like white people either. >> i think it is the individual that counts. how will you get to know a person unless you meet them? when the supreme court ruled segregation was illegal, these children were ready. >> at 6:00 p.m. on american artifacts, we look when the supr political cartoons in the early 20th century. he continued to drive for the washington evening star for the next 42 years. his cartoons appeared almost daily, usually on the front page of the paper, very prominently placed. >> watch american history tv, every weekend on c-span3. "washington journal"
continues. host: joining us this morning from outside of washington at the conservative political action conference is the former congressman tim huelskamp, now president and ceo of the heartland institute. thank you for being with us. what is the heartland institute, and why did you take this job after leaving congress? guest: great question. the heartland institute is a 34-year-old free market institution that promotes free-market solutions to solve social and economic problems. we have been based in chicago that whole time. we operate in every state by working with state legislators. there are 7000 of us around the country. even though congress is out of session this week, there are 43 legislators in session. in session.res host: what will be your message
today? guest: we have a number of messages. we are for energy freedom. we have been the principal opponent al gore and his movements of climate alarmism. we will talk about that. we are also talking about tax cuts. we are also promoting many of our health care freedom ideas. we need more access to health care, not government control. that will be a topic of discussion. what we are doing state after state to expand access to health care, which i think the left and right agree about. host: would you have voted for the tax-cut? guest: absolutely. theuld not have voted for big spending bill. that remains a problem going forward. host: what about the concern and the numbers that show the tax cut would add to the nation's debt and deficit. the headline in the new york times, republicans have
forgotten they hate deficits. guest: the problem is the spending, not the revenue side. revenues will continue to grow. we need to bolster this economy. also the deregulatory efforts have a tremendous economic boost as well. we have to grow this economy. the flipside is the spending side. taxes aren't about spending. it is the spending that the swamp continues to win that battle against the administration. spending continues to go up in department after department. there is real concern outside of washington worried about the uncontrolled spending patterns in the capital. host: the republicans agreed to this two-year spending bill because many on the right were demanding more money for the military. in order to get the vote, they agreed with raising money on the domestic side as well. do you disagree with your colleagues, former colleagues?
guest: i would have voted against that package as did dozens, i don't know how many, republicans. for those in the republican party that think unlimited spending on the military is their goal, i disagree, and most americans is agree. disagree.-- a threat to our economy. we need to control runaway spending with a balanced budget amendment. multiple states are very concerned that is going to overtake our nation and economy because of the out-of-control spending. host: what are states doing on a local level? guest: they are doing a number of things. a number of states are looking at article five convention, a
.alanced budget amendment we are working with states to reform medicaid, provide work requirements and the provide incentives to get people off of welfare. i think that is good for the economy, good for the family, and good for budgets. i think we can have liberty loving principles on welfare and medicaid and free energy principles. i think we can get the economy growing again and reduce , which we are seeing out of the top administration and house of representatives as well. host: what grade would you give the trump administration on energy policy? guest: a+. scott pruitt is the best guy. he did exactly what he was supposed to. he followed through.
it is not about energy dependence. it is about energy dominance. fallsted a conference last promoting america first energy. we have promoted the fact that we have hundreds of years of energy resources available. it does not help leaving it in the ground. if the market needs coal, it should be using that. if it needs oil, it should be using that. offshore drilling going forward, that is great for the economy and great for those states. pruitt'st about scott spending of taxpayer money for travel? guest: i haven't seen the specifics on that. i know the left has been going after those specifically. we have to be good stewards of the money. i know a number of folks in the administration are doing a fantastic job of reducing
spending, diligently the apa, which is saving money. the best thing scott pruitt has done at the epa is said let's focus on environmental problems, not the environmental fictions of al gore and the u.n. they are making sure that they are keeping our water and air clean. at the end of the day, co2 is not a problem in my opinion in the opinion of thousands of scientists. we are hopeful that the epa will review the endangerment finding, which is this claim c02 is damaging the climate. let's have a science-based approach. host: it does seem to be the opinion of the intelligence community that climate change does pose a threat. here is a tweet by sheldon whitehouse, democrat, check out the worldwide threat assessment without by the u.s. intelligence
community. pages six includes a serious warning about climate change. here is the assessment, something the director of national intelligence talked about when he presented this to members of congress recently. i have seen portions of that assessment. as far as i know, dan coats is a former u.s. senator. he is not a scientist. there are thousands of scientists that say that conclusion is wrong. that is part of the assessment process to review. you have the city of oakland that says on one hand they have a massive problem. they are suing oil companies because they will have massive increases in sea level, 100 year flood every week, but in their bond statements, they are saying there is really no problem. there is alarmism going on. we are hopeful the administration will move forward on this concept and look closely
at the science of the matter. i think all americans in agree, what is the science? wase really know if al gore right 20 years ago when he predicted the ice caps would melt? he was wrong about that. we should assess any risks. when you have city of oakland and other cities planning and lawsuits they will have massive of peoples because upon a change, but when they go to borrow money, they say there is no problem. either they are lying in the courts or lying in their municipal bond document. ander of those are crimes should be looked at closely in the court of public opinion and legal avenues. host: we are talking about energy and economic policy with former congressman tim huelskamp, represented kansas, republican from 2011 to 2017, now ceo of the heartland
institute. let's go to ron, independent. you are up first. caller: i just have two comments. one, according to the constitution, gun control is restricted to a well regulated militia, which today would be the national guard, and you would have to be a member of the national guard to get an ar-15. that is not being done. guest: that is not the case at all. that is not the case. recognized that is not in the constitution. that is not what our founders intended. we have a real crisis that happened. to minimize the crisis in florida by claiming it is all about the militia is not the case. that is what i am worried about on this particular issue. you have a bunch of politicians, folks in washington who dictated gun free zones all over america. there should be a well protected
second amendment. we also believe the parents of the children still at the school should have a choice of where they go to school as well. that is in the back of my mind as well. these kids have to go back to school where the adults failed, where the police officer failed to intervene, where the fbi didn't do their job, politicians misusing that. it is not about a constitutional amendment. it is not about the national guard. back the president when he asked for bump stocks to be banned? isst: i don't think that going to solve the problem that occurred. i don't know how that is related to it. i support the idea that perhaps we should have concealed carry for teachers that are trained. let's let the states make these decisions. in my home state of kansas and numerous other states, let's not
make certain that only criminals have guns in the schools, but let's make sure teachers and administrators and police officers are doing their jobs and well armed to defend and train our kids in school. host: what about raising the age limit from 18 to purchase and ar-15 to 21? guest: i don't think you need to do that. that doesn't address the problem. we have plenty of mental health problems in america. we have other things driving these problems in schools and elsewhere. raising the age and saying because you are 20, you are a single mother with two, and you cannot defend yourself. i don't think that makes sense to me or to most americans. at the end of the day, let's take a breath, get on her knees knees and-- on our pray. it is a crisis. i have an 11-year-old and
16-year-old at home. i am worried. when you have politicians running out, media running out and saying we're going to do something quickly. should we actually allow teachers to conceal carry in school? i think we should. we should have done that a long time ago. let's let the states make those decisions rather than at the dictated by folks in washington, d.c. host: david, a democrat. your question or comment. caller: we know the science is out there that climate change is real, that carbon, co2 is bad for the environment. i don't know where you are getting your junk science from. oh, the bible. screw the bible. let me talk. -- me talk to medicaid is talk. medicaid is for kids that are sick. it is not a welfare program.
it is for people who are priced out of the insurance economy. are not inglad you congress anymore. i'm so glad. host: ok. guest: a couple of things on medicaid. medicaid is not just for kids. it is for adults, seniors. we also know on medicaid there are folks that should not be on that. their approach that should be encouraged to work for a job. the actual scientific research shows that if you expect people to work and look for a job, expect people to actually get training and volunteer, they do that. it works. we want to get people off medicaid and on health insurance they can afford. we support health care reforms that improve access, lower the price of insurance, lower the price of care. we are doing that. we are working with groups on the left and right to reduce health care costs in state after state. we can do that. we don't have to have someone from washington dictate that.
we need to take care of our poor. we can do that best buy improving access -- by improving access and inducing the cost. the heartland institute has been promoting this principle for years. you worry about the science, co2 being devastating to the climate. al gore has been wrong in every one of his productions. let's sit down and have a scientific discussion did let's have a red team-blue team briefing where we look at the science. there are thousands of scientists saying the world is not going to and because of co2. co2 is an inherent part of our atmosphere. we are not going to die because of that. folks like al gore, who is not a scientist, claim otherwise. i disagree with him. let's have a debate. john, california, independent. iller: i am calling because
disagree with what you just said two seconds ago. climate control and all that stuff, are you a scientist, out of curiosity? guest: i am not. are you? caller: you should read some of the science stuff. i happen to be a scientist from caltech over 20 years. what you are saying, it is real, i'm afraid. i have read a lot of paper, , abe thousands of scientists couple thousand against 100,000. i agree the world is not going to end. host: mr. quarles camp, let's let the desk mr. huelskamp, let's let the color finish. then i will let you respond. caller: the world is not going to end. it is going to get progressively worse.
global warming, there was a report from caltech that shows that changes happen because -- anyway -- host: congressman. guest: i had a little noisy background. i could not follow his whole argument. he believed al gore is right and i am wrong. that is his opinion. the thing about scientists and what i saw in the previous menstruation is it is about ideology rather than data. we know -- previous administration is it is about ideology rather than data. let's get real data overextended periods of time. not the last 50 years, let's go back thousands of years. take a look at heartland.org.
take a look at the debate. we have had 12 international science conferences. we have had those debates and had that discussion. at the end of the day, science is not dictated by majority vote . just because 51% of the scientists claim to believe that. have anbelieve humans impact on climate. everyone believes that. , willcientists don't know the world, will oakland be overrun in 2100 by the rise in the sea level? no scientists support that. that is the case they are making in the courts. let's have a debate. the obama administration did not allow the debate to happen. when they pursued engagement planning, they do not allow the debate. they just dictated what would
happen based on an ideology. everyone prediction of the -- every one of the actions of the model has been wrong. we encourage the debate. we will find out that al gore's movies were all wrong and do not make for good public policy. host: we will go to west virginia, ted, a democrat. caller: good morning, greta. love you. [laughter] caller: i just have a few comments for the person talking about climate change isn't real, and he sidestepped the question about the reason why the republicans gave billions and even trillions of dollars to corporation breaks and fat cat fat catand businessmen so they can cut the wic program and what they call
entitlements. i personally believe that a small, sick child that needs food has an entitlement, and i would like to say that all of you conservative people who aren't conservative, they are fascists. you are a fascist, sir. right now, we have a fascist government run by a russian mob boss. host: we will leave it there, ted. what is think that is wrong with politics today, name-calling. at the end of the day, we want to take care of our poor. here is what mystifies me. administration, you want to help the poor, why would you drive up the energy prices with your war on coal? that is what they did.
hillary clinton said she would finish the job by driving all these call miners out of business. clean coal is actually ok for the environment. it is great for our economy and keeps energy prices low. the idea that you're going to help the poor by driving up utility prices is a bad argument , not good, and very dishonest to say that you will help them by making them pay more for electricity. we have tremendous coal resources. we can use them in an environmentally friendly way and grow our county. i think it is a win-win, unless you are on the left and disagree with using coal. they don't want to use any goal. the problem is the rest of the world is still using coal, and america will be using coal for the foreseeable future. maryland, is in republican. pocomo city, and a
libertarian. host: you are on the air. caller: as far as i am concerned, under come along in the majority of the states, you can use the king james bible regardless of whether you believe the story as facts in law, so why do have all these laws against cannabis and hemp usn genesis as god gives dominion over all the seeds on the land? we can make hemp and bring down the carbon footprint on the planet. we would also get rid of this opioid epidemic because we have a national remedy with cannabis to cure cancer and stop pain. host: does the heartland institute have a position on that? guest: we need to reform the
fda, allow a quicker way to approve pharmaceuticals, medical devices, and we think we have a plan to bring more drugs affordably and quicker to the marketplace. host: congressman, it was your group took credit for president for the right to try language in the state of union, something we were just discussing with starlee coleman of the goldwater institute, which is pushing this legislation. talk about your involvement in that. how did you get the white house to agree? caller: the white house -- guest: the white house approached us. success has many fathers. we weren't the only one. there were many influential groups in the trump orbit. they said, are there any ideas you think would be good for the president to promote? right to try is a great idea.
it is a first that in innovating in the pharmaceutical industry. if you have a terminal illness, why should the government say you cannot take a potential cure? that is cruel. we have pharmaceutical companies that are opposed to allowing individuals to have that choice. the federal government should not stand in the way. the fda should not stand in the way for potential cures for terminal illnesses. folks said, you have an idea, and we encourage them to use right to try and energy freedom and other aspects of our efforts on climate realism. we were glad to see all those in the state of the union. it is not just the state of the but moving forward with
the fda on right to try and folks at the goldwater institute. we think it is a great opportunity for economic growth and benefit and making sure millions of americans lead healthier lives. host: carol is next, independent. i would like to touch on something that is barely ever said, ammonia in the water. bacteria ando kill also they put it in our water, and ammonia never leaves the water. what do they have to say about that? it is also harming the people in a lot of ways, such as i believe it is causing alzheimer's. bacteriattack the good in your liver and kidneys because it is in the water. host: congressman, are you familiar with this? guest: i have not seen any science that would back up that claim.
necessarilyldn't focus on ammonia in the water, but that is their target, making sure americans have clean air and clean water. they should focus on that rather than this co2 claim driven by the opinion of the last administration. host: congressman, when you were in the house of representatives representing kansas, you were a vocal member of the freedom caucus, the conservative group of lawmakers in the house critical of the leadership under house speaker john boehner. do you think the current members of the freedom caucus and its leadership are being vocal againstn speaking out the current republican leadership? guest: i think it is about principles and issues. far too often in politics, i was just in the state senate 14 years, six years in congress, 20
years of elected office, so often, we make it about personalities. at the end of the day, it should be about this post. the freedom caucus is about conservative principles. mark meadows in jim jordan, it is about common sense. do what he promised to do. i spent six years in washington where no one did what they were promising to do. publicans promised to repeal obama care. you have to be strategic in picking your battles. you cannot be strategic in picking your principles. i think the house freedom caucus is the conservative conscience for the house. just because you elected president and appoint a few folks that are secretaries that are doing a fantastic job doesn't mean you don't have decades of power entrenched within the bureaucracy. hopefully, they will do more and
republicans will stand on what they promised to stand on. that is the great role of the house freedom caucus. what grade would you give house speaker paul ryan? once inn tax reform, a a generation opportunity. that was only possible because of president trump. on tax cuts, probably d or f on fiscal responsibilities and spending. on the regular versailles, it has been all donald trump and the administration. congress is a massive failure. congress and the white house, we encourage them to stop talking about the repeal of obama care flexibtead provide ility to the states that they
have the freedom and the ability to experiment. tremendous on the tax cuts. host: former commerce men tim huelskamp of the heartland institute. guest: thank you. host: we will take a break. when we come back, becky pringle from thet our table, national education association. we will be right back. ♪
landmark on c-span's cases, we look at the supreme court case mcculloch v maryland, which solidified the federal government's ability to take actions that explicitly stated in the constitution. explore this case and the ruling with university virginia theciate law professor and author of mcculloch v maryland, securing the nation. watch that on c-span, c-span.org, or listen with the free c-span radio app. the companion book is available for $8.95 plus shipping and handling. for additional resources, there is a link on our website to the interactive constitution. years, in depth on
booktv has featured the nation's best-known nonfiction writers for live conversations about their books. this year, we're featuring best-selling fiction writers for our monthly program in depth, fiction edition. 4.n us live, sunday, march the most recent book is the frozen hours, and other books include the final storm, to the last man, and 11 more novels, which recount the military history of america from the american revolution to the korean war. we will be taking your phone calls, tweets, and facebook messages. our special series, in-depth, fiction edition, with jeff shara on tv on c-span2. >> "washington journal" continues. beckyat our table,
pringle, vice president of the national education association here to talk about school safety. the president over the last couple days suggesting we should arm teachers, those teachers who want to take training, want to be in the classroom and have a gun, also adding perhaps those teachers would get a bonus. greta, i have been teaching for over 30 years, science, middle school, the wonder years. when the president said that i just try to imagine my classroom as i talk about the wonders of science, trying to instill in them the excitement of the natural world, and i am trying to imagine on top of that having the responsibility of carrying a loaded weapon and making a split-second decision about whether or not to use it. that is not the responsibility
we want to lay on educators across this country, and it is serving not what i was trained to do. host: in wall street journal, some teachers are already arms. allow teachers to carry guns on campus is. so far, six states have introduced legislation that would make it easier to have school personnel carry firearms on the property. several school districts in ohio and texas with armed staff say on thursday the have not had any incidents involving guns going up or being shot unnecessarily. we know that there are teachers that have a license to carry guns, and their states allow them to do that. what the president is proposing is putting that possibility on teachers throughout -- responsibility on teachers throughout this country.
what we have learned since the horrific shooting last week, and we are still mourning the loss of so many innocent lives, is we want to listen to our students and educators. amazing. been we are so incredibly proud that through their grief they are speaking up. what are teachers are saying is don't army with guns. -- arm me with guns. me with resources, nurses and counselors, pencils and computers. that is what is going to make the difference in the lives of students. host: we have divided our lines, parents (202) 748-8000. teachers and administrators, (202) 748-8001. all others, (202) 748-8002. i know teachers are saying arm me with the things you outlined,
to havingachers open schools hardened, metal detectors, security guards, those types of security added to the environment? guest: again, i am going to say, we need to ask them. each school community needs to come together with parents and students, and please don't leave the students out. they need to come together and talk about what is going to be the best strategy to protect them. but we cannot change this conversation from how we are going to prevent it. there is no excuse for anyone having military grade weapons that are designed to kill as many people as possible in a very short amount of time. that is what our students are demanding of us, the adults in the system. they are demanding change, and they want it right now. are there state, local, or
national requirements of schools to have active shooter drills, lockdown drills? guest: it varies from state to state and community to community. those are the things we're talking about, of course. once you have an active shooter, we want to respond in a way that saves as many lives as possible. that is a conversation for that community to come together and decide what is best for their students. one of the things we want to be careful of is make those decisions, we don't want to turn our schools into prisons and our teachers into armed prison guards and our students into prisoners. that is not the kind of learning environment where we can have the kind of access to quality discussions and resources, and the kids wilfeel free to learn d grow. host: let's hear what our
viewers have to say. we will go to mike in california. welcome to the conversation. caller: good morning, greta. you are the most attractive journalist on air. america.ing, i met -- who is the guest? i missed it. pringle, vice president of the national education association. caller: becky, thank you so much for coming on. i have just two or three things, greta. we had a shooting in louisiana. . thank god they were not killed. host: ok. caller: i think we need to immediately employed five to 10 highly trained national guards in every school, six foot chain-link fence. i am a contractor here as greta knows.
it is $35 a foot installed. with nationalm up guard drones. they are experts at it. isis is toast. thank god to president trump. he is so great. linkedy the kids will be every one of them in the schools, immediately, and they will be able to react immediately. host: do you have any thoughts on that? guest: i worry about the image that just created for me that we turn our schools into battlegrounds. if that is the direction we are going in, then we are not hearing what our students are saying to us. host: what are the students saying? what do you make of the movement of the high school students in florida and around the country? guest: exactly, and around the world.
i am incredibly proud of them. they are standing up and speaking out and not sitting down. , they have been accused of being a front for someone. they have not been taken at their word, or they have mental they could not possibly be that told they could not possibly be this articulate. of course they are. we have talked and well. they are asking for common sense gun laws, gun reform in this country. all of this conversation has been diverted away from that, what our students are demanding. host: we will be talking to a parkland, florida, student on "washington journal." us onhall will be joining "washington journal," that set iphone 15, 1 of the students accused of being activist that
is on 9:15. one of the students accused of being an activist. caller: the nra seems to be the biggest obstacle to getting anything done. members.as many i know with the school districts saying we don't have the money for everything, no money to put into schools. the nra has retired people, trained people. say justd step up and like the safety people for the crosswalks, we will go to the , protect the, protect the schoe people there that are retired. it would not cost anything because they are part of the nra , and they could get through severe background checks. i think that the nra wants to do something, step up, do it.
you could solve this problem. it would not cost anybody any money. host: ok. ms. pringle. prevention, wes are talking about universal background checks. we have been talking about that so long. democrats, republicans, gun owners, non-donors, they all agree with that. -gun owners,s, non they all agree with that. it is shocking we haven't been able to the congress that. the pressure our students are , andng on our lawmakers what they are seeing in our democracy, their voice being heard, it is incredible. i believe they mean it when they say never again. host: i want to follow up on the previous caller the mentioned
the shooting in louisiana. this was hammond, louisiana, two people injured on southeastern reason it never see campus overnight. louisianastern university campus overnight. the incident involved several people on the north campus leading to a shooting according to the school's official twitter account. randall in minnesota, you're next. caller: i want to commend your guests, even though i agree that whatever works works. we are going around it wrong if we suggest people already overwhelmed with the situation be asked to do more. i commend people that are for law and order. here's what we have to understand is our adversary. they are only going into the school because they feel that is
there retribution or whatever reason in their head. we have to pardon the target, -- harden the target, and we can do that through existing infrastructure and law enforcement. when people are trained to be a police officer, that can be there apprentice service. on the outgoing and, those transitioning to retirement can use the last several years to train incoming trainees. we have a failure to communicate. we have been mistaking motion for progress. we have been going around this mountain 40 years. i am sick of it. i was around and aware austin, texas, i believe the first random shooting by a perpetrator. scouts, be like boy prepared. we can do this with existing infrastructure and expenses already being wasted, like that
fbi fiasco. they should all be fired. whoever took the call and did not respond should be fired. host: ok. becky pringle. best: we absolutely need to taking a look at those folks. we need to be talking about prevention, and we need to talk about preparedness as well. that is where our communities and schools and parents and administrators and law enforcement come in to talk about what is best for their community, what is needed for their community. we need to look at both sides of that, prevention and being prepared. host: another headline i want to share with our viewers and have you respond to. here is the new york times, supreme court that will over pple labor cri stronghold. whetherl decide
employees must pay the union of fee for representing them in collective bargaining. conservatives argue the first amendment bars workers from having to pay anything. the supreme court has sent the most they agree with that argument. would bar the union from collecting fees from anyone who benefits from their collective bargaining. guest: we are talking with our members about the impact and the public. unions are the backbone of this country. wagesot only secured the and working conditions for mostly middle-class working people, but they also were instrumental in changing things .ike safety in the workplace in our case, making sure our student's learning conditions
are conducive to them actually being able to meet the needs of every individual student. that was cannot be silenced -- voice cannot be silenced because this case is about our ability to lift up our voices, or in this case our students about safety, and we have the power to do that. we want to make sure we are not stripped of that power. it is essential. host: if the court were to rule against unions, what are you talking about for losses for the nea? guest: we are talking about organizing our members, having conversations with them about what the union is, what it has done not only for them, but what does for society in the future. what it does for us as an education union, we are instrumental in taking on issues, for example racial
justice in education, making sure we have equity and access for all of our students regardless of their zip code, regardless of their race, regardless of their abilities. those are the issues we are focused on. we are talking with our members about advocating for those things because that is what our members tell us is important to them, that they have that voice to speak up for their students and earn a living to take care of their family. we are having that conversation. we are not looking at this as a loss. we are looking at this as an opportunity to build our power. host: apologies for coughing while you were talking. let's listen to what the president had to say when he met with local and state officials about gun free zones. [video clip] president trump: i would like to see true people with great talent with guns and being
adept at guns, of which there is only a percentage, and that will be a substantial number. you cannot hire a security guard. your school, you would need 150 security guards. that is a big school with a tremendous permanent. who wants that many security guards standing all over with guns? you could have been concealed on teachers. people would not know who they are. it is a tremendous threat. advertising -- instead of advertising this school discovery, you let the people know the opposite. nobody is going to attack at school. they are cowards. they don't want to be shot at. they will be shot at. not a lot of people agree with us, but a lot of people do agree with us. you come into our schools, you are going to be dead. it is going to be fast.
unless you do that, you are going to always have this problem. guest: the president in that clip is making the case for how impractical that idea is. that we have armed educators or others that are going to be on every place on the campus. it is not possible. what we are not hearing from him is what he is going to change in law, what he is going to do to make sure we don't have guns coming in our schools for military purposes. there is no excuse for them to come into our schools and be it did take the lives of that many students in that short a period of time. host: darlene is next in nevada. caller: good morning. i don't hear the conversation about this being a student, and he got expelled from school with
no resources. i don't know what we expect as a nation when we put people on the street who are hurting, who are in need of support, and somehow the special education system did not address his issues, but every adult who ever worked with him new he had issues. this is not an issue of we need to our adult in the public school system. what is that going to look like? that is a child, to. are you saying you are willing to put your own child at risk because they have a health issue, mental health issue? this is a nation that should be looking at the safety net. host: let's take that point. what resources does a teacher have, and what is the protocol when they have a student they believe is troubled and poses a threat? guest: it is essential that we
provide our schools and teachers with the tools they need to address the needs of every single student. educators always amazed me. they immediately came out with this #armme. they know if they don't have social workers to address the needs that are coming into our schools, if they don't have these resources, we will have trouble ticket who are not getting the support -- troubled kids who are not getting the support they need. that is what they are saying. if you listen to them, it is pretty amazing how that has actually blown up in the twittersphere. educators know they need those resources to assist all of our kids, every single one of them. on in virginia, good
morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. one subject about this i want to discuss, let's say i have a daughter who is a kindergarten teacher. she has been training for guns. theis fingerpainting with children. in of a sudden a guy comes and fires some shots. she doesn't have time to go get her gun. blamingnra be that teacher because she doesn't have time to do two jobs instead of her main job, teaching? if she doesn't protect, you can just imagine what the media would be screaming about how she was a loser, and she shouldn't. it would just be awful.
i think the whole idea of arming teachers is absurd. host: let's take that point. guest: i cannot agree more with your caller. i was listening to how one of the students who survived the shooting in florida described thehorrific scene where frightened students were running at the teacher, and they were looking at her to protect them. imagine having the responsibility of having a gun. where is that got? -- gun? firearms should be locked away for safekeeping. how do you get access to that? imagine, it was so vivid. they were rushing at her. imagine having the responsibility to get a gun out at that moment.
the caller is exactly right. how would she feel at that moment she has that responsibility? whether or not the president is proposing initially training once a year or twice a year, we all know when we are in those situations, unless you are constantly training, you are not ready to make that decision in an instant whether you are going to use that gun or not. host: quickly, what is the nea planning to do on this issue in the coming weeks? guest: guest: we are working with our partners and students in supporting and lifting up their voices. we are also partnering with other organizations for a date of action on april 20, live for your listeners and viewers to talk about, go to our website to get more information about what they can do to bring about change.
host: we will leave it there, thank you for the conversation. guest: thank you. host: the house is gobbling in for a pro forma station. thanks for watching. enjoy your weekend. -- houses gaveling in for a pro forma station. thanks for watching. enjoy your weekend. >> the house will be in order. before the house a communication from the >> a communication from the speaker. >> the speakers rooms, washington,